Application number: 17/P1717   Ward: Figges Marsh/Longthornton

Officer Recommendation: Grant Outline Planning Permission subject to s106 legal agreement and conditions.

Proposal: Outline planning application (with all matters reserved, except in relation to parameter plans) for the comprehensive regeneration of the Eastfields Estate comprising the demolition of all existing buildings and structures; erection of new buildings ranging from 1 to a maximum of 9 storeys providing up to 800 residential units (C3 Use Class); provision of up to 275 sqm of flexible commercial non-residential floorspace (flexible Use Classes A1 and/or  A2 and/or A3 and/or A4 and/or B1 and/or D1 and/or D2 Use Classes); provision of new public open space and communal amenity spaces including children’s play space; new public realm, landscaping works and new lighting; cycle parking spaces (including new visitor cycle parking) and car parking spaces (including within ground level podiums), together with associated highways and utilities works.

The Committee noted the officer’s report, the Supplementary Agenda – Additional Information and the Supplementary Agenda – Modifications. Officers drew Members’ attention to the revised overarching and estate specific heads of terms contained in the Supplementary Agenda – Modifications.

The Committee received an introductory presentation from  Officers, and verbal representations from Councillor Suzanne Grocott and The Cabinet Member for Environment Regeneration and Housing.

Councillor Suzanne Grocott spoke representing residents and made points including:

·         There is a current community at this estate

·         The proposal will double the number of units and is very high

·         The number of affordable units will reduce

·         Leaseholders will lose amenity space

·         Residents may lose their gardens

·         Concerned about loss of greenery

·         There is no space for a decant of current residents

Councillor Martin Whelton spoke as Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Housing and Environment and made points including:

·         Estate was built in 1965 and is now very energy inefficient

·         Current Estate is very poorly laid out

·         Could be considerably enhanced by providing more new homes

·         Increase in housing density is very important as we need more new homes to meet shortage in London

·         This estate can be better in the future

The Committee discussed the application under the following headings:

Principle of Development and Land Use

In answer to Members Questions, officers gave the following replies:

·         The retail provision is 275m², this will be flexible, but is the size of a small supermarket

Members commented that they welcomed this scheme and are pleased that current tenants will be rehoused in a unit that is the size they now need, and not in a  like-for-like unit. Pleased that current tenants and Leaseholders will get new homes at ‘Decent Homes’ standard. They also welcome the proposed new design, feel that Clarion has done well.. The current estate is inward looking, unconnected and the green space is desolate and not used.

Viability and Affordable Housing

Members asked if the redevelopment of  this estate will have to wait until the more viable estates have been redeveloped? Officers replied that the under the S106 agreement the applicants have to provide a reasonable delivery of this estate, it will not have to wait for the other estates to complete.

One Member commented that he thought that the overall provision of affordable housing across the three estates was not acceptable.

Design and Heritage

Members commented that they took note of the Design Review Panel’s comments on the design, and they liked the new design which was wholly appropriate,

Open Space and Biodiversity

Members noted that the unsuitable plane trees on the site perimeter will be removed and new trees planted.

Parking and Transport

In answer to Members Questions, officers gave the following replies:

·                    The site has a low PTAL rating, despite being close to Mitcham Eastfields Station, because the PTAL rating is a measure of Transport connectivity, and not proximity to a single mode of transport

·                    The site will provide a higher level of parking than required by the London Plan because current resident are being offered like-for –like parking arrangements. Concerns regarding commuter parking in these spaces can be met by a future CPZ, this is allowed for under the Heads of Terms, with the developer to pay for this.

RESOLVED

The Committee voted  to GRANT outline planning permission subject to any direction from the Mayor of London, any direction from the Secretary of State, the completion of a S106 agreement and conditions