Venue: Virtual Meeting - this meeting will be livestreamed via the council's YouTube account
Contact: Matthew Stickley Tel: 020 8770 5122 | Email: email@example.com
Note: To submit a Written Statement to this meeting or request to speak, visit https://www.sutton.gov.uk/info/200474/your_council_voting_and_elections/1211/register_to_speak_at_the_planning_committee
Welcome and introductions
The Chair, Councillor Drew Heffernan, welcomed members to the first virtual meeting of Sutton Council’s Planning Committee.
Apologies for absence
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Peter Geiringer, for whom Councillor Tim Crowley sat as a substitute. Accounting for this substitution, the Clerk called the roll to confirm attendance and asked if any members wished to declare an interest in any item on the agenda. All members expected in attendance confirmed they were present.
Councillor Jill Whitehead declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 5 (application DM/2019/00959 - Sheen Way Playing Fields) as she had been a member of the all-party Local Plan Task and Finish Group from 2015-2018 which considered various site allocations across the borough. No other members declared an interest in any item on the agenda.
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2020.
RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2020 be agreed as an accurate record.
Declarations of interest
Declarations of interest were made earlier in the meeting.
As an appeal against non-determination of this application has been submitted, the committee is asked to consider what its decision would have been had an appeal not been submitted.
Erection of a part one, part two storey building creating a Special Educational Needs (SEN) school (Use Class D1), modification of existing access from Headley Avenue, provision of areas of hard playing space, a multi-use games area (MUGA), car parking, cycle parking and hard and soft landscaping works, and other associated works.
The committee considered a report on the above application. Members noted that an appeal for non-determination had been received by the Planning Inspectorate on the application and so the committee was not able to decide the application. Instead, the application would be decided by the Planning Inspectorate following a Public Inquiry. The committee was asked to consider and decide what it would have decided had this application still been one for decision by the committee.
Andy Webber, Head of Development Management and Strategic Planning, and Sarah Buxton, Deputy Planning Manager, introduced the report. The meeting was adjourned from 19:58 to 20:05.
Members asked questions of officers regarding the access to the site via highways, both during construction and once the development would be completed.
Members asked further questions regarding the Design Review Panel that considered this application, the access to the site during and following construction and associated analysis, parking at the site, and the loss of amenity to local residents.
Members noted that three Written Statements had been received but did not ask questions of clarification on them to officers.
The meeting was adjourned from 20:44 to 20:49.
Ms Lizette Howers addressed the meeting on behalf of objectors and then answered members' questions.
Councillor Jillian Green then addressed the meeting as a ward councillor and also answered members' questions.
The applicant had not registered to address the meeting.
The meeting was adjourned from 22:10 to 22:18.
In debate, members discussed the need to ensure suitable SEN provision was balanced with the requirement for this to be at an appropriate site. Members discussed concerns regarding the access to the site and that previous suggestions, such as via Morrisons supermarket, would be preferable to access through residential areas. Members discussed the prospect of noise and air pollution during and following construction.
A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation that, were the application one the committee could decide, the committee grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:
To grant (3) Councillors Clare, Haldane, and Whitehead
Against (7) Councillors Allen, Burke, Crowley, Foster, Heffernan, Galligan, and Shields
Abstained (0) None
The Clerk confirmed the votes were: three votes for, seven votes against, with no abstentions. The Chair confirmed the recommendation had, therefore, not been agreed.
Councillor Crowley moved a motion that, were this application one the committee could decide, it should be refused on the grounds that:
· There would be restricted access to the site during and following construction;
· The site could not viably cope with the forecasted traffic during and following construction; and
· The Construction Logistics Plan did not provide adequate mitigation for the forecasted traffic during and following construction.
This was seconded by Councillor Burke. A poll vote on the motion was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:
For (7) Councillors Allen, Burke, Crowley, Foster, Heffernan, Galligan, and Shields
Against (0) None
Abstained (3) Councillors Clare, Haldane, and Whitehead
The Clerk confirmed the votes were: seven votes for, no votes against, ... view the full minutes text for item 5.
Any urgent business
To consider any items which, in the view of the Chair, should be dealt with as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances (in accordance with S100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972).
There was no urgent business.
The Chair thanked members, officers, and residents for attending the first virtual meeting of Sutton Council’s Planning Committee and declared the meeting closed at 23:26.