Agenda item

Description of application – Refurbishment and upwards extension of Cranbrook Court to provide 33 units of temporary accommodation for the homeless (Sui Generis) and 12 units of residential accommodation (Use Class C3).

Oral representations from the applicant’s agent in support of the application included the following points:-

·  The proposal site was a former care home, converted to temporary accommodation for the homeless in 2012.  Since then, it had been operated by Orchard and Shipman in line with a legal agreement that afforded the Council first refusal for renting out units via a registered provider.

·  The site had the appearance of being ripe for redevelopment or at the very least, in need of investment. It was originally part of the same plot of land that was redeveloped for Sutherland Court by Hanover Housing and was notably smaller in height and mass than its neighbour, as well as clearly being of older stock. Furthermore, it was a corner plot and conveniently located, being equidistant from Penge East and Kent House railway stations.  It was also a short walk from Penge High Street in one direction and Cator Park in the other.

·  It was suggested at consultation stage that the site would be better developed for accommodation for the elderly. In this regard it should be noted that the existing use was essential to meeting the Council’s statutory duty to house vulnerable people and that the use was policy protected. A comprehensive redevelopment of the site had therefore always been a difficult prospect. As such, development options had always focussed on refurbishment and expansion of the existing building, with the use continuing throughout construction.

·  The end result of this proposal would be the improvement of the quality and quantity of temporary accommodation available to the Council, cross-subsidised by opening up part of the site to private housing. It would not be lost on Members that the provision of housing, particularly at the starter home end of the market, also met a critical need.

·  Initial enquiries about the site’s development potential began in early 2017 and a series of positive and proactive pre-application discussions followed. While the principle of development was never disputed, there was an ongoing concern regarding the proposed height at 4 storeys. The applicant made a number of design amendments seeking to address these concerns but ultimately the original proposal was refused. Although other issues were discussed in detail as part of a subsequent appeal, the determining factor of the appeal dismissal was the scale of development at four storeys.

·  The detailed report of the Planning Inspector set the parameters for the current development proposal. The scheme reduced the number of private units from 19 to 12 and reduced the scale of development from four storeys with a flat roof, to three storeys with a pitched roof. This brought the scheme in line with the scale of surrounding development and was an entirely appropriate addition on what was a prominent corner site.

·  The proposal would secure the future of the temporary accommodation, improve the circumstances of those living there and provide a small number of new homes at the more affordable end of the market.

·  The design development had been informed by the Planning Inspectorate, Bromley Planning officers and Ward Councillors and overall the proposal should be seen as a positive improvement to a site in need of regeneration.

Oral representations on behalf of all three Ward Councillors in support of the application were received from Ward Member Councillor Kathy Bance.

Councillor Bance had been aware of the development since 2011 and had managed complaints from residents.  The site was currently being used for temporary accommodation and she knew the building well.

Councillor Bance considered that the proposed refurbishment and extension to the building would have no impact on the local surroundings.  It was not situated on a main road and was located in an area where plenty of transport links were available.  No complaints had been received in regard to any resident of Cranbrook Court.

While she understood the concerns of residents in Sutherland Court, this proposal would provide much needed family accommodation.  The developer had liaised well with the Council and relevant consultees to resolve any emerging issues.  The proposal would be of great benefit to Penge.

The Development Management Area Team Leader gave the following updates:-

·  Members were advised to consider the updated 5 year land supply when considering the application.

·  The appeal under application 18/01013/Full1 had been dismissed by the Planning Inspector.

·  During construction of the upward extension, it was intended that occupants would remain in place.  Each room would be refurbished as it became vacant. The occupants in private accommodation could be decanted into the new third storey when that was complete which would allow the development to be finished.

·  Condition 19 in the officer recommendation should be amended to read that parking spaces should be permanently retained for the use of private units.

Committee Member and Ward Member Councillor Brooks considered the developers had presented a more acceptable scheme than previously proposed.  The scheme would provide much-needed family homes and temporary accommodation.  For this reason, Councillor Brooks moved that the application be permitted. 

The Chairman seconded the motion to grant permission, emphasising that the increase in units for temporary accommodation was necessary. The decrease in the provision of private accommodation units and the reduction in height of the building from 4 storeys to 3 were welcomed.

Having considered the report and representations, Members RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE PRIOR COMPLETION OF A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT as recommended and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report of the Assistant Director, Planning and Building Control with condition 19 being amended to read that parking spaces should be permanently retained for the use of private units.