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 56 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 Kabir Ahmed declared an interest in agenda item (6.1) Ocean Estate Site H, west of Aston Street, including Allonby, Channel and Studland Houses (PA/13/02911). This was on the basis that he was a Board Member of Tower Hamlets Community Housing (Council Appointed).
|
||
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 127 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 9th January 2014. Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 9th January 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 64 KB To NOTE the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Strategic Development Committee and the meeting guidance
Minutes: The Committee noted the procedure for hearing objections, together with details of persons who had registered to speak at the meeting.
|
||
DEFERRED ITEMS Nil Items. Minutes: None. |
||
Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings on site and construction of three residential blocks between two and thirteen storeys high comprising 225 residential dwellings (64 one-bed, 106 two-bed, 30 three-bed, 15 four-bed and 10 five-bed) with associated landscaping and basement parking
Recommendation: That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by the London Mayor. prior completion of a legal agreement, conditions and informative(s)
Minutes: Update Report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application for planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings on site and construction of three residential blocks with associated landscaping and basement parking.
The Chair then invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Tim Miller spoke in objection as an occupant of the property on the northern side of Matlock Street. Mr Miller objected to the loss of privacy from the proposed building. Specifically, the loss of light to his daughter’s bedroom, who required medical treatment in this room. His daughter had a right to natural light and privacy. In view of this, he requested that the windows of the new building, near his daughter’s bedroom, should be bay windows or that the building should be set back further. The separation distances to his property were 18 metres. In response to Members, he stated that he had put his concerns to the applicant and Council Officers. He was supportive of a condition that addressed the overlooking issues. This would address his concerns about the scheme.
Mike Tyrell from Tower Hamlets Homes and the Chair of the Ocean Regeneration Trust spoke in support of the application. Mr Tyrell welcomed the proposals that sought to replace low grade buildings with new affordable houses including family housing and high quality amenity space. Mr Tyrell highlighted the much needed improvements to the route to the Whitehorse Road Park that should encourage use. The design was sympathetic to the area. The scheme would protect amenity. In response to Members, he clarified the uplift in affordable housing.
Piotr Lanoszka (Planning Officer, Development and Renewal) presented the report. Mr Lanoszka explained the site location, the outcome of the local consultation, the proposed housing mix that was considered acceptable. Mr Lanoszka also explained the proposed layout, elevations, the quality of the outdoor space that would integrate the site with the surrounding area, the car parking plans and the good transport links for the site.
Mr Lanoszka described the impact on views from the key points. In particularly, the visibility of the proposal in the backdrop of the Grade 1 Church. Whilst there would be some impact in this regard, the specialists considered that, with careful management of the materials, the impact should be minimal. Mr Lanoszka also explained the planning obligations. It was considered that the proposed benefits outweighed the shortfalls in this regard. Given the overall benefits of the scheme, Officers were recommending that the scheme should be granted planning permission.
In response to Members, Mr Lanoszka explained the separation distances between the proposed building and the nearest properties which were at least 20 metres in compliance with policy. As a result, it was considered that the plans would not affect privacy. However, should the Committee consider that there were exceptional circumstances in this case, Members could impose an informative to mitigate the issues with overlooking raised by the objector speaking. With the permission of the Chair, the applicant confirmed that they were ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
||
GRANT |
Sceptre Court, 40 Tower Hill, London EC3N 4DX (PA/13/02692) PDF 335 KB Proposal: Change of Use from Office (Use Class B1) to a dual use as Higher Educational Establishment (Use Class D1) and Office (Use Class B1)
Recommendation: That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by the London Mayor. prior completion of a legal agreement, conditions and informative(s)
Minutes: Update Report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application for planning permission for change of use from Office (Use Class B1) to a dual use as Higher Educational Establishment (Use Class D1) and Office (Use Class B1).
Jane Jin (Planning Officer, Development and Renewal) presented the report. Ms Jin explained the policy designation for the site within the Central Activities Zone (CAZ) and a Preferred Office Location (POL). The proposal would be departure from policy as it will result in a net loss of Office floor space within the POL.
Ms Jin explained the case for the departure given that the plans would not affect the function of the CAZ and POL but it would provide a supporting role. Also the proposal would support the expansion of higher educational facilities in the borough. The Committee were also advised of the proposed layout and that the impact on amenity and the highway was acceptable. Transport for London had no concerns subject to the conditions.
The Committee also noted that there would be no external alterations and details of the planning obligations including the ten scholarships for local residents. In view of the merits of the scheme, Officers were recommending that the application be granted.
In response to a Member, it was reported that the details of the ten placements were pending finalisation with the applicant
On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That planning permission at Sceptre Court, 40 Tower Hill, London EC3N 4DX (PA/13/02692) be GRANTED for Change of Use from Office (Use Class B1) to a dual use as Higher Educational Establishment (Use Class D1) and Office (Use Class B1) subject to:
2. Any direction by the London Mayor.
3. The prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the committee report.
4. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above acting within normal delegated authority.
5. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated authority to recommend the conditions and informatives in relation to the matters set out in the committee report.
|
|
Other Planning Matters Nil Items. Minutes: None.
|
||