Agenda and minutes

Planning Applications Committee - Tuesday 29 June 2021 7.00 pm

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

Contact: Farah Hussain, Democratic Services,  020 7926 4201, Email: fhussain1@lambeth.gov.uk

Note: Information on how to access the meeting is set out on the agenda. However, if you just want to watch the live broadcast you can copy and paste the following link into your browser: https://bit.ly/2SxDRyz The video will remain available to view for 180 days. 

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:

There were none.

2.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 245 KB

To agree minutes of the meeting held on 25 May 2021.

 

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED: The minutes of the 25 May 2021 meeting was agreed as the correct record of proceedings.

 

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

 

3.

Pre Application - Homebase, 100 Woodgate Drive (Streatham Vale) pdf icon PDF 797 KB

    No recommendation is made to the committee as this item is for a pre-application development presentation. Matters arising from discussions during the item will be recorded in the meeting minutes but will not be binding on the eventual decision-maker.

    Minutes:

    Case No. 21/02353/PPA, (agenda item three, page 25 of the agenda pack and page 15 of the second addendum)

     

    Officers provided an overview of the pre-application proposal, which would be a mixed-use residential development consisting of 271 one, two and three bed apartments, commercial unit and a 2-storey cycle hub. The developer had worked closely with stakeholder groups through their pre-application stage and had taken concerns on board, regarding the height of the development.

     

     The developers presented the pre-application proposal:

    -       The site had suitable transport links, being within walking distance to Streatham Common Rail Station. The design approach was aimed at creating a 19th century cityscape skyline within the development.

    -       There were 13 townscape views that had been tested with officers and they were confident the height was acceptable in townscape terms.

    -       The developers’ representatives highlighted that they had tested numerous options for the roof scape and thought that not having a flat roof would improve the visual aspect of the buildings.

    -       The site was required to give access to Network Rail land.

    -       In total there would be 271 units, with 35% of the units being affordable. The housing mix was distributed through all the buildings. 76% of units would be dual aspect.

    -       A linear rain garden would be created which would provide the development with rich ecology and biodiversity. The development would use green initiatives and deliver an Urban Greening Factor of 4, compliant with policy requirements.

    -       Further work was needed in regard to a potential conflict between blue badge parking bays and dedicated open space.

    -       Daylight and sunlight aspects had been tested across the scheme and was BRE compliant.

    -       A cycle hub would be introduced, which would be highly visible, sustainable and offer a washing and repair facility, managed by a social enterprise.

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

    -       The children’s play area would be only open to residents and not members of the public, but the development would not be gated.

    -       Further consideration would be given to the potential conflict between the location of blue badge car parking and access to the children’s play space to the south of the site.

    -       There would be three play space areas for children, which had been designed to ensure sunlight would be received. For the older age group of years and over, the two closest open spaces, Streatham Common and Streatham Vale Park were located within 800 metres of the site.

    -       The potential threat of crime due to the passageway between the buildings was discussed and Officers confirmed that there had been an assessment of the sunlight surrounding the passageways and it was BRE compliant.

    -       The parking stress in the surrounding area, during peak times, would be approximately 78%. They aimed to apply for eight blue badge parking spaces on the development, and it was highlighted that this development would focus on sustainable transport options.

    -       Effects of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

Rear of 260 Knight's Hill (Knight's Hill) 20/02581/FUL pdf icon PDF 2 MB

    Officer Recommendation:

     

    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 six 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. 20/02581/FUL, (agenda item 4, page 37 of the agenda pack, page five of the first addendum and page 11 of the second addendum).

     

    Officers introduced the report and highlighted the following:

    -       The proposal included 800 sq.m of office space and 8 3-bedroom residential terrace houses.

    -       The current proposal was similar to an extant permission granted in 2019.

    -       The council’s independent viability consultant informed Members that a benchmark land value must be exceeded by the residual land value of the proposed development before any payment in lieu can be brought into consideration. In this case, as the site has an extant planning permission which has informed the existing use value. This increased the benchmark land value to a similar level to the residual land value of the proposed development, resulting in a much lower affordable housing payment. 

    -       There would be no harm to any heritage assets.

    -       The site would provide two parking spaces, one of which would be for blue badge users, and overall, this would provide a reduction in vehicle trips.

     

    The Committee then heard the following points from the agent in support of the application:

    -       The application optimised the space on the site and the family homes were all adaptable to provide greater value than what was previously proposed on the site.

    -       The appearance of the town houses was enhanced and would preserve the amenities to the neighbouring buildings.

    -       There would be a 62% reduction in carbon emissions which would provide a bio-diversity gain.

    -       All servicing and deliveries would be carried out on site and this development would bring the site back into use.

     

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

    -       An explanation of how the development’s viability was assessed.

    -       The extant planning permission resulted in an alternative use value which in turn greatly reduced the affordable housing payment. The site was currently derelict and would therefore have a very low existing use value attributed to it.  However, when brought to market, with the extant scheme the site would be higher in value than previously. This would bring the value closer to the residual land value of the proposed scheme and resulted in a low affordable housing payment.

    -       Matters relating to the intentions of the applicant in respect of using previous permissions resulted in a lower affordable housing payment were not material planning considerations.

    -       Condition 8 would determine if all details of the greenery were to be acceptable and would be reviewed by the council’s landscaping team. The green roof condition did not specifically mention green walls, however Officers agreed for the landscaping condition (no. 8) and green roof condition (no. 21) to include mention of the green walls as requested by Members.

    -       The office space would be small, approximately 130 square metres and would be suitable for small businesses or start-ups.

    -       The entrance to the flat above the office was confirmed as being located at ground  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

76 Upper Ground (Bishop's) 21/01142/FUL & 21/01143/LB pdf icon PDF 3 MB

    Officer Recommendations:

     

    Application A (21/01142/FUL):

     

    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 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 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 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.

     

    Application B (21/01143/LB):

     

    1. Resolve to grant conditional Listed Building Consent 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 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 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 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. 21/01142/FUL & 21/01143/LB, (agenda item 5, page 85 of the agenda pack, and page 20 of the first addendum and page 13 of the second addendum).

     

    Officers introduced the application and advised that:

    -       Three further representations had been received from the South Bank and Waterloo Neighbours (SOWN) community group which were set out in the addendum.

    -       The development was to refurbish and extend the IBM building to provide an uplift of 10,455 square metres and 1130 office jobs in the Waterloo opportunity area and Central Activity Zone (CAZ).

    -       The existing pedestrian and vehicle ramp would be demolished to provide an enlarged area of open space between the existing building and the adjoining National Theatre.

    -       CGI images were shown to the committee which included the additional fifth floor extension.

    -       The development would provide an employment and skills contribution of £1.2 million and an affordable workspace contribution of £1.12m as a payment-in-lieu (PIL).

    -       The proposal would not harm the strategic or local views.

    -       The proposal would maximise the landscaping and roof terraces with additional planting, including tree planting.

    -       Some of the public benefits included the increase in office floorspace, uplift in jobs, overall carbon reduction in emissions of 42.66%, and an enhanced parks and open space contribution of £115,000.

    -       The Design and Conservation Officer highlighted the statutory duties, case law and national policy in the consideration of this application with respect to heritage assets.

     

    The Committee then heard from representatives who spoke in objection to the application, and made the following points:

    -       The National Theatre had concerns of the proposal’s negative impact, such as the noise from the construction and had asked for a neighbour agreement to be reached between the developer and the Theatre.

    -       Waterloo had a Gross Development Value (GDV) of £5 million, with 30 million tourists and 100 million commuters using the public realm daily.

    -       The impact of this development on open spaces and the public realm in the surrounding area needed to be clearly addressed by officers through the proposed S.106 agreement and for it to be revisited and re-prioritised.

    -       The development would negatively impact the local area and due to the uplift in employment and the associated increase in activity. The green spaces in the area needed to be invested in to accommodate the increased activity at lunchtime, general recreation, and for public health.

     

    The Committee then heard from representatives who spoke in support to the application, and made the following points:

    -       The applicant had invested in other buildings and the timing would enable construction works to begin at the earliest opportunity.

    -       The proposal would enhance the pedestrian experience on the South Bank and provide high quality office space which was also highly sustainable.

    -       The proposal would plant 20 new trees. Further to this, terraces that were currently unused, would become workspace gardens.

    -       The development was an extension to an existing building, which increased public realm by 38% and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.