Issue - meetings
25-28 Dalgleish Street, London, E14 (PA/15/02674)
Meeting: 18/02/2016 - Strategic Development Committee (Item 6)
6 25-28 Dalgleish Street, London, E14 (PA/15/02674) PDF 1 MB
Proposal:
Construction of a part four storey, part seven storey building to provide 60 flats with refuse and recycling facilities together with laying out of a ‘Homezone’ in Dalgleish Street.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by the London Mayor, the prior completion of a legal agreement and conditions and informatives.
Decision:
Update report.
On a unanimous vote the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That planning permission be GRANTED at 25-28 Dalgleish Street, London, E14 for the construction of a part four storey, part seven storey building to provide 60 flats with refuse and recycling facilities together with laying out of a ‘Homezone’ in Dalgleish Street (PA/15/02674) subject to:
2. Any direction by the London Mayor.
3. The prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the committee report.
4. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above acting within delegated authority. If within three months of the resolution the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to refuse planning permission.
5. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to impose conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters set out in the Committee report and the update report.
6. Any other conditions or informatives as considered necessary by the Corporate Director for Development and Renewal
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager) introduced this application for theconstruction of a part four storey, part seven storey building to provide 60 flats with refuse and recycling facilities together with a ‘Homezone’ in Dalgleish Street. It was reported that whilst this application and item 6.2 (Hertsmere House, 2 Hertsmere Road, London (PA/15/02675, PA/15/02748))were linked by virtue of the planning obligations, they should be considered on their own merits.
Piotr Lanoszka, (Planning Officer, Development and Renewal) presented the detailed report referring to the site and surrounds and thenearby new build developments, the Conservation Areas and listed buildings. The site itself carried no designations and had very good public transport connections. Consultation had been carried out and one objection had been received and the issues raised were noted.
It was considered that the site was suitable for new housing. The housing mix comprised 100% affordable housing and given the housing mix in the surrounding area, it was not considered that the application would result in an over concentration of one housing type in the area. The application could come forward as a donor site for the application at Hertsmere House or could be delivered as part of another market led application or possible by a Housing Association.
The site was within easy reach of local schools, parks and local facilities. The scheme ranged in height and included sets back to fit in with the area. Furthermore, it was of good quality design including a court yard and a roof terrace. Although there would be a high proportion of single aspect units, it was considered that this was largely unavoidable given the site constraints. The impact on the main school building would be minimal while the impact on neighbouring amenity would be minor. There were conditions to mitigate the construction impact. Planning contribution had been secured.
In view of the merits of the application, Officers were recommending that it be granted.
In response to questions, Officers highlighted the similarities and differences between this scheme and the extant scheme (in terms of the housing tenure, density, massing and location). This scheme was better designed than the previous scheme. The previous scheme could still be implemented so should be given some weight. It was noted that there were a number of scenarios for delivering the application in terms of the funding (as set out in the report) and that the condition requested by Thames Water was a standard condition and would be secured.
Officers also answered questions about the sunlight/daylight assessment for Iona Tower showing that there would be some reductions in daylight at the lower floors. Overall, given the character of the area and the constraints posed by the Tower, it was considered that this was acceptable. It was also confirmed that there would be no direct overlooking or loss of privacy due to the separation distances and orientation of the buildings.
Officers also answered questions about the services charges and rents for the units.