Agenda item
St Clement's Hospital Site , 2 Bow Road, London E3, (PA/13/1532, PA/13/1533 and PA/13/1534)
PA/13/01532.
Proposal: Full planning permission for the redevelopment of the Grade II listed former St Clement’s hospital site comprising the part demolition (and infill of associated basements), part refurbishment and change of use of the existing hospital buildings and the construction of eight new buildings between two and nine storeys high to accommodate 252 residential units, 306 sqm (GIA) community floorspace (D1 Use Class), 174 sq m (GIA) commercial floorspace (B1/A2 Use Class), 69sqm (GIA) café/restaurant (A3/A4 Use Class,) 32 parking spaces, cycle parking, refuse storage, plant equipment, private and communal amenity space and associated works.
PA/13/001534.
Conservation area consent for the demolition of unlisted buildings (post-dating 1948) and removal of and works to trees in association with the redevelopment of Grade II listed St Clement’s site.
PA/13/01533.
Listed building consent for the demolition of the Timber Building, Catering Department, Nurses Home and Old Boiler House; the limited partial demolition of the Laundry building, the Bungalow, Administration Block, North Block, South Block, Generator and boundary walls; and the repair and conversion of the retained listed buildings in association with the planning application for the redevelopment of the St Clement’s hospital site.
Recommendation: GRANT planning permission and conservation area consent and Listed building consent subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement, conditions and informatives.
Minutes:
Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader, Development and Renewal) introduced the item regarding planning permission, conservation area consent and listed building consent at St Clement's Hospital Site 2 Bow Road, London to facilitate the redevelopment of the Grade II listed former St Clement’s hospital site comprising the part demolition, part refurbishment and change of use of the existing hospital buildings to accommodate 252 residential units, commercial floorspace, parking spaces, cycle parking, refuse storage, plant equipment, private and communal amenity space and associated works.
The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Dennis Twomey spoke in objection to the application as a resident of a nearby property. Whilst supportive of the redevelopment of the site, his main concern was the impact on light to his property. He considered that the failings in the report (up to 20% to Brokesley Street properties) were significant and would affect the occupants quality of life. He acknowledged that there was an acute need for housing in the area. However, he considered that a different layout and design could solve the issues and should be explored. Therefore, he requested that the Committee reject this application and a better scheme be brought forward.
Katherine Tyrell spoke in objection to the scheme on behalf of the Mile End Residents Association and residents of Brokesley Street. Whilst supportive of the redevelopment of the site, she objected to the impact on Brokesley Street in terms of loss of light. She also expressed concern at the impact on 644 Mile End Road. It appeared that no real consideration had been given to this. A further concern was the impact from night time deliveries, especially on the children sleeping in the nearby houses. This could go on for many years. She requested that all deliveries and construction work take place in normal hours. She also requested clarification around the s106 contribution for education (in terms of how and where it would be spent) in view of the additional pressure on education services.
Adrian Bohr spoke in favour of the proposal. He highlighted the merits of the proposal and the extent of the community consultation where most of the respondents had been broadly supportive of the scheme. In response to the feedback, the developers had amended the scheme to include the community floor space. The impact on 644 Mile End Road had been considered and there would be no undue impact. There would be minimal out of hours deliveries and servicing. Brokesley Street would not be used for this purpose. However, the applicant was willing to review the Construction Management Plan to ensure that such activities mostly took place on site. The community floor space would be in place in perpetuity.
Councillor Rachael Saunders spoke in support of the scheme as the local ward Councillor. She reported that, whilst she did initially lodge objections, having now heard about the scheme during the consultation, she now welcomed the proposals especially the plans for the community centre at the John Denham Building. At which the community were to be given two years to achieve a community use. On this basis, they were hopeful that they would be able to come back for planning permission in the near future to request a change of use.
She noted the benefits brought to the area by recent high quality festivals and cultural events and noted that the community use could also host such activities. The plans could help transform the area into an important cultural and community space.
Jane Jin (Planning Officer) presented the detailed report explaining the site location, surrounds and outcome of the local consultation.
The Committee were advised of the plans for the building including the housing mix, the community floor space and the café/restaurant. Members were also advised of the works under the listed building consent to retain and refurbish the listing buildings with minimal external interventions. English Heritage and the Council’s Design and Conservation Officer had considered the proposals and had not raised any concerns subject to the conditions. It was considered that plans were in keeping with the surrounding area. It was also noted that the affordable housing offer was policy compliant and that the level of amenity space was acceptable including on site provision for children of all age ranges.
The sunlight and daylight impact had been assessed and it was noted that any development on the site would introduce some issues for the neighbours given that parts of the site were currently without buildings. However, on balance, the impact on sunlight/daylight was considered acceptable in view of the merits of the scheme and as the impact was generally minor in nature. There was also a full s106 including education contributions and five apprenticeship places.
On a unanimous vote, the Committee RESOLVED
1. That planning permission (PA/13/01532), Conservation AreaConsent (PA/13/001534) and Listed Building Consent (PA/13/01533) at St Clement's Hospital Site , 2 Bow Road, London E3, be GRANTED for:
PA/13/01532: Full planning permission for the redevelopment of the Grade II listed former St Clement’s hospital site comprising the part demolition (and infill of associated basements), part refurbishment and change of use of the existing hospital buildings and the construction of eight new buildings between two and nine storeys high to accommodate 252 residential units, 306 sqm (GIA) community floorspace (D1 Use Class), 174 sq m (GIA) commercial floorspace (B1/A2 Use Class), 69sqm (GIA) café/restaurant (A3/A4 Use Class,) 32 parking spaces, cycle parking, refuse storage, plant equipment, private and communal amenity space and associated works.
PA/13/001534: Conservation area consent for the demolition of unlisted buildings (post-dating 1948) and removal of and works to trees in association with the redevelopment of Grade II listed St Clement’s site.
PA/13/01533: Listed building consent for the demolition of the Timber Building, Catering Department, Nurses Home and Old Boiler House; the limited partial demolition of the Laundry building, the Bungalow, Administration Block, North Block, South Block, Generator and boundary walls; and the repair and conversion of the retained listed buildings in association with the planning application for the redevelopment of the St Clement’s hospital site.
SUBJECT to
2. Any direction by The London Mayor
3. The prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the committee report.
4. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above acting within normal delegated authority
5. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to impose conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters set out in the committee report.
6. That, if within 3 months of the date of this committee the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to refuse planning permission
Supporting documents: