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: No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made.
Councillors Sirajul Islam, Md Maium Miah, Danny Hassell, Amina Ali, John Pierce, Helal Uddin, Suluk Ahmed, Muhammad Ansar Mustaquim and Julia Dockerill declared an interest in agenda items 6.1, Quay House, 2 Admirals Way, London E14 (PA/14/00990), 6.2 South Quay Plaza, 183-189 Marsh Wall, London, PA/14/00944 and 6.3 Arrowhead Quay, East of 163 Marsh Wall, E14 (PA/12/03315). This was on the basis that they had received representations from interested parties on the applications.
Councillors Sirajul Islam, Danny Hassell, Amina Ali, John Pierce, Muhammad Ansar Mustaquim and Julia Dockerill declared an interest in agenda item 6.1, Quay House, 2 Admirals Way, London E14 (PA/14/00990). This was because they had attended the formal site visit as agreed at the 25th September 2014 Committee meeting.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 108 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 25th September 2014. Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 25th 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 Strategic Development Committee.
Minutes: The Committee noted the procedure for hearing objections, together with details of persons who had registered to speak at the meeting.
|
|
Quay House, 2 Admirals Way, London E14 (PA/14/00990) PDF 61 KB Proposal:
Demolition of the existing building and redevelopment to provide a residential led, mixed use scheme to include a tower of 68 storeys (233 metres AOD) comprising 496 residential units, 315.3 sq.m. (GEA) of flexible commercial uses including retail/financial and professional services/café/restaurant uses (Use Classes A1 to A3), a residents’ gymnasium and associated residential amenity space, car and cycle parking and landscaping.
Recommendation:
To REFUSE planning permission subject to any direction from the Mayor of London.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Update Report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application and the update.
Robert Lancaster (Planning Officer) presented the deferred report. It was reported that the Committee considered the application at its last meeting on 25th September 2014 where Members resolved to defer the consideration of the application for a site visit to better familiarise themselves with the site and surrounds. The Officers recommendation remained to refuse the scheme for the reasons set out in the deferred report.
The Committee were reminded of the site location, the surrounds and the key features of the scheme. They were also informed that Officers had now agreed with the Applicant the Head of Terms of the proposed legal agreement and a draft unilateral undertaking had been submitted. However, it was proposed that the reason for refusal on this matter should remain a reason (reason 2) given that a legal agreement had not been entered into and the need to highlight the importance of such a legal agreement in the event of an appeal.
It was also reported that, since the last meeting, Officers had met with the Applicant to consider the concerns and the Applicant had submitted informal information to address some of the concerns (as referred to in the deferred report). The Applicant had also advised that if these amendments could not be fully assessed in time for this Committee meeting, then the Committee should take the scheme as submitted. Given the lack of time to assess and consult on these amendments before the Committee meeting, the scheme remained as originally submitted. Furthermore it was considered that the proposed amendments would not address all of the reasons for refusal or deal with the overdevelopment aspects of the scheme.
In response to questions, Officers considered that the scheme showed clear and demonstrable signs of overdevelopment due to the density of the scheme in relation to the site constraints. Officers objections were not merely based on the height of the scheme rather the symptoms of overdevelopment. Officers had engaged with the Applicant over a long period of time to express their in principle concerns about the scheme.
The views of Greater London Authority (GLA) remained as in September as detailed in their August letter (that had been circulated again to Committee Members). Officers read out a recent e-mail from the GLA dated November 2014 reiterating their concerns about the scheme.
Councillor John Pierce seconded by Councillor Amina Ali moved a motion that the application be deferred to allow Officers to engage further with the Applicant with a view to amending the scheme. On being put to the vote, this motion was lost.
On a vote of 4 in favour of the Officer recommendation, 1 against and 2 abstentions the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That planning permission PA/14/00990 at Quay House, 2 Admirals Way, London E14 be REFUSED for the demolition of the existing building and redevelopment to provide a residential led, mixed use scheme to include a tower of ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
South Quay Plaza, 183-189 Marsh Wall, London (PA/14/00944) PDF 4 MB Proposal:
Demolition of all existing buildings and structures on the site (except for the building known as South Quay Plaza 3) and erection of two residential-led mixed use buildings of up to 68 storeys and up to 36 storeys comprising up to 888 residential (Class C3) units in total, retail (Class A1-A4) space and crèche (Class D1) space together with basement, ancillary residential facilities, access, servicing, car parking, cycle storage, plant, open space and landscaping, plus alterations to the retained office building (South Quay Plaza 3) to provide retail (Class A1-A4) space at ground floor level, an altered ramp to basement level and a building of up to 6 storeys to the north of South Quay Plaza 3 to provide retail (Class A1-A4) space and office (Class B1) space.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to, any direction by The London Mayor, the prior completion of a legal agreement, conditions and informatives.
Minutes: Update Report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application and the update and the Chair then invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Sarah Castro, local resident, Richard Horwood, Chair of the Pan Peninsula Leaseholders and Residents Association and Councillor Andrew Wood, ward Councillor spoke in objection to the scheme. The objectors expressed concern about the following matters in relation to the scheme:
On behalf of the Applicants, Harry Lewis and Julian Carter addressed the committee expressing the following points in support of the application:
In response to Members, the speakers clarified the levels of on site play space that would be provided and how the developer would ensure that this was of high quality. There would also be home working spaces that could be used by older children. Whilst consideration had been to providing a new school on site, it was found that there was not enough capacity to provide a school in the development. The applicant would take steps to prevent anti social behaviour by for example working with the ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
|
Arrowhead Quay, East of 163 Marsh Wall, E14 (PA/12/03315) PDF 2 MB Proposal
Erection of two buildings of 55 and 50 storeys to provide 756 residential units (Use Class C3) (including 90 Affordable Rent and 42 Affordable Shared Ownership) and ancillary uses, plus 614sqm. ground floor retail uses (Use Classes A1-A4), provision of ancillary amenity space, landscaping, public dockside walkway and pedestrian route, basement parking, servicing and a new vehicular access.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to, any direction by The London Mayor, the prior completion of a legal agreement, conditions and informatives.
Minutes: Update Report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application and the update and the Chair then invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Diana Maudslay Cross, Rachael Crellin, local residents and Councillor Andrew Wood, ward Councillor spoke in objection to the scheme expressing the following points:
· That it would be premature to grant the planning permission without the adoption of the South Quay Master plan to properly assess the impact. · There was an overprovision of small units and not enough family units so it would not encourage mixed and balanced communities. · Lack of social housing. · Impact on local schools, doctor surgeries that were already overstretched · Impact on transport. · Noise impact. · Loss of open space, paths and adverse impact on biodiversity and wildlife · Creation of a barrier between Canary Wharf and the south of the Island. · That the consultation document of 2012 was out of date in terms of number of children in the area and play space. · Concerns about the density that was significantly in excess of the Greater London Authority guidance. · Impact on existing problems with broadband water. · Height. If granted, it would be one of the tallest buildings in the country.
On behalf of the Applicant, Glen Howell, Julian Carter and Simon Ryan spoke in support of the scheme expressing the following points:
· That the height of the scheme was acceptable taking into account the surrounding buildings site and advice from Officers. The GLA had no major concerns with the height of the scheme. · Highlighted the merits of the scheme including the landscaping works, the public dockside walkway, the improvements to the permeability of the site. A large part of the site would be open space. · Lack of demand for the existing the office use. The policy support for this type of scheme in the area. · High quality housing including affordable housing in excess of size requirements. · New S106 and CIL contributions in addition to those secured for the previous consent. This included contributions for education and contributions to transport. · There had been testing to provide a school on site. However, it was found that this could not be achieved so there were contributions for school places. · Clarified the percentage of new units that could be easily adapted for wheelchair use. · That the cumulative impact of this scheme and other schemes had been taken into account. · That the plans had been widely advertised and there had been widespread public engagement on the scheme. · That the scheme complied with the emerging South Quay Master Plan according to Council Officers. · Effort had been made to ensure that the affordable and private units were of equal quality. · Noted the need to provide separate entrances for the private/affordable blocs to ensure that the services charges for the affordable units were affordable.
Graham Harrington (Planning Officer) presented the report and update. He gave a detailed presentation on the scheme covering: the planning history of the site, the site and surrounds, the site designation in policy, the outcome ... view the full minutes text for item 6.2 |
|