Agenda item
49-59 Millharbour, 2-4 Muirfield Crescent And 23-39 Pepper Street, London, E14 (PA/16/03518)
- Meeting of Strategic Development Committee, Thursday, 30th November, 2017 7.00 p.m. (Item 4.1)
- View the background to item 4.1
Proposal:
Demolition of existing buildings at 49-59 Millharbour, 2-4 Muirfield Crescent and 23-39 Pepper Street and the comprehensive mixed use redevelopment including two buildings ranging from 26 storeys (90.05m AOD) to 30 storeys (102.3m AOD) in height, comprising 319 residential units (Class C3), 2,034sqm (GIA) of flexible non-residential floor space (Classes A1, A3, A4 and D1), private and communal open spaces, car and cycle parking and associated landscaping and public realm works. The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement.
Officer recommendation to the Committee:
That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by The London Mayor, the prior completion of a Section 106 legal agreement, conditions and informatives.
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager) introduced the application for the demolition of existing buildings at the site and the comprehensive mixed use redevelopment of the site including two buildings ranging from 26 storeys to 30 storeys. He explained that the application was considered by the Strategic Development Committee on 26th October 2017. The application was recommended for approval, however members voted to refuse planning permission due to concerns over:
· The height of the proposal and its failure to step down;
· The overdevelopment of the site;
· The bulk and massing of the proposal.
Following negotiations with Council officers, the applicant had made a number of amendments to the scheme to increase the level of affordable housing and to provide a health unit within the development.
Chris Stacey (Planning Services) presented the report reminding the Committee of the site location and the key features of the application. In terms of the changes, it was noted that the applicant had converted 18 of the private units to affordable units taking the overall affordable housing offer within the scheme up to 40% (from 35%). The tables in the Committee report showed the revised offer compared to the previous offer as presented to the October Committee. The applicant had also replaced A1 floor space with D1 floor space to be used as a doctor’s surgery (subject to the health trust agreeing to take on the facility) or another community facility.
Officers remained of the view that the application should be granted permission. However, should Members still wish to refuse the application, one reason for refusal was proposed (incorporating the Committees three suggested reasons for refusal) as set out in the report as well as a further standard reason relating to the absence of a legal agreement, set out in the update report. The Committee were also advised of the implications of a refusal and that the emerging Local Plan and the London Plan might be given more weight at any appeal
Members asked questions about the status of the emerging plans at any appeal. It was confirmed that whilst at this stage in the process, the Committee were not required to take into account these plans, they would carry more weight in the future and the Planning Inspector at any appeal would need to take into account any policies in place at the time. This advice would apply to any applications.
Members also asked questions about the height of the proposal and the failure to step down given the policy requirements. Confirmation was sought that the suggested reasons covered this issue. In response, Officers provided assurance about this.
In response to further questions, officers clarified the plans to provide an additional community facility in addition to a nursery (D1) and also the quantum of commercial space still proposed.
On a vote of 0 in favour of the Officer recommendation to grant planning permission, 5 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee did not accept the recommendation.
Councillor Marc Francis moved that the application be refused for the reason set out in the 30th November 2017 Committee report and the additional reason in the update report.
On a vote of 5 in favour, 0 against and 0 abstentions, it was RESOLVED:
That planning permission be REFUSED at 49-59 Millharbour, 2-4 Muirfield Crescent And 23-39 Pepper Street, London, E14 for the demolition of existing buildings at 49-59 Millharbour, 2-4 Muirfield Crescent and 23-39 Pepper Street and the comprehensive mixed use redevelopment including two buildings ranging from 26 storeys (90.05m AOD) to 30 storeys (102.3m AOD) in height, comprising 319 residential units (Class C3), 2,034sqm (GIA) of flexible non-residential floor space (Classes A1, A3, A4 and D1), private and communal open spaces, car and cycle parking and associated landscaping and public realm works (PA/16/03518) for the following reason as set out in the 30th November 2017 report and the update report
(1) The excessive scale and height of the proposed development within its local context would not be proportionate to the site’s position outside of the Canary Wharf major centre and would not maintain the transition in height between Canary Wharf and the lower rise buildings to the south. The proposed scale, height and massing would result in a development that is overbearing, is unduly prominent in local views and detracts from the low-rise character of the area to the south. The proposed development therefore fails to respect the features that contribute to the area’s character and local distinctiveness and demonstrates clear symptoms of over development and excessive density. This is contrary to Strategic Objectives SO22 & SO23 and Strategic Policies SP10 and SP12 of the Core Strategy (2010), Policies DM24 and DM26 of the Managing Development Document (2013) and Policies 3.4, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.7 of the London Plan (2016).
(2) In the absence of a legal agreement to secure agreed and policy compliant financial and non - financial contributions including for affordable housing, employment, skills, training and enterprise, carbon offsetting and transport matters the development fails to mitigate its impact on local services amenities and infrastructure. The above would be contrary to the requirements of Policies SP20 and SP13 of the LBTH Core Strategy, Policies 8.2 of the London Plan (2016) and Planning Obligations SPD (2016)
Supporting documents:
- PA_16_03518 - Deferal Report, item 4.1 PDF 185 KB
- 5.1, 26/10/2017 Strategic Development Committee, item 4.1 PDF 24 MB
- Update Report for Millharbour, item 4.1 PDF 29 KB