Agenda item
96-98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG PA/19/00256
Proposal:
The redevelopment of 96-98 Bromley High Street, comprising the demolition of the existing building (two storey residential building) (use class C3) to construct a four storey residential building containing 4 x two bedroom units, 2 x one bedroom units and 1 x three bedroom unit with associated cycle parking spaces, private amenity space and other associated works.
Recommendation:
Grant planning permission with conditions
Minutes:
Gareth Gwynne introduced the application for demolition of the existing building to construct a four storey residential building containing 4 x two bedroom units, 2 x one bedroom units and 1 x three bedroom unit with associated cycle parking spaces, private amenity space and other associated works.
Piotr Lanoszka (Planning Services) presented the report describing the nature of the site and the surrounding area, and the outcome of the consultation, resulting in the receipt by the Council of 10 letters of objection and 1 petition in objection of 39 signatures. Mr Lanoszka summarised the comments raised in objection to the proposal.
Mr Lanoszka briefly summarised the results of the assessments relating to land use; housing; design; heritage; impact on neighbour amenity; highways and transport; and the environment.
Officers considered that the application, complied with policy so should be granted.
The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.
Susan Christopher and Keith Cunningham expressed concerns about the scheme regarding the following issues:
· Massing and scale of the proposal is inappropriate and would make it out of character with other buildings in the locality.
· Impact on parking stress in the locality.
· Risk to nearby tree and car park.
· Loss of residents privacy through being overlooked.
· Major loss of daylight.
· Disruption and noise of development.
· Stress and impact on health of residents, including vulnerable residents
· Claims of a factual inaccuracy in the case officer’s report: the distance between the proposed development and 1A Priory Street being 6.5m (not 12.5m).
· Objectors have engaged an independent daylight consultant to review proposals. The consultant’s report was not mentioned in the case officer’s report.
· Flaws in the assessment of sunlight and daylight loss.
Councillor Dan Tomlinson addressed the Committee. Councillor Tomlinson stressed that he was not opposed in principle to development on this site, but wished to express concerns about this scheme regarding the following issues:
· The cumulative impact of development in Bromley North is concerning to residents.
· Concern over reports of inaccuracies in the report regarding distance of 1A and 1B Priory Street from the proposal and of the address of nearby properties being incorrect.
· Further impact on parking stress in the locality.
· The major adverse impact on daylight/sunlight of affected properties, as indicated in the report, must be tested against Council policies not to approve schemes that would have significant material detriment to daylight and sunlight of local residents.
The applicant’s representatives indicated they did not wish to address the Committee, but were on hand to respond to any questions it had on the application or points raised.
Questions to Officers
In response to questions, officers explained that:
- The reported distance of 1A and 1B Priory Street from the proposal was correctly stated in the report as 12.5m as the distance between principal elevations; however the distance is closer when the ground floor extension to 1A Priory Street is taken into account.
- The locality included a variety of buildings of different scale and height and the proposal would therefore not be out of character.
- Conditions already proposed would mitigate the loss of privacy and impact of noise on local residents (for example the obscure glazing on some windows).
- No impact was anticipated to neighbouring car park or tree.
- Work had been undertaken with Historic England to ensure acceptable safeguards to archaeological loss. Previous planning applications on the site had not provided such safeguards.
- Provision of housing at the site was in line with Council priorities and formed the main public benefit of the scheme to weigh against negative impacts.
- Whilst daylight loss to some neighbouring properties was significant, this proposal is acceptable as retained levels are considered good for an urban location.
Questions to Applicants team
In response to questions, the applicant’s representatives explained that loss of parking provision would be limited to the removal of the current residential driveway and that the proposal is for a car-free development.
Councillor Dan Tomlinson left the meeting at this point.
Councillor John Pierce proposed and Councillor Mufeedah Bustin seconded a proposal that the application be deferred for the reasons set out
below. On a vote of 3 in favour, none against, the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That the application for 96-98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG (PA/19/00256) be DEFERRED pending a site visit.
The Committee was minded to defer the application for a site visit for the following reason:
· To establish the distance of the properties at 1A and 1B Priory Street from the rear elevation of the proposed building.
In accordance with Development Procedural Rules, the application was
DEFERRED in order to undertake a site visit.
Supporting documents:
- PA-19-00256 - Bromley High Street Committee Report FINAL, item 5.2 PDF 2 MB
- Case Officer's Presentation - 96-98 Bromely High Street, item 5.2 PDF 2 MB