Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, please see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are reminded to declare the nature of the interest and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it’s the Members’ responsibility to declare any interests form and to update their register of interest form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of your interest, you are advised to seek advice prior to the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services

There were no declarations of pecuniary interests.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 23 February 2023.

The minutes of the sub committee meeting held on 23 February 2023 were approved as a correct record of proceedings.

To RESOLVE that:

1)   in the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and

2)   in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

3)    To NOTE the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Strategic Development Committee.

The Committee RESOLVED that:

1.              In the event of changes being made to recommendations by the

Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is

delegated to the Corporate Director Place along the broad lines

indicated at the meeting; and

2.              In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the

Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add

conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for

approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate

Director Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the

Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the

Committee’s decision.

3.            To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings for the Strategic Development Committee.

There were none.

Paul Buckenham introduced the application to grant listed building consent, subject to conditions on alterations to the Grade II 'East India Dock Boundary Wall' and Grade II 'Embankment Wall’. The application was initially brought to the sub-committee on 19 October 2022 with associated planning application PA/21/02182, which was refused. At that time no vote was taken regarding the associated Listed Building Consent.

Victoria Coelho provided a presentation to accompany the application and the sub-committee were reminded of the key features of the proposal’s site and surroundings. Further to questions from the Committee, Officers provided more information on:

·       Clarification on why a lift rather than a ramp would improve the  impact on the listed embankment steps. Consideration was given for a ramp; however the surface gradient would hinder access and a lift was deemed  more suitable. Conditions will be included to ensure the lift is appropriate to the existing surroundings.

·       How the  proposed refiguration will  visually improve the sight line directly with the steps.

·       Clarification on whether the proposed repairs will match the existing historical wall. Officers confirmed that conditions will be included on details of materials used for approval prior to any alterations made.

Following the points raised by the Officers, the Committee debated the application and noted:

·       Concerns around brick repairs and a request that a condition scheme of heritage interpretation be submitted and approved.

Upon a unanimous vote, the Officers recommendations as set out in the main report to grant listed building consent was agreed, subject to conditions and informatives set out in the committee report, as well as an additional condition to the scheme of heritage interpretation to be submitted and approved.

It was therefore RESOLVED that the listed building consent be GRANTED at Mulberry Place Town Hall, 5 Clove Crescent, And Lighterman House, 3 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG:

·       Alterations to the Grade II ‘East India Dock Boundary Wall’ and Grade II ‘Embankment Wall, Railings and Steps’ to create three new openings to assist pedestrian movement and connectivity, provision of a new accessible lift adjacent to the existing embankment steps, limited conservation led repair.

Subject to:

1.    The conditions and informatives set out in the officers report; and

2.    Additional condition scheme of heritage interpretation to be submitted and approved.

Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the erection of a part-30, part-20 and part-10 storey building to provide up to 169 residential units, eight workspace units, new bus loop/stand, new youth play area, and public realm works.

Victoria Coelho provided a presentation to accompany the application, which highlighted the key features of the proposal’s site and surroundings, the planning history, land use and quality of the residential units.

Further to the presentation, the Committee asked questions to the Officers regarding the following issues:

·       Clarification on the revised application which proposed three larger units with smaller footprints, as opposed to the initial application of two smaller blocks with larger footprints.

·       The location of affordable housing units in proximity to the DLR station. Officers confirmed that workspace units would be placed along the DLR boundary wall. Details of proposed ventilation systems, landscaping and winter gardens to mitigate the noise and air quality impacts on the affordable housing units were submitted to the Committee.

·       The number of affordable housing provision within the scheme. Officers noted that it complies with the 35% requirement and meets the affordable housing targets.

·       Clarification on fire safety provision for the 30-storey building. Details were provided in the updated report which now includes a second staircase to mitigate fire concerns.

Following the points raised by the Officers, the Committee debated the application and noted:

·       Concerns with the distribution of bedroom sizes.

·       Concerns with the proposed landscaping and requested an additional obligation for a landscape plan and strategy to redress the balance and  overall aesthetic.

The Committee Adjourned for a short while in order to break fast and observe the Magrib prayers, then Reconvened.

On a vote of 7 in favour, 0 against and 1 abstention, the Officers recommendations as set out in the main and amended in the update report to grant planning permission was agreed, subject to conditions and informatives and completion of a s106 planning obligations agreement.

It was therefore RESOLVED that the planning application be GRANTED at Land Under The DLR Bounded By Scouler Street And Aspen Way And Prestage Way, Aspen Way, London:

·       Details of the plan

o   Erection of a part-30, part-20 and part-10 storey building to provide up to 169 residential units, eight workspace units, new bus loop/stand, new youth play area, and public realm works.

Subject to:

1.    Any direction by the Mayor of London

2.    The conditions and informatives set out in the officers main and updated reports; and

3.    A completion of a s106 planning obligations agreement inclusion within the s106 obligation relating to a landscaping strategy and plan.

Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of building up to 46 storeys (151.905 m AOD) comprising up to 795 co-living units in sui generis use together with communal facilities, non-residential floor space (class E use) and public realm improvements including landscaping, access and highways works; together with other associated works in respect of the development.

Kevin Crilly provided a presentation to accompany the application, which highlighted the key features of the proposal’s site and surroundings, the planning history, existing building and consultation process.

Further to the presentation, the Committee asked questions to the Officers regarding the following issues:

·       Clarification on the affordable housing contribution payment proposal. Details were provided on the instalments and proposed deadlines.

·       Further details on comparable rent levels for co-living and studio schemes. Details were provided on the principles of co-living, classified as sui-generis use, which closely resemble HMO’s and acknowledged in the London Plan.

·       Clarification on affordable housing provision. Details were provided on the applicant’s local rental market assessment and the London plan policy H16, which approves of this type of housing scheme.

·       An explanation on wind assessments undertaken in relation to the height of the proposed scheme. Details were provided on the EIA (Environmental Impact assessments) which met the criteria and landscaping conditions which will mitigate any adverse effects.

·       Clarification on Thames Waters conditions and drainage provision. Details were provided regarding the network upgrades, infrastructure and development phasing conditions imposed. Committee members were also provided with details of the flood risk and drainage stipulations within the London plan policies from D.ES4 to D.ES6.

·       An explanation on why only 230 consultation letters were sent out to neighbouring properties. Officers confirmed that the consultation deadline boundary was extended to ensure more properties were notified. No responses were received.

Following the points raised by the Officers, the Committee debated the application and noted:

·       Concerns with the lack of registered speakers in attendance.

·       Concerns with the lack of 3d images to accompany the report.

On a vote of 4 in favour, 4 against, with 1 abstention. The Chair took the casting vote in favour which amended the vote to 5 in favour and 4 against. The Officers recommendation, as set out in the main report and amended in the update report to grant planning permission was agreed, subject to conditions and informatives set out in the committee report and completion of a s106 planning obligations agreement.

It was therefore RESOLVED that the planning application be GRANTED at 56 - 58 Marsh Wall, London E14 9TP:

Subject to:

1.    Any direction by the Mayor of London

2.    The conditions and informatives set out in the officers made and update reports; and

3.    A completion of a s106 planning obligations agreement.

·       Details of the plan

o   Demolition of existing buildings and construction of building up to 46 storeys (151.905 m AOD) comprising up to 795 co-living units in sui generis use together with communal facilities, non-residential floor space (class E use) and public realm  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.3

Update report for PA/22/00455 Land Under The DLR Bounded by Scouler Street and Aspen Way and Prestage Way, Aspen Way noted.

Update report for PA/00591 56-58 Marsh Wall, London E14 9TP noted.