Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Akwasi-Ayisi, Beacham and Sahota.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 28 July 2014 as a correct record.

Cllr Bevan provided further clarification on the point he was trying to make at the last meeting regarding the viability of schemes. He emphasised that developers were aware of the Council’s affordable housing policy from the outset and should be factoring that into the purchase of the land to ensure future developments brought forward were financially viable and able to meet the affordable housing contribution expected.

RESOLVED

·         That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 July be agreed as an accurate record.

This meeting is scheduled to consider pre-application presentations to the Planning Sub-Committee and discussion of proposals.

Notwithstanding that this is a formal meeting of the Sub-Committee, no decisions will be taken at this meeting and any subsequent applications will be the subject of a report to a future meeting of the Sub-Committee in accordance with standard procedures.

The provisions of the Localism Act 2011 specifically provide that a councillor should not be regarded as having a closed mind simply because they previously did or said something that, directly or indirectly, indicated what view they might take in relation to any particular matter. Pre-application briefings provide the opportunity for Members to raise queries and identify any concerns about proposals.  

The Members’ Code of Conduct and the Planning Protocol 2014 continue to apply for pre-application meeting proposals even though Members will not be exercising the statutory function of determining an application. Members should nevertheless ensure that they are not seen to pre-determine or close their mind to any such proposal otherwise they will be precluded from participating in determining the application or leave any decision in which they have subsequently participated open to challenge.

This meeting was scheduled to consider pre-application presentations to the Planning Sub-Committee and discussion of proposals.

Notwithstanding that this was a formal meeting of the Sub-Committee, no decisions were taken at the meeting and any subsequent applications will be the subject of a report to a future meeting of the Sub-Committee in accordance with standard procedures.

Members were advised that planning permission for a previous application for the site had been refused in May 2013, with the applicant now in the process of developing a new scheme. Officers advised that ongoing discussions were underway with the applicant regarding the new application, with a focus on design and viability in light of the grounds given for refusal of the previous application. It was anticipated that an application would be submitted for determination by the end of the year.

Members made the following comments on the scheme:

·         Security concerns were raised about the proposed basement level car parking provision. The applicant provide assurance that the design for this element would meet the latest standards to ensure that in tandem with ongoing maintenance, the area would be secure and usable. Parking had been identified as a particular concern for local residents consulted on the scheme and had been one of the grounds for refusal of the original application.

·         The Committee raised concern over the low level of affordable housing contribution mooted for the scheme by the applicant’s rep and the likelihood of this consisting of an off site contribution. The applicant advised that an initial £1.35m off site contribution had been calculated utilising the GLA toolkit and which reflected the high value of the land in conjunction with the high construction costs for the design plus the reluctance of RSLs to manage a small number of affordable housing units on a scheme.

·         Clarification was sought on the potential for overlooking between flats as a result of the curved shape to the wings of the scheme. Assurances were provided that the curve was slight and in the unlikely event any overlooking materialised between units, screening linked to the green roofs could be provided in mitigation.

·         Confirmation was provided that the overall height of the scheme remained unchanged from the original application in order to create the landmark building that the applicant considered the site, due to its location, warranted. 

·         Members queried the north facing orientation of the main building and the potential impact this could have on daylight to the flats. Confirmation was provided that the windows to the units would be perpendicular to the main mass of the building to address this issue and which was inline with guidelines.

·         Assurances were provided that the scheme would contain sufficient cycle stands in compliance with Council and London Plan requirements and that finishes to external materials would be selected that would age well. 

·         Members sought clarification on the designation of the site. The land was currently a steel yard used primarily for the storage of steel girders, with limited employment on site. Officers confirmed that the site was not designated an employment site nor included within the draft strategic sites DPD or in Heartlands SPD area but classified as an ecological corridor. Approval could therefore be granted for housing on site subject to compliance with the UDP policy and in consideration of the planned provision of replacement commercial space onsite.

·         In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

The date of the next meeting is 15 September 2014.  

The next scheduled meeting would be on 15 September.