Agenda item
Former Goodmans Fields, 74 Alie Street and Land North of Hooper Street and East of 99 Leman Street, Hooper Street, London E1(PA/11/03587)
- Meeting of Strategic Development Committee, Thursday, 15th March, 2012 7.00 p.m. (Item 5.1)
- View the background to item 5.1
Decision:
Update report tabled.
In considering the application, the Committee required that the following point be formally noted and recorded in the minutes:
- The Strategic Development Committee are to be kept informed of the progress in implementing the S106 agreement at the appropriate stages of the development.
On a vote of 4 for and 1 against, the Committee RESOLVED
(1) That planning permission be GRANTED for the hybrid planning application at Former Goodmans Fields, 74 Alie Street and Land North of Hooper Street and east of 99 Leman Street, Hooper Street, London, E1 for residential-led redevelopment of the site comprising:
(a) Outline Application - All matters reserved (except for access)
§ Development of North East (NE) and South East (SE) quadrants of the site to provide:
§ Podium blocks of between 7 - 10 storeys (max 46.075m AOD) with two towers on each podium block of between 19-23 storeys (max 85.425m AOD) and dwellings fronting Gower's Walk;
§ Up to 700 residential units (Use Class C3);
§ Up to 6,709 square metres (GIA) of flexible commercial and leisure floor space (Use Classes A1 - A5, B1a, D1 and D2) at ground floor level including a health centre (up to 1,581 square metres GIA);
§ Associated vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access;
§ At least 9,380 square metres of Public Open Space; and
§ Related infrastructure and engineering works.
(b) Full details
§ Development of the North West (NW) quadrant of the site to provide:
§ Podium block between 6-10 storeys (max 46.075 AOD) and two towers up to 19 Storeys (max 76.17m AOD) and 21 storeys (max 85.4m AOD);
§ 250 bedroom hotel (Use Class C1) including a restaurant (Use Class C3) at ground to sixth floor level;
§ 164 residential units (Use Class C3);
§ 841 square metre (GIA) ancillary gym and swimming pool at ground and first floor level for residents use;
§ 1,713 square metre (GIA) flexible commercial / leisure floorspace (Use Class A1 - A5, B1a and D2) at ground floor level;
§ 17, 778 square metre (GIA) basement level across the site to provide 253 car parking spaces, 35 motor cycle spaces, 50 electric car charge points, 1358 cycle parking spaces and ancillary facilities for storage, management facilities and plant;
§ Public Open Space to form part of the wider outline public open space strategy; and
§ Associated access, landscaping, surface car parking and cycle parking and related infrastructure and engineering works.
(2) That such planning permission be subject to any direction by the Mayor of London; the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure planning obligations and to the planning conditions and informatives as set out in the circulated report and amended by the update report Tabled at the meeting.
(3) That the Corporate Director Development and Renewal be delegated power to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above.
(4) That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to impose planning conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters listed in the circulated report.
(5) That, if within three months of the date of this Committee the legal agreement indicated in resolution (2) above has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to refuse planning permission.
(6) That in the event of any responses being received relating to the outstanding Environmental Statement Consultation prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director Development and Renewal be delegated authority to assess if any such response raises issues which substantively exceed the nature of the Committee’s decision, subject to this not being the case the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated authority to issue the decision.
Minutes:
At the request of the Chair, Mr Pete Smith, Development Control Manager, presented the circulated report and tabled update and referred to the reasons given by Members at the last meeting as to being minded to refuse the application, along with implications of a refusal. Mr Smith indicated that, since the last meeting, the applicant now proposed a mix of 48% social rent, 26% affordable rent (pod levels) and 26% intermediate. This meant more family units at a social rent, leading to a significant change of family sized, socially rented units in that part of the Borough.
Ms Mary O’Shaughnessy, Planning Officer, added that child playspace had now been increased from 1322 sq.m to 2900 sq.m which met the policy requirement. This had been achieved by reducing the amount of communal amenity space, which still accorded with policy requirement. Ms O’Shaughnessy continued that the developer had now provided further information on proposed biodiversity enhancements across the site which were much more consolidated and were considered acceptable.
Mr Smith indicated that a further offer had been made to commit to providing 80 apprenticeships during the construction programme and to encourage engagement with the local community. He referred to a letter appended to the update report received from Whitbread Plc in which agreement was given to enter into a social compact to ensure that local residents had the best possible opportunity to enter into hotel work and related training.
Members then put questions to Officers with regard to:
- Changes in the applicant’s offer regarding housing provision.
- Formal conditions to ensure the employment provisions and training centre.
- Further implications of a decision to refuse the application and the likelihood of appeal.
Officers’ responses included information that:
· The viability of the scheme had been robustly examined and the applicant had offered additional levels of housing provision that now affected the viability or profitability of the scheme.
· Employment provisions and the training centre were being factored into the scheme through the S106 agreement. The developer would build and fit out the training centre, which would be leased to the Council at a peppercorn rent on a 15 year basis. The facility would be run by a Trust established jointly by the Council and developer and linked to the hotel.
· It was now considered that the offers made since the last meeting meant that the previous reasons for possible refusal would not be sustainable on appeal. Should the applicant go to appeal, any S106 arrangements would be determined by the Planning Inspector and, after 1st April 2012, the development would become subject to the Community Infrastructure Levy, which would impact both on the viability of the scheme and the amount of S106 benefits to the Council.
In considering the application, the Committee instructed that the following point be formally noted and recorded in the minutes:
- The Strategic Development Committee are to be kept informed of the progress in implementing the S106 agreement at the appropriate stages of the development.
On a vote of 4 for and 1 against, the Committee RESOLVED
(1) That planning permission be GRANTED for the hybrid planning application at Former Goodmans Fields, 74 Alie Street and Land North of Hooper Street and east of 99 Leman Street, Hooper Street, London, E1 for residential-led redevelopment of the site comprising:
(a) Outline Application - All matters reserved (except for access)
§ Development of North East (NE) and South East (SE) quadrants of the site to provide:
§ Podium blocks of between 7 - 10 storeys (max 46.075m AOD) with two towers on each podium block of between 19-23 storeys (max 85.425m AOD) and dwellings fronting Gower's Walk;
§ Up to 700 residential units (Use Class C3);
§ Up to 6,709 square metres (GIA) of flexible commercial and leisure floor space (Use Classes A1 - A5, B1a, D1 and D2) at ground floor level including a health centre (up to 1,581 square metres GIA);
§ Associated vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access;
§ At least 9,380 square metres of Public Open Space; and
§ Related infrastructure and engineering works.
(b) Full details
§ Development of the North West (NW) quadrant of the site to provide:
§ Podium block between 6-10 storeys (max 46.075 AOD) and two towers up to 19 Storeys (max 76.17m AOD) and 21 storeys (max 85.4m AOD);
§ 250 bedroom hotel (Use Class C1) including a restaurant (Use Class C3) at ground to sixth floor level;
§ 164 residential units (Use Class C3);
§ 841 square metre (GIA) ancillary gym and swimming pool at ground and first floor level for residents use;
§ 1,713 square metre (GIA) flexible commercial / leisure floorspace (Use Class A1 - A5, B1a and D2) at ground floor level;
§ 17, 778 square metre (GIA) basement level across the site to provide 253 car parking spaces, 35 motor cycle spaces, 50 electric car charge points, 1358 cycle parking spaces and ancillary facilities for storage, management facilities and plant;
§ Public Open Space to form part of the wider outline public open space strategy; and
§ Associated access, landscaping, surface car parking and cycle parking and related infrastructure and engineering works.
(2) That such planning permission be subject to any direction by the Mayor of London; the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure planning obligations and to the planning conditions and informatives as set out in the circulated report and amended by the update report Tabled at the meeting.
(3) That the Corporate Director Development and Renewal be delegated power to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above.
(4) That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to impose planning conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters listed in the circulated report.
(5) That, if within three months of the date of this Committee the legal agreement indicated in resolution (2) above has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to refuse planning permission.
(6) That in the event of any responses being received relating to the outstanding Environmental Statement Consultation prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director Development and Renewal be delegated authority to assess if any such response raises issues which substantively exceed the nature of the Committee’s decision, subject to this not being the case the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated authority to issue the decision.
Supporting documents: