Proposal:

Construction of a part-four and part-nine storey building comprising 32 x Class C3 residential dwellings, hard and soft landscaping works, security enhancements, and the re-opening of an existing under croft parking structure.

Recommendation:

Grant planning permission, subject to conditions and subject to a legal agreement

Update report was tabled

On a vote of 4 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:

1.             That, planning permission is GRANTED at  Brunton Wharf Estate,  Salmon Lane, London,  E14 for

Construction of a part-four and part-nine storey building comprising 32 x Class C3 residential dwellings, hard and soft landscaping works, security enhancements, and the re-opening of an existing under croft parking structure.

2.       Subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report

3.       Subject to the planning conditions set out in the Committee report  including an additional condition  requiring details of a Management Plan relating to the fencing and the secure gate to the Food Garden.

Update report was tabled.

Jerry Bell introduced the application for the construction of a part-four and part-nine storey building comprising 32 x Class C3 residential dwellings, hard and soft landscaping works, security enhancements, and the re-opening of an existing under croft parking structure.

This application was considered by the Development Committee on 17th September 2020.  At that meeting, the Committee discussed: the removal of the security gates from the food garden plans; the adequacy of the proposed CCTV and the acceptability of the altered refuse and recycling arrangements.  The Committee also discussed fire access to Caledonia House, with the development in place. The application was deferred by the Committee for a site visit to enable Members to better understand the issues. Further representations had been received and these were set out in the report and update.

Sally Fraser (Planning Services) presented the application addressing the matters raised at the site visits and providing a brief overview of the proposal.

The following issues were discussed:

•       It was recommended that the gate on the parameter of the food garden be reinstated and this be secured by the condition. To ensure this, it was proposed that an additional condition be added requiring details of a Management Plan relating to the fencing and the secure gate to the Food Garden.

•         The condition to ensure the site was secure by design, particularly the measures to ensure that the CCTV is linked to the borough’s network.

•       The proposed recycling and refuse arrangements

•         The fire access issues. The Fire Authority had initially raised no objections. The Fire Authority had subsequently notified the Council that they required  more time to consider the access arrangements. Details of the new arrangements were noted. These had been developed in consultation with the Fire Authority. It was emphasised that details of the arrangements must be agreed and signed off by the Fire Authority before the planning permission was issued.

Committee Questions:

In response to questions, the following issues were discussed

•         The reinstatement of the fob accessed gates to the food garden. It was felt that an exception to the policy could be made in this case to justify this. 

•         The Committee supported this on the basis that the garden was publicly accessible. It was also emphasised that it should be of a good quality in terms of its appearance. Details of its design can be specified in the Management Plan.

•         Members discussed the reinstatement of other gates but were generally opposed to this.

•         Regarding the fire access plans, Officer outlined the information in the update report. It was confirmed the plans had been designed in consultation with the Fire Authority. They also provided further assurances about the condition requiring the Fire Authority’s approval of the plans before the permission could be implemented, and that the plans would be amended as necessary to ensure they met requirements.

On a vote of 4 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:

1.       That, planning permission  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

Proposal:

Construction of a part-four and part-nine storey building comprising 32 x Class C3 residential dwellings, hard and soft landscaping works, security enhancements, and the re-opening of an existing under croft parking structure.

Recommendation:

Grant planning permission, subject to conditions and subject to a legal agreement

Update report was tabled.

Councillor Dipa Das moved and Councillor John Pierce seconded a proposal that the consideration of the application be deferred for a Committee site visit.

On a vote of 3 in favour and 2 against the Committee RESOLVED:

1.             That the application at  Brunton Wharf Estate,  Salmon Lane, London,  E14 be deferred for a Committee site visit.

Update report was tabled.

Jerry Bell introduced the application for the construction of a part-four and part-nine storey building comprising 32 x Class C3 residential dwellings, hard and soft landscaping works, security enhancements, and the re-opening of an existing under croft parking structure.

Sally Fraser (Planning Services) introduced the report, describing the site location and views from the surrounding area. Public consultation had been carried out, resulting in the receipt of 27 objections  including a survey of residents opinion. A summary of the responses was noted.

The following issues were noted:

•         In land use terms, the scheme will deliver 100% affordable housing with 50% of the units to be offered at the London Affordable rent and the remaining 50% at the Tower Hamlets Living rent. 

•         The scheme would deliver a broadly compliant housing tenue mix, with a minor deviation in policy.

•         The housing would be of a high quality.

•         There would be wheelchair accessible units and 3 disabled parking bays.

•         In terms of the design, the 9 storey element would mark the corner of site. It had been through various iterations and the height had been reduced. It was considered that the development would fit well into the area with a strong architectural approach and robust material palette.

•         In terms of the landscaping, the quantum of communal amenity space exceeded policy requirements. The proposed site wide landscaping works would enhance and expand upon the existing provision, for the benefit of existing and future residents

•         The plans sought to provide a generous level of child space which was policy compliant in relation to new units.

•         The application proposed changes to parking arrangements, including the relocation of parking spaces and revised on site serving arrangements, accessed off Yorkshire Road, which were supported.

•         Details of the site wide security enhancements would be secured by condition. There would be no gates to the community garden.

•         The impacts on neighbouring amenity had been carefully tested. It was considered that there would be no noticeable impacts to properties in terms of daylight, sunlight, overshadowing, outlook or enclosure.

•         The public benefits of the scheme were noted.

Officers were recommending that the application was granted planning permission.

The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.

Ian Campbell, spoke in objection the scheme. He expressed concerns about the following issues:

•         That the drawings were out of date on the Council’s planning portal. They had been changed very recently with the loss of security features, visitor space and changes to the community food garden.

•         Overdevelopment of the area and reduction in amenity space

•         Size and height of the development.

•         Fire access issues

•         Increased noise.

•         The plans should be deferred to allow further consideration to be given to the issues.

Simon Thorpe spoke in support of the application. He provided assurances about the stakeholder consultation. The feedback had informed the design of the proposal.  He emphasised the merits of the scheme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5