Source: https://cds.bromley.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=133&MId=6612&Ver=4
Timestamp: 2020-07-14 22:15:25
Document Index: 60713159

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 4', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2']

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Charles Joel and William Huntington-Thresher; Councillors Robert Evans and Samaris Huntington-Thresher attended as their respective substitutes.
The following non-pecuniary interests were declared in regard to Items 6 and 7:-
· Councillor Turner - former employee of Bromley College;
· Councillor Benington - former Governor of Bromley College; and
· Councillor Huntington-Thresher – former Governor of Orpington College.
RESOLVED that the Minutes of the previous meetings held on 30 April and 8 May 2019 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.
Report CSD19087
Minute 62 – 30.04.19
The Chief Planner informed Members that a ‘holding’ letter had been received from the owners of the site requesting further time to respond.
Description of application – Erection of a new College facility (Class D1), creation of a new access and cycle parking, 3 substations, servicing, new public realm, hard and soft landscaping and other works.
Oral representations in support of the application were received from the Executive Principal of London S.E. Colleges who emphasised that time was critical for the scheme to be delivered by 2021. The airport location was fundamental to the scheme and following completion, the College would contribute to the shortage of skilled workforce that was designed to meet industry needs.
Councillors and officers were consulted throughout the planning process to produce a scheme of imaginative design and a much needed educational facility.
A Travel Plan had been agreed to.
In response to Member questions, the Executive Principal advised that:-
· around 200 car parking spaces were currently provided for students at the Bromley Rookery Lane campus; the majority of students travelled by local transport;
· the Lookout Café would need to organise its own parking provision and whilst occasional parking pressures may arise, the College and café should be able to co-locate comfortably;
· students would be encouraged to make use of the shuttle bus to and from the College; this would be monitored and kept under review;
· the provision of electrical charging points for cycles (including an increase in provision for cars) could be discussed as part of the Travel Plan;
· no provision for motorcycle or scooter parking was currently in place;
· a shuttle bus strategy would be agreed;
· the College would provide full-time courses for 16-18 year olds however there was also provision for students to progress to degree level. Apprentices would attend one evening/day per week;
· the provision of short-term parking spaces could be reviewed if required.
Oral representations from Ward Member Councillor Julian Benington in support of the application were received at the meeting. Councillor Benington considered the scheme to be a fantastic opportunity for both young adults living in and out of the Borough.
The Planning Development Control Manager summarised the report in relation to officer views. Additional changes to the recommended conditions had been requested via correspondence received from the applicant’s agents. In this regard, Members were asked to delegate those amendments to planning officers.
Committee Member and Ward Member Councillor Stevens fully supported the scheme as an opportunity for young people and adults in the Borough. Only four responses in objection to the application had been received. The staggered start and finish times of the College and students’ use of the shuttle bus should alleviate concerns regarding vehicles and parking. Councillor Stevens moved that the application be granted. The motion was seconded by Councillor Brock.
Councillor Fawthrop referred to the letter received from the applicant’s agent requesting removal of condition 37 relating to contamination of land. He emphasised the importance of ensuring that the site was deemed safe and requested that if conditions were delegated to officers for amendment, it should be with the exception of condition 37 which must remain as stated.
Description of application – Variation of Condition 2: Approved Documents and Condition 21: Lighting Scheme of permission 17/05343/FULL (as amended by 17/05343/AMD) for hotel with 56 bedrooms, a restaurant (and associated kitchen/servicing areas), lounge, gymnasium and associated access road together with service area and car parking and a sub-station to realign the vehicle entrance, adjustments to the car parking layout and coach parking area, alterations to the landscaping treatment to the west of the hotel, removal of the approved substation, amendment to approved light fixings and alterations to the drainage strategy.
Committee Member and Ward Member Councillor Stevens reported that the principle of the scheme had already been established and the proposed variation would cause no visible change to the street scene. Councillor Stevens moved that permission be granted.
Councillor Fawthrop seconded the motion. In regard to various ongoing applications at the site, he referred to a clause within the Lease which stated that if lots of further buildings were erected, the Airport would be required to make a further contribution to the Council (outside of the turnover tax) up to £1.5m and suggested that Bromley attempt to obtain further finances in relation to this. The Legal Representative advised that this matter was for a different Committee to consider.
Councillor Mellor raised concerns regarding the loss of trees. The Planning Development Control Manager agreed that the recommended condition relating to the safeguarding of trees would be amended to further enhance protection.
Dates and times within the recommended conditions would also be amended to ensure the scheme completed on time.
RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions and informative set out in the report of the Chief Planner with various conditions amended as reported above.
An Article 4 Direction for The Drift, Keston was previously authorised in 2015, but never implemented. Further Portfolio Holder approval was then obtained in June 2015 and following a one year period of consultation, approval was now sought to issue the Direction.
The Chairman outlined the report and moved that issue of the Article 4 Direction be approved; this was seconded by Councillor Fawthrop.
RESOLVED that the Renewal, Recreation and Housing Portfolio Holder be recommended to approve the issuing of the Article 4 Direction.
Report DRR19/042
Members considered the possibility of making an Article 4 Direction for Land at New Years Lane, Knockholt, to remove permitted development rights for various classes of development following reports that the area had been divided into 92 plots which were being advertised for sale on the internet.
Committee Member and Ward Member Councillor Page reported that sale of the land was no longer being advertised on the internet. Councillor Page moved that the Portfolio Holder be recommended to make the Article 4 Direction.
It was reported that the final paragraph of the recommendation on page 112 was amended to read:- ‘For (i) to (iv) above, this would be a direction with immediate effect and for (v) the earliest possible effect (as explained further in section 7 of the report).’
Councillor Owen seconded the motion for making an Article 4 Direction. The Legal Representative reported that if sold, each parcel of land would be registered with the Land Registry. Councillor Owen asked if it was possible through the local search facility for potential purchasers to be informed of their liabilities should there be any encroachment by travellers and that they would be personally responsible for clearing up. The Legal Representative advised that the Local Land Charges was a statutory register and the best course of action would be to convey the information through a News Release issued via the Council’s Communications.
RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder for Renewal, Recreation and Housing make an Article 4 Direction on the land at New Years Lane to remove permitted development rights for the following classes of development:-
(iv) temporary uses of land for any purpose for not more than 28 days per year (Class B of part 4); and
For (i) to (iv) above, this would be a direction with immediate effect and for (v) the earliest possible effect (as explained in section 7 of the report).
Report DRR19/043
Members were informed of progress to date of the Examination into the new Draft London Plan.
The Chief Planner advised Members that following receipt of the Panel’s report, the Mayor was required to make it available for inspection and send a copy to the Council for each London Borough within eight weeks. The Mayor would then decide whether to accept, amend or change the recommendations. Should he decide to amend or make changes, these would need to be sent to the Secretary of State for approval.
Councillor Fawthrop expressed his gratitude to the Chief Planner and the Planning Team for their commitment to progressing the Plan on behalf of the Borough.
(1) the involvement of Bromley Council officers in the London Plan Examination in Public hearings; and
(2) that the Panel anticipate providing their report on to the Mayor in September and that the Mayor is then required to make the report available for inspection and send a copy to the Council within 8 weeks of receipt.
Report DR000000
Members considered a number of recommendations put forward by officers following a light touch review of planning committee processes by the Planning Advisory Service.
Councillor Allen commented that the recommendations and proposed actions to be taken following the PAS Review should be seriously considered and would welcome feedback on progress. In regard to budget cuts and staffing levels which was always a feature of budget monitoring reports, Councillor Allen reported that she was assured at a previous RR&H PDS meeting that recruitment was in hand. Recommendation 12 (substitutions at committee should not be related to Ward interest), was a significant issue and should, therefore, apply to all Planning Committee meetings. Councillor Allen suggested that all Members be made aware that this was a significant issue.
The Chairman suggested that the proposed actions be drafted and progressed as soon as possible.
The Chief Planner reported that the PAS were there to support the Council and offered training if required. A further report outlining a clear timescale for implementation of the proposed actions would be submitted to the next scheduled DCC meeting in September 2019.
In regard to Recommendation 5, Councillor Huntington-Thresher was informed that any Member may call-in an application to be considered by the Planning Committee where there were planning reasons or where there was a strong public interest reason and as long as it was submitted in writing. A large degree of residents’ concerns in relation to planning reasons would be sufficient for Members to do so.
It was agreed that recommendation 17 be amended to read:- ‘More pro-active approach to major pre-application discussions including early Member involvement such as presentations to committee and improved communication between Officers, Members and the applicant’
With the addition of the amendment reported above, Members RESOLVED that:-
(1) the recommended actions in the report be agreed;
(2) the resolution be taken forward by officers in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman; and
(3) progress be reported back to Committee as soon as practicable, but in any event before the end of 2019.
Report DRR19/031
Members received an update on the award of costs from planning appeals made in the financial year 2018/2019. The report also contained an update on cost claims paid in the same year.
Detailed information relating to this item was listed under the confidential part 2 section of the agenda (Item 16). (This was subsequently considered under the public section of the agenda.)
Report DRR19/032
Members considered an update on planning appeals received and decided for the year 2018/2019.
Detailed information relating to this item was considered under the confidential part 2 section of the agenda (Item 17).
Referring to Table One on page 135 (paragraph 3.5), Councillor Michael commented on the large variation between appeals allowed via the fasttrack method (55%) and those allowed via written appeal (29%). The total percentage of appeals allowed was 41% against the national comparison of 39%. So, although Bromley was slightly above the national average with appeals allowed, it was noted that the national percentage figure for appeals allowed was in fact rising.
Councillor Owen reported that the Chairman, Petts Wood and Knoll Ward Members and the Orpington MP had met with the Minister and the National Chief Planner and were keen for a Planning Inspector to visit Petts Wood for them to better understand Members’ concerns in regard to development within the Petts Wood Area of Special Residential Character and to see why members had a different interpretation of the rules in place. It was suggested that this could avoid the risk of appeals and further costs.
The Chairman reported there may be a possibility of making a Conservation Area in Petts Wood.
In response to the above, Councillor Allen referred back to the PAS Review where a great deal of the background to the matter above was covered in the recommendations. Members of the RR&H PDS Committee had previously enquired as to the use of the ASRC and had noted that planning applications in some Wards had elicited more ‘call-ins’ than others. If the PAS Review was taken seriously, then hopefully this time next year the Appeals Monitoring Report should have fewer entries in it.
Councillor Fawthrop advised that the majority of the Council’s lost appeals arose from the fasttrack system where in sufficient paperwork was submitted in evidence. The other possible cause for lost appeals was that some developers submitted household appeals via fasttrack in order to get around the system. This was a matter which required serious attention.
Councillor Huntington-Thresher emphasised the need for the Council to retain experts where necessary to assist in appeals such as traveller applications where the appellants usually engage a high degree of expert professionals to defend them.
The Chief Planner clarified that the fasttrack appeals system concerns householder development (not the developer themselves) and therefore any applicant could submit an appeal.
Members were also informed that, when appropriate, the Council does seek, within its means, to engage experts to act on its behalf.
The report also included a full breakdown on the range of current complaints. As this contained confidential information, it was considered under the part 2 section of the agenda (Item 18).
The Development Control Manager, Appeals and Planning, confirmed that one of the permanent members of the Enforcement Team had retired and as a result one member of the current agency staff had been moved onto a temporary 12 month contract and the other placed on a two year contract. One of those temporary staff had now filled the permanent post, which once again had left a vacancy. This would initially be advertised internally as a secondment and if it should fail to interest anyone, the position would then be advertised externally.
Members were advised that there was unlikely to be any reduction in enforcement levels due to action taken as a result of the PAS review. In fact, at present, there was currently an increase in the level of action being taken.
Councillor Stevens requested that officers in the Enforcement Team send a formal communication to Ward Members informing them when enforcement action within their Wards had been taken or completed. She also expressed her gratitude to officers for their hard work and commitment to the Council.
This was the final DCC meeting to be attended by Mr Jim Kehoe, Chief Planner. Members therefore joined the Chairman in expressing appreciation for his hard work and commitment to the Council throughout the last six years and they wished him a very long, happy and healthy retirement. The Chairman had arranged for a light buffet and drinks for those Members and Officers present to mark the occasion.
The Chairman moved that the Press and public be excluded during consideration of the items of business listed below as it was likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings that if members of the Press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information.
Report 19/031
This report contained potentially confidential details relating to Item 12.
Councillor Fawthrop advised that this information was in fact already in the public domain and moved that it be considered here under the public section of the agenda. The Chairman seconded the motion which was carried.
The Development Manager, Appeals and Planning, confirmed that there were no matters outstanding in relation to 61 The Avenue, Beckenham.
Councillor Mellor requested (and it was agreed) that a column be inserted into the table in Appendix 1 indicating the Ward in which sites were located.
Members considered confidential Part 2 information relating to Agenda Item 13.
Members considered confidential Part 2 information relating to Agenda Item 14.