Proposal:

Councillor Kahar Chowdhury (Chair)

Update report tabled

On a unanimous vote in favour the Committee RESOLVED:

1.       That, subject to any direction by the Mayor of London, planning permission is GRANTED at Asda –Crossharbour District Centre, 151 East Ferry Road, London, E14 3BT for the following development

•         A hybrid planning application (part detailed, part outline) for the demolition of existing buildings and the comprehensive, mixed-use, re-development of the site, comprising a maximum of 218,991sqm (GEA) of floorspace.

•         Full details are submitted for 526 residential units (Class C3), flexible commercial floorspace, including a new foodstore (17,087sqm GIA - A1-A4/B1/D2), a primary school (D1), community uses (D1), public bus parking and a site wide basement, with associated uses as part of the development including car parking (up to 410 spaces), cycle parking, and an energy centre. Building heights would range between a maximum of 17.4m AOD (3 storeys above ground level) and 60m AOD (15 storeys above ground level). Creation of new vehicular and pedestrian access and public realm works, including all ground floor hard and soft landscaping and other works incidental to the proposals, including a programme of interim works (which include a temporary multi-storey car park with 349 car parking spaces and a temporary access lobby to the retail foodstore).

•         Outline permission (with layout, scale, appearance and landscaping at upper levels being reserved) is sought for up to 111,137sqm GEA above podium level, comprising of between 1217 and 1446 residential units (C3), with associated private and communal podium amenity and landscaping, within four buildings with maximum heights ranging between up to 45.850m (AOD)/12 storeys and up to 115.50m (AOD)/32 storeys.

•         [The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement]

2.       Subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations in the Committee report dated 9th June 2021, the additional conditions/ obligations within the report dated 23rd September 2021 (regarding the matters set out below) and the update report

(a)     

•         minimum 10% of flexible commercial floorspace to be employment and assembly and leisure uses (former B1/D2 use classes)

•         maximum 20% of flexible commercial floorspace to be employment and assembly and leisure uses (former B1/D2 use classes) with maximum 999sqm employment (former class B1 use class) floorspace

•         noise and ventilation details to be submitted for D2 use class

(b)     

•         updated planning obligations to require reasonable endeavours to employ 40% local workers (to be defined) within the replacement Asda hypermarket.

3.       That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to negotiate the legal agreement. If within three months of the resolution the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director for Place is delegated power to refuse planning permission.

4.       That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to impose conditions and informatives to address the matters set out in the Committee report dated 9th June 2021 and 23rd September 2021 including the clarifications in the update report

Councillor Kahar Chowdhury (Chair)

Update report was tabled

Jerry Bell introduced the application for a hybrid planning application (part detailed, part outline) for the demolition of existing buildings and the comprehensive, mixed-use, re-development of the site, comprising a maximum of 218,991sqm (GEA) of floorspace.

This application for planning permission was considered by the Strategic Development Committee on 9^th June 2021.

The application was deferred by members to request that officers further consider the proposal in relation to

·   fire safety measures,

·   sunlight and daylight assessments,

·   water pressure,

·   affordable housing compared with a previous planning permission,

·   and the mix of town centre uses.

The Committee also requested an additional site visit for members to further consider the relationship with Friars Mead. This took place on 13^th September 2021.

Rikki Weir provided a brief overview of the scheme, describing the application site and the key features of the scheme.

The application has been updated with additional information relating to the Committee’s reasons for deferral as set out in the report.

Focusing on the reasons for deferral, Members noted an update on the following issues, as set out in the report.

·       The fire safety issues. The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and the Greater London Authority (GLA) considered that the submitted fire safety information complied with the relevant policy and the requirements.

·       The sunlight and daylight impacts on Friars Mead/ concerns about the adequacy of the assessment. It was noted that BRE have confirmed that the information available to Members (in the Environmental Statement, the applicant’s supplementary report and BRE’s independent review) is sufficient to enable members to fully assess daylight and sunlight impacts. The BRE confirm that properties in Friars Mead would have windows which would experience minor impacts or minor to moderate adverse daylight impacts. However, these properties would generally continue to receive satisfactory levels of sunlight.

·       The water pressure issues. It was noted that the Council had held a meeting with Thames Water and they have provided reassurances regarding the plans to increase the capacity of the network to accommodate local development. They had also confirmed that for Waste Water, there would be enough Foul Water sewerage network infrastructure capacity and Surface Water network infrastructure capacity for both the Detailed and Outline components of the application. Thames Water also have a legal obligation to provide a minimum level of water pressure. There would also be pre–commencements conditions to ensure that the development would be planned in such a way to address the water needs of the development.

·       Concerns about the level of affordable housing compared to the previous 2014 permission. It was confirmed that, as set out in the update report, on 17th September 2021 the applicant had agreed to provide 10 additional affordable homes, increasing the proportion from 25% to 27% from the previous committee. Overall, it was considered that the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing had been secured as confirmed by LBTH viability team. The proposed 27% was in excess of the 16.5% that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4

Proposal:

Update reports published.

Councillor Kahar Chowdhury moved and Councillor Sabina Akhtar seconded a proposal that the consideration of the application be deferred for the reasons set out below. On a vote of 6 in favour and 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED:

That the consideration of the planning application be DEFERRED, for the following reasons:

Further information/clarification regarding the following issues:

·       Fire Safety measures.

·       The Sunlight and Daylight assessments.

·       Issues raised by Thames Water in relation to water pressure.

·       Level of affordable housing in view of the differences with the previously approved applications.

·       Details of the retail and office space in terms of its contribution towards creating a District Town Centre.

A further site visit to look at the impact on neighbouring properties including Friars Mead

In accordance with Development Procedural Rules, the application was DEFERRED to enable Officers to prepare a supplementary report to a future meeting of the Committee.

Update reports published.

Paul Buckenham introduced the application for a hybrid planning application (part detailed, part outline) for the demolition of existing buildings and the comprehensive, mixed-use, re-development of the site, comprising a maximum of 218,991sqm (GEA) of floorspace.

The Chair confirmed that Committee Members had recently attended a virtual briefing presentation attended by Officers and members of the developer’s team and a site visit attended by Officers as set out in the Committee update report.

Rikki Weir presented the application describing the site and the surrounds and the key features of the application. He also summarised the planning history including the key differences between this new application and the previously consented schemes  in terms of the provisions of housing and removal of the petrol filling station.

The Committee also were advised of the following matters:

·       A summary of the outline planning permission, to be assessed at the reserved matters stage. The acceptability of which would be subject to the limitations in the control documents (Development Specification, Design Code, and Parameter Plans documents).

·       An overview of the detailed component, including the layout of the proposals.

·       Results of the consultation including the number of representations received in support and objection and the issues raised.

·       That in land used terms, the proposals were in line with the aspirations in the Site Allocation (Crossharbour Town Centre).

·       The scheme sought the removal of the Petrol Station (similar to the previous 2014 consent) due to the site’s unsuitability for this, in light of the Fire Authority’s comments as well as lack of policy support for its retention.

·       The Island Health centre is not included in the application site boundary and that the health centre site would not be prejudiced by this development. Controlled vehicular access would be retained to the health centre car park. 

·       That the housing mix broadly complied with policies. 25% of which would be affordable housing. It would help meet the Council housing delivery targets, particularly important in light of the recent adverse Housing Delivery Test result. It would deliver good quality housing including wheelchair accessible housing.

·       The other benefits of the scheme included the delivery of a number of interlinked public areas, improved pedestrian access, land earmarked for an education facility and a community centre, in line with the site allocation requirements.

·       In terms of the design and heritage issues, the tallest buildings had been arranged in such a way to minimise their impacts on residential amenity and Mudchute Park and to fit in with the stepping down policy to Canary Wharf. It would cause less than substantial harm to heritage assets and this would be outweighed by the benefits of the development. The Committee noted views of the proposals from the surrounding area.

·       The scheme had also been designed sensitively to minimise impacts on neighbourhood amenity. However the development would result in adverse impacts on sunlight/daylight to properties, particularly windows at Glengall Grove and Friars Mead. It was found that many of these impacts were due in part to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7