Application Number:            19/P3400                   Ward:  Merton Park

Officer Recommendation: GRANT Planning Permission subject to S106 Obligation or any other enabling agreement.

RESOLVED that Application 19/P3400 is granted planning permission subject to conditions and s106 agreement.

Proposal: The demolition of former two storey Doctors’ Surgery and erection of a three storey residential block providing 8 self-contained flats.

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation, including the additional condition proposed as set out in the supplementary agenda.

Two objectors had registered to speak and had submitted written statements which were read out by the Senior Democratic Services Officer at the request of the Chair.  The statements raised points relating to overlooking, loss of privacy and light, noise impact and the proximity of the refuse bins to neighbouring property.  A written statement on behalf of the applicant was also read out, setting out the adjustments made to address the concerns of neighbouring residents and the benefits the scheme would bring to the area.

The Development Control Team Leader South addressed the points raised by the objectors in respect of overlooking, loss of light and loss of privacy.  He advised the Committee that if it was minded to approve, an additional condition could be added to request complete obscure glazing on the kitchen window in question.  He demonstrated on plans the separation distances which were not close enough to warrant refusal and officers felt that the applicant was acceptable in terms of light.

In response to questions from Members, the Development Control Team Leader South advised:

- officers considered the location of the cycle and refuse storage to be reasonable.

- it would be reasonable to request obscure glazing and privacy screen up to 1.6 or 1.7m high if Members were minded.

- officers did not consider the distance between the windows of the proposal and the windows of No. 85 to be unreasonable.

- there would be no reduction or harm to amenity space and existing trees should be retained.

- the previous application was for 9 units and the current proposal was for 8 units and the previous application did not meet floor space standards, whereas the current application did meet the standards.

- each application must be considered on its own merits and the particular conversation area, therefore standard construction times would not be appropriate in this case.

The Chair adjourned the meeting at 7.58pm and resumed at 8.05pm

Members made a number of comments, including:

-       Some felt that the application was a good scheme overall, although there were concerns over refuse storage and the proximity to the bedroom of flat 3.

-       There were some concerns in respect of overlooking and privacy, which had not been dealt with and it was felt that the application should be rejected on that basis.

-       Some felt that the proposal would make a positive contribution to developing the area and would delivery important housing provision.

-       An additional condition relating to provision of Swift boxes was requested.

Development Control Team Leader South confirmed that a condition relating to swift boxes could be accommodated.

At the conclusion of the debate the Chair called for a vote on the recommendation to approve planning application, with the addition of the condition set out in the supplementary agenda and the condition relating to swift boxes and it was

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be GRANTED subject to conditions and a s106 agreement or any other enabling agreement.