Planning applications in Upper Kirkdale

[marymck]

*** EDITED DUE TO TYPO IN PLANNING APPLICATION NUMBER ***

Just a few planning notices to bring to the attention of STF members, all part of Wooster & Stock's plans for upper Kirkdale.

1. 109-111 Kirkdale (DC/12/79479/X)

This one's just "gone live" today - with a closing date for comments of 23 May 2012. Similar to earlier applications for the site.

The demolition of the existing buildings at 109-111 Kirkdale SE26 and the construction of a part 3/part 4 storey plus basement building (fronting Kirkdale) to provide offices and retail units on the ground floor and , incorporating terraces and balconies, together with a three storey plus basement building at the rear (fronting Willow Way) to provide , with a shared courtyard and amenity space, provision of 6 bicycle spaces and internal bin stores.

2. The Woodman - 110 Kirkdale (DC/11/79079 - PINS APP/C5690/E/12/2174886/NWF)

Appeal lodged with Planning Inspectorate against the Council's refusal of planning permission for ...

Demolition of the existing garage and outbuilding at the former Woodman Public House, 110 Kirkdale SE26, together with the construction of a detached, three bedroom dwelling house and the provision of a car parking space to the front.

Comments to be sent directly to:

Ms Vicky Williams
The Planning Inspectorate
3/06a Wing
Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Temple Quay
Bristol BS1 6PN

by 5th June 2012 in TRIPLICATE & quoting ref APP/C5690/E/12/2174886/NWF.

3. The Woodman - 110 Kirkdale (DC/11/78469/X)

Planning application was refused for this (and associated signage under another application number) ...

The change of use of the ground floor of the former Woodman Public House, 110 Kirkdale SE26, to an Estate Agency (Use Class A2) with storage in the basement, together with alterations to the elevations including lower window cills and replacement glazing to the existing ground floor arched windows and replacement entrance door on the Kirkdale elevation with a window to match and refurbishment and repainting of the exterior.

Council gave as reason for refusal ...

The proposed alterations would have a significant and deleterious impact on the appearance of this historic building, which is an important historic asset on a prominent corner in the Halifax Street Conservation Area and would fail to preserve or enhance the Halifax Street Conservation Area as required by government, London Plan and Lewisham policies, contrary to Objective 10: Protect & Enhance Lewisham's Character, Policy 15: High Quality Design for Lewisham & Policy 16: Conservation Areas, Heritage Assets and the Historic Environment of the Local Development Framework - Core Strategy (June 2011) and saved policies URB 3 Urban Design, URB 16 New Development, Changes of Use and Alterations to Buildings in Conservation Areas of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (2004), and Policy 7.4 Local Character, Policy 7.6 Architecture and Policy 7.8 Heritage Assets & Archaeology of The London Plan (July 2011).

Work appears to be progressing nevertheless. The lower panes of the arched windows (which were judged as very important by the Conservation Officer) appear to have been painted over with signage and external painting has been carried out. (Very difficult to see because the building is still hidden from view by tarpaulins.)

[Dorian]

Do you know the "grounds of Appeal" ?

The refusal looks very weak to me all on one subjective issue.

[marymck]

Do you know the "grounds of Appeal" ?

The refusal looks very weak to me all on one subjective issue.

The Council refused planning permission for application DC/11/79079 (the demolition of the old stables & outbuildings & construction of a detached three bedroom dwelling house - i.e. the decision Wooster & Stock is appealing against) for the following reasons:

1) The proposed dwelling, by reason of its location, size and design would have a detrimental impact on the streetscene generally as well as being an overbearing and unneighbourly form of development and have a negative impact on the former public house at The Woodman, 110 Kirkdale, which is a 'defined heritage asset' and proposed locally-listed building, contrary to saved policies URB 3 Urban Design, URB 6 Extensions and Alterations, URB 16 New Development, Changes of Use and Alterations to Buildings in Conservation Areas, HSG 4 Residential Amenity, HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential Development and HSG 8 Backland In-fill Development of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (2004) and Objective 10: Protect and enhance Lewisham's character and Policies 15: High Quality Design for Lewisham & Policy 16: Conservation Areas, Heritage Assets and the Historic Environment of the Core Strategy (2011).
2) The proposed dwelling would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the adjoining residential properties in Fransfield Grove and Halifax Street and provide a substandard level of accommodation external amenity space for future occupiers of the new dwelling, contrary to Policy 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing of the London Plan (July 2011) and saved policies URB 3 Urban Design, HSG 4 Residential Amenity; HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential Development; HSG 7 Gardens and HSG 8 Backland and In-fill Development of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (2004) and Objective 10: Protect and Enhance Lewisham's Character, Policy 15: High Quality Design for Lewisham & Policy 16: Conservation Areas, Heritage Assets and the Historic Environment of the adopted Core Strategy (2011).

I'm afraid I don't know the grounds for appeal, though I think that it's possible to view these at Laurence House (weekdays only).

[marymck]

Bump due to typo in planning application number in my original post & fast approaching deadline for comments.