Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room (B6) - Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton, London, SW2 1RW. View directions

Contact: Lara Edwards Tel: 020 7926 6816 Email:  ledwards@lambeth.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Declaration of Pecuniary Interests

Under Standing Order 4.4, where any councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.

 

 

Minutes:

With regards to application 19/03500/FUL (36-46 Albert Embankment) Councillor Joanne Simpson declared that while not a pecuniary interest, she was a ward Councillor for Prince’s. She confirmed that she was not involved in a ward Councillor capacity and did not have a predetermined view on the application.

 

2.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 219 KB

To agree minutes of the meeting held on 26 November and 3 December 2019.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 26 November and 3 December 2019 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record of the proceedings.

 

The Chair announced a provisional timetable for the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 9.9.1.

3.

36-46 Albert Embankment (Prince's) 19/03500/FUL pdf icon PDF 5 MB

    Officers’ recommendations:

     

    1.    Resolve to grant conditional planning permission subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) containing the planning obligations listed in this report and any directions as may be received following referral to the Mayor of London.

     

    2.    Agree to delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to:

     

    a.    Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes; and

    b.    Negotiate, agree and finalise the planning obligations as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

     

    3.    In the event that the committee resolves to refuse planning permission and there is a subsequent appeal, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.

     

    4.    In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within 6 months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in this report, addendums and/or the PAC minutes.

     

    Minutes:

    Case No. 19/03500/FUL (agenda item four, page 115 of the agenda pack, page seven of the first addendum and page 13 of the second addendum.

     

    The Planning Officer gave a presentation which included a summary of the report and subsequent addenda that had been published on Friday 17 January 2020 and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which included the demolition of the Texaco petrol filling station and the refurbishment of Vintage House. The petrol station would be replaced by a 600 room hotel, with an ancillary restaurant and bar on the ground floor level. There were no objections to the loss of the petrol station. The proposed scheme would have similar impacts compared to the scheme approved in 2017 (16/00795/FUL) in terms of townscape, heritage, daylight and sunlight and outlook impacts. There would be several conditions to ensure that residents would not be disturbed by noise. Computer generated imagery was presented of various locations, including proposed schemes in Vauxhall, which displayed the similarity in building sizes to the proposed scheme. The hotel would be covered by a biodiverse green roof and at ground level there would be mainly hard landscaping with a few trees and landscaping cabinets. There would be no harm to heritage assets, however the surrounding conservation area would positively benefit from the demolition of the petrol station and the refurbishment of Vintage House. The Greater London Authority was of the view that the proposed hotel building would result in less than substantial harm to the setting of the Albert Embankment Conservation Area, but GLA officers advised that this was outweighed by the public benefits flowing from the scheme. The proposed servicing route would be through Spring Garden Walk and Goding Street. At present, Goding Street was a shared space between vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. The applicant agreed to mitigate harm to Goding Street through a contribution of £150,000 towards cycling and pedestrian infrastructure improvements along Goding Street. It was proposed that the hotel vehicle drop-off area in the front entrance would only be used by licensed taxis to limit the number of vehicle movements within the area and ensure there was no queuing of vehicles along Albert Embankment.

     

    Following the officer’s presentation, the objector raised the following concerns:

    ·         Although residents did not oppose the proposal in principal, they objected to the bulk and size of the building, as the two towers were insensitive to the character of the area.

    ·         The Council were relying heavily on the previous approval, which did not fully consider the mass, scale and bulk.

    ·         The development would create extra traffic on Glasshouse Walk.

    ·         Residents requested a lower rise development proposal and provided examples of development they supported in the area.

     

    The applicant then provided the following information in support of the application:

    ·         The Council had ambitious plans and this scheme would be an exciting opportunity to help contribute to this.

    ·         It was identified that the location needed additional hotel rooms.

    ·         The proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

154-166 Clapham High Street And 162 Stonhouse Street (Clapham Town) 18/01832/FUL pdf icon PDF 7 MB

    Officers’ recommendations:

     

     

    1.    Resolve to grant conditional planning permission subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) containing the planning obligations listed in this report and any direction as may be received following further referral to the Mayor of London.

     

    2.    Agree to delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to:

     

    a.    Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes; and

    b.    Negotiate, agree and finalise the planning obligations as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

     

    3.    In the event that the committee resolves to refuse planning permission and there is a subsequent appeal, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.

     

    4.    In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within 6 months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in this report, addendums and/or the PAC minutes.

     

    Minutes:

    Case No. 18/01832/FUL (agenda item three, page 19 of the agenda pack, page one of the first addendum and page one of the second addendum).

     

    The Planning Officer gave a presentation which included a summary of the report and subsequent addenda that had been published on Friday 17 January 2020 and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which noted that the current application followed on from a previously withdrawn application ref 16/05293/FUL which had subsequently undergone multiple revisions. The application proposed to provide 28 residential units, an uplift of 25 units on the site. The scheme was supported by a viability assessment which showed that 40% of new units to be delivered as the scheme would not be viable with any affordable housing contribution or provision on the site. This was largely due to the high existing land value and construction costs associated with the scheme. Officers advised that a developer profit of 17.5% had been used in the scheme within the viability assessment. Notwithstanding the fact that the scheme was showing a deficit, the applicant had offered to provide four on-site intermediate shared ownership units and a cascade mechanism to secure a payment of £345,157 in-lieu of any Registered Providers taking up the affordable housing provision on site. There would be a 44m2 children play area, a cycle parking and refuse on ground floor.

     

    Officers then provided the following information in response to questions from Members:

    ·         The anticipated increase of servicing vehicles associated with the development would not exceed the capacity of the bay on Stonhouse Street. The loading bay was existing prior to the application.

    ·         The loading bay on Clapham High Street was a TfL loading bay and usage was not enforceable by the Council. If servicing were to be affected by vehicles exceeding the dwell time, the applicant would need to contact TfL who would take the appropriate measures.

    ·         The impact of emergency vehicles on Stonhouse Street could not be considered with the application as the current scheme did not seek to narrow the width of the rear access path. This would need to be considered as part of a separate application from a different applicant that was proposed to the rear of this scheme.

    ·         There had been has been engagement with registered providers during the application process which informed the design of the scheme but this engagement will be excluded from the 6 month marketing period which was required post decision.

    ·         All the proposed affordable housing units had been amended to provide well sized accommodation with private amenity space and dual aspects.

     

    At 22:00 the Committee elected to proceed with the meeting for a maximum of a further 45 minutes in order to conclude the remaining matters of business.

     

    The Committee considered information provided by officers in conjunction with the report before making the following observations:

    ·          That a local amenity society had given positive feedback on the proposals was noted.

     

    It was MOVED by Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Appeal and Enforcement Summaries August 2019 pdf icon PDF 374 KB

    To note the Planning Appeal and Enforcement Decisions for August 2019.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Presiding Officer clarified that the telephone call box permitted developments were being used for public advertisements which the Government later banned. One of the applications had been approved as it had passed assessment by the Inspector.

     

    Members thanked officers for their work in upholding Council policies.

6.

Appeal and Enforcement Summaries October 2019 pdf icon PDF 428 KB

    To note the Planning Appeal and Enforcement Decisions for October 2019.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Members thanked officers for their work in upholding Council policies.