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 6.2 Docklands Sailing Centre, 235A Westferry Road, London, E14 3QS (PA/16/00437) as he had received representations from interested parties on the application. |
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 156 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 12 April 2016 Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 May 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 Strategic Development Committee.
Minutes: The Committee noted the procedure for hearing objections and meeting guidance.
|
|
DEFERRED ITEMS None. Minutes: None. |
|
South Quay Plaza 4, Marsh Wall, London, E14 (PA/15/03073) PDF 6 MB Proposal:
Erection of a 56 storey building comprising of 396 residential (Class C3) Units, Retail (Class A1-A4) Space, together with basement, ancillary residential facilities, access servicing, car parking, cycle storage, plant, open space and landscaping and other associated works.
The application is accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by The London Mayor, the prior completion of a Section 106 legal agreement and conditions and informatives.
Minutes: Update report tabled
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application for the erection of a 56 storey building comprising of 396 residential (Class C3) Units, Retail (Class A1-A4) Space, together with basement, ancillary residential facilities, access servicing, car parking, cycle storage, plant, open space and landscaping and other associated works.
The Chair then invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Richard Horwood (Chair, Isle of Dogs Neighbourhood Planning Forum), Jim Kean (Discovery Dock East Tenants Association) and Councillor Andrew Wood (Ward Councillor) spoke in opposition to the application. They expressed concern about the impact that the scheme would have on social infrastructure. The infrastructure must be in place first including the new South Quay bridge before the scheme was implemented to mitigate the impact. The current bridge has been deemed inadequate by TfL. They also considered that the height of the scheme would be out of keeping with the area and the South Quay Masterplan. They also objected to the density of the scheme more than double that recommended for the PTAL for the application in guidance.
In terms of the land use, the scheme conflicted with the GLA policy produced in March 2016 expressing a preference for commercial use of the site (not residential). Concerns were also expressed about the adequacy of the combined access route (given the expected usage figures including those for large vehicles) that would result in increased traffic congestion on the highway and the impact on neighbouring sunlight and daylight (given the findings in the Committee report). Concern was also expressed about the quantum, and quality of the child play space. Reassurances were also sought about access rights to existing parking spaces.
In response to questions from the Committee, the speakers clarified their concerns about the impact that the scheme would have on the transport network. They also answered questions about the cumulative impact from this and other schemes on the nearby junction, increased traffic congestion from the development, the unsuitability of the current bridge, the methods used for calculating the PTAL rating in the Committee report, the lack of play space and the changes to GLA policy.
Mike Nisbet, Patrick Campbelland James McAllister addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant. They considered that the application would regenerate a vacant site maximising the development potential of the site in accordance with policy resulting in the delivery of good quality new homes that would be tenure blind, new public realm, a consolidated assess route and generous levels of child play space. Consultation had been carried out and the scheme had been amended to mitigate the concerns. Care had been taken to minimise the impact of the scheme and the developer would continue to engage with the local community.
The speakers were mindful of the concerns about the impact on the highway and the combined assess route. They reassured Members that a detailed transport assessment had been carried out. The findings showed that the combined access route could support ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
|
Docklands Sailing Centre, 235A Westferry Road, London, E14 3QS (PA/16/00437) PDF 292 KB Proposal:
Demolition of 3. no existing modular units and siting of 6 no. modular units for use as a primary school (Class D1) temporarily for 1 academic year, until 31 August 2017. Retention of 3 no. modular units after 31 August 2017 for use by Docklands Sailing and Watersports Centre (D1/D2) for a period of 5 years from the date of permission.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to the planning conditions and informatives in the Committee report.
Minutes: Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application for the demolition of 3. no existing modular units and siting of 6 no. modular units for use as a primary school temporarily for 1 academic year, until 31 August 2017 and the retention of 3 no. modular units after 31 August 2017 for use by Docklands Sailing and Watersports Centre for a period of 5 years from the date of permission.
The application had attracted 21 objections meaning it was referable to Committee. The application had been referred to the Strategic Development Committee (as opposed to the Development Committee that did not meet until 8 June 2016), by the Corporate Director of Development and Renewal, as he considered it appropriate as the applicant is seeking a timely outcome of the planning process prior to the start of the new school term in September.
The Chair then invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Daniel Anson (Governor of Arnhem Wharf Primary School) Katy Bennett-Richards and Councillor Dave Chesterton addressed the Committee in objection. (Councillor Chesterton explained that he was not speaking as a Councillor or a Trustee of the Dockland Sailing Centre).
They objected to the impact of the development on the highway during the school run given its close proximity to the Arnhem Wharf Primary School. Given the overlap in the school hours, the plans would worsen the existing problems with traffic and parking congestion around the school.
They also objected to the impact on the Dockland Sailing Centre from the loss of the club facilities and the position of the new modular units that would ‘bisect’ the site. Furthermore, there was no guarantee that the development would only be temporary.
In response to questions from the Committee, they clarified their concerns about the ongoing issues with parking congestion outside the Arnhem Wharf Primary School, expressed concerns about the safety of the highway in the vicinity and outlined the measures that the school implemented to try to prevent this. They also answered questions about the impact on the Dockland Sailing Centre and the lack of consultation with the centre
Sarah Counter (Canary Wharf College), Peter Webb and Councillor Andrew Wood spoke in support of the scheme emphasising the need for a new school in the area. They considered that if refused, the children would have to be bussed to schools outside the Borough. Council Officers had raised no objection to the scheme. There would be staggered start times to avoid conflict with the Arnhem Wharf Primary School and any undue impact on the highway. The students would be from the local area, resulting in minimal vehicle activity. The college operated a similar college nearby that had not given rise to any highway issues.
The Council and the sailing club had been consulted about the plans and the management were supportive of the plans given the long term benefits for the centre so were many parents.
Chris Stacey-Kinchin (Planning Officer, Development and Renewal)gave a presentation on ... view the full minutes text for item 6.2 |
|
S106 Planning Obligations - Use of Health Contributions for Preventive Health Projects. PDF 2 MB Recommendation:
That the Committee agrees the use of a proportion of the health s106 contributions (£1,392,773) secured in connection with planning permission PA/06/02068, for preventive health measures such as the proposed green grid projects.
Minutes: Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the report seeking approval of the use of a proportion of the health s106 contributions (£1,392,773) secured in connection with planning permission PA/06/02068, for preventive health measures such as the proposed green grid projects.
With the prior permission of the Chair, Councillor Andrew Wood addressed the Committee. He expressed concerns about the delays in implementing some of the projects within the green grid programme, and questioned the merits of some of the spending decisions and whether they represented value for money. Whilst mindful of the timescales involved, he stressed the need for such issues to be taken into account and that the proposals be subject to a cost benefit analysis.
Tim Madelin (LBTH Public Health Strategist) presented the detailed report. He explained the aims of the proposal to mitigate demand on health care by improving the environment. The Council’s Planning Contributions Panel had considered the proposals and they considered that it provided a practical solution to improve health and wellbeing. It also complemented the Council’s approach of providing support and funding to NHS schemes that it could not fund itself. Details of current projects were noted.
A letter of support from the Clinical Commissioning Group for the proposal was set out in the agenda.
The Committee asked about the process for selecting projects and how they could get involved in the programme.
In response, officers discussed in greater detail some of the projects included in the programme. They also highlighted the process for identifying projects, determined by the Council’s Green Grid Strategy. Officers undertook to circulate to Members information on the Council’s Green Grid Strategy that would be refreshed as part of the Local Plan review.
In summing up, the Chair welcomed the greening of the Borough and felt that this was an innovative use of money. Nevertheless he felt that it was important that some of the funding was allocated to the provision of health care facilities given the pressures on such facilities in the Borough.
On a unanimous vote the Committee RESOLVED:
That the Committee agrees the use of a proportion of the health s106 contributions (£1,392,773) secured in connection with planning permission PA/06/02068, for preventive health measures such as the proposed green grid projects.
|
|