Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room B6, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill SW2 1RW

Contact: Maria Burton Tel: 020 7926 8703 Email:  MBurton2@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 regard to Application 17/05807/EIAFUL, Councillor Joanne Simpson declared in the interests of transparency that she was married to Councillor Jack Hopkins, who would be speaking in objection to the application as a Ward Councillor, but this would not influence her decision-making.

 

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

 

2.

Land Bounded By Wandsworth Road, Parry Street, Bondway And Vauxhall Bus Station (Oval) 17/05807/EIAFUL pdf icon PDF 3 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 and any direction as may be received following further referral to the Mayor of London and any direction received from the Secretary of State.

     

    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 four 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. 17/05807/EIAFUL (agenda item 3, page 57 of the agenda pack, page 7 of the addendum and page 2 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 14 December and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which included the construction of a mixed-use development of two towers of up to 53 storeys, with a connecting 10-storey podium, the provision of a 618 room hotel, 257 dwellings and a new public square.  A £30 million payment in lieu of affordable housing was considered appropriate due to the site constraints.  The application would enable the removal of the gyratory and associated works to Vauxhall Bus Station.  The development would be car-free except for Blue Badge parking, and cycle parking met London Plan standards.  Servicing would be done from the basement car park which was accessible via vehicle lifts, and on-streets loading bays would be available for ad hoc deliveries.  The south tower at 185 metres was higher than the 150 metres identified for the site and was therefore considered a departure from the development plan. There was an extant planning permission on the site.  Members were shown images of the existing context, proposed road layout, proposed floorplans, the application within the context of other approved schemes and proposed views.

     

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

    ·         The development was too large for the site, and combined with other developments in the area would have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring buildings.

    ·         Bus users transferring between bus stops would have to walk further than in the existing bus station, and would have to walk around large buildings.

    ·         The number of vehicle lifts for servicing was insufficient, and servicing arrangements did not fully consider the number of deliveries that would be associated with 250 flats.

    ·         The development would result in increased traffic, particularly on Wandsworth Road, thereby worsening air pollution. 

     

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

    ·         The applicant had worked with the Council for two years to develop a solution for the site.  The development would help to achieve the long-term goal of the removal of the Vauxhall gyratory.

    ·         Approximately 2,000 people would be employed at the development.

    ·         There would be affordable housing on-site and a £30 million contribution to off-site affordable housing.

     

    Councillor Jack Hopkins then spoke as Ward Councillor for Oval:

    ·         The application did not meet a number of the Council’s policies, such as on height, affordable housing, playspace and amenity space.

    ·         The requirement for the gyratory to be delivered before the development could be occupied was positive, but Members needed to be confident that it would be delivered.

    ·         Financial contributions to parks would not create new space, and existing parks were already busy.

    ·         The impacts on daylight and sunlight were unacceptable, and rough sleepers were no less deserving of light.

    ·         Neighbouring developments had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

3.

Glenbrook Primary School, Clarence Avenue (Thornton) 18/03236/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 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.

     

    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 and PAC minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.

     

    4.     In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within (four) 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 and the PAC minutes.

     

    Minutes:

    Case No. 18/03235/FUL (agenda item 2, page 1 of the agenda pack, page 1 of the addendum and page 1 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 14 December and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which included the construction of a four-storey secondary school on the existing primary school site, with entrances on Clarence Avenue and Clarence Crescent.  The application for the redevelopment of the primary school had already been approved.  The principle for a new secondary school was supported and would provide new school places.  Car use would be discouraged through the use of a Travel Plan, and there would be contributions towards highways improvements, ‘school streets’ consultation, Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) review and additional bus capacity.  Members were shown images on the existing site, views to and from the site, the proposed layout, sunlight distribution of playspace and the relationship between the new primary school and the proposed secondary school.

     

    The agent, highways consultant and representative from Harris Federation then provided the following information in support of the application:

    ·         Harris was an experienced provider of education and the site was capable of supporting a secondary school.  The school would help to meet the urgent demand for secondary places.  The new school would open in September 2020.

    ·         There had been extensive consultation with parents, carers and community groups.  The Department for Education was fully supportive of the application.

    ·         Break and lunch times would be staggered to prevent overcrowding.

    ·         The development would only have parking for blue badge holders and there would be no space for drop-off and pick-up of pupils.

    ·         The applicant had undertaken a travel study and found that there would not be a severe highways impact.

    ·         The applicant would make contributions to footpaths, cycle paths, bus services, ‘school keep clear’ road markings and a CPZ review.  The travel plan would be reviewed as the number of pupils increased.

    ·         The building would be over 30 metres from neighbouring properties, and would not affect neighbouring amenity, daylight or sunlight.

    ·         The building would be primarily made of brick, with coloured accents for break up of the façade. The elevation of the sports hall would allow further circulation on ground level.

     

    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.

     

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

    ·         The cycle storage was in the southwest of the site, and would all be Sheffield stands.

    ·         There would be a number of deliveries through the week for servicing, which would use vehicles in a range of sizes.  Refuse vehicles would not be able to enter the site so would have to use Clarence Avenue.

    ·         The site was in the Clapham ‘L’ CPZ but this did not prevent servicing or deliveries.  Vehicles  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

Appeal and Enforcement Decisions June 2018 pdf icon PDF 260 KB

5.

Appeal and Enforcement Decisions July 2018 pdf icon PDF 249 KB