Just a quick note to say that I understand that the revised design for the stained glass window at Northbrook School was APPROVED by Planning Committee A at their meeting on Thursday night. Papers available here.

Planning committee B met last Thursday night to consider the application to vary the planning permission awarded in September 2008 for the new Northbrook School building on Taunton Road.  As you’ll remember, the applicants wanted to add louvres around the windows and also change the agreed colour of the render.  This also brought to light the fact that a design had been agreed for the feature stained glass window behind closed doors.

The committee APPROVED the revised render and louvres – the render having being toned down from the initial variation proposals.

Given the huge controversy the Northbrook application has caused locally, I was amazed to read that the Conservative Party propose to take school planning applications even further from public scrutiny and have them decided by the Bristol-based planning inspectorate.  We need more public scrutiny and democratic accountability for this huge school-building programme, not less!

Further to my post earlier this month, latest info on the Northbrook application is:

• The application to vary the render shades and add louvres is going to planning committee B on Thursday 4th February.  Officers have recommended to the committee that the application is approved.  You can read the report here. The meeting is held in public at 7.30pm at the Civic Suite, Catford, so you’re welcome to attend if you wish.
• The application to alter the window to reflect the more appropriate design agreed with the community (see my 12th Jan post) has now been received.  The application and drawings can be viewed online, at the Planning Office at Laurence House, Catford, or at Manor House Library during normal library opening hours.   Deadline for comments is 9th February.  These can be emailed to planning {at} lewisham.gov(.)uk – please quote ref DC/10/73303, and feel free to copy me  in.

Before Christmas, I wrote here and here about the controversy over the changes to the Northbrook School front window, which had been approved behind closed doors by Lewisham Council without any consultation with residents or their local councillors.

I’m pleased to say that following a meeting with residents and the Lee Manor Society held just before the Christmas break, the designers have come back with a revised window which addresses many of the concerns local people had – the image to the right illustrates how this will look (we’re waiting for a better visual from the designers).

The change to the window will have to go through the planning process in due course, and I was told at the meeting that residents will be consulted on the window this time. 

In the meantime, the planning department are consulting on some alterations to the render colour/louvres application.  This has now been changed again to tone down the yellows, oranges and reds.  You can see examples here.  Residents have until Friday to get their comments to planning {at} lewisham.gov(.)uk (quote DC/09/72596, and please feel free to copy me in).

For reference, the main page for the render/louvres application is here.   Incidently, the notes of the public meeting I chaired on 24th November are now online here.

The frustrating thing is that we could have got here a lot more quickly if the Council had chosen to consult locally in the first place…

The way the design for the stained glass window for the new Northbrook School building has been approved by the Council ‘behind closed doors’ has caused a lot of controversy and ill-feeling locally.  As I wrote last week, I believe there’s a need for a written policy so that residents can understand how such decisions are made (even if they don’t agree with the decision itself!) and so that it’s clear when ‘details’ become big deals and need to be consulted on.

I promised to raise this at Council and did so last Wednesday.   My question, and the Deputy Mayor’s disappointing response is below:

LONDON BOROUGH OF LEWISHAM

COUNCIL MEETING

25 NOVEMBER 2009

Question by Councillor Robson of the Deputy Mayor

Question

A recent decision made by planning officers to agree a ‘detail’ of a planning permission without further consulting residents has caused some controversy in Lee Green Ward. Having asked officers for a copy of the procedure followed in this case, I was surprised to be told that there is no written procedure for officers to follow in deciding whether such details conform to the original permission. Can Members be assured that a written policy is put in place to ensure that residents can understand the processes followed in such cases?

Reply

The question is referring to what is known as “Approval of Details” applications. These are submitted by applicants in order to discharge their obligations by way of conditions imposed on planning permissions. Such requirements normally arise in instances where fuller illustrative details or technical specifications are needed. In granting the original planning permission the principle of the development has already been confirmed, but the submission and approval of appropriate details serves to ensure that the development will be implemented to a satisfactory standard.

It is not normal practice amongst local planning authorities to notify or consult third parties on Approval of Detail applications for the simple reason that the formal consultation exercise will already have been undertaken for the original application. Indeed, Lewisham Council’s Statement of Community Involvement makes no reference to such applications.

The decision to impose particular conditions on a planning permission may sometimes be as a consequence of the stated concerns of local occupiers, and it is also important that these applications – which amount to approximately 12% of the yearly total – are dealt with as expeditiously as possible, so as not to hinder or delay developments of acceptable form. Accordingly, officers, who enjoy delegated authority by way of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation, are entrusted to use discretionary judgement to this end. There have been occasions when the committee determining the application may consider that the details of a particular issue are of such significance that they need to be referred back to them for decision. If the committee do not take this approach it is normal practice for officers to discharge the conditions under their delegated powers.

In the interests of consistency the original case officer will invariably deal with the process of discharging the terms and conditions of a planning permission. The formal approval process also requires the agreement and signature of a senior officer. With such safeguards in place I do not believe that producing a policy or guidance note as to how such submissions should be best dealt with would serve any useful purpose.

 In my supplementary question, I pressed the Deputy Mayor further, pointing out that residents have a right to understand what’s going on, and that the council also owes it to planning officers to have a policy in place that they can refer to rather than leaving them defending decisions without the benefit of a written policy to guide them.  The Deputy Mayor reiterated her belief that producing a policy or guidance note isn’t a good use of officer time. 

My own view, for what it’s worth, is that officer time spent serving residents is time well spent, and the Northbrook case shows that residents aren’t being best served by the current lack of policy.

Lee Green residents will no doubt remember that last year, the planning application for the new Northbrook School building on the corner of Wantage and Taunton Roads caused some controversy.  The plans were eventually approved by the Council’s strategic planning committee back in October last year.

Ther planning department have now received an application to vary the planning permission that was granted.  The applicant team want to alter the windows to integrate some louvres and also to change the colour of the render used around the windows.  The original plans included render in various shades of green and yellow.  As you can see from the pictures, the new plans replace the green and yellow with shades of yellow, orange and red.

However, what’s caused a lot of concern locally are the changes to the stained glass windows to the front of the school.  As I understand it, the render’s being changed to fit with the new-look stained glass, which features a large cross in the same shades.

The changes to the window design have already been granted permission by council planning officers under delegated powers (that is, behind closed doors, without consulting the local residents or councillors).  Apparently the original permission included a provision for this ‘detail’ to be agreed by officers.   The changes to the colour of the render, and the integration of  the louvres can’t be agreed in this way, and need public consultation.

It seems absurd that the window is considered a detail, but the render needs consulting on.  It’s true that it’s common practice for details to be agreed by officers without going through the whole planning process - but the changes to the window are much larger than the usual ‘detail’ changes (which tend to be detailed matters like submitting a sample of the bricks to be used). 

I’ve asked officers to give me a copy of the council policy or procedure they follow when deciding whether a change is a ‘detail’ or not. I’m told there isn’t a written policy and that it’s normal practice to agree details without consulting on them.  It seems to me that even if residents don’t agree with the decision made, they should be entitled to understand how such decisions are made.  When does a ‘detail’ cease to be a detail and become a big deal?

The fairest way to deal with this would be to fully consult on the windows and the render as a package, so that residents can have their say – for or against.  I was against the original plans as I believe they were too intrusive, and I think the new plans are even more intrusive – though it’s difficult to separate the render from the window.  The right shades of render might actually be an improvement on the lime green we had before.

A public meeting has been arranged for Tuesday 24th November and will be held at the present Northbrook site on Leahurst Road (the old Ennersdale site) from 7.30pm.  I’ll be chairing the meeting.  Though the windows aren’t part of the application, I can’t see how we can avoid dicussing them, and I can only hope the applicant team will  take the discussion into account when deciding whether or not to proceed with their plans.

In the meantime, I’ve tabled a question to the Deputy Mayor (who’s in charge of planning) at the next Full Council, outlining my surprise that there’s no written policy in place to deal with the ‘details’ of applications, and asking her to ensure that such a written policy is put in place so that residents can understand the processes followed in such cases.