Agenda, decisions and 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 |
---|---|
The agenda order was varied at the meeting to consider item 6.1 Sainsbury Foodstore, 1 Cambridge Heath Road, London, E1 5SD (PA/17/01920) before item 5.1 Chrisp Street Market, Chrisp Street, London (PA/16/01612). For ease of reference, the items are listed in the minutes in the order that they appeared on the agenda.
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS PDF 67 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 reported that he would not be participating in agenda item 5.1 Chrisp Street Market, Chrisp Street, London (PA/16/01612). Councillor Francis left the meeting for the consideration of this application.
Councillor Peter Golds declared a personal interest in agenda item 6.1 Sainsbury Foodstore, 1 Cambridge Heath Road, London, E1 5SD (PA/17/01920). This was on the basis that he had undertaken consultancy work on behalf of Sainsburys.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 101 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 11th January 2018 Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 11 January 2018 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair subject to the inclusion of Councillor Peter Golds in the list of Councillors present.
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE PDF 87 KB 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 Place 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 Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.
3) To NOTE the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Strategic Development Committee. 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, Place 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, Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision
3) To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Development Committee and the meeting guidance.
|
|
DEFERRED ITEMS None
Minutes: None |
|
Chrisp Street Market, Chrisp Street, London (PA/16/01612) PDF 4 MB Proposal:
Comprehensive redevelopment of the site (including existing car park) comprising the demolition of existing buildings with the exception of the Festival of Britain buildings, Clock Tower and Idea Store; erection of 19 new buildings ranging from 3 to 25 storeys (up to a maximum AOD height of 88m) providing 649 residential units (C3 Use Class) (including re-provision of the124 existing affordable residential units); existing market enhancement, including new canopy and service building; refurbishment of retained Festival of Britain buildings; reconfiguration and replacement of existing and provision of new commercial uses including new cinema (D2 Use Class); alterations and additions to existing Idea Store for flexible community/ affordable office space use (D1/B1 Use Class); office space (B1 use class); retail, financial and professional services and café/ restaurant floor space (A1 - A3 Use Class), including A1 food store; public house (A4 Use Class); hot food takeaway floor space (A5 Use Class); upgrade and provision of new public open space
Officer recommendation:
That subject to any direction by the London Mayor, planning permission is APPROVED subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure planning obligations, conditions and informatives.
Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor David Edgar (Chair) for this item
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Planning Services) introduced the application for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site comprising the demolition of existing buildings (with the exception of the Festival of Britain buildings, Clock Tower and Idea Store) for the erection of a 19 new residential buildings (including the re-provision of the 124 existing affordable residential units); existing market enhancement, the reconfiguration, replacement and provision of new commercial uses and associated works.
The Committee’s attention was drawn to the two update reports for this application detailing: changes to the proposed affordable housing, the offer to provide additional affordable retail units as well as clarifications and additional representations.
The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Ammar Hasanie and Terry Mcgrenera spoke in objection to the application. They expressed concern about the applicant’s consultation and the lack of engagement with local residents and businesses. They also expressed concern about the lack of car parking and the findings of the applicant’s transport survey that concluded that most of the visitors to the market travelled to and from it by foot or transport. The objectors felat that many more customers travelled by car. Concern was also expressed about the amount of affordable housing proposed. There would be a disproportionate increase in the number of private housing compared to affordable housing. More should affordable housing should be provided.
In response to questions from Members, they clarified their concerns about the lack of consultation by the developer and engagement with the local community. It was felt that a ‘top down approach’ had been undertaken with very little publicity resulting in a lack of awareness of the plans in the community.
Jean Cuomo, local business owner and Anastasia Edwards, local resident; local resident spoke in support of the application. They considered that the scheme would regenerate the area, provide greater choice, increase footfall and trade and address security issues. The local community had been kept fully informed of the plans and the proposals had been regularly discussed at the Chrisp Street Partnership meetings. There was concern about the continued operation, the increased rents and the physical state of the centre and the market area if the development did not go ahead.
In response to questions from the Committee, they discussed in further detail the consultation process including the role of the Chrisp Street Partnership in raising awareness of the plans with the local traders over many years. They also shared their thoughts about the affordability of the new rents level for the traders and the phasing plans.
Scott Hudson (Applicant’s representative) spoke about the planning benefits of the application. He emphasised the scope of the applicant’s consultation with the local community. Details of which had been submitted to the Council.
In response to the questions from the Committee, he considered that the Chrisp Street Market was in need of regeneration. The applicant had consulted widely and the plans had been widely publicised for all to see. For example, there ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
Sainsbury Foodstore, 1 Cambridge Heath Road, London, E1 5SD (PA/17/01920) PDF 3 MB Proposal:
Demolition of the existing store and decked car park to allow for a replacement Sainsbury's store (Use Class A1) of 5,766 sqm (net sales area), 11,414 sqm (GIA) to include a Use Class D1 'explore learning' facility (118 sqm GIA); 871 sqm (GIA) of flexible retail/office/community floorspace (Use Class A1, A2, A3, B1 and D1); 471 residential units arranged in 8 blocks ranging from six to 14 storeys in height (up to a maximum height of 58.9m AOD); an energy centre and plant at basement level; 240 'retail' car parking spaces and 40 disabled car parking spaces for use by the proposed residential units; two additional disabled parking bays proposed at Merceron street; creation of an east-west public realm route from Cambridge Heath Road to Brady Street and public realm provision and enhancements; associated highway works to Brady Street, Merceron Street, Darling Row and Collingwood Street, and Cambridge Heath Road.
Officer recommendation to the Committee:
That the Committee resolves to inform the Planning Inspectorate that were it empowered to determine the application for planning permission the Council would have REFUSED permission for the reasons set out in the Committee report Minutes: Update report.
Paul Buckenham (Planning Services) introduced the application for the demolition of the existing store and decked car park to allow for a replacement Sainsbury's store to include an 'explore learning' facility, flexible retail/office/community floorspace, 471 residential units arranged in 8 blocks ranging from six to 14 storeys in height with associated works.
The Committee were advised that on the 14 December 2017, the Planning Inspectorate notified the Council that an appeal had been submitted because the statutory period for determining the application had expired and no decision had been made. As such, the powers to determine the planning application had been taken away from the Council and now lie with the Secretary of State (Planning Inspectorate). The Committee was advised to consider the application in the same manner as it would have done if the decision to determine application had not been removed from the Committee. The Committees resolution would determine the position that the Council would adopt at the Appeal. The appeal for non - determination would be considered alongside the appeal for the refusal of planning application PA/15/00837 in May 2017 at a conjoined Public Inquiry with the appeal.
Simon Westmorland (Planning Services) presented the report describing the site location, the surrounding area including the conservation areas and the listed buildings that were close to the site. He also referred to the consultation responses and the issues raised. The Committee were reminded of the concerns about the previously refused application relating to harm to heritage assets and loss of sunlight and daylight to neighbouring properties. Members noted the key changes to the proposal in terms of the reduction in the height of the proposal that had in turn reduced the number of residential units.
The Committee were advised of the key features of the application, including the proposed layout, floorspace, the elevations and the new walkway. Overall the proposal was considered to have a good design. The application would provide 17.5% affordable housing by habitable room (65 units). This falls significantly below the development plan policy requirements for 35 to 50 per cent affordable housing provision. The viability of the application had been independently tested on behalf of the Council and by the Greater London Authority (GLA). However no agreement on the viability of the application had been reached and the GLA considered that the amount of affordable housing to be wholly unacceptable. The application was appealed before viability matters could be resolved.
In heritage terms, the reduction in height had removed some of the harmful impacts from the previous refusal, particularly in relation to the Grade 1 listed Trinity Green Almshouses. However, the scheme would still result in less than substantial harm to the Grade 11 listed Albion Yard Brewery and the Whitechapel Market Conservation Area. In terms of the daylight and sunlight issues, there had been some positive improvements to a limited number of nearby properties when compared to the previous refusal. Despite this, the proposal would still result in the ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
|