STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE ______Thursday, 23 January 2020 at 6.30 p.m. Council Chamber, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
The meeting is open to the public to attend.
Members: Chair: Councillor John Pierce Vice Chair : Councillor Abdul Mukit MBE Councillor Kevin Brady, Councillor Val Whitehead, Councillor Zenith Rahman, Councillor Rabina Khan, Councillor Sabina Akhtar and Councillor Tarik Khan
Substitites: Councillor Dipa Das, Councillor Dan Tomlinson and Councillor Leema Qureshi
[The quorum for this body is 3 Members]
Public Information. The deadline for registering to speak is 4pm Tuesday, 21 January 2020 Please contact the Officer below to register. The speaking procedures are attached The deadline for submitting material for the update report is Noon Wednesday, 22 January 2020
Contact for further enquiries: Scan this code for Zoe Folley, Democratic Services, an electronic 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, E14 2BG agenda: Tel: 020 7364 4877 E-mail: [email protected] Web:http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/committee
Page 1
Public Information
Attendance at meetings. The public are welcome to attend meetings of the Committee. However seating is limited and offered on a first come first served basis.
Audio/Visual recording of meetings. Should you wish to film the meeting, please contact the Committee Officer shown on the agenda front page.
Mobile telephones Please switch your mobile telephone on to silent mode whilst in the meeting.
Access information for the Town Hall, Mulberry Place.
Bus: Routes: D3, D6, D7, D8, 15, 108, and115 all stop near the Town Hall. Docklands Light Railway: Nearest stations are East India: Head across the bridge and then through the complex to the Town Hall, Mulberry Place Blackwall station: Across the bus station then turn right to the back of the Town Hall complex, through the gates and archway to the Town Hall. Tube: The closest tube stations are Canning Town and Canary Wharf . Car Parking: There is limited visitor pay and display parking at the Town Hall (free from 6pm)
If you are viewing this on line:(http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/content_pages/contact_us.aspx) Meeting access/special requirements. The Town Hall is accessible to people with special needs. There are accessible toilets, lifts to venues. Disabled parking bays and an induction loop system for people with hearing difficulties are available. Documents can be made available in large print, Braille or audio version. For further information, contact the Officers shown on the front of the agenda.
Fire alarm If the fire alarm sounds please leave the building immediately by the nearest available fire exit without deviating to collect belongings. Fire wardens will direct you to the exits and to the fire assembly point. If you are unable to use the stairs, a member of staff will direct you to a safe area. The meeting will reconvene if it is safe to do so, otherwise it will stand adjourned. Electronic agendas reports and minutes. Copies of agendas, reports and minutes for council meetings can also be found on our website from day of publication.
To access this, click www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/committee and search for the relevant committee and meeting date. QR code for Agendas are available at the Town Hall, Libraries, Idea Centres and One smart phone Stop Shops and on the Mod.Gov, Apple and Android apps. users
Page 2
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
1. DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS (Pages 5 - 8)
To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992. See attached note from the Monitoring Officer.
2. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) (Pages 9 - 14)
To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 20th November 2019
3. RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE (Pages 15 - 16)
To RESOLVE that:
1) in the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and
2) in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.
3) To NOTE the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Strategic Development Committee. PAGE WARD(S) NUMBER AFFECTED 4. DEFERRED ITEMS
There are no items.
Page 3
5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION 17 - 22
5 .1 Quay House, Admirals Way, London, E14 3A 23 - 74 Canary (PA/19/01462) Wharf
Proposal:
Demolition of the existing building and redevelopment to provide a mixed use development comprising a hotel (Class C1) and serviced apartments (Class C1) with ancillary gym, retail, parking, landscaping and public realm works.
Recommendation:
Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions
5 .2 Fiftieth Floor, 1 Canada Square, London, E14 5AA 75 - 90 Canary (PA/19/02217) Wharf
Proposal:
Change of use from Office (Class B1) to Non-Residential Institution (Class D1)- Higher education facility.
Recommendation:
Grant planning permission with conditions
6. OTHER PLANNING MATTERS 91 - 92 Canary Wharf 6 .1 North Quay, Canary Wharf - pre-application 93 - 114 Canary presentation (PF/19/00247) Wharf
Proposal:
Outline planning permission for construction of a mixed- use, high-density, high-rise, employment-led development with up to 8 new buildings of up to 225m AOD in height.
Recommendation:
The Committee notes the contents of the report and pre- application presentation.
The Committee identifies any other planning and design issues or material considerations that the developer should take into account at the pre-application stage, prior to submitting a planning application.
Next Meeting of the Strategic Development Committee Wednesday, 12 February 2020 at 6.30 p.m. to be held in Council Chamber, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Page 4 Agenda Item 1
DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS - NOTE FROM THE MONITORING OFFICER
This note is for guidance only. For further details please consult the Members’ Code of Conduct at Part 5.1 of the Council’s Constitution.
Please note that the question of whether a Member has an interest in any matter, and whether or not that interest is a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest, is for that Member to decide. Advice is available from officers as listed below but they cannot make the decision for the Member. If in doubt as to the nature of an interest it is advisable to seek advice prior to attending a meeting.
Interests and Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPIs)
You have an interest in any business of the authority where that business relates to or is likely to affect any of the persons, bodies or matters listed in section 4.1 (a) of the Code of Conduct; and might reasonably be regarded as affecting the well-being or financial position of yourself, a member of your family or a person with whom you have a close association, to a greater extent than the majority of other council tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward affected.
You must notify the Monitoring Officer in writing of any such interest, for inclusion in the Register of Members’ Interests which is available for public inspection and on the Council’s Website.
Once you have recorded an interest in the Register, you are not then required to declare that interest at each meeting where the business is discussed, unless the interest is a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI).
A DPI is defined in Regulations as a pecuniary interest of any of the descriptions listed at Appendix A overleaf. Please note that a Member’s DPIs include his/her own relevant interests and also those of his/her spouse or civil partner; or a person with whom the Member is living as husband and wife; or a person with whom the Member is living as if they were civil partners; if the Member is aware that that other person has the interest.
Effect of a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest on participation at meetings
Where you have a DPI in any business of the Council you must, unless you have obtained a dispensation from the authority's Monitoring Officer following consideration by the Dispensations Sub-Committee of the Standards Advisory Committee:- - not seek to improperly influence a decision about that business; and - not exercise executive functions in relation to that business.
If you are present at a meeting where that business is discussed, you must:- - Disclose to the meeting the existence and nature of the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, if later; and - Leave the room (including any public viewing area) for the duration of consideration and decision on the item and not seek to influence the debate or decision
When declaring a DPI, Members should specify the nature of the interest and the agenda item to which the interest relates. This procedure is designed to assist the public’s understanding of the meeting and to enable a full record to be made in the minutes of the meeting.
Page 5 Where you have a DPI in any business of the authority which is not included in the Member’s register of interests and you attend a meeting of the authority at which the business is considered, in addition to disclosing the interest to that meeting, you must also within 28 days notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest for inclusion in the Register.
Further advice
For further advice please contact:- Asmat Hussain Corporate Director of Governance and Monitoring Officer, Telephone Number: 020 7364 4801
Page 6 APPENDIX A: Definition of a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest
(Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, Reg 2 and Schedule)
Subject Prescribed description Employment, office, trade, Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on profession or vacation for profit or gain.
Sponsorship Any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from the relevant authority) made or provided within the relevant period in respect of any expenses incurred by the Member in carrying out duties as a member, or towards the election expenses of the Member. This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
Contracts Any contract which is made between the relevant person (or a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest) and the relevant authority— (a) under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and (b) which has not been fully discharged.
Land Any beneficial interest in land which is within the area of the relevant authority.
Licences Any licence (alone or jointly with others) to occupy land in the area of the relevant authority for a month or longer.
Corporate tenancies Any tenancy where (to the Member’s knowledge)— (a) the landlord is the relevant authority; and (b) the tenant is a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest.
Securities Any beneficial interest in securities of a body where— (a) that body (to the Member’s knowledge) has a place of business or land in the area of the relevant authority; and (b) either—
(i) the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body; or
(ii) if the share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that class.
Page 7 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 2 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SECTION ONE (UNRESTRICTED) 20/11/2019
LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS
MINUTES OF THE STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
HELD AT 6.30 P.M. ON WEDNESDAY, 20 NOVEMBER 2019
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1ST FLOOR, TOWN HALL, MULBERRY PLACE, 5 CLOVE CRESCENT, LONDON, E14 2BG
Members Present:
Councillor John Pierce (Chair) Councillor Abdul Mukit MBE (Vice-Chair) (Item 6.1) Councillor Kevin Brady Councillor Val Whitehead Councillor Rabina Khan (Item 6.1) Councillor Sabina Akhtar (Item 6.1) Councillor Tarik Khan
Other Councillors Present: Councillor Dan Tomlinson (Item 6.1, left the meeting prior to the vote)
Apologies:
Councillor Zenith Rahman
Officers Present:
Solomon Agutu (Interim Team Leader Planning, Legal Services, Governance) Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Planning Services, Place) Piotr Lanoszka (Canary Wharf & Strategic Projects Lead, Place Dircetorate ) Adam Garcia (Senior Planning Officer, West Area Team Place Directorate) Gareth Gwynne (Area Planning Manager (West), Planning Services, Place) Simon Westmorland (West Area Team Leader, Planning Services, Place) Zoe Folley (Committee Officer, Governance)
1. DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS
The following Councillors declared a personal interest in agenda item 5.1, 96- 98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG. This was on the grounds that they knew Councillor Zenith Rahman who had a property interest in the land subject to the application and had objected to the application.
Page 9 1 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SECTION ONE (UNRESTRICTED) 20/11/2019
• Councillor Kevin Brady • Councillor Tarik Khan • Councillor John Pierce • Councillor Val Whitehead
The Councillors made the declarations for transparency purposes only as they considered that they could determine the application with an open mind in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and they would participate in the consideration and voting on the application.
The following Councillors declared a personal interest in agenda item 5.1. 96- 98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG. This was on the grounds of their association with Councillor Zenith Rahman.
• Councillor Sabina Akhtar • Councillor Rabina Khan • Councillor Abdul Mukit MBE.
The Councillors indicated that they would leave the meeting room for the consideration and voting on this application.
2. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S)
The Committee RESOLVED
That the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 5th November 2019 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
3. RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS AND MEETING GUIDANCE
The Committee RESOLVED that:
1) In the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director, Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and
2) In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director, Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision
Page 10 2 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SECTION ONE (UNRESTRICTED) 20/11/2019
3) To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Development Committee and the meeting guidance.
4. DEFERRED ITEMS
There are no items.
5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION
5.1 96-98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG (PA/19/00256)
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the demolition of the existing two storey residential dwelling and the erection of a four storey residential development comprising 7 new residential units.
He advised that the application was previously considered at the Development Committee meeting on 10 October 2019, where it was deferred for a site visit. At that meeting, three Members of the Committee disqualified themselves from participating and voting on the application The Council’s Constitution requires that in such circumstances, the application is referred to the Strategic Development Committee.
Piotr Lanoszka presented the application, highlighting the site location and the character of the surrounding area. The site was not in a Conservation Area and the existing building added little to the setting of the area.
Ten representations in objection and a petition with 39 signatures had been received regarding amenity impacts and the overdevelopment of the site.
Regarding the land use, the proposed redevelopment would optimise the development potential of the site and contribute to the housing supply. The standard of accommodation would meet or exceed the minimum space requirements. The proposed housing mix was acceptable given the small scale of the proposal. The height and design of the building would be broadly in keeping and would reflect the local context. This was assisted by the step backs at the upper part of the development.
In terms of the amenity issues, Officers considered that the proposal was acceptable. The development would have obscured glazing to protect privacy and limit overlooking. The primary aspect of the habitable rooms would be positioned away from neighbouring properties. The building line would be broadly the same as the existing house, with the exception of the 2m extension at the south side of the property. Whilst a number of neighbouring properties would experience significant loss of daylight, as detailed in the report and update, the retained levels of daylight would remain acceptable for an urban setting. Further details of the impact on 1A Priory Street were set out in the update report. Overall the proposal would have a minor to moderate
Page 11 3 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SECTION ONE (UNRESTRICTED) 20/11/2019
adverse impact on daylight to the extension. Officers considered that the results did not justify a refusal of the application.
In terms of the heritage issues, Officers were satisfied that the issues raised by Historic England Archaeology (GLAAS) could be managed by the conditions to safeguard the archaeological interest of the site
The proposal would be a car free development.
Officers were recommending that the application was granted planning permission.
Registered speakers – objectors.
Susan Christopher and Keith Cunningham expressed concerns about the amenity impacts on residents’ properties, including:
A loss of privacy and outlook, given the breach in the policy on separation distances. Increased traffic congestion and parking issues. Disturbance from the construction work, adding to the existing problems from other developments. The works would disrupt in particularly the amenity of vulnerable residents Increased ASB from the proposal. Daylight impacts. It was considered that the daylight assessment in the report was inaccurate. The property at 102 Bromley High Street would be adversely affected. Bedroom windows would be adversely affected.
In view of the above issues, it was considered that the siting of the proposal was ill considered given its proximity to the primary school.
Concerns were also expressed about the excessive height, scale and massing of the development. It would tower over residential properties. The objectors also expressed concerns about the excessive number of recent applications to redevelop the site
Councillor Dan Tomlinson, who was a Ward Councillor, also spoke on the application. He declared an interest in the application as he knew Councillor Zenith Rahman. Whilst not opposed to the development of the site in principle, he expressed concerns about the cumulative impacts from developments in the area, given the lack of parking. He also echoed the concerns about the daylight impacts to residents and the separation distance.
Applicant
The applicant’s representative chose not to address the Committee but indicated they were available to respond to any question from the Committee.
Page 12 4 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SECTION ONE (UNRESTRICTED) 20/11/2019
Committee’s questions.
The Committee asked questions about the design of the eastern elevation of the proposal, the massing and height and how this would affect the surrounding properties.
The Committee also asked questions about the amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties given the daylight failures and the proximity of the development to neighbouring properties - given the separation distance in some instances fell short of the recommended 18m
In response, Officers advised of the approach adopted to designing the development including the eastern elevation. Emphasis had been placed on protecting privacy and providing measures (such as screening and setting back the building) to safeguard residential amenity. It was therefore considered that these measures should in themselves safeguard outlook and privacy. It was considered that the impact in this regard would not be dissimilar to other developments in an urban area.
Regarding the 12.9 and 12.5m separation distances, these were broadly similar and typical to those for developments in an urban area.
Regarding the height of the building, it was noted that the area comprised a mixture of building heights. Given this and the setbacks in the design, the proposal did not give rise to any concerns in town scape terms.
Officers also provided further assurances about the impact on the extension to 1A Priory Street. The extension had a number of sources of light and the provision of the obscure glazing and screening would also preserve amenity. Overall Officers did not consider that the adverse impacts identified in the report justified a refusal of the application.
Members also asked questions about the impact on the highway. In response, it was confirmed that the application included a range of conditions in the report requiring amongst other things the submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan.
Members also sought clarity about what the public benefits of the scheme were said to be and whether they could be considered as sufficient enough to outweigh the harm from the development, in terms of the height and massing, the sunlight and daylight issues and the design of the eastern elevation?
In response, the Committee were reminded of the need to balance the benefits of the development - the delivery of housing, with the potential impacts set out in the report, particularly the impacts identified in the daylight and sunlight assessment. In carryout this assessment, the Committee were advised to consider the test set out in DM 25firstly whether there was a deterioration, secondly whether the deterioration was material and thirdly whether the material deterioration was unacceptable.. It was also pointed out
Page 13 5 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SECTION ONE (UNRESTRICTED) 20/11/2019
that, in law the provision of private housing by itself did not normally count as a public benefit.
On a vote of 0 in favour of the Officers recommendation, 4 against and 0 abstentions, the Committee were minded not to accept the officer recommendation to grant Planning Permission at 96-98 Bromley High Street, London, E3 3EG for:
• The redevelopment of 96-98 Bromley High Street, comprising the demolition of the existing building (two storey residential building) (use class C3) to construct a four storey residential building containing 4 x two bedroom units, 2 x one bedroom units and 1 x three bedroom unit with associated cycle parking spaces, private amenity space and other associated works(PA/19/00256)
Having not accepted the officer recommendation, Councillor Kevin Brady moved a motion that the application for planning permission be REFUSED (for the reasons set out below) and on a vote of 4 in favour of refusal, 0 against and 0 abstentions the Committee RESOLVED:
That the application for planning permission is REFUSED.
The Committee refused the application due to concerns over the following issues:
• Height, scale and massing of the development. • Design of the development, particularly the eastern elevation. • The adverse amenity impacts, particularly in terms of a loss of daylight to neighbouring properties. • That there was no evidence of public benefits and the alleged public benefits were not significant enough to outweigh the harm caused by the development.
6. OTHER PLANNING MATTERS
6.1 Pre - Application Presentation: Bethnal Green Holder Station, Marian Place, London PF/19/00061
The Committee noted the contents of the report and pre-application presentation
The meeting ended at 8.40 p.m.
Chair, Councillor John Pierce Strategic Development Committee
Page 14 6 Agenda Item 3
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Report of the Corporate Director of Place Classification: Unrestricted
Guidance for Development Committee/Strategic Development Committee Meetings.
Who can speak at Committee meetings? Members of the public and Councillors may request to speak on applications for decision (Part 6 of the agenda). All requests must be sent direct to the Committee Officer shown on the front of the agenda by the deadline – 4pm one clear working day before the meeting. Requests should be sent in writing (e-mail) or by telephone detailing the name and contact details of the speaker and whether they wish to speak in support or against. Requests cannot be accepted before agenda publication. Speaking is not normally allowed on deferred items or applications which are not for decision by the Committee.
The following may register to speak per application in accordance with the above rules: Up to two objectors For up to three minutes each. on a first come first served basis. Committee/Non For up to three minutes each - in support or against. Committee Members. Applicant/ Shall be entitled to an equal time to that given to any objector/s. supporters. For example: Three minutes for one objector speaking. This includes: Six minutes for two objectors speaking. an agent or Additional three minutes for any Committee and non spokesperson. Committee Councillor speaking in objection.
Members of the It shall be at the discretion of the applicant to allocate these public in support supporting time slots. What if no objectors register to speak against an applicant for decision? The applicant or their supporter(s) will not be expected to address the Committee should no objectors register to speak and where Officers are recommending approval. However, where Officers are recommending refusal of the application and there are no objectors or members registered, the applicant or their supporter(s) may address the Committee for 3 minutes.
The Chair may vary the speaking rules and the order of speaking in the interest of natural justice or in exceptional circumstances.
Committee Members may ask points of clarification of speakers following their speech. Apart from this, speakers will not normally participate any further. Speakers are asked to arrive at the start of the meeting in case the order of business is changed by the Chair. If speakers are not present by the time their application is heard, the Committee may consider the item in their absence.
Page 15 This guidance is a précis of the full speaking rules that can be found on the Committee and Member Services webpage: www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/committee under Council Constitution, Part C Section 35 Planning Code of Conduct
What can be circulated? Should you wish to submit a representation or petition, please contact the planning officer whose name appears on the front of the report in respect of the agenda item. Any representations or petitions should be submitted no later than noon the working day before the committee meeting for summary in the update report that is tabled at the committee meeting. No written material (including photos) may be circulated at the Committee meeting itself by members of the public including public speakers.
How will the applications be considered? The Committee will normally consider the items in agenda order subject to the Chair’s discretion. The procedure for considering applications for decision shall be as follows: Note: there is normally no further public speaking on deferred items or other planning matters (1) Officers will introduce the item with a brief description. (2) Officers will present the report supported by a presentation. (3) Any objections that have registered to speak to address the Committee (4) The applicant and or any supporters that have registered to speak to address the Committee (5) Committee and non- Committee Member(s) that have registered to speak to address the Committee (6) The Committee may ask points of clarification of each speaker. (7) The Committee will consider the item (questions and debate). (8) The Committee will reach a decision.
Should the Committee be minded to make a decision contrary to the Officer recommendation and the Development Plan, the item will normally be deferred to a future meeting with a further Officer report detailing the implications for consideration.
How can I find out about a decision? You can contact Democratic Services the day after the meeting to find out the decisions. The decisions will also be available on the Council’s website shortly after the meeting.
For queries on reports please contact the Officer named on the front of the report. Deadlines. To view the schedule of deadlines for meetings (including those for agenda papers and speaking at meetings) visit the agenda management timetable, part of the Committees web pages. Visit www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/committee - search for relevant Scan this code to Committee, then ‘browse meetings and agendas’ then ‘agenda view the Committee management timetable’. webpages. The Rules of Procedures for the Committee are as follows: Development Committee Procedural Rules – Part C of the Council’s Constitution Section 35 Appendix B. Terms of Reference for the Development Committee - Part B of the Council’s Constitution Section 19 (7). Council’s Constitution
Page 16 Agenda Item 5
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Report of the Corporate Director of Place Classification: Unrestricted
Advice on Planning Applications for Decision
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 In this part of the agenda are reports on planning applications for determination by the Committee. Although the reports are ordered by application number, the Chair may reorder the agenda on the night. If you wish to be present for a particular application you need to be at the meeting from the beginning.
1.2 The following information and advice applies to all those reports.
2. FURTHER INFORMATION
2.1 Members are informed that all letters of representation and petitions received in relation to the items on this part of the agenda can be made available for inspection at the meeting.
2.2 Members are informed that any further letters of representation, petitions or other matters received since the publication of this part of the agenda, concerning items on it, will be reported to the Committee in an Addendum Update Report.
2.3 ADVICE OF CORPORATE DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE
3.1 This is general advice to the Committee which will be supplemented by specific advice at the meeting as appropriate. The Committee is required to determine planning applications in accordance with the Development Plan and other material planning considerations. Virtually all planning decisions involve some kind of balancing exercise and the law sets out how this balancing exercise is to be undertaken. After conducting the balancing exercise, the Committee is able to make a decision within the spectrum allowed by the law. The decision as to whether to grant or refuse planning permission is governed by section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990). This section requires the Committee to have regard to: ‒ the provisions of the Development Plan, so far as material to the application; ‒ any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application; and ‒ to any other material considerations.
3.2 What does it mean that Members must have regard to the Development Plan? Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 explains that having regard to the Development Plan means deciding in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. If the Development Plan is up to date and contains material policies (policies relevant to the application) and there are no other material considerations, the application should be determined in accordance with the Development Plan.
The Local Development Plan and Other Material Considerations
3.3 The relevant Development Plan policies against which the Committee is required to consider each planning application are to be found in: ‒ The London Plan 2016;
Page 17 ‒ The Tower Hamlets Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2025 adopted in 2010; and ‒ The Managing Development Document adopted in 2013.
3.4 The Planning Officer’s report for each application directs Members to those parts of the Development Plan which are material to each planning application, and to other material considerations. National Policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF) and the Government’s online Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) are both material considerations.
3.5 One such consideration is emerging planning policy such as the Council’s Local Plan1 and the Mayor of London’s New London Plan2 The degree of weight which may be attached to emerging policies (unless material considerations indicate otherwise) depends on the stage of preparation of the emerging Development Plan, the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the relevant policies, and the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the draft plan to the policies in the framework. As emerging planning policy progresses through formal stages prior to adoption, it accrues weight for the purposes of determining planning applications (NPPF, paragraph 48).
3.6 Having reached an advanced stage in the preparation process, the Local Plan now carries more weight as a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. However, the policies will not carry full weight until the Local Plan has been formally adopted. The New London Plan is at a less advanced stage of the adoption process.
3.7 The purpose of a Planning Officer's report is not to decide the issue for the Committee, but to inform Members of the considerations relevant to their decision making and to give advice on and recommend what decision Members may wish to take. Part of a Planning Officer's expert function in reporting to the Committee is to make an assessment of how much information to include in the report. Applicants and objectors may also want to direct Members to other provisions of the Development Plan (or other material considerations) which they believe to be material to the application.
3.8 The purpose of Planning Officer’s report is to summarise and analyse those representations, to report them fairly and accurately and to advise Members what weight (in their professional opinion) to give those representations.
3.9 Ultimately it is for Members to decide whether the application is in accordance with the Development Plan and if there are any other material considerations which need to be considered.
Local Finance Considerations
3.10 Section 70(2) of the TCPA 1990 provides that a local planning authority shall have regard to a local finance consideration as far as it is material in dealing with the application. Section 70(4) of the TCPA 1990defines a local finance consideration and both New Homes Bonus payments (NHB) and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) fall within this definition.
1 The Tower Hamlets Local Plan 2031: Managing Growth and Sharing the Benefits’ was submitted to the Secretary of state for Housing, Communities and Local Government to undergo an examination in public on 28 February 2018. As part of the examination process, the planning inspector held a series of hearing sessions from 6 September to 11 October 2018 to discuss the soundness of the Local Plan. The planning inspector has put forward a series of modifications as part of the examination process in order to make it sound and legally compliant. These modifications are out to consultation for a 6 week period from 25 March 2019.
2 The draft New London Plan was published for public consultation in December 2017, The examination in public commenced on 15 January 2019 and is scheduled until mid to late May 2019.
Page 18 3.11 Although NHB and CIL both qualify as “local finance considerations, the key question is whether they are "material" to the specific planning application under consideration.
3.12 The prevailing view is that in some cases CIL and NHB can lawfully be taken into account as a material consideration where there is a direct connection between the intended use of the CIL or NHB and the proposed development. However to be a ‘material consideration’, it must relate to the planning merits of the development in question.
3.13 Accordingly, NHB or CIL money will be 'material' to the planning application, when reinvested in the local areas in which the developments generating the money are to be located, or when used for specific projects or infrastructure items which are likely to affect the operation or impact on the development. Specific legal advice will be given during the consideration of each application as required.
Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas
3.14 Under Section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, in considering whether to grant listed building consent for any works, the local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
3.15 Under Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed buildings or its setting, the local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of architectural or historic interest it possesses.
3.16 Under Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, in considering whether to grant planning permission for development in a conservation area, the local planning authority must pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area.
Trees and Natural Environment
3.17 Under Section 197 of the TCPA 1990, in considering whether to grant planning permission for any development, the local planning authority must ensure, whenever it is appropriate, that adequate provision is made, by the imposition of conditions, for the preservation or planting of trees.
3.18 Under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (Duty to conserve biodiversity), the local authority “must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity”.
Crime and Disorder
3.19 Under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act (1998) (Duty to consider crime and disorder implications), the local authority has a “duty …..to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area (including anti-social and other behaviour adversely affecting the local environment)…”
Transport Strategy
3.20 Section 144 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999, requires local planning authorities to have regard to the London Mayor’s Transport strategy.
Page 19 Equalities and Human Rights
3.21 Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (Public Sector Equality Duty) (Equality Act) provides that in exercising its functions (which includes the functions exercised by the Council as Local Planning Authority), that the Council as a public authority shall amongst other duties have due regard to the need to- (a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited under the Equality Act; (b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; (c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.
3.22 The protected characteristics set out in Section 4 of the Equality Act are: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. The Equality Act acknowledges that compliance with the duties set out may involve treating some persons more favourably than others, but that this does not permit conduct that would otherwise be prohibited under the Equality Act.
3.23 The Human Rights Act 1998, sets out the basic rights of every person together with the limitations placed on these rights in the public interest. Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 prohibits authorities (including the Council as local planning authority) from acting in a way which is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Members need to satisfy themselves that the potential adverse amenity impacts are acceptable and that any potential interference with Article 8 rights will be legitimate and justified. Both public and private interests are to be taken into account in the exercise of the Council's planning authority's powers and duties. Any interference with a Convention right must be necessary and proportionate. Members having regard to the Human Rights Act 1998, to take into account any interference with private property rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights and ensure that the interference is proportionate and in the public interest.
Environmental Impact Assessment
3.24 The process of Environmental Impact Assessment is governed by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (2017 Regulations). Subject to certain transitional arrangements set out in regulation 76 of the 2017 Regulations, the 2017 regulations revoke the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (2011 Regulations).
3.25 The aim of Environmental Impact Assessment is to protect the environment by ensuring that a local planning authority when deciding whether to grant planning permission for a project, which is likely to have significant effects on the environment, does so in the full knowledge of the likely significant effects, and takes this into account in the decision making process. The 2017 Regulations set out a procedure for identifying those projects which should be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment, and for assessing, consulting and coming to a decision on those projects which are likely to have significant environmental effects.
3.26 The Environmental Statement, together with any other information which is relevant to the decision, and any comments and representations made on it, must be taken into account by the local planning authority in deciding whether or not to grant consent for the development.
Third Party Representations
3.27 Under section 71(2)(a) of the TCPA 1990and article 33(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, the Committee is required, to
Page 20 take into account any representations made within specified time limits. The Planning Officer report directs Members to those representations and provides a summary. In some cases, those who have made representations will have the opportunity to address the Committee at the meeting.
Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing
3.28 Amenity impacts resulting from loss of daylight and sunlight or an increase in overshadowing are a common material planning consideration. Guidance on assessment of daylight and sunlight is provided by the ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ 2011 by BRE (the BRE Guide). The BRE Guide is purely advisory and an appropriate degree of flexibility needs to be applied when using the BRE Guide.
3.29 There are two methods of assessment of impact on daylighting: the vertical sky component (VSC) and no sky line (NSL). The BRE Guide specifies that both the amount of daylight (VSC) and its distribution (NSL) are important. According to the BRE Guide, reductions in daylighting would be noticeable to occupiers when, as a result of development: a) The VSC measured at the centre of an existing main window is less than 27%, and less than 0.8 times its former value; and b) The area of the working plane in a room which can receive direct skylight is reduced to less than 0.8 times its former value.
3.30 The BRE Guide states that sunlight availability would be adversely affected if the centre of a window receives less than 25% of annual probable sunlight hours or less than 5% of probably sunlight hours between 21 September and 21 March and receives less than 0.8 times its former sunlight hours during either period and has a reduction in sunlight over the whole year of over 4%.
3.31 For overshadowing, the BRE Guide recommends that at least 50% of the area of each amenity space should receive at least two hours of sunlight on 21st March with ratio of 0.8 times the former value being noticeably adverse.
3.32 Specific legal advice will be given in relation to each application as required.
General comments
3.33 Members are reminded that other areas of legislation cover aspects of building and construction and therefore do not need to be considered as part of determining a planning application. Specific legal advice will be given should any of that legislation be raised in discussion.
3.34 The Committee has several choices when considering each planning application: ‒ To grant planning permission unconditionally; ‒ To grant planning permission with conditions; ‒ To refuse planning permission; or ‒ To defer the decision for more information (including a site visit). 4. PUBLIC SPEAKING
4.1 The Council’s constitution allows for public speaking on these items in accordance with the rules set out in the constitution and the Committee’s procedures. These are set out at the Agenda Item: Recommendations and Procedure for Hearing Objections and Meeting Guidance.
Page 21 5. RECOMMENDATION
5.1 The Committee to take any decisions recommended in the attached reports.
Page 22 Agenda Item 5.1
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 14/01/2019
Report of the Corporate Director of Place Classification: Unrestricted
click here for case file Application for Planning Permission Reference PA/19/01462 Site Quay House, Admirals Way, London, E14 3AG Ward Canary Wharf Proposal Demolition of the existing building and redevelopment to provide a mixed use development comprising a hotel (Class C1) and serviced apartments (Class C1) with ancillary gym, retail, parking, landscaping and public realm works.
Summary Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions Recommendation Applicant Quay House Admirals Way Land Ltd Architect/agent Savills Case Officer Kevin Crilly
Key dates Application validated 08/07/2019 Public consultation finished on 23/08/2019
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed development would deliver a single 40 storey building consisting of a 400 bed hotel and separate 279 bed serviced apartment use with an ancillary restaurant at ground floor level.
In land use terms, given the sites location within the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area and the Isle of Dogs Activity Area, a proposed hotel and serviced apartments is considered appropriate for this location. The proposed C1 uses would be in conformity with the London Plan emerging policy E10 and current policy 4.5 and is strongly supported by the GLA. The proposed uses would meet policy D.TC6 of the Tower Hamlets Local Plan (2031).
The height, massing and design are considered to appropriately respond to the local context. The building is considered to deliver a unique and high quality design which would be a positive contribution to the area.
Page 23 The landscaping works and the activation of the ‘Underline’ below the DLR is considered to be a positive improvement which would provide improved pedestrian access to the dockside and improve pedestrian routes towards Canary Wharf.
There would be some impacts to the daylight and sunlight of neighbouring residential developments including some significant impacts on the neighbouring Wardian building. As detailed in the report there are a number of contributing factors, including the existing balconies on the Wardian development and the location of one of the Wardian buildings close to the site boundary.
Parking access and servicing are considered to be acceptable subject to conditions and the submission of a Travel Plan.
A strategy for minimising carbon dioxide emissions from the development is in compliance with policy requirements. Biodiversity enhancements are also proposed which are considered sufficient to meet policy requirements.
The scheme would be liable to both the Mayor of London’s and the Borough’s community infrastructure levy. In addition, it would provide a necessary and reasonable planning obligation to local employment and training.
The scheme would provide significant public benefits including the provision of visitor accommodation contributing towards the Borough’s target of 5,000 net additional rooms by 2041. Some of the key benefits include:
- 172 permanent direct jobs once operational - Commitment from the applicant to contribute £65,000 towards the expansion of their existing hospitality and leisure skills training, targeting local people, to be run by the London Training Centre. - Activation of the Council’s ‘Underline’ in partnership with Parkour Generations
A full list of benefits can be found in the Planning Benefits section.
Page 24 SITE PLAN
Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey, London Borough of Tower Hamlets 100019288 Planning Applications Site Map PA/19/01462
This site map displays the Planning London Application Site Boundary and the Borough of extent of the area within which Tower Hamlets neighbouring occupiers / owners were consulted as part of the Planning Date: 14 Scale : 50m grid squares Application Process January 2020
Page 25
1 SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
1.1 The application site, approximately 0.2 hectares in size, is located on the south side of West India South Dock within the Millennium Quarter of the Isle of Dogs.
1.2 The site is bounded to the north by the South Dock, to the West by the Wardian residential development to the south by Admirals Way and to the east by a number of 3-6 storey commercial business buildings. The elevated DLR railway dissects the site from north to south along the western edge and along the southern boundary.
1.3 The site is located approximately 500 metres walk away from South Quay (DLR) Station to the east along Marsh Wall, approximately 380 metres from Canary Wharf London Underground Station via the South Quay footbridge. The nearest bus stop lies 130 metres away from the site. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 4.
1.4 Currently there is an unoccupied three storey office building on site providing 1871sqm of office floor space and known as Quay House with a surface level car park accommodating 39 parking spaces.
1.5 The site is not located within a conservation area or in close proximity to any listed buildings but is adjacent to the grade II listed Millwall Docks. The site falls within the Designated Strategic Views of 5A.1 from Greenwich; 6A.1 from Blackheath; and 11B.1 from London Bridge.
1.6 The site is located within an area of significant growth with a number of high density residential and commercial developments located within close vicinity. Immediately to the west of the site is the Wardian development which is nearing completion and consists of two residential towers of 55 and 50 storeys. To the east of the site is the South Quay Plaza residential development which consists of a number of towers between 36 and 68 storeys currently under construction. Pan Peninsula is positioned to the south-east of the site, which includes two tall towers of 48 and 39 storeys. The residential development 2 Millharbour is located to the South East and is nearing completion delivering 901 residential units. 40 Marsh Wall (Novotel) is located to the south west of the site and was completed in 2016 providing a 38 storey hotel.
1.7 There is an emerging context of consented tall buildings within the immediate vicinity including 50 Marsh Wall, 3 Millharbour and 54 Marsh Wall. These are referenced within the neighbouring site history.
1.8 The site is located within the South Quay Masterplan area and within the Isle of Dogs and South Poplar Opportunity Area (OAPF). The site forms part of the Marsh Wall West Site Allocation in the Local Plan 2031.
1.9 The site lies within Flood Zone 3 (High Risk) i.e. greater than 0.5% per annum (less than 1:200 probability a year) but is protected by local river wall defences and the Thames Barrier to 1 in a 1,000 year probability (Low Risk).
Page 26 2. PROPOSAL 2.1 The application proposes the demolition of the existing office building to be replaced by a 40 storey building. The proposal would include a 400 bedroom hotel and 279 serviced apartments with the building split vertically. The development will also include an ancillary 584 sq.m of restaurant floor space and an open air platform level amenity space at third floor level. 2.2 The hotel will provide 400 bedrooms, starting at the 6th floor with an average 12 rooms per floor. The hotel will be accessed via ground floor through the hotel lobby in the northern part of the site. The hotel front of house accommodation is located over the lower levels of the building from ground to level 6 2.3 An ancillary restaurant to the hotel will be accessed directly from the dockside walkway on the northern elevation of the building through a lobby. The restaurant has its own stair and lift connecting to additional seating space at first floor level, as well as the open deck space at level 3. The restaurant can be accessed from secondary single doors on the west and east elevations, as well as directly from the hotel lobby. 2.4 The serviced apartment section of the proposed development will provide 279 Serviced Apartments, starting at level 6 with 9 units per floor. The serviced apartments front of house accommodation is located over the lower levels of the building from ground to level 5. The serviced apartments would provide a mix of studio, 1 bed and larger accessible apartments 2.5 The proposal includes improvements to the landscaping under the DLR and along the dockside. The applicants have identified the ‘underline’ as an opportunity to provide a unique and engaging public realm improvement to encourage activity in accordance with the recently adopted Local Plan through the addition of a Parkour training zone and new hard and soft landscaping. 3 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY Application site 3.1 PA/14/00990 - The most recent and relevant planning history on the site relates to a planning application which was refused by the Strategic Development Committee in 2014. The proposal comprised of the demolition of the existing building and the redevelopment to provide a 68 storey tower mixed use development to provide 496 residential units, 315.3 sq. metres of flexible commercial uses including retail/financial and professional services/café/restaurant uses (Use Classes A1 to A3), a residents' gymnasium and associated residential amenity space, car and cycle parking and landscaping. 3.2 The proposal was refused on the basis that the development was considered to exhibit clear signs of overdevelopment including
Limited and compromised public realm
An insensitive relationship with South Dock
A failure to provide an active and engaging frontage on its southern façade
Page 27 A failure to provide high quality child play space which, as a result, would not provide high quality residential accommodation. Neighbouring sites
Completed 3.3 PA/10/01049 – 40 Marsh Wall (Novotel) – Demolition of existing office building and erection of a 38 storey building (equivalent of 39 storeys on Manilla Street) with a three-level basement, comprising a 305 bedroom hotel (Use Class C1) with associated ancillary hotel facilities including restaurants (Use Class A3), leisure facilities (Use Class D2) and conference facilities (Use Class D1); serviced offices (Use Class B1); public open space, together with the formation of a coach and taxi drop-off point on Marsh Wall. Approved 15/11/2010 – Completed and operational
3.4 PA/11/01945 – Dollar Bay - Redevelopment of the site for a residential led mixed use, comprising a 31 storey building (measuring 114.505m AOD), to provide 121 residential units (Use Class C3), 105 sq.m Use Class A1/A3 at ground floor, underground parking, plant and ancillary accommodation and hard and soft landscaping providing both public and private open space amenity. Approved 29/03/2012 - Completed and operational
Under Construction 3.5 PA/12/03315 – Arrowhead Quay (Wardian) Erection of two buildings of 55 and 50 storeys to provide 756 residential units (Use Class C3) and ancillary uses, plus 701 sqm. ground floor retail uses (Use Classes A1 -A4), provision of ancillary amenity space, landscaping, public dockside walkway and pedestrian route, basement parking, servicing and a new vehicular access. Approved - 19/02/2015 – Under Construction (Near Completion) 3.6 PA/12/03248 – City Pride (Landmark Pinnacle), 15 Westferry Road - Erection of residential (Class C3) led mixed use 75 storey tower (239mAOD) comprising 822 residential units and 162 serviced apartments (Class C1), and associated amenity floors, roof terrace, basement car parking, cycle storage and plant, together with an amenity pavilion including retail (Class A1-A4) and open space. Approved 10/10/2013 – Under Construction 3.7 PA/14/00944 – South Quay Plaza – Demolition of all existing buildings and structures on the site (except for the building known as South Quay Plaza 3) and erection of two residential-led mixed use buildings of up to 68 storeys and up to 36 storeys comprising up to 888 residential (Class C3) units in total, retail (Class A1-A4) space and crèche (Class D1) space together with basement, ancillary residential facilities, access, servicing, car parking, cycle storage, plant, open space and landscaping, plus alterations to the retained office building (South Quay Plaza 3) to provide retail (Class A1-A4) space at ground floor level, an altered ramp to basement level and a building of up to 6 storeys to the north of South Quay Plaza 3 to provide retail (Class A1-A4) space and office (Class B1) space. Approved 30/03/2015 - Under Construction 3.8 PA/14/01246 – 2 Millharbour - The erection of seven mixed-use buildings—A, B1, B2, B3, C, D and E (a ‘link’ building situated between block B1 and D)—ranging in
Page 28 height from 8 to 42 storeys. New buildings to comprise: 901 residential units (Class C3); 1,104 sqm (GIA) of ground-floor mixed-use (Use Class B1/ A1/ A2/ A3/ A4/ D1); a 1,049 sqm (GEA) ‘leisure box’ (Use Class D2); plant and storage accommodation, including a single basement to provide vehicle and cycle parking, servicing and plant areas; new vehicle and pedestrian accesses and new public amenity spaces and landscaping. Approved 04/09/2015 - Under Construction
3.9 PA/14/01428/A1 – Meridian Gate - Demolition of all existing structures and the redevelopment of the site to provide a building of ground floor plus 53 storeys comprising of 423 residential apartments (use class C3) and circa 415sqm office (use class B1), 30 basement car parking spaces; the ground floor uses comprises an electricity sub-station, entrances for the office, affordable and private housing, basement access via car lift and cycle lifts, and circa 43sqm retail/cafe (use class A1/A3); public open space; and a single storey enclosure providing a secondary basement access. Approved 06/03/2015 – Under Construction 3.10 PA/15/02671 – Alpha Square 50 Marsh Wall – Application for demolition of all buildings on site at 50 Marsh Wall, 63-69 and 68-70 Manilla Street to enable redevelopment to provide three buildings of 65 (217.5m AOD), 20 (79.63m AOD) and 34 (124.15m AOD) storeys above ground comprising 634 residential units (Class C3), 231 hotel rooms (Class C1), provision of ancillary amenity space, a new health centre (Class D1), a new school (Class D1), ground floor retail uses (Class A3), provision of a new landscaped piazza, public open space and vehicular access, car parking, cycle storage and plant. Retention of 74 Manilla Street as North Pole public house (Class A4). Approved 27/03/2017 - Under Construction 3.11 PA/14/03195 – 1-3 Millharbour – The demolition and redevelopment of sites at 3 Millharbour and 6, 7, and 8 South Quay with four buildings: Building G1, a podium with two towers of 10 - 38 storeys and of 12 - 44 storeys; Building G2, a four floor podium with two towers of 34 and 38 storeys inclusive of podium; Building G3, a tower rising to 44 storeys; and Building G4, a four floor podium with a tower of 31 storeys inclusive of podium. Approved 30/09/2016 - Under Construction Approved schemes 3.12 PA/16/01637 – 54 Marsh Wall - Demolition of the existing building and construction of two new linked buildings of 41 and 16 storeys (over double basement) comprising 216 residential units; two ground floor commercial units (Use Classes A1-A3, B1) totalling 174 sq. m GIA fronting on to Marsh Wall; basement car parking and servicing; and landscaped open space including a new pedestrian route linking Marsh Wall and Byng Street. Approved – 15/11/2018
3.13 PA/16/02808 – 225 Marsh Wall - Full planning application for the demolition of all existing structures and the redevelopment of the site to provide a building of ground plus 48 storey (maximum AOD height 163.08m) comprising 332 residential units (Use Class C3); 810 square metres of community floorspace (use class D1); 79 square metres of flexible retail/restaurant/community (Use Class A1/A3/D1), basement cycle parking; resident amenities; public realm improvements; and other associated works. Approved on Appeal 10/10/2018 3.14 PA/17/01597 – Skylines - Demolition of all existing structures and construction of a new mixed use development consisting of five buildings ranging from ground plus 3
Page 29 to ground plus 48 storeys in height comprising 579 residential units (Class C3); a two-form entry primary school with nursery facilities (Class D1); a 10,272 sq. m GIA small and medium enterprise (SME) Business Centre (Class B1); 2,228 sq. m GIA of flexible commercial floorspace (A1/A2/A3/B1/D1 and D2); single level basement car parking and servicing; and landscaped open space including a new public piazza with future pedestrian connection to Chipka Street and ground and podium level communal amenity space. Committee resolution to grant subject to S106 28/03/2019 4 PUBLICITY AND ENGAGEMENT 4.1 A total of 99 planning notification letters were sent to nearby properties as detailed on the attached site plan on 17/07/2019. A site notice was erected and a press notice was advertised on 25/07/2019. 4.2 A second public consultation was undertaken in December 2019 following the submission of additional Environmental Information in relation to the EIA. 4.3 The number of representations received in response to notification and publicity of the application is as follows:
12 Letters of support 4 letters of objection 2 comments 4.4 The comments raised in supported related predominately to the inclusion of a Parkour facility below the DLR and the improvements to the landscaping under the DLR and the creation of additional jobs. 4.5 The comments raised in objection to the proposal can be summarised as follows:
The scheme is not compliant with strategic planning policy and, as a result, would lead to unacceptable townscape and visual impacts.
The Applicant has failed to demonstrate hotel need on this site.
The scheme would result in increased transport and highways impacts compared to previous schemes due to increased trip generation without significant mitigation measures.
Daylight and Sunlight impacts on neighbouring properties.
Construction Impacts.
The scheme would prejudice the future development of neighbouring sites.
The proposal does not take enough consideration of the guidance within the South Quay Masterplan.
The loss of light to apartment 1705 Bagshaw Building (Wardian) is significant and would not meet BRE guidance. 4.6 The applicant has also undertaken a number of public consultation exercises including four public exhibitions in February, March and April 2019, distribution of newsletters to neighbouring residents and engagement with local stakeholders.
Page 30 5,000 letters were distributed to identified local neighbours and stakeholders notifying and informing them of the scheme. 4.7 Prior to the public exhibitions, key community groups and other stakeholders within the identified surrounding area of the applicant site were contacted with an invite to the public exhibition and offered further information to make them aware of the development and allow the opportunity for feedback. 4.8 The scheme has been developed in light of extensive pre-application discussions held with officers at LBTH. A total of 8 pre-application meetings were held with officers at the Council’s planning department from November 2018 through to submission. 4.9 Two pre-application meetings were held with the GLA. The first GLA Pre-Application meeting was held on the 9th January 2019. In attendance from the GLA were Planning, Design and Energy officers, together with a representative from Transport for London (TfL). The second follow up GLA Pre-Application meeting was held on the 1st May 2019, where officers from LBTH were also in attendance. 4.10 A pre-application meeting was held in April 2019 with TFL (Transport for London) to discuss transport and highways specific matters. The meeting included representatives from Docklands Light Railway (DLR) which falls within the site application. TFL provided a formal pre-application advice letter in May 2019. 5 CONSULTATION RESPONSES LBTH Transportation and Highways
5.1 Whilst 2 accessible spaces meet policy requirements given the number of uses additional spaces may be required. Details of how accessible parking spaces are managed should be included within the final travel plan and secured by condition. Details of cycle storage, changing facilities and access should be secured by condition. The public realm and materials should match the neighbouring sites to provide a seamless public realm.
5.2 A Servicing Management Plan should be secured by condition to ensure there is not impact on the public highway and to reduce unnecessary vehicle trips. The number of predicted taxi journeys is considered high and the applicant should promote and encourage sustainable forms of transport through the use of wayfinding signage indicating the closest public transport links. This should be secured through a condition.
5.3 This site is constrained and construction will be problematic due to the location of DLR infrastructure and the need to keep access to the Admirals Way estate for other users. A construction plan summary has been submitted but a full, robust Demolition and Construction Plan will be required which specifies how the works will take place without unduly impacting on the surrounding public highway, Marsh Wall in particular. LBTH Waste Policy and Development
Page 31 5.4 The applicant is required to confirm all bin stores will be required to be designed in accordance with the latest British Standard BS5906 and Waste management in buildings – Code of practice and Building Regulations 2000. LBTH Environmental Health (Smell/Pollution)
5.5 No objection subject to recommended conditions regarding extract ducts and plant. LBTH Environmental Health (Air Quality)
5.6 The application was accompanied by an Air Quality Chapter as part of the EIA. The proposed development is considered to be air quality neutral. It unlikely that future occupiers of the building will experience unacceptable exposure from the general environment.
5.7 It is recommend that the strictest environmental standards and a full air monitoring scheme should be required as part of the construction management plan which should be submitted to and approved by the Council before any work starts on site. This should comply with the latest Institute of Air Quality Management Guidance on Dust Control and monitoring and the GLA SPG on construction dust. LBTH Environmental Health (Noise/Vibration)
5.8 No objection subject to recommended conditions
5.9 LBTH Environmental Health (Contaminated Land)
5.10 No objection subject to conditions LBTH Sustainable Urban Drainage
5.11 A detailed surface water drainage scheme will need to be submitted to LPA prior to works commencing as such a pre-commencement condition will be necessary to secure this. LBTH Biodiversity
5.12 The application site has no significant existing biodiversity value. No objection subject to biodiversity enhancements being secured by condition LBTH Energy Efficiency
5.13 The current proposals have sought to implement through energy efficiency measures, communal gas boiler and integration Air Source Heat pumps to deliver CO2 emission reductions. The current proposals for CO2 emission reductions meet the onsite target with a 48% reduction. The remaining reduction should be a financial payment in lieu secured through the S106.
5.14 It is considered in the proposals are in accordance with adopted policies for sustainability and CO2 emission reductions and it is recommended they are secured through appropriate conditions to deliver:
Page 32 Submission of a post completion verification report including the as built calculations (SBEM) to demonstrate the reduction in CO2 emissions have been delivered on-site. Submission of Final BREEM Certificate to demonstrate an Excellent rating has been delivered. Canal and River Trust
5.15 No objection. Environment Agency
5.16 No objection. London City Airport
5.17 No objection. Thames Water
5.18 No objection TfL – Land Use Planning
5.19 It is noted that 48 cycle parking spaces are proposed to serve the development. This provision is formed of 34 long-stay cycle parking spaces and 14 visitor cycle parking spaces. This level of provision assumes that all serviced apartments provided at this site are to be 1-bedroom.
5.20 The applicant should clarify how many rooms are being delivered as part of this proposal, and then use this figure to determine the amount of long-stay and short- stay cycle parking that should be provided
5.21 It is also noted that no cycle parking has been provided for the restaurant use proposed on site. Whilst it is understood that this is an ancillary use to the proposed development, this does not preclude visitors from the surrounding area also using this. In light of this, it is recommended that cycle parking provision for this use is also incorporated into the scheme.
5.22 It is noted that cycle parking is to be provided in the basement and at ground floor level. The applicant must provide detail on how this cycle parking has been designed in line with the London Cycle Design Standards (LCDS).
5.23 The car-free nature of the proposed development is welcomed. The provision of electric vehicle charging points for the two disabled parking spaces is also welcomed.
5.24 Taxi movement at this site (132 two-way movements a day) is equivalent to 4.3% of daily movement. This level of movements does not accord with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy targets or reflect the mode shift targets included within the now adopted Isle of Dog Opportunity Area Framework.
5.25 The trip generation assessment provided indicates that the majority of trips to and from this development will be walking, with it estimated that there will be 1,375 two-
Page 33 way pedestrian movements a day. It is therefore essential that the walking environment around the site is high quality and there is sufficient space to support both existing and future pedestrian flows.
5.26 It is noted that the applicant has made improvements within their site boundary to facilitate increased walking to and from the site, namely through public realm improvements which is welcomed. It is noted that wayfinding signs are proposed to be placed around the site, as well as the potential to provide on Marsh Wall. The provision of wayfinding signs are welcomed – particularly as the development will bring in visitors who are likely to be unfamiliar with the environment and will therefore benefit from wayfinding signage which will help inform, direct and guide them.
5.27 Furthermore, it is noted that the South Quay Walk will be opened, with the existing gate to the north east of the site will be kept open. This is welcomed. This walk will provide a key link between the site and the surrounding area. In light of this, the condition of South Quay Walk should be improved to facilitate the increased pedestrian and/or cyclist movement along it.
5.28 Further detail on how the servicing bay will be managed, in particular measures that will be implemented to ensure that there is no stopping on the adjoining carriageway by any vehicle, should be included within the full Delivery and Servicing Plan for this site. Furthermore, as highlighted above the applicant should seek to minimise taxi movement to and from this site to accord with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. Greater London Authority
5.29 The principle of developing the site in the Isle of Dogs & South Poplar Opportunity Area to provide a new 400 bed hotel, 279 serviced apartments and a 584 sq.m restaurant is strongly supported.
5.30 The layout, height, massing and appearance of the scheme is supported as is the upgrade of public realm beneath the elevated DLR track. Further details of daylight and sunlight analysis and a Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment (TVIA) must be provided to demonstrate no unsatisfactory impacts result on surrounding buildings and spaces.
5.31 Further revisions and information are required, and the carbon dioxide savings verified before the energy proposals can be considered compliant with London Plan draft London Plan policy. An amended drainage strategy is required, and the applicant must embed urban greening principles in the proposal.
5.32 A Transport Assessment and revised travel plan considering further trip generation assessment, measures to reduce taxi movements and further clarity on health streets objectives must be provided. An Asset Protection Agreement must be agreed, and planning conditions adopted to ensure the protection of adjacent TfL and DLR assets. Provision of cycle parking and design must be clarified and other items (including a delivery and servicing plan, construction logistics plan, and measures for electric and ultra-low emission vehicles) must be secured by condition. Metropolitan Police (Designing Out Crime)
5.33 No comment received
Page 34 London Fire Brigade
5.34 No comment received 6 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES AND DOCUMENTS 6.1 Legislation requires that decisions on planning applications must be taken in accordance with the Development Plan unless there are material considerations that indicate otherwise.
6.2 The Tower Hamlets draft Local Plan 2031 (Managing Growth and Sharing the Benefits) has been the subject of publicity, consultation and an independent examination. The Inspector’s report (dated 20 September 2019) concludes that subject to the inclusion of a number of main modifications, the plan satisfies the requirements of Section 20(5) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and meets the criteria for soundness in the National Planning Policy Framework.
6.3 On 27 November 2019, the Mayor in Cabinet agreed to refer the report to the full Council to formally adopt the Local Plan, including the modifications recommended by the Inspector and the additional minor modifications proposed by officers. The Local Plan is expected to be adopted by the Council at its meeting on 15 January. If adopted he Local Plan will carry full weight and form part of the Development Plan for the purposes of Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
6.4 Planning decisions must be taken in accordance with relevant policies in the Development Plan, unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise. This report and recommendation has therefore been drafted in anticipation of the adoption of the Local Plan by the Council on 15 January.
6.5 In this case the Development Plan comprises: ‒ The London Plan 2016 (LP) ‒ Tower Hamlets Local Plan 2031
6.6 The key development plan policies relevant to the proposal are: Land Use LP4.5, SP06, D.TC6
(hotel supply and demand) Design LP7.2, LP7.3, LP7.4, LP7.5, LP7.6, S.DH1, D.DH2, S.DH3, D.DH6, D.DH4 (layout, massing, materials, public realm, heritage)
Amenity LP7.6, SP03, D.DH8, D.ES9 (privacy, outlook, daylight and sunlight, noise)
Transport LP5.17, LP6.9, LP6.10, LP6.13, S.TR1, D.TR2, D.TR3, and Waste D.TR4, S.MW1, D.MW3, (sustainable transport, highway safety, car and cycle parking, waste,
Page 35 servicing)
Environment LP3.2, LP5.1, LP5.2, LP5.3, LP5.10, LP5.11, LP5.13, LP5.17, LP7.14, D.ES2, S.ES1, D.ES3, D.ES5, D.ES7, D.ES8 (biodiversity, energy efficiency, air quality, drainage)
6.7 Other policy and guidance documents relevant to the proposal are: ‒ The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 ‒ National Planning Practice Guidance (updated 2019) ‒ The Isle of Dogs & South Poplar Opportunity Area Planning Framework 2019 (OAPF) 7 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 7.1 The key issues raised by the proposed development are: i. Land Use ii. Design iii. Heritage iv. Neighbouring Amenity v. Transport and Servicing vi. Environment vii. Infrastructure Impact viii. Planning Benefits ix. Human Rights and Equalities Land Use 7.2 The application is for the demolition of the existing office building to be replaced by a single 40 storey building providing a 400 bed hotel and a separate serviced apartment use consisting of 279 apartments. The ground floor would include an ancillary restaurant use adjacent to the dockside. London Plan Policy 7.3 London Plan (2016) Policy 4.5 ‘London’s Visitor infrastructure’ broadly supports visitor accommodation and recognises the contribution it makes to supporting the economy and stimulating growth. The policy seeks to ensure visitor accommodation is in appropriate locations such as: town centres; in areas with good PTAL; the CAZ fringe; and near to major visitor attractions of regional or sub-regional importance. Specifically it seeks to achieve 40,000 net additional hotel bedrooms by 2036, with at least 10% wheelchair accessible. 7.4 Draft London Plan policy E10 broadly re-iterates the existing policy albeit it updates the demand for additional rooms. The evidence for increased demand is from the GLA Working Paper 88 which outlines the projections for demand and supply until 2050. The estimate is 58,000 additional rooms will be required by 2041.
Page 36 7.5 The site is also located within the Isle of Dogs which is part of the Isle of Dogs and South Polar Opportunity area. Opportunity areas have been identified for their ability to accommodate significant development of residential and non- residential uses. Local Policy 7.6 Policy D.TC6 states the short stay accommodation will be supported in the following locations:
Central Activities Zone (CAZ) Canary Wharf (Major Centre) Tower Hamlets Activity Areas District centres or along primary routes where adjacent to transport interchanges 7.7 The policy further highlight a number of criteria that new short stay accommodation developments would be required to meet:
a. the size, scale and nature of the proposal is proportionate to its location
b. it does not create an over-concentration of such accommodation can be demonstrated, taking account of other proposals and unimplemented consents in the local area
c. it does not compromise the supply of land for new homes (in accordance with our housing trajectory) or jobs and our ability to meet the borough’s housing and employment targets, and
d. the applicant can demonstrate adequate access and servicing arrangements appropriate to the scale, nature and location of the proposal. Assessment Loss of Office 7.8 The application site is not located within a Preferred Office Location and the loss of employment foorspace can be considered. Policy D.EMP3 acknowledges that the loss of employment floorspace would be acceptable where the site is unsuitable for continued employment use. It is considered that the existing low rise office would be unsuitable for continued employment use in its current condition and the existing site is underutilised. Furthermore the benefits of the proposed scheme would outweigh the loss of what is a small quantum of employment floorspace in context of the wider Canary Wharf and Isle of Dogs area. Proposed C1 Uses
7.9 Given the sites location within the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area and the Isle of Dogs Activity Area a proposed hotel and serviced apartment use is considered appropriate for this location. The scale of the building would be similar to other high density developments within the area and would comply with criterion a of policy D.TC6. 7.10 The applicant has submitted a hotel demand study which has highlighted a lack of product diversity within the local market, and a need for a mid-range product. The
Page 37 GLA Working Paper 88 highlights that there is a demonstrable need for hotel accommodation across inner London. The site’s proximity to Canary Wharf, London City Airport and with direct connections to central London means the site is suitably located to serve both leisure and business visitors. 7.11 The application site is constrained by the DLR which dissects the site to the west and limits the potential developable area. The site has had a previous planning application for a residential development refused which highlighted the difficulty of providing quality residential accommodation on the site. Given the limited opportunities to provide good quality public realm and external child playspace due to the limited plot size and the site constraints it is not considered that a residential use would be easily delivered on the site. 7.12 Additionally, within the Local Plan the site is designated within the Marsh Wall West Site Allocation. Policy 4.6 of the Local Plan designates the Marsh Wall West Site for housing and employment land uses. Marsh Wall West Site Allocation 4.6 includes an indicative site capacity of 2,645 homes up to 2031. As of the time of submission, within the Marsh Wall West Site Allocation a total of 2,494 homes had been granted planning permission. 7.13 As part of the pre-application process the applicants explored the potential options for developing neighbouring sites to the east to demonstrate that the development of the application site would not prevent the future delivery of housing were these sites to come forward. The masterplan including within section 5 of the applicants design and access statement provides an example which illustrates that there would still be sufficient potential to develop these sites for residential use. Although the masterplan has not been thoroughly tested or been through any adoption process, it must be given very limited weight, however it does demonstrate that the development of the site as a hotel and serviced apartment use can be brought forward without compromising the supply of housing and would comply with part c of policy D.TC6. 7.14 Part d is assessed within the Transport and Servicing section of this report and demonstrates that the uses would have appropriate servicing and access. Conclusions 7.15 The proposed hotel and serviced apartment accommodation would support growth and would help meet the projected demand for additional rooms within London. The scale and nature of the proposal is considered appropriate for the location of the site within the Activity Area. 7.16 The proposal would be in conformity with the London Plan emerging policy E10 and current policy 4.5 and is strongly supported by the GLA. The proposed uses would meet policy D.TC6 of the Tower Hamlets Local Plan (2031). In land use terms the proposal would be acceptable. Design 7.17 Development Plan policies require high-quality designed schemes that reflect local context and character and provide attractive, safe and accessible places that safeguard and where possible enhance the setting of heritage assets.
Page 38
Figure1: Proposed view from South Dock
7.18 Policy S.DH1 of the Local Plan (2020) requires developments to meet the highest standards of design, layout and construction which respects and positively responds to its context, townscape, landscape and public realm at different spatial scales. Developments should be of an appropriate scale, height, mass, bulk and form in its site and context. 7.19 Policy D.DH4 requires developments to positively contribute to views and skylines that are components of the character of the 24 places in Tower Hamlets. Intrusive elements in the foreground, middle ground and backdrop of such views will be resisted. Development will be required to demonstrate how it: a) complies with the requirements of the London View Management Framework and World Heritage Site Management Plans (Tower of London and Maritime Greenwich) b) positively contributes to the skyline of strategic importance, forming from the silhouettes of tall building clusters around Canary Wharf (as defined on the Policies Map) c) preserves or enhances the prominence of borough-designated landmarks and the skyline of strategic importance in the borough-designated views (as defined in Figure 6) d) preserves or enhances local views identified in conservation area appraisals and management guidelines
Page 39 e) preserves or enhances visual connection of the public realm with water spaces, and f) preserves or enhances townscape and views to and from the site which are important to the identity and character of the 7.20 The Tall Buildings policy D.DH6 sets out the criteria for assessing the appropriateness of a tall building. The policy further directs tall buildings towards the designated tall building zones which include the Canary Wharf Zone within which the applicant’s site is located. Height Scale and Massing 7.21 The proposed development meets the requirements of Tall Building policy. The proposal would be lower in height and have a more slender, articulated form than the tall office buildings to its north, in central Canary Wharf. At 40 storeys tall, it would be within the range evident among existing buildings in the South Quay area. The podium and amenity space above it would appear as a distinct base element within the building, and the height of this element would relate well to nearby lower and medium scale buildings to the east of the application site, while helping to break up the overall scale of the proposed development. Appearance and materials 7.22 The building has been designed to appear as a singular curved object constructed in cast concrete with grooved patterns within the concrete providing visual interest and texture. The design includes a vertical slash through the length of the building indicating the separation between the serviced apartments and the hotel uses. 7.23 The base of the building consists of a predominantly glazed podium from which the solid concrete tower projects on exposed structural columns above an open landscaped deck area. Landscaping 7.24 The landscaping proposed includes hard landscaping which would be sympathetic to the existing context and provide cohesion which the surrounding surfaces. Yorkstone is proposed under the DLR to match with landscaping on the adjacent Wardian site. 7.25 The applicant has agreed to provide a financial contribution for additional hard landscaping works outside the redline boundary of the site to ensure the development fits in with the surrounding landscaping. 7.26 This space below the DLR has been identified as an opportunity to create a continuous, wide outdoor trail in the urbanised context of central London, with the benefits of being a dry and sheltered access for pedestrians and cyclists, whilst potentially delivering an innovative space (through the partnership with Parkour and various local artists). 7.27 Parkour Generations are a local parkour & freerunning specialists in training, education, performance, events and design. A part of their offering is the Chainstore, a specialist gym that is an indoor parkour training zone, designed to mimic the conditions of the outside world in terms of materials, feel and atmosphere. The
Page 40 Underline has been identified as a space suitable for maximising on Parkour’s offering.
7.28 The inclusion of the Parkour element of the scheme reflects the aspirations illustrated in the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area Planning Framework. Section 4.3 of the document seeks to enhance and where possible intensify and expand existing green infrastructure, through the creation of more pedestrian friendly routes. 7.29 In addition, the document details aspirations for a lively new urban community with facilities colonising the underline space. Indeed, the document states that; ‘development will make the most of every opportunity for green and open space, including greening the DLR underline’ (section 5.4.4). 7.30 The proposed included modular Parkour elements would allow the ‘underline’ to be used flexibly as both an amenity space and for activities. An important element of the Parkour concept is steel bars. The ability to connect, detach and reconfigure these bars in various positions allows for endless compositions. The Parkour components have been developed to enable bars to be stored within the units, with lockable hatches. Fixings within the hard landscape also allow for bars to be temporarily anchored in place during use.
Page 41
7.31 In addition, at ground level, there will be a series of soft landscape to provide a strong, well vegetated character to the site and a rich backdrop to the proposed development. Soft landscaping will be included at both ground level and platform level.
Page 42
Conclusion 7.32 The scale of the building is considered to be proportional to its location with the Tall Building Zone and within the Tower Hamlets Activity Area. The design is considered to be a unique and high quality design which provides a human scale at street level through the glazed building base and a visually interesting tower. The landscaping works and the activation of the ‘Underline’ below the DLR is considered to be a positive improvement which would provide improved pedestrian access to the dockside and improve pedestrian routes towards Canary Wharf.
Page 43
Inclusive Design 7.33 Policy 7.2 of the London Plan (2016), and policy S.SG2 of the Tower Hamlets Local Plan seek to ensure that developments are accessible, usable and permeable for all users and that a development can be used easily by as many people as possible without undue effort, separation or special treatment. 7.34 The proposed development will provide 2 accessible car parking space which is reserved for use by disabled visitors. 7.35 The proposal provides 10% wheelchair accessible rooms across the hotel and serviced apartments. A condition securing these units is recommended. 7.36 It is considered that the proposal would result in a scheme that would be well connected to its surroundings and would provide hotel accommodation that can be used safely and easily and with dignity for all regardless of disability, age, gender, ethnicity or economic circumstances in accordance with policy.
Page 44 Heritage 7.37 Development Plan policies require development affecting heritage assets and their settings to conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to their form, scale, materials and architectural detail. Strategic Views 7.38 The townscape and visual assessment considered the likely significant effects of the proposed development on a number of representative townscape views. This assessment demonstrates that for all strategic views, the building would be in keeping with the height of other buildings in the South Quay area, and would be lower than the completed height of the adjacent Wardian buildings, contributing to a varied skyline in its local area. The height of the development does not raise a strategic concern. Surrounding Conservation Areas 7.39 The existing office building is considered to possess no heritage or townscape value of merit. The site does not accommodate any statutory listed buildings, but there are a number situated within the local area; however the application is not considered to affect their setting given the dense nature of the area and surrounding developments. 7.40 The site does not lie within a conservation area and is sufficiently distant from neighbouring conservation areas to not impact on their setting. Neighbouring Amenity 7.41 Development Plan policies seek to protect neighbour amenity safeguarding privacy, not creating or allowing unacceptable levels of noise and ensuring acceptable daylight and sunlight conditions. Daylight and Sunlight 7.42 Guidance relating to daylight and sunlight is contained in the Building Research Establishment (BRE) handbook ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ (2011). 7.43 A number of residential properties surround the site which can be impacted by the development, these have been tested as part of the application, and the results have been independently reviewed on behalf of the Council, these are discussed below. 7.44 For calculating daylight to neighbouring residential properties affected by the proposed development, the primary assessment is the vertical sky component (VSC) method of assessment together with the no sky line (NSL) assessment where internal room layouts are known or can reasonably be assumed. These tests measure whether buildings maintain most of the daylight they currently receive. 7.45 BRE guidance in relation to VSC requires an assessment of the amount of daylight striking the face of a window. The VSC should be at least 27%, or should not be reduced by more than 20% of the former value, to ensure sufficient light is still reaching windows. The NSL calculation takes into account the distribution of daylight
Page 45 within the room, and again, figures should not exhibit a reduction beyond 20% of the former value. Impact on neighbouring properties 7.46 The Environmental Statement has evaluated loss of daylight and sunlight to existing properties using the BRE Report BR 209, Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight, a guide to good practice. The Council’s appointed the BRE as an independent Daylight and Sunlight consultant to review the applicant’s Daylight/Sunlight Information 7.47 The following significance criteria banding was used when summarising the overall daylight and sunlight effects to the surrounding buildings;
Negligible; 0-20% loss against existing Minor adverse; 20-29% loss against existing Moderate adverse; 30-40% loss against existing Major adverse; >40% loss against existing 7.48 Of the properties already constructed or nearing completion, the only properties with losses of light outside the BRE guidelines are at the Wardian (east and west blocks) – also known as the former Arrowhead Quay tower development site and at Phoenix Heights. These are dealt with below. Losses of daylight and sunlight to Tideway House, 1-6 Bosun Close, Dolwen Court, The North Pole public house, 1-7 Bellamy Close and 1-25 Block Wharf would all be within the BRE guidelines and classified as negligible. 7.49 The table below highlights the impact of the development on daylight to the Wardian and Phoenix Heights.
Page 46
Wardian Western Block
7.50 The western block is furthest from the proposed development. According to the figures in the Environmental Statement, loss of vertical sky component (VSC) to 140 windows out of a total of 576 windows would be outside the BRE guidelines. 31 rooms, out of a total of 398 rooms, 30 of which are bedrooms and one a kitchen, would have minor adverse effects on No Sky Line (NSL) 7.51 All of these windows have balconies above. Balconies tend to block light from the sky, which may make even a modest obstruction opposite have a large relative impact. In these circumstances, the BRE Report 'Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide to good practice' recommends an additional calculation without the balconies in place. The applicants have undertaken this analysis and without the balconies, 26 windows out of 576 windows would fail the VSC guidelines, but only very marginally. 7.52 It can therefore be acknowledged that, taking into account the existing balconies, it is considered that the effect of the proposed development upon this building would be minor and would be considered acceptable given the surrounding context of high density development.
Page 47 Wardian Eastern Block 7.53 On the eastern building, which is the closest to the Quay House development site, there would be a loss of VSC to 313 windows which would be outside the BRE guidelines. There would be some large reductions in VSC for the worst affected living rooms. No Sky Line (NSL) losses to 203 rooms would also be outside the BRE guidelines. 7.54 A larger reduction in daylight may be inevitable in situations where the existing building has windows that are unusually close to the site boundary and taking more than their fair share of light. The Wardian east block would fall into this category as it is a 55 storey building built up to the site boundary. This makes it very difficult to develop the Quay House site without impacting on daylight and sunlight to the Wardian east building. 7.55 The existing balconies is also a factor on the Wardian Eastern building albeit less significant than on the western building. 7.56 The independent BRE review report highlights the fact that ‘the Wardian east block could be classed as a ‘bad neighbour’ as it is a 55 storey building built extremely close to the site boundary and taking more than its fair share of light over the proposal site. This makes it very difficult to develop the Quay House site without substantial impacts on daylight and sunlight to the Wardian east block.’
7.57 In assessing the Wardian development (formerly Arrowhead Quay) the committee report for this application (PA/12/03315) in 2014 acknowledged the impact in daylight/sunlight terms of locating the Wardian East building so close to its boundary but balanced this against the benefits of the design. The report goes on to conclude the following in section 15.31: ‘All of the proposed flats in the East Tower would be Private and none of the proposed east/west facing single-aspect flats would be family sized flats. In the circumstances and taking account of other amenity issues, officers consider that the Arrowhead Quay proposal is acceptable in the context of the proposed tower on the Quay House site. Given this, officers do not consider that the approval of the Arrowhead Quay application would harm the development potential for a tall building on the Quay House site.’
7.58 The analysis referred to above confirms that the design of the Wardian building is contributing factor in the performance of these windows against BRE guidelines. Having regard to this fact as well as the absolute levels of VSC reduction and the surrounding context of high density development, it is considered that the effect of the proposed development is acceptable. 7.59 It is acknowledged that the proposed Quay House building would have an impact on daylight to the Eastern Wardian building. However, given the design of the Wardian and the proximity to the boundary together with the existing open character of the neighbouring Quay House site it is unavoidable that any redevelopment of the neighbouring site which includes a building of any significant height would have an impact on daylight.
Page 48 7.60 It should be noted that the 2014 Planning Consent for the Wardian (formerly Arrowhead Quay) site anticipated that a tower would be constructed on the Quay House site. 7.61 Through the pre-application process and through design development the Quay House building has been designed and amended to reduce the impact on the Wardian and limit the impact on daylight and sunlight as much as possible. As illustrated below, the form of the tower has been shaped and amended through engagement with officers to maximise the amount of light reaching both of the Wardian towers. The building has been shortened in the north-south axis to allow more light to pass to the neighbouring buildings.
Original Pre-app Scheme Proposed Scheme Phoenix Heights 7.62 Phoenix Heights is a block of flats located to the south of the site. There would be loss of VSC to three windows outside the BRE guidance. All three windows have overhanging balconies and when tested without these would be within the BRE guidelines. It can therefore be considered that the development only has a minor adverse impact on this neighbouring development. This is considered acceptable. Cumulative Impacts 7.63 In the cumulative assessment, the daylight and sunlight report has analysed loss of light to proposed developments at 3 Millharbour/6,7,8 South Quay Plaza, 50 Marsh Wall (Alpha Square East and West) and 54 Marsh Wall. 7.64 At 3 Millharbour/6-8 South Quay Plaza, loss of VSC to two bedrooms would be outside the BRE guidelines. The ADF analysis shows that they would have less than the recommended 1% ADF both with and without the new development in place.
Page 49 These windows are tucked into a corner of the building with overhangs above; without the overhangs, they would meet the guidelines. This would be a minor adverse impact for these two rooms only. 7.65 At 50 Marsh Wall, Alpha Square West, loss of VSC would be within the BRE guidelines. There would be an impact on daylight distribution outside the guidelines for six rooms. This would be a minor adverse impact for these rooms only 7.66 At 50 Marsh Wall, Alpha Square East, there would be losses of VSC outside the BRE guidelines to 199 windows. Some of these are multiple windows serving the same rooms. The effect on daylight distribution would be within the guidelines. 7.67 Overall the loss of daylight to 50 Marsh Wall, Alpha Square East is assessed as moderate adverse. 7.68 At 54 Marsh Wall, 82 windows would have a loss of VSC outside the BRE guidelines, with typical losses of 20-29%. Many of the rooms have more than one window. All these rooms would have adequate daylight, measured by the ADF, with the new development in place, and the effect on daylight distribution would be within the guidelines. This would count as a minor adverse impact on daylight. Overshadowing
7.69 The only nearby amenity space would be to the Wardian development to the west. The proposed development would not significantly impact on this and would have a negligible impact on neighbouring amenity areas from overshadowing. Sunlight 7.70 The table below details the impact of the development on sunlight to neighbouring developments.
7.71 For the Wardian eastern tower building loss of sunlight would be outside the BRE guidelines for 114 living rooms and studios out of a total of 450 rooms. For nearly all of these the losses of sunlight would be substantial. Again the balconies are a factor and the without balcony test shows that 33 of these rooms would only fail marginally. 7.72 For the Wardian western tower building there would a negligible impact on sunlight. Conclusions on Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing. 7.73 The methodology used for the assessment has been completed in accordance with the principles and tests as explained within the BRE Report 209 Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to good practice (2011).
Page 50 7.74 It is officers view that whilst there are some major impacts on daylight and sunlight, particularly to the Wardian East building there are contributing factors which exacerbate these impacts, namely the existing wrap around balconies to the Wardian building and the proximity of the East Wardian Tower to the boundary of the site resulting in this buildings overreliance on the neighbouring site for daylight. As discussed this situation was acknowledged during the assessment of the Wardian application and it is acknowledged that any significant development of the Quay House site would have an impact on daylight to the Wardian. 7.75 It is officers view that the propose development would provide significant public benefits and given the specific circumstance described above the proposed impacts on daylight and sunlight would be considered acceptable in this instance. Overlooking 7.76 The separation distances between the proposed building and other neighbouring properties would be a minimum of 20 metres and would be considered sufficient to limit the potential for unacceptable levels of overlooking and would not unacceptably impact on neighbouring privacy. Noise and Vibration 7.77 The application is supported by a Noise Report as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The report demonstrates that the scheme has been designed so that it appropriately responds to the immediate application site context. Subject to conditions ensuring fixed plant is within acoustic enclosures if necessary it is considered that the completed proposed development would not give rise to significant effects in respect of operational noise and vibration Wind/Microclimate 7.78 The application is supported by a Wind Microclimate Assessment as part of the EIA. The assessment was reviewed the conclusions that the site would be suitable for the proposed uses subject to some localised mitigation measures within the landscaping are considered acceptable. Construction Impacts 7.79 Demolition and construction activities are likely to cause some additional noise and disturbance, additional traffic generation and dust. In accordance with relevant Development Plan policies, a number of conditions are recommended to minimise these impacts. These will control working hours and require the approval and implementation of Construction Environmental Management and Logistics Plan. Transport and Servicing 7.80 Development Plan policies promote sustainable modes of travel and limit car parking to essential user needs. They also seek to secure safe and appropriate servicing. DLR Safeguarding 7.81 The application site is located in close proximity to the elevated DLR railway. TFL and the DLR have been consulted as part of the application and have requested a
Page 51 number of conditions regarding landscaping and maintenance below the DLR. These have been included within the recommended conditions Car Parking 7.82 The development would be ‘car free’ with the exception of two disabled access spaces. This is in line with Local Plan policy. The Council’s Highways officer has indicated that additional accessible spaces may be required and any necessary future provision of these would be secured through the Travel Plan within the S106. 7.83 The provision of electric charging points to the accessible spaces would be required and secured by condition. Servicing and Deliveries 7.84 The proposed development includes a dedicated service layby at the Admirals Way frontage. The provision of the servicing layby at this location ensures that servicing can be undertaken on-site and away from the main pedestrian and cycle routes, away from DLR infrastructure and not impede traffic flow on Admirals Way. 7.85 All deliveries associated with the development which involve large vehicles will be controlled by a delivery booking system. Subject to a Management strategy secured by conditions the proposed serving arrangements are considered acceptable. Cycle Parking 7.86 Draft London Plan policy T5 and current London Plan (2016) policy 6.9 requires 1 space per 20 bedrooms for long-stay and 1 space per 50 bedrooms for short-stay. Therefore, there would be a requirement for 34 long stay and 14 short stay spaces across both the hotel and serviced apartment uses. Long stay cycle storage would be located within the basement of the building accessible from two larger lifts within the ground floor foyer. Short stay spaces would be located in various locations close to the entrances to the building. The location of these would be secured by condition. 7.87 Final details of cycle parking ensuring this meets London Cycle Design Standards (LCDS) would be secured by condition. Overall, the proposed cycle storage is considered to be acceptable subject to the submission of the details secured by condition. Trip Generation 7.88 A multi-modal assessment has been undertaken as part of the Transport Assessment. This concluded that the proposed development has the potential to generate some 2,753 two-way trips during a typical weekday (between 07:00 and 19:00). The majority of these trips would be made by walking (46%) and using rail services (39%). The Council’s Highway officer and TFL raised concerns about the increase in two way taxi trips and recommended that the applicant should promote and encourage sustainable forms of transport through the use of wayfinding signage indicating the closest public transport links. This should be secured through a condition.
Page 52 Demolition and Construction Traffic 7.89 Should the application be approved, the impact on the road network from demolition and construction traffic would be controlled by way of conditions requiring the submission and approval of Demolition and Construction Management Plans. The Demolition and Construction Management Plan will need to consider the impact on pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles as well as fully considering the impact on other developments in close proximity. 7.90 The application site is constrained and construction will be challenging due to the location of DLR infrastructure and the need to keep access to the Admirals Way estate for other users. A robust Demolition and Construction Plan which specifies how the works will take place without unduly impacting on the surrounding public highway, Marsh Wall in particular would be required. Marsh Wall has experienced a high level of construction traffic over the past few years which impacts on its efficiency. It is an important east – west link and the applicant will need to provide a scheme which restricts the impact on this route and takes into account the cumulative effect on construction traffic with neighbouring development. Summary 7.91 Subject to the above it is considered the proposal would be acceptable in terms of supporting sustainable modes of transport, and will have no significant impacts on the safety or capacity of the highways network, in accordance with NPPF (2012) policy 6.1, London Plan (2015) and . Environment 7.92 The planning application constitutes an EIA development. The application was submitted in July 2019 accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES) produced by Ramboll on behalf of Quay House Admirals Way Ltd, and provided assessment of the following topics: - Transportation and Access; - Air Quality; - Noise and Vibration; - Water Resources and Flood Risk; - Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing; - Wind; - Climate Change; - Townscape and Visual Impact; and - Built Heritage. 7.93 The ES has been reviewed in accordance with The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (as amended) (EIA Regulations).
Page 53
7.94 The Council’s EIA Officer and retained EIA consultants and the have confirmed that the submitted ES meets the requirements of the EIA Regulations. 7.95 The ‘environmental information’ has been examined by the Council and has been taken into consideration by officers to reach a reasoned conclusion of the significant effects of the Proposed Development, which forms the basis of the assessment presented in this report. Appropriate mitigation / monitoring measures as proposed in the ES will be secured through planning conditions and/or planning obligations. The environmental information comprises the ES, including any further information and any other information, any representations made by consultation bodies and by any other person about the environmental effects of the Proposed Development. Energy Efficiency and Sustainability 7.96 At a national level, the National Planning Policy Framework sets out that planning plays a key role in delivering reductions to greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to climate change. The NPPF also notes that planning supports the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. At a strategic level, the climate change policies as set out in Chapter 5 of the London Plan 2015 and the Tower Hamlets Local Plan (D.ES7) collectively require developments to make the fullest contribution to the mitigation and adaptation to climate change and to minimise carbon dioxide emissions. 7.97 The London Plan (2016) sets out the Mayor’s energy hierarchy which is to: Use Less Energy (Be Lean); Supply Energy Efficiently (Be Clean); and Use Renewable Energy (Be Green) 7.98 Policy D.ES7 includes the requirement for non-residential developments to be zero carbon with a minimum of 45% reduction in regulated carbon dioxide with the reminder to be offset with cash payment in lieu. 7.99 The Quay House Energy Statement (June 2019) sets out how the applicant has sought to meet the CO2 emission reduction policy requirements through energy efficiency measures, communal gas boiler and integration Air Source Heat pumps. The report notes that the following CO2 emissions:
Baseline – 1573 tonnes CO2 per annum Lean Scheme – 1450 tonnes CO2 per annum Proposed Scheme – 818 tonnes CO2 per annum CO2 savings – 757 tonnes CO2 per annum
7.100 The CO2 emission reduction is anticipated to be 48% against the building regulation baseline which is compliant with policy requirements. It is recommended that the delivery of the CO2 emission reductions is secured via Condition.
Page 54 7.101 The S106 would include a financial payment of £1,468,800 to offset the remaining carbon and comply with policy D.ES7. Sustainability 7.102 Policy D.ES7 also requires sustainable design assessment tools to be used to ensure the development has maximised use of climate change mitigation measures. At present the current interpretation of this policy is to require all non-residential to achieve BREEAM Excellent. The applicant has submitted a BREEAM Pre- Assessments which shows the scheme is designed to achieve a BREEAM Excellent Rating with a score of 79.5%. 7.103 The proposal for the scheme to achieve a BREEAM Excellent should be secured via condition. Summary and Securing the Proposals 7.104 It is considered that the proposals are in accordance with adopted policies for sustainability and CO2 emission reductions and it is recommended they are secured through appropriate conditions to deliver:
Submission of a post completion verification report including the as built calculations (SBEM) to demonstrate the reduction in CO2 emissions have been delivered on-site. Submission of Final BREEM Certificate to demonstrate an ‘Excellent’ rating has been delivered. Air Quality 7.105 Development Plan policies require major developments to be accompanied by assessments which demonstrates that the proposed uses are acceptable and show how development would prevent or reduce air pollution. 7.106 The application is accompanied by an Air Quality Assessment within the EIA. The assessment states that the impact of construction on local air quality could be significant and strict controls including air quality monitoring should be secured through the Construction management plan. Once complete the development would be air quality neutral as required by the GLA SPG on sustainable design and construction. Air Quality measures including ultra-low NOx boilers within the building would be secured by way of a condition. Waste 7.107 Development Plan policies require adequate refuse and recycling storage alongside and combined with appropriate management and collection arrangements. 7.108 The LBTH Waste Team have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied that subject to securing the details of bin storage size and servicing arrangements by condition the proposal is acceptable. Biodiversity 7.109 Development Plan policies seek to safeguard and where possible enhance biodiversity value.
Page 55 7.110 The application site has no significant existing biodiversity value. It is adjacent to South Dock, which is part of a Site of Borough Importance for Nature Conservation. The proposed development would increase the shading of part of the SINC but, due to the deep water and lack of aquatic vegetation, this is not likely to have a significant adverse impact on the ecology of the dock. Unlike other recent and proposed developments around the dock, there is no proposed encroachment into the water body and hence no loss of area of SINC. There will not, therefore, be any significant adverse impact on biodiversity, and ecology 7.111 The landscaping at ground-floor and third-floor levels includes a good range of nectar-rich flowers, which will contribute to a LBAP target to increase forage for bees and other pollinators. 7.112 Subject to conditions securing the biodiversity enhancements proposed the development would be considered comply with policy Flood Risk & Drainage 7.113 Development Plan policies seek to manage flood risk and encourage the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage. 7.114 The application is supported by a flood risk management plan and SuDs strategy which demonstrates there would be no increase in surface water runoff from the development. This would be secured by condition and is considered acceptable. Land Contamination 7.115 The application has been reviewed by the Council’s Environmental Health Land Contamination officer and subject to standard conditions, the proposals are acceptable from a land contamination perspective and any contamination that is identified can be satisfactorily dealt with. Infrastructure Impact 7.116 It is estimated that the proposed development would be liable for Tower Hamlets Community 7.117 Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments of approximately £4,970,970 and Mayor of London CIL of approximately £3,66,2820. It is important to note that these figures are approximate. This will likely change given indexation is linked to the date planning permission is granted. 7.118 Alongside CIL, Development Plan policies seek financial contributions to be secured by way of planning obligations to offset the likely impacts of the proposed development on local services and infrastructure. 7.119 The applicant has agreed to meet all of the financial contributions that are sought by the Council’s Planning Obligations SPD, as follows: 7.120 £114,472 towards construction phase employment skills training 7.121 £149,436.80 towards end-user phase employment skills training
Page 56 Planning Benefits 7.122 The scheme would provide significant public benefits including the provision of visitor accommodation contributing towards the Borough’s target of 5,000 net additional rooms by 2041. Other notable benefits anticipated by the applicant include:
- 172 permanent direct jobs once operational. - 355 jobs in the wider construction supply chain economy. - 302 construction jobs on site. - Support 73 further permanent jobs in the wider supply chain including operational apprenticeships and an Employment and Skills Training programme for the end user. - An Employment and Skills Training programme during construction. - A new public garden and restaurant with views to the dock and back to Canary Wharf. - A new public realm along the dockside. - Partnership with Parkore Generations, providing activity space below the DLR. - CIL contributions - Significant construction spend in the economy. (Anticipated by the applicant to be in region of £17.6m) - Wider supply chain spend annually during the build. (Anticipated by the applicant to be in region of £18.3m ) - Significant additional visitor spend into the local economy each year. - in business rate receipts each year. (Anticipated by the applicant to be in region of £1.7m) - A carbon offsetting scheme which exceeds local targets to comply with the emerging 45% carbon emission reduction target in the new development plan, adopted last week. 7.123 The applicant has also pledged a commitment to contribute £65,000 towards the expansion of their existing hospitality and leisure skills training, targeting local people, to be run by the London Training Centre, a local organisation based in Tower Hamlets and set up to provide vital skills and qualifications to those most in need. The purpose would be to ensure that local people have access to the employment opportunities within the new development. Human Rights & Equalities 7.124 The proposal does not raise any unique human rights or equalities implications. The balance between individual rights and the wider public interest has been carefully considered and officers consider it to be acceptable. 7.125 The proposed provision of the hotel meets inclusive design standards and over 10% of the new rooms would be wheelchair accessible and 2 disabled car parking spaces provided. These standards would benefit future employees and visitors, including disabled people, elderly people and parents/carers with children. 7.126 The proposed development would not result in adverse impacts upon equality or social cohesion.
Page 57 8 RECOMMENDATION 8.1 That conditional planning permission is GRANTED subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the following planning obligations
8.2 Financial Obligations
a. £114,472 towards construction phase employment skills training b. £149,436.80 towards end-user phase employment skills training c. £1,468,800 Carbon offsetting obligation d. 57,925.00 towards wider landscape improvements
8.3 Non-Financial Obligations
a. Access to employment
‒ 20% local procurement ‒ 20% local labour in construction ‒ 20 construction phase apprenticeships ‒ 2 end-user phase apprenticeship
b. Transport ‒ Approval and implementation of Travel Plan
c. Compliance with Considerate Constructors Scheme
d. 90 Day Lets Rooms will not be occupied for periods of 90 days or more; Twenty-four hour servicing will be provided; Telephone lines will be provided in the rooms with no opportunity for personal lines installed by the occupier; Rooms will be charged out at a maximum at weekly rates; The use will be secured in the form of a licence, not a lease; The occupants of the room will not have exclusive possession of the room; and Management will have access to the room for the provision of substantial services, including room cleaning.
8.4 That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to negotiate the legal agreement. If within three months of the resolution the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director for Place is delegated power to refuse planning permission.
8.5 That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to impose conditions and informatives to address the following matters:
Page 58 9 PLANNING CONDITIONS
Compliance 1. 3 years deadline for commencement of development. 2. Development in accordance with approved plans. 3. Restrictions on demolition and construction activities: a. All works in accordance with Tower Hamlets Code of Construction Practice; b. Standard hours of construction and demolition; c. Air quality standards for construction machinery; d. Ground-borne vibration limits; and e. Noise pollution limits. 4. Piling 5. Energy and efficiency standards 6. Air quality emission standards for boilers & CHP
Monitoring 7. TV reception 8. Surface and groundwater conditions
Pre-commencement 9. Code of Construction Practice 10. Construction Waste Management Plan 11. Construction Environmental Management Plan and Construction Logistics Plan (including construction methodology re. cranes in consultation with London City Airport) 12. Land Contamination Remediation
Pre-superstructure works 13. Details of external facing materials and architectural detailing. 14. Details of hard and soft landscaping of all public realm and open spaces including details relating to play equipment, street furniture and lighting, wind mitigation measures, biodiversity mitigation and enhancements. 15. Details of flue emissions 16. Details of cycle parking 17. Surface water - Drainage Strategy 18. Disabled Car parking 19. Wayfinding and signage strategy 20. Delivery, Servicing and Waste Management Plan 21. Details of 10% Accessible Rooms
Prior to relevant works 22. Details mechanical plant and equipment and noise mitigation
Page 59
Occupation 23. Secured by design compliance 24. Extraction Equipment (Restaurant) 25. BREEAM
Page 60 APPENDIX 1 – List of Plans for Approval
Schedule of Drawings
10243-SHP-Z0-00-PL-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-00-PL-A-G100-100 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-00-PL-A-G100-101 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-00-XP-A-G100-100 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EE-EL-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EE-XE-A-G100-00 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EN-EL-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EN-EL-A-G100-100 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EN-XE-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-ES-EL-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-ES-XE-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EW-EL-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EW-EL-A-G100-100 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z0-EW-XE-A-G100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-00-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-00-XP-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-01-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-01-XP-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-02-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-02-XP-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-03-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-03-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-03-PL-A-G200-002 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-03-PL-A-G200-003 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-04-PL-A-332-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-04-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-05-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-06-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-07-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-08-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-09-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-17-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-18-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-24-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-27-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-28-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-40-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-AA-SE-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-B1-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-BB-SE-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-CC-SE-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-EE-EL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-EN-EL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-ES-EL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-RF-PL-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-RF-XP-A-G200-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-DE-A-G251-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-DE-A-G251-002 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-DE-A-G251-003 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-DE-A-G251-004 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-DE-A-G251-005 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-DE-A-G251-006 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-PL-A-F200-101 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-TY-PL-A-F200-102 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-XX-PL-A-F100-001 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-XX-PL-A-F100-002 REV P0 10243-SHP-Z1-Z1-EW-A-G200-001 REV P0 1846-EXA-XX-00-DR-L-0100 REV A 1846-EXA-XX-00-DR-L-0200 REV A 1846-EXA-XX-03-DR-L-0100 REV A 1846-EXA-XX-03-DR-L-0200 REV A
Page 61
Schedule of Documents
Design and Access Statement- Simpson Haugh (June 2019) Planning Statement – Savills (June 2019) Transport Statement – Systra (June 2019) Transport Statement Addendum – Evoke (October 2019) Framework Travel Plan – Systra (June 2019) Construction Management Plan – Systra (June 2019) Delivery and Servicing Plan – Systra (June 2019) Waste Management Plan – Systra (June 2019) Energy Statement – PSH (June 2019) Sustainability Assessment - PSH (June 2019) Health Impact Assessment – CBRE (September 2019)
Page 62
APPENDIX 2 – Relevant Plans and CGI’s
Proposed Ground Floor Page 63 Page
Proposed Upper floors (8, 10,12,14) Page 64 Page
Proposed East Elevation Page 65 Page
Proposed North Elevation Page 66 Page
View of ground floor looking east Page 67 Page
View from South Dock Page 68 Page
View looking west across South Dock View looking North from Havannah Street Page 69 Page
The proposed relationship with the DLR
Page 70 Page
The Proposed ‘Underline’
Page 71 Page
Existing View
Page 72 Page
Proposed View
Page 73 Page
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5.2
STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 23rd January 2020
Report of the Corporate Director of Place Classification: Unrestricted
Application for Planning Permission click here for case file
Reference PA/19/02217
Site Fiftieth Floor, 1 Canada Square, London, E14 5AA
Ward Canary Wharf
Proposal Change of use from Office (Class B1) to Non-Residential Institution (Class D1)- Higher education facility.
Summary Grant planning permission with conditions Recommendation
Applicant University College London
Architect Nicholas Hare Architects
Case Officer Gareth Owens
Key dates - Application registered as valid on 10/10/2019. - Letters sent to neighbours on 21/10/2019. - Site notice on 30/10/2019. - Press date on 31/10/2019. - Site visit to 38th floor (occupied by University College London) and 50th floor (proposed Change of Use floor) on 15/11/2019.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposal is for the change of use of Level 50, One Canada Square from Class B1 (Offices) to Class D1 (Non-Residential Institution).
The applicant is the University College London’s School of Management, who intend to use the space for its research and postgraduate teaching facilities.
This application is reported to the Strategic Development Committee as the proposal is a departure from the Development Plan and the change of use is to floor space in excess of 2,500 sq. metres.
This application is referable to the Greater London Authority under Category 3E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008: ‘Development – a) which does not accord with one or more provisions of the development policies force in the area in which the application site is situated; and b) comprises or includes the provision of more than 2,500sq.m of floor space for a use falling within any of the classes in the Use Classes Order – xi) class D1 (non-residential institutions).
This application has been considered against the Council’s approved planning policies contained in the London Borough of the Draft Tower Hamlets Local Plan 2031 (January 2020)
Page 75 as well as the London Plan (2016), the National Planning Policy Framework and all other material considerations.
We have also considered the application against the Draft London Plan – ‘Intend to Publish (2019) as this carries substantial weight.
The proposal would result in the net loss of B1a floorspace of 2500sqm. This loss, within a ‘Primary Preferred Office Location’ (PPOL), is not normally supported.
However, in this specific instance, the proposal is considered to be acceptable. This is because the proposal would result in a minimal loss of office space and would introduce a use which would support the function to the Canary Wharf PPOL and which would be a main Town Centre use within the (emerging) Canary Wharf Metropolitan Town Centre. The specific University use would also be beneficial to surrounding businesses and the PPOL as a whole.
Page 76 SITE PLAN
Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey, London Borough of Tower Hamlets 100019288 Planning Applications Site Map PA/19/02217
This site map displays the Planning London Application Site Boundary and the Borough of extent of the area within which Tower neighbouring occupiers / owners were Hamlets consulted as part of the Planning Date: 14 Scale : 50m grid squares Application Process January 2020
Page 77 AERIAL VIEW OF THE SITE
N
Page 78 1. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
1.1 The application site is the 50th floor of One Canada Square. The floor comprises approximately 2500sqm of B1a office space, but is currently vacant.
1.2 One Canada Square lies in the heart of Canary Wharf. It contains commercial uses at basement and ground floors and 50 floors of office space above, with the exception of floor 38, which is in D1 use. The building provides a total of over 115,000sqm of floorspace.
1.3 The site lies within the Canary Wharf Primary Preferred Office Location and the Canary Wharf Major Town Centre. It also falls within a ‘satellite’ element of the Central Activities Zone and the Isle of Dogs and South Poplar Opportunity Area.
1.4 The predominant land use in the vicinity of the site is Class B1a (Offices), with a substantial element of Class A1 (Retail) and other Town Centre uses at ground and basement floors.
2. PROPOSAL
2.1 The applicant seeks permission for the change of use of the 50th floor from office use (class B1) into a non-residential institution use (class D1).
2.2 The applicant is the UCL School of Management, who currently occupy the 38th floor. The proposal site would accommodate the expansion of the School and would provide a mixture of office space and teaching and learning space.
2.3 The proposed floorplate would have office space for staff, one lecture theatre and further seminar rooms. UCL anticipate that floor 50 would accommodate 210 students and 75 staff.
2.4 The proposal would provide 30 long stay cycle parking spaces and 30 short stay cycle parking spaces.
3. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 PA/99/01080 – Change of use of part of floor 5 from offices to medical clinic/ consultancy (Permission granted 19/10/1999).
3.2 PA/05/01500 – Change of use of 45sqm of B1a floorspace at ground floor level into A1 retail (Permission granted 25/10/2005).
3.3 PA/06/00417 – Change of use to part of floor 6 (217sqm) from offices (B1a) to education (D1) (Permission granted 15/05/2006).
3.4 PA/07/02257 – Change of use of 435 sq. m of B1a floor space in the lobby area, into class A3/ A4 (Permission granted 30/10/2007).
3.5 PA/11/02661 – Change of use of 100sqm of B1a (office use) at floor 10 into dual B1a (office use) and D1 (non-residential institutional use) (Permission granted 28/11/2011).
3.6 PA/15/01229 – Change of use of floor 38 (3187sqm) from Class B1a into Class D1 (Non- residential Institution) – Higher Education (Permission granted 23/07/2015).
3.7 PA/17/03186 – Change of use of Room 21 (37th floor) from B1a (office use) to allow a Dual B1a/D1 use of the room to GP consultation room (Permission granted 07/02/2018).
Page 79 4. PUBLICITY AND ENGAGEMENT
4.1 Upon validation of the application, a press notice was published in the local press on 31st October 2019 and a site notice displayed on 30th October 2019. The council sent consultation letters to 67 nearby occupiers on 21st October 2019.
4.2 No letters of objection were received in response to this consultation.
One letter of support was received, which stated that the proposed use would complement the existing business uses and support the continued growth of business and enterprise, in line with policy aims.
5. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Greater London Authority
5.1 The proposal does not raise any new strategic planning issues.
LBTH Transportation and Highways
5.1 No objection to the proposals:- cycle parking is in accordance with London Plan policies.
6. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES AND DOCUMENTS
The new Local Plan
The Tower Hamlets draft Local Plan 2031 (Managing Growth and Sharing the Benefits) has been the subject of publicity, consultation and an independent examination. The Inspector’s report (dated 20 September 2019) concluded that, subject to the inclusion of a number of main modifications, the plan satisfies the requirements of Section 20(5) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and meets the criteria for soundness in the National Planning Policy Framework.
On 27 November 2019, the Mayor in Cabinet agreed to refer the report to the full Council to formally adopt the Local Plan, including the modifications recommended by the Inspector and the additional minor modifications proposed by officers.
The Local Plan is expected to be adopted by the Council at its meeting on 15 January. If adopted he Local Plan will carry full weight and form part of the Development Plan for the purposes of Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Planning decisions must be taken in accordance with relevant policies in the Development Plan, unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise. This report and recommendation has been drafted in anticipation of the adoption of the Local Plan by the Council on 15 January.
As per the above, the Development Plan documents relevant to the determination of this application comprise:
- The London Plan (March 2016) - Tower Hamlets Local Plan 2031 (January 2020)
6.1 The key Development Plan policies relevant to the proposal are:
Page 80 Land Use (Central Activities Zone functions and priorities, Town Centres, Opportunity Areas, educational facilities, office space)
London Plan: 2.1, 2.2, 2.10, 2.11, 2.13, 2.15, 3.16, 3.18, 4.1, 4.2, 4.10 TH Local Plan: S.SG1, S.EMP1, D.EMP3, S.TC1, S.CF1, D.CF3
Amenity (Noise and disturbance)
London Plan: 7.6 TH Local Plan: D.DH8
Transport (cycle parking, sustainable travel, waste and servicing)
London Plan: 6.3 TH Local Plan: D.TR3, S.TR1
The new draft London Plan
On the 9th of December, the Mayor published his ‘intend to publish’ version of the London Plan. This version of the plan responds to the Inspector’s recommendations. This will now be sent to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State can then issue a direction which requires the GLA to amend the Plan if required. The Plan cannot be published (adopted) until these points have been addressed. It is anticipated that the final Plan will be published circa March 2020
6.2 The key emerging London Plan policies relevant to the determination of this application are:
Land Use SD1, SD4, SD5, SD6, SD7, SD10, S1, S3, E1, E8
Amenity D3
Transport T5, T6
Other policy and guidance documents relevant to the proposal are:
- National Planning Policy Framework (2019)
- National Planning Practice Guidance (updated 2019)
- The Isle of Dogs and South Poplar Opportunity Area Planning Framework (2019)
- Central Activities Zone SPG (March 2016)
- Tower Hamlets Town Centre Strategy 2017- 2022
7. PLANNING ASSESSMENT
7.1 The key issues raised by the proposed development are: i. Land Use ii. Transport
Page 81 iii. Equalities and Human Rights
Land Use
7.2 The proposal would result in the loss of 2,549 m2 of B1a office space on the 50th floor of One Canada Square. The site has been vacant for the past 12 months and the applicant notes in their Planning Statement that the space has been marketed for office use during that time, without success. However, no evidence has been submitted to support this claim.
7.3 Local Plan policy D.EMP3 states that development which results in the loss of employment (B- class uses) floorspace within Preferred Priority Office Locations (PPOLs) will not be supported. The proposal is, as such, a departure from the Development Plan in as far as it relates to that policy.
7.4 However, the site also forms part of the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area and the Canary Wharf Major Town Centre, which have separate primary functions and for which other Development Plan policies apply. These will now be considered.
7.5 Paragraph 19 of the NPPF states the planning system should do everything it can to support economic growth and encourage sustainable growth in order to build a strong and competitive economy.
7.6 Policy 2.10 of the London Plan (2016) seeks to sustain and enhance the Isle of Dogs as a strategically important, globally-orientated financial and business services centre, whilst policy 4.2 seeks to meet the distinct needs of the Isle of Dogs office market, by sustaining and developing its unique and dynamic cluster of ‘world city’ and other specialist functions.
7.7 Local Plan policy S.EMP1 states that whilst PPOL’s comprise predominantly of office uses, these areas are suitable for other strategic CAZ uses, which support its strategic function. These strategic functions include community facilities such as educational facilities and the proposal is, as such, a suitable supporting use in this location.
7.8 In relation to its Town Centre function, Local Plan policy S.SG1 states that the Boroughs’ Town Centres will continue to be the focus of shopping, leisure, cultural and community activities. Local Plan policy S.TC1 encourages development which promotes mixed use and multi-purpose Town Centres. It recognises that Canary Wharf is to be upgraded to a Metropolitan Centre in the emerging London Plan, in acknowledgement of the size of its catchment and the substantial retail, leisure and service floorspace it provides. This underlines the importance of Canary Wharf as a place which functions as a Town Centre of significant importance, in addition to its primary business function.
7.9 It should also be recognised that the amount of B1 (office) floor space being lost through this proposal (2,549m2) when compared to the amount of office floor space present within the PPOL (1 Canada square alone provides over 111,000m2 of office floor space) is in percentage terms a very small loss.
7.10 Canary Wharf is an expanding PPOL with larger floor plate office floors being consented within the Estate - the recent Wood Wharf planning permission provides an additional 165,000m2 of B1 (Offices) floor space alone.
7.11 In relation to the proposed community use, Local Plan policy S.CF1 states that development which seeks to enhance existing community facilities will be supported. In addition, it notes that new community facilities will be directed towards the boroughs Town Centres.
7.12 In relation specifically to higher education facilities, current London Plan policy 4.10 and emerging London Plan policy E8 parts D and E state that the Mayor wishes to support
Page 82 measures to secure and develop London’s leading role as a centre for higher education of national and international importance. He recognises that there is considerable potential for innovation through collaboration with businesses, which can be a catalyst for economic growth and can help support the growth of emerging sectors in London.
7.13 UCL was ranked eighth in the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) World University Rankings 2019 and in so doing provides excellence and leadership in teaching and research. The proposed expansions of UCL’s School of Management within One Canada Square would continue to develop collaboration with businesses in Canary Wharf.
7.14 For the reasons described above, it is considered that the loss of 2,549m2 of office floor space, in addition to the loss of the 3187sqm of office floorspace given over to the University in 2015, is on balance acceptable, as it will not undermine Canary Wharf’s function as a PPOL given its size in relation to the business offering that exists within Canary Wharf. Also, the proposed use is a main Town Centre Use which is also a main strategic function of the Isle of Dogs satellite CAZ.
7.15 The proposed use would contribute positively towards the functioning of the Town Centre and the CAZ and would support and not undermine the primary business function of Canary Wharf.
7.16 It should be noted that Class D1 (non-residential institutions) uses also includes such uses as clinics, health centres, crèches, day nurseries, museums, libraries, and places of worship. Whilst the higher education use proposed is considered acceptable in planning policy terms, other uses within the same class may not be acceptable or may create different impacts based on the amount of floor space proposed. Hence a condition is recommended to remove permitted development rights for the use to change in the future to other uses in the same class and restrict the permission to educational use only.
Transportation
7.17 According to paragraph 29 of the NPPF people should be given a real choice about how they travel, and transport related policies should always favour sustainable modes of transport wherever possible.
7.18 Policy 6.3 of the London Plan states that development should not adversely affect safety on the transport network. Policy 6.9 states that developments should provide secure, integrated, convenient and accessible cycle parking facilities in line with the minimum cycle parking standards which are set out in a table which forms a part of policy 6.13.
7.19 The application site has a PTAL rating of 5, indicating very good access to public transport. No additional car parking provision is proposed for the D1 (Non-Residential Institution) use which is supported, as both staff and students are expected to use alternative modes of transport (other than a car) to travel to and from the site.
7.20 The proposal will provide 60 cycle parking spaces, of which 30 spaces will be long stay and 30 will be short stay. This is in line with the requirements under the London Plan. These spaces will be provided in One Canada Square infrastructure car park.
7.21 Considering the above, the proposal would have an acceptable impact on the capacity of the surrounding highway network.
Page 83 Amenity
7.22 According to paragraph 17 of the NPPF local planning authorities should always seek to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings.
7.23 Local Plan policy D.DH8 states that development should protect the amenity of surrounding existing and future residents and building occupants by not creating unacceptable levels of noise, vibration, artificial light, odour, fume or dust pollution during the construction and life of the development.
7.24 It is noted the nature of the proposed use is not that dissimilar to that of a B1 use, in that a large proportion of the floor space will be given over to offices for the 75 staff envisaged to be present in the space. As such officers do not envisage that this change of use will have an undue impact upon the amenities of other occupiers within or surrounding One Canada Square, with respect to noise generation.
Waste
7.25 Policy 5.17 of the London Plan states that all developments should plan for waste management, should minimise waste and should achieve a high level of performance with respect to reuse and recycling.
7.26 Whilst no specific details relating to waste management have been included within the application, the management and collection of waste on this site is the subject of a private arrangement between Canary Wharf Group and their chosen contractors and as such this application has no impact upon the Council’s waste management service. It should also be noted that the change of use from B1 (Business) to D1 (Non-Residential Institution) is unlikely to have a significant impact upon the quantity of waste being produced on this site.
8 Conclusion
8.1 The net loss of office floor space, whilst not generally supported in a PPOL, is considered acceptable here, given the minimal loss of the floor area, the amount of new office floor space coming forward in Canary Wharf, the proposed D1 use which would support and comply with the function of the new Metropolitan Town Centre and the functions of the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area and given that the proposed University use would positively contribute to adjoining businesses.
8.2 In light of the above, it is considered appropriate for the Council to make a departure from its Development Plan in this specific instance.
Human Rights & Equalities
8.3 The proposal does not raise any unique human rights or equalities implications. The balance between individual rights and the wider public interest has been carefully considered and officers consider it to be acceptable.
8.4 The proposed development would not result in adverse impacts upon equality or social cohesion.
RECOMMENDATION
8.5 That conditional planning permission is GRANTED.
Page 84 That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to impose conditions and informatives to address the matters listed below and to add any other conditions and informatives as necessary.
Planning Conditions
Compliance:
1. 3 year deadline for the commencement of the development 2. Development in accordance with approved plans 3. Provision of 60 cycle storage spaces 4. Premises shall only be used for the provision of education
Page 85 Appendix 1 – Relevant and CGI’s
Existing Plan Page 86 Page
Proposed Plan
Page 87 Page
UCL “Harvard style” lecture theatre on 38th floor of 1 Canada Square – intended to be replicated on 50th floor
Page 88 Page
UCL Break out area on 38th floor of 1 Canada Square - intended to be replicated on 50th floor
Page 89 Page
UCL Staff Offices 38th floor of 1 Canada Square - intended to be replicated on 50th floor
Page 90 Page
Agenda Item 6
STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT 23 January 2020 COMMITTEE
Report of the Corporate Director of Place Classification: Unrestricted
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 In this part of the agenda are reports on planning matters other than planning applications for determination by the Committee. The following information and advice applies to all those reports.
2. PRE-APPLICATION BRIEFINGS AND PRESENTATIONS
2.2 Presentations will be held in accordance with the attached protocol.
3. PUBLIC SPEAKING
3.1 The Council’s Constitution only provides for public speaking rights for those applications being reported to Committee in the “Planning Applications for Decision” part of the agenda. Therefore reports that deal with planning matters other than applications for determination by the Council do not automatically attract public speaking rights.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 (Section 97) LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS USED IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORTS UNDER THE ITEM OTHER PLANNING MATTERS
Brief Description of background papers: Tick if copy supplied for register: Name and telephone no. of holder: See individual reports See individual reports Page 91 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6.1
STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 23/01/2020
Report of the Corporate Director of Place Classification: Unrestricted
Pre-application presentation
Reference PF/19/00247
Site North Quay, Aspen Way, London
Ward Canary Wharf
Proposal Outline planning permission for construction of a mixed-use, high- density, high-rise, employment-led development with up to 8 new buildings of up to 225m AOD in height.
Applicant Canary Wharf Group
Architect/agent Allies and Morrison, Quod
Case Officer Piotr Lanoszka
Key dates Pre-application discussions began in October 2019 Initial developer’s public consultation took place in November 2019 Planning application likely to be submitted by the end of May 2020
SITE PLAN
POPLAR DLR STATION HERTSMERE RD
ASPEN WAY
WEST INDIA THE SITE DLR STATION
CANARY WHARF CROSSRAIL STATION
SITE LOCATION PLAN
Page 93 1. BACKGROUND
1.1 The National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance promote early engagement between developers and Local Planning Authorities, prior to submission of a formal planning application. The Council welcomes pre-application discussions and has a well-established process to facilitate this.
1.2 In March 2019 the Council’s Development and Strategic Development Committees considered a draft protocol for pre-application presentations. The protocol is now incorporated in the Committee Terms of Reference. The Council’s updated Statement of Community Involvement also highlights the importance of pre-application engagement and the role of elected members and local communities in this stage of the planning process.
1.3 This report updates the Strategic Development Committee on progress made and issues identified in respect of pre-application discussions for the proposed redevelopment of the North Quay site.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
2.1 Outline planning permission for construction of a mixed-use, high-density, high-rise, employment-led development.
2.2 The outline planning permission format with the associated suite of control documents would be based on the outline planning permission for the redevelopment of Wood Wharf. More information about the outline planning permission format is provided in Appendix 1.
2.3 The development would comprise the construction of up to 8 new buildings. Flexibility is being sought in the uses that could come forward
2.4 Commercial uses would include: office floorspace (Use Class B1) and retail floorspace (A1 – A5); and hotels and serviced apartments (C1);
2.5 Residential uses would include: residential dwellings (C3), co-living (C4), student accommodation (Sui Generis);
2.6 Community floorspace would include: cultural and leisure uses (D1 and D2).
2.7 The development would comprise construction of up to 8 new buildings, in a mix of low, mid and high-rise buildings and building elements, reaching a maximum height of approximately 65 storeys (above ground floor) / 225 meters AOD. The anticipated maximum number of residential units is approximately 950 across a range of sizes and tenures.
3. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
3.1 The site measures over 3 hectares and is subject to a site allocation in the new Local Plan. For details of the site allocation, please refer to Appendix 2.
3.2 The site is located to the north of the recently constructed Crossrail Station, on the northern side of the North Dock and to the south of Aspen Way. To the east, the site is bounded by Upper Bank Street with the Billingsgate Market located on the opposite side of the street, while to the west is the West India Quay DLR station & Delta Junction with various commercial and residential uses located further west, along Hertsmere Road.
3.3 The site lies within the northernmost part of the Canary Wharf Metropolitan Centre and is designated as a Secondary Preferred Office Location where Development Plan policy expects mixed-use employment-led proposals with no more than 25% of residential floorspace. The site is also located within the London Plan’s Isle of Dogs & South Poplar Opportunity Area.
Page 94 3.4 The site benefits from excellent public transport accessibility, being adjacent to West India Quay and Poplar DLR Stations and the Canary Wharf Crossrail Station as well as being within a short walking distance of the Canary Wharf Jubilee Line Underground Station.
3.5 The site currently serves as a temporary construction compound for the Crossrail scheme as well as for other development projects by Canary Wharf Group. The site includes a section of the Grade I listed quay wall, however this is fully covered by a marine deck.
3.6 There are a number of heritage assets in the vicinity of the site, the closest being the West India Dock Conservation Area, to the west, and the St Mathias Church Conservation Area to the north. Both conservation areas contain significant numbers of statutorily listed buildings. Given the high-rise nature of the proposed development, the proposed towers would be visible in the setting of other, more distant heritage assets, as well as in the strategic views identified within the London View Management Framework.
3.7 The site is located underneath one of the flight path approaches to London City Airport and within a Flood Risk Area. The North Dock is a Site of Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation.
4. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
4.1 The site benefits from an extant full planning permission ref PA/03/00379 dated 12/01/2007 for a development of three large floorplate office buildings of 43, 23 and 37 storeys (up to 221m AOD) and housing 372,660m² of office floorspace and 5,324m² of retail and food & beverage uses.
4.2 In April 2017 CWG submitted an application for a full planning permission ref PA/17/01193 for an alternative scheme, a mixed use development comprising 4 buildings ranging from 30 to 67 storeys in height (up to 227.58m AOD), providing up to 158,586m² of office floorspace, 1,423 residential units, 216 serviced apartments and 25,213m² of retail and food & beverage uses. The application was withdrawn in December 2017.
4.3 The key challenges posed by the previous proposal were as follows:
Land Use
4.4 The mixed use scheme was divided approximately 60/40 between commercial and residential floorspace. The principle of residential use within a core commercial area was at the time contrary to the spatial designations of the London Plan, the associated Central Activity Zone (CAZ) SPG and the Council’s Core Strategy and could potentially prejudice the ability to retain a sufficient reservoir of sites in the area that are able to provide large floor plate offices to safeguard the future of Canary Wharf as a strategic office location of global significance.
4.5 Review by independent employment and land use consultants confirmed that the proposed 60/40 split would not result in undue harm to employment provision in the borough or to Canary Wharf’s global role as a business centre, however the withdrawal of Deutsche Bank from the scheme cast doubt on the deliverability such a substantial office component – given that a pre-let for Deutsche Bank’s new headquarters was necessary to secure funding for the remainder of the office tower.
Placemaking
4.6 The place-making role of the development in integrating Canary Wharf and Poplar, including through improving the physical access to the Canary Wharf centre and its jobs, amenities and public transport links for the residents of Poplar was a key issue. The adequacy of the proposed improvement measures to the Aspen Way footbridge and the links to it raised
Page 95 particular concerns. This matter was not fully resolved at the time of withdrawal of the application, with officers confirming to CWG that significant improvements to the Poplar DLR bridge are no longer sought (officers were unable to demonstrate sufficient peak footfall to warrant widening of the bridge) but that provision of up and down escalators on the Poplar end of the connection is necessary.
4.7 The link is a crucial connection to a strategic transport interchange and to the Canary Wharf town centre for residents of Poplar. There were concerns that this connection would feel like a ‘tradesmen entrance’ or a ‘poor door’ to Canary Wharf although the scheme did provide generous level access from the southern end of the bridge, across North Quay, to the upper level of the Crossrail Station and the main ground level of Canary Wharf Estate (elevated by one storey from the dock level).
Townscape
4.8 Whilst some progress was made at pre-application stage, very significant concerns remained about the exceptional bulk of the northern elevation of the proposed office tower as well as insufficient variation in height of the residential towers, both leading to creation of a table top effect and an overbearing impression of a cliff edge or wall of development when viewed from Poplar.
4.9 Although considerable height and bulk is expected and appropriate in this location, the previous proposals did not make sufficient effort to provide a more sensitive transition between the high-rise Canary Wharf and the low-rise Poplar.
Affordable Housing
4.10 The applicant’s offer was 17% affordable housing by habitable room, significantly below the Council’s target. This raised very significant concerns. BNPP reviewed the viability information on behalf of the Council and considered that more affordable housing could be viably provided; however the application was withdrawn prior to this matter being resolved.
5. PUBLICITY AND ENGAGEMENT
5.1 The applicant’s initial public consultation took place in November 2019, with a mail out to local residents and 3 public exhibitions. Applicant’s summary of the feedback received is set out in Appendix 4.
5.2 The emerging proposals are scheduled to be presented to the Council’s Conservation and Design Review Panel (CADAP) on Monday 27th January 2020.
5.3 The next stage of the applicant’s public consultation is expected to take place in March 2020.
6. PLANNING ISSUES
6.1 The following key planning issues have been identified at the pre-application stage.
Land Use
6.2 The applicant is now pursuing a flexible outline planning permission which would allow them flexibility not only in land use but also in size, design and exact positioning of individual buildings, in turn allowing them to better adapt to changes in the office and residential markets over the next 5-10 years.
6.3 The proposed range of land uses includes office, retail, food & beverage, cultural/leisure uses, residential, co-living, student housing, hotel, and serviced apartments. The overall aim
Page 96 is to create a more vibrant environment reflective of a modern metropolitan town centre. This could help improve the longevity of Canary Wharf as a business location.
6.4 At this stage the maximum residential scenario results in approximately 30/70 split of residential to commercial, with the maximum office scenario at 100% commercial with no residential whatsoever. Given the site’s location within a Secondary Preferred Office Location, the emerging Local Plan allows for a 25/70 split while encouraging as much commercial floorspace as possible. Student housing and co-living are also subject to the 25% residential accommodation cap.
Townscape
6.5 The current approach is much finer grain than previously proposed, with significant potential to provide a more gradual and sympathetic transition in heights, bulk and massing between Canary Wharf and Poplar. Nonetheless, some concern remains that insufficient variation of building heights and close separation distances between buildings could still result in a wall of development whilst compromising the size and character of the new open spaces.
6.6 This tension is effectively the result of a trade-off between the withdrawn scheme as a collection of few well-spaced but significantly higher and bulkier buildings vs the new proposals as a collection of a large number of smaller buildings, whilst broadly maintaining the overall quantum of floorspace.
6.7 The townscape response has started evolving through the pre-application discussions, with a greater variety of heights introduced, however much work is still outstanding to limit the proposals’ impacts on views from the north. Officers have still not seen any verified view photomontages.
Placemaking
6.8 The applicant maintains that the existing footbridge over Aspen Way is fit for purpose and does not plan to widen or substantially improve the connection, now relying principally on the emerging proposals for the redevelopment of the New City College to improve access on the northern side of Aspen Way (although it has been suggested that the previous commitment to provide escalators and public realm works on the north side could be translated into a commensurate financial obligation to assist with efforts to provide ramped access to the bridge on the north side).
6.9 An important issue is also how the bridge lands on North Quay and whether there would be sightlines from Poplar High Street to the Crossrail Station, to improve legibility of the route and make the connection as generous and welcoming as possible. Inclusive access and pedestrian capacity are also key considerations.
6.10 The proposed distribution of open spaces and routes is broadly acceptable and responds well to the context of the site and the Site Allocation brief. In particular, the east-west route provides potential to connect to the Billingsgate Market site, providing a link between Hertsmere Road and Trafalgar Way. Nonetheless, the level of enclosure provided by the proposed heights, massing and limited separation distances between building remains challenging.
Neighbouring Amenity
6.11 Planning policy seeks to protect and where possible improve the amenity of surrounding neighbouring properties and provide a good standard of amenity for all future occupants of development proposals. The application will be accompanied by necessary technical documents, such as daylight and sunlight assessments and noise reports which will be reviewed by the Council’s relevant specialist teams.
Page 97 6.12 Given the massing of the extant consent which was based on large floorplate office towers, it is likely that any proposals would result in lower amenity impact than that previously approved.
Transport and Servicing
6.13 Planning policies promote sustainable modes of travel and limit car parking to essential user needs. They also seek to secure safe and appropriate servicing. The proposals centre on creation of one servicing access point off Hertsmere Road and creation of a low traffic east- west route through the site to allow for drop-off. The proposals would be largely car-free, with the exception of some blue badge parking spaces. There is also potential for an east- west cycle route along the southern edge of Aspen Way.
Affordable Housing
6.14 At this stage no details of the affordable housing offer have been provided and officers’ understand that this offer will be subject to development viability.
7. RECOMMENDATION
7.1 The Committee notes the contents of the report and pre-application presentation.
7.2 The Committee identifies any other planning and design issues or material considerations that the developer should take into account at the pre-application stage, prior to submitting a planning application.
Page 98 APPENDIX 1 - Outline Planning Permission
Outline planning permission may be understood as ‘permission in principle’ with the detail being assessed through the five reserved matters and any conditions and s106 obligations attached to the permission, subject to the limitations within the control documents.
The proposal would be “controlled” through the use of the three principal documents, as follows:
Parameter Plans – these define, inter alia, where buildings, roads and open space may arrive on the site, the distribution of uses across the site and maximum heights and maximum footprints (length and width) of each development plot.
Development Specification – this document sets out a written account of the parameter plans and details, inter alia, the floorspace specifications for the proposed land uses, minimum and maximum vehicle parking and minimum cycle parking and open space, the range of dwelling mix for each tenure and unit type and areas of new land and moorings.
Design Guidelines – The purpose of this document is to determine a design language for the Masterplan and to establish a robust framework for its development that encourages high quality and rich diversity. Any future reserved matters applications for the development of any of the Development Zones defined in the Parameter Plans or open spaces between them will be required to accord with the Design Guidelines, unless there is a good and justified reason to depart from them.
The matters reserved for later determination are:
Access - the accessibility to and within the site for vehicles, cycles and pedestrians in terms of the positioning and treatment of access and circulation routes and how these fit into the surrounding highway network;
Layout - the way in which buildings, routes and open spaces within the development are provided, situated and orientated in relation to each other and to buildings and spaces outside the development;
Scale - means the height, width and length of each building proposed within the development in relation to its surroundings;
Appearance - the aspects of the development which determine the visual impression the development makes, including the external built form of the development, its architecture, materials, decoration, lighting, colour and texture; and,
Landscaping - the treatment of land other than buildings for the purpose of enhancing or protecting the amenities of the site and the area in which it is situated, including soft and hard landscaping, earthworks, public art and boundary treatment.
Page 99 APPENDIX 2 – North Quay Site Allocation
Page 100
Page 101 APPENDIX 3 – Images Please note that as this is a live pre-app, the below images and plans may be out of date and not represent the current version of the development proposals.
Figure 1 – North Quay 2007 office scheme
Figure 2 – north Quay 2017 mixed-use scheme
Page 102
Figure 3 – North Quay CGI of the first iteration of current proposals
Figure 4 – Proposed massing and land use in the maximum residential scenario Page 103
Figure 5 – proposed site layout and land use in the maximum residential scenario
Page 104 APPENDIX 4 – Developer’s Summary of Initial Public Consultation
Page 105 This page is intentionally left blank NORTH QUAY Stage 1 Consultation Summary
11 November 2019
1. Overview
This document provides a summary of feedback from the first stage of public consultation for North Quay. The consultation has focused on presenting the emerging principles for the site and approach to mix, public spaces and connections.
2. Events and attendance
Three public exhibitions were held in different locations to the north, south and west of the site. 126 peo- ple attended the events. The majority of attendees were local residents.
Date Location Attendance Tuesday 5th November (3pm-7pm) Marriott Hotel, Hertsmere Road 48 Thursday 7th November (3pm-7pm) Canary Wharf Ideas Store 51 Saturday 9th November (10am -2pm) St Matthias Community Centre 27 126
3. Feedback analysis
55 people provided written feedback at the events through completing a feedback form.
Q1 What is your connection to the area?
RESIDENT 44 | WORKER 22 | SHOPPER 3 | STUDENT 3 | VISITOR 1
Q2 What are your priorities for North Quay?
33 19 14 1 PUBLIC SPACE RESTAURANTS, CAFÉS, BARS SHOPS HOTEL / SERVICED APARTMENTS 24 18 11 LEISURE HOMES OFFICE / WORKSPACE
21 17 10 CONNECTIONS TO POPLAR CONNECTIONS TO CROSSRAIL CO-WORKING SPACE
Page 107 1 Q3 What qualities do you want form the public space being provided at North Quay?
29 17 14 10 PLACES TO SIT / RELAX SOCIAL SPACES PLAZA / SQUARES PUBLIC ART
29 15 13 10 GREEN AREAS / PLANTING SUSTAINABILITY EVENTS INNOVATION
25 15 11 ACCESS TO DOCK FRONT PLAY OUTDOOR DINING
Q4 Our proposals include new pedestrian routes through the site to improve connections between Poplar and Canary Wharf. Do you think this will benefit the area?
YES 44 | NOT SURE 9 | NO 2
Q5 Would you welcome additional retail in this location?
YES 31 | NOT SURE 16 | NO 9
Q6 Is there anything you think the local area could benefit from?
No. of comments Topic 12 More public spaces and green areas 7 Things for children to do 7 Improved connections from Poplar to Canary Wharf 6 Community spaces / venues with activities 5 More varied retail offer 5 Improved social infrastructure 5 Events and attractions 4 Training opportunities 4 Better cycle infrastructure 4 Homes - paticularly affordable housing 2 Flexible workspace
These topics are described in more detail in Section 4.
Page 108 2 Q7 Is there anything else you would like to raise in relation to the emerging proposals.
No. of comments Topic 6 Improving connections between Poplar and Canary Wharf a priority 4 Concerns relating to height and overshadowing 3 Important to consider pedestrian experience along north of site / Aspen Way 2 Development should feel spacious at ground level 2 Family homes needed in the area 2 Improvements needed to cycle and pedestrian infrastructure 2 Independent retail and cafés and bakeries needed over bars and restaurants 2 Character of the development 1 More play opportunities needed in the area 1 Support needed for local community services 1 Concern about pollution and proximity to Aspen Way 1 Concern about construction impact
The detail surrounding these topics is provided below.
4. Key themes from consultation
The key themes that have emerged through initial consultation and written feedback are summarised below in order of priority.
Public spaces The need for attractive public spaces was raised more than any other issue in the written feedback. Comments mainly related to the need for safe spaces, green spaces and spaces next to the dock. There was a strong view that spaces should feel welcoming, inviting and inclusive rather than corporate in order to bridge the gap between Canary Wharf and the more residential areas to the north. Comments also included suggestions for spaces which reflect ecology, sustainability and wellbeing.
Connections Many people could see the benefit in improving the connections through North Quay to Poplar as well as improving the east-west integration of the site. It was generally considered that the existing Poplar Link Bridge needed to be improved to make the link more appealing. More information was requested on how the bridge will be integrated into the proposed development.
Family friendly activities Activities or places for children and families to visit was high up the agenda. There was a view that more people from the wider area could benefit from facilities at Canary Wharf if there was more a more diverse offer and if there were things to do at the weekend. A children’s education / ‘discovery-style’ centre was suggested. Family friendly public spaces were also mentioned.
Community spaces / venues Similarly, there were a number of suggestions for facilities that would serve the community, such as affordable spaces to hire and cultural facilities. Poplar Union was mentioned as a reference.
Events and attractions Suggestions for live events and attractions received a high percentage of comments, with the view that they could improve social links in the area and provide a reason to visit North Quay.
Impact on neighbours Several people living in buildings to the west of the site raised initial concerns regarding height, impact on views, as well as potential overshadowing.
Page 109 3 Retail The need for retail received mixed views, although the majority felt that it would be of benefit to the area. The majority of written comments suggested that independent or mid-level shops would be preferable to more big brands and would help to give North Quay a different identity that would support the local area and not be inward looking or only for the benefit of people working at Canary Wharf. Suggestions included groceries, bakeries and cafés over bars and restaurants.
Pedestrian and cycle infrastructure Existing pedestrian and cycle infrastructure around the site is considered to be poor. People are keen to see improvements here in terms of accessibility and safety. How pedestrians enter the site from Aspen Way and the quality of public realm along the main road and beneath the DLR was questioned. A new east-west cycle route was also suggested, along with improved north-south links.
Social infrastructure Several people noted a need for more health and education facilities in the area, specifically GPs and secondary schools.
Housing There were mixed views on the need for more homes. Respondents felt there was more of a need for family housing and affordable housing (specifically social rent) over more luxury homes.
Training opportunities Access to training courses was raised alongside the need for a more aggressive and visible training programme for Poplar residents. There was a suggestion for links with the College.
Workspace Where workspace was referenced it was regarding the need for more variety, with smaller offices, flexible set ups and co-working spaces all suggested so that smaller businesses can benefit from the proximity to Canary Wharf.
Character Feedback on character related to the opportunity for North Quay to step down in scale to respect the context of Poplar, the need for the development to feel inclusive, and to make more of the history of the docks in the design approach.
Page 110 4 TOWER HAMLETS
PROTOCOL FOR PRE-APPLICATION BRIEFINGS AND PRESENTATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEES
NOVEMBER 2019
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 It is common for pre application discussions take place before a planning application is submitted, particularly if the development is of a large scale, would be complex or is likely to attract significant public interest. The Council offers a pre-application planning advice service aimed at anyone who is considering making a planning application or wishes to carry out development in Tower Hamlets.
1.2 Early engagement in the planning process is encouraged and supported by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2019):
“Early engagement has significant potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning application system for all parties. Good quality pre-application discussion enables better coordination between public and private resources and improved outcomes for the community. (para. 39)
The more issues that can be resolved at pre-application stage, including the need to deliver improvements in infrastructure and affordable housing, the greater the benefits.” (para. 41)
1.3 Early elected member engagement in the planning process is also encouraged and supported by the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) which says:
“Democratically elected members are strongly encouraged to participate at the pre- application stage, where it is appropriate and beneficial for them to do so. Section 25 of the Localism Act 2011 confirms that elected members do not have a ‘closed mind’ just because they have historically indicated a view on a matter relevant to the proposal.”
1.4 Planning applications for larger scale major development or proposals which generate significant public interest are decided by the Council’s Development Committee and Strategic Development Committee (the Committees) in accordance with their published terms of reference.
1.5 A briefing or presentation to the committee at an early stage in the design process (before an application is submitted) can help to shape proposals so that they are more likely to comply with development plan policies and be more responsive to local interests, issues or concerns. Briefings and presentations can assist in the Committees being aware of significant development proposals that are evolving and support informed decision making on future planning applications.
1.6 The Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), adopted by the Mayor in Cabinet in April 2019 highlights the importance of good quality pre-application engagement.
1 Page 111 1.7 A number of London Council’s (e.g. Hackney, Croydon, Haringey and Camden) have introduced a protocol for planning committee member engagement at the pre-application stage. The updated terms of reference for the Committees includes: “To consider any application or other planning matter referred to the Committee by the Corporate Director, Place including pre-application presentations (subject to the agreed protocol)”.
1.8 The protocol and procedures were presented in draft form to the Strategic Development Committee on 28 March and Development Committee on 1 April 2019. Comments received from Committee members have been incorporated.
1.9 The protocol and procedures to support pre-application engagement with the Committees is set out below.
2. PROTOCOL FOR COMMITTEE MEMBER ENGAGEMENT
What sort of development is covered by the protocol?
2.1 The Committees make decisions on applications referred to them under the terms of reference outlined in the Council’s Constitution (2019), relating to scale, significance and extent of public interest.
2.2 It is unlikely that the Committees will be able to accommodate briefings or presentations on all proposals that may be determined by them in the future. Within this context, the following criteria provide a guide for the types of development that may be suitable for pre-application presentations:
development that meets or exceeds the criteria for referral to the Mayor of London;
development on sites allocated in the Council’s Local Plan;
development that would contribute to the Council’s regeneration programmes, including the Council’s own development;
significant infrastructure development by the Council’s strategic partners, such as health authorities, infrastructure providers or higher education institutions;
Other significant developments as identified by the Chair or members of the appropriate committee.
2.3 To help manage the impact on the committee agendas and time available the Divisional Director for Planning and Building Control (or their nominee) will work with the Chair of the relevant Committee to decide whether a particular proposal would benefit from a briefing or presentation.
When should pre-application engagement take place?
2.4 Officer briefings and developer presentations should take place at the pre-application stage, to optimise the opportunities for issues raised to be responded to by the developer through the design process. When this is not possible, engagement should take place early in the formal application period.
2.5 Pre-application discussions are discretionary and there is no set rule as to the point in the process when a briefing or presentation should take place. Timing will vary depending on the nature of the proposed development, complexity of the planning issues and level of
2 Page 112 public interest. As a general guide a presentation to the relevant Committee is likely to be beneficial when:
At least one pre-application meeting has been held with officers, so that a briefing on the planning issues can be prepared;
A presentation to the Council’s Conservation and Design Advisory Panel (CADAP) has taken place (if appropriate), so that their views can be reported;
Pre-application community engagement has taken place so that the views of local residents and other interested parties can be shared.
Developer presentations
2.6 This protocol allows for a developer presentation to the Committees as part of the briefing process. No formal decisions will be taken at such meetings and any subsequent planning applications will be the subject of a report to a future meeting of the appropriate Committee.
2.7 The purpose of the pre-application presentations are:
to ensure committee are aware of significant development proposals prior to an application being submitted and formally considered by them;
to make the Committee consideration of planning applications more informed and effective;
To allow the Committees and developers to understand which development plan polices will be relevant to the proposals. ;
to ensure issues are identified early in the application process and improve the quality of applications;
To foster a collaborative working approach that avoids potential delays (e.g. fewer deferred applications or office recommendations that cannot be supported).
3. PROCEDURES FOR PRE-APPLICATION BRIEFINGS AND PRESENTATIONS
3.1 Briefings and presentations will be scheduled as part of the public agenda for the relevant Committee, normally under the existing heading “Other planning matters”. A short report summarising the development proposals, the progress made and the issues identified at the pre-application stage will be prepared by officers. The report will not contain an assessment or commentary on the planning merits of the proposal.
3.2 The meeting will be open to members of the public and will be chaired by the Chair (or Vice Chair in their absence). The Developer will supply all presentation materials including any models or digital material, to be agreed in advance with planning officers.
3.3 The Development Procedure Rules, including public speaking, which apply to the determination of planning applications, will not apply to pre-application briefings or presentations as the Committee will not be making a formal decision. However the Planning Code of Conduct will still apply.
3.4 Ward councillors will be invited to attend the meeting and will be notified in writing (usually e- mail) at least 7 days in advance. Ward Councillors will have the opportunity to register to
3 Page 113 speak at the meeting to articulate their views and any local issues that the Committee should be aware of.
3.5 The procedure for briefings and presentations will be as follows:
Officers to introduce the proposal, update on the progress of pre-application discussions and set out the main planning issues that have been identified.
The developer and their architects, planning agents or other representative will present the proposals for up to 15 minutes.
Ward Members who have registered to speak will have the opportunity to give their views for up to 3 minutes each.
Members of the Committee will be able to ask questions to the developer and officers and highlight any planning issues (development plan policies or material considerations) that they would expect to be taken into account by the developer prior to an application being submitted.
The lead officer will summarise the comments raised and provide a note of the meeting.
3.6 Whilst Committee members are encouraged to participate fully, to provide comments or raise questions, they should ensure that they are not seen to pre-determine or close their mind to any such proposal, to avoid being precluded from participating in determining a future planning application.
3.7 Ward members who are also members of the Committee that will determine a future application and who register to speak and express a view on the proposed development will be disqualified from determining a future planning application.
3.8 Officers may provide subsequent interim briefings to update the Committee as the pre- application process progresses, or following the submission of an application. A site visit may be arranged so that members can familiarise themselves with the site and surroundings before receiving the pre-application presentation.
4. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
4.1 The protocol will be introduced under the current provisions of the committee terms of reference which allow the Corporate Director to report any other matters to the Committee that she or he considers appropriate. A future review of the Council’s constitution will allow for a formal incorporation of the protocol into the terms of reference.
4.2 The operation of the protocol will be monitored in terms ensuring it is operating effectively for members, developer and officers. The effect of the protocol on planning outcomes, including greater certainty in decision making and reduction in the number of overturned recommendations and appeals will be monitored over time.
4 Page 114