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
Note | No. | Item |
---|---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS PDF 64 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 Sirajul Islam declared an interest in agenda item 6.1, Land to the south of Rainhill Way, Bow Cross Estate, London, E3 (PA/14/01486). This was on the basis that a resident had attended his surgery on this application.
Councillor Chris Chapman declared an interest in agenda item 11 Havannah Street, London E14 8NA (PA/14/01807) as he had met the resident of the property.
|
||
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 104 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Committee held on 15th September 2014.
Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 15th September 2014 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
|
||
RECOMMENDATIONS 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 Development and Renewal 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 Development and Renewal is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.
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, Development and Renewal 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, Development and Renewal is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision
|
||
PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE PDF 94 KB To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Development Committee and meeting guidance.
Minutes: The Committee noted the procedure for hearing objections and the meeting guidance.
|
||
DEFERRED ITEMS None. Minutes: None |
||
Grant |
Land to the south of Rainhill Way, Bow Cross Estate, London, E3 (PA/14/01486) PDF 418 KB Proposal:
Erection of 4 x 3 bedroom residential units on land located south of Rainhill way, Bow Cross Estate, London E3.
Recommendation:
To GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Committee report.
Minutes: Update report tabled.
Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader , Development and Renewal) introduced the application.The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Claire O’Riordan, Councillors Danny Hassell and Khales Uddin Ahmed spoke against the application speaking on behalf of surrounding residents. They expressed the following concerns:
In response to questions about the consultation, it was felt that there was a lack of consideration of the feedback. The Planning Inspectorate considered that the three storey element would be overbearing. This remained a major concern. The scheme was very similar to the refused scheme in terms of proximity to the boundary wall with only one metre difference.
The applicant’s representatives Lyndon Gill and Tina Khakee addressed the Committee and expressed the following points:
· That the density of the scheme complied with policy. · That it was planned to provide two areas of food growing space in excess of the current informal arrangements. · Recognised that mistakes had been made in taking forward the previous scheme, but this scheme was very different. · That the applicant had run consultation events at pre application stage for residents where the plans for the site would have been explained. · That the Applicant was willing to defer the application to engage further with Councillors and residents with a view to addressing the concerns. · Noted that the outline scheme had not expired
|
|
GRANT |
369a Roman Road, London, E3 5QR (PA/14/01595) PDF 1 MB Proposal:
Variation of condition 2 of planning permission PA/12/02272 dated 27th February 2013 for the: “Installation of a new shopfront, retention of retail unit to Roman Road frontage, and the conversion of the remainder of the unit into a two bedroom flat
The variation is sought to enable the following minor material alterations:
· Internal alterations to the layout of the retail and residential units · Changes to the design and dimensions of Vivan Road light wells including additional glazing
Recommendation:
To GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and informatives as set out in the report.
Minutes: Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader, Development and Renewal) introduced the application.
Gerard McCormack (Planning Enforcement Team Leader) gave a presentation on the application explaining the planning and enforcement history.
He explained the key features of the scheme including the proposed amendments. The main changes to the residential unit were the reduction in size of the approved light wells, repositioning of the entrance door, insertion of new door and staircase. The changes to retail unit included: a second entrance door, a stair case and plans to increase the retail floor space.
Members were advised of the outcome of the consultation. Concerns had been raised about the reduction in window frontage due to the proposed bin store. However, it was proposed that the window be installed as originally approved and that the bin storage area would no longer be provided. Accordingly, most of the objections had now been addressed.
Overall, the application complied with policy and was recommended for approval.
In response to questions from Councillors, it was explained that, whilst there would be a marginal loss of light to the bedrooms, on balance it was considered that the improvements to the living and kitchen area would compensate for this.
On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED:
(1) That planning permission at 369a Roman Road, London, E3 5QR (PA/14/01595) be GRANTED for variation of condition 2 of planning permission PA/12/02272 dated 27th February 2013 for the: “Installation of a new shopfront, retention of retail unit to Roman Road frontage, and the conversion of the remainder of the unit into a two bedroom flat
The variation was sought to enable the following minor material alterations:
(2) That the Corporate Director for Development & Renewal is given delegated authority to impose the conditions and informatives (or add or remove conditions acting within normal delegated authority) in relation to the planning permission on the matters set out in the Committee report
|
|
GRANT |
7 Westport Street, London E1 0RA (PA/14/01887) PDF 389 KB Proposal:
Change of use of part of ground floor unit from Estate Agent (Use Class A2) to mini cab call centre use (Use Class B1).
Recommendation:
To GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and Informatives.
Minutes: Update Report tabled
Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader, Development and Renewal) introduced the application.
Shahara Ali-Hempstead (Planning Officer) gave a presentation on the application explaining the site location and the outcome of the consultation. It was explained the scheme complied with Council policy in terms of land use, amenity issues, highway and pedestrian safety given the nature of the scheme. Therefore, subject to the conditions, the application should be granted.
On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED:
(1) That planning permission at 7 Westport Street, London E1 0RA (PA/14/01887) beGRANTED for Change of use of part of ground floor unit from Estate Agent (Use Class A2) to mini cab call centre use (Use Class B1).
(2) 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.
|
|
REFUSE |
11 Havannah Street, London E14 8NA (PA/14/01807) PDF 126 KB Proposal:
Conservatory extension at ground floor level and first floor extension.
Recommendation:
To REFUSE planning permission on the grounds of the reason set out in the Committee report.
Minutes: Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader , Development and Renewal) introduced the application.The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Mr Balvinder (Applicant’s agent) Councillors Andrew Wood and Shahed Ali spoke in support of the scheme. Councillor Wood declared a personal interest in the item as he knew the applicant and was also a Ward Councillor. The speakers representations are summarised below:
Angelina Eke (Planning Officer) presented the detailed report explaining the site and character of the surrounding area. The building was not listed or in the Conservation Area. Members were advised of the outcome of the consultation including representations in support from local Councillors and Jim Fitzpatrick MP who considered that the plans would help keep families in the area.
Officers had no concerns in principle to the proposed ground floor extension. However, it was considered that the proposed first floor addition would be by reason of its bulk, mass and scale including design would result in an inappropriate form of development that would detract from the appearance of the original dwelling. Furthermore the continuous frontage created by the main house with the extended element would be visually overbearing and harmful to the street scene.
It was noted that the applicant had taken steps to address the issues. However, on balance, it was considered that would be an incongruous addition that failed to comply with policy and should be refused.
In response to Councillors questions, Officers noted the need for family housing. However, in view of the concerns, the scheme could not be supported. There were inaccuracies in the September 2014 Committee report, but theses were nothing more than errors. Officers had engaged with the applicant to secure a more appropriate scheme in line with policy. However, it was felt that any further amendments could make the scheme unfeasible. Officers agreed that a condition could be added to the ... view the full minutes text for item 6.4 |
|
OTHER PLANNING MATTERS None. Minutes: None. |
||