Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive apologies from Members of the Committee.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Asli Mohammed and Dave Sullivan.

The Chair to announce any items of urgent business circulated separately from the main agenda.

An erratum agenda was published as, due to a technical issue, the previous report was originally published with incorrect paragraph numbering.

Members to declare any personal and financial interests in items on the agenda. Attention is drawn to the Council’s Constitution; the Council’s Code of Conduct and associated advice.

Resolved-

That the list of Councillors’ memberships as Council appointed representatives on outside bodies, joint committees and school governing bodies is noted.

Ward: Plumstead Common

The Planning Committee is requested to grant planning permission for thechange of use from an existing single-family dwelling (Use Class C3) to a six-bedroom, six-person HMO (Use Class C4), in addition to a rear dormer loft conversion, installation of two rooflights on front elevation, conversion of garage into habitable space, replacement of front garage door with windows and all other associated external alterations.

Resolved that full planning permission be granted for the change of use from an existing single-family dwelling (Use Class C3) to a six-bedroom, six-person HMO (Use Class C4), in addition to a rear dormer loft conversion, installation of two rooflights on front elevation, conversion of garage into habitable space, replacement of front garage door with windows and all other associated external alterations.

Granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 2 of the report, with amendment to Condition 4 to state the following to be detailed in the notice of determination:

‘Notwithstanding the details shown on drawing no. P005 (Revision A), prior to the first occupation of the development, full details of revised cycle parking facilities shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The cycle parking facilities shall provide six (6) cycle parking spaces. Details shall include the location of the cycle parking facilities and the size and materials for the cycle storage shed.

All cycle parking spaces shall be provided and made available for use prior to occupation of the development and maintained thereafter.’

And an addition informative to state ‘The applicant is encouraged to provide cycle storage facilities in the front garden of the property to provide for greater accessibility for future occupants.

That the Assistant Director (Planning & Building Control) be authorised to make any minor changes to the detailed wording of the recommended conditions as set out in Appendix 2 of the report, where the Assistant Director (Planning & Building Control) considers it appropriate, before issuing the decision notice.

The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation, recommending that planning permission for the proposal was granted, as outlined in the Officer’s report.

In response to Members questions the Planning Officer and Area Planning Manager (East) clarified that access to the cycle parking located in the rear garden was via the hallway and kitchen dining area. The report did not address the width of the hallway, as this aspect is not a requirement under planning regulations.  Further, the existing single story side extension was built out to the boundary line.  Although existing extension had been illegal built out, it has been deemed lawful due to the absence of enforcement action within a four-year period, thus it could not be considered in the context of the current proposal. Furthermore, the rear dormer and loft conversion were classified as permitted developments, making them acceptable in this case and would be construction without the need for formal consent.

The Local Planning Committee accepted an address from the adjoining neighbour, who argued that the proposal should be refused as it did not adhere to the Council's Urban Design or Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). He referenced specific principles, chapters, and sections, emphasising that Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) should not cause significant adverse impacts on the amenity of nearby properties or the neighbourhood.   He further explained that the positioning of his property and No. 4 resulted in the rear elevations of the houses being in close proximity and that this would lead to the proposed rear box dormer and roof conversion failing to meet the 45-degree light requirement, consequently causing a loss of light to their dining room, which would contravene the HMO Development guidance.

The Area Planning Manager (East) explained that the 45-degree angle was assessed from window to window and served as a guideline. The rear of the two properties faced south, with the speaker's property located to the east of the development, resulting in any potential impact occurring in the evening only. 

In response to further questions from Members the Area Planning Manager (East) and Planning Officer advised that, if the hallway were 1.2 metres, it would be wider than an HMO granted last meeting and that any bikes would not go directly through the main part of the kitchen, but through the shared dining area.  The kitchen area was 2.5 metres larger than the requirement and it was considered would accommodate the requirement for two sets of kitchen provisions, which would form part of the HMO license process and clarified that the plans had been revised and there would be no kitchen facility in the loft area.

With consent of the Chair the Planning Officer Further advised Members of the substance of a late submitted email from the agent which confirmed that the Landlord was accredited with experience of manging HMOS across London; regular inspections would be undertaken, a 24 hour emergency contact number would be provided and they had a dedicated waste team.  The Area Planning Manager (East) added it was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.