Agenda item
Land at corner of Broomfield Street and Upper North Street known as "Phoenix Works", London, E14 6BX (PA/15/00641)
- Meeting of Strategic Development Committee, Thursday, 19th November, 2015 7.00 p.m. (Item 5.1)
- View the background to item 5.1
Proposal:
Demolition of existing buildings on the site and erection of buildings that range in height from 3 to 14 storeys containing 153 units including 28 undercroft and surface car parking spaces and a central landscaped courtyard
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure planning obligations, conditions and informatives.
Minutes:
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager) introduced and presented the application for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of new primarily residential buildings ranging in height.
It was noted that the application was previously considered at the last Committee meeting on 8th October 2015 where Members resolved to defer the application for a site visit.
At that visit, Members requested further information about two issues: the height of the application buildings in relation to that of the surrounding buildings and the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring amenity in terms of daylight and sunlight. Accordingly, the report now before Members clarified these issues.
Before presenting these findings, the Committee were reminded of the key features of the scheme including the site location and surrounds, the layout of the proposal, the access arrangements, the proximity to Bartlett Park, Craig Court and Werner Tower. The Committee also noted views of the proposal from the surrounding area.
In relation to the comparative height, it was reported that given the modest height difference between the tallest element of the proposal and the neighbouring buildings, that this was considered acceptable. The scheme would be in in keeping with the surrounding area. In terms of sunlight and daylight, it was reported that most of the windows within Werner Court and Craig Tower met the requirements in policy save for some exceptions. Details of the findings were set out in the report and reported to the Committee.
In conclusion, the additional information had been carefully considered and the Officer recommendation remained to grant the scheme.
In response to the presentation, Members asked questions about:
· the quality of the social housing (in view of the recent scrutiny review).
· the impact on the canal tow path at the front of the proposal given the width of the tow path.
· the possibility of imposing a condition regarding the cleaning and maintenance of the tow path.
· the wind mitigations measures in respect of the children’s play area.
· the public transport rating for the site given the density of the scheme.
· the bulk scale and massing of the scheme.
· overdevelopment of the site given the sunlight and daylight impact
· conflict with the Council’s Core Strategy that supported medium to lower rise developments in this particular area.
· the cycle storage plans
· the lack of lifts given the proposed number of storeys within the scheme.
In response, Officers explained that it would be possible to review the landscaping condition to include details of the wind mitigation measures in the child play space. It was also possible that a protocol is prepared and agreed between the applicant and the Canal and Rivers Trust concerning the cleaning and maintenance of the canal tow path. In relation to this point, the Committee received legal advice on what this could and could not cover in view of land ownership issues. The Committee then moved and unanimously agreed that, if granted, a condition should be added to the permission that no development take place until a protocol is agreed between the Canal and Rivers Trust and the applicant regarding the maintenance of the tow path.
It was considered that the proposed density range of the scheme could be accommodated and complied with the London Plan given the lack of adverse impact from the development and that it would optimise use of a brownfield site .It was clarified that whilst at the upper end of the London Plan density range, the Plan stated that the matrix should not be applied mechanistically. Instead the scheme should be assessed on its impacts. In addition, the density broadly reflected that for nearby schemes.
The Committee must take into account adopted planning policy rather than policy that had yet to be adopted in relation the recent scrutiny review. There would be a condition to ensure the cycle storage would be safe and secure. In terms of the quality of the housing, this would be tenure blind.
On a vote of 1 in favour of the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission 3 against and 1 abstention, the Committee did not agree the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission
Accordingly, Councillor Marc Francis proposed and Councillor Andrew Cregan seconded a motion that the planning permission be not accepted (for the reasons set out below) and on vote of 3 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstentions, it was RESOLVED:
That the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission be NOT ACCEPTED at Land at corner of Broomfield Street and Upper North Street known as "Phoenix Works", London, E14 6BX (PA/15/00641) for
· Demolition of existing buildings on the site and erection of buildings that range in height from 3 to 14 storeys containing 153 units including 28 undercroft and surface car parking spaces and a central landscaped courtyard (PA/15/00641)
The Committee were minded to refuse the scheme due to concerns over:
· Overdevelopment of the site.
· Height, build and massing.
· Impact on neighbouring amenity in terms of daylight and sunlight, particularly the properties at the north of the site.
· Impact on the towpath
· Conflict with the Council’s Core Strategy’s Vision in respect of the area.
In accordance with Development Procedural Rules, the application was DEFERRED to enable Officers to prepare a supplementary report to a future meeting of the Committee setting out proposed detailed reasons for refusal and the implications of the decision.
Supporting documents:
- Phoenix Works SDC 19 Nov, item 5.1 PDF 74 KB
- Commitee Report October 2015 - Phoenix Works PB (3), 08/10/2015 Strategic Development Committee, item 5.1 PDF 3 MB
- Update Report, item 5.1 PDF 209 KB