Agenda item

Planning application reference number: 14/AP/4337 

Report: see pages 12 to 35 of the agenda pack and pages 1 to 3 and 6 to 13 of the addendum report.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of existing building and the erection of replacement four storey building comprising retail unit (Use Class A1) at ground floor and basement level and 6 flats on first, second and third floors, associated car parking and amenity area.

The sub-committee heard an introduction to the report from a planning officer who also highlighted the additional comments in the addendum report. Members asked questions of the officer.

Local residents who objected to the application made representations to the sub-committee and answered members’ questions.

The applicant’s agent made representations to the sub-committee and answered members’ questions.

There were no supporters of the development, who lived within 100 metres of it, wishing to speak. 

Councillor David Hubber spoke in his capacity as a ward member. Members of the committee asked questions of Councillor Hubber.

At this point Councillor David Hubber left the room.

Members debated the application and asked questions of the officers.

A motion to grant planning permission was moved, seconded, put to the vote and was lost. The chair invited members to put an alternative motion.  

At 8.45pm, the meeting adjourned and reconvened at 8.55pm. The chair explained that the adjournment had been agreed in order for members to consider alternative motions they may want to put.

A motion to refuse the application was moved, seconded, put to the vote and declared to be carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission for application number 14/AP/4337 be refused, as:

1. The proposed development, by reason of the height and width of the replacement building representing a significant increase in massing in relation to the existing building, coupled with the separation distance to the adjacent flats within Timbrell Place, would result in a significant loss of day light and be overbearing in appearance for the occupiers of these adjacent properties.  The resulting harmful impacts upon neighbours’ living conditions is contrary to saved policies 3.2 and 3.13 of the Southwark Plan 2007, Strategic Policies 12 and 13(8) of the Southwark Core Strategy, policy 7.6 of the London Plan 2015, Section 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and the Southwark Residential Design Standards 2011.
2. The loss of the existing public house would amount to the loss of a valued community facility, contrary to Policy 3.1 of the London Plan 2015 and paragraph 70 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.
3. The proposed redevelopment of the site would result in the loss of a non-designated heritage asset which is of value to the surrounding townscape and the replacement building would not be of such quality to outweigh the harm resulting.  The application is therefore contrary to paragraphs 128 to 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, Strategic Policy 12 of the Southwark Core Strategy 2011 and policies 7.4 and 7.8 of the London Plan 2015. 

At 9.15pm the meeting took a comfort break until 9.25pm, at the end of which Councillor David Hubber rejoined the meeting.