Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee - Tuesday 7 May 2024, 7:00pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting
Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee
Tuesday, 7th May 2024 at 7:00pm
Speaking:
Agenda item :
Start of webcast
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
2 Minutes - 27th March 2024
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
3 Applications (Paper No. 24-137)
Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.
Group on welcome to this meeting of the conservation and heritage advisory committee, my name is Michael Jobs and I'm Chair of the Committee.
members, I will call your name shortly, please, which on your microphone, to confirm your attendance once you have confirmed, please remember to switch it off.
and I'll call names in order, Councillor Belton.
Hello good evening, everyone, Tony Belton planning applications share, and the Member for Battersea Park Ward.
Councillor Cooper thanks very much Michael Councillor Leonie Cooper, Deputy Chair of the Planning applications, Committee and Furzedown ward.
Councillor Owens,
thank you very much, Chair, I am Councillor Owens and I am a ward councillor in the Northcote ward, thank you.
Martin Dodge son, I don't think, is here and nor is Frances Radcliffe, Andrew Catto, yes, Andrew Catto, from the Putney Society standing in for Laura Pavlos.
no Chris Rice.
Mr. Potter.
I didn't bother here on behalf of the AA IBA.
Ms Lawson.
Duty history Group.
Ms Greenwood.
Pamela, Greenwood, once a historical Society, Mr Farrow.
Good evening, Peter Farrow from the wonderful society.
And we have normally in Greece recently, things at least had Councillor was born here, the history champion, but he will not be attending her this evening.
Do we have any apologies for absence?
Thank you, Chair, and just the one apology, Laura Poll, place.
and the following officers are also present, first for remotely.
Lauren way.
Good evening to Lauren Way principal conservation and urban design officer.
And
Mr Sellars.
Leading Chair Barry Sellers's prewar design officer, pontiff and the Democratic Services Officer.
good evening Becky Hickey from Democratic Services.
And apologies I didn't and of Mr Armstrong from the Clapham Society.
Due to good evening, Roger Armstrong, representing the Clapham Society, apologies for that.
Now I'm asked to remind you to ensure your microphones are turned off unless you're speaking.
And I would also add, please turn your phone off or on to silent so that you don't embarrass yourself during the meeting.
Our declarations of interest are there any declarations of interest if there are, please quote the item on the paper number.
Are there any?
No good in that case, I think we move to the minutes of the meeting held on 27 March.
2 Minutes - 27th March 2024
first of all, are they a correct record and will you authorise me to sign a copy of them, I'll do that at the end of the meeting agreed.
3 Applications (Paper No. 24-137)
matters arising, I'll take them in the composite set of papers, page 3.
first-hand Lodge.
Councillor Cooper, I think you must have been reading that speech thought bubble that was popping out to the top of my head, it's still looking absolutely disgusting, it doesn't seem to be improving even slightly, I wondered if the lies that were scheduled to be signed at the end of the week of the committee meeting had been signed and I wondered if there was any likelihood of any progress anytime, I don't know before 2026, perhaps just to pluck a date from the air, I mean, it really is looking very sorry for some and it's a beautiful building who can report on this the
Ms Y or Mr Sellars, I can give some update on this Chair, I have had an update this morning from our property services department, so there is now a final version of the lease being drafted, and there's only one point that needs to be settled between the lease so that,
there is some progress, but they're hoping for the lease to be agreed.
In the next week or so, so there is only one point to be settled, belief still hasn't been signed, though so hopefully we can have some positive news at the next conservation and heritage advisory committee.
I'm sure the rest of my mum.
My colleagues on the Committee share that hope.
It does seem to have taken rather longer than we had we had hoped, OK, shall we move on to page 4 any matters arising there?
No.
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
could I just raise a couple of items there the the renewed local listing exercise.
can we have we, we were told at the last meeting that it will start in July.
is that now confirmed or not?
Ms Way or Mr Sellars.
NBS Chair, I can confirm that it will take place in in July, the exact date is to be confirmed, but it's in the Forward Plan with our consultations team for that date, and there's no reason for it to be moved now at this stage.
good and I know there's been some correspondence with are with other officers about this exercise and some of the
some of the failings of the the previous exercise in terms of making information available, and I know Councillor Osborne is very much on that that case, and I I hope we can manage to do a better job with the results of that exercise than was the case last time.
The the paragraph following that, the third paragraph on on the page, the reviews of of conservation areas.
I presume that there is no progress on finding the the resources to to resuscitate that programme of of reviews because there, and I think that that's rather regrettable, given that some of the
some of the appraisals of conservation areas are now very out of date.
so could I have the the support of the Committee in urging officers and councillors?
To try to find the resources to resuscitate the exercise that started more than a couple of years ago.
Do I take that take nods have support?
OK, thank you.
are there any other matters arising?
okay, could we then move to?
The applications that are due to be considered by us at this meeting.
and
start with a 2024 1 1 5 5, the the Alton activity centre.
and over to you, Ms Way.
thank you Chair, and apologies to everyone for not being able to be there in person today, unfortunately, I am having issues with the train strike, so the first item on the agenda is is 2024 forward slash 1 1 5 5, sorry, sorry, if you Chair Chair just before we go on any further.
I wondered if Becky Hickey could just move to one side, because if we're going to look at things on screen, you are actually sitting in front of it.
sorry to request, but.
We'd look, we'd rather look at you but as as the agenda item, you're not Jew, do you mind thank thank you so much, that's fine, sorry, sorry, I miss way.
Not a problem at all if there are any issues with with anyone hearing me, because I know that teams is a little bit temperamental, pleased is flag that to me.
so there's there's a bit of background to this site, so this this gives you some context in terms of the site photo photos.
of the areas that are subject to this application, so this application is focused on two areas within the alternate West estate, which is the downshift fields, open space to the south of the Grade II star listed blocks to the open space that's currently got.
a rather tired-looking play area within it and then also Oulton activity centre, which is in the within the map therein in the south-west of the site, which is again sort of a space.
To refer a play area space, but it's enclosed by quite tall railings, the third or the the third area, the subject to duplicate up this applications, which was not passed to the original master plan, is the site to the south of down Sheffield, which is currently the location for the bull sculpture which is a Grade II listed sculpture situated there if you can see in number 3,
So this is just one area for you just to give you the context, but the red line plan is within the within the application to show you there, there is two areas in particular that's to be focused on.
and all the designations within this is probably one of the highest concentration of heritage designation within the the Borough, so we have the Oulton conservation area, she covers Oulton, west and Oulton east all the way down to the area of the boundary with Richmond in 2020 a large part of the site including down she fields and includes Alton activity centre who was registered as a registered park and garden at Grade II.
You have the Grade II star listed point blocks to the north of the red line, just outside of the red line and, obviously, down to your house, which is also listed, the bull sculpture is also listed, so you got a multiple amount of heritage designations within the site just within the immediate vicinity, obviously we've got other listed buildings towards the south with Minster Gardens bungalows Mount Claire and,
Various other listed buildings which are just outside of this of this map, so a lot a lot of the the members of the Committee will be aware are well aware of the context of this particular application, and that is the consented master plan which allowed for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site to the south east of of the the red line plan which included the redevelopment the area which includes the library and included Oulton activity centre and down Sheffield's.
with some proposed improvements to downshift fields, including the a new play area and also Oulton activity centre, having some improvements as well now that, as part of the review of of this master plan and what can be implemented, going forward, the Councillors and,
The Housing Team housing regeneration team have been looking at ways in which they can implement parts of the Master Plan after the housing provider was we lost the housing provider for for the scheme after it was consented, so this is one of the first proposals coming forward that seeks to try to implement some positive aspects of that master plan, so it's focusing on basically downshift fields.
I note an activity centre with a view of potentially reviewing in the future the sort of village or square area and the redevelopment site to the south-east that the that's outside of this red line plan, so this gives you a context in terms of what was consented as part of the HMA master plan for these particular areas, so you've got here the down Sheffield on the left which shows that they were proposing to have a new trim trail and a review of all the
Pathways to allow this this loop.
Around
Which was something that was considered important for those residents within Oulton Avenue.
And you were to new play areas, one within within downshift fields and then obviously the the redevelopment of Oulton activity centre that included and are the interactive play space.
so again, just looking at the existing view of the site, looking down with a high cliff, drive blocks to the north.
So the three main areas that were looking at the there is the proposed new play space for downshift fields, which is shown here, so this isn't exactly the same location as the current play space, but obviously a significant improvement on the existing situation just been through various pre-application discussions with Council officers and has been subject to a design review panel. So you see here it's very much about sort, a kind of naturalised play space with lots of interactive fit features. It includes like a large climbing structure. We wish to see an on the left and if I go through they've got a nest playdate then to the north and some water features towards the south which you see in the foreground in this. In this image,
just another concept area, view of that, play space that shows it looking back in the opposite direction, seen more in the foreground there, you've got the kind of key feature, which is that that large climbing structure that wraps around for very much a distinctive change to what is there at the moment much softened effect in terms of the landscape how impacts particularly in relation to the the boundary treatment of the play space,
this this gives you a la a kind of general landscape arrangement plan shows those the elements spaces that that ran through and the it very much linked through the through the paths to allow.
Maximum access to the to display space.
so the other element of changes have been implemented, and this is a change from the previous master plan is, as the the the applicant team have reviewed the actual pass that run round down she fields, so this is the current plot arrangement you see here that there isn't that loop the paths lead up towards the the Hartcliffe Drive blocks and then come down, but there isn't any way of really linking through as as a as a space and here's the consented plan which you see that has quite.
Quite angular paths that lead from those blocks to the north down to what is a circular loop path around which links you through down.
so what the applicant team has looked at is actually the original master plan on and working with the existing path layout, but in providing the improvements to it, so you'll see here that if we've they've introduced links that the allows that loop path to be introduced as per the master plan but they've suffered some of those linking paths,
and brought some of those in retain some of those Lincoln parts up to the High Cliff, Drive blocks, and so you have the loop path that runs round, which included the trim trail which was part of the original consented master plan, which is the points on the are in green at this point are the of the trim trail.
and then it links back to the to the play area towards the east, to west, I'm losing my mum to the east.
And this just gives you an idea for some of the furniture that's proposed to introduce a very matched in it are in keeping with the fuss of the master plan, but really the main changes are, that is that pathway is more respectful to the to the original pathway layout but just linking it through so that you have have that loop.
So the the the next part of the application is Oulton activity centre, so this part of the site has less sort of heritage, does sensitivities to it, it is still within the conservation area and the registered park and garden see the structures and buildings within a town all of lesser significance, so this is again the consented master plan, so you see here the white block that that's the existing.
Centre that's on the site, that's outside of the red line, it was part or outside of the red line, in the consented master plan, and it's still parked outside of the red line in this master plan, and this is because it is managed by different parts of the Council and it's currently largely used a sort of after-school private after-school club.
And again, he is looking at the concept view of of the activity centre so.
were the the applicant's team had really looked at and have gone out to public consultation, quite extensive public consultation and including speaking to schoolchildren of various different ages, male and female, to look at what they really want out of this site so that it's it's very much a a scheme that has responded to what the needs of of the children within the local area and what they consider they would like from this space so it is quite a bit different from the previous master plan.
Another area or concept view just to show that space, the different zones that are being proposed, so this is the
General landscape plan, so I haven't included there is sort of a place strategy which sets out areas in.
with or with a key at the side, which I thought might be a bit difficult for members to be able to see it upon the screen, so the main areas, if you see here within the southern part of the site, it split into two commits zones you've got like an open space here which is has basketball heaps and interacted space which is the space hearing is the kind of orangey Conor Tope space that.
quite interactive and then on the other side you've got another a different sort of play surface which has the
sort of from feature wall feature that runs around it towards the north of the site. You also have a science zone CC, to the north of of the whites, for quite blocked out space in that corner. That's to be a science stone so that I'll have tables and magnifying posts, and a little amphitheatre seating area for the main premise behind some of the changes basically really is is looking at an interactive space that allows integration with all different types of children. Different age ranges
But also allowed spaces for, can avoid related activities like the basketball net, but also spaces full 4 for girls as well, that and that has been quite extensively considered and reviewed as part of the pre application stage with officers.
And the one area that has been included in the red line that wasn't part of the master plan, which is the the the bowl sculpture area towards south of downshift fields which at the moment, I think, colour of.
Members will know, it was originally an open space that sat within the landscape and then introduced the car parking towards the back of it, which allow lost it space. That's an interesting image within when you look at the list description, there's an image, an old image, of of children sitting on it, and it's sitting within the landscape, with the with the blocks, towards in, in the background that that setting has been eroded quite significantly and as part of this application, and they're looking at improving the landscape around the ball, which is which is an additional features. So this is an indicative plan landscape plan here, as you'll see
they are proposing to increase the hedge behind the site, to allow a little bit more masking and framing of the view of of the bull sculpture and then the landscaping around it to form such a circular space around it if I take you back here with actually having.
the
The seating areas sit situated looking more towards double sculpture, whereas at the moment you have a seating area that has your back towards the sculpture, so it's not really celebrating this Bill this s sculpture in the right way so this one improvements there in terms of the the actual setting of the full sculpture, presumably there's it would be lovely if we could take the car parking away and reinstate its landscaped roof to the rear, but obviously the reality is that it's not possible so this is just looking at say those enhancements.
and I think that's my last slight.
Thank you, if you have any questions, thank you are asked why, first of all, any any factual questions points that are need to be clarified.
no, Mr Catto, probably a rather technical point, but there's a red line as the application site, which doesn't bear very much resemblance to any real edges on the ground.
and there's no sign of blue lines or whatever to indicate who wealth owns what around it, I suspect that something that's convenient for this purpose, but isn't it doesn't actually is rather meaningless if you look at the lives, are not on the map.
any any response to that.
I think that the yeah, I think the red line is just trying to cover the area which is just subject to the application, obviously I can check about the blue line, because obviously the the area of land owned by the Council is much more extensive than the Red Line as we know so I can't check that.
But I think we've just tried to confine it to the areas that are subject to this application, that's why it is rather there's not obvious reasons for the lines.
OK thank, thank you,
comments on on this proposal or any part of it.
Mr Conway Major.
And again, this may sound very technical, but
much mention was made of it being part of the master plan for the regeneration now, as far as I am aware, firstly, does anybody have a strong view from a planning law point of view whether doing any of this stuff constitutes starting the regeneration and therefore starting building the previous planning consent and secondly, might I point out to
Council officers that the previous planning consent is actually completely unbuildable under modern Building Regulations because ever since the two staircase rule came in, none of the buildings approved are actually can can now be constructed under current building regulations.
Ms Way.
just to add that this is a separate application to the master plan, so it's it's come forward to seek to try to implement some of the positive aspects of the master plan, but this is a standalone application. It will is not linked to the previous consent because, as I was stating, there are changes within this within that are shown in this application that show clear changes to the master plan, so this will not trigger that as a way of implementing the master plan, they would need to implement that original master plan as part of that application in order for it to be started, and I don't believe that is the intention of of the Housing and Regeneration Team. They're very much focused on looking at ways in which we can consider the master plan and that the ethos of the master plan on what actually is
what could be delivered on the ground is a lot of.
the there's a lot of discussions and public consultation that has taken place on this.
I hope that helps.
Thank you for clarity yet.
any other comments that people want to make about this through this application.
let me let me stress one point that Miss way made, that this is an application in the heart of a a very dense set of heritage assets nationally and locally listed.
So it is, and it is important that we get this right.
does anyone want to make any comment in that context?
Elton
I am not really Chair in the sense that I think it is an advisory committee for me in the planning applications committee, but I'm really encouraging people to make a comment we would like us to know whether you think it as it stands, it's OK or not, we are as as a
As an administration we are very aware that the people of Roehampton have been looking forward to some kind of regeneration for ages and I, the history of this everyone knows about it, would be really nice if we could get moving with something so.
Comment would be helpful, I think thank you
Mr Farrow
The application is essential for.
and every rerouting a trim trail and the
replacement of play equipment on to play areas
I don't think anything that I've seen indicates that it would have an adverse effect on the listed buildings in the conservation area.
And in fact, I very much liked the look of the playing equipment that was being put up in in the first area.
to that extent, to that end, I would say that I would very much support what I've seen of the application for these items.
sorry, I say to me again.
Yes, I, I'm gonna second, what Peter Farrow has just had to say about the play equipment, I think that's fine, there's obviously a concern, but
Down Sheffield is sometimes referred to, I say, sometimes as a capability Brown landscape, I think if you look at its history.
It's hugely hugely changed since the estate was built, there were very few trees on that hillside in the 1950 s, and I think we have or are reasonably should be saying, is this having an impact, positive or negative on the landscape we see rather than a deeply historic landscape I think that's gone.
and in that sense, my reservations which I had when I first saw this about putting a modern trim trail.
on a historic landscape are not as bad as they used, I think, yeah, we're we're not really looking at a historic landscape, but we should treat it as as part of the estate, so in that case yes I, I'm in favour whether the rest of my society's in favour I will leave them to tell me later.
Councillor Lyons yesterday, I just want to concur with what has been said about the children's pay area. As I was particularly impressed, I mean by the this is the range of ages that would be catered for. I know we're looking at it as a different context, but you know given on so many estates, you know, we're where we receive children, don't have that sort of access. I thought it was highly impressive and you know it's great to see see being laid out. Thank you
Can I second what has been said said so far, I've been very impressed looking through the application at the thought that has gone into.
the the proposal was again, particularly in relation to to the play areas and, and, I think.
there is an appropriate balance between the practicalities of the play areas and the sensitivity to the landscape.
in which this is all located, so I have nothing to say, but praise about these proposals, does anyone have any contrary view?
or modification to that view.
If not, I think we approve of this application with a claim.
and I hope that it succeeds at PAC.
just just just a small point, I'm very familiar with what's on the site at the moment.
and I think it would be really helpful to see better pictures of the actually existing Olson activity centre or if we're looking at other things in the future.
so that we can actually see the difference, so I think Councillor Owens has said how positive it is to say something that will cater to children of many different ages, and I think if you saw what was on the site at the moment now limited, it is the acclaim might be even stronger.
OK.
Right do you have enough to to put in a minute for the for PAC, yes, OK, let us move on then to application 2024 0 7 8 1, a very different kind of application Wandsworth High Street over to you in this way.
is my colleague, Mr settlers will be presenting this one?
Am I wrong?
Sorry, Barry I couldn't hear you briefly for that moment in time, I think it's working now, I think your microphone wasn't working.
the the the item is a 1 98 to 200 Balham High Road that's OK glory either that is different from the list that I'd been given, sorry so this is 2023 3 6 4 6.
1 9 8 200 Balham High Road Surrey.
Ms yeah, certainly this is this is a properties in Banham town centre, involves the demolition of existing second floor and a erection of a second new second third and 4 4 4, partly to see one hotel used to provide 18 hotel rooms and the fourth floor for residential use 2, one bedrooms and 1 two bedroom flats and you'll see that from the photograph here this is the building as it stands at the moment and you've got retail on the ground floor.
the building there are probably dates to about 1960 s, I believe, postwar.
And there has been, it is part of that defects, it says that the you see the brick building along with the first floor, there runs robbery through to the to the right there, there have been additions to that block in the recent past 2 3 storeys and we've now got one now on the corner of this.
This plot.
I should add that this is a view here from just outgrow, looking towards the building on the right-hand side, you have the Grade II listed underground station that gives you the focus of where we are in terms of this part of Bellen town centre and that's looking towards the the the the the underground station as we see there.
And this is an aerial view of the town centre showing the corner of that particular block and its relationship to the underground station.
And you'll see that there's an existing.
second storey
block on top of that corner and that's proposed for demolition and the erection of a three storeys above the the brick component part.
Now this gives you this relationship, it's.
Not too far away from the Nightingale Lane conservation area, just not grooving see the the yellow there as the heritage destination, you've also got to the south of the railway, you've got to the church, it's most church.
And he got little Les, Locally-Listed or.
Station as well on the right-hand side now so yeah, so that's the the the heritage destinations in that area, and one point should point out which was not shown on the map there, but the the area is this form within a mid-rise zone so in terms of the local plan so it's up to 5 storeys in that particular area that's that's the destination in terms of the parameter heights.
so that's something which we have to take into account as part of the applications material consideration.
We move forward.
Right just as the shot of the building as it stands at the moment, the elevation onto I just not grow, and you've got the existing second floor component part, which is a which was an addition in the past, to the the red brick component at first floor.
and here we have the proposal.
Chestnut Grove, and with the three floors of brick structures, to lead to the above the ground floor and a fourth floor in in a render for the residential accommodation to the the top floor.
Again, on the Balham High Road frontage, showing the existing situation.
and we move to the proposed situation again you see the
ground-floor, actually there's the shop there on where it's currently the actual name VIP and the the the the what second unit from the left is gonna be the proposed entrance, so you lose a a retail unit to make the entrance to through the hotel.
going going forward, then you got the so that the three-storey block sits on top of the which is basically a podium, which is the two-storey podium to this, this this development.
And a view from the rear.
And celebration as well.
And this is the existing side elevation.
The proposed that has got to change their dramatic structure in terms of its scale in terms of that part of Balham.
And here we have some CJI eyes, so on the left-hand you see the existing one on the right you see proposed CJI i showing the additions to that corner block and its impact on the listed building now what I should point out is as part of the
premise heights zoning is the way of whereby the prioritise can go up to five storeys in terms of the policy LP, for there's a consideration as part of that policy, which means that it has to not have any adverse effect on any heritage assets around now. Therefore, you could argue Hussain, because I had that in my behind notes to the case officer, that this could give rise to a list of sets down to harm to the setting of the listed building
By by means of its height and scale, and so on, so that's I think, a consideration for you to take on board as part of the considerations for this application.
It does make quite a change to the corner of that particular block.
I think we have another view of it as well here, looking down bypass the railway station towards the underground station and you've got the block on the right-hand side, so it's quite a change in scale what is at the moment to what's being proposed?
And the the the actual conversions to 18 units to the
accommodation is quite tightly packed, they're all Arab and are there is that there is a an area where they can cook as well, but basically they're bedroom units.
Going in there.
So it's a referential, and then you got the flat above that for luxury 2 flats above that of the top floor, so I think that's probably the last one, is it not?
And then we perhaps have some comments.
if a could we start with with any factual questions about this application?
If there aren't any, I invite comments, I'll start with Mr Dodge son, who has just arrived.
in the nick of time.
From the bottom of society. Thank you Chairman, I do apologise, it took me about an hour and 45 minutes to get here tonight. Sorry, sorry, I hope perhaps you'll indulge me if I I speak at some length about this clearly, obviously, the Committee is concerned with this property, primarily because of its impact on the listed building, which is Balham underground station, which was built and forgive me, Mr Sellars, I don't know what he said, but it was built in, I understand it opened in 1926
1 9 8 200 Balham High Road, I think the the the context and the slight history of that building, although it's not within the conservation area, I think is quite important because how it appears, and how it affects the tube station is very important.
ostensibly, it is a low built building.
I have looked into the history of it and there might be others around the table who perhaps can correct me there are a couple of books that were published with images of or earlier images of Bolam, which I think have got incorrect when the building was actually built, they talk about it as being the result of the 1940 bomb damage that created the crater in Balham High Road with for which there's some famous images of the bus.
It ended up in that crater, but actually one of the photographs of that crater is taken from a building that could only be the building bits of this this application relates to because it's taken at a low level, it's a railing, it's not one of the Victorian buildings so I suspect that those buildings were pulled down between the date of the maps which the London bomb maps based on which were around 1914 and hadn't been amended when they did the London or assessment of bomb damage in the war and the area that that building,
The of that building is tinnitus just only having suffered minor damage, whereas a bank next door was fully demolished, so what we have was in the 1930 s of building adjacent right next to the underground station and the Holton underground station, which was low built.
sort of queasy art, deco in style and complimented the underground station very well and that modernist approach that was being taken there, what's been allowed to happen, regrettably, because the building is not in the conservation area, as you saw from the images, Mr
which has shown to you just now.
Add-ons have been added already, which are actually very detrimental to the building, where that building in a conservation area, I am sure we would not have let the who's go through or we would have objected to the existing additions, but sadly obviously the building is not in the conservation area itself, so turning them to the the tube station. Maybe this has already been enunciates, but yeah, Charles Holden was a really really top architect of the 20th century. I mean he was a IBA gold medalist, he twice declined knighthood, he was a vice president of IBA right rubber he designed 55 Broadway, which is a landmark building in London
he was, you know, what a great I think I don't know if Mr Bosch would agree, but he was a great architect and and Balham and any of the other places that have a stations that were designed by him are very lucky to have those pieces of architecture in in this town centres and as far as I'm aware, that is the only listed in terms of Grade II and and Grade 1 or Grade II star listed buildings in the centre of town centre of Balham. So in terms of the impact on Bolam, that building is very, very important. I think, as the years have gone by, people have regarded it as an even better building than perhaps it was regarded at the time it was built. I think it has so many good qualities to it. The stone the Portland stone, the detailing and so on, and therefore to have a building right opposite, have this extraordinarily inappropriate, bulking and let alone the detailing of the building opposite
in my view, is extremely detrimental to the setting of a grade II listed building to be quite frank, I think it should be a Grade II star listed building.
But or even if it's a Grade II listed building, I think it's extremely detrimental to it.
Mr Cato, I see about the no.
Mr Farrow, then.
In the words and I think of.
Gwyneth Paltrow, you had me at Hello. I think the the effect of this building on the splendid underground building would be extremely detrimental. I noticed that we have to use the term less than substantial because there are only two descriptions of harm that are allowed in planning legislation, but it seems to me a shame that
the the term less than substantial.
doesn't sound anywhere near harsh enough. I I found this or an application that was, it seemed to me to be poorly put together and I think one significant element which were minor element. If you look at the elevations of the building with Mr seller's shoulders, they've chose to put the replicate the windows on the existing first floor on the upper floors. Whereas if you look at the drawing of the building next to it, they show what are self-evidently, I think Crittall windows that are existing and the fact they didn't have the amounts to recognise what they were dealing with indicates, I think and extremely poorly put together application
And I can only reiterate that I find the height of the building and the bulk of the building next to the underground station to be very unacceptable, thank you.
Mr Potter.
I feel that this this proposal is totally inappropriate.
And
really it's.
In fierce contrast to the buildings that are already involved with the tube station.
I used to say one thing I did say as part of my comments, that it would have been useful to have Haddrick a master plan coming forward, to show how, if other people were going to do a similar thing, then how that would be done as a or as going forward in a coherent manner rather than piecemeal and what you probably look at is that most of these form within.
To property bound to property elements, this one is not 1 9 8 200, and if you go down the line than if they form pairs, rather than singly so, that's something to look at as part of that going forward.
that's a strong argument for the development of design codes, isn't it?
which I think is something that the Council might want to take forward, indeed, I know that some London boroughs are developing a design code to cover the whole borough Councillor Owens.
I just want to say I concur, I concur with an awful lot of what has been said from the point of view of the bulk of the massing and and the high rate, I know that particular stretch quite well we've recently had.
some traffic changes just just before then, so you now can't turn right on the road before you get to where the hotel would be, because of the school of the two new zebra crossings that's being put in, it is an incredibly busy junction in the morning with the children and I know it's a hotel and I'm imagining people won't be parking him and it's not in the remit, but I'd just as surprised me because it is,
There's quite a lot of busy area, but thank you, that's just my point.
Unless anyone has anything very important to say, Mr Khan, may I just take a completely contrary view on this one.
I think the tube station was built, as indeed its twin down the road at the various two things, and so on.
To fit in with a Victorian street, which was two storeys taller than the existing building on that site.
And could hold its own whatever goes on next door, because it is a completely different animal on the corner, it's it's attached to a three storey building round to the left, of the view where we've got.
And equally yes, design codes, let's please ask the Council to do that, while you're raising the topic.
Thoroughly and co, I think, can this Panel thoroughly encourage the Council to get on with design codes.
and
But yes, this is an area where we should be looking to build a bit more, but maybe not three more floors.
Councillor Belton, and then Mr touched on, I'm not sure I don't want it the other way round now because, as I said before, I don't want.
I think it's not my role just to speak about much other than to hear the advisory comments, but I was thankful to Mr Gator because I thought to myself.
and in a way, I'm inviting people who are opposed to or dislike this, to put their case strongly against de J dry, convinced me, amongst other planning application members, perhaps in that many of the guys I just mentioned the similar tube to the stations on the line and indeed,
Low-rise and very famous tube stations all over London have are now surrounded by all sorts of things of all kinds of heights and contrasts, I rather wondered whether, in fact, the contrast between might display it just as much as are trying to compliment it.
I'd I don't like.
Much that I think anyone does what's there now, particularly though the the the the new third floor and I rather preferred the design version, but I'm open to be persuaded I want to hear this because I just think it's a
given the development pressures on the Borough, and indeed on the city as a whole.
but it may be a little bit unrealistic, keeping it at the heart of the hate we're talking about, but I'm open to be persuaded, I think, Mr Dodson, I'll give him one more go.
To help persuade you I.
I don't think it's necessarily the the height per se, it's the disjointed nature of what's being proposed, had somebody been proposing that entire row of 19 30s low built buildings were having the entire row with perhaps two more storeys added on, as you say that would be no higher than the buildings that were there previously at the or at the beginning of the last century but I think it's the fact that we're we've got high calibre architecture in terms of the underground station.
Being immediately put just juxtaposed against what I would think most people here, we would regard as not high calibre architecture or that the buildings is creating is is going to look very unsightly inconsistent.
so had they been proposing that all the entire row had been three floors high and it was good quality, I architecture, as is the case further north, she go along towards.
too little corner of the next road Ramsden Road, then that probably would have been more acceptable, but it's the, it's the, it's the spikiness, I suppose, of what's being done in a low calibre of the detailing.
OK, so I think we have divided views here.
although I don't think I'm hearing anyone arguing.
for this particular proposal in isolation, I think what I'm hearing is.
That?
Without some further development, further to the north.
This this boo I I got this building rather than rather sticks out like a like a sore thumb, it seems to me, I'm I'm not so worried about the, if I can speak personally about the Chestnut Grove or elevation, I'm concerned much more about the the Balham High Road elevation which just sort of sticks up in isolation from from anything else.
And if I worry that stats are a personal.
View, but I think there is a case for densification and re raising height, but not in this sort of isolated fashion.
Yeah, I'm I'm I'm of the view that it is a story too high, at least I like the way it wraps around the corner, but I think being that tall it's gonna threaten other buildings like for instance the rather charming I think it's it's station terraces in Chestnut Grove which is lovely building with little cartoonish on the top Victorian and I think that,
I'm a bit worried about the use as well, this sort of hotel is, it gonna be a habitat, is it really a hotel?
And the
traffic generation, everything the aspect of it, but.
yeah, I think it's is too high anyway, in my view, thank you.
can I try and sort a square of the various views that have been put here?
That we would not be opposed to a high a heightening of the of the terrace as a whole, proceeding up up to the north.
we have some concern about the.
is it the fourth floor, have aid or what the top storey?
we're not.
Opposed to some height heightening, as I say, along the terrace OS, as as a whole, but as it stands at the moment.
we cannot support this individual proposal
is that a reasonable way of putting it?
Could I just add that yeah, sorry group is very much what you said and what others have said, that it is the least one storey too tall rather than say we have concerns about it, I'd say we we would suggest that.
if the planning applications committee is minded to consider the application, or how do I put this, no, they shouldn't accept the the the the the top story.
And I wondered whether we could also suggested if the planning application committee.
is willing to accept the application that there should be conditions attached requiring details to be submitted, I return to the argument line I made earlier about the windows, I think they've made a big mistake in the fenestration, the the the appearance of the windows.
And it does give cause to concerned that the the detailing it may may very well let the building down, so, as I say, conditions attached to submission of details.
and I would take it that the the rider to to that is that they say no to a sensitive that detail is important in such a sensitive loch location.
Councillor Belton,
Back on the comments, this is not making a judgement in any sense, but on your summary.
do you see the conservation area advisory committee just advising about form and architectural style, or do you think that I ought to know, I guess I know it's a question for the standing orders of the committee, or do you think you have a role in commenting on usage because at least one person,
Questioned.
usage and you didn't mention it in your summary.
I would not I, as I understand, out to our terms of reference.
they give us a very, very wide competence in dealing, but in making comments, providing advice to talk to your Committee, Councillor Councillor Belton on on anything relating to buildings, in conservation areas and
the their surrounds and in dealing with heritage assets, in which case or that one of the Members commented that respirator the mildest that he would like proof that a hotel requi was required there, I mean that that that was a comment from one person, I'd.
it seems to me that.
It would.
As I read the application, it was very unclear to me whether it whether what was being proposed was a hotel in the common sort of sense of that or something like.
co living arrangement even or and are part hotel kind of arrangement, because I'm there is mentioned a sort of common common areas isn't for.
for the use of of residents, so it doesn't seem if, as I'd read the application, it didn't seem to me to come across as if I can put it this way, a conventional hotel would be very small hotel.
yeah, I know thank you for.
so clarity, I think we would seek on what the precise usage is planned to be.
On the basis of my summary, as modified by or added to by Mr Farrow and my subsequent comment about usage, does that does that meet the points?
That have been made in discussion where people are happy with that.
And if I can just reiterate a point that I think at least Mr Kato's report, I mean Dundee, this really does highlight the need for design codes.
in that case, you've got enough, I I hope.
Let me move back in my list, I'm sorry, I seem to have two lists which are of slightly in conflict with each other, can we move to?
2024 0 7 5 1 61 63 Wandsworth High Street almost opposite here.
And I think that is Ms Way.
that's right Chair, thank you, so, as you mentioned, this application is literally across the road from from where you're residing 61 to 63 Wandsworth High Street, so the application description is conversion of the upper first and second floors two self-contained flats along with a new third floor extension at third floor extension having two flats within it.
so here's the site in question so again quite a sensitive environment, the the site is to was built in the early 20th century, sparking a van some infilling of some of the of the areas along the High Street.
There is quite a few of these 19 sort of early 20th century comma 19 20s blocks very much of its period, red, brick, copper floors and then a shop front to the lower floors with quite a prominent parapet towards the front elevation.
This just gives you a bit more of a context on the side elevation because of the set down positioning of of the Quaker Meeting House next door to it, the side elevation is actually quite prominent, as you walk coming down towards High Street and there is actually a ghost sign on that side elevation and the Bill the building amendment has a flat roof which then goes towards the rear with a large hall attached to the rear.
there you see there, there's the context of the site, so you have the Quaker Meeting House directly adjacent to the building.
And that is a grade II listed, along with its immediate setting to the rear, which is which is the burial ground, and then you have to see the Town Hall to the north further along House South Tenants College, your two buildings directly next to the other side of the building and then you have the spreadeagled public house which is a listed building that then goes towards the kind of central part of Wandsworth town.
So again, Mr chose to the context and apologies for the red, the red line is actually positioned on the Quaker Meeting House, not the site itself is supposed to be just to the next to it.
but discuss gives you an illustration of the extent of heritage designation, so it's within Wandsworth Town conservation area, which was recently appraised as part of the programme, so it's one of the the the first to rear be re-appraised because of the conservation area appraisal was particularly lacking in detail and as part of that assessment officers identified buildings that make a positive contribution or a negative contribution and in this particular site.
The building in question was considered to make a positive contribution by virtue of it in its continuous frontage forming that kind of continuous sense of enclosure on this southern side of the of Wandsworth High Street, there is a degree of historic interest in terms of it forming part of the small infill 19 20s infill plots,
but very sensitive in terms of sandwich, pretty much between a large number of of listed buildings, bearing in mind that see the sort of hatched area that South Tenants College is going in towards the rear of the site, which has been quite heavily redeveloped, which includes classes the the tower and one and blocks that are associated with the tower towards the south which should have now built out the library will be going it is is going to go into it and then you have the the block next to Quaker Meeting House which then comes down onto the High Street itself as in a staggered arrangement.
So this is this giving you an existing context view in terms of the immediate surroundings, its 5 bay building, three storeys, ground-floor shop with two upper floors, and you have the Quaker Meeting House directly to it and then the buildings, the other side, which have a semblance of architectural similarities to the spread Eagle to it albeit not part of the spread equal itself.
Now the proposals are, as I stated, to the conversing the upper floors to a residential accommodation, a total of 8 flats, so three on the first floor 3 on the second floor and two that will be contained in a new extension on top of the flat roof extensions effectively what that will be there will be a set back on the front elevation behind that parapet as you see here, the windows will maintain the the the rhythm of the base below, but it will be a full storey above.
And here you see the existing rear elevation and there will be effectively a full story on top, which towards the rear and the side will effectively come up as a or almost as a Shia story.
not set back to, as you see on the front elevation behind the parapet, so here's that side elevation, which has got the the goes sign.
and that shows you here that that floor is effectively.
Quite a kind of box-like structure on top, obviously you know it's not full height, but it is is taking the whole of that.
Top floor flat roof.
That is not set in towards the back or the side, but only set in from the parent pitch at the front. Now forgive me. There is very limited information within this application. This is the only 3D sketch view that has been provided as public each application and I appreciate it is a little bit deceiving when I first saw it, because, obviously, which had put proposed and showing in kind of a limey green yellow colour is what's proposed, but just to be clear that there's no extensions proposed to the lower floors if it is actually just a floor to be added on top
But I think it's just the colouring of the building, the the the buildings was, the back, makes it look like they're gonna add extension onto that, but that's not the case, but it is proposed effectively as a full story on top of the building which is situated within quite a prominent part of the conservation area.
so I will leave it with this particular sketch as it gives a bit for context, but it would be helpful to one says C.
The Committee members' views on this proposal, there is no been any prayer upon this proposal, by the way, is come in as the application with no.
a consultation with officers,
thank you
no, thank you first, as as usual order, any factual questions people have about this application, Mr Farrell.
have you?
do you think that the windows on the existing first and second floor are original contemporary with the construction of the building?
that's why I haven't looked into that in in as much detail, because this hasn't come in very long, so I I can't answer that without having to go and see the site which is hopefully taking place tomorrow, so apologies for that.
Window replacement, no, thank you, thank you.
I, I've had a look and it seems to me they could easily be contemporary with the building.
Which is a shame, because I don't like them very much.
But but if they are a result of their original, so thank you for that clarification of that aim.
If any other factual questions before I asked for comments.
OK, let me move to comments on this proposal.
Anyone.
Margaret Farrow, it's in our area, and I suppose we should have a view on it.
First sight, I thought.
as I said, I thought the windows were slightly weird it's buildings, I was not overly aware of it is on the high street, obviously, but.
It is sort of a relatively unknown or anonymous building.
and I was initially reluctant to accept.
an additional storey in as much as it would have an adverse effect on the
on the Quaker Meeting House and its burial ground, but
The adverse effect that this building already has on the burial ground in the Quaker Meeting House and the adverse effect that God knows how many storage is the tower behind the the building has I I think this is this is going to make a a fairly nominal adverse effect and
I, I don't think that we would.
Lodge an objection to it, I can't think of anything more to say, I'm afraid.
OK thank, thank you other comments.
Mr Minister.
This might be by way, more of a question for forgive me I I have, I understood correctly that the side elevation the
The the extension is is going to be slated, so it is not going to be a wall built up so that it's to make it symmetrical or 0 I'm slightly confused by.
But what I am looking at on the right, there's obviously there's a there's a.
There's a wall with the next property, but on the left, because it's the it's a higher building than the meeting house next door.
the bidders have looks orange from here, I can't see what that actually is is that there's an unable to clarify that.
The drawing so that I can actually look at what the text is showing the side elevation, because I appreciate that it's difficult to read some of the text in the presentation.
so I'm just going to bring it up, just to be very clear.
So you're looking at,
A zinc site elevation to the side elevation will be of a standing, seam, zinc, cladding, so in other words, it's really not symmetrical, is outside all the room, sorry, that's the way it would have on the side have you got aside so they may just bring up the side.
So this for so I just find that slightly drunk. I don't know it. It just means that the buildings not being cemetery, it's not symmetrical, what's being proposed to when you look at it from the there's the main street, you're going to have on the left-hand side as sort of slight height this very sharply pitched, but nevertheless, as slate or zinc covered construction on the left, whereas on the right it'll go but up right up against the the the party wall, with the next building or on the funny-looking from the front, so I mean I'm just thinking in my mind that if you're approaching the building we would, it doesn't look as though it would have ever been intended to have been built like the hat
as I just a cow, I suppose it's comment I I find it a little bit uncomfortable.
yeah, in my view, it ought to be carried up as a party wall.
yeah, it's totally wrong to just have a lightweight structure on the boundary like that.
Yeah
can I please just second that one that should be raised as a wall in the same material as the wall underneath and ideally the front and rear slope should be a mansard.
Mr Potter, you were hovering, so I was just bearing in mind the comments about those windows you could introduce some dumb you wind.
Shoe.
Be removed.
but a few times.
There needs to be done.
could I just ask whether Mr Potter is asking for these dummy windows to be on the elevation facing the Quaker Meeting House?
Ed
the dummy windows on the elevation facing the Quaker Meeting House.
Is that what you were considering?
Sorry Chonburi, yes, I'm sorry yes, no.
Rationalise that deprivation needs to be gone.
And
so I think there was.
Well, I, I think that possibly would be asking a great deal of the applicant.
it's a tricky one about the party wall, I hesitate to disagree with Andrew, but I think we're the edition to be.
A mansard.
On all three sides, no not happy with that.
it was suggested.
Yeah yeah, they quicker.
it should be raised in brick, but the two front and rear extensions should be a mansard so that it looks like a building with a pitched and solid roof, but its party wall, which is a very common form, but you will find all over any part of the borough you care to look at.
Yankee and the party wall would not normally have windows at.
but it does have windows, it does it, but it is a party wall, strictly speaking, as long as those two little windows are each under one square metre, they can just squeeze them through the Building Regulations, but actually there's another, there's a technical consideration to bear in mind here if they're gonna put windows through that side this is a boundary situation.
Can you turn your microphone off and I'm reluctant to have to engage in a an extended discussion about?
The the party wall, I have to say, I do agree about the mansard personally.
But Mr Dodson.
It was just ready to say that I suppose the other alternative would be all four elevations were mansard like, but then that would presumably create a gully which would be very difficult to handle.
I think what we're saying is that we, we have no rooted objection to this proposal, but we would urge the applicant to consider.
Making the front and the rear of the of the of the a roof extension or the box on the roof, as as mansard.
and to to have the the party wall as a party wall.
Is that is that what we put?
They'll all be sorted out in the party wall award that year.
goodbye goodbye.
OK is that.
LEP
I, I'm Re, as I say I'm reluctant on on this one to go into great detail, but I think that there is an issue about the handling of the side elevation.
Okay, you put that very well, we considered the side elevation to be unresolved.
Properly resolved, shall we say.
Is that clear enough for you in a minute taking?
OK, let us move on to the final app application, which was added as a supplementary.
Item
They says application 2024 0 1 8 3.
Mountain, Clare, campus and wow, sorry, there's a much longer.
Tie title, but let's just call it Mount Clare campus for for short miss way.
Thank you Chair so.
Yes, Item 6, a late item back into Roehampton so.
a little bit of context just in relation to this particular part of of Oulton estate.
So I take you through to some some site photograph so Mount Claire a Grade 1 listed building
Part of the ensemble of 18th century residences that resided and in this part of Roehampton which you see here in the bottom corner, at the top it's situated within the autumn, west registered park and garden, so it's
It was originally a locally locally listed landscape and in 2020 when the HRA landscape was officially nationally registered.
It kind of supersedes the local listing.
The site sits very wards, the southern part of the site, right close to the boundary with with Richmond Borough, you also have the Oulton conservation area and within the site you have these blocks, char all kind of flat roof, two storey blocks which you see here that sit so sit around the 18th century building which were added after the original.
master plan at LCC master plan, so original last a plan kept the landscape surrounding that Clare is as open and then these were added later on in in existence by the 19 70s, when you look in the maps and were was essentially student accommodation and have remained as such since.
So again, just to show you the context of where it is in relation to the landscapes, her right towards the southern side of the southern part of of the Oulton West site.
you have there been state gardens, bungalows as well.
third is showing again that site context, in addition to Mount Clare, we also have the temple which is Grade II star listed, which is sited just in the corner of the sites, are where it wraps around towards.
the eastern part of the site, currently in an overgrown part of the site and surrounded by quite high metal rounding railings to stop any car vandalism of the site. This was located in this area in the early 20th century in originally put form part of Park State House, which is the wetlands cottage, which has many, has taken many names over the years and was then relocated into the location. It is now, and originally right in front of it was was a small pond, so it kind of overlooked that pond now in a rather overgrown area with a very derelict lodge
Right next to it.
so this is the existing site plan, as you see, you have the the temporary in that very eastern corner of the site and we clock what we consider to be Picasso House, which is the largest of the buildings, right next door, to Mount Claire soon as large one of the largest buildings still to toy but can are set for word of mouth Claire and then you have these smaller.
Cuboid blocks into Lincoln Con Cubo Dick blocks that kind of wrap around the sort of topography of the site down towards the boundary with Richmond Park now.
just to note that there isn't any physical changes proposed to the exterior of these buildings, this is just a change of use of application for a temporary period of 5 years and it is for the use of temporary accommodation, so you see here this is an existing typical student accommodation arrangement, as you see in some of those blocks the two storey cuboid blocks here.
and that's the proposal, so a very minimal change to allow for the temporary change of use to what we'd be classed as sui generis use for temporary accommodation, external changes will not take place, which is why we only have very minimal information in terms of actual drawings, most of them are existing plans,
existing pack, pica Picasso house, just for illustrative purposes.
again, no changes proposed just utilising the existing accommodation for that temporary use, a lot of these have already got existing bathrooms and, importantly, the existing now Clare House, which is currently used for administration and offices for the university which is currently leasing the site that will not change there will be no physical works to the building and it will remain in its existing uses as office administration for this to
For the administration of of the temporary use, so there's no physical changes to the new site, but it is obviously a change of use of of the the land and the buildings that surround the grade 1 listed building, and there's no proposals as part of this temporary application for the temple but as part of the ownership that will allow the red line plan that does include the temple their proposals have come forward for a prospective purchaser, so the current site is owned by the Methodist Church and leased by the University and the PR, obviously these proposals come forward as the potential new owner of the site.
As is shown in the application form.
so
I welcome the Member's views on this on this temporary application.
Thank you, thank you.
I there is a long and complicated history to the to this site and
certainly the temple has recently been the subject of.
a discussion in in this committee.
Which are approved recently the
The retention of the
fencing around round the temple as a a protection against gangster vandalism.
The the history is somewhat of a sorry history, leaving the the buildings in a rather sad state, I think we could all agree, but before.
Going on to our comments about this application, are there any factual questions that people want to raise?
Mr Dodson, I just say, is the actual house itself, it's currently being used as offices.
or is it empty?
the last time that I visited the site in.
November 2023, it was the it wasn't being occupied.
Right now, Surrey University, so we've got a listed at an empty listed building at the moment, and what is proposed would mean that it would be at least being occupied and kept an eye on is that correct, yes, thank you.
Any other factual questions.
O
In that case, I will go to Mr Catto, first of all Canadian panel, I think I did ask him, thank you very much Chairman, for getting this on the agenda at short notice when it came through.
I thought that it was very important that this Panel have a chance to to talk about this particular application we are looking as I, the more I look at the documentation and there was really only one.
The drawings don't show very much, they don't eat, they barely met, they don't mention the temple at all, they don't mention the lodge at all, except as a ruin, which is what it is.
they don't they really don't it's quite clear to be frankly that the octopus the applicants, don't actually want Mount, Claire they've got no idea what to do with it, what they want is the fairly nasty to put it poignantly out of place, to put it bluntly, student accommodation that is now on the site in order to make quite a lot of money over the next five years by renting it to the council's housing department for temporary housing
so the funding for all of this is coming from this Town Hall, I think this needs to be borne in mind, that is the proposal.
The
Point, I think that is important, is that the more I read of the documentation, the less there seems to be any sign, that they are interested or care or really intend to do anything to protect, and we are talking about a grade 1 listed building in Mount Claire there are only five in the borough.
That's how rare these are, we are talking about a second listed building in the temple, which is one of only two south-west 15 buildings on the Buildings at Risk Register.
And the only way the other one's got gone conversation going on at the moment about saving it.
These buildings matter, and if they are handed over to somebody for a five-year temporary use, who's saying that the income may go towards maintenance in the form of heating?
I don't think this, this committee should be endorsing this application.
thank you other other views.
or comments.
I presume the the Lego the Lego arrangement, just a very limited life.
I'm I'm not competent to.
to comment on that.
The 19 80s buildings built probably not at great expense at the time they are built to the standards of their time which by today's standards makes them nearly uninhabitable. The proposal, because it is a five-year temporary use suggests that they will do the absolute minimum to these buildings, including no external changes which means that the people to be housed there will be living in something with 19 80s, standards of energy efficiency and I would suggest very soon in something rather mouldy was very low standards of energy efficiency.
Mr I, I'm I'm struggling to understand how the change of use would would or would not impact on the security of the of the of the relevant listed buildings, I can't is it better that it's there left empty or is it better that there are
at heart people in need of housing there, I I don't know I can't quite decided, are they going to have to be special measures to protect the building, because in some way or not has that?
you're right, there are no proposals, apart from using Mount Claire, a four storey, multi roomed mentioned, sorry Villa to be accurate.
as basically the security office, if it if it wasn't there, they'd put up a porta cabin for two house, the security people, who will be necessary, the O'Rourke, the applicants obviously think to.
Look after or prevent anti-social behaviour, but there could be using one room and a toilet, I suspect.
and we all know anybody who is on this committee should know that an empty listed building, look at the stories we've been hearing time after time after time on our updates.
No from first download that an empty listed building is a deteriorating listed building, and we really need one at this site, deserves better protect Grade, One McClair has suffered horribly, it was the owner of Mount Claire who commissioned capability Brown to do the ground, there is absolutely nothing left of what was done by Brown
That you can see in any way immediately around the building. It's a shame. It was built as a country, retreat on a ridge of high ground, with a view over down Sheffield's in one direction, now completely blocked out by trees, and a view over Richmond Park in the other direction, great place to live. You can't see out in either direction anymore, sadly, but I'm not gonna propose taking down the trees, but I do think we ought to be encouraging the council
To reject this as it stands because it does not contain sufficient provision for the protection of two listed buildings.
I think it's clear that I'll come to you.
Mr. Armstrong, in in a moment, I think it's clear that there are strong reservations.
About this, this application and the the risk to the listed buildings.
which are central to the to the site.
the
Sorry, all we are an advisory committee.
it clearly is for the Council, not just the Planning Department, but the housing department I presume.
Who will have to take a final final decisions or about bout this?
But I have to say I share the reservations that have been expressed about the the risks to the to the listed buildings.
What can practicably be done to
to ameliorate those those risks
which which will exist whatever the the view that is taken about this application 0 and it is the emptiness that that essentially constitutes the that the risk those practicalities of course as something that no we can't but we're not in a position to where it Advisory Committee we we cannot take decisions about that I think all that we can do
is to express concerns about those those risks so that they are taken very seriously by the Planning Committee and the Housing Committee in when they take final decisions Councillor Cooper thank you I just think we need to be careful that we don't overstep the parameters that the Committee sits within and whilst I hear what you say about the Housing Committee I think it's more likely to be the housing department
and the decisions that they make about the quality of temporary accommodation that they may or may not wish to procure is not really something I think that we can cover here although we may all have we may have no view or we may have very strong views on it but it's not really within the parameters of the Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee because it's not actually a conservation issue it's a quality of temporary accommodation issue which is definitely not of thing you know that doesn't really speak to a detriment to the
I mean you could argue that there's too much temporary accommodation in on the alternate state but it will be quite hard to argue that the relationship between that and the the various different aspects of heritage there actually is in my opinion thank you I very much take that that point which is why I was emphasising that our concern is the risk that already exists to the to the two listed buildings I don't think we have a view we cannot have a view I absolutely accept that about the the the quality of the housing that will be presented that is not
we haven't spoken already about the remit of this committee that is outside our remit I'm quite clear about that
but do you have enough that we have concerns about the risks to the listed buildings
under this application
recognising that those risks already exist
so we're not saying that you know this is that that the risk we're talking about are you need to this application but this application doesn't do anything to ameliorate them I think is
to the point that we are trying to make I'm less anyone unless I've got that wrong
OK thank you
let us move on to paper 24 1 1 3 8 page 11 in your packs which is a report on applications
which came before this Committee and have now been determined after discussion at PAC they both relate to the Frances Barber pupil referral Unit on on Francis can Road we Hopkins had real concerns about those those applications but in the end the the decisions that PAC made were to approve those applications to accept them
Councillor Cooper again thank you I think it's actually slightly misleading the way that this paper's laid out because it does sound as though the Planning applications Committee approved the submission that was considered here that was the vote that, in the majority of the Committee did not support the proposals, actually it's come twice to the Planning applications Committee and the first time the planning applications committee didn't support the proposals either it then came back again.
and the planning applications committee. Then the second time around, with the drawings having been amended and improved in the opinion of the Committee to such an extent that some of the problems and issues that the Planning applications Committee had had felt related to the first version of the application and that included setting back some of the height of the top level so that it was further away from the properties in Jury Street, including some more detailing, so it wasn't quite so much. You know a square box with blank walls being very weird to hear about it, but anyway you know there were there were low, there were quite a number of changes and therefore, members of the Committee who had been on are as unhappy as this committee had been and with the first version which this committee had seen felt abled with, there is a revised application to support it so
I am not quite sure that that's included in full in the way that this has been drafted, so I just thought it was worth mentioning that thank thank you for that, I I, I should have mentioned that I was aware.
That there have been somewhat tortured and discussions.
Impair PAC on two occasions of or about this, I make no comment and I don't think it's our job to make comment are on on that, but I know that there was a good deal of discussion, let us put it that way,
on on PAC, or about these applications, Councillor Belton.
Since you presided can argue a much cruder summary, I think you know, you gave an impression that the committee took no notice of these comments it did yeah, we agreed with you and amended it, so I think instead of you could look at it as a positive from this committee's point of view here I accept that of course,
okay, is there any other business?
the Chair, I just have a quick update to give to two committee members about St Mark's School, because I visited the site last week as part of our remit of reviewing the Heritage at Risk entries every year, and we have to do condition surveys.
I visited the site last week, the site, I think Councillor Belton kindly gave a bit of an update in the last committee as well. It's now fully occupied and majority of the works have been completed. The landscaping works are proposed to take place in the near future. They are waiting on the railings they're being made at the moment, but they have to be a replication of the railings and s in the church, but from the point of view of heritage at risk, we have, as officers, recommend to historic England for its removal of the from the list as it has largely been repaired.
And all of the structural works have been completed, and the now the building is now occupied by the architectural firm, I will update the Committee, hopefully by the next committee, if the Storrington Glenn have agreed to remove it, but they I don't see any reason why they shouldn't remove it now when the works are largely complete, so just a bit of good news story to end the evening because I know that Councillor Belton has been involved in this site from a very long period.
yeah
Not quite as long as the Act.
And I'm I can report that work was going on yesterday, even in the rain, yes, yesterday on the bank, the bank holiday, on the landscaping.
I happened to pass and took note.
OK any other other business.
clearly, to say thanks for that update and I feel very good about it and I was going to go and call in myself, and I should think I mean for I'm sure Barry can probably give me the detail, I should think we're talking.
That certainly in the 90 so we put it in the 80s, when I was not sure long, Jim anyway sorry, but 1990 s to 2000 and was OK.
Mr Catto, sorry, might I take advantage of having this was presence to ask in respect of another buildings, another building at risk?
I understand there may be a pre-application going on, I don't ask you to divulge what's happening, but if you could, about the white line in Putney, and does that look like getting to a planning application at some point.
I can't really say much, but there is a live pre application enquiry in for that vaulting and officers have visited the building as part of the heritage risk and discussion survey I can advise that it doesn't appear to be any worse condition than the previous survey still being occupied by guardians to the building I can't say much more than that I'm afraid intercourse of pre application but there is one in
fully understood why you can't comment, it's just nice to hear that something's happening,
Ms Lawson.
Hello Lauren, I wonder if I could ask about if you're talking about reviewing how it is at risk, is there something that you do all of the buildings that, nonetheless, at this time of year, I'm curious about shooting Beck Lodge?
And actually it was mentioned that Waterfall House might go on to that list if there wasn't a PR, I know there's a planning application to, but it's not been considered yet.
And even though it's right firsthand Lodge as well, actually at the moment, until that, yes, it was agreed.
so my colleague David, I know who attends the Committee quite regularly, he's in charge of the off of Tooting beg, Beck Lodge.
there's still some discussions around that because obviously the main thing is to might try and get some sort of occupation of the site, which is not forthcoming at this stage, so it was reviewed, obviously the the building is in better condition because the repair works have taken place but there's still the
the the tool.
fencing which surround it, which have now lapsed permission, but officers are advised to try to make them take those down until some sort of agreement has come forward for the use of the building.
that includes occupation, obviously because it is protecting the building, but there's no, unfortunately nothing I can add on that particular building Waterfall House, the last update that we had was that they're still working through the revisions to the PA to the planning and listed building consent application that will take account of some of the unauthorised works to the interior of the building and there hasn't been as much progress as we'd like to see so.
again, that's David, so we'll see if we can try and get a little bit more quote progress on on that one, to get, have a look and see what what can come forward in terms of new additions to the to the list, so my understanding is we we do put forward new additions where there is no obvious solution going forward that's one of the key criteria.
With first downloads, Thursday the first two to add it to the list unless we know that there is nothing coming forward, but we do know that the lease is at the point where we really think it is or that I've been assured is is nearly at the point where it will come forward and be signed, and there'd be a credible solution coming forward for that building. So it's quite a. It is quite a lot of work to get things on to the list in terms of historic England's involvement as well, so we only put them on unless we really don't see any proposal coming forward the same before Waterfall House
again, we can we can recommend additions to the list at any point in the year, it's not just this year, so if we do not see any progress and we can make those discussions with historic England, but we want to give them the opportunity to try to rectify some of the structural issues in terms of the cracking and and the unauthorised works.
to see if there can be a solution found for that one, whereas obviously things like the temporal, there's no obvious solution for that site at this stage, and there needs to be something to allow for it to actually come off the list even repairing it doesn't always take it off the list there needs to be some sort of long-term solution for the site like St Marks.
Thank you, thank you, thank you very much.
Is there any other other business?
In which case are all I have to do is to draw the draws the Committee's attention to the list of dates of future meetings and to thank you for your contributions this evening, thank you very much.