Issue - meetings
106 Commercial Street,PA/16/03535
Meeting: 14/06/2017 - Development Committee (Item 5)
5 106 Commercial Street (PA/16/03535) PDF 118 KB
Proposal:
Conversion of building (class B1/B8) to fine dining food market (Class A3).
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to APPROVE planning permission subject to Conditions.
Additional documents:
- 6.1, 10/05/2017 Development Committee, item 5 PDF 3 MB
- 6.1 Update 106 Commercial Street, item 5 PDF 72 KB
Decision:
Update report tabled.
On a vote of 0 in favour of the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission, 4 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee did not agree the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission.
Accordingly, Councillor Marc Francis proposed a motion that the planning permission be refused for the reasons set out in the Committee report dated 14 June 2017 and on a vote of 4 in favour, 0 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee RESOLVED:
That planning permission be REFUSED at 106 Commercial Street for the conversion of building (class B1/B8) to fine dining food market (Class A3) for the following reasons as set out in the Committee report, dated 14 June 2017(PA/16/03535):
Land use/ road safety
1. The proposed development by reason of its configuration of internal uses and space would result in an over intensification of use which would restrict to the ability of customers to safely access and exit the site, the ability to move within and around the building, the inability to control the number of visitors in the site and to ensure that new development does not have an adverse impact upon the safety and capacity of the street network. The proposal is therefore inappropriate development and contrary to policy 7.3 and 7.4 of the London Plan (2016), policies SP01 and SP09 of the Tower Hamlets Core Strategy (2010), and policies DM20 DM23 and DM25 of the Tower Hamlets Managing Development Document (2013).
Impact on the conservation area
2. The proposed development by virtue of the impact to the external appearance of the roof and the loss of the slate roof, and proposed acoustic roof would cause less than substantial harm to the character and appearance of the Brick Lane and Fournier Street Conservation Area and would fail to preserve or enhance the character of this heritage asset. The harm identified to the designated heritage asset is not outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme. The scheme would therefore be contrary to paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework, and policies SP10 of the Core Strategy (2010) and policies DM24 and DM27 in the Managing Development Document (2013).
Noise
3. The proposed development would cause harm to the amenity and living conditions of occupiers of adjoining residential properties through the overbearing impact of noise and disturbance generated as large numbers of customers enter and exit the development. The development would therefore be contrary to policies SP10 of the Core Strategy (2010) and DM25 of the Managing Development Document (2013) which seek to protect amenity for future and existing residents.
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager) introduced the application for conversion of building (class B1/B8) to fine dining food market (Class A3).
The Committee were reminded that at its previous meeting on 10th May 2017, the Committee were minded to refuse the application, contrary to the Officers recommendations due to concerns about the following issues.
· Impact from the use
· Impact on the setting of the Conservation Area
· Impact of the proposal on the external appearance of the building particularly the roof
· The access arrangements given the level of anti-social behaviour in the area;
· Overcrowding in the area and the safety implications of this
· Noise disturbance
· Increased congestion in Commercial Street
· Servicing arrangements.
Officers had since draft detailed reasons for refusal around these reasons as set out in the report that also contained their advice on the strength of the reasons.
Tim Ross (Planning Services) presented the report. The Committee were reminded of the site location and surrounds and the nature of the proposal. Regarding land use and road safety, it was noted that the policy directed this type of premises to central locations. However, it could be considered that due to the volume of visitor numbers and the internal configuration, that the plans would result in the over intensification of use of the site and impact on road safety. Therefore, a reason on these grounds could form a reason for refusal. Regarding the impact on the Conservation Area, Officers felt that it could reasonably be considered that the proposal would cause some harm in this regard and would not be outweighed by the public benefits of the application. Therefore, this also could be sustained as a reason. Regarding the noise disturbance, it could be considered that the development had the potential to cause some harm to amenity throughout the later evening that could not be controlled by condition. Therefore it was considered that a reason on this third ground could also be defended.
In respect of the concerns around ASB and the servicing arrangements, there was a lack of evidence to support these reasons.
Officers remained of the view that the application should be granted planning permission, however if they were minded to refuse the scheme, they were invited to consider the three suggested reasons in the Committee report.
On a vote of 0 in favour of the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission, 4 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee did not agree the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission.
Accordingly, Councillor Marc Francis proposed a motion that the planning permission be refused for the reasons set out in the Committee report dated 14 June 2017 and on a vote of 4 in favour, 0 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee RESOLVED:
That planning permission be REFUSED at 106 Commercial Street for the conversion of building (class B1/B8) to fine dining food market (Class A3) for the following reasons as set out in the Committee report, dated 14 June 2017(PA/16/03535):
Land use/ road safety
1. The ... view the full minutes text for item 5
Meeting: 10/05/2017 - Development Committee (Item 5)
5 106 Commercial Street, (PA/16/03535) PDF 3 MB
Proposal:
Conversion of building (class B1/B8 ) to fine dining food market (Class A3).
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to APPROVE planning permission subject to Conditions.
Decision:
Update report tabled.
On a vote of 0 in favour of the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission and 7 against, the Committee did not agree the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission.
Accordingly, Councillor Marc Francis proposed a motion that the planning permission be not accepted (for the reasons set out below) and on a vote of 7 in favour and 0 against, the Committee RESOLVED:
That the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission at 106 Commercial Street, be NOT ACCEPTED for the conversion of building (class B1/B8 ) to fine dining food market (Class A3) (PA/16/03535).
The Committee were minded to refuse the application due to concerns over:
· Impact from the use itself.
· Impact on the setting of the Conservation Area
· Impact on the external appearance of the building, particularly the roof.
· The access arrangements given the level of anti-social behaviour in the area
· Overcrowding in the area and safety implications of this
· Nosie disturbance.
· Increased congestion in Commercial Street
· The servicing arrangements.
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 setting out proposed detailed reasons for refusal and the implications of the decision.
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the conversion of building (class B1/B8 ) to fine dining food market (Class A3).
The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Rupert Wheeler (The Spitalfields Society) and Susan Kay (local resident) spoke in objection to the application. They felt that the plans would result in more crime and ASB in the area and result in noise nuisance in an area already blighted by such issues. This which would spoil residential amenity. The results of the acoustics testing were inaccurate and should be repeated. It was completed at a time when the background noise levels in the area were at exceptionally high levels which were in no way the norm. The benefits for small and medium sized business would be negligible given that the market would be managed by one single operator. The application conflicted with the Brick Lane Town Centre Manager’s advice on these matters. The alterations to the roof would harm the appearance of the building, and spoil the setting of the surrounding listed buildings. They also expressed concern about the capacity of the smoking area for a business of this size, the proximity of the onsite cycling space to restaurant tables and the accessible of the accessible first floor toilet. Concern was also express about the access arrangements for customers and servicing vehicles and the impact of customer’s queuing outside the premises as a result of the issues.
In response to Members questions, they clarified their concerns about the size of the smoking area (compared to the provisions at nearby premises). It could restrict access to the building. They also further discussed their concerns about the servicing plans. It was proposed that the deliveries and servicing would take place through the customer entrance during the daytime along busy unsuitable routes. This could potentially involve many different suppliers and would result in significant congestion and highways issues. They also clarified their concerns about dispersal from the premises given the capacity of the premises. There would be hundreds of customers leaving the premises at any one time, spilling out onto a narrow pavement- potentially into other public houses. It was questioned how this would be managed. They also further explained their concerns about the premises ultimately becoming a drinking establishment and the impact of this, the issues with the background noise survey and the assessable toilet. They also spoke about the applicant’s consultation.
Rupert Warren (Applicant’s representative) spoke in support of the application. He spoke about the merits of the application. It would fit in with existing uses and create employment. The Council’s Conservation Officer was satisfied with the application. There would be stringent conditions regulating activity including, measures to control noise, odour, the operation of the smoking area, a dispersal policy and a servicing plan. He noted that a change from use class A3 to A4 without permission would be a breach of planning control. He also noted that the application did not make provision for a ... view the full minutes text for item 5
Meeting: 05/04/2017 - Development Committee (Item 6.1)
6.1 106 Commercial Street (PA/16/03535) PDF 2 MB
Proposal:
Conversion of building (class B1/B8 ) to fine dining food market (Class A3).
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to APPROVE planning permission subject to Conditions.