Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Abigail Jones

There were no declarations of pecuniary interest.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 19 January 2017 were agreed as an accurate record.

Officer Recommendation:

The recommendations for each individual application are detailed in the relevant section of the reports. 

The published Agenda and Supplementary Agenda tabled at the meeting form part of the Minutes:

1. Supplementary Agenda: A list of modifications for agenda items 10, 11 and 13 were published as a supplementary agenda.

2. Item 6 was withdrawn from the Agenda prior to the meeting.

3. Verbal Representations: The Committee received verbal representations detailed in the minutes for the relevant item.

4. Order of the Agenda – The Chair amended to order of items to the following: 10, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 5, 7, 9, 15, and 16

Application Number:16/P4082                  Ward: Merton Park

Recommendation: Grant permission subject to conditions

Proposal: Conversion of single family dwellinghouse into 2 x self-contained flats

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation.

RESOLVED

The Planning Applications Committee agreed to Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions

Application Number: 15/P1569                 Ward: Trinity

Recommendation: GRANT Planning Permission Subject to completion of a s106 Agreement and Conditions

ITEM WITHDRAWN FOM THIS AGENDA

This item was withdrawn from the Agenda prior to the meeting.

Application Number: 16/P4696                 Ward: Graveney

Recommendation: Grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Proposal: Two storey side extension

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation.

RESOLVED

The Planning Application Committee agreed to Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions

Application Number: 16/P2011                 Ward: Hillside

Recommendation: GRANT Planning Permission subject to conditions

Proposal: Erection of a single storey extension and replacement roof involving increasing the height of the roof and excavation of the existing floor level by 350mm to accommodate mezzanine level accommodation.

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation. The Committee received verbal presentations from an agent representing objectors, from the  applicant, and from ward councillor Daniel Holden.

In response to Councillor Holden’s comments The Planning Officer suggested that an informative be added regarding rain water run-off

RESOLVED

The Committee voted unanimously to GRANT Planning Permission subject to conditions and the addition of an informative regarding rainwater run-off.

Application Number: 16/P4355                 Ward: Village

Recommendation: GRANT Variation of Condition 2.

Proposal: Variation of condition No.2 (proposed drawings) attached to LBM Ref: 15/P3760 regarding the erection of a two-storey end of terrace building to create two self-contained two bedroom flats.

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation.

RESOLVED

The Planning Applications Committee granted the variation of Condition 2.

Application Number: 16/P4810                 Ward: Trinity

Recommendation:

Grant planning permission subject to planning conditions.

Proposal: Demolition of existing two storey rear outbuilding and covered workshop area and two storey outrigger attached to main building. Change of use of ground floor to flexible uses including A1/A2/B1a. Rebuilding of outrigger at a greater width and addition of mansard roof extensions to the main roof and to part of the outrigger to enlarge the existing residential unit. Alterations to existing pedestrian access points.

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation and additional information in the Supplementary Agenda - Modifications. The Committee received verbal presentations from three objectors to the application, and from ward councillor Abdul Latif

The Objectors commented that this application was the same as the previously refused by the Committee in November 2016. However, the Planning Officer asked members to note that the changes made to the ground floor, with the removal of the residential unit, meant the development was now fully compliant with Policy DM E3 on which it had previously been refused. In this application there was no loss of employment land, and the change of use class was not against policy.

The Committee noted the particular concern of objectors relating to the loss the current business, Top Gear Ltd, but noted that the relationship between tenant and landlord was not a planning issue

Members commented that they were sorry to see the current business tenant lose his premises, but that they could see no reason to refuse this application under Planning Legislation.

RESOLVED

The Committee voted to GRANT Planning Permission subject to conditions

Application Number: 16/P4366                 Ward: Abbey

Recommendation: Grant planning permission subject to conditions

Proposal: Change of use from a former Metropolitan Police Safer Neighbourhood unit (B1a Business Use Class) to a Community Centre (D1 Non Residential Institute Use Class).

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation and additional information in the Supplementary Agenda - Modifications. The Committee received verbal presentations from two objectors and the agent to the application

In response to points raised by the Speakers and Committee Members, the Planning Officer made the following comments:

·         A full noise assessment had been undertaken and noise mitigation measures were imposed by condition 3. LBM Environmental Health Officer was satisfied with these measures.

·         The provision of sound limiters could be added by condition

·         The hours of opening, 8am – 10pm every day, are one hour less in the morning and one less in the evening than the authorised hours of the former Police community office which was 7am to 11pm

·         Officers will relay back to the property management team that when setting the leasing arrangements for the premises that ‘good neighbourliness’ should be included. This would involve discouraging users from congregating outside of the adjoining residents properties.

Members commented that it was important for the local residents to communicate their concerns to the management committee of the proposed community centre.

RESOLVED

The Committee voted unanimously to GRANT Planning Permission subject to the published conditions with the addition of a condition regarding the fitting of sound limiters.

Application Number: 16/P4709                 Ward: Hillside

Recommendation: Grant Permission subject to Conditions

Proposal: Erection of a single storey side & rear extension first floor side extension and excavation of basement

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation and additional information in the Supplementary Agenda - Modifications. The Committee received verbal presentations from two objectors and the agent to the application.

Members commented that they welcomed the changes made to the previous application particularly the non-demolition of the house, the new roofline and the further technical information relating to the basement.

Members requested that permitted development rights be removed from the property so that if further extensions to the house were applied for the decision would have to come back to the Committee. This was proposed as a recommendation and agreed before the voting on the recommendation to grant planning permission.

RESOLVED

That the Committee:

1.    Agreed that in allowing planning permission they required permitted development rights to be withdrawn from this property

2.    GRANTED Planning Permission subject to conditions

Application Number: 16/P4324                 Ward: Graveney

Recommendation: Grant planning permission subject to conditions and s106 agreement.

Proposal: Demolition of all buildings and redevelopment of the site to provide 36 residential units (C3 Use Class) within a residential block of 2, 3, and 4 storeys with a 5th storey set back and 246sq.m of non-residential floor space on ground floor for use within classes A1 (retail) and/or B1 (business) and/or D2 (assembly & leisure) together with associated access, car and cycle parking, landscaping and associated works.

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation and additional information in the Supplementary Agenda - Modifications. The Committee received verbal presentations from two objectors and the agent to the application.

The Objectors raised residents’ concerns that included:

·         the poor design of the proposal,

·         parking and local traffic congestion would be made worse by the proposal,

·         the offer of affordable homes was less than the target of 40%

·         the potential for the proposal to make localised flooding worse

The agent reminded the committee that given the independent assessment of the  financial  viability appraisal the developers offer  to deliver  14% affordable housing is more than they are required to offer. He also explained that the developer would be required to add a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) so that the risk of surface and foul water flooding was reduced.

Members made comments including:

·         they were concerned about the high proportion of single bedded units

·         they did not see need for commercial ground floor when there were lots of empty units in the area already

·         the proposed design does not fit in with Edwardian streetscene

·         the proposed design is overbearing, too tall, and un- neighbourly to Caithness Road and Ridge Road

·         a member said that he liked the design but that it was too tall by one storey

In reply to comments made by the objectors and Councillors  the planning officer made the following points:

·         The Officers Report shows evidence  that parking would not be made worse by the development, particularly with its commitment to a car club

·         The mix of unit sizes in the development is not considered to be an issue in this type of development

·         Commercial use is included in the proposal to meet the Council’s Policy requirements for employment generating use of land

·         Officers are satisfied that the height, bulk and massing of the development is suitable for the site.

The Committee discussed further and decided that they could not refuse on parking issues. But a refusal was proposed and seconded on the grounds of the height, bulk and massing being too great. This refusal  was voted on and agreed.

RESOLVED

The Committee agreed to:

1. REFUSE the application for the following reasons:

The Height, Bulk and Massing of the proposal are all too great, contrary to LBM policies

2. DELEGATE to the Director of Environment & Regeneration the authority to make any appropriate amendments in the context of the above to the wording of the grounds of refusal including references to appropriate policies

Application Number: TPO 706                   Ward: Hillside

Recommendation: That the Merton (No.706) Tree Preservation Order 2016 be confirmed, without modification.

The Committee noted the Officer’s Report and presentation, and a verbal representation by an objector to the confirmation of the TPO, and ward councillor Daniel Holden.

RESOLVED

That the Merton (No.706) Tree Preservation Order 2016 be confirmed, without modification.

Officer Recommendation:

That Members note the contents of the report.

The Committee noted the report on recent appeal decisions.

Officer Recommendation:

That Members note the contents of the report.

The Committee noted the report on recent  Enforcement cases.