Agenda and minutes

Venue: Room 8, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill, SW2 1RW

Contact: Nigel Harvey Tel: 020 7926 3136 Email:  nharvey1@lambeth.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of Interest

    Minutes:

    Councillor Ruth Ling declared an interest in item 8 on the agenda (Lease Lend Cottage) as she knew one of the objectors. However she had not discussed the matter with that person and did not consider this to be prejudicial.

     

    Councillor Ruth Ling declared an interest in item 9 on the agenda (Fenstanton Primary School) as she was the Ward Councillor for that area and had been involved in briefings but had not been lobbied by or spoken to objectors on the matter and did not consider this to be prejudicial.

     

    Councillor Roger Giess declared a personal and prejudicial interest in item 9 on the agenda (Fenstanton Primary School) as he had campaigned regarding the project and did not take any part in the discussion or voting on this item.

     

     

2.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 104 KB

3.

Canterbury Court, Chichester House And Chester House, 1-3 Brixton Road London SW9 6DE (Vassall Ward) (11/03236/FUL) pdf icon PDF 272 KB

    Recommendation: To Grant variation of condition 14 of planning permission 10/04188/FUL and that delegated authority be given to officers to negotiate and complete any consequential variation to the S106 legal agreement by way of a deed of variation.

     

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/03236/FUL) (Page No. 31 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Ruth Ling and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That approval be granted to vary Condition 14 attached to planning permission 10/04188/FUL as set out in the report and addendum subject to Condition 1 referring to the date of the original planning permission (10 April 2010).

    (2)   That delegated authority be given to officers to negotiate and complete any consequential variation to the Section 106 legal agreement by way of a deed of variation.

     

     

4.

1-9 Bondway and 4-6 South Lambeth Place, London, SW8 (Oval Ward)

4a

(11/04043/FUL) pdf icon PDF 256 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Conditional Planning Permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a Deed of Variation.

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/04043/FUL) (Page No. 49 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Ruth Ling and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That approval be granted to vary Condition 12 and remove Condition 18 attached to planning permission 10/03151/FUL as set out in the report and addendum subject to Condition 1 referring to the date of the original planning permission (18 April 2011) and the satisfactory completion of a deed of variation.

     

     

4b

(11/04252/FUL) pdf icon PDF 251 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Conditional Planning Permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a Deed of Variation.

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/04252/FUL) (Page No. 69 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Roger Giess and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That approval be granted to vary Condition 27 attached to planning permission 10/03151/FUL as set out in the report and addendum subject to Condition 1 referring to the date of the original planning permission (18 April 2011) and the satisfactory completion of a deed of variation.

     

     

5.

170-174 and 176-188 Acre Lane, London (Ferndale Ward)

5a

(11/03181/FUL) pdf icon PDF 217 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Consent to Vary Condition 16 Planning Permission 10/01543/FUL Subject to a Deed of Variation to S106 Agreement

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/03181/FUL) (Page No. 133 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor John Whelan and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That approval be granted to vary Condition 16 attached to planning permission 10/01543/FUL as set out in the report and addendum, subject to Condition 1 referring to the date of the original planning permission (August 2010) and a deed of variation to the Section 106 Agreement.

     

     

5b

(11/03182/FUL) pdf icon PDF 222 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Consent to Vary Condition 17 Planning Permission 10/01543/FUL Subject to a Deed of Variation to S106 Agreement.

     

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/03182/FUL) (Page No. 147 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Roger Giess and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That approval be granted to vary Condition 17 attached to planning permission 10/01543/FUL as set out in the report and addendum, subject to Condition 1 referring to the date of the original planning permission (August 2010) and a deed of variation to the Section 106 Agreement.

     

6.

116 - 120 Coldharbour Lane London SE5 9PZ (Herne Hill Ward) (11/00261/FUL) pdf icon PDF 282 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions and variation of Section 106 agreement.

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/00261/FUL) (Page No. 223 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor John Whelan and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That approval be granted to allow minor material amendments to planning permission 09/01389/FUL as set out in the report subject to the additional condition set out in the addendum and a variation to the Section 106 Agreement.

     

     

7.

15 Stockwell Green (Larkhall Ward) (11/03606/DET) pdf icon PDF 155 KB

8.

Playground At Hurley House Cotton Gardens Estate Reedworth Street London (Prince's Ward) (11/02866/RG3) pdf icon PDF 217 KB

    Recommendation: That conditional planning permission be granted.

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/02866/RG3) (Page No. 21 of the Agenda)

     

    Following an officer presentation the meeting was addressed by two local residents from Vanbrugh Court who made the following points:

     

    • There was no objection to the fact that there was to be a playground but to the specific proposal.
    • There were problems with the proposed site which raised environmental issues.
    • The site would attract Anti Social Behaviour, as happened in Kennington Lane.
    • There had been no consultation with any nature body.
    • An alternative proposal was suggested which would have more balconies overlooking and would enable the area to work towards village green status.

     

    In answer to a question from a Member, residents stated that the play areas would be an attraction for anti social behaviour as there was seating in the area. There had been a similar outcome at the other side of the block.

     

    The meeting was addressed by representatives of the applicant and a local resident in support who made the following points:

     

    ·        There were no play areas for younger children near the estate and the proposals would cater for 490 apartments in the area.

    ·        The nearest play areas involved crossing a busy main road.

    ·        At present children playing were being bombarded by missiles and often had to play in communal corridors.

    ·        There had been extensive consultation on the proposals and there had been an 8 page petition in support.

    ·        Originally the proposal had been to site the playground nearer to Vanbrugh Court and this was the only other option because of the proximity of the trees.

    ·        The residents from Dryden and Sheridan Houses had withdrawn their objections. Also in 2010 some residents from Vanbrugh Court had supported the proposals.

    ·        In answer to a query from a Member it was confirmed that the Crime Prevention Unit had been consulted and had no comments to make.

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)               That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.

     

     

9.

Lease Lend Cottage, Hannington Road SW4 0LZ (Clapham Town Ward)

    Minutes:

    The two applications were considered together and the general discussion is presented here. Each application’s resolution is listed by that item below.

     

    Following an introduction by the officers the meeting was addressed by three residents who made the following points:

     

    • They were not opposed to the site being redeveloped but this was not the correct development.
    • The previous agreed development with two quality houses on the site was fine and they did not know why it had been changed. There was demand for large size houses in the area.
    • Concerns about the fact that the present gates were to be removed. At present when the gates were left open there was an increase in crime and there had been a significant increase in the number of burglaries in the area. They considered that a 1.8 metre high fence would not deter burglars.
    • The proposed development was too high a density and the small access road would have difficulty in coping with the extra traffic.
    • Concern over the siting of the bin store which would be at the bottom of an existing garden and would bring additional noise and be smelly, particularly in hot weather. The extra bins would be a nuisance and could cause an obstruction.
    • The previously agreed development had provision for 7-9 bedrooms whilst there would be 17 bedrooms in this development. Many of these bedrooms were en suite and at basement level.
    • There would be a loss in the number of trees.
    • There had been 14 objections but no-one in support.
    • Although there had been garages on the site the owner had used them for storage.
    • The development would be very close to the boundary fence.

     

    The applicants addressed the meeting and made the following points:

     

    ·        The size of the dwellings had been reduced as a result of a change in market conditions.

    ·        The proposed density was within the limits set out in the London Plan.

    ·        The footprint of the proposals was less than the previously agreed scheme.

    ·        The buildings were further away from the boundary than the previous scheme so that neighbouring gardens could enjoy more sunlight.

    ·        There were no proposals for timber fences as a green space would be provided around the walls.

    ·        The scheme would be gated which would be of benefit to security in the area.

    ·        The addendum to the report proposed that there be an additional condition requiring the submission of a waste management plan. There would be enclosed storage for refuse and recycling facilities.

     

    In answer to questions from Members the applicant confirmed the following:

     

    • The siting of the refuse facilities was constrained by the maximum walking distance for bin collectors.
    • The height of the boundary wall would be 1.8 metres, although that was not consistent across the boundary. The existing boundary walls would be retained and repaired where necessary. There would be more light compared to the existing approval.
    • The development was always intended to be gated.
    • Although there was 23% additional floor space compared to the existing scheme the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

9a

(11/01929/FUL) pdf icon PDF 271 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions and a Section 106 Agreement.

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/01929/FUL) (Page No. 161 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Roger Giess and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and the addendum, the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Agreement restricting car parking permits and the following amendments to conditions:

     

    ·        That there be fully enclosed bin store provision

    ·        The retention of gates to the site entrance

    ·        An emphasis of secure by design requirements regarding boundary wall treatments

    ·        Add a condition, as set out in the addendum, requiring a Waste Management Plan to be submitted and approved and an informative to include arrangements for bins to be returned within the site after collection.

     

     

9b

(11/02157/CON) pdf icon PDF 228 KB

10.

Fenstanton Primary School, Christchurch Road, London, SW2 (Tulse Hill Ward) (11/04184) pdf icon PDF 357 KB

    Recommendation: That the Reserved Matters be approved.

     

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/04184) (Page No. 193 of the Agenda)

     

    Councillor Roger Giess stood down for this item and played no part in the discussion or voting.

     

    Following an officer presentation the meeting was addressed by a local resident and a representative from Lambeth NUT who made the following points:

     

    • The site was too restricted.
    • It was the wrong place for this type of development.
    • Noise would carry over from the rooftop play area on the Primary School.
    • Concern about the hours at which construction would take place and that there should be a complaints liaison officer.
    • Concern that there should be employment for local people.
    • Concerns that the minimum internal and external space requirements for schools were being met.
    • Concern about the fact that the secondary school would be an academy and the proposed name for this school (City Heights Academy).
    • The lack of community facilities on the site.

     

    The applicant, architect and Head Teacher of Fenstanton School were present to answer questions from Members where the following points were made:

     

    • The proposals met the minimum requirements for internal and external space for schools.
    • There would be a youth centre on the site.
    • The name of the Academy had been selected as a result of consultation.
    • The contractor was proposing to offer 20 places for apprentices to work on the site.
    • It had been a deliberate policy to make sure that the envelope of the building was kept within that agreed as part of the outline planning permission. They had managed to keep the secondary school restricted to 4 storeys which would be beneficial to the operation of the building.
    • There was play provision at ground level in addition to that on the roof.

    .

    The Committee noted that the conditions regarding hours of construction had been agreed as part of the outline planning permission and were not for agreement as part of this application. The status of the secondary school was not a planning matter.

     

    Members expressed some concern at the proposal to provide shutters. They stated that, if shutters were necessary, they should be integral to the building design and provided internally.

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor John Whelan and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report as amended in the addendum and the addition of an informative stating that the design of the shutters should be integral to the building design with a preference for internal shutters.

     

     

11.

155A-167 Stockwell Park Road (Ferndale Ward) (11/00752/FUL) and (11/00779/CON) pdf icon PDF 273 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Conditional Permission and Conservation Area Consent.

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/00779/CON) (Page No. 267 of the Agenda)

     

    There was an officer presentation which stated that the third objection under paragraph 5.3 of the report had been withdrawn.

     

    The meeting was addressed by a representative of the Friends of the Almshouses who were in support of the application and expressed thanks for the withdrawal of the objection.

     

    A Member queried the fact that the links between the blocks were to be glazed as he felt this to be inappropriate.

     

    Officers confirmed that officers had proposed this design as an alternative to a solid walkway and was considered to work well.

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.

     

     

12.

Land at Nos. 382, 386, 388 and 390 Streatham High Road (St. Leonard's Ward) (11/04200/DET) pdf icon PDF 285 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Approval of Details.

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/04200/DET) (Page No. 305 of the Agenda)

     

    There was an officer presentation where it was reported that an email had been received from the Head of Conservation and Design confirming that they had no objections to the application.

     

    The meeting was addressed by a representative of Save Skating in Streatham and Councillors Judith Best and Jeremy Clyne who made the following points:

     

    • The lightbox would not be seen by motorists approaching from the Croydon direction until it was too late to turn into the car park.
    • The proposed canopy was too small and would result in a lot of people who might be queuing outside the centre being exposed to the elements.
    • The proposed materials were cheap and would require a high level of maintenance.
    • The National Ice Skating Association (NISA) had stated that they would withdraw their accreditation as a centre of excellence due to the poor access to resurface the ice (zamboni).
    • There had been a lack of consultation.
    • The Tesco canopy would be larger than the one for the Ice Rink which was not prominent enough.
    • The Streatham Action Group was not on the list of consultees.
    • The present proposals were not an improvement on the ones submitted to the Committee in June 2011. In particular there was an increase in the use of timber.
    • Councillor Jeremy Clyne suggested that the Planning Section was not independent from Regeneration. Officers commented that this was inappropriate because, although Regeneration and Planning were in the same Division, Planning officers made their recommendations independently.

     

    In answer to questions from Members the following points were made:

     

    • The only way to clean the render was by spraying water or with the use of scaffolding and it was questioned as to whether the operators would be able to carry it out.
    • The proposed scheme would not work in terms of layout etc. There had been progress but it was still not what was wanted.

     

    The Chair reminded the meeting that the application was only for the partial discharge of condition 3 and condition 4(q) and that other matters had already been agreed as part of previous applications.

     

    The applicants addressed the meeting and made the following points:

     

    • At the previous facility there had been queues of up to 30 metres waiting outside the entrance. There would be adequate room to accommodate these queues in the Reception Area which would be larger than the previous facility.
    • The revised scheme would result in a greater presence in the area and would reflect the surrounding buildings.
    • The materials would be high quality and whatever materials were used would require maintenance.

     

    In answer to questions from Members the following points were made:

     

    • The timber to be used in the building was of high quality and very hard wearing. Similar installations elsewhere had not shown any sign of deterioration. It was low maintenance and ‘self washing’.
    • As regards the render it was not proposed to have this right down on the ground. There would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

13.

55-59 The Cut London SE1 8LL (Bishop's Ward)

    Minutes:

    Guillotine

     

    During the discussion of this item, the guillotine fell at 10.00 pm.

     

    MOVED by the Chair, and:

     

    RESOLVED: That in accordance with Standing Order 9.9, the meeting continue for a further period of up to 45 minutes.

     

    The three applications were considered together and the general discussion is presented here. Each application’s resolution is listed by that item below.

     

    There was an officer presentation covering the following points:

     

    • The application had been called in by Councillor Diana Braithwaite.
    • The Sainsbury’s store would replace three units but that two of the units already had planning permission for the planned use and therefore only No. 59 was being proposed for a change of use.

     

    The meeting was addressed by a representative of Waterloo Community Development Group who made the following points:

     

    • There was support for Sainsburys opening in this location and there was particular support for the ATM as there was a lack of provision in the area.
    • Concern was expressed about the impact of the proposed chiller which would be situated close to residential property and should be moved towards the front.
    • Concern about noise and pollution from the in-store bakery.
    • Concern about the delivery and servicing arrangements as the Lorries used by Sainsburys (11 metres) were too large and bigger than those used by other companies.

     

    The meeting was addressed by Councillor Diana Braithwaite, Ward Councillor for Bishop’s Ward who made the following points:

     

    • She was not objecting to the application and had no concerns about the ATM application.
    • There had been extensive consultations over several months that had involved residents, councillors from Southwark and businesses in the area and the report did not reflect this.
    • She asked that the applications be deferred as they did not reflect the current situation.
    • If the Committee were minded to agree the applications she asked that amendments be made to condition 3 of application 11/02860/FUL and conditions 5, 6 and 7 of application 11/02775/FUL.

     

    The applicant addressed the meeting and made the following points:

     

    • Consultation had been carried out with residents and their comments had been taken on board.
    • They were happy to accept conditions regarding the noise levels on the plant.
    • As regards deliveries to the store, they were happy to accept conditions restricting it to one 11metre long vehicle per day. They were also willing to reduce the times when deliveries could occur.

     

    Officers stated that at present it was proposed that there would be a 15 metre long loading bay on The Cut outside the shop. Short Street was too narrow to accommodate a bay. As this would mean the loss of a parking bay on The Cut, a loading bay on Short Street would be redesignated for pay and display. The loading bay on The Cut would be available for any business in the area to use.

     

    In answer to questions from Members the applicant also stated the following:

     

13a

(11/02860/FUL) pdf icon PDF 223 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/02860/FUL) (Page No. 87 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Ruth Ling and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report as amended in the addendum and that Condition 3 be amended to reduce the noise to 10db below background noise and to restrict tonal quality subject to clarifying the wording to ensure the enforceability of the condition.

     

     

13b

(11/02775/FUL) pdf icon PDF 261 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission.

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/02775/FUL) (Page No. 99 of the Agenda)

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Roger Giess and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report, the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 agreement and the following amendments:

    ·        Condition 5 be amended to reduce the noise to 10db below background noise and to restrict tonal quality subject to clarifying the wording to ensure the enforceability of the condition.

    ·        Condition 6 be amended to ensure that there is a limit of one 11metre delivery lorry per day.

    ·        Condition 7 be amended to allow deliveries only between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm

     

     

13c

(11/02779/FUL) pdf icon PDF 244 KB

14.

Stewarts Lodge, 201 Stewart's Road (Larkhall Ward) (11/03420/FUL) pdf icon PDF 220 KB

    Recommendation: Grant Conditional Permission subject to Section 106 agreement.

     

    Minutes:

    (Case No. 11/03420/FUL) (Page No. 239 of the Agenda)

                                                            

    There was an officer presentation for members to assess the visual impact of this prominent scheme.

     

    MOVED by Councillor Diana Morris, SECONDED by Councillor Roger Giess and:

     

    RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

     

    (1)   That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and the addendum, and the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Agreement as set out in the report.