Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Microsoft Teams

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

Note: The technical difficulties have been resolved. Please access the meeting by copying and pasting the following link into your browser: http://ow.ly/FSYV30qNCph 

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 regard to items two, three and five of the agenda, Councillor Becca Thackray stated that although a Ward Councillor for Herne Hill, she confirmed that she did not have a pre-determined view of the applications.

2.

Kings College Hospital, Ruskin Wing, Denmark Hill (Herne Hill) 20/00383/VOC pdf icon PDF 3 MB

    Officers’ recommendations:

     

     

    1.    Resolve to grant conditional planning permission.

     

    2.    Agree to delegate authority to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability to finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes.

    Minutes:

    Case No. 20/00383/VOC (agenda item two, page one of the agenda pack, page one of the 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 22 May 2020 and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which included the request to permit 24-hour operation of the helipad for a temporary period of 3 years in connection with medical emergencies. The existing permission was subject to a condition requiring the monitoring of night flights.  It was proposed to amend this condition to require the provision of additional monitoring data.  The data log would need to be submitted at the end of the 3 year period, or at any other time at the request of the local planning authority. Noise impact assessment was conducted at eight locations against the World Health Organisation guidelines of 65dB, where awakenings due to aircraft noises may occur. The figures from 2019 showed 89 recordings within a year, where the majority occurred during the summer period. The complaints data suggested that 37 awakenings occurred during this time.

     

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

    ·         Ruskin Park House was high up on the hill and a volume of 90 decibels had been recorded by residents.

    ·         Residents were woken up if the helicopter were to arrive at 3am and would stay awake until it took off at 4am, and the first Heathrow flight would take off at 4:30am. This had sometimes occurred twice a week at the beginning of the operation.

    ·         The quality of residents’ lives had materially changed and they would like to be consulted further.

    ·         They proposed a further one-year extension to the night flights for further data to be collected, as well as a McDonnell Douglas helicopter be used.

     

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

    ·         In the first year of night landings an improved patient outcome was delivered as well as the maintaining of the predicted number of flights.

    ·         They did not anticipate an increase in the number of landings in the next three years, but a possible decrease due to other hospitals starting to provide night flying operations.

    ·         The relative infrequency of flights was reflected in the limited number of complaints received but noted that the concerns of some occupiers of Ruskin Park House. Pilots had been advised to adjust their flight path where weather permitted, to avoid this particular approach. This had successfully reduced the number of complaints from summer last year.

    ·         The night crew were the only enhanced care resource in the south east, and the reduced journey had meant that there was an improved patient outcome for time critical incidents.

    ·         The 24-hour availability of the Kings helipad improved the health services to the 4.8 million people they served.

     

    Officers then provided the following information in response to questions from Members:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

3.

Land adjacent to 1 Chaucer Road (Herne Hill) 20/00480/FUL pdf icon PDF 1 MB

    Officer’s 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.

     

    2.    Agree to delegate authority to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability 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 Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability, 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 six months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability 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. 20/00480/FUL (agenda item three, page 55 of the agenda pack, page three of the addendum and page six 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 22 May 2020 and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which included the demolition of the single storey garage building and the erection of a new two storey 2-bedroom dwelling house with associated amenity space, cycle parking and refuse storage. The location was within the Poet’s Corner Conservation Area, which had few opportunities for development. Properties within the conservation area had a variety of different frontages, and the proposed scheme was considered appropriate in the urban environment context. Detailed BRE tests on sunlight and daylight showed that the scheme complied with these standards. A financial contribution of £19,149 towards the provision of off-site affordable housing would be secured through the S106 Agreement. The scheme would be car free, with an obligation to provide a three-year subscription to a local car club membership.

     

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

    ·         The Poet’s Corner Conservation Area Designation Report stated that that all new development was required to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area. The scheme did not improve or enhance the area and was not a congruous or subordinate addition to the area.

    ·         The building would dominate and obscure the street view as it was positioned sideways directly on the pavement.

    ·         It would degrade the Conservation Area by blocking a historic view of Chaucer Road from Dulwich Road.

    ·         Objectors raised concerns that the raised front elevation from 2.4m to 6m, would dominate the streetscape and significantly impact the availability of natural light into neighbours’ main living spaces.

    ·         The two windows within the proposed design directly overlooked 1 Chaucer Road’s master bedroom and sitting room, which would impact on residents’ privacy.

    ·         The demarcation between 1 Chaucer Road and the proposed scheme should be improved, as it partially used the driveway and the proposed fence did not follow the whole length of the boundary.

     

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

    ·         The proposed scheme would occupy a smaller footprint to that of the current structure on the site.

    ·         The sunlight studies demonstrated how the layout ensured that no unacceptable harm was caused to the amenity of surrounding land or residential buildings, in relation to privacy and overshadowing.

    ·         It would incorporate the highest quality materials.

    ·         The proposal made a positive contribution to the character of the conservation area by providing a scheme which would allow for open space, used high quality materials and a well-articulated street frontage.

    ·         The high-quality design had been recognised by the Herne Hill Neighbourhood Area Planning Group, who described the proposal as ‘both inventive and respectful of its context.

    ·         A Section 106 Agreement would ensure that new residents would not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

20-22 Union Court (Larkhall) 19/02328/FUL pdf icon PDF 4 MB

    Officer’s 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.

     

    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. 19/02328/FUL (agenda item four, page 99 of the agenda pack, page four of the addendum).

     

    The Planning Officer gave a presentation which included a summary of the report and subsequent addenda that had been published on Friday 22 May 2020 and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration and noted that the scheme proposed to demolish Units 7 and 20 and replace them with one building ranging from one to five storeys in height (plus basement and mezzanine level) located in the Clapham North Key Industrial Business Area (KIBA). The scheme proposed Business B1 floor space, affordable workspace, 80 cycle parking spaces, eight blue badge spaces and a reduction of car parking spaces from 64 to 58. The closest residential buildings were Singer Mews and 18 and 19 Fergusson Mews. Fergusson Mews would receive reductions of sunlight/daylight, which was considered acceptable with the urban context. Singer Mews had south facing windows and would not be impacted by the scheme.

     

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

     

    ·         The proposal was an exciting opportunity to strengthen and diversify employment floor space within one of the borough’s limited number of Key Industrial and Business Areas.

    ·         This scheme formed part of a wider initiative to create environments which would foster and encourage the economic growth of small and medium enterprises. The scheme was more important now, given the challenges faced as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

    ·         The scheme provided an increase in employment floorspace, a high quality, sustainable and green development and the creation of over 400 new jobs.

     

    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.

     

    Councillor Andy Wilson then spoke as Ward Councillor for Larkhall, stating the following:

    ·         He was supporting the application as it would provide significant investment in one of the Council’s KIBAs.

    ·         He was grateful that the applicant gave a tour, explained their plans and addressed concerns from residents in Singer Mews regarding their potential loss of amenity.

    ·         The area needed more commercial space that would provide local residents with employment opportunities close to their homes.

    ·         The scheme would support up to 455 jobs, over 330 more than the number that were previously supported in Union Court.

     

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

    ·         The proposed uplift of B1 light industrial space was considered acceptable, as it was broadly in line with emerging policies, and would be secured in condition 3.

    ·         Unit 1 was unoccupied, and no company would need to move out.

    ·         Conditions 10 and 11 would ensure trees were planted within the landscaping of the scheme.

    ·         The proposal would create new cycle spaces, of which 60 would be provided at basement level and 20 would be short term parking spaces on the ground floor. Officers could encourage the applicant to provide more spaces but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

313 To 315 Railton Road (Herne Hill) 19/03371/FUL pdf icon PDF 2 MB

    Officer’s recommendations:

     

    1.     Resolve to grant conditional planning permission.

     

    2.     Agree to delegate authority to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability to finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes.

     

    Minutes:

    The Chair proposed that due to lack of time, the item be deferred.

     

    It was MOVED by Councillor Wilcox, SECONDED by Councillor Kind, and

     

    RESOLVED, unanimously

     

    To DEFER consideration of the application.

     

6.

Appeal and Enforcement Decisions November 2019 pdf icon PDF 524 KB

    To note the Planning Appeal and Enforcement Decisions for November 2019

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Members thanked officers for their work in upholding Council policies.

7.

Appeal and Enforcement Decisions December 2019 pdf icon PDF 433 KB

    To note the Planning Appeal and Enforcement Decisions for December 2019

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Members thanked officers for their work in upholding Council policies.