Agenda item
Bow House and Theatre Building, 1 Paton Close, London, E3 2QE - (PA/20/02101, PA/20/02102)
Proposal:
PA/20/02101: Development to provide a two-storey roof extension to the existing Theatre Building, 1 Paton Close, comprising nine dwellings (2x one-bedroom, 4x two-bedroom and 3x three-bedroom), associated cycle parking, access, refuse and recycling storage, amenity space, landscaping, and restoration works to the existing facade of the existing Theatre Building and adjoining Bow House.
PA/20/02102: Works to the Listed Building for restoration works to the existing facade of the existing Bow House building.
|
Recommendation: Grant planning permission and Listed Building Consent with conditions and subject to s106 Agreement |
Minutes:
Update report published.
Jerry Bell introduced the application for the provision of a two-storey roof extension to the existing Theatre Building, 1 Paton Close, comprising nine dwellings with associated works.
This also sought listed building consent for restoration works to the Grade II listed Bow House Building (Former Poplar Town Hall). He also referred to the update report containing clarifications about the Council’s Planning Obligation SPD.
Jane Jin presented the report, describing the existing buildings, the land use, the nature of the site and the surrounds including its proximity to the Phoenix School and listed buildings nearby.
The following issues were noted:
· Consultation had been caried out. Representations had been received about the lack of affordable housing and impacts from proposals as set out in the Committee report. This included representations from the Head Teacher of the nearby school about the parking impact and construction impacts from the development. Officers had considered these representations and were of the view that the requirement to submit a Construction Management Plan, (including measures to avoid adjacent school’s drop off and pick up times) would be appropriate and would minimise any impacts.
· With the exception of the urgent works to the cladding, the works were unlikely to commence before Covid related restrictions were lifted in terms of people returning to office working.
· The scheme had been carefully designed to ensure that the height, bulk and massing would have a minimal impact on the existing listed building and the setting of the area.
· The Council’s Conservation Design Officer had reviewed the restoration plans. It was considered that the scheme would result in less than substantial harm to heritage assets. Officers considered that the proposal accords with relevant design and heritage policies.
· It was also considered that the works would enhance the appearance of the existing building and the Grade II Listed building by making improvements to the current degraded façades.
· The development would provide 9 residential units of a good standard including family sized housing, which met policy standards. The proposal would be liable for small sites financial contribution towards affordable housing.
· Other benefits of the development were noted including: the provision of external amenity space, a roof-top outdoor space for the benefit of all residents, and biodiversity gains.
· The proposal includes additional cycle parking and would be car free. No additional parking spaces were proposed. Highway Services had considered the application and had raised no objections
· The scheme would have a negligible impact on residential amenity.
· The Council’s Building Control department had considered the details of the proposed cladding. They had raised no issues with the fire safety documents.
· Given the merits of the application, Officers considered that it should be granted permission.
Committee’s questions:
The Committee discussed the following points:
· The replacement cladding and the proposed materials for the main building and the roof extension.
· It was confirmed that the building cladding was to be replaced. Further reassurances were provided that the plans had been considered and reviewed in consultation with Building Control and that the applicant had submitted a detailed fire safety report. Details of the plans were set out on the presentation slides.
· The choice of materials for the roof top extension. It was noted that developers may often choose different more ‘light weight materials’ for roof top extensions, given the merits of this approach on building grounds.
· The Construction Management Plan and the need to minimise disruption to residents. Assurances were sought about the length of the building time.
· Impact on the highway safety- particularly during the construction phase in terms of construction vehicles movements, cyclists safety, increased parking and traffic congestion.
· These issues had been assessed by the Council’s Highway Team. It was also confirmed that a range of conditions were proposed as set out in the Committee report to manage these issues. This included: a requirement to submit a Parking Management Plan, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (in consultation with Phoenix School) and measures to minimise risks to pedestrians and cyclists.
· Officers would take on board the issues raised at the meeting in preparing these conditions with the relevant services.
· It was also confirmed the Council only had controls over when building works must start. However, it was anticipated that the works should be completed in a timely fashion.
· The refuse storage arrangements. Officers confirmed that the existing ground floor storage area would be enlarged and would meet the requirements for the existing and new occupants. The Council’s Waste Services had not raised any concerns.
· The cycle parking. It was noted that the plans sought to deliver a number of secure stands and visitor stands in addition to the existing Sheffield Stands. Details of the arrangements were noted. These arrangements would meet the minimum requirements set out in policy.
· That leaseholder issues were a private matter, rather than a planning matter.
· The process for allocating the s106 contributions for small site contributions for affordable housing.
On a vote of 5 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That, conditional planning permission is GRANTED for the following
· Development to provide a two-storey roof extension to the existing Theatre Building, 1 Paton Close, comprising nine dwellings (2x one-bedroom, 4x two-bedroom and 3x three-bedroom), associated cycle parking, access, refuse and recycling storage, amenity space, landscaping, and restoration works to the existing facade of the existing Theatre Building and adjoining Bow House (PA/20/02101)
2. Subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report:
3. That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to negotiate the legal 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 informative to address the matters set out in the Committee report, subject to the removal of condition 7, regarding Archaeological Investigation
On a vote of 5 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:
5. That, conditional Listed Building Consent is GRANTED for the following:
· Works to the Listed Building for restoration works to the existing facade of the existing Bow House building. PA/20/02102
6. Subject to the conditions set out in the report:
Supporting documents: