Proposal:

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of three blocks ranging from 1 to 26 storeys in height comprising 648 residential units, commercial floorspace, 32 off-street car parking spaces, communal courtyards, associated landscaping and associated ancillary works.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant planning permission subject to conditions and obligations and GLA Stage II approval

Update report tabled

The Committee received and noted a report together that outlined a proposal to demolition of existing buildings and erection of three blocks ranging from 1 to 26 storeys in height comprising 648 residential units, commercial floorspace, 32 off-street car parking spaces, communal courtyards, associated landscaping and associated ancillary works. With the permission of the Chair (i) Amanda Day to spoke in opposition to the application; and (ii) David Roach spoke in support of the application. The Chair also exercised his discretion to allow a representative of the Applicant to speak during the consideration of this report on aspects of the proposal.

It was noted that the officer recommendation was to grant planning permission subject to conditions and obligations and GLA Stage II approval

The Committee asked a number of questions about the proposals and the points raised are summarised as follows:

The Committee noted:

·         That with regard to the impact on the Accident and Emergency Department at the Royal London that the Hospital was satisfied with this proposal. Whilst the Applicant feels that there is very little difference in what they already have the permission to build and what they now wish to build;

·         With regard to parking spaces referenced in the proposals whilst the aim is to have zero parking there is an issue regarding the viability of the scheme should the number of spaces are reduced;

·         That although when a housing developer gets planning permission they are normally required by the Council to make a number of the homes that they build officially “affordable”. This number in Tower Hamlets being 35 per cent and developers are aware of the requirement before they begin drawing up plans;

·         Also developers can as the scheme progresses through a viability assessment evidence that the amount of affordable housing they originally agreed is no longer viable;

·         That with regard to money the GLA has secured from Government to tackle London’s housing crisis. The developer has already accessed the maximum it can from such a funding stream;

·         That with regards to the play and informal recreation provision within the scheme that can be accessed safely from the street by children independently. There would be a share amenity space on ground floor and on certain levels within the blocks and that space which forms an integral part of the surrounding neighbourhood.

·         Noted that a percentage of the play and informal recreation provision space has been moved from ground to first floor which will be protected against pollution by the buildings in the proposed development.

·         Developer contributions secured as part of planning permission for such new developments have in the past provided significant funding for any new healthcare infrastructure needed to support growth. However, with the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) there is a change from an up-front negotiation of developer contributions (section 106 payments) on a site by site basis around a planning application. Now health professionals (including CCGs) now need to provide costed evidence of infrastructure needs to the local planning authority for investment and release of appropriate funds.

·         Noted that only emergency service and maintenance vehicles can access the car free areas of the site and the later only at agreed times;

·         With regard to the impact of the site on the neighbourhood through developer contributions (section 106 payments) secured as part of planning permission there has been the inclusion of increased permeability and extensive public realm work that will form an integral part of the surrounding neighbourhood.

·         Were concerned that the scheme in its current form would not deliver the desired percentage of affordable housing and that consideration should be given to there being a Late Stage Review of the scheme. Which would ensure that the review and any additional contribution

·         towards off-site affordable housing provision;

·         This review of the viability of the scheme would also look at if it can capture any additional affordable housing due to any up lift as a result of an overall increase in value;

As a result of a full and wide ranging discussion on the report Councillor Rabina Khan moved and Councillor Kevin Brady seconded that the following be added to the legal agreement:

·         Obligation requiring a late stage review of the affordable housing.

On a unanimous vote, this additional obligation was agreed.

On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED:

1.         That subject to any direction by the Mayor of London, conditional Planning permission is GRANTED at Site Bound by Raven Row Stepney Way, Sidney Street, London, E1 for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of three blocks ranging from 1 to 26 storeys in height comprising 648 residential units, commercial floorspace, 32 off-street car parking spaces, communal courtyards, associated landscaping and associated ancillary works (PA/18/00917) SUBJECT to:

2.         The prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the report subject to:

·         Amendment in the update report specifying that there will be 1 x end-user phase apprenticeship

·         An obligation requiring a late stage review of the affordable housing.

·         Confirmation by officers of the carbon off-setting contribution

3.         That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to negotiate the   legal agreement and to agree the section 106 legal agreement and any subsequent Rent and Nominations Agreement and Highway Agreement. If within three months of the resolution the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director for Place is delegated power to refuse planning permission.

4.         That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to impose conditions and informatives to address the matters set out in the report: