Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Online 'Virtual' Meeting - https://towerhamlets.public-i.tv/core/portal/home. View directions
Contact: Zoe Folley, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4877 E-mail: zoe.folley@towerhamlets.gov.uk
Media
No. | Item |
---|---|
Election of Vice -Chair of the Committee To elect a Vice-Chair for the remainder of the Municipal year.
Additional documents: Minutes: It was proposed by Councillor Abdul Mukit MBE and seconded by the Councillor Dipa Das and RESOLVED:
That Councillor John Pierce is appointed Vice-Chair of the Development Committee for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2020/2021
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS AND OTHER INTERESTS PDF 214 KB Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, please see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.
Members are reminded to declare the nature of the interest and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it’s the Members’ responsibility to declare any interests form and to update their register of interest form as required by the Code.
If in doubt as to the nature of your interest, you are advised to seek advice prior to the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services
Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of interests. |
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 229 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Committee held on 4th June 2020 Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE PDF 142 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.
Additional documents:
Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED that:
1. The procedure for hearing objections and meeting guidance be noted.
2. In the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes be delegated to the Corporate Director, Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and
3. 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 be delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision
|
|
Additional documents: |
|
Bow Exchange, 5 Yeo Street, London E3 3Q (PPA/19/02281) PDF 381 KB Proposal:
Demolition of the existing building and redevelopment of the site comprising the erection of 4 to 9 storey building to provide 2,471sqm of flexible B1c workspace at ground and mezzanine level and 92 residential units (Use Class C3) on the upper floors, together with landscaped public open space, communal amenity space, on-site child play space, waste storage, cycle parking and disabled car parking.
Recommendation:
Approve planning permission subject to conditions and a legal agreement.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Planning Services, Place) introduced the application for the redevelopment of the site to provide a 4-9 storey mixed used scheme, comprising residential units and workspace. Matthew Wong (Planning Officer, Place) presented the application.
This application was considered by the Development Committee on 4th June 2020. Members decided to defer the application in order that Members could view the proposed developments’ relationship with Caspian Wharf. Members were reminded of the site location, the surrounds and the key features of the proposals, including the: · Provision of commercial units with 10% at affordable rents. · New housing including 35% affordable housing. · Public open space and improvements to pedestrian links. · That the appearance of the development would be in keeping with policy
Concerns were raised about the relationship with Caspian Wharf in terms of access between the podium areas. In response to the security concerns, the applicant has taken the following steps:
· submitted imagery clarifying the relationship. · Increased the podium railing. · Provided details of the new boundary treatment
The podium arrangements have been designed in consultation with the Metropolitan Police (Designing out Crime Officers) and conditions would be secured to ensure the development was secure by design. Given this, officers felt that this relationship would be acceptable.
Concerns were also expressed about the amenity impacts on Caspian Wharf, in view of the relationship with the proposal. It was reported that:
· The rooms mostly affected should continue to receive adequate levels of sunlight and daylight and outlook given they were served by unobstructed windows. The separation distances, in some instances, should also provide some relief. · The outdoor terrace space would retain BRE compliant levels of sunlight and should retain an unobstructed outlook.
In summary, there would be no undue loss of daylight and sunlight, loss of outlook, sense of enclosure or loss of privacy to properties at Caspian Wharf. In response to questions about the design, Officers advised of the approach to the design. The scheme had been design to respond appropriately to the area. Officers would take care to ensure that the materials were of the highest quality and the development adhered to the plans.
On a vote of 5 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That, planning permission is GRANTED at Bow Exchange, 5 Yeo Street, London E3 3Q for the
2. Subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the report.
3. The planning conditions set out in the Committee report including updated conditions regarding the boundary treatment, the provision of a 2.5 meter podium boundary to be maintained for the lifetime ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION PDF 291 KB Additional documents: |
|
38-44 White Horse Road and 605-623 Commercial Road, London (PA/19/00669) PDF 3 MB Proposal:
Development of mixed-use scheme up to 5 storeys comprising 38 residential units, 740sqm flexible commercial floor space (Use Class A1, A2, A3, B1, D1, and D2) at basement and ground floor level, and associated amenity space and cycle storage
Recommendation:
Approve planning permission subject to conditions and a legal agreement Additional documents: Minutes: Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the provision of a mixed use development of up to 5 storeys. The plans also included 46 White Horse Road. Its omission from the site address has had no material impact on the assessment of the application. Shahara Ali – Hempstead (Planning Officer, Place) presented the application explaining the nature of the site and the surrounds within the Conservation Area and the Limehouse Neighbouring Centre. The proposal sought to redevelop the site through demolishing existing buildings and the construction of the new development. The enforcement action relating to the unlawful demolition works had been held in abeyance pending the outcome of this planning application. Consultation had been carried out. Nine letters in objections had been submitted and, and issues raised were noted. It was noted that: · In land use terms, the scheme would contribute to the broader regeneration of the area. It would provide a significant opportunity to enhance the derelict site by bringing back commercial units and providing an active frontage along Commercial Road. Whilst there would be a net reduction in employment floor space, the proposal would provide an improved quality of commercial floor space. This would complement the role and the function of the Town Centre. There were no restrictions in policy regarding the provision of housing on the site. · The scheme would provide 40% affordable housing by habitable room. The housing mix, including the slight divergence from policy, was considered acceptable. The private and the affordable units would have separate cores. · The quality of the residential dwellings would be high in terms of internal accommodation and external amenity. All play space for younger children( 0-11) would be provided on site. · The plans included a number wheelchair assessible units. · The height, massing and design of the proposed development would appropriately respond to and would make a positive contribution to the surrounding area and meet Local Plan policy. · The loss of the non-designated heritage assets would result in a less than substantial harm to the conservation area. The replacement buildings would not wholly compensate. Nevertheless it was felt that the public benefits would outweigh this including the provision of new housing, affordable housing and commercial units · The proposal would impact upon the daylight and sunlight to some habitable rooms to Powesland Court on the west side of White Horse Road. The impacts were considered to be acceptable in the urban context. There were also measures to protect privacy and adequate separation distances that should preserve amenity. · The proposals were acceptable in highways, servicing, biodiversity and energy terms, subject to the appropriate use of planning conditions and obligations. · A range of contributions has been secured
In response, Members asked questions about a number of issues. The following points were discussed:
· Whether the development met the requirement to provide 50% affordable housing on public and industrial land. · In this case, it is not considered this requirement applied due to the timing of the sale of the land in relation to the introduction of the ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
|
Former 23 Gillender Street, 24-26 Gillender Street, London, E3 3LB (PA/19/02684) PDF 1 MB Recommendation:
The restoration and refurbishment of the existing buildings for continued industrial use falling within Class B1c, B2 and B8 uses. Associated external alterations to the existing buildings and internal and external alterations to the listed building at 23 Gillender Street.
Proposal:
Grant planning permission with conditions and planning obligations Additional documents: Minutes: Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the restoration and refurbishment of the existing buildings for continued industrial use. Aleksandra Milentijevic (Planning Services Officer) presented the application explaining the nature of the site and the surrounds. Consultation had been carried out by the Council as set out in the report and the applicant had carried out extensive consultation. She explained the key features of the application, including: · The proposed ground floor arrangements. This included the provision of a new glazed main pedestrian entrance and reception area, providing a better working environment and improvements to the street scene. · The provision of additional flexible workspace. · Supporting facilities for future staff. · Improved servicing arrangements including noise mitigation measures. · Other benefits of the proposals included, biodiversity diversity enhancements through the provision of green walls along the site’s boundary, planting on the roof terrace, and measures to improve energy efficiency of the existing industrial buildings on site. It was noted that the external changes would result in less than substantial harm to the grade II listed and locally listed buildings. However given the merits of the scheme, this was found to be acceptable. In response to questions, the following points were noted. · No objections had been received from heritage groups. · Details of the biodiversity diversity enhancements. Such measures should also provide additional sound proofing and help mitigate the effects of air pollution.
On a vote of 5 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That subject to any direction by the Mayor of London, planning permission is GRANTED at Former 23 Gillender Street, 24-26 Gillender Street, London, E3 3LB for
· The restoration and refurbishment of the existing buildings for continued industrial use falling within Class B1c, B2 and B8 uses. Associated external alterations to the existing buildings and internal and external alterations to the listed building at 23 Gillender Street.(PA/19/02684)
2. subject to the conditions and the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report
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
|
|
OTHER PLANNING MATTERS There are none Additional documents: |