Planning Committee C - Thursday, 6th August 2020 at 7:30pm - Lewisham Council Webcasting

Planning Committee C
Thursday, 6th August 2020 at 7:30pm 









Start of webcast
Share this agenda point
2 Minutes
1 Declarations of Interests
Share this agenda point
3 Brockley Social Club, 240-242 Brockley Road, London, SE4 2SU
3 Brockley Social Club, 240-242 Brockley Road, London, SE4 2SU
4 Woodelm Court, Devonshire Road, SE23 3LX.
5 Land at Rear of 148 Deptford High Street, London, SE8
5 Land at Rear of 148 Deptford High Street, London, SE8
5 Land at Rear of 148 Deptford High Street, London, SE8
2 Minutes
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

good evening and welcome to planning commend coming to say I am the Chair my name is on Rotimi of about whether Chow that Planning Committee I am joining by them members of the Committee war along alongside
myself to determine tonight application there these are not an unusual circumstances place if if we are technical issue please be aware it all fits the office hours
gratified is as soon as possible after the cancer please Members please tone of your microphone because of the background noise
I am
if they will have any question any question or any during this meeting please kindly indicate in being charged for and chat facility or owl now I'll call the
the Clerk of the meeting to call the roll call of the Members were present place broke our place
good evening Cagney from members of that with the roll call in alphabetical order as the Bernard's
are the moment Councillor another is running late is of difficulty to accesses and Tim I'll continue cats the clock
present Councillor Ingleby
Councillor Keller Councillor QROPS skied present
Councillor Maslin
I move on Castle but will present
Councillor passion
has she Crescent
Councillor Penfold Thursley
Councillor Rathbone present encounters got back is Councillor Bernard's with us
Councillor Massey
that completes the roll-call thank him
I am in communication with Councillor bernard's he's trying to logging but IT is not letting him come to do so thank you Councillor Rose gone
no like him be Clerk of the Committee to place interviews the officer we're going to O'Donnell to advise and assist the Committee this evening place
blood clots
back I beg your pardon
yes that can I read out the name the job title and the role of the individual at tonight's meeting thank you James Hughes Team Leader presiding Officer Louisa art
sorry about that Louisa Orchard senior Planner Assistant recited son Alfie Williams Planning Officer Case Officer for Item 3 Georgia McBurney can officer Case Officer for Item 4
sovereign Planning Officer case of item 5 poorly young senior Lawyer legal Services of Lucian Council Solicitor provided advice
myself put it may not committed Clarke
the massacre IT consultant
thank you know I haven't finished there's just less just come up on my screen on beg your pardon for James Whitfield digital skimming off Sir providing webcasting support care for her tea Head of committees provided moderation thank you thank you Chair thank you yeah before before we consider the application and planning application to 19 up please we have some administrative matter too
to the Committee to lead to
attention at an attempt to attend to glory forced the last last minute of the last minute of the last meeting place
chair he has been asked if you want anyone who's in the lobby to be admitted at this time
yes of course yet there is somebody in the low-pay and there is unknown user I think somebody who came in earlier today to be tested for connection stealing Glazer
yes putting now in the meeting of Tory Akademi the I just heard my name
yes is the clock I met you earlier today sorry high yet 2 minutes like their three mother
that's OK
thank you please are the minutes of the last meeting place
it's offered we saw good I've no issue with it

2 Minutes

thank you agree
thank you
secondly now is any Members out any declaration of interest

1 Declarations of Interests

to declare
on tonight's agenda place
and pass along away yes it might be an I should say this now I'm a member of the musicians Union so that might affect a question I ask in relation to the cuts to the social club
thank you Councillor Ogilvie Councillor prideful yeah I had I chaired the public meeting in respect of the first I think the broccoli social club but I didn't form of you I haven't formed a view yet on this one so I don't think that I have any interest or or prejudice anyway thank you Councillors and that it was all about him now
it's true
yes Councillor manner do you have any declaration of interest in this agenda within tonight
let's just more 1 Councillor Clarke
yes yes any they have anything you want to deter place now no no declarations of interest
Councillor Oborski sorry I'll weaponise it well what Sky he I know I don't have any interest night worker and fine thank you Councillor Mark Maslin
let's move up Councillor pursue
no I have no interested declare
Councillor Osborne
I'm certainly interested Chair but I don't have any conflicts of interest can you are hereby call everybody now you can call me
I feel that that to me I'm sorry
there were many others thinking we were such good comrades you need to leave me out like them sorry lower the amount any interest place
the last item on the agenda is in my ward but I have yet to form a view and I was not asked by my community to object on their behalf thank you thank you Chairman Councillor O and I also like Councillor Clarke can't agree the minutes of the last meeting because I've trying to convey
thank you
we now come to the men business of the again that the legal requirement director of legal requirement for the Committee to remain
remain carers of all time and Councillor soon remain present throughout the big throughout the meeting the score on this distorts in order to vote on the on the item the Council IT Officer will monitor the admitting and advice of any
connectivity issue if
if admitting become enquirers or if we lost on rating the meeting the meeting will be caught and B tech I've who will be resolved resolved Officer when endeavour to resolve the any issue as soon as soon as was us as quickly as possible and we would ask you to bear with us if these upon
I propose to take big they application in other into the night tonight 18 other each application wool it each application
the Committee will before scared the presentation from big from the Planning Officer set setting out the proposer development development and the relevant planning consideration and the recommendation the Committee may be asked the planning officer question the applicant the applicant the again would be invited to speak in support of the application which will be given the give given five minutes subject to the discretion of the Chair any member of the public will pre registered to speak will be invited to speak will be given five minutes and also the
the objectors descending will be given five minutes after any objector be committee will decide the application movie moved to ground the application refused the application or defer the application if
if they decided to refer all if the application on the Committee needs to give the reason please come with it
can they
the presenting officer to present the first application thank him
first application place to eat it's an officer yet healthy and yet this queuing up with me and say that yeah yeah within say thank you thank you Chair

3 Brockley Social Club, 240-242 Brockley Road, London, SE4 2SU

I'll cake so this is an application at the broccoli social club to 40 so thoughts over the road
and the application is for the demolition of the existing building and the construction of a part 4 part 5 storey building including a basement to re-provide the social club and provide nine residential units and the application site at present is a two storey building used as a social club which is the case on the western side of Brockley Road at its junction with Foxbury Road
M and S the front elevation and tracing unto Brockley Road there the immediate area is predominantly residential and that features a variety of architectural styles and scouted development on the opposite side of Foxby Road is a picture carriage he seemed cursed there which is adjacent to a 4 storey block of flats known as Foxbury called and Foxbury Road is predominantly comprised of Victorian two storey Terry's terrace properties and similar properties also characterised the stretch of broccoli might Road immediately to the north of the site so he Syria the Surrey here the ASA building on the opposite side of Brockley Road
is I'm a four-storey building known as pear tree house an is forms part of the wider development of silence 6 and 7 storey buildings that but then
progress no fun Brockley Road and the site has a pay towel for and is approximately 400 metres from Brockley station
I am coming to the proposals the proposals would see the that demolitions the existing building the no social club with be arranged over ground floor and basement this is the basement Plan here the basement with feature the kitchen storage and function rooms
come to the first floor this with would retain the main bar area in this area
and the access would be from Foxby Road in the side elevation
and the social club would also feature a sunken terrace in this area with the patrons of the social club
I'm so it may even moving and the residential accommodation and this will be arranged over the northern part of the ground floor here and on all of the upper floors then is comprised of 5 and 2 bedroom 3 person units two 2 bedroom 4 person units and two free bedroom 4 person units and the be entrances to the Weston shall and condition from the front and rear elevations
I am so the northern half of the ground floor would feature free bedroom flat saying here
I'm at first floor level there would be free flats
there are still out there
and the second and third floor and saying here and I've seen that I as comprised of two flats and the top floor with feature one three-bedroom flat and saying there
and don't be separate refuse facilities for the residential and social club could located in the rear of the building and cycle parking two hours aside parking to the front and rear for the residential in communal areas
section food shown at sunken terrace
8 The building would feature facing yellow bricks as the third floor
am with dark coloured bricks on the ground floor to distinguish the social club entrance the top storey would be set in from all sides and clad in a dark coloured metal
and the windows would be aluminium in a dark grey colour
that the front elevation faces inset balconies
from the second floor above
and at the way they were being closed winter garden style balconies as seen here
analysis decided erection shiny entrance the social club as he could see a different colour bricks that distinguished the social club
this is the other side elevation Notley obscure glazed windows in the side elevation nest
I am certainly into the main planning situation starting with the principle of the development and the principle of development is supported to given that the redevelopment would see the existing social club retained and employment on the site potentially increased additionally proposals would see the offer to local community groups expanded and formalise which is considered a planning merit the provision of 9 misadventure units including two family sized dwellings would contribute towards the borough's housing requirements
terms of residential Quality
conditions are recommended skewing the recommendations of the acoustic reports and the management strategy for the social club in order to prevent unacceptable noise and disturbance to the so that from the social club
and ensure compliance with the agent of change principle and knows you is provided at paragraph 61 68 of the committee report the proposed residential units are considered to be good quality which exceed the technical housing standards with Joe aspect as a minimum providing good levels of outlook light and ventilation the failure to provide balconies for one unit is not considered to in the refusal of the application given the overall highest standard of accommodation in terms of urban design and officers consider that the proposed building worked represent a high quality and contextual additions to the area that responds positively to the surrounding architecture and town scape reflecting the variety of building heights within the Sinn vicinity so that's fish some examples there four storey building on Foxbury roads none is Foxby call and in the blocks of flats opposite the site on block the road
the proposed materials and detailing of the building and see this be high quality and successfully differentiate the social club from the residential accommodation providing a distinct identity for the social club
am in terms of the transport impacts of the proposed development is considered to have an acceptable impact on the surrounding transport network subject to legal agreement securing a financial contribution to see PZ and the imposition of conditions securing a construction logistics Byrne and the provision of cycling and refuse facilities prior to the occupation
of the building and the terms of the impacts of living conditions of the neighbouring prophecies
the proposed development is Keith considered to have an acceptable impact with the adverse impacts to light restricted to a single of window at number 2 3 8 Brockley Road that shown as window 1 0 free to his last win though on that pitch there
and the adverse impacts has been weighed against the benefits of the proposal and as a matter of planning judgement are considered to be acceptable conditions recommended skewing the details of the screen and balconies and roof terraces to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring properties is protected turn into sustainable development the conditions recommended to security energy Strategy earns such strategy are considered to ensure an acceptable impact and finally the natural environment there
are not considered to be any significant adverse impacts the natural environment given that it would be a net gain in landscaping and biodiversity and therefore planning permission is recommended for approval subject to conditions and the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement
thank you Chair
chair needed
I think some of them 3 Councillor once was 3 Members want to ask questions of this catalogue pursue
Councillor pass through the gate and the can we go back to the side that that shows the ground floor place
because this is this is part of the social club and a housing unit all on the same floor as that so
healthier communities
in you still say the screen and shares a second say the screen that is there's a housing unit and oak account now 17 to fix that
the for
that's its back now I fate yet so this error here is the social club and in this area is the residential unit the cause of I think it it's always a bit of a worry when there's a commercial use planned for the ground floor of a property that they the long term plan is for all to become residential and because there's a Bassman I would feel some concern about about that that situation arising I know it has come back to a planning committee but the fact that there's living accommodation on the same floor as the proposed social club just just against me a little bit of of of doubt about that and the site particularly about basement accommodation as she quickly identify a council that there would be an necessity for application and change the use of the social club so that they won't get through that without planning permission
sadly I think we must consider the matter in hand which is the plans in front of us was within any potential future use
of the social club but you can be content that they would need planning permission stay did attempt to change the use of the social
I have done just to be unsure as to what that situation would be in the light of government changes as a say that that the fact that there's a basement basement living is not a Joyce OK thank you very much
chair I think Councillor Keller has a question yes that saw him Councillor Khan
thank you Councillor the Chair and thank you gained Alfie could you go to the elevation shows the front door of the social club with the banner learned yet of that work next out note that one yet what I did read
but I'm not clear why the façade can't go all the way across
I the floor for balconies
in terms of for the flat above
it be
in those odds of you missed the it would compromise the design so that thus clearly meant to be part of the social club SYPTE to put balcony until Pellatt with look slightly incongruous with that's the canopy says not really appropriate support a balcony on top of that said that they have been provided to avail
o Alfie's frozen
because if he doesn't come back in a moment I think just picking up on this point that it's illegibility issue so I think to get a clear separation between residential and commercial uses the applicants probably select the design of that nature I'm I'm mindful we do have the applicant here so we can probably get the question where you could put your question directly to the architects when we had when we hear from them
carried thank you just can't be arsed to Arsenal captain I pick up on the fact that it leads one may be true flat without any form of amenity space I did understand what we said there are just so it could have been worked around differently but thank you for the response and I will I would ask the architect Richard permission thank you Councillor Cranford ways
Councillor Paul
sorry my my commute so thank you to me thank Jess yeah if you look her her paragraph largely 5 about car parking obviously there's been a parking survey done but says that there is some capacity
I have concerned about the parking because I'm a ward councillor for this area I get casework about people who are unable to park in the road
particularly during the day because Brockley station is the first zone to station on that line and people drive in from Crofton Park and Forest Hill said in a more out wherever and they park in those surrounding roads I'm just concern we're building nine residential units and I understand about in own be encouraging bike use but you can't sell a flat say to somebody will actually you can't have a car and parking is really difficult there I note that the report says that there is parking available on Brakspears Road we can Road and St Margaret's Road will that's the other side of the lane road with some Margot Road is actually blocked off up Brockley Road and you'd have to drive round through Adelaide Avenue about half half mile drive so what I'm saying is there needs to be
a CPZ or at least the residents need to be urgently given the choice of the CPS said and I note that that is something that you've put in there about a financial contribution I would like that firmed up of the top at all possible
the Bill and the officer the will come back to them though half yes sure an that Saracens criteria than 5 year looking skew the contribution to the sea he said
that can be used for consultation and if successful potentially the implementation of the CPS Ed but it is not within our power to guarantee that that consultation will be successful a Nestlé guarantee that there will be a controlled parking zone so with the winners as much as we can within the legal framework cannot ride on yeah I mean come can we say this condition there will be a consultation I accept that we can't tell people how they vote by an I have my own parking survey this morning I went over there and there are two spaces Foxbury none in Harcourt one in Howson on what an Arab in and that was 11 30 and this is at a time when people are still furloughed and not using stations much they would be normally so can we not have it as a condition that there will be a CPZ consultation I accept you can't say there will be a CPS Ed
that is up for the residents to decide
so Councillor Pinfold the contribution is in respect of the consultation so it funds the consultation and then the section 1 6 agreement if if Members are minded to grant consent would be structured so that we could use part of the funds if there if there's funds left over for implementation but as a Committee we we can't take him that the certainty that there would be a CPS at in the future because it's not within our remit as a committee I would underline that the Transportation Officer has reviewed the parking stress servant so are hovers office fair satisfied that there is capacity and that it would be up to local residents by way of them a local referendum and gun consultation to bring forward the CPS Ed
thank you Chair
are you satisfied with our then Councillor my phone locked clear wet weather would gain saying we have the power to say there will be a consultation as a result or the while 0 6 law
I understand that we are about what the result of that would be but can we say that there will be a consultation the the only thing you can take into consideration Councillor is the funding that would be brought forward from the developer would would go towards a consultation for a controlled parking zone that consultation would be undertaken by the Highways Team and then subsequently as a result of consultation if the CPS at his brought forward then that we would have a mechanism that would preclude future occupiers of these residents from having a parking permit but it's it's just infer that so that this the section 2 6 will structure the funding and Members can take that into consideration as a local finance consideration
thank you Councillor Rose one place
thank you Chair so Councillor pursued already picked up on this earlier ambitious relating to noise so we've got noise management is a conditions 5 6 and 7 arm but obviously prescriptions of this is very much in Officer and Planning Policy speak it would be helpful if it could be made more clear what that actually translates into I'm particularly interested in obviously the insulation works speech would be in place to segregate obviously the noise from the social club and residential sections if it could be laid out by the applicant or officers walked with that she translates into in layman's terms that would be very helpful thank you Councillor up and can we leave that one for the applicant yet that's absolutely Chair of teachers minded to lower he appear Corsican thank you are Councillor
Paretsky please
and is located out and going to leave my questions the applicant thank you Councillor Clark Place
thank you Chair my question was to the officer about the height of the building and in in relation to the building surrounding because it does seem rather high in relation to the building right next to it which is a two storey building as I understand it and I would like you to if you could go back over the buildings immediately opposite the and the terraced housing immediately opposite because it appears to me that the height is an rather large against those all so could you tell me of the buildings which are much higher story there obviously part of different sets of buildings but I would imagine there were built quite a long time ago are you aware of the sort of debts the highest or buildings because they would have been built under a different planning regime so if you could give me any more clarity I would be grateful or can you say that Councillor Clarke yes I can yet I
but I believe that date from the Sixties on I can't be absolutely certain they look the style looks like it yes yes sir can't give any more carry on on that
in terms of the the higher is is clearly higher than the adjacent buildings on Brockley Road and and Foxby Road but there is there is a variety of heights within the townscape as its office this photos show and I appreciate out built at different times but it does show the evolving nature of the architecture and the scoured development on Brockley Road there also is a character of to have
larger buildings on the corners of roads with at the junction of Brockley Road the so it's it's not shown in this photo but am desert large church at the end of Wickham owed and actually at the other end the Foxby roads where it needs Brockley Road and there's a pub there and a Nasa four-storey building as well with a Sainsbury's of belief so that there is this character of larger buildings and at at the junction of Wyse a main road
so it is
officers view that this it would be contextual and given a variety and trim different scales of development within the immediate vicinity
thank you and I must admit so might have got strange light on my computer bit I must admit I find it incongruous are suddenly and a row of houses of all one height and opposite houses of one height the other flats are delivery side on to houses so that they're not flat onto you know facing
directly facing people's front windows and this would be directly facing people's front windows and over Gardens I do find this one a little bit Sir difficult because that sort of height seems incongruous to the immediate housing around it not the 19th what looks like 19 60 s flats
you know it across to the other side of the road that are a side on and one end that are tucked back I I'm a little bit concerned about the height and the impact of height on people around an opposite thank you
this this come back on her forehead is that OK Chair
that I can be me
shockingly officer response to the point yes please can you do to yet I'm just talking go back I'll go back to that in regard to the facing windows there is there is that establish relationship further up on Saxilby Road say it although it's a different relationship they're not so at the moment that is a fairly typical relationship within on that road in other sections and and on the surrounding roads so I I take the point but there is a change but it's it's not one I would say is out of character for the area
chair wouldn't be able to see the actual pictures of the height if you could show me the heights of the building as against the and the the you know the makeup
they are
yes because that's slightly different for them two storey houses facing 2 storey houses that so you know that's a an awful lot higher than a 2 storey house facing you
it so it's the concern the privacy or or visually him has its visual impact its amenity it some privacy as eyes that has a major impact on the I am for you know just generally not not only you know going down the street it looks incongruous to the two that immediate surroundings in my mind but also for the people living opposite and are next to it I think
that does seem out of context I or what I would say in response is that yes I would change the outlook from the the properties opposite for it they would have aspects 3 either side of that there is an a daylight sunlight suggests that the impacts in terms of light would be within acceptable limits
thus retaining a third just to that that has as far as we have to strike a balance to make sure that we're optimising site potential with sites to have good access to public transportation if the Chair's minded to allow we could also let the let the architect respond in in respect of the design rationale because he could probably take Members through answer what what the thinking is in terms of the design if you're if you're if the Chair's minded to to go in that direction thus thank of James here I agree with them up Councillor up Councillor par you finish really are presently
sorry yes thank you very much Chair I am thank you thanks a logging Garvey please
I thank you child wait till the architects with this
thank you
thank you can we know him by being the applicant and the agent place so we have a Mr. undersea whose the Chartered Architects he can turn on your microphone and your Comer thank their own my hope the wrong and is it worth it is working
excellent Runciter crocodile thank you who you'll know before you start please you have five minutes he had to him but are you the only one going though they supplied support of this application going to speak or somebody else do not pick these just name in Ireland just you your five minutes and city very much stuck now thank you get
the gentleman who was listening in my name as they say as Robert nursery I'm charter attacked our represent not those still less do have designed building in liaison with the planners saying had been very helpful our original brief was simply to save the social club it needs to be brought up to date and the considered of City external residential to help this and fun the actual club ravine rebuilt
just as a matter of interest one of the things about the basement been an uncluttered felt entered residential actual social plot and the site they aren't charge of what happened not the Director our initial scheme that attending Elkin was involved in the previous plan and had more apartment it was sorry small a picturebook cetera and was not a boy the principle of development is acceptable they were concerned about it
it's high they wanted a higher building they wanted a different mix of units and the preference of a flat roof over the pitched roofs all whole design thought changed her and said to to meet those councils design ethos things best brains new as they can followed pining farmers some of the local authority's internal consultees and develop the whole to the shoes come the place some of the flats and the media's with linear in a very good a high ceilings Oby triple aspect all and I was made some bright and cheerful cricketer to live in we talked about the balcony is everyone's got about the parking one flat but is to read the either the canopy I'll come to that later on perhaps in the question
as you know is a plethora of reports some of which are understood some which may not be but the external into comes up sees gone through in detail and there have been no objection dry PFI those experts now and say they're right but our the people but advice on this at an insignificant reports read it has been touched on the ceilings noise exposure Assessment noise impact Assessment a daylight sunlight overshadowing impact Assessment parking serve out with mentioned earlier but I'm see energy strategy
all these topics have been assessed at meetings were held
and various people including the broccoli society than me helpfully praising the scheme moving it forward
berlusconi meeting was held wants the application submitted
point to raise and many changes that we could make happen night and comprising blocks fit boxes about the society raise sold site currently has little landscaping better Naret but with a reduced footprint basic Hollaback of the size totally covered we've now an admitted a significant amount of landscaping green and blue routes Blue Rose being designed as she hold rainwater more sobering Green Green Rowsley Road not be traffic that are not additional vouchers leisure space etc. So worth containing people aim the cycle stores about Green Rose and offered the prospect will improve the ecological area which I think in images really helpful in this error and also helps with water run off at his
sometimes these heavier showers and reimburse forgetting is now plan to to hold up water and the time on site or cabinet within sight
therefore the Council's policies at core promises of additional house and maintain the existing but it is nice by proceed criteria
there are local concerns been directed specifically by the Planning Farm in many of these because of his report this really builds out very full explanation of how they approached it what everyone criteria were we think the design is acceptable gives
also be given the backing of the Council and the Bragi satiety the weasel to suit design meets or hopefully exceed that this I stand the he met materials to return yet to be agreed the one thing I would disagree with the out beyond any to go please Eddie finished the the top stories actually can be unlike RHI not dark it served RAL 7 3 8 pale grey so it will actually juice impact loss daylight and outlook privacy Alban assessed by specialists and through them and based on the B are are Thanet which we are able to to use them in the setts and the noise is also something that there's been a report on that and passed I can answer questions when I come up obviously with good leadership the club and weight going to be done I can minimise the noise and that's what the designed every or now that we've actually done a scheme in Brentford boating sadly never as this and the sound proofing works really last hopefully case officer's recommendation is accept them all our trust schemes impact on those who oppose it in Ireland but she dropped when I said in place and it's setting that the landscape is action that anything else we can day off Seiken's needs while providing additional much-need housing and the club will survive and that's the really major input from Apple thank you thank you
Councillor Prosky place
I've got several and things I just want to ask you and to understand a little bit more so festival I don't understand
excuse me I don't understand the landscaping of the the terrace outside the club and the slope I just don't understand how that works at all and I don't I just don't or can't perceive there and I don't understand how what the thinking is in that space and how it would actually be used in practice and I don't think there's anything on any of the plans which show anything about there's a kind of this aside path that goes between the main building and the the house that is next year and I completely understand why you Pat to put that in but there's nothing about materials on that tall and I really wouldn't want that to sit become like really horrible weedy spot so I'd like to see that if you are going to have that space it needs to be paid properly so that that doesn't become a problem for the residents and the club the cycle storage you'd got 18 semi vertical psychic cycling slots but there increase acre I'm a cyclist and they can actually be incredibly difficult to use if you're not like seriously Abberley able bobble bodied and it's also this Nose there's lot these flats I would imagine will be used partially with faecal with young families maybe babies and they may want to actually start you know transporting their children around and I would let I would really like to see in new developments in space for that big bikes that cargo bikes that actually can transport children because otherwise you're not really accommodating everyone in the community in this kind of bills so that's that and then then in the energy report excuse me Chair known going on but I need to these answer so the energy report it says I this bit I just don't understand OK because
you've got these wonderful solar panels on the road which is going to produce a lot of energy but you've also got like 9 gas boilers within these flats which is something that Lewisham is ultimately going to try and eradicate out of buildings over the next into because we're trying to get ourselves down to carbon 0 by 20 30 and what I did in the energy report it says due to the cries preference and the ability to export electricity generated so an appeal B has been explored further so it reads as if what you're saying is that instead of actually dealing with the carbon this actually being used in the building your creating more to kind of offset that carbon use which to me is bit of there have been a cop-out
and then it says there is also another section which it says to erase could be merged to form one large array providing electricity to either residential communal areas or social club one-word but one would over deliver and one would under-deliver and I just have substantial amaze so if you can help me with a few of those issues I'd really appreciate chip and you then thank you sense a fairly good be Tennal inflation right side side of can be paid the pretty ropey five are in fact the thing Elfie that you mentioned to us but he OK there as well but before we put one either end so it's actually protected route is not really expected that people go down that side path with more minor because the entrance and from and the front you're trying to record it but both of the residential access points lift the Senni central the stairs and Morfa Foxley Road but there's actually access all the way through for the residents to get to go down the side is more to do with simply makes allowance or either I wouldn't expect it to do that unless there but by but I can't get in one than they could do and so so that's an option yes bikes and really I think more critical nowadays ticking patient where we are in you need to encourage what's Bahgat got so many bike stores there may be an under don't know the answer this but the maybe an option serving on on the main road to actually come out and be signed theatre which would lead either to give the likes of it more room to be less bird or ISO but some within certain look at the thing a space we've actually widen the path there over this painting route One Knowbury Tom guessing that a bit more space to convince us I think your point is snapping at it and place it can the that's because it's important
well they cannot this make a point on on that that the cycle stores equally the Highways Officer did raise someone issues Councillor Cook scheme erased and the space around the stores was increased or on the request of the Highways Officer so that that has been considered and the scheme amended to reflect for comments about highways officer
thank you thank you thank you healthy now so hopefully that can give you some answers to that point as far as the energy report goes off see we're not the experts in this part I will say that the energy methods of in in the future next month year will be changing significantly we may well have to go to gasp at site lettre boilers are becoming more efficient but there are also other names now as a needy unit exception HER all-electric but actually handled
the heating and pressure etc. turn to them not a choice out there the energy assessor has to do something to insert some submit but this was fitted puppy a year ago nearly lose a long while ago
and things have changed significantly so expect that to be alternate graded I don't cook because I won't be a condition everyone there than 35 percent carbon etc
yes requests covered by a condition so they so yes so the Council of point Moody's we don't like as more than the thing are all trying to go away from them and as long as we get the 35 and at least you may well find that this the actual flattened tells us forget to have even more efficient than one a year ago OK landscaping this visit as a small Lauer Terrace and then the bank had comes up with his landscapes natural planting is is suitable for that kind of landscaping atlases is not it's not going to be a wonderful slide down such etc. it's actually tough Lance Lynn there and protect everything around that site taking will work honestly
but obviously we always look at these things again but I wanted to keep the actual Terrace as small as I can and that was not to be going outside because they will generate noise the canopy over is expressly their staff at noisy catches it but it's made material actually well absorbed noise that's the reason it's there in that location not they were our so specific how aware the will go out if I'm not smoke etc. I lose my that chap but that canopies there specifically catch that and we want to make how to be a small as possible
smoky air as far as possible and encourage people not to be lovely and then the landscape in Sydney lamb rams up site visit of slump going down that is that cover all your points sorry first of all and yes I think it does I mean personally I would like to see some kind of condition if we can hurt that that I know it's kind of a bit of a woolly condition but something about and the installation of gas boilers only an absolute last resort intensify it if it makes the whole a whole built unviable but I would really think that we know in terms of what we're trying to do in their motion I think we should avoid gas boiler installation as as as much as we can so I think if we can build some sort condition into that officers out appreciator the added principle though for civil
cadaver gallery badawi sorry
thank you Chair and
I'd like to repeat my question about the balcony why not why no balcony above the sorry yes yes we think the reality that his fifth Vickers's canopies especial structure to stop noise from fixed things through it will be tricky so and I think they need
department for directness they want the club to be a separate standalone structure offensively let's their visual impact had works are sticking it intimate domestic health and balcony on top of that is not gonna tell an appeal and said there's more to do the appearance hazard it's on this sound protection policy of the canopy
and we have got some amenity space around so it's a balance and a figure of is quite rightly pointed out in his report everywhere else has got about no got big out is new again though it's just one of those things that unfortunate on that corner the a club took precedence
not necessarily want but that's how it came about or on its current Walt know if if I just know that if this were my ward lack of be one of the main questions that my residents will be asking you know why this inequality and night one clarity on that and I support councillors question Crapser's comments regarding the boilers near block thank you very much
we will go into certain I think you're right considering going but
thank you just want to continue on this question about some of the the noise mitigation and the report on page 38 says it should exceed a background noise level and it's this further at it us on page 29 in the report could an office many chances question as well but it is specifically just played back music because if you do live music they you decibel is not going to be background and especially given that one of the residents' is on the same level as the is the main room and on the on the first four belief so could you clarify any clarification aware of what type happen today you see background a real power light music which is not at the moment of course but these are obviously we had other planning applications in the past years flats above studios and so on and as the report says we have to be very clear about what Sir what type of music is going on
I was actually quite right at the moment there is no music going on I haven't even renew their licence have use it because there was no point
so yes there will be live music I will be looking at her protecting the flats and the structure and form embodies intimating that the whole structure the separation it designed exclusively to make sure sound does not escape than that as a severally return be good scheme in Brentford as the also Club again had no money for your part needed help and we put flat over the top and it is a specialist feel financial downside so the lights in you and I probably don't understand quite what they do but the products the await put together is a bit like keeping rain out you know how to keep by now now with flat roofs and the specialist nature Zach outfits sound contain the using right material so they will be part of that forward
movement towards theatrically task is not so yes it is absolutely critical it is really important and I wouldn't expect some in the Labour home your brief that water and we will expect that that developer here in the contractor not apply this will be especially sensation heart and I will make sure it is is pretty effectively some assistance they really are my biggest concern is the outside sound and an up
but we will need to make sure the club is run properly and made sure that the people hanging around them like yours designer probably more at her be atypical pretty more difficult therewith natural flat etc than the structure will be picky good so I think I have if if invited so if the officer can just come in on the point about management's if if if you're minded to let them
yeah can get the and condition 15 for management plan is can be approved by us and that words implement some of the recommendations in terms of noise mitigation recommended within need noise impact on noise exposure reports also just about the both reports were reviewed by the Environmental Health Officer
he was satisfied with the recommendations of the report and recommended conditions 5 6 and 7 be imposed which would then be reviewed by any in sorry an environmental health officer been submission so they would get to look at a speck for the all of the sound insulation and the grazing type into there was the external noise that sort of thing
pavements need to check that the work condition is both me
yet and also fit member should be where a and cook condition 16 as well this advises that
this requires that a welcome pack is provided to residents so they fully aware of the of the Saleh moving in next 2 or above way social club they've Debbie before provided with a copy of the Management Strategy which has to be approved by the Council so they would be moving in in full aware full fully aware that they are neighbours of a social club agents of change exactly you thank you
thank you Councillor couplet
yes it's just I wonder if the Officer could sure just shows the where the actual outdoor canopy is in relation to the surrounding houses and where the noise would be the man in him noise would emanate from the building
so it's to the front
3 been bike with me with them hang out of this making the point that it said the front facing Brockley Road away from the vestigial Street on Salisbury Road I just wanted to be sure thank you at once
thank you Councillor Rusby
thank you Chair I think Councillor Ingleby is largely covered my questions so and find to move on thank you
Councillor passion
no right could never question thank you Councillor pine for Place yeah thank you Chair it's really following on from Councillor angle this point I mean and another life where I played a rock bands were used to and play places where they had a noise meter and when the band played a certain level of dB the package out 0 sure Mark Cousins always been person situation has that been considered because that would seem to make it that the noise could only reach a certain level
so Councillor I think we'd have to be careful that something would be consistent with the agent of change principle in the London Plan so that that generally indicates that the the generator of noise is responsible for putting insufficient insulation measures so if those conditions at we've suggested for members do their jobs then what you're proposing should be required because the agent of change principle would indicate that that the insulation between the the noise-generating use and the receptor is sufficient enough that you know it wouldn't amount any took type a statutory nuisance I think in this case because the Environmental Health Officer has reviewed the conditions in their their satisfied and you know like like the agent says it it's quite a technical matter but dirt there would be anything in the London Plan that would require something of that nature so I think we'd have to probably be satisfied with the with the conditions that are suggested thank you Councillor NGO be so have another question place
thank you are going to end up more
journalist Mr. Glasspool is the objection to the scheme
yes please go away
I understand I have five minutes yes can you have an on air my earlier of chemicals
I should be on can you see me yet we can see half your thank you I know Tom Glasspool I'm a local resident and I live directly opposite the rear of the site on Foxby Road the scale and height of the development is completely out of character with the street the application portrays the surrounding area is mixed Murray's in reality Foxby Road is a road of 2 or 3 storey Victorian terrace houses the proposed development of the current demolition of the current Victorian building and replacement with a structure which is three storeys taller than any other property on Foxby Road would look completely out of place
currently the wide main road Brockley Road provides a clear demarcation from the blocks of flats with the application attempts to portrays the dominant character of the surrounding area this proposal does not have due regard to the physical character of the site it buildings nearby and it's setting the scale of the building at over twice the height of the roof pitch of the surrounding two storey terraced houses is such that it will even overlook all the back gardens of the houses on the opposite side of Foxby Road such as mine which due to the uniform height of the surrounding properties currently fill private and not overlooked the proposed building is not consistent with the character of the street and will dominate the skyline of the currently low profile residential streets the suggestion in the application that Foxby Road has ample spare parking is untrue the headline percentage of free space quoted in submitting parted Parking Survey is misleading as it amounted to only to free spaces at the time of survey as councillors of the have noted residents frequently have issues parking their vehicles on the street it's used not only by residents but also uses vehicle storage by the Foxbury carriage and the locals broccoli and sick up Van Hire patrons of the broccoli social club filled the street with their cause of an evening and the nursery school creates further parking issues in rush hours along with those who park on the street to commute into town from Brockley station the creation of nine additional households on the Street will only exacerbate the congestion on the road
the application includes numerous balconies and roof terraces and concerned that the roof terraces particularly where their close the boundary line with an frosted windows everywhere but the sides at here will intrude on neighbours' privacy and have the potential to create significant noise disturbance down the whole street I will have several balconies directly opposite my front bedroom and bathroom windows which are currently not overlooked additionally the proposed accommodation is not of a high quality and doesn't meet Lewisham's own suggested guidelines on suitable developments Lewisham does not need more small two bedroom executive flats is crying out for 3 plus bedroom affordable family homes as recognised in the LDF Core Strategy policy this development will not help Lewisham to reach its stated goal of 50 percent affordable housing from all sources his proposed also does not have sufficient access to private gardens or communal areas the family dwellings much is made in the application of the local amenity value of the social club in reality to private members club many of its patrons commute to it by car and are not local local residents it's not somewhere that local residents can simply walk into an enjoy drink or a meal and the dots clubs etc which I mentioned are presumably for members of the social club and not the general public the club will necessarily be shut during the demolition and rebuilding of this site I question whether it will be a sustainable business upon reopening especially now that it will need to operate with social distancing and given that the people who currently drinking the club will have found other places to drink in the interim it's a tried and tested routes used by developers to avoid the rules of the provision of affordable housing to develop and mix 9 flat and commercial unit property only to later put in a request for a change of use wants to commercial unit has proven to be non-viable a year or so after completion and I'm wary that this may be the intention here I do not object the redevelopment of the site the design and scale of the current proposal the developers but less Beale bless preoccupy birthing how densely they compact flats onto a constrained site to maximise profit with no regard for the character of the street or the quality of the housing they're providing the rather should be looking to build one or two family home 1 minute book nothing I just about to finish anyway they should be looking to the one or two family homes with quality design which complement the surrounding properties the applicants would do well to consider the adjacent site where there is currently a low rise family home being built to see how this can be done such an application would be met with wide support from local residents thank you
think there is a question from Councillor Rusby and
yes thank you Chair I just wanted to really I suppose to your on statement that The Heights incongruous and out of keeping with the local area so I'm off the in advance I conducted a review on line on Google maps of the adjacent streets so my understanding is up at the cross roads with Horsted Harcourt Road the buildings bear at the end of Foxbury Road
they are go up to 3 storeys we've obviously got the existing 4 storey property next to be Esso petrol station and then the other side of Brockley Road I figured out to 6 storeys are so my question I suppose would be is how many stories would you consider to be congruous with the surrounding area bearing in mind the 6 storey four storey and 3 storey buildings on a within 100 metres of a property
I think the the District's distinct the difference with the the blocks of 19 60 s flat says that they are on the other side of a main road from this property and so from if we had 50 photographs produced by the planning officer showing elevations from from from Brockley Road had you had a similar one from the Foxby road side which is itself a simple Street with a 2 and 3 storey Victorian properties on it you'd think that a 6 storey building on the corner of the road would look incongruous I think so I think something which is in keeping as I said of of something along the lines of a two and three storey property wouldn't be out of keeping whereas further A tall block which as I say I think would overlook even my back garden across the top of my house incongruous what about the existing 4 storey block of flats on Foxbury Road opposite the social club that I don't think it was not really on Foxby road it back it there's a there's a visit parking area and its set back from the road it's almost it sits behind the carriage that they're the Esso garage it doesn't about directly on to Foxbury Road with with with windows pointing straight out of people's windows across the street cats so a secular in regards about property on your position is but it's not really on Foxby Road so it wouldn't count it certainly doesn't feel like that from Foxbury Road thank you very much I'm I'm good Jack thank you thank you Councillor applying for a place yeah thank you for Carnival of Light just one thing you said in your submission that the flats on top of the social club does not lead lurking guidelines could expand on that
my understanding is that Lewisham is looking in its planning policies to develop family homes and the majority of these are going to be two bedroom flat it that that's my main concern along that we aren't we have no provision here for social housing and that and Lewisham's guidance is that it should be we should be having 50 percent across all sources that's his stated aim and you're going to be building 9 here which are going to be entirely for profit and you're going to be skirt unbalancing it yet further
thank you yeah follow that the officers last coming to lap they are I'll come in on that and this is a a 9 unit scheme as you know so in affordable housing contribution is not required by policy m AOD the family sized unit but would only majority are to within the mix there were OK we are the application would provide two free bedroom unit said there would be a contribution to family house in as part of the scheme
additionally when you do something reference in the in the and planning guidance that that's a family homes should have access to private gardens and communal garden areas and there's nothing like that on the plan for this
suggest just for clarity the London Plan standard is a certain number are certain square metres of amenity space based on the number of bedrooms in the in the proposed units and officers are satisfied that the units meet those as set out in the committee report
thank you Councillor all
force key and if
the actual owner available to talk to us tonight thank us a real cut out I'd like to and I think that there's been a bit of a there's a little bit of an imbalance in the arguments going on here and I really like to hear from the from the owner as to what their hands are hat why they have decided to do
invest in so is there a reason why there's bits so many flats built in terms of are they trying to read back the cost of their community club what their long-term plans are I just like to know a little bit more is is is there anybody who can answer questions like that
I mean Councillor custody we have we have to be mindful in some respect that the intention of the applicant really isn't material to the planning decision so in terms of the planning considerations around the the bread butter planning issues like the scale of the design you know the replacement of the community facilities in the like you know the applicant can respond whereas the intention of the developer answered of why they've done what they've done isn't isn't really relevant it's only that it's compliant with Lewisham's policies so that we can take the planning decision but in terms of the the agent could certainly answer planning issues but the long term retention of the developers is it before serving
thank you
I with your Council of cross-cutting well OK I'm not going to ask about the long term but what I want to understand is is this of is is a viability issue that the in terms of you know that had to build to a certain scale in order to be able to actually do what to actually build the the community space that's kind of what I want to know and I want to know a bit about the community use of that space because there is a kind of some because that because people are talking about cars coming into the area I want to because from my reading of the papers it was saying that actually it was going to be used for community use and you know day time use with mums and children and things like that's I can I think it's pertinent to this discussion if the Chair's minded to do so we could bring back Mr.
nursery to see if he can answer those questions but it's up to the Chair
is this the agent still on the medium and its to thing well get is irrelevant to the planning the future intention of the developers and relevant in terms of what Councillor a couple of his question about the viability of the scheme so the there's a policy requirement in the Core Strategy for the applicant to replace any community use so the requirement that wheat we can't lose the broccoli social Club here so if if that was the applicant's intention than that would be contrary to policy so the internal support being a mixed use redevelopment the Core Strategy does support that as well so as pretty Officer's comments previously 1 optimise the site potential to bring forward residential alongside a replacement community uses is policy compliant there's no viability requirement if there's no affordable housing here so he's he's not required to bring forward a full viability appraisal because there's no
there's no affordable housing requirements and like to say if we can only really consider the application that's before us so if you're if Members are of the view that it's a policy compliant proposal so in line with the officer recommendation then that should be the material consideration for Members when their deliberating so putting the other side are not relevant items should be left out of the equation I guess not of Serco satisfying answer Councillor I know that we've got to stick to the planning so can I just add that me and the 1 6 1 0 6 agreement skewers community axis then so to come in I offer would be formalised if if you are minded to grant the application which is an act currently there isn't that
let me send a necessity for the club third from any community axis miming so that thus another point I would add
thank you Councillor Clark Place
thank you Chair and I was just going to come back on the heighten the massing because and the resident was talking about the buildings around about and the officer was talking about them but Cern historically in planning history you'll notice that many of the taller buildings had space set around the buildings and there were at an angle to the main street as some of these flats are if you look on Google Earth for example see very clearly how space and trees were put around high buildings to mitigate for their height and massing and this is what concerns me about this building because the height and massing is immediately on top of
two storey residential housing and all of the streets surrounding that have two storey residential housing on Foxbury Road and Harcourt Road and then Brockley Road as a main road that separates large flats on a much wider Road on the opposite side and those flats are set back with space around them this has no space around it and the height and massing therefore is has much greater impact on the houses immediately surrounding it and I appreciate we're trying to densify what lots of things on one small site but I feel it in my opinion this is an overdevelopment of of such a small highest site and I come back to the recent problems with coronavirus where densities seen actually as not being the and the Holy Grail that we've all always been making it out to be so I am still concerned about the height and massing of this and that's my major concern thank you yes ma I press that for my this the site does have a pay tell a for says highly accessible and therefore officers considered to be appropriate for the sort of density it has said we said it has a infill character appropriate for mixed use scheme Emma and as a love said before a vast reference the context in terms of the authority of heights within the townscape in the building has been designed with an element of
trying to mediate between the the the toes story and low-rise buildings in its stepped away from the properties on Brockley Road and in the top storey set in so it has been designed to break up the massing in all the Thu
addressed some of the concerns Councillor Clarke his and
they expressed their
you consider should please
it's about I don't quite know who to addressed this question too it's about that the fact that the only amenity space are the balconies associated with the the flats in in its development there isn't any green courtyard or anything like that and some of those balconies look out on to the main road which at that point is a congested bus route coverlet quite frequently so I wonder if there's been any look at the the air quality as to whether that those amenity spaces are actually usable or if the airy so dirty that no one's going to be able to actually use that amenity space so I just want to what studies have been done
the the scheme has been designed with that in mind in that and many of the flats have balconies external terraces
on two different elevations to address that concern with one noise and to air quality so it does not just rely on on that one Falconi at Finance and to Brockley Road they do have access to the winter garden on the rear just the touch on the issue mentioned earlier in terms of privacy those balconies on that rear elevation facing Foxbury Road have been designed to being closed in order to
to mitigate some of the privacy impacts in its dead they've got glazing all around so that their more typical of windows and that related to plough in front faith son elevation facing windows is a typical relationship I would say on Foxby oath or that admittedly not on that part of Foxby Road but there are certainly front facing windows so as apps Oxford Road and in many of the surrounding mouth
thank you thank you Councillor Castle
rosicky and Councillor Osman you have your hands up and say that any question no no I'm good thank you I'm good Jack thank you Council applied for a place yeah I think Alfie has probably dealt with this mainly it was pointless Castle Krakowski raised about the community space so at the moment I'm isn't Mr. Glasspool the said that the club is private that LEPs are the community can't use it what would be the the extent of the community use should be groundless application
you'll need to get Alford is yes apologies flat this the empty the section of seeks agreement would secure 50 a minimum of 15 hours can be community access plan a week and that would be a rights similar to local authority so the that currently that an offer isn't there or isn't formalise
by granting this application they'll be that would become formalised so the increased the Office of the local community
thank you thank you
we still have Christian know all they will have any properly registered to speak on this motion on this application
I think all the speakers have spoken Chair thank you thank you very much
now we need to decide to move the proposer on this application right
gaps they will still need to act officer before we move any proposer place as allowing Oby
we can you cancelling the need
sorry if nobody else has a question her I would like to propose that can I confirm nobody else has a question OK
I'd like to propose that we are granted permission with the conditions in the report with the as Councillor Crutchley raised earlier with the condition of the gas boilers own being putting in his as a last resort that we'd that their application tries to avoid that news electricity that's my proposal
but can I suggest Council that the final wording of that condition is delegated to officers and we can work with the Chair to finalise guests a great thank you second by Assad's that are second it thank you Councillor Prosky
Long before we before we need to vote for the proposer industry to me to make sure that everybody every members present
in this discussion on these and application
the CTA
I'm sorry for the initial technical problem I had to log in so I wasn't I was at them in from the start of this application on their for our people to vote for it thank you were more as overtime or vote on this or on these thank you and some of them I came
well well members are now and how ethic of the plan to call there to make the roll call in Upper Witham favour against an abstain in this application base OK Councillor Clarke how do you vote against
Councillor Ingleby had you vote in favour
Councillor Keller her had you vote
I'm not work more community use I'll communal spaces in favour
because the Crypt Sky had you vote in favour
Councillor Maslin had you vote
other think until Ombersley present Kessler abattoir had you vote in favour of their
Councillor Boshell have you vote in favour
Councillor Penfold how you vote in favour
Councillor Rathbone had you vote in favour
the Kippax 7 in favour and 1 against the proposal
thank you including the application is granted in in software to all the condition with a
thank you arms would need to have maybe five minutes break
we come back at six minutes past nine place
thank you Chair

3 Brockley Social Club, 240-242 Brockley Road, London, SE4 2SU

giving Flaherty still present on the on the meeting arm just calling the Planning Officer to present the lists application place

4 Woodelm Court, Devonshire Road, SE23 3LX.

the the presentation on the screen yes thank you and agenda item 4 as an application submitted under section 74 of the Town and Country Planning Act 19 90 and minor material amendments in connection with the planning permission granted on appeal in 20 19 the destruction of a two-storey extension provide five 2 bedroom flats and associated changes at Woodham Court and Devonshire Road as he 23 the application has been brought before the Planning Committee as it was a sign that the Chair of you meet in that the application was there would be better to me by Planning Committee
the application site comprises of a purpose built 3 storey block comprises of seven flats the block was approximately built in the 19 70 s and and is constructed in brick with horizontal windows production balconies the application site is situated on a corner plot on the western side of Devonshire Road in the southern corner of your may road beside him over the site also 20th century modern flatted accommodation blocks and also setting wrapping around the wider area comprises of Victorian dwellings terraces and semi-detached buildings which are for M storeys in height with some units having basement level accommodation these properties on this side of the road for within the Forest Hill Conservation Area the application site is located adjacent to the force that conceal thought Forest Hill Conservation Area and is not within it the site lies within Flood Risk same won the application site has a Pete Heller free on a scale of 0 to six bay which the Arabian alone and 6 be in the highest this slide shows the existing lower ground and ground floor plans Lower Ground floor House one of the existing flats and six garages
this last year to view the application site as viewed from 151 8 and shared
the Slideshare to view the application site from from eastern side of Devon shared
and this slideshows of the application site from your me right
the slide shows the urgency of the scheme that was approved by the Planning Inspectorate in or on appeal any 20 19 the Peru skill scheme as an exemplar and commission plant mission until February 20 22 the Planning Inspector state that the development PI is largely consistent with the height of accommodation surrounding the site the plans back to also said that the application is application site is not particularly prominent within the street scene and that they're not would extension would not increase its dominance to any great effect the planning inspector also highlighted the development would not harm the setting of corporate conservation area the present application proposed a number of amendments to the approved about them paragraph 8 in the committee report details all of the proposed amendments main differences between the proposed application the approved scheme are the increase in height of the building alterations the Bilgen roofline relocation political and alterations to the windows this slice share proposed front and rear elevations this slide shows the proposed side elevations
the main considerations in respect of this application are application Type and transport relevance standard of accommodation
the design impact on neighbouring amenity and transport highways issues
the approved scheme is pricey amended under section 73 of the Town contemplating up I set out in the committee report in section 7 point 1 they're not a statutory definition of a minor material amendment but is likely to include any amendment where scale and or nature resource development which is not substantially different from the one that would which was approved
proposed amendments would not result in any additional residential units or stories compared to the approved scheme are sought she murmurs are considered to be minor in the context of the approved scheme the principle of development has been established on the appeal scheme and then this is nothing change in respect of this
juice proposed amendments officers need help regards as to whether the proposed development would still provide an acceptable standard of accommodation table 2 in the committee report details of proposed changes to each unit units 19 12 as labelled on the proposed plans would still comply or exceed the minimum space standards
they were built there would be a reduction in amount of external profits private amenity space in his 19 12 compared to the approved scheme however these units are still considered provide sufficient private amenity space the proposed amendments would result in Unit 8 having a reduction how energy I gross internal area of 60 point 0 3 square metres compared to the approved to 61 square metres the reduction is less than 1 square metre was officers know that the GAA and would not comply with the minimum required for 2 bed 3 person unit however given the size of the adoption as both bedrooms would exceed the minimum space standards reduction in size compared to the approved is not considered to result non-essential sound of accommodation that would warrant a refusal on this ground it's a shame propose an immense overlaid on the approved front and rear elevations in pink are the changes in height to the building into the building line below the amendments the windows and doors
and this lighters proposed amendments overlaid on both side elevations in pink of the changes in height and building line in lieu of the amendment in the windows and doors the maximum prose increase in high as one for seven metres and juice the wrote relocation the lift core the building line with extended forward 2 metres even though the application site is not considered to be in a particularly prominent location the setting of the building within the application site there's the increase in height would not result in any increase in the number of units and stories proposed alteration to the highest scattered about them and not consider as on the development appearance and over dominant addition within the site or wider street scene nor had an unacceptable impact on the setting of the Forest Hill Conservation Area this lie show the approved and proposed him reproving proposed elevation this images the approved in this is the proposed and this is just in context the side elevation which is here and capacity proven Emin's for Alba pays the windows the Glazer alterations to the Alcan here's with one balcony being committed and oppose amendment on the front innovation extension being more in-keeping with the winter around the existing build them and are considered to be acceptable officers note the proposed materials are being it would need to be in compliance with the which was opened discharge and approved application and a condition would be added to this to ensure compliance with these materials
the shows the differences between the proposed propose an approved m rear elevation the proposed and as the windows on the rear elevation are considered to be more in keeping with the existing window arrangement in the property and Miss M slideshows one of the side elevations show the differences within the windows the reduction in the window higher and these are these windows excitedly more in keeping with the window arrangement in the existing property
the slide shows the already exist the approved and proposed other side elevation the amendments in the building line would be most visible from this elevation and the amendments the building will result in the re-siting of the entrance doors that's the entrance arrangement would be simmering pic in appearance that which was approved and is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on the character appearance of the building adjacent conservation area you'll sessions to the elevation the windows on this elevation also considerably more in keeping with the existing building and are considered to be acceptable the appeal decision did not raise any concerns in regards to impact on transport of the highways network
condition the conditions in respect of referees thought refuse storage and cycle parking and the construction management plan and the approved scheme have been discharged this application would secure these details as a as compliance conditions the Planning Inspector established at the proposed development would have an acceptable impact to neighbour amenity officers have had regard for the impact of the proposed amendments on neighbour amenity given the separation distance of between 19 to 21 metres that appropriate on the eastern side of Devonshire Road the proposal members are not considered have an unacceptable impact on these properties on these properties compared to the approved scheme given the separation distance the drapes Court which is a treasured side and rear and is set in with it any setting within the m from the boundary and and the distance to them the application site propose amendments are not considered have an unacceptable impacts on I've relevant of Drake's core separation distance to number 100 31 aid and she Road which is situated opposite the application site as highlighted in why is still considerably fish sufficient so the increase in height the relocated lift core elevation alterations would not have an unacceptable impact in terms of sense of enclosure loss of outlook or loss of light loss of privacy or overlooking our socks reposed about man is still considered have an acceptable impact on the amenity of surrounding properties
in light of the considerations set out in the committee report in this presentation it is recommended that the section savage 73 application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the committee report
thank you members of any question for the longing officer
there were various ancillary staff
Councillor Ingleby with before me
good Councillor C of E
thank you could jam could you were just clarify that the it's nebbish the appearance of the drawings but all art is the is there a change of cladding on the Tinners cladding owes grazing
so in order to get the image back up on the slide yes to signify want the materials are because it's only black ice
so originally it was approved with them clad in on both elements of the two storey extension that has been prepared for the bridge based ended up to the and up to the first floor of the proposed extension lead the brick to match the existing OK and the window type too slowly
and double glazed aluminium framed windows
OK that matching original saw him luck with or as with the approved to this as with the Prater believe are the same as the existing within the building just a more modern version of the existing window
OK thank you
Councillor Gloyer thank you Chair and Georgia could you please go to the picture that shows the proposed entrance fleece
this is the slide yes this will yet I'm I can see a difference in this stays I'm is part of this disabled access
from there's the noise around so there's there's no rampart to decide how it just there to Carly there's only Saez access in the axis of the site
so that means basically anybody who is wheelchair-bound can't live there is it possible to condition or change place so Castle because we're bound by the appeal decision if the Planning Inspector considered the access arrangement suitable of what may grant a permission 2 thousand 19 we be unable to revisit that so if the access arrangements you know given given that it's a pre-existing block and given the age of the block then I think we would be constrained in that respect thank you James 'nduja
thank you any other member of question 4
so far we have Helen Dennis who is the applicant's representative things anyone
Ms Dennis are you
Ms Jennifer Garner when he then you have five minutes
well I'm probably going to say much of which is already being set by and torture on this application and I think a lot of the objections are being raised and relate to the original scheme the height of the scheme the overlooking etc so really I wanted to make the point that the scheme for two floors at in five US other has already been approved and there was a question in relation to the height of the building and the the increase in height under this application is 147 centimeters and so I just really wanted to and if the size that am any concerns that objections and previously related to the overall height of the original scheme and not their fight of the and minor amendment in this scheme and so wanted to to make that clear and also some comments about the building being out of character with the conservation area and I wanted to clarify that the building isn't within the conservation area as the first point and as the second point is it is adjacent to a 20th century building a three and four floors which I think is Drake's court and so the proposed built in is more aligned in visual impact to Drake sport then to
the and therefore acceptable in that regard
I'd also like to to make the point that and the building is in a poor state of repair and the development at this stage gives us the opportunity to make an structural changes make structural improvements to thing income improve the external facade also to provide garden facilities
in addition to the balconies already exist that the residents living in the blocks can actually utilise so in a way to improve in the overall environment than the existing residents as well as being in keeping with the the the planning approval as all I wanted to say thank you give up until or mushroom place
the Chairman my questions have been answered earlier presentation thanking thank you arm gems is any object turn and there is one objector Cher so it's a Mr. Stephen Glastir offence I think Fadela Calcast orchestral outside all sorry Councillor Brockway thank you just very quick question and courageous clarity ask you the increase in height is in order that the lift core can be René repositioned is that the reason the increasing the rainy reason is
he still College other surfaces and the brief OK thank you I just wanted clarity thank you Councillor gonna
I think I'm capturing the goes before me or me
dismissal of involving OK thank you can't come just really quick I'm could that the applicant could you the report says that as a discussion about the timber I will crush away the timber was being used and the development is it the consensus to use a docks to I know this is going to be conditioned but architecture is it dark or a lighter Condit timber that you are proposing to use at Tipperary were acoustic its' Breck at the first built level and that it's a cladding which is not word I'm side not sure where that the reference to the word relates
page 171 in the report about 98 2 point night paragraph 98 jockey you and that
you'll get community and there is a part of 98 yes
there's no reference to timber and how of 98 part unless my mod dot gov has jumped to the next application that's that's OK thank you I think it's it's back on this one Councillor Ingleby yes OK story of them at the games
now got you yes please thank you
and you mentioned sitting tenants I'd like to place I listened existing tenants existing tenants and my apologies for for the prior to then use the correct terminology and but they they will not be required to leave they still have homes at the end of this process I mean they for Lease Holders their owners of the properties they've been consulted with and the construction management plan has dealt with how we ensure that the environment is safe for the mother defendable takes place thank you very much Helen
thank you I was a member of any parcel of any question place
thank you get you can invite the
so Mr. glasses are you in the meeting
he can turn your microphone
and we see me when you see me
we can't hear you within an earlier reference
well you know we actually wanted to have sorry I'm I'm here with a fellow resident I'm going to do the speaking but these is one of the chaps who helped craft our initial reply letter their their 32 property series you know and the was LO before you start sorry you have only five minutes if you're going to share with board even to be only five mini me speaking
I'm aware thank you
OK so
we actually wanted to show you the the true visual situation from some of the plan and I might still do that even though it's getting quite dark now but I think him it will be interesting to do their I would first like to before we get to really what a couple are a couple of bullet points I'm assuming the Committee meet that the Members Councils of read the submission that we gave today the position statement as well as the three page letter that was signed by the majority of residents here first of we've never seen those diagrams before the ones that were just shown with the increase in height
many in the the fellow resident Reece next to me who lives in another flat we've seen them because we are this meeting nobody else to seem them but actually showed what was proposed I think in a far clearer like than anything we seen an actually that's part of our point about this whole process it seems to have been quite disingenuous in several ways so there's that point about the fact we haven't seen those pictures those those those very useful schematic before and therefore none of the other residency matches adds to the whole I mean this is not a comment on on on James who was very efficient and very doesn't very helpful in dealing with my crests today are generally that whole process which has gone for years
that has been people not being informed addresses being sent wrong there so now we've by an additional issue in that you just put some very relevant to the case schematics up but none of us have seen and since you put first put in the the application of course we have a resonance Association now partly because of the COVID crisis but but also because things are this another point I'd like to make following on from is the
again disingenuous just like the original wording an application which didn't even mention an increase in height it that I mean if you read out a letter you'll see the language used was was everything to disguise the increase the additional increase in height and the photo you showed of the adjacent road it's a very small road I'm going to turn round and show it to you now I believe a fisheye lens was used on the photo that you are just shown to many that road look like a very big Road I'm turning my back now and I'm hoping you can actually see it behind me without more click into the road
I don't know if as clear but the point is it's a small side road you can get one carpet your fisheye lens photo made it look like it was highway and of course again yes it's Dexter conservation and review the the proposal is not in a Conservation let's so look I'm just gonna get straight to the main points of argument which is that some government regulations regarding the amount of light that people can be expected to enjoy as well as Building Research establishment guidelines best practice of thing to be flouted left right and sentience application a lot of people have here old spent a lot of times in their living rooms which almost all at the front
and we started growing vegetables since the lockdown and I wanted to share some of the differences between how well the vegetables do when they have direct sunlight at the higher ledgers how poorly minor doing because I have a suitor on apartment and just above ground level and why the reasons I'm not a property owned or rented but the chap makes Amir he answers property I'm trying to show you from over my shoulder I don't know if you can see it's probably it's not going to work in this this time of my I'm sorry appointing his vote my window is below ground level who can sort of see their so for me you know it was already going to be
a 23 percent increase in height plough point 7 so I am looking at the figures here it's got from 13 to now to 23 percent increase in height that that is the lettuce Simpson said in his insistence on mine the so-called minor material amendments which seemed to us in any reasonable reason I've been involved in planning of own bins to go please yeah almost finished I mean involved in planning processes personally I've represented local authorities across the country including London I worked on both sides of the process I don't believe that a minor material amendment by Lewisham council's own guidelines or any Local Authority guidelines and therefore the application really needs to be resubmitted and honest with what is and give everybody who lives round here a chance to see what it really looks like I'm finally
I would say I'm interested to know how the people of the road were consulted the people actually live there because my private conversations with a lot of people live there suggested by no means everyone is happy with it I assume it's meant that they were consulted in the same way we did but of course you don't always want to put your head above the parapet when you think your home might be a risk so I don't the details obviously leases I think
I probably will leave it at that thank you thank you very much you can I just make one additional point that I forgot about the the fact that that property is much closer to the road than the property that was mentioned that record next to it again if there was daylight I can show you that there's an entire building and a half length difference between the timings of place
OK that's it there's just as much closer to the road and all the other buildings so the fact building us thank you very much
members do you have any questions for the protective
Councillor pursue
I just wanted to ask about that that the height and the gentleman just spoken or said that that that there's really quite a substantial difference in height of what's now proposed I thought there was not much difference in the eye it was a a metre or metre also so can you just clear that Utley's and yet so compared to what's been improved the highest praise an increase from the approved by 1 point 4 7 metres compared what's already been approved
thank you
could ask a question Councillor Harper thank you when you say 1 point for sadness nearly 1 half metres that from the diagrams it appeared to me that the height was only increased at a certain point on the building not all the way round because 1 point 5 meeting metres around the whole building the full site is quite significant increase if it's 1 point 5 metres 1 4 7 in a small area that's a different thing altogether it would have a different massing so could you just clarify the height at a question to the to the objector's well was you know was there incur any consultation one thing to the officers on a minor amendment do we have to consult as there is there or inform and should we have informed the residents on this scheme and should they have had the documents to view that was the question to officers and a question to the actual learned resident was there any information or consultation by the actual developers curious about that as well thank you to all along
horror I was is and I'll answer the question about the consultation first and around the question about the higher and in terms of the consultation all neighbouring properties were consulted and all the relevant Georgia online originally had to re-consult twice of this application there was one issue that description and then there was an issue with one of the plots option publicly on the website and that was rectified on the 9th of April than we re-consult on the 9th of April there were plans have been published on the website and since Margaret April in terms of the increase in height the whole and acquire the building is increasing but the whole high increasing by 1 point 4 7 metres 1 point 4 7 metres the maximum high and that's the lift core element of the order for the rest of the height of the building is in Greece this dot hole
increase in one go enforcer a flat increase of 1 point for seven across the whole brief
and could you just tell us what is the general increase in height yet was perhaps could check I look committee report
and how do we work that out to be minor or major that I think that's the point that the resident Alison that's the men point as to what is a minor amendment I note in our notes have been reading it but I think it for clarity might be good for a bit more information for members
so Councillor Walsh George's looking up that the differences in height I can take the one about minor material amendment versus and on material of emit so if it was something that was a minor material amendment that's a matter of planning judgement for the planning authority so there's no two District case law definition of what a minor material that is given the Inspector's finding in the previous appeal decision officers are satisfied that what's being proposed Chair would amount to monitor amendments or we've obviously done the full round of consultation in relation to the differences between the approved scheme and what's being proposed here so again we've got an increase in height to accommodate the lift core
as well as a window rationalisations and a few other items but like I say it's the officer view that in relation to what's been approved so that the base line here is the addition that the Inspector has already granted in relation to what's proposed here it's it's a minor material amendment and the officer view and are all at George to speak about the matter
he's having some of the issues in the report as close Mr. Seán reopen that to get the and to get the difference there with one man can I accept curse o'clock I say that the the increase but when you looked at the drawing and you saw the pink overlaid which gave you the increase in height of the main building up a live shop I believe that's about 35 centimeters but still 350 because of the I mention well
that's not true even in your own note furthermore troops armed school me you after conquered through the Chair you done threat and give
31 minimum
perhaps residents could just come back about the consultation and because he mentioned that they didn't have the docket access to the documents and wasn't one wasn't aware of some information about I understood we consulted with the residents so perhaps the resident might want to come back on that while awaiting the detail
scatter in terms of the connotation everything that was in the PowerPoint presentation that Georgia presented as part of the planning application file so that's available online to all about all the consequences it received a letter could be those full files using the reference number and this had been online since the reconsultation day the Georgian noted so officers are satisfied that we've we've consulted fully in respect of the application and we've met the regulatory minimums here it's if you want to put a question to the objector about consultation that's that's to you
Councillor park and why as the objective would like to say something and costs he oversee yen brought that issue up and I was just checking with officers that we had done what we needed to do that was all
and I understand that officers that's the case but Sir it's it's up to you Chair if you want to bring our decked Obakin
lots of immaculately office us common and allow him sorry I was attacked the highest A ranges from nor point to the smallest increase in hired no politics for any ranges up to 1 point for 7 metres and the one went for seven metres as the lift the lift shaft element
OK thank you
thank you Councillor Carter
thank you Chair cannot ask how well the residents opposed to know what was online and when are why they are informed and and also they there's a digital exclusion issue I just need to make sure we've done our due diligence I understand circumstances but the questions got to be asked
so in terms of the neighbour consultation once it was realised that one documents was on public on the website then they were they were made public and every consultation was undertake Rhian undertake on the night of April there was an hour to everyone who was am consulted on the application and we received erm objections in response to the reconsultation
thank you Georgia
thank you before we proceed either in council responding to bring a motion standing other Cliff Arnall thank you Chair arm I would actually like to bring a motion that we proceed to a vote immediately on with all due respect to my colleague's arm it's coming up to 10 o'clock and as made very clear in the papers are previous refusal of this application was overturned by the Planning Inspectorate considering misses an MA and that our previous refusal was overturned by the inspectorate as much sympathy as I might have for the essentially objectors but it seems very clear to me that this Committee can only rule in one manner and I don't think further discussion is of benefit to anyone so my motion is that we proceed to a vote thank you OK before we do before we got a C and two and Councillor Prosky I'm I'm
exactly the same thing as James are you sat on the them yes yes second it thank you
can the clerk please do the roll-call
thank you
before we do that places him all the member present
on this application before we can take place
I present thank you present thank him
president present present rather investing to preserve thank you very much and plodding please can you do the Roko flips perception odd had you vote
Councillor Bernard had you vote
voting for
Councillor Clarke had avert for
Councillor Ingleby had the right to rule in favour
Councillor Keller had you vote of style
has the Chris_K had you vote in favour
Councillor again by the were had you vote infill
as to show how you vote in favour
have the Penfold how you vote against
Councillor Osborne had you vote in favour
OK that seven in favour one against one abstention to the proposal
thank you application granted subject to all the condition attached
just to be precise them the motion was to move to a vote but was naturally clear indications to what they felt might be example own so I think we need a substantive and the before a person centred Cancellara's VA can you please I propose that we grant approval where all conditions attached previously
I second hand
can the clerk to the local police
passed up an odd how do you vote on 14 before the growth
as the clock had you vote for
Councillor Ingleby had you voted in favour
Councillor Keller had the vote abstain
has the cryptic is how do you vote for
Councillor other but one how you vote for
Councillor Pat Sheehan had you vote in favour
Councillor Penfold how do you vote in favour
you're trying to wrote the
Councillor reform and how do you vote in favour
that is 8 in favour no against one abstention to the proposal
there are two different votes shall I was about and stopping talking about it and the other was about whether we approved the scheme says not paid to my birth at all
thank you Councillor frightful application granted software to all the conditions attached thank every day
I think we need to and they to propose can't another because going to 10 o'clock for Wickham
members switch thing standing oldest Chair thank you Councillor pursue second circle secondly thank goodness
there were thank you favour is everybody agreed in favour need a grey thank him very like a Member Chair can actually said for health reasons I can't go on beyond 11 o'clock at night and I must get to regular sleep patterns food and health reasons thank you for your letter locker
either now out to some met arm the you want to proceed all we got five minutes break place members
perceive a lot if we continue that for so the fact that by the MoD dot gov is his frozen having to use one computer because the IT problems so I'm going to have to close and after a computer per minute to get back up otherwise I got my notes so far enough to look in me in come come back or get the more of to work so he goes
I closed not dot gov first maybe that'll do it
tried again
it has say pay put in the day that
as the Chair if reminded grissini of 1 1 1 5 a lighter remaining on the agenda
Louise to open
OK what I'll do I got my him I have it on my other on my iPad but I don't have my notes on assistive from memory said the same brevity of the nasal continue
there's an officer to present the lesson application place
there's Lamb

5 Land at Rear of 148 Deptford High Street, London, SE8

can you see the slide show
yes I'm for this application the man the Members should have received an addendum is it correct
so that was passed earlier today in relation to two additional conditions members should receive divide MoD Gove
I've got it yes I've got the thank you the application is for construction of a 2 storey 3 bedroom single family dwelling on the land at the rear of number 1 hundred for to end debt for Thai street
the application has been referred to committee following objections from their facility as well as neighbours and individual
this night this night shows the location of the site with its neighbours
the site has access from Horsforth streets and is within the Deptford High Street and thing for conservation area
the site is in the vicinity of a grade 1 listed building St Paul Church and its grounds the proposal site is between Peter flow and a CP that area it has good access to public transport
in this light we can see more detail of the irregular shape of the plot also indicating enforcement none TPP trees
here are some photos of mind state of the site in the centre the boys were showing the front Levisham
3 to any images showing the internal condition of the boundary wall
the is might show shows the proposed development scheme it is considered as modern design complementing number 1 Prosperous Street which is an honour aboard winning design faith in 2 thousand and 18
here is the arrangement of the proposed ground and first floor
they keep finding consideration starting with principle of the development
can you hear me yes
the purpose which the proposal would deliver a family sized dwelling with a higher standard of residential amenity The site will make a contribution towards meeting housing needs in a sustainable urban location the proposal will make more efficient use of the land and therefore it is supported in principle and considered
mining may subject to design and other he consideration
the proposed building with a high quality site specific proposal at with create interest at
it is currently on their optimise site and improve their frontage of this part of the and prostrate Street
in terms of heritage assets the proposed dwelling would be 50 8 metre away from the main building of St goal Church pitches on the opposite side of the road it would occupy a plot of land which currently is
the letter and son on society
the height
the highest point of the dwelling would be less than six metre which would be far lower than the height of the listed building the proposed dwelling would have similar feature of number 1 with a different colour in terms of transport no car parking is proposed as part of this application
materials would be facing big wooden cladding and aluminium windows which are and mission to ensure the high quality
there is some photos showing the nearby buildings the impact of proposal has been assessed on neighbour neighbouring properties including St Paul Church St Joseph's Primary School number One Hundred 60 to 100 50 there for tracery and most important is the impact on the immediate neighbour at number 1 crossfield streets
impact of the proposed development on the amenity of number 1 CrossFit Street has been assessed by two site visits and condition or his motion older to set you an added to set you no adverse impact on number one in terms of sustainability the proposed green roofs are welcomed
concerns were also expressed regarding the existing tree at the neighbouring property in order to 40 routes and the health of trees during the construction tell you a couple of condition will be added
therefore having taking into account the planning considerations about officers recommend to to approve the proposal subject to condition
members are involved in a question for the
sort of pressure
I only wanted to check out how high you said the boat was I thought you said two leases and that can't possibly be so what yet was nothing smeared them let's just got a new
you say that again place when I'm not speaking less than six metre the height of the building would be less than six metre thank you
Councillor Frost frosty
yeah I just want meeting one of fee and objectors letters they raised the issue quite strongly about the fire risk attached to the two buildings being very the two buildings being very close together and also being both being wooden clad and also the
the way that it was if they could only get what they can only go one way in one way out of the building and does it meet all fire regulations in terms of the safety of the property if if there was a fire with that word if they want it won't back bedrooms was being occupied I think they have to the objective was say that they had to walk in front of the kitchen in order to get out which wouldn't fulfil PFI regulations or something that that's I'd like that clarified please circuit Council just to interject on that point
if the applicant will be required to get Building control certification for the dwelling but at this scale fire-safety is not a planning matter so
in relation to a big high rise buildings the London Plan is making some changes but at the single family dwelling a level than that would be a building control issue and the objector I believe is here so I'm just the Chair's reference the the agent I think or the applicant's we were touched today and I think they're unwell so they were able to make a registration but we do have the objector who is
Jonathan pile I believe so when when we're ready and if the
I guess I obviously the Chair can can direct proceedings but you may want to put the question to the objector directly at and our final like you can't do that thank you OK
Councillor Cook comma
thank you to me and
I see the I should it's the sitting room window the one facing on to crossfield Street
it looked quite small and I'm very familiar with that area I'm concerned that the home is not actually gonna get enough light with that small size window I'm wondering what the reasoning around allowing their smaller size was I'm giving or today and Crossley Street you mean
yet floor Ashley and if the ground floor window unconcerned about OK it's better Finn goes as room on his fine yup them this window we serve to the study wrong are Ritchie with the here all the more reason for more light
it is there so that his wife to a study room
that would be defined as non-habitable counsellor yes but I'm I'm we know unfunny about these things I I just know that if I'm in their studying on the I need more life yes that their kitchen and a dining room with gets a light from here and dispatched from with get light farmed this as central courtyard yeah now I see that I was I would quite happy I actually think is quite a nice design is just that that one window and I thought
intervene to today the cancelling of be appeared to leave the meeting and the Murphy can be re-established
but we invite you to pause while we try and get back come across for to place
the meeting can you turn the microphone on and your camera please

5 Land at Rear of 148 Deptford High Street, London, SE8

I have come to growing unease among the webcast back giddily are we can't we can't see you again said
1 videos on we can see you can be
no no we can't see you former Didier was turned poll
so Mr. Pile you can you can continue on and just
I read your statement on audio
there will be sufficient
good evening and I'm one of your five minutes
I am an architect when we designed and built the house next door this site as our family home moving in in 2 thousand and 18 who only fully support the construction of the dwelling next door we strongly object to this proposal for the following reasons offered amenity loss of daylight not of amenity of outlook from all amazing way to their encroachment on our only open space light and noise pollution invasive overlooking and loss of privacy unsustainable design and inappropriate design response to the setting and lack of the necessary care and attention to detail required of the conservation area missing information Priskin inaccurate is enjoying lack of any contact from the applicant agent meeting following our 24 points of objection letter potential damage to a protected tree that I hazard but will now go into more detail on these points within the time available
our full height full with windows looking into our courtyard with trees and Church beyond the primary source of daylight and only visual connection to the world beyond but all the principal rooms in our house the impact of this proposal on our family life in terms of loss of privacy loss of daylight and an overbearing sense of encroachment would be catastrophic even irrigation the proposed steeply sloping green roof will quickly dry out and probably die the flat and pitched green roofs will require frequent naming of no from old clearance and the person carrying out this work will be given a direct view it's a whole our main living rooms and bedrooms he wanted show you fat it photographic evidence of his point had been told that we're not allowed to
to build a house against multiple boundary walls on a tight site like this takes immense care and attention to detail making our health look at simple as it does to a lot of effort you see no evidence of the kind of work necessary for jails example the fit of the roof of our house is 45 degrees the applicant's drawings show the pitch of their proposed route as 30 degrees but they show the to ruse aligning this is a huge discrepancy with proposed first floor which fulfil the view from our living room kitchen and main bedroom in an unconvincing and overcomplicated arrangement for it sloping green roof and timber that will be extremely difficult to Belfast in Italy horizontal timber boards on the pitch roof will track leaves and dirt leading to unsightly staining I'm an experienced architect and I've studied the drawings in great detail I feel very strongly that the proposed design is far from being of the highest standard required the conservation area and I'm also deeply concerned that because of these flaws in the design it could end up badly built for even unfinished if built it is likely to deteriorate rapidly to accomodate tree roots floor levels in some rows will have to be raised over half a metre reducing the Internal headroom than inadequate 2 metres or even less wings would require three or four steps making the non-compliance for lifetime homes none of this is dealt with in the proposal on the street frontage the new upper floor in relation to the reconstructed from ball is incorrectly and inconsistently drawn claim to be following the design of our house is false the gap between gable end may have been increased but cleaning access is still fire a strange window that can only access by a ladder balanced on a winding stair this width does not even meet rules on fire separation between dwellings where the air source heat pumps mentioned in the Ofsted report where the necessary ventilation in tax in takes an exhausts the go whereas the boiler flue termination these could all impact negatively on us they will have to go somewhere but nothing is shown in the application you are considering the plan of our house drawn incorrectly the boundary between the two sites is also drawn incorrectly heights are inaccurate and misleading making our house is simple and result without Minister bar
thank you surely Lewisham should want to see a design on the next door site opposite one of only two Grade 1 listed buildings in the entire borough that respects the existing architecture but for the reasons I set out we believe this application fails to rise to that challenge we strongly object to the proposed design it would have a direct and irreversible negative impact on the amenity and privacy of our lies I also believe it would like the conservation area and undermine future regeneration thank you can
Councillor was one of the other question for the of given
thank you Chair it's not so much a question for the objectors a question for officers here arm can you ply clarification on the issue raised by Mr. Pile in regards to Göring's and over diagrams not matching for example drawing stating 30 degree
slope formerly versus
diagrams showing a 45 degree slope and similar matters like that
so the case officer and I had a discussion on this morning about the plans are viewers that they meet the requirements for validation purposes for planning and the case officer are looked at the roof alignment and it to us it appears whatever the percent slope as the roof lines and the plans he has if if Members are minded to grant permission and they'll be conditional on the decision notice that would require the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans so provided that the approved plans show the roof Lyman so as in both both roofs accord it's not necessarily the case that we should get hung up on what the percentage angle is like a sigh are viewers of the case officer's assess the plans in their acceptable for planning purposes if there's an encroachment across a boundary line or something at that that would be a civil matter it wouldn't be related to planning I can thank you so to follow up Jonathan ban so the minor standing of your objection essentially the soon to be two parts to it part one is loss of amenity to yourself and your family from the essentially be overlooking of the property the loss of sight lines or loss of sunlight etc and part two would be that the quality of building itself is not sufficient for its location conservations though
in your opinion what would be necessary to bring the quality of the building up to that standard would it be a question of for example replacing the cladding materials with something similar to what you used which is I'm assuming based upon your statements and be fact the building is a ward winning of the highest arm available standard would something like that be sufficient or is the design of a building building itself not just the materials involved so fundamentally flawed but it could never meet the standards of the conservation area
I think that this design as it stands below superficially it looks like a very similarly follows the form of our built them there appear to many as it were Fortey's flight of the cloth whereas the have confidence that it will even be able to be delivered from the Policia the tree roots ignored impact massively on the height of the building and there are a whole range of other things they used to close until Doughty
been suggested as a way of reducing variation
can't you
horizontal timber boarding and open joint the Rainsbury
the idea of the outbuilding in similar buildings learn from others is not the only building and a flight this is but with a gap behind the board and when it rains the rain runs not only down the front of the board the town the back of people but if the water horizontal rain can't you that and that leaves this House of under a tree there and next to a tree I will get blocked up so the it's
I could go on about half that and there are a whole range of issues
added to the fact that when you look at the plan they're not that very well result the upper floor can chop out over the thought yards
there's been a superficial attempt to follow the pattern of hours but it's actually a very different site
broadening the conversation slightly here but are very strong feeling is that convention follow consent that me outside actually had when we both sides
were of a single storey building hiding behind the wall and that makes sense to me because the consent for upper floor was premised on the idea that our health would read as an outbuilding to the buildings on debt the High Street not the beginning of a new terrace which is extremely unlikely to ever exist so this houses built it's going to end up as Bissell his are and
semi-detached arrangement to build without Matt and one of which on by way of going to deteriorate rapidly that first so you know when we bought the site or on HAP it had a consent for a single storey house and a large part of our house is single storey it has a single storey relationship the two storey are I mean this Berkeley's I was hoping the show you which shows not only the relationship route the
the flat roof to the two storey section this is this is viewed through the wall between our courtyard and the house next door this is the view that anyone who is maintaining the green roof on the proposed house nor house into both our primary bedroom and living room and I'll kitchen and we know from experience last year we had to pull out over two hundred tree seedlings from our flat roof you have to go out there a lot and do that for houses done HRA tree this hadith underneath the tree those green roofs the one that doesn't deny which is on the 45 degree slope will need constant maintenance
and the issue about the float is not a minor issue drawing is incorrect over gets approved if based on a false that it mattered now buildings it's there are too many it's it's it is not a competent designed by an architect movement is appropriately skilled for all conservation area opposite the Grade 1 listed building and you're right we have won awards this building his great those awards I was much for Declan's they offer us meet one lots of a was for it and I'm just and fenced it it's even being entertained the possibility if too easy just on a computer graphic it looked very similar over it's not it's worth that's nice it isn't right now thought that the long answer to a very clear no ice rink chatter if I could just respond on the maintenance plan just on a on a planning level I assert except as a difference of opinion OK in architectural style here but I think as as Committee members we have to be mindful that the sort of future maintenance of anything at the householder level is is a bit of an overreach so the Committee cat force anybody to paint their house or to water their garden or to maintain the roof or anything like that so we're really here to take a consideration of the design and the materials that the basic planning issues that are set out in the in the Officer report so we concerned have a discussion about this the scale and the massing of the dwelling and the amenity impacts but to go too far into the future maintenance issues I think we'd be treading over ground that isn't material to planning so I just wanted to sort of orientate members towards the discussion around
people around the design of the dwelling not its maintenance gems before we will I'm come debt OMV picture the our go-to show as a very fine
sorry what was that Gerrard acute job they incur talk Shaw on the is a very fine by the Office us it's not verified no Goslar I think Members were after this regard that is not verified by the officers place up me Councillor Desmond thank you care arm so
for question of officers rarely so
Jonathan obviously comes across as a very credible and very expert about this matter from his professional background arm and he has raised I think a variety of very legitimate points normally we'd be able to ask the applicant obviously to respond to those so the fact the applicant isn't here and also for fat but the raw I think some unresolved technical questions
things like for example the question of what will we actual effect be upon the amenity if their courtyard is enclosed by a new building ill will were is it possible share slash offices for us to defer this matter so not to go either way either approval or refusal until such time as we can have the applicant so we could hear their side as well as possibly how some of these issues investigated further agree with gun we have to be reason and I don't think we have reasonable reason now I'm James you can guide me on that list I mean it is the Officer view Castlerock on that you have Members have all the information before them to make a decision so in in relation to the materials the applicants made their submission officers of assessed of materials is being compliant with the London Plan and comply with Lucious policies that's not to say that there can't be sort of differentiation between the materials you know so one the the the neighbouring dwelling can be constructed of a difference palette of materials and the current scheme is proposing something different both can be judged to be a high quality response to the conservation area and that the officer view is that the proposals compliant if there's specific information Councillor the you feel you're missing to make the decision than you can make a motion to defer but you'd need to give your reasons for that and so as I say we can get some further advice from the legal officer of needed but the the full case is set out in the committee report so officers of the view that
we have we have the information available
OK thank you James argued for instance Jack Councillor Pryke for making 0 sorry sorry before we go Councillor pursue sorry other Councillor pursue
get on and slightly concerned with what you say terms about the fundamentally the plans being good enough and because once want something is built it it's really difficult to enforce if it if turns out to be not as we expected it to to look particularly its thing about the pitch of the roof and low sort of things so when you say it's good enough what what sort of tolerance is that showing because the difference between a 30 degree angle and the 45 degree angle is an awful lot and a once it's built trying to get someone to re angle their roof is gonna be an extremely difficult thing to do so and our unsorted thinking what is this good-enough you know I'm a little bit concerned
well I think tourists who issues there on gossip or Sheerman firstly the plans in the Officer position are suitable for planning purposes the question over whether the materials are acceptable the officer view is that they are so condition 5 in that in the Officer package sets out a requirement for specification of detailed materials so that's pretty standard planning practice so if officers get materials in the we think online of quality for the conservation area than weekend refuse the condition and we can ask for something that we consider to be hard quality
I think it's a high quality contemporary response to the conservation area and we are getting an extra piece of conservation or a wall here which I quite liked about the scheme so it's something that makes a small contribution to the conservation area
legacy with with due respect to the objector I think that we have to you know relatively
here dwellings here that our contemporary in terms of their scale and their size
the officer position is that the materials for the proposal are acceptable like the peril materials for the approved scheme that was approved a couple of years ago so we set that out in the committee report and like I say it's not that it's good enough we feel it's policy compliance and that its high-quality if you pace Chen
what I will I mentioned to it was the thing about the pitch of the roof that isn't materials that's now actual design and how accurate you perceive that to be because this will make an awful lot of difference to the appearance and we've heard the assertion that the plans are inaccurate and officers subject the plans our view is that they showed the reforms according as in the proposed roof will align with the existing roof adjoining and that it would be built in accordance with the proprietor if it's not then that would be a planning enforcement issue but were satisfied that the plans are accurate
thank you
Fasola colour governor
thank you Chair and I shared sank sands and as I said it beginning and if my ward I know the area well
I am and I see lighting issues that are highlighted myself before Mr. Paul Kane Mr. Parvis highlighted I long list of other issues that I think we can generally speaking consider material and even if we don't necessarily like that idea I am whilst now in terms of the aesthetics of the drawings I liked of design when I hear these things matters being right I become concerned especially considering the fact that the building is right next door to a primary school on the other side of Mr. Powell piles dwelling so yeah and
the tree root issue is not addressed the thought they did to me this is a major you know the floor is one of most important considerations you can have after the roof and yet we have been told the drawings are not accurate so ice icicle councils pursued and RAF bombing not I had concerns over this because I just read for confirmation the Tree Officer has assessed the scheme as has the cost the Council's Conservation Officer so neither them raise an objection to the scheme but certainly are saying it certainly within committees
committee's remit to take whatever view they think is appropriate on the design so we we were concerned enough
actually I can't make Geoff at two points one is for material way add two conditions one is the condition 5 and one condition 12 and a condition for material is with site visit so somebody someone of the officer goes there and check the materials and condition 12 is for the Arctic troll materials were for the caddying and for the Prix which would be the main issues of the materials and regarding the tree and we have again to condition 1 condition is for their filing system to make sure that the root of their trees during the construction and offer that would be or would not be damage and then another condition is for the make sure that that protection of the trees would be considered during the construction
thank you
Councillor Clark Place
yes thank you I was just going to say that I think this is a very important application from the present point of view of its siting it is very close to Grade 1 listed building and it is in a conservation area and we do expect much higher standards of design in these particular cases and so the fact that oversee and architect comes forward and says to us that there are deep concerns over some of the design I do think that
the certainly with me resonate slightly when it is in such an important position so and I have some concerns and one of them also was the sense of enclosure for the house next door and remembering that also is an award winning House as has been pointed out so the design for me on this is absolutely critical that it would be right and I am a little bit concerned that that this is some questions of this particularly a flat roof that me event it the look of that design is important for for this area is a conservation area so I think the fact it is a flat roof and the design may not hold is actually relevant in this case it's not that we can say that we can make sure a flat roof works it is whether that design will be suitable for that area in the long term and I'm not convinced I'd like the officer and possibly also the objected to come back on this sense of enclosure because it looked to me like the next door property will be enclosed and we on over mental health and well you
this would result of loss Councillor Penfold
so far are gonna hurt you to suspend the meeting while we try to establish him I Key said that he was going to have his computer forcibly we started so that must be what has now happened
yes any began on his iPad I think it's it's going to happen to me also I've just been sent a message say on about to be signed out on pressings knows it it's not allowing me to
can you do the iPad thing Jack I might be able to live in have not been cut out yet but I've got a message saying your computer is about to restart so or you could you can dine on the phone number that's on the calendar in the too hard saying nothing to see if I can use my iPad if if it happens it's as a say it's not happened yet I'll switch of more not preferred in it and attempt to see if I get on my bed
as Councillor Penfold aware he can call in
he says the same invited everyone else so
since then the route through pictures we were to find minute save Councillor pen fell repairs if he doesn't then we proceed without is set to get in 2 minutes just try
3 minutes would be within tolerance thank you
all the joys of virtual meetings
currently no 25 minutes should Bina his Councillor Clarke Infiniti finish up

5 Land at Rear of 148 Deptford High Street, London, SE8

Councillor Pat cyber that and yes I think had made the points clear that I was concerned about the fact it was in a conservation area Grade One close to Grade 1 listed building I think some legitimate points have been made over the design which I was certain concerned about and I was wanting the officers to come back on this sense of enclosure and that was something perhaps the resident also might want to have femme spoken further on a with regard to the design quality the idea of the flat roof is a design issue for me as well because that would have a long-term impact on how the area looked if that was not feasible so those are the points thank you Chair thank you yes nay may I chaired as shared the presentation again to get back to the point that the council made yes flirt
the plan
it is not a one and it is inside this plot
and it is the view to number 1
and here is the proposed plan from this man's you can see that there sloped roof are very similar they are actually repeating this slope Road regarding the flat roof this part which is mainly their area of the
proposed plan are single storey with a flat roof and roof light and that the flat roof would be green and this part because is close to the tree which is there is flat roof as well to make the impact on tree less you can see there the slopes of fear and can see the slope of the proposers low-profit in this application and number 1 they are similar on this plan and also if
the call to arms
there the size of the slow growth and the dormer is very similar to number 1 it is another view to the front elevation
and here as well so the height and the size is very space similar to number 1
let's similar exactly the same it is the view to number 1
and then
here again is it this one shows that the view from number 1 to them to sample at the moment and so we appreciate that his view will be difficult by the new development paths and it is not a planning consideration I'm afraid
and also regarding the tree as I said that there is conditioned to make sure that the trees would be a remain as the health of the tree we remain during the construction other way I'm as as they are close to the main building
o again regarding a material as I said previously to condition have been and imposed to make sure that the the materials would be be in the high quality which can be 10th can have an and they show the character of the conservation area
so again if you go by here the slope it is just showing the sloped roof of the new building and the number one are similar under the same
shouted you wanna that the ejector respond and said Councillor Clark's question
luck now has a powerful now
Councillor configuration
yes thank you Chair when Ms Polmadie submission he said that the new build with block his light which when those for the plans are being blocked by the new-build the cancer with the applicant submitted a full daylight and sunlight assessment to accompany the application
the conclusion of that report is that no window would be obscured or overshadowed to the point where it exceed BRE criteria so that's not to say that there wouldn't be an impact but this is a case where there's no exceedences so the officer view is that it would be acceptable in planning terms of the dwelling will obviously presented will obviously be visible but in terms of the overshadowing impacts the daylight sunlight position would be acceptable Mr. Paul may want to come in and speak about well I mean obviously Mr. Parrs different view about a lot of things for curbing the actual plans the fells so I would like to hear from him as the which went out again to be blocked by this that the and if the officers' go-to hurt that page 14 on her
which carries with you
along the route
that possible
there are can you pull the plug the presentations
presentation you mean
height 14 place
thank you so the the image most left
is the law sitting room an Arcachon in our dining area and you can also see two windows either side of the courtyard in those are two principal bedrolls those are really
the windows of the house the nature of the design that's internal courtyard with essentially built up against boundary walls and all sides apart from a little tiny window on the streets similar to the one for those with this proposal these are the windows into the ground floor of the House and the majority of accommodation of the houses on the ground floors of that is it is no other way of seeing out
so all of that view it's it's about the combination of encroachment loss of the UN at fitfully appreciate that a view in a loss of a view is not a planning criteria but the loss of any view and the unthinkable Rosamund onto the only windows where we can get any access to seeing the world beyond is you can you can see that if this House was built that the whole life of our house with completely change in the sense of the way that it felt plus the fact that lands appreciate him maintenance itself
it's not a mission to be discussed to what I'm talking about is the overlooking caused by the frequent maintenance that will be required so you know even in the glazing in the dormer window is obscured which is a condition anyone out on that roof pulling out the interest of tree seedlings which they will have to do several times a year
will be able to look directly into our bedroom our guest bedroom are kitchen or bathroom what it's not a bathroom into a kitchen dining room where are 6 year old son plays an
we could impact on our lives the nature of this site that would be one or so let it solution and it doesn't make sense to us that you should copy that next door to it because it massively impacts on the House that we filled needs a different solution next door
members before we go on we need to consider what is in
planning from planning application anything not relevant with this planning application I don't think we need to consider a place because we're because the way I'm looking at this now is already stated in them gents is like that dealing with this split here we need to focus on the planning application and follow the procedure please members can I call Councillor Prosky place
I am actually really pleased that I've just seen those pictures except for the first time I can't now understand what what the objection is which actually it has not been actually very care or the way through this but there are a couple of these I would like to know from the officers whether the that the quote that the level of qualification of the person who actually designed that they house that is is actually being gives this kind of a bit of a bit of a thing going on here which is almost assuming that there's this place has not been designed by anybody who's got any kind of qualifications and I'm a bit worried about that and also I just want to know I do want to understand about this about the way that the House is going to be heated because I do think that this is not properly explained because it does say in the papers that the instant there's an installation of a communal air source heat pump to serve central heating and domestic hot water I'd like to know what this communal air source is where it where where is this coming from communal as laws is not something that you can just pull up a hat it's got to be something that's actually provided by community I'd like to know what that is and if it's going to be like it if if you if you're going to do ground source heating you have to have a huge area that is exposed to so the Paris overheating from the sun or you have to do you have to drill huge piles into the earth and there is just not the space on that site to do its I'd really liked understand how this is actually going to work because it is part of the prep that that the planning proposition thanking Sir cancer I just want to introduce back there and you know I think that we need to be clear that both those point Sir irrelevance applauding so are not on the the Opik couldn't store an air source heat pump in the building without planning permission so if if if Committee were minded to grant permission there's a condition with respect to sustainability but that the issue of whether or not as a minor scheme the applicant brings forward and air source heat pumps are not it is a relevance to the applicant to be frank as are required to bring forward that detail you after my me of your first point but I it I think it was it was something that this potentially outside outside planning
what was the first the first point Councillor
first point was I'd like to know A-level qualification or as you design the property and I don't understand how this is not a hit and planning matter if it's in the papers for discussion because it's no skip commuter Aso's heat pump to serve it says in the papers as an installation of carnival air source heat pump to serve central heating at us or water so surely I can ask so because everything my card to make carbon savings as as a major scheme it's it's up to the applicant how they want to bring forward sort of the if they want to bring forward an hour so see pump or boilers are however that the sustainability measures is
we welcome you know that the Sustainability Officer has reviewed the scheme and we welcome these sustainability measures but in terms of their imposition if the applicants minded to bring them forward we can assess it by condition in terms of the architect them afraid that simply as irrelevant whether or not
you know ye if a if a proposal comes forward in the plans are suitable for planning purposes then the sort of background or qualification the applicant what their circumstances are simply not relevant to planning unfortunately but then also goes the objectors well then I take him well the ejector is is a neighbour so he's the he's the person who lives next door
legacy members can he hit it's it's material planning points that his making not his qualifications
thank you
Councillor Ingleby Claisse
I don't think thank you Chair can you hear me yeah comparing ever I'm I think I can see this going it's I mean I've said this in other Planning Committee meetings to when the an applicant isn't here and were getting two substantial details about design and shipping rate I mean it really does weaken the application process planning Councillors and there's to underside raised in error on the last discussion about the point about cladding on page 100 71 again having all these things that have to be discussed or finalised by condition is just to for me it's one step too many and given the the high quality of the the the the high stakes of the were near a grey one of the context and the design and therefore and proposing that we reject this application on the grounds of grounds of design and materials and context
I can yes gonna secondaries are here whatever could I request got so that we if if the Members are minded to make such a motion that the the wording of the reason for refusal be delegated to officers to out to finalise yet as long as its way along design or materials and context yes yes and I'm very concerned about the discrepancy between the drawings and specified angles on the roof
before we before I gets put to a vote Councillor Rathbone had suggested a deferral
if Members are of the view there is insufficient information in terms of the plans and we could potentially bring the application back so we could allow the applicant to speak in support of it but it's entirely within member's remit what they like to do with the application so there's a motion to the floor Members can decide what they like to do that it's at the direction of the Chair jerk on before we go I think we need to bring them the legal Officer in taste to give us advice on this cause
good evening and in terms of in terms of and deferral Members interpreted fair if they feel their certain information or clarification and points that they want to be fought back to them which isn't clear from what is being provided now so if they wanted different I don't know information that would be fine in terms of the refusal of the proposal
I took down it with design materials and contacts I'd asked members if they were minded to go down that road that they explained what their issues were with each of those elements so that officers could and consider whether or not they felt that they were radical reasons to graft own refusal
asked there's been a proposal and explained seconded I think we are obliged to take a vote on that anyway on with the 0 sorry I didn't hear the second our I heard it been proposed I didn't realise it 8 approach then check and it's nothing were obliged to fo yesterday it must will be useful to to be clear to other Members what your voting on imprecisely if if may be cancelling curbing could expand that that reason that would be helpful
thank you
there is a general lack of coherence to the whole application in design terms and in context terms and particularly the context of the Grade One building nearby the issues that have been raised in relation to the also being next to a high quality neighbouring building as well and and they and their position the materials themselves as too many materials that have been left to conditioning it's not good planning policy to to leave so anything to conditioning when the designs takes his highs this I think the design issue is is is his Premier here and that's what we're voting on and the sense of enclosure that Councillor Kaka has a sense of enclosure that came out from the discussion as well
so all those points around design so I'd like to propose that the we reject the application
and we ended discrepancy between the diagram and the Witton angles on the roof as well as the Council of the plan discrepancy wouldn't be a matter of planning harm so I think we probably have to
to walk away from that one
could I think you could say that you felt the roof form in the design of the roof was was harmful but that if you were of the view I don't think we could refuse on on on what the applicant perceives to be a plan to scrap answer what the objective perceives to be a plan discrepancy no grey I think I answered by as you my James and I will go expertise as to the wording as you'd understand what it is I'm talking about so mean said to summarise to summarise for members the view that there's a lack of coherence in the design
in relation to in relation to the scheme in the adjoining dwelling that there is significant amounts of materiality left to condition
the impacts of enclosure
and then the
context of an impact on the heritage setting to was that was not raised as I could not all correct so that the full points yes I mean I think the officer response to the points around conditionality is that it would be a pretty typical approach in relation to materials to condition that so there would be nothing typical about leaving the details of materials to condition states that would be very typical Planning practice so I think you'd have the officer view on the sort of strength of that point
members are certainly entitled to take a different view with respect to design and the impacts of design then officers you have the officer view we think the design is suitable in its accordance with the adjoining dwelling in relation to enclosure I think we'd have to be clear whether that was in relation to design or amenity I think that the Council would be might have to clarify that point for us
it's to do with design it's to do within the the fact wider whether you classifies amenity but I'm there was a case was the objective pointed out the the substantial threat to the light but it also it is a design issue as well and coming when you have to those windows on a low level light that she had to fund them when you design a building you think about in a pre post 10 66 castles we think about lights where we put our windows
the Council I would caution you the daylight sunlight
assessment indicates that there's no windows that contravene beret so I think it would be the officer view that refusing the scheme for the impact on adjoining properties with respect to daylight sunlight issues would be or would be a bit of a risk OK let's go weeks the design it was a fairly sobriety closure Ms I think they enclose you is the most up from from from I thought I was really actually and like very night sitting on the fence for this but when I saw the picture of what actually have where they were they actually inhabiting the space with the windows and then the the only bit of view above the wall is going to be blocked that for me was it that everything else got the windows are broken says a fact that that the only view they've got three pronged that courtyard space up is going to be blocked that that that for me was it it's an enclosure aspect think is the most crucial thing so as as Mr. Pile flagged councillors be that the loss of view is not a material planning assume so it it's simply cannot be taken into consideration by members so that design if if you feel the design of the amenity space is enclosed in that represent poor design I think that's a reasonable position to take yet in terms of the loss of the view for the neighbour that's not something committee can consider OK yes the design OK
as to whether members would like to defer or or vote on the motion to refuse that's that's led by the Chair so all of that support I think has come from the shows indicated it had been moved and seconded so that does need to be voted upon
I'd be grateful if you could move to the vote quickly because I'm being counted down in a matter of minutes to being timed out for this same problem I'm trying to get in on my iPad I can't yell is I have only two minutes and 54 seconds Clerk make the roll call please yes please that's a Bernard's had you vote
our vote to reject the application
Councillor golf at you vote I also vote to reject the application
Councillor Ingleby hard you vote I'd vote to reject
Councillor Keller had you vote to reject
so in favour of refusing the proposal review
Councillor props gay had you vote I'd like to reject the proposal thank you
as that again by the were heard you vote in favour of the application
so you do not want to reject it nor Morrison
cast up a shoe how do you want to vote against the that the current motion to accept the year application C or refusing you'd like to refused application no no she'd luck she liked to vote in favour of the application
because the panel held right to vote I would like to refuse the application
has the reform and how I'd like to vote I would like to refuse the application
OK there are seven in favour off refusing application there are two a gate refusing the application no abstention
the application refused
how do we have time to deal with the issue of the minutes yesterday
I have only 41 seconds left her
gather round run Claudette ornaments agreed both the AGM minutes that took place on the 15th of July 20 20 and the minutes for the last meeting before this one yes yes yes yes yes

2 Minutes

thank you thank you Chair thank you members and everyone why
tomorrow and I'll time yet light