Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Louise Fleming, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4878, E-mail: louise.fleming@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item | ||
---|---|---|---|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Louise Alexander and Rupert Bawden. Councillors Stephanie Eaton and Josh Peck deputised for them respectively.
|
|||
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 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.
Minutes: Councillor Ahmed Hussain and Alibor Choudhury declared personal interests in item 6.1 which related to land bound by Hackney Road and Austin Street, including Mildmay Mission Hospital, Hackney Road E2 as they had been lobbied by both objectors and supporters to the scheme.
Councillor Ahmed Omer declared a personal interest in item 7.3 which related to 132 St Paul’s Way, as he was a member of the Leaside Partnership Board.
Councillor Ohid Ahmed declared a personal interest in item 7.3 which related to 132 St Paul’s Way, as he was employed by Leaside Regeneration Ltd, which had been consulted on the application.
Councillor Ahmed Hussain declared a personal interest in item 7.3 which related to 132 St Paul’s Way, as he was a Ward Member for Mile End East.
|
|||
UNRESTRICTED MINUTES PDF 42 KB To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 19th July 2006.
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 19th July 2006 were agreed and approved as a correct record, subject to it being noted that Councillor Abjol Miah had also been nominated for election of Vice-Chair.
|
|||
RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 To NOTE that the Chair has agreed to the submission of the Update Report of the Head of Development Decisions in accordance with the urgency provisions at Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to ensure Members have before them all the relevant facts and information about the planning applications set out in the agenda.
4.2 To RESOLVE that, in the event of recommendations being amended at the Committee in light of debate, or other representations being made by Members of the public, applicants, or their agents, the task of formalising the wording of any additional condition(s) be delegated to the Head of Development Decisions along the broad lines indicated at the meeting.
Minutes: 4.1 The Committee NOTED that the Chair had agreed to the submission of the Update Report of the Head of Development Decisions in accordance with the urgency provisions at Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to ensure Members have before them all relevant facts and information about the planning applications set out in the agenda.
4.2 The Committee RESOLVED that, in the event of recommendations being made by the Members of the public, applicants or their agents, the task of formalising the wording of any additional conditions be delegated to the Head of Development Decisions along the broad lines indicated at the meeting.
|
|||
PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS PDF 9 KB To note the current procedure for hearing objections. Minutes: The Committee noted the current procedure and those who had registered to speak.
|
|||
Minutes: Mr Michael Kiely, Head of Development Decisions, introduced the site and proposal for the demolition of existing buildings (excluding community centre) and redevelopment to provide a campus of six buildings comprising:
on land bounded by Hackney Road and Austin Street including Mildmay Mission Hospital, Hackney Road, London E2 7NS, which had been deferred at the last meeting of the Committee held on 19th July 2006 to enable Members to undertake a site visit.
Mr Stephen Irvine, Development Control Manager, presented the officer’s report and the update report relating to the application. The applicant had submitted an update to the Daylight/Sunlight Report which had already been submitted. The results of the assessments were considered acceptable, considering the urban context of the development. Mr Irvine summarised the letters of support and objection which had been received since the last meeting on 19th July 2006.
Officers had recommended the application for approval as, on balance, it was considered to be acceptable in terms of land use, design, amenity and highways. It was recognised that there would be some impact on local residents. However, it was felt that the benefits to the community would outweigh any negative impact on adjoining properties.
Members asked questions relating to the objections which had been received, the weight given to the comments made by the Greater London Authority (GLA) and the viability of the scheme. Concerns were expressed over the height, design and siting of the proposal. Concern was also expressed over the response from the Crime officer in terms of a possible rise in crime and anti-social behaviour.
Mr Irvine addressed the comments made and outlined the conditions which would be attached to any planning permission to mitigate the concerns of the residents. The application had been assessed by the Council’s Design Team and it was considered to be acceptable. Members asked questions relating to a prior application for the site which had included a smaller tower block. Mr Kiely reminded Members that they had to consider the application in front of them and that the merits of a previous application were not a material consideration for the Committee.
The Committee unanimously AGREED not to support the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings (excluding community centre) and redevelopment to provide a campus of six buildings comprising:
|
|||
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION |
|||
Rodwell House, 100-106 Middlesex Street, London E1 PDF 187 KB Minutes: Mr Michael Kiely, Head of Development Decisions, introduced the site and proposal for the demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment by the erection of buildings between 5 storeys (26 m) and 35 storeys (119 m) high for mixed use purposes comprising 32,458 sq m of student accommodation, 772 sq m of residential, and 8,825 sq m of offices (B1), shop (A1), and gymnasium, and 186 sq m of community uses, formation of associated car parking and highway access as well as hard and soft landscaping works at Rodwell House, 100-106 Middlesex Street, London E1.
Mr Mike Lowndes addressed the Committee on behalf of the residents objecting to the proposal on the grounds that there were omissions in the report and the reservations of the Greater London Authority (GLA) and Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) had not been addressed. He also objected on the grounds of design, loss of light and the proximity of the proposal to the existing residential properties.
Mr Matthew Gibbs spoke on behalf of the applicant. He reminded the Committee that a previous planning application had already been approved for the site. He addressed the residents concerns relating to height and informed Members of the consultation which had taken place.
Councillor Phillip Briscoe addressed the Committee on behalf of the residents in the Spitalfields and Banglatown Ward. He expressed concern relating to the density of the proposal, the height being out of character and the area being designated in the draft Local Development Framework for office and retail, and not for residential uses.
Mr Stephen Irvine, Development Control Manager, presented the planning officer’s report. He addressed the concerns raised by the objectors and outlined the reasons for the officer’s recommendation of approval. It was recommended that four further conditions be added to any planning permission granted to mitigate the residents concerns. He detailed the differences between the proposal and the previously approved scheme and informed the Committee that there would be no loss of light. The application was inline with London Plan Policy and on balance was acceptable.
Concerns were raised by Members over the objections made by English Heritage and an apparent conflict with the emerging Local Development Framework (LDF) and the weight to be given to the LDF in their consideration of the application. Concerns were raised as to whether the site was suitable for a tall building and why the area hadn’t been included in the tall building cluster in the LDF. Mr Kiely explained the process of developing the LDF and that less weight should be given to it when it was only in a draft form and less than half way through the process.
However, after hearing the submissions and the presentations made by officers’ Members were still concerned and it was proposed that the application be deferred to enable Members to obtain advice from officers in respect of the weight which they should give to the draft LDF when considering planning ... view the full minutes text for item 7.1 |
|||
Minutes: Mr Michael Kiely, Head of Development Decisions, introduced the site and proposal for erection of three predominantly commercial buildings with a total floor area of 110,960 sq m; Building A 22 storeys (102.5 m) high, Building B 20 storeys high (93.5 m) and Building C 4 storeys high (32.7 m) to provide 84,305 sq m of offices (B1) and 2,805 sq m of retail and basement car park for 40 vehicles and associated plant accommodation; the removal of Aldgate gyratory and closure of Braham Street to create a new car park and other associated changes to the existing highway arrangement; new pedestrian route to Drum Street; and new entrance to Aldgate East underground station on land bounded by Whitechapel High Street, Colchester Street, Buckle Street including car park and Braham Street, London E1.
Mr Richard Humphreys, Strategic Applications Manager, presented the report and corresponding update report. He outlined the reasons why officers had recommended the application for approval. It was recommended that the ability to add an additional Head of Term to the Section 106 legal agreement to ensure that the Council received a commuted sum for the future maintenance of the park be agreed, pending the resolution of the future ownership and maintenance of the open space. The Committee was advised that the funding of highway works to replace the Aldgate Gyratory was a matter between Transport for London (TfL) and the developer. However, it was recommended that an additional condition be added to any permission to ensure that no development commence until an agreement had been reached between the relevant parties in respect of the necessary highway works. The Committee was also informed that an additional representation had been received from the owner of 15-17 Leman Street expressing concern that he had not been properly consulted on the proposals. Therefore, it was proposed that the owner be reconsulted and the Head of Development Decisions be authorised to deal with any representation received.
Members asked questions relating to the consultation which had taken place with local businesses on Whitechapel High Street, as the proposed changes to the highway system were extensive; the retention of the desired architects; the effect on daylight and sunlight; and the mitigating measures taken regarding television reception.
Mr Humphreys addressed the questions raised by Members. Consultation with local businesses would be undertaken by TfL. It was anticipated that the existing architects would be retained by the developer although the Council was not empowered to insist on this. The assessment of daylight/sunlight was satisfactory and a condition would be imposed to address any effect on TV reception.
The Committee AGREED that planning permission for the erection of three predominantly commercial buildings with a total floor area of 110,960 sq m; Building A 22 storeys (102.5 m) high, Building B 20 storeys high (93.5 m) and Building C 4 storeys high (32.7 m) to provide 84,305 sq m of offices (B1) and 2,805 sq m of retail and basement car park for 40 vehicles ... view the full minutes text for item 7.2 |
|||
132 St Paul's Way, London E3 4AL PDF 122 KB Minutes: Mr Richard Humphreys, Strategic Applications Manager, presented the officer’s report in respect of the erection of four blocks of 6, 7, 9 and 11 storeys (plus basement) to provide a 2,667 sq m Medical Centre (Class D1) and 36 flats (15 x 1 bed, 16 x 2 bed and 5 x 3 beds) with 8 off-street parking bays and landscaping/communal outdoor space at 132 St Paul’s Way, London E3 4AL.
The Committee was informed that the 10 storey building, as stated in the report, was actually a 9 storey building. The proposal included an overprovision of affordable housing and had been endorsed by the Mayor of London. Members received a computer presentation showing images of the proposal and views from various angles.
Members asked questions relating to the provision of health care in the area; the demand for an additional health centre; the amount of amenity space provided; and the floors on which the family accommodation would be located.
The Committee RESOLVED, at 10.30 pm, that it would continue for no longer than an hour in order to complete its business.
The Committee AGREED that planning permission for the erection of four blocks of 6, 7, 9 and 11 storeys (plus basement) to provide a 2,667 sq m Medical Centre (Class D1) and 36 flats (15 x 1 bed, 16 x 2 bed and 5 x 3 beds) with 8 off-street parking bays and landscaping/communal outdoor space at 132 St Paul’s Way, London E3 4AL be GRANTED subject to the following
A Any direction by the Mayor of London pursuant to the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000, as an application for new buildings exceeding 30 metres in height.
B The completion of a legal agreement pursuant to section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure obligations under the following Heads:
1) Car free arrangements 2) Local Labour in Construction 3) 38% affordable housing provision for social rent measured by floor space 4) TV reception monitoring and mitigation 5) The adoption of a Travel Plan in respect of the Medical Centre 6) To ensure the provision and satisfactory management of the Medical Centre
C An agreement pursuant to section 278 of the Highways Act to secure the funding of repairs to the public highway.
D The following conditions
1) Three year time limit 2) Details of external materials to be submitted for written approval 3) Details of hard and soft landscaping including the provision of green roofs to be submitted for written approval. 4) Approved landscaping scheme to be implemented 5) Building, engineering or other operations shall be carried out between the hours of 8.30 am and 6.00 pm Mondays to Fridays and 9.00 am to 1.00 pm Saturdays only with no works to take place Sundays or Public Holidays. 6) Any power/hammer driven piling/breaking out of material to take place between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm Mondays to Fridays only 7) The details of sound insulation/attenuation measures and ventilation as specified in the submitted ... view the full minutes text for item 7.3 |
|||
120-132 Chrisp Street, London E14 PDF 153 KB Minutes: Mr Michael Kiely, Head of Development Decisions, introduced the site and proposal for the demolition of existing light industrial buildings and erection of a building comprising 15 storeys plus roof terrace to provide restaurant/café (Class A3) and office/commercial unit (Class A1, A2, A3, B1) on the ground floor with 59 residential units above at 120-132 Chrisp Street, London E14.
Mr Stephen Irvine, Development Control Manager, presented the officer’s report and outlined the issues for the Committee to consider.
Members asked questions relating to disabled parking and the lack of a financial contribution by the applicant to health care provision in the area. Mr Irvine advised the Committee that, in weighing up the viability of the proposal, it was the view of officers that the benefit to the community of the good housing mix outweighed the financial contribution to health care provision.
The Committee AGREED that planning permission for the demolition of existing light industrial buildings and erection of a building comprising 15 storeys plus roof terrace to provide restaurant/café (Class A3) and office/commercial unit (Class A1, A2, A3, B1) on the ground floor with 59 residential units above at 120-132 Chrisp Street, London E14 be GRANTED subject to the following
1.1.1 The satisfactory completion of a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (and other appropriate powers) to include the matters below; and the conditions and informatives outlined in Sections 1.3 and 1.4 below; and Section 278 of the highways Act 1980, to include the matters outlined in paragraph 1.2 below. 1.1.2 The application be first referred to the Mayor of London, pursuant to the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000, as an application for a new building exceeding 30 metres in height and involving more than 500 residential units. 1.1.3 The Committee confirmed that it had taken the environmental information into account as required by Regulation 3 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Assessment) Regulations 1999. 1.1.4 A statement be placed in the Statutory Register confirming that the main reasons and considerations on which the Committee’s decision was based, were those set out in the Planning Officer’s report to the Committee (as required) by Regulation 21(1)(c) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999.
1.2 The execution of legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act and section 278 of the Highways Act to secure:
1.2.1 The provision of 34% affordable housing 1.2.2 The provision of land in connection with the development of public open space/piazza on Carmen Street 1.2.3 Car free development 1.2.4 Local Labour in Construction 1.2.5 Contribution towards education provisions (£35,000) 1.2.6 Travel plan 1.2.7 The provision of disabled parking spaces along Chrisp Street
1.3 The conditions outlined below:
1.3.1 Permission valid for 3 years 1.3.2 Full particulars of external materials to be submitted for the Council’s written approval prior to the commencement of construction of the development 1.3.3 Details of hard and soft landscaping treatment to ... view the full minutes text for item 7.4 |
|||
REVISED PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS PDF 25 KB Minutes: Mr Michael Kiely, Head of Development Decisions, introduced a report which proposed a revised procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Strategic Development Committee. At its meeting on 19th July 2006, the Committee had requested that the procedure be reconsidered as it was felt that a revised procedure would be more suitable for the types of applications which it considered.
The current procedure, as agreed by the Development Committee on 7th June 2006, permitted one person to speak in objection and one person to speak in support of an application for up to 5 minutes each. It had been suggested that for major applications, more than one objector representing different views or areas of the community, be allowed to address the Committee.
It was proposed that there be 2 speaking slots of 3 minutes, and a single speaking slot of either 3 or 6 minutes, depending on whether there were one to two objectors speaking. It was also proposed that the procedure be reviewed after being in operation for 6 months.
The Committee RESOLVED that
(i) the revised procedure for hearing objections, as attached as Appendix 2, to the agenda report, be adopted; (ii) the procedure be reviewed in 6 months; and (iii) the Development Committee be advised of the Committee’s decision.
|