Update report noted.

Paul Buckenham introduced the application to grant planning permission for a comprehensive and phased mixed-use redevelopment comprising 1,358 residential units (Class C3), Secondary School (Class F), commercial, business and services (Class E(a)-E(g)(i)), community uses (Class F), car and cycle basement parking, associated landscaping, new public realm and all other necessary enabling works.

Nelupa Malik  provided a presentation to accompany the application, which highlighted the proposal’s site and surroundings. The proposal will provide 1,358 residential units, which equates to 35% affordable housing units, including a 46% of the affordable rent tenure as family housing. It will also include a 1,200 pupil capacity secondary school and a separate sports facility. There will be 12 building plots within the scheme and the construction program will take approximately 6-8 years, which will begin in 2024 if planning permission is granted.

The Committee was given background information on the extant planning permission, granted  in 2016 by the Mayor of London (ref: PA/15/02216). This was to provide 722 residential units in total of which 140 will be affordable housing units, and 210 family-sized units. The affordable units equated to 20%, split between affordable and intermediate properties. A mixture of retail uses, a secondary school and community uses were also proposed within the scheme.

In 2018 a revised application was submitted to provide 1,524 residential units and adopted the consented scheme. However, an appeal against a non-determination of the application was submitted in 2019 and granted by the Secretary of State in 2020,  following a public inquiry that same year. The appeal was challenged by the Council via a judicial review and planning permission was quashed and a public inquiry reopened in May 2021. The appeal was dismissed in November 2021.

The scheme was revised again and presented to the Committee as a pre-application on 18 October 2023. At that time questions were asked but no votes were taken.

The Chair invited Andrew Wood, to speak in objection to the application. Mr Wood highlighted the following concerns:

·       Planning permission was granted in 2016 for the secondary school and sports block, with a S106 agreement stating it had to be built by 2022. This did not occur and the developer has now proposed that if planning permission is not granted, the school will not be constructed.

·       Requested that either a further condition be implemented to ensure the secondary school lease is signed prior to granting the application. Or defer a decision until October 2024 to permit officers to legally ensure the lease is signed and construction of the school can commence.

The Chair then invited Ruth Bravery, to speak in objection to the application. Ms Bravery highlighted the following concerns:

·       The new proposal is 166 units less than the previously rejected proposal and only 10% smaller. The revised scheme proposes 636 units more than the consented scheme, is 88% larger and has altered significantly from the consented scheme. The application should be deferred so officers can reassess the density of the proposal.

·       Officers have assessed the infrastructure for the site, but not the impact for all other developments in the wider area.

·       A new water main will have to be installed as Thames Water has stated the site cannot be occupied without one. Electricity will also need to be accessed from beneath the Thames to a new substation, causing further disruption.

The Chair then invited Annie Clements from Carney Sweeney, on behalf of owner of Greenwich View Place, to speak in objection to the application. Ms Clements highlighted the following concerns:

·       The proposal will have negative transport impacts on Mill Harbour and Marsh Wall during the construction phase.

·       The use of Millharbour for construction, access and operational servicing will cause disruption, as the road is too narrow. If the application is granted, a condition should be implemented that states access is via Westferry Road and not Millharbour. Both TfL and Council's transport officers have observed this.

·       The proposed site's substation will negatively impact the neighbouring site, who have design aspirations to construct  a defined movement network within the conjoined open space.

The Chair then invited, Richard Martin, Director of Westferry Developments and Jonathan Marginson from DP9, to speak in favour of the application. Both Mr Martin and Mr Marginson highlighted the following benefits:

·       The two inspectors reports have enabled a tailored design and the scheme has undergone substantial consultations including; a pre application with Members, quality review panels, design workshops, discussions with community development panels, presentations at two neighbourhood forums, a three day public consultation, and numerous other stakeholders discussions including the Health and Safety Executive and the London Fire Brigade.

·       The proposed scheme will create 1,358 high quality homes. 379 of these will be affordable homes, which equates to 35% by habitable room, 46% of the affordable homes will be three and four bedroom units, to meet the growing demand for housing across the borough and improves on the previous scheme,

·       The scheme will also create a 1,200 pupil secondary school, a community centre, a police hub, a creche, retail and amenity space and over two hectares of public open space in which over 450 new trees will be planted.

·       The scheme will create thousands of jobs during the construction phase and after. Ongoing work with council employment officers will ensure that local residents have access to jobs and offer 135 local apprenticeships. The S106 agreement will contribute towards improvements to Cross Harbour, DLR, improved bus services, and cycle highway provision.

Further to the presentation, the Committee asked questions to objectors, the applicant and officers regarding the following issues;

·       Noted that a letter from the Department for Education (DfE) confirms that the agreement policy is in agreed form. If the planning application is granted, the signing of that agreement for lease with the DfE would likely take place before the S106 agreement is signed, although the confirmed date when the DfE sign cannot be provided.

·       The 2016 S106 agreement had provisions to include a school operator to be identified, funding, and evidence that the school could be delivered by a specific date. Those conditions were not met, so the S106 was nullified. For this revised application, a school provider has now been sourced, the DfE have confirmed funding and the school is part of the scheme.

·       Confirmed that the S106 agreement has a clause included to ensure that the secondary school lease is signed before planning permission is granted. The school's long stop date  for completion is 1st September 2027.

·       Noted that the sports ground is also part of the secondary school lease. A S106 Communities Strategy agreement for the use of the sports or and the MUGA  outside of school hours would be secured if planning was granted.

·       Explained that Thames Water usually requests a condition requiring that specific amounts of units be supplied. Approximately 99 units can be provided until an infrastructure plan is submitted and approved by Thames Water. Infrastructure impacts across the Isle of Dogs will be reviewed. Thames Water's statutory requirement to deliver one bar of pressure at street level has been tested on site and adheres to requirements. Water pressure concerns typically occur in older high-rise buildings and is not likely to affect this scheme.

·       Confirmed that ‘Your Shout’ consultancy were hired to gather resident feedback on the scheme by the applicant. 968 letters of support were received.

·       Clarified that the applicant worked with the nearby school and  provided health and safety classes for children. The school were also notified of construction times. Heavy traffic will not impact school pick up and drop off times and the applicant are complying with the Council's code of construction practise.

·       Explained that the affordable housing units will be in separate blocks. Some communal areas will be allocated towards the market units and others such as the gym will be provided to all residents via a pay to use service as a S106 Amenities Strategy. All open areas will have public access.

·       Confirmed that the community centre will be provided rent free to an operator. In regards to the massing, block T5 has been removed from the revised scheme and replaced with a 15 storey building and T4 has been reduced in height.

·       Acknowledged there will be minor adverse daylight / sunlight impacts to properties along Starboard Way and Omega Close due to the density of properties, although the wider benefits of the proposal, such as the  35% affordable housing, family housing and public open space outweigh these issues. Right to Light considerations do not apply.

·       Explained that all 379 affordable housing units will be delivered throughout each phase, with 100 units for phase one, then 96 units for phase two. Phase three will deliver 128 units and phase 4 55 units. The S106 agreement requires the provision of the delivery of affordable housing prior to the 50% of private homes being occupied within each phase.

·       Confirmed that negotiations are currently underway regarding CIL payments, in terms of how the funds will be allocated to maintenance of the park and Community Centre.

On a vote of 6 in favour, 1 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee RESOLVED:

1.    That the consideration of the application at the former Westferry Printworks, 235 Westferry Road, London be GRANTED.

2.    Subject any direction by the Mayor of London, Section 106 agreement including obligations and conditions and informatives set out in the committee report.

The Committee Adjourned for a short while, then Reconvened.