Agenda item
16-24 & 48-50 Bow Common Lane and site at Land South of 12 Furze Street (PA/09/1656)
Decision:
On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED
(1) That planning permission be GRANTED at 16-24 & 48-50 Bow Common Lane and site at land south of 12 Furze Street for the development of 129 units (comprising 65 x 1 bed, 44 x 2 bed, 16 x 3 bed and 4 x 4 bed) and 139 sq m of commercial floorspace Use Class B1 (office space), a pedestrian and cycle pathway, 142 bicycle parking spaces and landscaping works, subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement and to the conditions and informatives as set out in the report.
(2) That if by 13 October 2010 the legal agreement has not been completed to the satisfaction of the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services), the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to refuse planning permission.
(3) That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to impose the conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters listed in the report.
Minutes:
The Chair asked that it be recorded that Councillor Marc Francis had intended to speak in favour of the application but was unable to attend the meeting due to other commitments. She added that Councillor Francis had not discussed the proposals with her.
The Chair then invited registered objectors to address the meeting.
Mr Clive Harrison, a resident of Bow Common Lane, spoke in objection to the application, indicating that the scheme would result in him and a neighbour being deprived of light and overlooking of a glass ceiling to the rear of his property would cause a loss of privacy. His home and garden would also be overlooked by roof terracing. The daylight and sunlight survey mentioned in the report did not include him and his neighbour. The previous planning permission granted on 21 November 2007 had related to 12-50 Bow Common Lane, rather than 16-50.
Mr Daniel Botting, a resident of Park View Court, spoke in objection to the application. He stated that he had moved to that part of the Borough as it did not have many tower blocks but the development would cause a sense of enclosure and loss of outlook, with a five storey block being built close to his home. The proximity of the proposed building, at 11m from his home, meant that Block A would completely obscure the view from his front room. This part of his objection had not been reflected in the report. There would be a massive impact on his property regarding daylight/sunlight and there would be a heavy impact from construction noise. He felt that this would reduce his quality of life and there would be a negative effect on the value of his property.
Mr Philip Villars, the applicant’s agent, commented that a very comprehensive report had been prepared regarding the application and the scheme had been the subject of negotiations with Officers over a long period of time, with changes having been made to address residents’ concerns. The daylight/ sunlight survey showed that there had been adherence to all guidelines and the impact was shown as satisfactory. Overlooking of other properties had been reduced to a satisfactory level through the use of obscure glazing to balconies and windows. The distance from other properties had been amended on a number of occasions and was now also satisfactory. He added that the development would provide significant benefits through the provision of affordable housing.
Mr Nick Rees, the applicant’s architect, stated that the design quality and principles of the development exceeded the Borough’s aspirations. The general design had not changed since first approved in 2007, when the Committee had felt there was enough amenity space and this would be improved. The new public route between Bow Common Lane and Furze Street would be well overlooked for personal security and there would be improved synergy between the development and parkland on Furze Green. Landscaped courtyards would be provided, with glazed balconies and there would be a generous cycle park provision.
Mr Jerry Bell, Strategic Applications Manager, gave a very detailed presentation of the proposals for the development of 129 housing units, commercial floorspace, a pedestrian and cycle pathway bicycle parking spaces and landscaping works at 16-24 & 48-50 Bow Common Lane and site at land south of 12 Furze Street, as contained in the circulated report and tabled update report. He indicated that there had been additional representations regarding sunlight/daylight and referred to the consultation procedures that had been undertaken. He confirmed that obscured windows in Block A would prevent overlooking and there were no windows facing 36 Bow Common Lane to protect privacy. Four four-bed housing units would be available for social renting and the amenity space would be above the level required in the Borough’s policies. The S106 contributions were also very good.
Members then put forward questions, which were answered by Mr Bell, in connection with: the relation of objectors’ properties to the various blocks of the development; proximity of the development to other properties; measures to address possible overlooking and loss of privacy; the sunlight/daylight survey; control of noise during construction; retention of employment levels in the site area; provision of disabled parking; the effects on families of a car free development; public transport assessment and use of S106 monies for local projects; highways improvement works to Bow Common Lane.
On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED
(1) That planning permission be GRANTED at 16-24 & 48-50 Bow Common Lane and site at land south of 12 Furze Street for the development of 129 units (comprising 65 x 1 bed, 44 x 2 bed, 16 x 3 bed and 4 x 4 bed) and 139 sq m of commercial floorspace Use Class B1 (office space), a pedestrian and cycle pathway, 142 bicycle parking spaces and landscaping works, subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement and to the conditions and informatives as set out in the report.
(2) That if by 13 October 2010 the legal agreement has not been completed to the satisfaction of the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services), the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to refuse planning permission.
(3) That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal be delegated power to impose the conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters listed in the report.
Supporting documents:
- 16-24 48-50 Bow Common Lane land of 12 Furze Street (COMMITTEE REPORT- FINAL 1), item 7.3 PDF 777 KB