Agenda item
ASDA, 151 East Ferry Road, London, E14 3BT PA/12/03670
Decision:
Update tabled.
On a vote of 3 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions the Committee RESOLVED:
That planning permission PA/12/03670 at ASDA, 151 East Ferry Road, London, E14 3BT be GRANTED for the demolition of existing supermarket, and comprehensive redevelopment of the site for mixed-use purposes to provide up to 30,445sq.m (GEA) of floor space (Use class A1 – A4, B1, D1-D2) and up to 850 residential units (Use class C3) for the reasons set out in section 2 of the 16th August 2012 Committee report and inaccordance with section 3 of the same report AND the additions to the Legal Agreement and Conditions set out in the 27th September 2012 Committee report.
Minutes:
Update tabled.
Owen Whalley (Service Head, Planning and Building Control) introduced the application regarding the ASDA site at 151 East Ferry Road, London, E14 3BT PA/12/03670. Amy Thompson (Planning Officer) presented the detailed report with a power point presentation of the application. She drew attention to the proposed reasons for refusal given by the Committee on 16th August 2012. She addressed each reason as set out in the Officers report and the implications of a refusal on these grounds as follows
Education provision-Officers considered that the impact was acceptable, given the s106 contributions were policy complaint and the plans to expand schools in the borough. Furthermore, the onus was on the Council to address this issue as the education provider, and therefore officers recommended that lack of education provision was not included as a reason for refusal.
Height of building with relation to CABE comments. Officers considered that this element was acceptable. Ms Thompson showed images of the proposal in relation to the surrounding properties. She highlighted the plans to reduce and move the massing from the sensitive edge of the park. Mudchute Park and Farm were satisfied with the plans following extensive consultation. CABE were satisfied with the principle of the scheme and its impact from Greenwich, however remained concerned regarding the detailed design. Details of the material for the scheme would be brought back to the Council for approval as reserved matters application.
Overall provision of affordable housing. Officers considered that the offer of 31% was acceptable taking into account viability.
In attendance were the Council’s viability experts. They reported on the in depth testing carried out by the applicant and officers since the August 2012 meeting to see if further affordable housing could be provided. The results of this further testing was detailed in the report and explained. It found that the offer of 31% remained the maximum that could be delivered with the full s106 and an acceptable mix of affordable housing. None of the other options tested were viable.
The scheme would be subject to a review mechanism to see if further affordable housing could be delivered in phase 5 of the development. Should this be so, it was proposed that 20 of the private units be converted into social housing in the first instance. Any surplus would be allocated to off site affordable housing.
On balance weighing up the merits of the scheme, the Officers recommendation remained to grant the scheme.
Officers gave an update on the policies for affordable housing. They drew attention to the Mayor of London’s polices as set out in the London Plan and emerging policy. It was anticipated that the Mayor would determine any future applications before him in accordance with these policies.
Members then asked questions about:
- The review mechanism to secure further affordable housing. (The overage clause).The criteria for deciding when this would be triggered and its enforceability.
- The size of the private units identified for possible conversion.
- Whether the unit sizes were indicative and could be changed.
- The reasons for discounting the options as undeliverable.
- Assurances were sought that the Pharmacy would remain on site.
A Member spoke in support of the scheme. It sought to provide much needed family housing, school places, local employment and community contributions. The height and massing had been well designed. The applicant had listened to the views from the consultation and had reduced the height. The scheme protected light levels and was in keeping with the area. Given the current economic climate and the reasons set out in the Committee reports in favour of the scheme, it should be supported.
In response, Officers described the review mechanism in more depth. This would be provided for in the legal agreement with a set figure for triggering the additional affordable housing and a fixed percentage of the profit margin. This would be written into the agreement for certainty.
The unit sizes for the 20 private units were indicative at this stage. None of the alternatives tested were acceptable on planning grounds as set out in paragraph 3.12 of the report. The profit margins fell below the rate required for viability due to the additional costs of the amendments. The housing mix was contrary to policy. In some cases (options 1-3b) they would severely decrease the s106.
It was agreed that the request for the pharmacy to stay on site should be taken on board.
On a vote of 3 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions the Committee RESOLVED in favour of the Officer recommendation:
That planning permission PA/12/03670 at ASDA, 151 East Ferry Road, London, E14 3BT be GRANTED for the demolition of existing supermarket, and comprehensive redevelopment of the site for mixed-use purposes to provide up to 30,445sq.m (GEA) of floor space (Use class A1 – A4, B1, D1-D2) and up to 850 residential units (Use class C3) for the reasons set out in section 2 of the 16th August 2012 Committee report and inaccordance with section 3 of the same report AND the additions to the Legal Agreement and Conditions set out in the 27th September 2012 Committee report.
Supporting documents: