Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: David Knight, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4878 E-mail: david.knight@towerhamlets.gov.uk
Media
No. | Item |
---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS PDF 117 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.
Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Abdul Mukit declared an interest in respect of item 5.2 stating that he had a close relationship with the applicant and would be withdrawing from the meeting for the duration of the item.
Councillor Rajib Ahmed declared an interest in respect of item 5.2 stating that he knew the applicant.
Councillor Mufeedah Bustin declared an interest in respect of item 5.2 stating that she knew the applicant.
Councillor John Pierce declared an interest in respect of item 5.2 stating that he knew the applicant.
Councillor Leema Qureshi declared an interest in respect of item 5.2 stating that she had a close relationship with the applicant and would be withdrawing from the meeting for the duration of the item.
Councillor Dan Tomlinson (present from Item 5.2 and participating as a registered speaker only in the item) declared an interest in respect of item 5.2 stating that he knew the applicant and objectors and would be withdrawing from the meeting prior to deliberation and voting by the Committee.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 161 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Committee held on 19th September 2019 Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED
1. That the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19 September 2019 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE PDF 142 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 Development Committee and meeting guidance.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee RESOLVED that:
1. The procedure for hearing objections and meeting guidance be noted.
2. In the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes be delegated to the Corporate Director, Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and
3. 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 be delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision
|
|
DEFERRED ITEMS There are no items. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no deferred items. |
|
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION PDF 291 KB Additional documents: |
|
City Hotel, 12-20 Osborn Street, London, E1 6TE (PA/19/01301) PDF 3 MB Proposal:
Part 4, 5 and 6 storey rear extension plus partial basement and associated internal changes to the existing hotel to create an additional 153 rooms, external alterations to the Osborn Street elevation, cycle parking facilities, disabled car parking, plant, demolition of rear buildings within car park and other associated works.
Recommendation:
Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions Additional documents:
Minutes: An update report was tabled.
Gareth Gwynne introduced the application for part 4, 5 and 6 storey rear extension plus partial basement and associated internal changes to the existing hotel to create an additional 153 rooms, external alterations to the Osborn Street elevation, cycle parking facilities, disabled car parking, plant, demolition of rear buildings within car park and other associated works.
Adam Garcia (Planning Services) presented the report describing the nature of the site and the surrounding area, and the outcome of the consultation, resulting in the receipt by the Council of 37 Letters of representation, 37 letters of objection and 1 petition in objection of 60 signatures. Mr Garcia summarised the comments raised in objection to the proposal.
Mr Garcia briefly summarised the results of the assessments relating to: · Land use · Design and heritage · Impact on amenity of the surrounding residential properties, including the impacts on sunlight and daylight; · Overshadowing and impact on outlook, privacy and sense of enclosure at Green Dragon Yard; and · Impact on outlook, privacy and sense of enclosure at 22-30 Osborn Street.
Finally Mr Garcia provided a summary of proposed transport and servicing procedures and outlined the proposed planning obligations.
Officers considered that the application, complied with policy so should be granted.
The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.
Matt Cassini and Ahmed Boudeffeur expressed concerns about the scheme regarding the following issues: · The application included little effort to mitigate the impact on local residents. · Applicant’s public engagement had been inadequate and misleading. · The proposal would have a detrimental impact on community safety. · Assumptions in the application have gone unchallenged. · There is insufficient evidence for an increased demand for hotel rooms. · Concerns about fire risks and escape routes. · Construction noise and dust and impact on air pollution. · Vehicles would cause an obstruction when turning in the street. · Overshadowing and loss of daylight to neighbouring residents. · Loss of residents’ privacy by being overlooked. · Access to Green Dragon Yard would be hindered. · Detrimental impact on waste management. · Detrimental impacts on biodiversity and health.
Gareth Jackson and Kevin Francis addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant and made the following points: · Consultation with residents had been thorough. · Demand for increased hotel places is evident. · The applicant has made changes to the proposals to address residents’ concerns. · Significant efforts have been taken to ensure fire safety. · Whilst the applicant had made genuine efforts to obtain floor plans of Green Dragon Yard, none were available. · Daylight tests indicate only moderate loss of daylight with levels consistent with those in the locality as indicated in the officer’s report.
Questions to Officers In response to questions, officers explained that the Highways Service had reported no significant concerns with potential impact on the street including parking, turning, impact on local businesses etc. Officers provided further detail on the tests used to determine the loss of daylight and sunlight to affected properties. Further to questions regarding fire risk concerns of objectors, officers advised that fire strategies were outside the scope ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
ELECTION OF CHAIR Councillors Abdul Mukit and Leema Qureshi left the meeting prior to the start of this item.
As the Chair had left the meeting and the deputy chair was not present, the Clerk asked the Committee to elect a person to preside.
Councillor Rajib Ahmed proposed and Councillor Mufeedah Bustin seconded a proposal that Councillor John Pierce be elected Chair for the remainder of the meeting. On a vote of 3 in favour, none against, the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That Councillor John Pierce be elected Chair for the remainder of the meeting
Additional documents: |
|
96-98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG PA/19/00256 PDF 2 MB Proposal:
The redevelopment of 96-98 Bromley High Street, comprising the demolition of the existing building (two storey residential building) (use class C3) to construct a four storey residential building containing 4 x two bedroom units, 2 x one bedroom units and 1 x three bedroom unit with associated cycle parking spaces, private amenity space and other associated works.
Recommendation:
Grant planning permission with conditions Additional documents: Minutes: Gareth Gwynne introduced the application for demolition of the existing building to construct a four storey residential building containing 4 x two bedroom units, 2 x one bedroom units and 1 x three bedroom unit with associated cycle parking spaces, private amenity space and other associated works.
Piotr Lanoszka (Planning Services) presented the report describing the nature of the site and the surrounding area, and the outcome of the consultation, resulting in the receipt by the Council of 10 letters of objection and 1 petition in objection of 39 signatures. Mr Lanoszka summarised the comments raised in objection to the proposal.
Mr Lanoszka briefly summarised the results of the assessments relating to land use; housing; design; heritage; impact on neighbour amenity; highways and transport; and the environment.
Officers considered that the application, complied with policy so should be granted.
The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.
Susan Christopher and Keith Cunningham expressed concerns about the scheme regarding the following issues: · Massing and scale of the proposal is inappropriate and would make it out of character with other buildings in the locality. · Impact on parking stress in the locality. · Risk to nearby tree and car park. · Loss of residents privacy through being overlooked. · Major loss of daylight. · Disruption and noise of development. · Stress and impact on health of residents, including vulnerable residents · Claims of a factual inaccuracy in the case officer’s report: the distance between the proposed development and 1A Priory Street being 6.5m (not 12.5m). · Objectors have engaged an independent daylight consultant to review proposals. The consultant’s report was not mentioned in the case officer’s report. · Flaws in the assessment of sunlight and daylight loss.
Councillor Dan Tomlinson addressed the Committee. Councillor Tomlinson stressed that he was not opposed in principle to development on this site, but wished to express concerns about this scheme regarding the following issues: · The cumulative impact of development in Bromley North is concerning to residents. · Concern over reports of inaccuracies in the report regarding distance of 1A and 1B Priory Street from the proposal and of the address of nearby properties being incorrect. · Further impact on parking stress in the locality. · The major adverse impact on daylight/sunlight of affected properties, as indicated in the report, must be tested against Council policies not to approve schemes that would have significant material detriment to daylight and sunlight of local residents.
The applicant’s representatives indicated they did not wish to address the Committee, but were on hand to respond to any questions it had on the application or points raised.
Questions to Officers In response to questions, officers explained that:
|
|
OTHER PLANNING MATTERS There are none. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no other planning matters. |