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.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 101 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 19th February 2015 and the meeting held on 12th March 2015. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Committee held on19th February 2015 and the ordinary meeting held on 12th March 2015 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.
|
|
Former Enterprise Business Park, 2 Millharbour, London (PA/14/01246) PDF 163 KB Proposal:
Full planning permission for the erection of seven mixed-use buildings—A, B1, B2, B3, C, D and E (a ‘link’ building situated between block B1 and D)—ranging in height from 8 to 42 storeys.
New buildings to comprise: 901 residential units (Class C3);1,104 sqm (GIA) of ground-floor mixed-use (Use Class B1/ A1/ A2/ A3/ A4/ D1); a 1,049 sqm (GEA) ‘leisure box’ (Use Class D2); plant and storage accommodation, including a single basement to provide vehicle and cycle parking, servicing and plant areas; new vehicle and pedestrian accesses and new public amenity spaces and landscaping
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by The London Mayor, the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report. Additional documents:
Minutes: Update Report Tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the item. It was explained that given the nature of the changes to the application since previously considered by the Committee in March, that the Chair in consultation with Officers had decided to permit public speaking on this application in accordance with the Development Committee procedure rules.
Accordingly, the Chair invited registered speakers to address the meeting.
Michael Majewskito, (resident), Richard Horwood (Pan Peninsula Leaseholders and Residents Association) and Councillor Andrew Wood, Ward Councillor, spoke in objection to the scheme. They expressed concerns over:
· Loss of trees at Mastmaker Road. · Flood risk from the scheme given the capacity of the water drainage system. · Lack of sustainable energy measures – i.e. solar panels. · Car parking issues. · Impact from construction works. There was no information on how the impact from noise and dust etc. would be dealt with. To address this, no work should be permitted on Saturday. · Concern about the inclusion of the foot bridge in the PTAL assessment given the poor condition of the bridge to cope with the additional population. Transport for London felt that it was not fit for purpose. The PTAL rating drove the density assessment, so the issue also undermined the density assessment. · That it would be premature to approve the scheme prior to the adoption of the South Quay Master Plan and the Isle of Dogs Action Plan to manage the impact of the scheme as stated by Sir Edward Lister of the Greater London Authority (GLA). · Lack of child play space given the child yield from the scheme and other schemes. The introduction of four bed units would increase the yield further. There was also no guarantee that the play space from the surrounding schemes would come forward. · That the density of the scheme was significantly in excess of the London Plan density guidance and other approved schemes. · Impact on infrastructure from the development. · Adequacy of the CIL contribution to mitigate the impact of the development.
In response to questions from Councillors, a speaker clarified his concerns about flood risk from the development given of the lack of space for natural drainage and that some Council’s don’t allow basements to cover more than 50% of the site. Mr Majewskito pointed out that he had written to the developer to voice his concerns but none of the issues had been properly addressed save some changes to the trees. It was also felt that the proposed South Quay foot bridge should have been excluded from the PTAL rating and density assessment as there was no guarantee it would come forward.
Jennifer Ross and Andrew Long spoke in favour of the application, explaining the history of the application in the context of the Urban Development Framework (UDF). Whilst the plan set some general principles for the development of this site, (that were briefly outlined), the scheme had been developed as a stand alone scheme and to respond well to what was ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION None. Minutes: No items. |
|