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 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: Councillor Marc Francis declared a personal interest in agenda item 6.1 66-68 Bell Lane and 1-5 Tenter Ground E1 7LA (PA/15/01474) as he had received representations from interested parties on the application.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 87 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Committee held on 13th January 2016. Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 13 January 2016 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 meeting guidance.
|
|
DEFERRED ITEMS None. Minutes: None.
|
|
66-68 Bell Lane and 1-5 Tenter Ground E1 7LA (PA/15/01474) PDF 493 KB Proposal:
The demolition of the existing building at 66-68 Bell Lane and the erection of a new single dwelling house set over five floors (including the basement) with ancillary private artist’s studio space and the creation of linked ancillary residential accommodation located on the 2nd floor of No. 1-5 Tenter Ground
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to REFUSE planning permission for the reason set out in the Committee report.
Minutes: Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application for the demolition of the existing building at 66-68 Bell Lane and the erection of a new single house set over five floors (including the basement) and the creation of linked ancillary residential accommodation within No. 1-5 Tenter Ground.
It was reported that on the 3rd February 2016, the Planning Inspectorate notified the Council that an appeal had been submitted under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 because the statutory period for determining the application had expired and no decision had been made. As such, the powers to determine the application had been taken away from the Council and now lie with the Secretary of State (Planning Inspectorate).
Officers’ remained of the view that the scheme should be refused. However, in view of the above, Officers’ had amended the recommendation to gain the resolution of the Committee should it have been in a position to determine the application. The resolution of the Development Committee would set the position that the Council would adopt at Appeal. The Committee were advised to consider the application in exactly the same way as it would a planning application for decision, based on the merits of the scheme.
Paul Johnston spoke in objection to the application (on behalf of the Spitalfields Community Group and the architects that submitted the 2012 application) welcoming the officers’ report.
He objected to the loss of the locally listed building given the merits of the building and the contribution it made to the historic street scene and the Conservation Area. All of the historic features would be lost in contrast with the 2012 consent that preserved such features. There was no justification for the wholesale demolition of the building.
In summary, he was supportive of an alternative design that would retain the historic features.
The Chair reported that the applicant had been invited to address the Committee in accordance with the Development Committee Procedure Rules but had declined to address the Committee.
Gareth Gwynne, (Planning Officer, Development and Renewal) presented the detailed report and the update explaining the location of the subject building, and the surrounds in the Artillery Passage Conservation Area including the nearby listed buildings, contemporary buildings and the newly consented developments.
Members were advised that the building at Bell Lanewas a non statutory listed building and was a rare example of early infill public housing. In addition the façade of 1-5 Tenter Ground made a positive contribution to the Conservation Area. Both buildings fulfilled a valuable role in linking the historic buildings in the surrounding area.
Members noted the key aspects of the proposal, including the height, appearance and layout of the scheme, the windows, the chimney and the relationship of the scheme with the existing warehouse.
Consultation had been carried out (resulting in 11 representations in support and 60 objections). The key issue raised related to the design and heritage implications.
Turning to the assessment, ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
|
OTHER PLANNING MATTERS PDF 75 KB None. Minutes: None. |