Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee - Wednesday 27 March 2024, 7:00pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting

Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee
Wednesday, 27th March 2024 at 7:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

I good evening everybody.
welcome to this meeting of the conservation and heritage advisory committee, my name's Michael job and I'm Chair of the Committee.
members, I am now going to call your names, please switch on your microphone and confirm your attendance once you have done, so please turn your microphone off, so I'll read the names in order Councillor Belton.
good evening, Tony Belton councillor Battersea Park Ward, I don't say Councillor Cooper, Councillor Owens,
good evening, Councillor Owen's Northcote ward
I don't see Mark Dodson.
from from society.
Roger Armstrong, good evening, Roger Armstrong, representing the Clapham Society Mr Catto Andrew Catto, good evening, Andrew Catto from the Putney Society, and while I'm here, can I give the apologies for Laura Polglass, who is on the list?
and thank you.
Ms Edward Potter.
good evening.
yes, added Potter, yes, I'll representing your IBA.
Philip Bradley.
Bradley, Tooting history group, substituting for Libby Lawson conservation officer.
Pamela, Greenwood,
good evening, Pamela Greenwood, wants us historical Society.
and finally, I think Councillor.
Councillor Osborne
yes, Councillor Osborne.
council's history champion, observing at this committee.
thank you and have heard what we've had a couple of apologies already noted, can you let us know the other apologies, please, I'll read out the full list Chair, just to be clear, apologies received from Libby Lawson, Frances Radcliffe, Laura Poll, Paul Glaze, Peter Farrow and Kris Rice.
thank you.
and the the following officers also present.
Lauren Way.
Lauren Way principal conservation area urban design officer oppressive.
Barry Sellers breathing very shadows, Principal Amazon Officer.
and Victoria Brooks up.
Good evening, Victoria Brooks up senior conservation and urban design officer.
finally and critically Callum Vernon, as our Democratic Services Officer, Good evening, everybody.
right and I just say, Councillor Cooper are arriving.
o Councillor Cooper.

1 Declarations of Interest

can I ask if anyone has any declarations of interest in relation to any agenda item, and if you do so, please say, which the agenda item is and the paper number?
and including whether or not you're going to participate in discussion on that item.
any declarations.
no.
in which case?

2 Minutes - 30th January 2024

can I ask everyone to make sure their phones are off so that you're not made a fool of or embarrassed?
by your phone ringing during during the meeting.
and then item 2 is to ask whether I can sign the minutes of the meeting held on the 30th of January as a correct record.
no corrections objections.
right, I shall do that now.
are matters arising?

3 Applications (Paper No. 24-128)

or let us just go through page by page.
Page PAGE 1 or of of the meaningful page 3 if you're reading from the the the factor of papers that have been circulated.
I have one item are just to ask whether there has been any progress on first-down Lodge.
no, I pass it every day, it's for updates, progressing into a ruin, though it will have completely fallen down very soon, I think someone's put.
boarded up all the windows, so it looks an absolute eyesore, so it is progressing in terms of turning into an absolutely repulsive eyesore and I write, on behalf of first-hand residents, I don't know about once a month and I'm told repeatedly by the officers happy to share their names that,
that they are, and must be, the longest set of lease negotiations in the history of lease negotiations, I mean, you know, but nothing actual has happened, I mean, maybe the, maybe there is a new lease about which I have not yet been told feckless.
officers have anything bought report.
all we know is that at least have due to be signed this week and that the Lizzie, potentially seas, have got a heritage consultant involved, now start the pre-application process once that lease has been signed, that's all we now, I'm afraid,
code well, you will have noted of Councillor Cooper's concerns and I'm sure the vote shared by by other members of the Committee.
can I take this opportunity to is not only gender a fishery, but can I reassure Councillor Cooper to an extent?
I raised the situation of VES the St Mark's bursary on Battersea Rise.
about 34 years ago, and and was supported by Councillor Passmore beloved memory.
and the two of us got it listed and it's been falling down ever since, and if you'd gone pass' recently, it's all been repaired is resolved, the brickwork so being cleaned up, take a look at it as you go down, Battersea Rise is fantastic and not after 34 years as an architect's practice moving in.
and to make it a living building in the near future.
that?
I don't find it especially reassuring to think that we might have to wait 34 years to see the same kind of attention paid to Furzedown Lodge Brexit OK well, even even 33 his. It is about 33 years too long because it's already been at least three years since the occupant passed away, so it's already been empty for three years and it's it's you know it really needs to have something done, but you know perhaps it'll take another 33 minutes I mean who who who knows venues
part of smart targets, but you know this is an interesting one.
okay, I'm sure members of the committee will recall that we were hugely enthusiastic.
after long, long delays, I think almost every meeting of this Committee since I joined it several years ago, there had been an item of report about some St Mark's Church Church School, we were hugely relieved and welcoming of the proposal that that came before us.
I, I think a year ago.
and it is in the good to say that it it's progressing well, I think there are probably a couple of months at least before we'll see the architect's mood move in, I actually passed it today and it clear there is clearly work going on, but quite a lot of work still still to be done.
can I move on to page 2 for any other on page 4 of the of the pack?
any items there are items 6 1 0 8 Battersea Park Road Live, application, which we of this, I think it would two, if not three meetings ago we discussed.
it is, is there any progress to report there?
no, I'm afraid, not. There is a lawful development certificate in at the moment for to make the lawful use of it to be non community based, but that is still being considered by officers. Thank you,
and also on on the same page under under item 6, the final paragraph.
the fits you estate, I take it that the formal position here is that we're waiting for the housing department to submit a formal application.
that's correct, yes.
Page 5
is there anything?
Page 6
OK, thank you, thank you very much.
let us then move on to Item 3, the meat of the of the meeting, which is the the applications, and, first of all, are among those.
application 2023 4 4 0 2 64 Clapham Common North Side.
is that Victoria over to you?
and just for those who are watching online.
we have a representative of the balanced society.
thank you, Chair, I could do you think I say.
this
first sight is a late 18th century property understood to have been built in the 17 80s. The history of the building can be traced through historic mapping and is directly referred to and discussed in the Battersea volume of the Survey of London originally a stand-alone building, the site was incorporated into a late 18th century or early 19th century Villa called Northside and when that property was demolished in the late 19th century for redevelopment with the current terrace the site was spared and again incorporated,
various applications were submitted in the 19 80s for alterations to convert it to a five bedroom house, the most recent applications were in 1988 and were refused and the decisions were upheld at appeal.
there have been no more applications or pre-application enquiries.
looking at the photos you can see on screen, the property has experienced.
as an interesting and rare remnant of the pre 19th century townscape around the common it presents as a modest building, indicating its historic cottage or Gardeners, Cottage use, set back from the road with a front garden and side entrance, it's been extended to the rear,
as can be seen from Tonbridge Road.
the site is located within the Clapham Common conservation area in a sensitive location along the north side of the Open Common, it makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area, revealing the time depth of development as a rare survival of pre 19th century development the building is not currently locally listed but we would consider it in light of this application and as part of the upcoming review and public consultation.
the image on screen shows the property at present.
and just move on to the next one, this is the proposal to demolish and replace the property with a three storey residents.
it includes a full width rounder and alters the bay rhythm, from a single beta sort of the two-bay rhythm, there is a terrace to the rear and that you can see that in the gap from from the front elevation.
and there's also a touchscreen.
sorry and there's also a new glazed walkway to the to the the site.
to the rear of the building has a more contemporary appearance, being extended upwards and outwards, with roof terraces to the side and to the rear.
thank you are you mentioned possibility of of local listing I I recall from, are the applications in the 19 80s that went to appeal?
before being refused that one at that stage, I think it was English Heritage.
was was asked whether it wanted to list the building and declined to do so, but there was a recommendation made in one of the reports are in, I think, 1988 that it should be locally listed, so I think that,
that is really are overdue.
but there have been lots of objections on the on the planning portal or start with, Mr. Armstrong, good evening, I've actually applied for this building to be statutory listed again, and I think.
there's a lot more supporting evidence now than there was 35 years ago when it came up for radical alterations at that time.
the property has been empty for 35 years roughly.
which is shameful, I think they could have done a light renovation at the time and letter they could have.
I suppose, been in receipt of rents to the amount of about a million pounds, it's 0 directly overlooks Clapham Common, and it's just bizarre that it's.
been left in this state for so long.
I have historic maps here, one of 18 106, which shows the building more or less on the same plan as it has at present.
and there's another map of about 70 90, which shows the building, standing alone or with the site next door, where we know that two houses were built in 17 89 and 17 90, which still stand numbers, 62 and 63 Clapham Common North Side, they still stand, although there'd been Victorian eyes so we've got a Victorian frontage but they evidently or were obviously Georgian back.
and its extraordinary history that the House was actually incorporated into a larger building.
occupied by John Harris, who's a bookseller.
I think that occurred in 18 134 and there is a stone tablet in the wall of number 63 north side, which tends to suggest that that was when that development occurred and then in 18 85, to 6, when the river redevelopment by Henry Nicolas Coors Selous and John Stanbury, which,
develop the frontage of Clapham Common North Side with a red brick, three-storey Victorian houses.
the cottage was preserved, local legend has it that it was occupied by a gardener, an elderly person, and because it was on such a a small piece of land that it just wasn't worth demolishing it, but that at that stage, and so it has remained,
as a tiny cottage on Clapham Common to this day and which is extraordinary, it's largely architecturally intact, the only thing that's been altered as the windows were altered in the Victorian period.
but I, I consider it.
you know, I, I think it's it's extraordinary that it isn't Grade II listed when most buildings of the 18th century and
in the London area that survive in any way intact are are listed and, and it's a rare house type, because of course we've lost almost all the Georgian cottages from London, there's hardly any Georgian cottages left.
because they've all been demolished in slum clearance, so it's a very rare survival and yeah I've would be.
anyway, I think the proposal is just outrageous
and
yeah, I think it should be refused.
I'll take other comments.
does anyone, let me put it this way, is there anyone who is going to stand up in favour of this?
in effect, demolition and redevelopment.
do I take it, therefore, that we object to this proposal?
and I think we should offer our support to to Roger Armstrong in his in his efforts to.
to have the building statutorily listed.
by his de historic England, him pay English Heritage doing it the these days.
OK.
with all due respect to Sir Roger or as a person, he may be him that's employing personality, but it could also be that you're applying in your representative of the collecting society guys, and I wonder if it might be more appropriate to record in all minutes that the Committee supports the Clapham Society in its
attempt to get it listed, I mean J, it's a small point but possibly worth making.
our point will take.
OK, let us move on then to.
2023 4 7 9 3, which is a 6 4 Festing Row. OK, sorry, I'm I'm getting I'm getting ahead of myself, of course this application has been withdrawn, it has been refused because I've been withdrawn from our agenda because a decision by has been made
under delegated powers by officers to refuse the application, so essentially nothing for us at this stage to to to discuss, so we're on actually to 2024 0 3 4 5, which is 23.
Drake Field, Road.
and just in case anyone hasn't noted it.
it is 0 3 4 5 rather than 4 7 9 2, which was originally printed in the in the agenda pack.
just for just make sure that everyone's got that straight right is this Ms Way?
it can even committee so this application is for 23 Drake Field Road, which is a 19 60s end of terrace building within the Hever Estate conservation area, so it forms part of a group of terraced buildings, think it's six buildings.
on this on the street, and there's a further six behind it on the on the corresponding street, and these were introduced in the 19 60s.
following bomb damage within this part of the estate, as you see here in relation to the rest of the conservation area with this part of Drake Field Road 23 Greatfield Road here on the on the right and then you have the kind of quintessential late 19th century buildings on the left-hand side of the Hebrew estate so set forward 2 storeys with attic storey with those very distinctive detailing to the buildings that you save the upheaval estate, the Highbury Estate, particularly as is a particularly good example of the Queen Anne style and,
considered as one of the most one of the more exceptional estates by Alfred Heber. So the building here at the corner, if you have a look just set some street views you see here, there's there's a further view to show that that break in the consistent building line where you've got 23 set back, and he just to give you a bit more clarity on it. So you've got a particular set back to the to the 19 60s terrace, but also a gap between the two building types. So there's a clear distinction between the two, with a small kind of kind of sliding roof structure. Just between the two and you see, the flank flank elevation at the side, elevation of of the building next door
so, as you can see, hits within the Hooper Estate conservation area, and you can see this is the this is the grouping here, then a further grouping that side and then actually you've got further group on the other side of the street, so it's more than six apologies that this is this was for a direct direct bomb damage in this location which obviously then led to clearance of of the terraces that were here and then the resulting development of these 19 60s terraced buildings.
so the existing front elevation you see the red line here and you can see that distinctive gap between the two building types, what they're proposing here is effectively a kind of facsimile of the the quintessential Hebrew estate buildings, as you see on the other on the left-hand side, albeit not completely the same closing the gap between the building next door, so there will not be that distinctive gap and instead you've got this kind of very narrow single bay of windows that are set back that then gets set back to the rear to the the front elevation of the 19 60s terrace.
other features you'll see, is it sort of not got, is not as wide as hasn't got the wide proportions of the off of the buildings you see here, so it's a slightly more narrow version of the behaviour estate, Queen Anne style buildings, but effectively they are seeking to introduce a development that set much further forward and continues the building line of the Queen Anne buildings and sort of squeeze it into the plot of 23
it just shows you a proposed 3D model, so you can see here how, in order to maintain the setback and it's, and due to the impact on neighbourliness, of the next door building
they have to set back that bay quite considerably, to fall in line with the bay, the front elevation of the 19 60s terraces which then it results in quite a significant flank wall here and a rather awkward arrangement of the roof at this point.
just showing for the rear elevation, the existing building, as you see here and then what they're proposing here is again similar to what we have for the existing terraces, but we have got a basement being introduced as well, so it sits two storeys plus attic and basement and you'll see here you've got choose an extension to add to the back as well as the first floor extension not extension, but it sort of reads as an extension of a of the Queen Anne style. Buildings and list is giving you a 3D view just to show the the extent of the light-welter should go into the
into that basement area, it's an interesting one night to see the committee's views on this because I see it's a particular take off.
with the style being pastiche, I appreciate this as different views on it, but it would be.
in its is an interesting one to see what the care committee's views would be on this, but thank you thank you, so this is essentially a an application to to demolish early 19 60s, council, council, property, or so 3 0 3 to turn a three, thus the plot of a 3 bedroom house into a three bedroom two storey house into a 4 storey 6 bedroom house in pastiche.
Victorian Queen Anne.
style are, I think, balanced society should.
should have first go at this, thank you, Chairman, can you hear me, Mark Dodson balanced society, are it's an interesting one, this type of thing has been done elsewhere on the harbour estate.
most notably at the top of rather than road, I think we may, in fact, have discussed those properties and previously, and I think they were quite well done, they maintained some of the brick detailing was.
Flemish bond her brick work in red to match the other properties and it would appear that that's what's going to happen here, although actually there's some quite extraordinary comments that they talk about red London stock brick, well I think that's a contradiction in terms which slightly makes me worried as to whether whoever drew this up actually does know about these things.
but and obviously, as has been said, it is a sort of pastiche I personally, I wouldn't regard this as the sort of Queen Anne style revival that there are other properties on the estate that perhaps that could be applied to, but nevertheless,
it is an attempt to replicate what's next door, I think it's it's quite a shame in a way that the door, the porch, will be narrower than the other porches which are to the character of those buildings, is quite wide, spacious and so forth, whereas this is going to be a little bit meaner I can see that in the context of the
of the 19 60s properties that the reason why they have pushed that side bit back is services that it's flush with the frontages of the 19 60s houses, but it does have added a feature, that's a little bit at odds with with the other properties in that terrorist group. Nevertheless, I think on balance,
there are well actually no before we, I give my sort of summary views, I think I would just turn to the roux rear, because the
the approach that's being taken at the rear seems to totally ignore the characteristics of the other houses in that group, firstly, they're not replicating the bay windows at the
this is because I think it's the ground-floor level or first floor level, and also the extent to which the property has been extended back, is again much larger than the other properties now I know, obviously within other parts of the borough you know, people all the time are doing lateral conversions at the back extending kitchens backwards.
but this is a conservation area. The aim clearly of these people is to try and replicate what's next door, and I think it's a shame that they perhaps doing quite so much extensive work at the back, but of course dare I say their argument would be Well. This is an improvement on what's there, maybe there's some people who are going to defend the 19 60s properties. I don't know I, it does beg the question if this is being done now and if it succeeds, maybe other owners of the properties in that terrace might one by one want to replicate it, so I think it's quite important that we get this right now, so I think my overall view would be from bone societies that, on balance, we support the general concept. I think that there's quite a lot of room for improvement but on balance we support the general idea
thank you or other or other comments, other questions, other views.
Minister yeah, I'm I think the they're trying to put too much on the site with a basement.
the adjoining Victorian terrace doesn't have a basement in that it's got a cellar coal cellar, but not basement like this one.
I think that sort of
an element of overdevelopment and am also concerned about the effect on the rest of the 19 60s terrace of the, because there was a gap which is now being infilled and I'm sort of wondering whether it would be better if that gap was or some kind of gap was maintained between one terrace and the and the next.
and then we wouldn't have this little or awkward.
junction the roof and the and the junction between the two terraces.
so that those are my sort of observation.
Potter
thank you, yes, I I I, I am rather against this this edition on replicating what's there already, because it really puts the 1960 services in re, makes them really, it is overpowers them and Napoleon, Richard, as they stand, and I think it would be doubly wretched when this thing is built so I I propose it.
Mr Catto.
I would be, we would be very cynical of me to oppose this because some years ago I got permission for doing exactly the same thing on a street in Putney which unfortunately never got built for other reasons.
but I'm with you that the the the the the it looks as if this one needs some tuning up, I think the
the idea is sound, but I'm worried as this as anybody else who think who finds a a statement calling the red-brick stock, for example, that may be the detailing,
if you're going to do that sort of reproduction, it has got to be perfect,
borrowings. Thank you, I can carry a lot of has been said already, I suppose, on the basement I mean on that road, there would be quite a few basements, wouldn't them and obviously, if you're doing something from scratch, sadly in the modern world and you can afford to do it, that's what you would be doing given spaces at a premium, but I, but I do I do get I mean the back of it is, as you know, it was quite out there, I mean you know, it footfall looking at the other houses and looking at the fact that it's in a conservation area, it's completely different and you wouldn't want the neighbours doing exactly the same. Thank you
Councillor Cooper.
and I think it's hard to say that the existing property adds much to the conservation area itself, the doodlebugs, which is what it was most various extensive damage or in a number of the roads there are, and indeed the Council still has its own Conny Lodge.
and in fact they celebrated the the falling of the the doodlebugs, I think in the summer of 2019 it was actually before the pandemic.
sir, so I'm not particularly attached to the building that's there, however, I do agree that the proposed construction would sort of overwhelm the the remainder of the terrace that would then be left and whilst I can just about live with the the front and I think the idea of a pastiche of a Victorian Queen Anne style we've got quite a lot of references going on there haven't been because obviously Queen Anne was not a Victorian,
in any size, shape or form, so so it it, it does sort of speak to the some of the dwellings on one side, although it no longer speaks to the it's a current neighbours that it lives with it's the back really that I do find I mean there are people who put in light wells or are at the front of buildings on various roads on the Hebrew estate this is really, I don't know whether, if we could go back to that slide, but it's really very large
and it seems to also not just have a lightwell, but it also seems to to me.
to protrude into the garden much much further than the the buildings that it's seeking to replicate, not just at the ground floor floor level, so the light well is actually halfway up the garden as well, then you've got this sort of quite large I was going to say monstrous but that's probably a bit cruel really over it's just too big and then at the first floor level it also is very big so,
I mean, I think we have agreed some things him impotently actually quite recently on the Committee where we said it spoke to the neighbouring properties in, I was somewhere near Cole Croft, Road and Hazelwell, Road Howes Lane so it somewhere around there, I can't remember exactly where so in some ways are not completely against it but I do think the back is too big.
I think that's a an overdevelopment, and I think I'm probably with Councillor Owens his position on this and.
yeah, I I could live with it, but not not quite in its current form, or I I think what I'm hearing is something that I perhaps hinted at when I said.
a 2 storey 3 bedroom house was being replaced by a four storey six bedroom house that there is an element of overdevelopment going on here is that what I'm what I'm hearing?
I am particularly at at the the rear of the house, so we are, unless I'm I'm getting it wrong, and of I'll hear you in a moment, Councillor Councillor Belton, when we're not again.
the the notion of.
a an attempt to continue what was there before 1944 or whenever the doodlebugs fell.
we're not again that, but we think that the scale of what is proposed here.
Brayley's trespassing on the the territory of overdevelopment if I can put it that way, but Councillor Belton.
thank you, if I may, at 2.00 points, one that you'll accept, and the other one you'll be annoyed with me about, but sorry about that.
the planning applications committee is always being told that we either accept it or refuse it, we that we had done have the ability to amend as it were, but we have to judge the application in front of us, I suppose we are not currently so therefore the nuanced comments that you're making,
are all very well, but we actually have to decide yes or no.
and therefore the nuances sometimes get lost some, you might you might in nuancing it tend to favour the position you didn't wouldn't want the applications committee to take if that makes sense, I think it's much stronger from your point of view if you actually say straightforwardly we are we will oppose this on grounds A B or C because that's what the committee will be forced to decide.
the one year the comment you wouldn't like, because I think it has a I'm saying as sitting next opposite or the historic the history heritage champion of.
of Wandsworth Council, I I just can't forbid this is happening all over the place in in making a social and political comment I do apologise, but this went from a Council of the House which was no doubt being rented out the rate of a
not in modern terms, 250 pounds whatever the rent would be on on that one is going to be, and you put the number of millions on it, you like, with the size of this thing, for a transfer of wealth from from the public sector to the private sector which is a massive example of what happened through right to buy process, there's lots of examples of this my favourite is in Sisters Avenue where six of these properties went and been replaced by.
3 million pound houses, I just make that comment as a as you, I said you weren't like it because it's not going to do Strictly with a physical building, but it is to do with the history of what's happening to these places.
I, I suspect that I will be told that.
you're trespassing, beyond the remit of a Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee, whose whose read just dismiss it just happens to be true.
I think we we, we have a decision to make, but I think the view is that the principle of for want of a better term, pastiche development.
is supported, but we also think that the scale of this development is too large, and it's a matter of, are we saying yes or even yes, but on the grounds of were in support of the past stage?
or are you saying no, because the over development is too important guidance, please, from around the table?
let's go back to Mark, yes, I mean if, if I went on to Peter scenario, if the applicants were given the impression, but the application as it stands would not be passed by the Planning applications Committee.
and the officers, perhaps I don't know if they are in a position to discuss the application with the applicants, to suggest the sorts of improvements to the application that would be more likely to get past, is that a scenario that could occur?
any discussions in terms of the application are best undertaken at pre application stage so we would encourage them to withdraw and then engage with prep in pre-application discussions to go further to move it into the right direction, as it were, and it certainly has been the case good applications have been withdrawn.
after reports of discussions at this.
Advisory Committee have been passed on.
Mr Catto, can I pick up on on on the the point about?
what might happen if we give the sort of indication you're talking about?
the national planning procedure does encourage officers to work proactively with applicants to get it right, so
if we were to say, for example, we like everything up to and including the back wall, but the rest of it is too big.
then it would make perfect sense for the case officer to take that back to the applicant and say, would you like to change this or not, it's an invitation for them to change it, and if they've got any sense, they'll say yes,
but that is the procedure and yes, in my view, I I would go along with the notes, your your decision, you're trying to make, I think, which is that the principles fine, but actually, if you look at the back, it's got at least three extensions that probably would fail if they were asked to ask for as extensions to genuine existing house.
Mr Dodge then again.
I think you've made the points that I was going to make, actually the, I would just wonder whether whether the political point that's been made by Councillor Belton.
I wonder if Ms Councillor Belton could indicate whether he would be likely himself to accept the application or oppose it.
can I go back on that, I mean, I can't that's a political and historic interest to me and I might write about it, but it wouldn't influence my judgement about whether I thought it was an application that should be biased or not, but the political objection wouldn't have effect that I suppose what I'm trying to get at is easy. Is it likely that the political hue of the Council now would mean that it would be rejecting it because of the reasons you've given? No, I don't I personally do not think so. I have Councillor Coopers here and, as in these council owns, I think Members on both sides would decide this on the merits, as I saw it as an application full stop, regardless of tenure, and I
if I can just intervene, I think it's important that we do not put councillors who are members, still more chair of planning applications or committee into a position where there is a risk that they might be seen as pre-determining an application, so I think we mustn't press camp Councillor Bell from any further on on that issue apologies Chairman, I think if I can, we also be at
we don't sit on it as Councillors who are Labour Councillors or Conservative Councillors, we sit on the Committee as Councillors who happen to have previously been elected as Conservative or Labour, and you know our political persuasion has nothing to do with our decision-making processes, leaving aside your very well-made point about pre-judging, thank you.
I can I come back to the question I put put to you earlier, are we saying yes, but or are we saying that the bottom is so big that we say no?
yeah, thank you Chair, I am very pleased to balanced society through tonight, as Frank might have to contribute from Tooting, I think we've had enough contributions from various members of the committee to say objects, but we're also looking for the reinstatement of the GAA, something far more modest at the rear, a smaller basement I'd also urge people to read the one objection as coming from the unfortunate next-door neighbour who has lived in the
next door council house for 50 years and is very upset by the proposal to not only with regard to the extensive building work is going to him in light, but I I, I think she's gonna lose amenity or that any occupant of the house next door can lose amenity is gonna be overseen and I think there's grounds for objection from for what it's doing to.
I won't quite make a speech in favour of a 19 60s terrorist, but it is part of the history of the Hever estate, and I, the official, often did forward on it in 1,044 I'm not suggesting that we should defend poor planning and building decisions made in the 1960 s but it,
the erasure of of that gap, or that whole I think it doesn't erase it, it raises one one site out of six or one question I had for the officers about the application, if and when it goes to committee that in terms of you know, what colour stock brick is and all the other kinds of detailing they've identified will that be secured by condition at plan, I mean it's at something that would be secured by condition of the planning committee if, if it, if it goes forward and it was in its pleasant or an amended form to the planning Committee, then I'm sure the answer to that is yes and I see a North American.
okay, I'm going to put it to to a vote.
are we saying that the the shortcomings of this proposal in terms of overdevelopment are such that we are saying no, even though we are not unsympathetic to the idea of a for want of a better term, pastiche development on the site?
OK, I think that's unanimous.
do you have enough to go in into the minute, thank you, and thank you to members for for that discussion, let us then move on to 2024 0 3 0 7.
the the land at Whitnall Way on the on the Charfield estate, whose oozes leading on this greening committee, various others here to thank you report, just to say I start off, really in terms of this, this application.
we have a number of applications being submitted at the present to do with the Wandsworth homes across the borough, and there are a number of applications coming in of which this is one and the Whitnall Way Estate in in in in in Charfield Avenue, they're proposing 32 residential homes in three blocks and we've got to bring up. You've seen it on the the first slide there, that which was shows that it's all very well treed estate and it doesn't doesn't particularly show the topography there, but this particular slide does it's very undulating site and the the houses were 1950 0, about 5 storeys and blocks, and they don't really follow any particular orientation. Necessarily, it seems to be partly because of the topography so
and the the consultants who are working for the Housing Department effectively are looking at the infill parts of the state that have defined room for some blocks and basically the show chosen car parking sites or garage court sites which are no longer used and particularly as one example here.
so the idea of bringing two to develop a typology which is not akin to necessarily the the the the the the existing one, but certainly in terms of scale, massing, they're not too far away from that.
but there is one particular site which particularly want to draw your attention to because it actually sits next to the conservation area, so you see the yellow there on the
drawing there, which is the West Park conservation area and the the de triangle which site opposite, there is a site for W T to the three sites Deputy 1 Deputy to Deputy 3, and really I thought that one or to be perhaps brought to this committee is three sites here and at the top one there in the North.
is what I thought I ought to draw to your attention simply because it's quite close, but is is indexed to the conservation area effectively where it came in as a pre-application, they came in at 5.00 storeys, and I was a bit concerned about the height scale and massing vis-a-vis the the the houses in Charnwood Avenue and I say it could be less as set out to harm and so they came back and,
drop a three storey scheme at the front there and that went to design review panel who promptly said Well, we're not yeah, we could probably say another that the story would be OK. So anyway, when I evaluated it, is at an officer level. I thought my comments perhaps were it's probably a neutral in terms of impact on the conservation area, but you might feel otherwise, but I think there's a, it is different than you know in terms of the proximity right on the right on the the streetscape there, too, to chart our way or the other blocks are quite sort of well trees around it, but this one is right on the road on that on the back of the pavement effectively
you might just go through more one or two more sides when showing the the the the relationship perhaps to the the street, here's the here's the frontage onto Charfield Avenue, as existing and as as proposed.
with the forced to order the development, and it's got the sort of rather uncharacteristic dormers at the top there, which you, which I'll probably go into more detail in a moment when we pass through two other slides,
as WT 1, which is just away from the street, ready Deputy 1, again, it's yeah.
and carry on.
while this is the frontage on t and frontage for building, which is W T 2, and as you will see from the drawing, which has four storey building where the roof as these dormers, in which they're not actually.
housing at that level, they are actually for the the louvers for the air source heat pumps, and I suggested perhaps yeah, there could be flipped round to the rear of the site, perhaps it, rather than having it on the front but following a meeting today actually with with the team who were putting forward the schemes, they said that's impracticable, really simply because of the fact that the the pitch on the roofs that are we've got what we receive from one of the angels or any of the drawings at all but the pitch of the roof on that frontage. 1
is slightly different a side, so that would be quite a cost to bear to change the whole picture round, but what they could do is actually review the design of the louvers off the front is to make them a bit more palatable, perhaps in terms of improving the design of the the.
the appearance of the the delivered.
appearance so really I mean it is whether you still feel it is too big and bulky and for the HRA yeah translations conservation, or whether you're OK with that or whether you review your year, will you feel they are you support changes further to the to the design of the the the the the dormers in some way?
many comments, reading OK, thank thank you, and this does Mr Sellars, let me just emphasise for a moment.
that this is a good example of.
a problem that can arise in for for the planning department when it receives applications essentially from within the council.
and of course, we hope that there is good liaison between the housing department when it is drawing up proposals of this kind.
and the planning department, but on the other hand, are the Planning Department cannot give preferential treatment?
to for the Council as an applicant, as distinct from any other developer, so I think that we need to bear that in mind when we're dealing with with these kinds of applications.
you will recall there was a discussion at the last meeting about the fits you Estate, and the and the proposals that the Housing Department as a developer is currently Inc.
engaging with the community on before submitting an application.
but I, this is not my patch, I have looked at this closely, so I think Mr Cato should have first dibs on this from the Putney Society.
Gorstage in some detail at our February meeting because it's been on the cards for us out for a while, firstly in defence, if I may have the Council's own team on this, there were three public consultations on site there was, as has already been mentioned by various sellers, a pre application, so I don't think they've been hiding their light under a bushel or high or keeping away from.
comments from the Planning Department,
we looked at it and decided that actually it's pretty much in what you would expect, given that the council are understandably looking at the empty spaces in estates that were built at a time when what was considered as the appropriate density maximum density, because I built some Council housing myself a long time ago.
was considered those densities. Maxima were now would now be considered not too low as a minimum, so inevitably there is some spare space on that thing within within the estates and I I commend the way they're they're looking at it and I think this Putney society is not averse to this and by the way, we've got five more applications of a similar nature have arrived since this one, so we looked at it, we thought it was OK, we didn't bother to comment.
one could ask why I, I haven't had a chance to look at Street View or it is wow, have we got any images of the properties on the other side of the street that'd be overlooking this, although any images or any of the officers have.
if?
broadly speaking, there, there are generally two storey, detached houses sometimes are semi-detached, but the Desisa scale, maybe three, maybe a third storey in the roof.
so again, it is quite near the street, isn't it, the the the the one we saw, I just wonder whether that yeah previously they've had sort of leafy tree area, green, grassed area or low built garages, it's going to make a bit of an impact on those deer probe, buildings opposite and around are a bit of a mixed bag there's one big,
late Victorian has on the corner directly opposite, but the immediate sorrow and surroundings on the other side are, in fact more recent infill from the fifties, sixties and what have you, so it's a really mixed bag.
of all sorts of scales and sizes.
and the block proposed is actually one storey lower than the one right next door to it, that's been there since 1950, whatever it is.
other comments or any any questions.
so do I take it, then, that I see?
someone who has got a.
one of the officers has found a Street View, yeah.
that one is in the middle of the screen as a PE is or was a pastiche from about 40 years ago.
yeah
OK, that's how it is worth is worth saying that there has been a substantial number of objections from our residents on the estate.
on grounds that Mr Catto has really hinted at that, I mean there is a lot of open space and not unnaturally.
some of the residents, you don't want to lose that that open, open space, but
are we prepared to upset the the Local Lead Putney Society view on on this?
yes.
OK, thank you.
thank you very much for that.
I think, then that takes us on to.

4 Decisions (Paper No. 24-129)

page 9 in the in the pack paper 24 1 2 9 or just go through that decision by decision just I mean, this is just for noting.
1 7 9 Battersea Park Road.
of where?
PAC in effect agreed with us good, I think.
was it?
so it was, I'm so, sorry, sorry.
number 2, then Battersea Park, and the British genius site.
any comment.
number 3 on page 11.
Dial House on what Baston Road, but in effect on.
the Upper Richmond Road, it is briefly commented that the Panel were very much concerned about the trees on that site, work has now started on site, they put up a holding, which has the trees on the public side of the hoarding, so we are hopeful that they will be spared from being knocked about by the workmen.
good.
and finally, on page 12 number 4 of the decisions, the the flour kiosk outside Clapham Junction station, you'll see that the slightly curiously a a raft of supporting.
statements for the for the application was submitted, I think three days before PAC met and then on the the day of PAC the the application was was withdrawn.
I don't know if we have any information on why was withdrawn the
I suspect we await another application.
OK, I think that brings us on to any other business.
Ms S Bradley.
sorry, I couldn't help noticing the Council's press release last week about once of residents said to be happiest thanks to historic local landmarks, and this, I think, arose from a report in the Times newspaper saying that a historic England had issued a report linking high satisfaction levels of residents with high numbers of,
grade 1 2 and 2, stylish to buildings and other.
ancient monuments, et cetera, and the article in the Times said quite clearly that once of ranks first, according to this analysis, in the report, having read the report, which I do recommend, committee members do on the historic England website there's actually no reference to months of or any other local authority your borough or local authority area it's a very detailed statistical analysis of satisfaction ratings and,
the the very strong correlation without explaining the causality with particularly interestingly Grade II listed buildings, so just wondered, I'm not expecting kind of anything from officers today, but if anybody.
I I want to town hall is going to discuss the the value and importance and satisfaction and level of happiness that comes from having a high number of heritage assets in the borough, would it be appropriate to ask this committee to have a future report about where the once or Franklin first?
comes from and where, where the figure derived from, particularly since it isn't in the historic England report, I'm sure it's true and I'm sure that there is a correlation and I'm sure once of is a happy place because it's got not simplistic buildings but are just trying to pin down whether,
one of his number one comes from, thank you, Chair.
I look to the Council's history champion.
all I can say is I do know about it, the
as it happens, Phillips brought it to my attention but or almost simultaneously, the leader's office at the Council brought it to my attention as well, it's a little bit of a mystery and I think the only way to get to the bottom of this what's given rise to the reference to Wandsworth is to make contact either with historic England or with the journalists concerned and my first stop, I think, will be historic England at the idea of a of some sort of discussion on it, I think it was a very good idea as we as we move towards 2025 and once if there's the LA or the London Borough of culture,
which will have a big heritage element in it.
could I raised just two other items or of any other business, firstly?
do we have a date as yet as to when the?
then renewed local listing exercise will actually start.
yes, they were hoping for that to go out to public consultation in July, so it was supposed to go out that area, but there have been other priorities that need to take President in terms of public consultation, but it will be taking place in July so that is in the Forward Plan for it to take place there would be no delays any more.
thank you.
my second are 1, I'm going out, I suspect it's most way who's going to have to answer answer this.
we, we very much welcomed the the reviews of some 8 conservation areas that took place on
now a couple of years ago, it's been mentioned a couple of times since I think in this forum that we would like a renewed exercise on conservation areas.
now, especially now that the the
the Council has one, or the borrower has won the the Borough of culture.
Con Con competition, I understand, of course, that there are resource issues in involved, but I wonder if it could be taken back to senior officers and eventually, of course, to
to to Councillors to the Leader and and other Councillors whether resource could be found.
to complete the review of
the
the conservation area or assessments and management arrangements, some of which are now.
showing their age, I think, would be a way of putting it politely.
I hope I have the support of.
of members of the Committee in urging that
OK is that any other other business?
Ms White.
I just wanted to make the Committee aware because I don't think it's in the decisions that we would look at because it's quite an old application, I think it was 2022 but 8 Victoria Drive this came to committee quite a while ago but it it got dismissed and we had a hearing a couple of weeks ago and the Inspector agreed with the Council decision for it to be dismissed so just for context it's a good,
it is a good decision because it's is the cascade within the setting of Fairlawn, which is a locally lit listed.
landscape not within the conservation area of Putney, he.
but.
the Inspector did agree that there was there was impacts and that just wanted to highlight that to the committee is a good decision.
sorry, Councillor Belton.
thank you, and the history champion raised another issue with me, which I thought perhaps are worth mentioning now.
I'm not quite sure that you can do this very formally, but he was suggesting that.
developers might just get a little tawny tick, not a very important one, obviously, but just a little time taking the approval rating, if on occasions when there was a significant site where actually.
she volunteered to put in their own foundation stone or whatever you might wish to describe it, some history marker about the site, this obviously doesn't apply everywhere, but the whether it could happen, I don't think it's quite something that we could make a planning policy about, but I just raise it here because Mr Sellars might be able to influence the odour plan and suggests suggest it here or there when site scheme available.
so
thank you.
I'm sure that on a major site with major buildings, I can see the case for that very clearly.
and I'm sure you're right, there's no, there's there's no need for a planning policy.
on on such matters
in fact, one on.
I, I don't have to describe it, but I'm sure everyone recalls the giant gasholder.
the used to be down the end of Prince of Wales Drive just where there's one there about that that site on that particular gasholder.
so they do exist.
committee, can I just point out, there are various means whereby, when sites do come forward, developers can
flag up things that they have an association with that development, and I just bring out the Peabody development, for example, where they worked with a local artist, and I was involved with that process as well, whereby the the work with residents and they chose a particular themes and those themes are being have been embraced in brickwork on the facades of the buildings and I think that adds to the richness of the development as well because there's a story they are being told to the wider public.
and I'm sure there are other examples around.
while I'm sure, but I'm sure that people are are aware of is the redevelopment of the the old hospital site at the top of East Hill.
and yes, I are, as you say, I think there are a number of such markers that are in developments, but development is an opportunity to add something to what's already there.
I think if I in my dreams I'd quite like to make it a a planning requirement, but I think that's not really not really in my gift, but I suppose what I'm I'm looking for and I'm I'm not quite sure what it is we do in order to provide it. What I'm looking for is greater encouragement, because what we've got at the moment is it's kind of random, it depends on the developer and it depends on how they feel about the site. Obviously it would be irrelevant if the site didn't have any kind of historic importance, but if it did have we can't bank on the on the developer taking that into account, so it's a so I'm I'm searching for some form of encouragement
and I'm sure the the conservation planners have heard the message.
could I just ask a question because I'm not quite sure the answer.
in the case of listed buildings.
if they're not in a conservation area, if there's going to be a development adjacent to them, is that something that this committee can consider yeah, yes, that is the Alexa okay.
and there have been cases that have come before this committee quickly, simply because they are close to I, I raise it because there is a development proposed in Balsam right opposite, the tube station, which is a Grade II listed building, and I am just wondering whether something that may be might need to be considered yeah, thank you and I I think that has be that has been Green forced by the the slight change not just in the name but the remit of this committee.
to consider not just conservation areas, but any conservation area teach it issues.
and you have just reminded me, I don't know how many of you have seen the latest weekly list, but there are a number of applications across the borough of form, from Openreach for the erection of.
if I'm rude about them, I would say advertising hoardings to replace telephone booths.
it's a bit more complicated than that several of them are actually in conservation areas.
I'd just alert the relevant societies to those.
because I think the the the information given by Openreach, or certainly made available on the website is striking by it by the absence of information.
it's simply a covering letter saying that this is going to happen.
so.
can I also say.
at the same time, also in the new lists, several from JC Decaux who wanted to do something very similar, but fatter, but they're sweetening the pill with a defibrillator defibrillator.
sorry, you, I've just realised I'm I'm conflating two things that Openreach has.
put put in some applications,
for new telephone masts
which are?
in conservation areas too, yes, it is J Cedar so yeah, as we can rely on all these masts and all these new screens, from JC Dicko, with all these moving, they're all going to enhance and compliment and and really enhance the conservation areas in some way, that as yet we've not known about the there's that the road is a phone Moss saga goes on and on and on and,
our society has tabled a question several times about what the Council's positive policy should be in finding locations.
only to be told Well, they can find a tall building, which is all well and lovely in West Putney, where there aren't any tall buildings and everything's a conservation area. So we've seen dozens and dozens of repeated applications for masts often about 10 feet from where the last one got turned down, which all get turned down and I'm afraid the official response we're getting from Wandsworth council is, we'll wait until they come up with one we like or words to that effect.
I hope I really could do with some guidance, although I have to say I have some sympathy with the planners here, because their hands are very substantially tied by the legislation.
so is there any other other business?
OK.
just then, to note the the dates of future meetings, which I think I think is poor on the last set of off of papers.

5 Future Meeting Dates

OK, thank you very much for your contributions this evening, thank you.