Agenda item
34-40 White Church Lane and 29-31 Commercial Road, London, E1. (PA/15/02527)
Proposal:
Demolition of existing buildings at 34-40 White Church Lane and 29-31 Commercial Road and erection of a ground floor plus 17 upper storey building (72.5m AOD metre) with basement to provide a flexible use commercial space
(B1/A1/A3 Use Class) at ground floor and 39 residential units (C3 Use Class) above with basement, new public realm, cycle parking and all associated works.
Recommendation:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by the London Mayor, the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure planning obligations, conditions and informatives.
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application for the demolition of existing buildings at 34-40 White Church Lane and 29-31 Commercial Road and erection of a ground floor plus 17 upper storey building with basement to provide a residential led development. It was noted that there had been a number of material changes to the application since its consideration at the 10th March 2016 Strategic Development Committee meeting. As a result, the application was being brought back to the Committee as a new application rather than as a deferred item.
Gareth Gwynne, (Planning Officer, Development and Renewal) presented the detailed report. The Committee were advised of the site location situated within Aldgate and within reasonable proximity to listed buildings and the Whitechapel High Street Conservation Area. They also noted images of the character of the area including a number of consented tall building schemes.
The Committee were advised of the key features of the application compared to the application presented in March. The scheme would be 72.5 AOD metres in height (one storey less than the previous scheme). It would also comprise 35.8% affordable housing in excess of the offer within the March scheme. All of which would be located on the lower floors of the development with the intermediate and private units on the middle and upper floors. There would be two ground floor entrances that all residents of the development would have access to, to overcome the concerns previously raised by the March Committee regarding this matter. The scheme would also include an area of internal play space that, in quantum terms, exceeded that included within the previous scheme. Although it should be noted that, due to the increase in affordable housing, the proposal would have a greater child yield. Whilst the proposed level of play space for the under 12 age group met policy targets, the level of play space for older children marginally fell short of the policy target. However, given the proximity of the site to local parks, on balance, Officers considered that this was acceptable.
The Committee were also advised of the outcome of the consultation. In terms of the land use, the plans accorded with the objectives in policy for the site and the emerging built context . Regarding the heritage assessment, the impact on the nearby listed buildings and the Conservation Area would be broadly neutral. The proposal showed no signs of overdevelopment (whilst exceeding the density guidance in the Local Plan). There would be no material loss of amenity and a range of Planning Obligations had been secured.
Officers were recommending that the planning application be granted planning permission.
Members asked questions of clarification that were answered by officers about the density of the scheme, the revised affordable housing offer and the separation distances to the nearest buildings.
Members also asked about the number of disabled car parking bays given the GLA’s comments requesting that four such spaces be provided. Members were informed that the application included two spaces within reasonable distance of the development in accordance with Highway Services advice. Given the site constraints, it was considered that there was no opportunity to provide additional bays within reasonable distances to the site. Nevertheless, TfL had been contacted to ascertain if two extra bays could be provided near the site on the TfL managed road network.
Members also asked about the nature of the commercial units and were advised that, given the size of the units, they should attract small scale enterprises.
The Committee also asked questions about the child play space. In particularly, the quantum and quality of the play space proposed for the different age groups. Some concern was expressed about the reliance on nearby parks to compensate for the shortfall in play space for older children given the lack of structured play space in those parks. In response, Officers clarified the make up of the proposed play space. Officers were mindful of the issues highlighted about the parks and they did have misgivings about the quality of the play space. However on balance, Officers felt that the approach to the child play space was acceptable and felt that the issues did not warrant a refusal.
The Committee also discussed the process for allocating the CIL funds to secure improvements, in view of the TfL request, the measures to safeguard amenity, the design of the shared ground floor entrances, the layout, and the measures to mitigate the impact on the microclimate.
In summary, the Chair stated that whilst he still found certain aspects of the scheme troubling particularly the high density and the height, he welcomed the changes to the scheme to overcome the previous concerns.
On a vote of 6 favour 1 against and 1 abstention, the Committee RESOLVED
1. That the planning permission be GRANTED at 34-40 White Church Lane and 29-31 Commercial Road, London, E1. for the demolition of existing buildings at 34-40 White Church Lane and 29-31 Commercial Road and erection of a ground floor plus 17 upper storey building (72.5m AOD metre) with basement to provide a flexible use commercial space (B1/A1/A3 Use Class) at ground floor and 39 residential units (C3 Use Class) above with basement, new public realm, cycle parking and all associated works ( reference PA/15/02527) Subject to:
2. Any direction by the London Mayor.
3. The prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations in the Committee report.
4. Any other planning obligation(s) considered necessary by the Corporate Director Development & Renewal
5. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above acting within delegated authority. If within three months of the resolution the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to refuse planning permission.
6. 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
7. Any other condition(s) and/or informatives as considered necessary by the Corporate Director for Development & Renewal.
Supporting documents: