Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee
Wednesday, 2nd December, 2020 7.30 pm

Venue: Virtual Meeting

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

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 

Media

Items
No. Item

70.

Welcome and introductions

Minutes:

The Chair, Councillor Drew Heffernan, welcomed those present.

71.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

72.

Minutes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 99 KB

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 4 November 2020.

To follow

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

 

1.    that the minutes of the meeting held on 4 November 2020 be agreed as an accurate record.

73.

Declarations of interest

Minutes:

For agenda item 6 Councillor Kevin Burke declared that he knew the objector and would withdraw from the meeting for this application.

74.

APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01024 - 21 Higher Drive, Banstead SM7 1PL pdf icon PDF 93 KB

Erection of a single storey rear extension and conversion of existing garage into a habitable room.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

74.       APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01024 - 21 HIGHER DRIVE, BANSTEAD SM7 1PL

 

The Committee considered a report on the above application for  the erection of a single storey rear extension and conversion of existing garage into a habitable room.

 

The item had been deferred from the Committee held on 4 November 2020 in order to investigate options for preventing the future use of the property as either a care home within Class C4 or for assisted living within Class C3b of the Use Classes Order 2020.

 

The committee heard that the applicant had offered to submit a unilateral undertaking under section 16 of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 which will mean they will not convert the property into a care home or use it for supported living. This had been

provided on a voluntary basis by the applicant.

 

Councillor Peter Geiringer joined the meeting at 19.35

Councillor Kevin Burke left the meeting at 19.43

 

Recorded Vote
TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01024 - 21 HIGHER DRIVE, BANSTEAD SM7 1PL Committee Report

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 for application number  DM2020/01024 be granted subject to the conditions reasons and informatives found in the planning portal.

Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 75.

    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01082 - 4 Beggars Roost Lane, Sutton SM1 2DX pdf icon PDF 166 KB

    Erection of a single storey front/side extension, erection of a single storey rear extension and alterations to first floor flank fenestration. Retention of windows and fenestration alterations to the front, side and rear elevations of the property, a dormer extension to the side roof slope, additional rooflights and the flat roof above the garage.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for erection of a single storey front/side extension, erection of a single storey rear extension and alterations to first floor flank fenestration. Retention of windows and fenestration alterations to the front, side and rear elevations of the property, a dormer extension to the side roof slope, additional rooflights and the flat roof above the garage.

     

    The application had received more than 10 letters of representations contrary to the officer’s recommendation.

     

    Polly Davidson, Planning Officer, presented the report.

     

    Ronak Dashini, an objector, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 31, and the applicant replied.

     

    The principal issues raised by Ronak Dashini were:-

     

    ·         The applicant had offered no compromise to neighbours throughout the process which had taken place over a considerable period of time.

    ·         There was not the necessary clearance between the application and the adjoining network rail land, which could lead to the risk of landslide.

    ·         The applicant had ignored planning regulations in the past.

    ·         The windows were opening rather than fixed as in the application.

    ·         There was a covenant on the land.

    ·         There had been disruption to neighbours caused by building works over a long period, this was made worse as people worked from home in recent months

    ·         More than 50% of the land area of the site would be covered by the application.

    ·         The applicant had told neighbours he will convert the property into an HMO.

     

    Members clarified with the objector the application includes a large number of windows and some of these over looked neighbouring properties, the objector confirmed neighbours main concern was loss of privacy. Members noted that the style of windows in the application was included in condition 5, and therefore would be enforceable. The windows to the west of the application would be obscured by condition, the only elevation which overlooked neighbouring properties. 

     

    Andy Webber, Head of Development Management and Strategic Planning clarified that works on site had been started without the benefit of planning permission, however, this was not a legal offence. An application at the site had been subject to an appeal, the inspector had only found fault with the out buildings which had been removed from this application. He also acknowledged the application upper limit for the amount of development for a site.

     

    In debate members drew attention the windows to the west of the application were to be obscured by condition the only elevation which led to overlooking to neighbours. 

     

    Members considered  policy in the local plan regarding noise and loss of privacy in relation to the application.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01082 - 4 BEGGARS ROOST LANE, SUTTON SM1 2DX Committee Report

    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 for application number DM2020/01082 be granted subject to the conditions reasons and informatives found in the planning portal.

    Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 76.

    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01052 - Former Sutton Hospital, Cotswold Road, Sutton SM2 5NF pdf icon PDF 149 KB

    Demolition of former hospital buildings and the erection of a new boundary fencing and gates.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    he Committee considered a report on the above application for  the demolition of former hospital buildings and the erection of a new boundary fencing and gates.

     

    The application was made by The London Borough of Sutton is the applicant and has an ownership interest in the site and more than one objection has been received.

     

    Following the presentation by Luke Simpson, Planning Officer.

     

    The Head of Development Management and Strategic Planning drew attention to the site allocation in the Local Plan.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01052 - FORMER SUTTON HOSPITAL, COTSWOLD ROAD, SUTTON SM2 5NF Committee Report

    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 for application number DM2020/0105 be granted subject to the conditions reasons and informatives found in the planning portal.

    Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 77.

    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01212 - 43-45 Stayton, Road Sutton SM1 1QY pdf icon PDF 143 KB

    Change of use from C2 (residential care home) to C3 (residential) to provide 4 self-contained residential units, extension to raised terrace and balustrade, alterations to fenestration and provision of refuse/cycle stores.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

     

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for Change of use from C2 (residential care home) to C3 (residential) to provide 4self-contained residential units, extension to raised terrace and balustrade, alterations to fenestration and provision of refuse/cycle stores.

     

    The application has been de-delegated by Councillor Penneck and the council has received over 10 letters of objection, contrary to the officers recommendation.

     

    Following the presentation by Polly Davidson, Planning Officer, it was clarified to members that:

     

    The garden terrace would provide private amenity space for the ground floor flats, the steps from the terrace to the garden would be removed, the main garden would be a communal space accessed from the side of the property. The garden size is compliant with the London Plan and the site is in close proximity to other open space.

     

    There would be no additional pressure on parking in the CPZ area and this would be addressed by condition. The property has good access to public transport and the town centre.

     

    The Chair drew the committee's attention to the written statements on pages 1-10 of the supplement.

     

    Members clarified the application did not include any alteration to the current number or location of windows, but that overlooking remains a concern of neighbours. Members suggested that additional soft landscaping could be considered as a condition to reduce over looking.

     

    Patrick Ogbonna, an objector, and Councillor Marlene Heron a ward councillor addressed the meeting under Standing Order 31, and the applicant Mike Stott replied.

     

    The principal issues raised by Patrick Ogbonna  were:-

     

    ·         There had been a high turnover of residents at the property and frequent changes of use of the property between care home for vulnerable adults and  guest house.

    ·         There was confusion over the use of the property.

    ·         There had been incidents at the address which had concerned neighbours

    ·         From the properties at the back of the application it was possible to see though the property in the application.

    ·         The garden space was very limited.

    ·         Four flats at the property would further reduce privacy from neighbouring properties.

    ·         Although the parking allocated is for two cars, there are frequently more cars in the space.

    ·         Conversion to two properties would be more appropriate.

    ·         Neighbours in the surrounding roads had similar views.

     

    Members suggested that the use of the property as four flats as outlined in the application would have less impact on neighbours than the current use.

     

    The Head of Development Management and Strategic Planning confirmed the current legal use of the property is a care home.

     

    The principal issues raised by Councillor Marlene Heron were:-

     

    ·         Each of the four flats in the application could have could have several occupants.

    ·         The application was against policy 29 of the Local Plan.

    ·         Traffic in the area would be adversely affected, the property was in proximity to an area outside of the CPZ.

    ·         Supported Housing was an important accommodation type, but this application did not clarify staffing arrangements.

    ·         The design of this application did not include specialist  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/01212 - 43-45 STAYTON, ROAD SUTTON SM1 1QY Committee Report

    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 for application number  DM2020/01212 be granted subject to the conditions reasons and informatives found in the planning portal.

    Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 78.

    APPLICATION NO. DM2019/02064 - 43-45 Angel Home, Stayton Road, Sutton SM1 1QY pdf icon PDF 141 KB

    Change of use from Residential Care Home to a larger House of Multiple Occupation (HMO).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for Change of use from Residential Care Home to a larger House of Multiple Occupation (HMO)

     

    The application has been de-delegated by Councillor Dombey and more than 10 letters of objection have been received contrary to the officers recommendation.

     

    Following the presentation by Polly Davidson, Planning Officer, members requested clarification on the following:

     

    The garden and terrace would be accessed from either the rear or the side of the property.

    The regulation of the general management of an HMO would be provided by the Regulatory Services team.

     

    Patrick Ogbonna an objector addressed the meeting under Standing Order 31, and the applicant Mike Stott replied.

     

    The principal issues raised by Patrick Ogbonna were:-

     

    ·         The application could result in 17 residents living in the property.

    ·         There would be more than 17 people at the address as residents would have guests.

    ·         The property backed onto houses with young children.

    ·         There is another HMO in close proximity to the property.

    ·         Some addresses close to the property did not receive letters about the application.

    ·         It is unclear what the applicant's intention was for use, either a care home or rented out via a company?

    ·         There had been unauthorised use as a guest house.

    ·         Local residents had concerns about noise, parking and the behaviour of residents in a residential area.

     

    The applicant informed the committee

     

    ·         The application had been developed over a period of time.

    ·         It is unfounded that all HMOs cause distress to neighbouring residents.

    ·         An HMO was considered to be appropriate.

    ·         Parking needs had been considered.

    ·         There would be minimal change to the exterior of the property

    ·         Each application must be considered on its own merits.

     

    In debate members noted that the suggested 17 residents in 10 rooms would be considerable and that the garden was a small size for the number of residents would impact neighbouring properties.

     

    Following the vote on the officer’s recommendation, Councillor Burke proposed, and Councillor Shields seconded, a motion that the application be refused planning permission on the following grounds:

     

    The proposed development by reason of the overconcentration of future occupiers within the proposed development would give rise to adverse amenity impact to neighbouring properties.  As such the development would be contrary to policy 29 of the Sutton Local Plan.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    DM2019/02064 - 43-45 ANGEL HOME, STAYTON ROAD, SUTTON SM1 1QY Committee Report

    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 for application number DM2019/02064be Refused subject to the conditions reasons and informatives found in the planning portal.

    Rejected
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 79.

    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/00781 - Waddon House, 283 Stafford Road, Wallington CR0 4FA pdf icon PDF 272 KB

    Demolition of existing bin and cycle storage and erection of a three storey building comprising 8 dwellings, parking, cycle store, bin store and landscaping.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The chair informed the meeting that due to time constraints the application DM2020/00781 - WADDON HOUSE, 283 STAFFORD ROAD, WALLINGTON CR0 4FA  would be deferred to the next meeting and that application and that application  DM2020/00462 - 35 DOWNS SIDE, CHEAM SM2 7EH would considered as agenda item 9 by the committee.

    80.

    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/00462 - 35 Downs Side, Cheam SM2 7EH pdf icon PDF 100 KB

    Erection of part one part two storey front, side and rear extension with new roof and alterations to fenestration and external materials.

     

    To follow

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report on the above application for  the erection of part one part two storey front, side and rear extension with new roof and alterations to fenestration and external materials.

     

    The applicant is an employee of the council.

     

    Following the presentation by Polly Davidson, Planning Officer, members requested

    clarification on the following:

     

    There were no further questions.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    APPLICATION NO. DM2020/00462 - 35 DOWNS SIDE, CHEAM SM2 7EH Committee Report

    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 for application number DM2020/00462 be granted subject to the conditions reasons and informatives found in the planning portal.

    Agreed
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 81.

    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).

    Minutes:

    There was no urgent business.