Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2017 as an accurate record.

The Sub-Committee RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2017 be signed as a correct record.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions of the Localism Act, Members and co-opted Members of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to register disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and gifts and hospitality to the value of which exceeds £50 or multiple gifts and/or instances of hospitality with a cumulative value of £50 or more when received from a single donor within a rolling twelve month period. In addition, Members and co-opted Members are reminded that unless their disclosable pecuniary interest is registered on the register of interests or is the subject of a pending notification to the Monitoring Officer, they are required to disclose those disclosable pecuniary interests at the meeting. This should be done by completing the Disclosure of Interest form and handing it to the Democratic Services representative at the start of the meeting. The Chair will then invite Members to make their disclosure orally at the commencement of Agenda item 3. Completed disclosure forms will be provided to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion on the Register of Members’ Interests.

There were no disclosures of a pecuniary interest not already registered.

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

There was none.

To consider the accompanying reports by the Director of Planning & Strategic Transport:

Alterations and conversion to form 3 one bedroom flats and one three bedroom flat facilitated by the erection of a single storey side and rear extension, conversion of existing garage and provisions of associated parking and refuse storage

Ward: Addiscombe

Recommendation: Grant permission

Following the officers’ presentation, Committee Members asked questions related to possible overlooking issues with the extension at the rear of the property and concerns were raised over parking availability. Officers present responded that the overlooking risk was relatively minor and that officers were satisfied with the parking provision given the close proximity to the tram stop. 

Mira Armour, speaking in objection to the application, made the following points:

·         The consultation process had been confusing for residents as a number of amendments had been made to the original application.

·         Residents did not approve of the design of elements of the application including the windows and the side extension roof.

·         There was a need in the area for family housing.

Officers present responded that the property provided a mix of family and single occupancy. The application had changed since the original application had been submitted in 2016 and when new considerations arose, residents were always re-consulted. Officers were satisfied that the proposed development complied with the character of the area and most of the extension was not visible from the front of the property.

Councillor Prince moved to grant the application, and Councillor Khan seconded the motion.

Councillor Bain moved to refuse the application, on the basis that the application would create overdevelopment in the area and had a lack of parking provision.

Councillor Winborn seconded the motion for refusal.

The first motion was put to the vote and was carried with 3 votes in favour and 2 against, causing the second motion to fall.

The Sub-Committee resolved to GRANT the application for development at 6 Ashburton Road, CR0 6AL.

Alterations, Retention of single storey rear extension and change of use from 5 rooms C4 Houses in multiple occupation to 9 rooms HMO, Provision of associated refuse storage and cycle storage

Ward: Norbury

Recommendation: Grant permission

Following the officers’ presentation, Members asked questions related to the provision of kitchens and toilets for the property. Officers present confirmed that the Council’s Environmental Health and Safety team had reviewed the application and were satisfied with the allocation of kitchens and bathrooms for the proposed development.

Jane Kelly, speaking against the application, made the following points:

·         The property had previously provided two family homes and the proposed development would be an over-intensification of the property.

·         There was no evidence for a need in the area for Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMOs).

·         There was no dining room in the application, which would create risks to tenants bringing hot food from the kitchen down into the bedrooms located on the lower floor.

·         Concerns were raised over the property already being used as an HMO before permission had been granted.

Officers present responded that properties were only classified as HMOs when accommodating for more than six people; the property had previously not met that threshold but the application increased the number to nine. There was a high demand for HMO accommodation and officers were satisfied with the quality of the development as proposed. There was a separate HMO licensing regime which inspected proposed HMO developments and no concerns had been raised regarding this application.  The issue of kitchen location was raised with the Environmental Health and Safety Team and they were satisfied with the arrangement in the application. 

The applicant, Michael Gerrard, speaking in favour of the application, made the following points:

·         The property had been refurbished to a high standard and was targeted at young graduates from university. The rent was affordable for this target market and supported efforts by young people to save for help to buy schemes.

·         A caretaker was employed to deal with the bins serving the property and smoking was banned outside of the front of the property.

Councillor Kabir moved to grant the application, and Councillor Khan seconded the motion.

Councillor Bains moved to refuse the application, however there was no seconder.

The first motion was put to the vote and was carried with 3 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.

The Sub-Committee resolved to GRANT the application for development at 14 Norbury Crescent, SW16 4LA.

Erection of an attached two storey four bedroom house with accommodation in the roofspace: provision of associated parking, bin store, cycle store and landscaping

Ward: Shirley

Recommendation: Grant permission

Following the officers’ presentation, the applicant, James Taylor, spoke in favour of the application and made the following points:

·         The design was in keeping with the character of the area and provided good quality family housing.

·         There was parking provision included in the development.

·         The rooms were of good size and met all the relevant government regulations.

Councillor Kabir moved to grant the application, and Councillor Khan seconded the motion.

The motion was put to the vote and was carried unanimously.

The Sub-Committee resolved to GRANT the application for development at 96 Bridle Road, CR0 8HF.