Agenda item

Retrospective planning permission for the demolition of the existing building, erection of a two/three storey building with accommodation in roof space comprising 6 x two bedroom and 1 x three-bedroom flats, formation of vehicular access and provision of 7 parking spaces, cycle and refuse storage and landscaping.

Ward: Sanderstead

Recommendation: Grant permission

Retrospective planning permission for the demolition of the existing building, erection of a two/three storey building with accommodation in roof space comprising 6 x two bedroom and 1 x three-bedroom flats, formation of vehicular access and provision of 7 parking spaces, cycle and refuse storage and landscaping.

Ward: Sanderstead

Councillor Humayun Kabir arrived at the Council Chamber at 6.18pm.

The officer presented details of the planning application and in response to members’ questions explained that:

• Officers had recommended a condition to improve the pathway to the bike storage and lighting does not need planning consent however if they felt as though an improvement could be made then it could be added as a condition.
• The guidance was that a 1.2m wide access pathway was provided for bikes. The access path on the site was between 85cm-1m wide which was just enough for a bike but it was not ideal.
• The pathway in the approved plan was wider than the pathway in the proposed development. The retaining wall was a lot slimmer which made the pathway wider.
• Officers put a condition on to provide step free access to both doors, three flats would then have step free access. The developer would have three months to implement the step free access to the flats.
• The lower ground floor gardens did not have access to the main rear garden. These were duplex flats. The London plan had an M42 standard which required 90% of new homes to have wheelchair accessible flats. This had been recommended as a condition by officers.
• Officers set out the differences between the previously approved application and the proposed development.

The committee clerk read out a written statement submitted by Mara Sturt-Penrose spoke in objection to the application, David Kemp spoke in support of the application and the ward Member Councillor Lynne Hale addressed the Committee with her view on the application. After the speakers had finished, the committee began the deliberation, during which they raised the following points:

• Refusal would not mean demolition as enforcement would have to be proportional.
• The principle of development of the site had been approved.
• The development was largely in keeping with the surrounding area.
• There were concerns about the headroom in the roof space and the width of the access path.
• The London plan had changed which is why some of the conditions in the proposed development were considered substandard.
• If the application was approved Members sought to enforce the several conditions such as improved lighting along the narrow pathway, the introduction of some landscaping at the front of the site and the enforcement of a maintenance plan for the landscaping on the site.

The substantive motion to GRANT the application based on the officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor Parker. This was seconded by Councillor Fraser.

The motion to grant the application was taken to a vote and carried with nine Members voting in favour. The Committee RESOLVED to GRANT the application for the development at Ark Apartments, 54 Arkwright Road, South Croydon, CR2 0LL.