Agenda, decisions and draft minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Zoe Folley, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4877, E-mail: zoe.folley@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS PDF 67 KB To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992. See attached note from the Monitoring Officer.
Minutes: No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made.
Councillor Marc Francis declared an personal interest in (Locksley Estate Site D) Land at Salmon Lane and adjacent to 1-12 Parnham Street, London (PA/17/01618). The Councillor left the meeting for the consideration of this item |
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 79 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Committee held on 6th September 2017 Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 6 September 2017 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE PDF 87 KB To RESOLVE that:
1) in the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and
2) in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.
3) To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Development Committee and meeting guidance.
Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED that:
1) In the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director, Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and
2) In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director, Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision
3) To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Development Committee and the meeting guidance.
|
|
114 -150 Hackney Road, London, E2 7QL (PA/17/00250) PDF 2 MB Proposal:
Mixed use redevelopment of site including part demolition, part retention, part extension of existing buildings alongside erection of complete new buildings ranging in height from four storeys to six storeys above a shared basement, to house a maximum of 9 residential units (Class C3), 12,600 sqm (GEA) of employment floorspace (Class B1), 1,340 sqm (GEA) of flexible office and retail floorspace at ground floor level (falling within Use Classes B1/A1-A5) and provision of 316 sqm (GEA) of Public House (Class A4), along with associated landscaping and public realm improvements, cycle parking provision, plant and storage
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to the Prior completion of a legal agreement, conditions and informatives.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Planning Manager) introduced the application for the mixed use redevelopment of site including part demolition, part retention, part extension of existing buildings alongside erection of complete new buildings ranging in height to house a maximum of 9 residential units, employment floorspace, flexible office and retail floorspace at ground floor level and provision of Public House along with associated works
Gareth Gwynne (Planning Services) presented application. The Committee were advised that the application forplanning permission for the proposed development was considered by the Development Committee on 9th August 2017. Following consideration of the application, the Committee resolved to defer the application to undertake a site visit and to receive further information about:
In terms of the daylight impacts, Officers acknowledged that the proposal would have a significant major and moderate adverse impacts upon 1-14 Vaughan Estate. In view of this, the applicant had provided additional information showing that the main living rooms of the properties would remain largely unaffected due to their dual aspect nature and that only non habitable rooms would be affected. These rooms would still receive a reasonable level of light. The information also showed that the existing design of the properties acted as a significant constraint on rooms achieving good natural light. The Council had appointed consultants to review these findings and they agreed with these results. Officers, on balance, considered these impacts were acceptable.
Regarding the future viability of the A4 unit and the fit out costs, it was noted that steps had been taken to resolve these issues, including a round table meeting held on the 4th September, organised by officers involving the applicant, representatives of Friends of the Joiners Arms, the New Joiners Arms, and the Culture at Risk Officer from Greater London Authority (GLA). Following that meeting, the applicant had submitted a series of amendments to the scheme to increase the size of the A4 unit, assist with the fit out costs and amend the heads of terms to extend the minimum lease length for a future LGBT+ operator for to 25 years. It was also proposed that the opening hours of the A4 unit be extended to allow it to operate as a late night premises for a 12 month trial period. Details of which were set out in the update report.
Regarding noise breakout and disturbance, Officers were recommending a number of measures as set out in the Committee report and the update report.
Officers remained of the view that the planning application should be granted permission.
The Committee asked questions about the measures to preserve the amenity of the occupants of Vaughan Estate. Officers explained that due to the design of the buildings and nature of the site, the proposal would have a limited impact on these properties. ... view the full minutes text for item 4.1 |
|
Proposal:
Residential development comprising 17,one, two, three and four bedroom flats available for affordable rent. The height of the building ranges from five to eight storeys.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and informatives
Minutes: Update report
Councillor John Pierce (Chair) for this item
Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the residential development comprising 17,one, two, three and four bedroom flats available for affordable rent. The height of the building ranged from five to eight storeys.
The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.
Alicia Joseph and Randone Francesco (local residents) spoke in objection to the application. They considered that the site should remain green space and provide a community garden for such things as food growing. Residents had held a number of meetings with local organisations including local schools and the Canal and Rivers Trust who were supportive of this approach in view of the community benefits. It was also felt that the proposal would have an oppressive effect on the surrounding area. Concern was also expressed about the significant biodiversity of the site and the clearing of the site and it was felt that the site should be brought back into use in its original state prior to the tree clearing. Reference was also made to the representations opposing the proposals. Overall, it was considered that the concerns with the previous application had not been addressed.
In response to questions, the speakers explained their concerns about the lack of engagement with residents about the plans (up until this new application had been submitted in the summer). They also emphasised the biodiversity value of the site, its current use as green space (noting it was locked because of security concerns but that local resident with a key could open it) and informal nature reserve, and outlined their alternative plans for the site. They also clarified their concerns about the clearing of trees without planning permission and the adverse effects of this in terms of the biodiversity value of the site. At this point, Officers clarified that none of the trees affected were protected and that they were not in the Conservation Area, therefore, this would not have been a breach of planning control.
Tim Bell (Architect) and John Coker (LBTH Housing) spoke in support of the application. They drew attention to the changes to the scheme to address the previous concerns in terms of the height, measures to further protect amenity, the setting of the canal and also the biodiversity enhancements. They also advised of the character of the existing space marked as A and B in the Committee report. Site A would accommodate the new housing and had been fenced off. The site had become overgrown and was cleared in 2016. Residents were informed of these works and only one response was received to the consultation. Site B had a gate and had been used by a few residents and the entire site carried no special protection. This area would provide green space and be opened up for the community. Overall, there would be a net increase in biodiversity benefits. The proposals would also provide much needed affordable housing including units at TH Living rents and London Affordable rents ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
Land bounded by Watts Grove and Gale Street, London, E3 3RE (PA/17/00732) PDF 6 MB Proposal:
Redevelopment to provide three residential blocks ranging from 3-7 storeys to provide 65 dwellings, plus bicycle parking, together with landscaping including public, communal and private amenity space. Creation of a new north-south link from Compton Close, a new east-west pedestrian between Watts Grove and Gale Street, and two disabled parking spaces on Gale Street.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 legal agreement, conditions and informatives.
Minutes: Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the redevelopment of the site to provide three residential blocks ranging from 3-7 storeys to provide 65 dwellings, plus associated working including the creation of a new links from Compton Close and between Watts Grove and Gale Street.
Victoria Olonisaye-Collins (Planning Services) presented the report explaining the site location, the existing use of the site and the recent planning history. The Committee were advised of the key features of the application and the outcome of the consultation and the changes to address the concerns raised about the proposed north/south access route.
Turning to the assessment, Officers considered that the land use was acceptable and was considered appropriate in this location. Whilst the density of the application would exceed the recommended range in policy, the proposals did not display any significantly adverse impacts typically associated with overdevelopment. There would be no unduly detrimental impacts upon the amenity of neighbouring occupants in terms of loss of light, overshadowing, loss of privacy or increased sense of enclosure. The development would provide an acceptable mix of housing types and tenure including the provision of 100% affordable housing (with 31% rent and 69% intermediate), this was strongly supported.
The proposals would be acceptable in terms of height, scale, design and appearance. Transport matters, including parking, access and servicing were acceptable.
The Committee asked questions about the previously withdrawn applications and the reasons why they were withdrawn. Questions were also asked about the nature of the objections to this application, the impact on David Hewitt House and Ladyfern house, the density of the proposal given the public transport rating for the site. Questions were also asked about the measures to increase the level of affordable rent units, the viability assessment for grant supported scheme and the factors that would have been taken into account in undertaking the assessment.
Officers explained that concerns had been raised about the opening up of the north/south access route on the grounds that it could increase anti - social behaviour. The petition mostly concerned this issue. To address the concerns, the application had been amended to install gates amongst other changes. Officers also outlined the nature of their concerns with the previous applications. It was felt that these issues had now been addressed. It was also considered that the impact on David Hewitt House would broadly be acceptable in terms of the amenity impacts as detailed in the sunlight and daylight assessment.
Officers also provided further assurances regarding the density of the application given it met the relevant tests in policy and the height of the proposals. Officers considered that the variation in building heights would respond well to the area and that the seven storey building would sit comfortable with the surrounding building heights.
It was also explained that a lot of work had gone into bringing the site forward and that the developer had experienced a number of issues in trying to bring the previous 2012 application forward on viability ... view the full minutes text for item 5.2 |
|
The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel Road, London, E1 1BB (PA/17/02088) PDF 2 MB Proposal:
Soft-strip works involving removal of fixtures, fittings and partitions associated with the former hospital; andlimited works of structural investigation and materials testing.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT Listed Building Consent subject to conditions and informatives.
Minutes: Paul Buckenham introduced the application for soft-strip works involving removal of fixtures, fittings and partitions associated with the former hospital; and limited works of structural investigation and materials testing
Kirsty Gilmer (Planning Services) presented the report explaining the key features of the site and the surrounding area and the nature of the internal works. The Committee were advised that the proposal would facilitate the future redevelopment of the site. However, member’s decision would not prejudice the determination of any future application at the site. It was noted that the proposed works had been sensitively considered to ensure the special architectural and historic interest of the Grade II listed building was preserved and there were a number of conditions to ensure this. Consultation had been carried out and no objections had been received.
On unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED:
That the listed building consent at The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel Road, London, E1 1BB be GRANTED for soft-strip works involving removal of fixtures, fittings and partitions associated with the former hospital; and limited works of structural investigation and materials testing(PA/17/02088) SUBJECT to the conditions and informatives as set out in the Committee report.
|
|
OTHER PLANNING MATTERS None Minutes: None. |
|