Agenda item

Ward

Riverside and Laleham Ward

Proposal

Demolition of existing Clubhouse building and outbuildings to allow for construction of a new ex-servicemen's club house and apartment complex comprising 14 no. apartments with integral car and bicycle parking, refuse storage, landscaping and amenity together with altered vehicular access point from Laleham Road.

Officer recommendation

This planning application is recommended for refusal due to the design and impact on the character of the area.

Description:

The application proposed demolition of the existing Clubhouse building and outbuildings to allow for construction of a new ex-servicemen's club house and apartment complex comprising 14 no. apartments, with integral car and bicycle parking, refuse storage, landscaping and amenity together with altered vehicular access point from Laleham Road.

Additional Information:

The Planning Development Manager advised the Committee of an amendment to paragraph 4.1 on Page 18 of the agenda in which Staines Town Society comments should read:

“Raises an objection on design – the proposal is still much too large for the site.  The building will be too blocky, high and bulky, the flat roof and materials……”

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Grant Benwell spoke against the proposed development raising the following key points:

·         Access/egress concerns

·         Traffic flow impacts

·         Community feel - query whether it will provide something for benefit of residents

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Steve Lawrence spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:

·Opportunity to regenerate an important site in Staines

·Will provide a positive enhancement to street scene

·Will re-provide self-sustaining community facility

·Will offer support for ex servicemen

·Applicants have held two public meetings

·No objections from statutory consultees

·Area has a mixed character, several examples of flat roofs

·Will reflect surrounding character and improve the appearance

·Building massing will be below that of the existing building

·Good quality materials will be used

·Provision of apartments will help with housing supply

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Councillor A.C. Harman spoke as Ward Councillor in favour of the proposed development raising the following key points:

·Building has existed since 1920

·Currently has a membership of 310

·Existing building requires extensive repairs and renovation

·Will enhance riverside location

·Will remove an unattractive building

·Access will be further away from Gresham Road

·Proposed building will be set back with a layby to open up streetscene

·Terraces and balconies will benefit from river views

·Soft landscaping is proposed

·The layout and appearance is appropriate and desirable

·Proposal provides the redevelopment of a brownfield site with a high standard of accommodation

·Help to meet housing needs

·Will provide green roofs and enhance biodiversity

·Will provide disabled parking

·Lift access to all levels

·There are a number of interesting design proposals

·Will provide additional water storage to assist with flooding

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

• Similar to previous application that was recommended for refusal
• Poor design and visually obtrusive
• Little regard to the character of the surroundings
• Fails to make positive impact on streetscene
• Query over whether pre-application discussions with planning officers took place?
• Concern over visual impact associated with air source pumps – no information provided
• Parking concerns
• Will provide an efficient use of land
• Good standard of housing
• Complies with planning policies
• EA concerns over flooding issues have been satisfied
• Will enhance the street scene and river views
• Para 11 of NPPF applies – will assist in housing delivery
• Is in a sustainable location
• Only four objections received
• Promotes sustainability
• Development is set back from the road and stepped in from the sides
• Improved access
• Highly desirable riverside location
• Meets local plan policies
• Is located at a dangerous junction
• It is a shame that the design is so disappointing

The Committee agreed an amendment to the motion to add an additional reason for refusal as follows:

the proposal has failed to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, that the renewable energy provision can be provided which is satisfactory in design terms.

Decision:

The application was refused, as recommended in the Planning Committee report, for the following reasons:

The proposal would, by reason of design, scale, density and location, represent an overdevelopment of the site, and would appear visually obtrusive and out of character with the surrounding street scene. Furthermore, the proposed Laleham Road elevation, would, by reason of its poor quality design, have a negative, adverse impact and fail to make a positive contribution to the surrounding area.  Additionally, the proposal has failed to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, that the renewable energy provision can be provided which is satisfactory in design terms.  The proposal is, therefore, contrary to Policies EN1, HO5 and CC!of the Core Strategy and Policies DPD 2009, the Supplementary Planning Document on the Design of Residential Extensions and New Residential Development 2011 and the NPPF 2019.