Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee
Wednesday, 4th July, 2018 7.30 pm

Venue: Civic Offices, St Nicholas Way, Sutton, SM1 1EA

Contact: Committee Services  Tel: 020 8770 4990 | Email:  committeeservices@sutton.gov.uk

Link: Audio

Items
No. Item

13.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence

 

14.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 96 KB

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 June 2018.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 6 June 2018 were approved as a correct record, and signed by the Chair.

15.

Declarations of interest

Minutes:

Councillor Whitehead Declared a non pecuniary interest regarding agenda item 9, 92 Ruskin Rd, Carshalton where  the objector is known to her.  Therefore she advised that she will not take part in this item.

 

Councillor Shields advised that for item 4, 2 Mayfield Road he has de-delegate the item but is still undecided so will remain.

 

Councillor Sadiq declared that re Item 8, TPO 44 Sandy Lane South that this site is within his ward but is does not  know the applicant.

 

16.

Application No. B17/77297 - 2 Mayfield Road, Sutton, SM2 5DT - Report pdf icon PDF 118 KB

Erection of a part one, part two storey extension at rear and side, conversion of loft space involving increase of roof height and chimney and installation of eight roof lights, alterations to existing windows, provision of new entrance gates on Mayfield Road and Hillcroome Road.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report on the above application for Erection of a part one, part two storey extension at rear and side, conversion of loft space involving increase of roof height and chimney installation of eight roof lights, alterations to existing windows, provision of new entrance gates on Mayfield Road and Hillcroome Road.
The Officer presented the report to the committee.  

 
The application had been de-delegated by Councillor Clifton and Councillor Shields

 

Members sought clarification on the building the ridge height and also how this compares to the previously refused scheme.  In particular clarification was requested on the floor plan specifically the proposed use of the new room.  Officers confirmed the existing ridge height is 7m and proposed is 8.4 metres, the officer showed the ridge height compared to the house next door. It was confirmed that the height would not be any taller than the adjoining property. Members made queries regarding the shape and pitch of the proposed roof, and the windows within the roof space. The officer confirmed that the proposal now has a pitched roof which is different from the original application and confirmed the windows will be flush with the roof.

 

Members asked specifically what makes this revised proposal acceptable. It was confirmed that the roof had a deeper pitch, and the design has been improved and is now more in character with surrounding properties. Members were further advised that the pitched roof is maintained and the chimney is retained and previously all features were removed.  Therefore whilst this is extended it retains the features.

 

Members asked for information regarding the new entrance.  The Officer confirmed the new entrance are for pedestrian access only.
 
Mary Naughton an objector, and Councillor Clifton, a ward councillor, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 31, and the applicant replied.
 

The principal issues raised by the objector Mary Naughton were:-

  • This is an area of special of local character, which is green and spacious people living here wish to protect it
  • Current houses are large with large gardens, when originally built number 2 was smaller and created in a  curve
  • The position of the house is near the listed building which is a tennis pavilion and merits protection
  • The proposal would result in harm to neighbouring occupiers, people living here benefit from heritage of the estate inspiring people to protect it
  • The first floor extension would increase size by more than half, and would have 3 times more roof space

 
The principal issues raised by Ward Councillor Clifton were:-

  • He was here as he understood that residents are concerned, and Highfield residents association had submitted letter of objection.
  • The objections were due to disproportionate bulk and size, and that it was believed that proposal had not improved on the previously refused application.
  • The application would also involve loss of garden space.

 

Councillor Shields asked Councillor Clifton if the concern is that this will be another step in the erosion in the area of special local character.   He responded that he  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Recorded Vote
TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
Application number B17/77297 Committee Report Rejected
Application B17/77297 Motion to refuse Motion Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 17.

    Application No. DM2018/00161 - 335 Sutton Common Road, Sutton, SM3 9HZ pdf icon PDF 162 KB

    Erection of a part one, part two storey side and rear extension to existing dwelling to create a self contained 2 bedroom dwelling and provision of 2 parking spaces to rear accessed from Ridge Road following demolition of existing detached garage.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for erection of a part one , part two story side and rear extension to existing dwelling to create a self contained 2 bedroom dwelling and provision of 2 parking spaces to rear accessed from Ridge Road following demolition of existing detached garage.
     
    There were no questions for officers,

     
    The agent Mr Groux addressed the committee. With the following key points

     

    • He spoke through the changes to the design from the previously refused application
    • He was surprised at the recommendation for refusal due to the ground floor and also asked for clarification due to separate dwelling
    • This is the only property on the roundabout location where there is not an extension up to the boundary

    Members queried with the agent that this was not an extension but the issue is that this is a separate house.  Members queried if other extensions are residential and were advised that the others are mixed.

     

    A poll vote on the officers recommendation to refuse permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:

     

    Resolved: That planning permission for application DM2018/00161 be refused.
     

     

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    Application number DM2018/00161 recommendation for refusal Committee Report Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 18.

    Application No. DM2018/00184 - St Helier Open Space, Wrythe Lane, Carshalton, SM5 1SL pdf icon PDF 88 KB

    Use of the site for a car boot sale every Wednesday and Saturday between the hours of 08:00 and 13:00, with a maximum of 488 sellers pitches and 197 off street parking spaces.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for use of the site for a car boot sale every Wednesday and Saturday between the hours of 8:00 and 13:00, with a maximum of 488 sellers pitches and 197 off street parking spaces.
     
    The application comes to planning committee due to the application being deferred by members from the planning committee on 25 April 2018 and the application relates to publicly owned land and there is one objection.  In addition, the application site is designated as Metropolitan Open Land, and the proposal therefore represents a departure from Suttons Local Plan. It was also deferred to allow members to visit site while boot sale is in operation.

     

    Members queried if there is a charge for parking and for entrance into the boot sale.  Officers confirmed that there is a charge of £2 for parking and £1 for entrance on foot. Officers confirmed that the football cage on the site and access to the park would still be retained. Members asked for clarification regarding officials on site.   The officer responded that 4 “Banks Men “ were on site to control traffic and in addition there are also security officers to keep traffic off the road. 

    Some concerns were raised regarding current time of operation and Officers advised that the boot sale is currently operating without conditions and the conditions would be attached if this temporary permission will be agreed.

     

    Members asked for information regarding enforcement of conditions, and Officers responded accordingly.  

     

    In debate Members considered that

    • Only one person had objected to the proposal they did not feel there was public opposition.
    • Members felt this is a good community activity.
    • Members commented that they believed the site was well organised and getting onto and off the site was well managed
    • Members felt the boot sale was good for the area and good for local shops and it will benefit Rosehill community local shops and cafes in the local area.


     A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:

     


    Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00184.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    Application number DM2018/00184 Committee Report Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 19.

    Application No. DM2018/00107 - Hackbridge Primary School Expansion, London Road, Hackbridge pdf icon PDF 217 KB

    Variation of wording of conditions 3 (School Travel Plan), 9 (Parking Exclusion Zone), 10 (Parking Management Plan), 15 (Construction Management Plan), 21 (Passivhaus Certificate), 31 (Control of Dust) and 40 (Crime Prevention) of planning approval C2015/72418/3FR.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for variation of wording of conditions 3 (School Travel Plan) 9 (Parking Exclusion zone, 10 (Parking Management plan), 15 (construction Management Plan) 21, (Passivhaus certificate, 31 (Control of dust) and 40 (Crime prevention) Of planning approval C2015/72418/3FR
     21 and 40 within 6 months of occupation and condition 3 school travel plan to be submitted prior to occupation.


    At debate members expressed concerns regarding pollution and air quality, and location of school site due to  sewage works and land fill site.  Councillor Whitehead advised that Environment and Neighbourhood Committee will look at ways to improve pollution and monitoring air quality which will be covered under the sustainable transport policy to help address this issues and she also advised that the school travel plan will alleviate this

     

    A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:

     

    Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00107

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    Application Number DM2018/00107 Committee Report Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 20.

    TPO 2018 / 05 - 44 Sandy Lane, Wallington, SM6 9QZ pdf icon PDF 99 KB

    To confirm the provisional Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 2018/05 protecting one Copper Beech tree (T1).  The tree is located at the frontage of the property on the junction with Onslow Gardens, Plum Tree Close and Sandy Lane South.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    At the start of the item Councillor Sadiq declared that this site is within his ward but is does not  know the applicant.

     

    The Committee considered a report on the above application to confirm a provisional Tree Preservation Order TPO 2018/05 protecting one Copper Beech Tree (T1).  The tree is located at the frontage of the property on the junction with Onslow Gardens. Plum Tree Close and Sandy Lane South.
     
    At debate Members commented that this is a tree of significant merit and value believe it should be retained. Members asked about the roots growing out of the tree and if it will still keep growing. The tree officer advised it is mature tree and did not feel it likely that the roots would put on more girth.  Members then indicated that they were ready to vote.

     

    A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:
     
    Resolvedthat the TPO 2018/05 be confirmed

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    Application number TPO 2018/05 Committee Report Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 21.

    Application No. DM2018/00137 - 92 Ruskin Road, Carshalton, SM5 3DH pdf icon PDF 156 KB

    Erection of a 2 storey 3 bedroom detached house with roof accommodation, 2 car parking space and refuse stores. Formation of new vehicular access from Park Lane.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Councillor Whitehead left the room

     

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for erection of a 2 storey 3 bedroom detached house with roof accommodation, 2 car parking spaces and refuse stores. Formation of new vehicular access from Park Lane
     
    Members asked for clarification on the criteria for the area of intensification in the surrounding area. The Head of planning advised the distances and confirmed this is set out in the local plan and that this  site falls within it.  Members also asked about access for vehicles to the property.  Officer confirmed there is currently access for cars on the corner property and there is a drop kerb which provided vehicle access.


    Denise Lander, an objector, and Councillor Joyce Melican, a Ward councillor, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 31.
     
    The principal issues raised by Denise Lander were:-

    • Highlighted the number of previous applications that have gone before and been dismissed.  She spoke through the reasons for refusal
    • This application is now for a larger 3 bed house and goes over garden boundaries of other gardens she believes that this will now have worse effect on other properties
    • Objector is concerned this is viewed as infill rather than a back garden development.
    • The objector also highlighted that their has also been permission granted to turn the existing house into two maisonette and all garden space will be gone and not in keeping with properties in the area.

     

    The principal issues raised by Councillor Joyce Melican were:-

    •  Long and complicated planning history 5 of applications made and refused.
    • In 2014 application 1 bed home granted and in 2017 2 bed home granted and now this application for a 3 bed home
    • This should be considered garden land.
    • Opposition to the application is based on the fact it is back garden development, is over development of the site, and  contradicts the local plan.

     

    At debate Members commented on lack of housing in that area and felt that as this in an area of intensification that could be approved.  Other Members thought that this application was a better use of the land compared to previous application.  Members confirmed that more property is needed in the area and therefore believed it should be approved. Councillor Shields commented that approving this application could safeguard the land against a more intensive development, such as a block of flats. Other Members commented that grounds to decline are very few and suggested a move to vote.

     

    Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00137.

     

    Councillor Whitehead returned to the room

     

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    Apoplication number DM2018/00137 Committee Report Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 22.

    Application No. A2017/78534 - Land Rear Of 45 To 47 Hilbert Road, North Cheam, SM3 9TF pdf icon PDF 151 KB

    Variation of condition 2 (revised drawings) of planning approval A2016/74333/FUL - alteration to ground floor layout and repositioning of proposed dwelling.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for Variation of condition 2 (revised drawings) of planning approval A2016/74333/FUL - alteration to ground floor layout and repositioning of proposed dwelling.
     

    Councillor Geringer advised Members that the property was not built in the correct position so house is now set further back.  He was concerned that would affect no 47 Hilbert Road, due to possible overlooking.  He suggested additional conditions to mitigate this. Officers responded confirming they believe the existing conditions would mitigate any potential for overlooking and were reasonable and proportionate.  

     

    Councillor Geringer also highlighted a number of building control issues and it was confirmed that these were not material planning considerations and would be looked at by the building control team. The Head of Planning confirmed that the Local authority building control at Sutton will be made aware of the issues and will be followed up.

     

    Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. A2017/78534

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    Application Number A2017/78534 Committee Report Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 23.

    Any urgent business,

    brought forward at the direction of the Chair, who has approved the reason for the urgency.