Venue: Microsoft Teams (please copy and paste the following link into your browser): https://bit.ly/2OtOpfS
Contact: Farah Hussain, Democratic Services, 020 7926 4201, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
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.
There were none.
Case No. 20/02331/FUL, (agenda item two, page one of the agenda pack, and page one of the addendum).
The Planning Officer gave a presentation which included a summary of the report and Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration. The proposed development comprised of four buildings between five to 21 storeys. The site area was 0.65 hectare, located on the eastern side of Wandsworth Road and northern side of Pascal Street. The site was within the central activity zone, was not located in a conservation area and there would be no harm to the heritage assets or their settings. The site benefits from an extant planning permission, that was granted in 2016, which includes 332 residential units including 84 affordable, a commercial block and new public realm. The proposed development would deliver 479 Built to Rent units including 176 affordable units, new public realm and a commercial unit. There would also be access to cycle storage units in the basement levels of the building, which would be for residents’ use. The roof of the buildings would include amenity spaces, biodiverse green roofs and plant areas. Members were shown images of the site, its context, proposed materials and design, and existing and proposed views.
The proposed housing would be Built to Rent (BtR) and the covenant period would be compliant with Policy H11 of the London Plan. Affordable housing would be provided at 40% of all habitable rooms with 155 units provided at London Living Rent equivalents and 21 units at Lambeth Tenancy Strategy (LTS) equivalents. A review mechanism would be secured to increase the proportion of LTS units if viability improves. The proposed unit mix, when considered in the context of the extant permission as a material planning consideration, was more balanced than the previous scheme. The Council’s external daylight consultant outlined the key issues relating to daylight and sunlight and privacy mitigation measures were also shown.
There would be 2189 square metres of internal and external amenity space, with 852 square metres of play space available to all residents. The development would be car permit free with the exception of blue badge holders, and the development includes a range of sustainable transport measures and would not cause harm to the transport network. There would be a 56% reduction in carbon emission beyond Part L of the 2013 Building Regulations and a financial contribution would be secured to achieve 0 carbon.
The applicant’s representativesthen provided the following information in support of the application:
- The proposal would provide genuinely affordable homes with high levels of occupancy. It was designed to create sustainable communities and build long term relationships with both residents and Lambeth as a whole.
- A number of indoor and outdoor amenity spaces would be provided along with a public children’s play space. The Community was at the heart of the plans and there would be dedicated on site staff and flexible tenancies.
- The original plans had been redesigned ... view the full minutes text for item 2.
Case No. 21/00180/RG3, (agenda item 3, page 121 of the agenda pack, page 1 of the first addendum and page 1 of the second addendum).
The Planning Officer gave a
presentation which included a summary of the report and Members
were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration.
The development proposed 11 events over a 52-day period, with four
major event days across one weekend.
The Common was classed as Metropolitan Open Land (MOL); only 10% of the common would be fenced off and the public would always have access to 90% of the common. The proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the Clapham conservation area and surrounding conservation areas. The proposal would not harm the setting or significance of the heritage assets.
All events would be required to comply with the Event Lambeth Guidance on the Control of Sound at out-door events. This outlined 3 noise monitoring points for the major event, and condition 16 ensures a fourth noise monitoring point is secured at Notre Dame Estate. Furthermore, a noise management plan for Festival Republic is required to be submitted via condition 17.
All medium and major events would take place in areas of amenity grassland or hard standing, which would minimise their impact. Grass protection is carried out as part of the terms and conditions for hire. For each event, the level of any damage is determined during a site walk with the event organiser, the Council’s Parks team, and the Events team. Damage is assessed based on pre and post-event surveys. A proposed programme of reinstatement is drawn up. This discussion informs aspects of the proposal that could be improved in the future, and further measures that may be considered necessary. For each event, the organiser will be required to submit a bond to Event Lambeth.
Applications for events held on
the Common are required to be accompanied by a waste management
plan, which is assessed by EventLambeth
as part of the event applications process. Furthermore, condition 6
requires all waste, refuse and recycling to be removed from the
relevant event site and the area within 10m of the perimeter of the
event site 1 day after completion of de-rig.
Following the officer’s presentation, objectors made the following points:
- The online consultation records received 318 comments and 315 of them were against the proposals. It was clear that residents did not want a ‘blanket’ permission to be granted. One proposed event involved the use of the Common for 29 consecutive days in the middle of the summer school holidays and could involve 320,000 visitors.
- Other concerns expressed included noise, criminality and anti-social behaviour.
- The volume of events on the Common had caused a significant amount of damage and some of the Common now seems irreparable. ... view the full minutes text for item 3.