Back to top arrow icon Back to top

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Hackney Town Hall, Mare Street, London E8 1EA. View directions

Contact: Emma Perry 

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

1.1  Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Smith, Tesler and Webb.  Councillor Bell substituted for Councillor Webb.

 

2.

Members to agree the order of business

Minutes:

2.1  The order of business remained as per the agenda.

3.

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

3.1  Councillor Buitekant declared a prejudicial interest in Item 8 – Blocks 5 and 10 Lathams Yard, Mount Pleasant Hill, as he lives very near to the site and had previously dealings with the application and left the Chamber during the discussion on this item.

 

3.2  Councillor Bell declared a non-prejudicial interest in Item 10 – Former Brownswood Library, Brownswood Road, as he had been previously lobbied on this item and felt this could be viewed as bias.  He remained in the Chamber but did not take part in the discussion or vote.

4.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 271 KB

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

the minutes of the meeting held on 11 March 2009 be

APPROVED as a true and accurate record. 

 

Minutes:

4.1  RESOLVED – that the minutes of the meeting held on 11 March 2009 be APPROVED as a true and accurate record. 

 

5.

Land adjacent to 81/83 and 85 Mount Pleasant Lane, London, E5 9EW pdf icon PDF 59 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

A)  Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to conditions.

 

B)  That recommendation A be subject to the applicant, the landowners and their mortgagees entering into a deed of planning obligation by means of a Section 106 Agreement of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to secure the following matters to the satisfaction of the Assistant Director Regeneration and Planning and the Interim Head of Legal Services.

 

 

Minutes:

Erection of a four-storey building with balconies to provide nine residential units (comprising 1 x 4 bed flat, 2 x 3 bed flats, 1 x 2 bed flat and 5 x 1 bed flats), together with creation of new driveway with gated entrance off Mount Pleasant Lane, provision of one disabled car parking space, provision of nine cycle spaces and provision of refuse/recycling store facilities.

 

5.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

 

5.2  This application had been previously considered by the Planning Sub-Committee on 16 October 2008 and it was brought back to this Committee due to an error in the education contribution given in paragraph 6.10 of the previous report, attached to the agenda.

 

5.3  The report stated that the total education contribution required was £27,006.00 but the revised contribution required was in fact £25,572.00.

 

5.4  There being no questions from Members, the Chair moved to the vote.

 

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

 

A)   Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to the following  conditions:

 

1.  SCB0 – Development in accordance with plans

The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

 

REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

 

2.  SCB1 - Commencement within three years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

 

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

 

3.  SCM2 – Materials to be Approved

Full details, with samples, of the materials to be used on the external surfaces of the buildings, including glazing, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before any work on the site is commenced.  The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

 

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

4.  SCM7 – Details to be Approved

Detailed drawings/ full particulars of the proposed development showing the matters set out below must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before any work is commenced.  The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

·  windows and doors including sections.

·  cycle store

 

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

 

5.  SCR2 – Dustbin Enclosures

Details of refuse and recycling storage enclosures showing the design and external appearance, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before the use/development commences. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

 

REASON: In order to provide adequate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

3 Rutland Road, London, E9 7TT pdf icon PDF 93 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to conditions.

 

Minutes:

Erection of additional floor at second floor level to provide one additional 2 bedroom flat.

 

POST SUBMISSION REVISION:  Scale of some drawings have been corrected.

 

(Councillor Hanson arrived during the discussion of this item and so did not take part in the vote).  

 

6.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

 

6.2  The Chair made reference to the materials and asked whether they would be reclaimed, to be consistent with the existing building.  The Planning Officer stated that a condition could be added for the materials to be submitted for approval.  This was AGREED.  

 

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

 

A)   Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to the following  conditions:

 

1.  SCB0  Development only in accordance with submitted plans

SRB0

The Development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

 

REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

 

2.  SCB1N  Commencement within 3 years

SRB1

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

 

3.  SCM2  Materials to be Approved

  SRM2

Full details, with samples, of the materials to be used on the external surfaces of the building, including glazing, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before any work is commenced. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

 

4.  SCM1   Materials to match

All new external finishes in respect of all the works hereby approved (and any other incidental works to be carried out in this connection) shall match the existing building in respect of materials used, detailed execution and finished appearance.

 

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

 

5.  SCR2   Dustbin Enclosures

Details of dustbin and recycling enclosures showing the design, and external appearance, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before the use/development commences.  The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

 

REASON: In order to provide for adequate bin and recycling enclosures in the interest of the appearance of the site and area.

 

6.  SCM9  No extraneous pipe work

  SRM9

No soil stacks, soil vent pipes, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be fixed to the (street) elevations of the building other than as shown on the drawings hereby approved

 

INFORMATIVES

 

  The following Informatives should be added:

 

The following policies contained in the Hackney Unitary Development Plan 1995 are relevant to the approved development/use and were considered by this Council in reaching the decision to grant planning permission: 

 

EQ1  Development Requirements

HO3   Other Sites for Housing

Policy 3A.4  Maximising the potential of sites

  Policy 4B.1   Design principles for a compact city  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

4/6 Sheep Lane, London, E8 4QS pdf icon PDF 131 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

A)   Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to conditions.

 

B)   That the above recommendation be subject to the applicant, the landowners and their mortgagees enter into a deed of planning obligation by means of a Section 106 Agreement of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to secure the following matters to the satisfaction of the Assistant Director Regeneration and Planning and the Interim Head of Legal Services

 

C)   That in the event of the Section 106 agreement referred to in Recommendation B not being completed by 9 April 2009, the Assistant Director Regeneration and Planning be given the authority to refuse the application.

 

Minutes:

Section 73 application for minor amendments; revision to elevation and internal layouts, connected to approved planning permission ref: 2006/0721 (for erection of a 6 storey plus basement building to provide 45 residential units (10 x 1 bed, 20 x 2 bed, 7 x 3 bed and 8 x 4 bed) and 2350 sqm of class B1 (office) floorspace.

 

(Councillor Sharer arrived during the discussion of this item and so did not take part in the vote).

 

7.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

 

7.2  The Chair asked whether the provision of trees on the roof was included within the proposal.  The Planning Officer stated that the application covered the same area as the previous application and that this could be incorporated into the landscaping condition, to be approved.

 

7.3  The Chair also asked that a parking condition be added to ensure that on site parking was restricted to the four disabled parking spaces proposed.  This was AGREED.

 

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

 

A)   Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to the following  conditions:

 

1.  B1 – Commencement within three years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

 

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

 

2.  NCC – Control of building hours

The building works required to carry out the development allowed by this permission  shall only be carried out within the following times:

 

0800 to 1800 Hours Monday to Friday

0800 to 1300 Saturday

 

No building works shall be carried out on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

 

Noisy operations shall not take place outside these hours unless the Council has agreed that there are exceptional circumstances, for example to meet police traffic restrictions, in an emergency or in the interests of public safety.

 

REASON: To safeguard the amenity of adjacent residents and the area generally in accordance with Council policy.

 

3.  R3 – Residential units to Mobility Standards 

The housing units proposed must be designed to mobility standards and be in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

 

4.  M4 - Ground surface treatment to be approved

Full details of all ground surface treatment to the site shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before any work on the site is commenced.  The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

 

5.  M5 – Boundary walls to be approved

Full details, including materials, of all boundary walls and enclosures shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before any work commences on site.  The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

 

6.  M9 – No extraneous pipework

No soil stacks, soil vent pipes, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be fixed to the (street)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Blocks 5 and 10, Lathams Yard, Mount Pleasant Yard, London, E5 pdf icon PDF 173 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

A)  Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to conditions

 

B)  That the above recommendation be subject to the applicant, the landowners and their mortgagees entering into a deed of planning obligation by means of a Section 106 Agreement of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), in order to secure the following matters to the satisfaction of the Assistant Director Regeneration and Planning and the Interim Head of Legal Services

 

C)  That in the event of the Section 106 agreement referred to in Recommendation B not being completed by 28 April 2009, the Assistant Director Regeneration and Planning be given the authority to refuse the application for the following reasons:

 

1.  The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement for securing affordable housing, would be to the detriment of housing needs in the borough and would fail to promote a mixed and inclusive community, and as such would be contrary to policy HO3 of the Hackney UDP (1995), policies 3A.7 and 3A.8 of the London Plan (2004), the LDF Planning Contributions SPD (2006), and advice contained in PPS1 and PPG3.

 

2.  The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement for securing educational contributions, would be likely to contribute to pressure and demand on the borough’s education provision, contrary to policies EQ1 and CS2 of the Hackney UDP (1995), the LDF Planning Contributions SPD (2006) and policy 3A.21 of the London Plan (2004).

 

3.  The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement for securing open space contributions, would be likely to contribute to pressure and demand on the borough’s existing open spaces, contrary to policies EQ1 and OS5 of the Hackney UDP (1995), the LDF Planning Contributions SPD (2006) and policy 3D.8 of the London Plan (2004).

 

4.  The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement for securing best endeavours to use local labour on-site, would be likely to harm the employment opportunities in the Borough contrary to policies ST3, EQ1, E15 and E18 of the Hackney Unitary Development Plan.

 

 

Minutes:

Construction of blocks 5 and 10 Latham’s Yard.  Block 5 to be part three, part four storey and consist of 1604 sqm of light industrial and office floor space (B1) and ten residential units (4 x 1 bed and 6 x 2 bed).  Block 10 to be three storey and consist of eleven residential units (3 x 1 bed, 2 x 2 bed and 6 x 4 bed).  Both blocks are proposed in place of 2 x blocks of live work units (up to 69 units) approved by planning permission 2001/1894.

 

8.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  He also made reference to the addendum which detailed further comments received from the Pollution Team, who raised no objection to the proposal but recommended a number of conditions to be added to the Recommendation A.

 

8.2  Caroline Hummel (Savills) spoke in support of the scheme, her comments are summarised as follows:

 

§  The scheme provides 52% affordable housing.

§  Six, four bed family units are being provided with significant amenity space.

§  20% renewables. 

§  The scheme will be secured by design.

§  S106 monies will be provided for a number of purposes including education and a library.

 

8.3  Discussion took place surrounding the revenue stream for the project and the change in the S106 agreement for no more than 50% of the open market dwellings may be occupied prior to the affordable units having been transferred to an approved RSL, and whether there was any possibility that the scheme may not get completed.

 

8.4  Caroline Hummel explained that they were trying to be flexible and that they were proposing a mixed use development, with the private sales helping to fund the other development.

 

8.5  The Head of Development Management added that they were considering each case on an individual basis and that the Council could serve a completion notice if the development was not completed.

 

8.6  In response to questions regarding the trees on the plan not in place yet and also whether the balconies were cantilevered, it was confirmed that highway tree works was one of the last items to be completed and that the balconies were to be cantilevered.

 

8.7  The Chair requested that a parking condition be added to ensure that cars cannot park on the land surrounding the development.  This was AGREED.

 

 

 

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

 

A)   Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to the following  conditions:

 

1.  SCBO – In accordance with plans

The Development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

 

REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

 

2.  SCB1N - Commencement within three years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

 

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

194 Pitfield Street, London, N1 6JP pdf icon PDF 152 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

A)  Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to conditions

 

B)  That the above recommendation be subject to the applicant, the landowners and their mortgagees entering into a Section 106 agreement in order to secure the following matters to the satisfaction of the Assistant Director of Regeneration and Planning and the Interim Head of Legal Services

 

C)  That in the event of the Section 106 agreement referred to in Recommendation B not being completed by 5 May 2009, the Assistant Director of Regeneration and Planning be given the authority to refuse the application.

 

 

 

 

Minutes:

Demolition of existing building and construction of a part six, part seven storey building to provide 90sqm of commercial (A1, A2, B1 and D1) floorspace on the ground floor and 16 residential flats (5 x 1 bed, 8 x 2 bed, 3 x 3 bed) above, with a disabled car parking space, 16 cycle parking spaces and associated facilities.

 

POST SUBMISSION REVISIONS:  A minor revision to the external appearance of the scheme was sought and agreed by the applicant.  This included:

 

§  Metal balustrades being added to the windows to the east and south elevation to increase visual interest.

§  Widening of the residential entrance way and hall (from 1.2m to 2.3m) to improve its relationship to the street.

 

(Councillor Desmond arrived during the discussion of this item and so did not take part in the vote).

 

9.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  He referred to the addendum which stated that on a review of pertinent case law, there was no record found that suggested that ‘Water Supply’ should be considered as a material planning consideration.  In addition, Thames Water had not objected to the proposed development connecting to the mains water supply, and it was considered that water supply was an issue normally resolved between Thames Water and the developer.

 

9.2  Steven Smeeth and Les Sullivan spoke in objection to the scheme, their comments are summarised as follows:-

 

§  They had submitted a letter of objection and an annotated photograph to the Planning Officer, for consideration.

§  Loss of daylight.

§  Already an issue of overcrowding in the surrounding area.

§  The sewerage and water system was already not fit for purpose, especially at Caliban Towers.

§  There had already been two instances of flooding at the previously agreed 168 Pitfield Street.

§  Concerned that a crane and materials would be stored in the car park of Caliban Towers.

§  Correspondence received from the planning service had not been sent to all local residents.

 

9.3  Tim Gaskell (Agent) spoke in support of the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

 

§  Undertaken detailed discussions with the Council and details of the scheme had changed as a result.

§  The scheme will be run by One Housing, which was one of the Council’s preferred RSLs.

§  The scheme provides good sized, quality units, with private amenity space to a number of them.

§  There are already a number of 5,6 and 7 storey buildings in the vicinity.

§  The scheme is located within a CPZ and they will restrict the number of residents applying for permits. 

§  There will be no loss of light to Caliban Towers.

§  There will also be no issue of overlooking to Caliban Towers, as all of the windows to the main living areas will face the main road and any facing Caliban Towers, eg bathrooms, will have obscured windows.

§  The development will be an improvement to the streetscape  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Former Brownswood Library, Brownswood Road, London, N4 2ST pdf icon PDF 176 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

A)   Planning permission be GRANTED, subject to conditions.

 

B)   That the above recommendation be subject to the applicant, the landowners and their mortgagees entering into a deed of planning obligation by means of a Section 106 Agreement of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), in order to secure the following matters to the satisfaction of the Assistant Director of Regeneration and Planning and the Interim Head of Legal Services

 

C)   That in the event of the Section 106 agreement referred to in Recommendation B not being completed by 14 April 2009, the Head of Development Management be given the authority to refuse the application

 

 

Minutes:

Demolition of existing building and erection of a five storey building containing seventeen residential units (four one bedroom flats, six two bedroom flats, five three bedroom flats and two four bedroom flats) and one disabled parking space, together with associated outdoor amenity space and landscaping.

 

10.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  He referred to the addendum which stated that there had been one post submission revision, with the inclusion of opaque glazed screens to the sides of the balconies on the south-west elevation.

 

10.2  He also informed Members that the drawings on the front page of the report referred to a drawing D03 rev. A.  The correct drawing was in fact D03 rev. B, which was included in Members’ A3 sized print outs.  Drawing D03 rev. A showed opaque glazing to habitable room windows on the south-west elevation of the proposed development; on drawing D03 rev. B, these windows revert to clear glazing.  In the event that planning permission was granted, the decision notice would refer to D03 rev. B and not D03 rev. A.

 

10.3  The Planning Officer also stated that an additional condition would be added for the scheme to be a car free development, within the Section 106 agreement.  This was AGREED.

 

10.4  Angela Brady spoke in objection to the scheme, her comments are summarised as follows:-

 

§  The proposed development is out of character with the surrounding area and also too bulky.

§  Fails to integrate with the existing streetscene.

§  It is one floor too high and 22% of the units are single aspect and face the car park.

§  It was previously agreed under a Section 106 agreement that the communal amenity space would remain, which had now been dropped from the current application.

§  Issue of overlooking.

§  Feels that the application is invalid as the site notice was not placed outside the site.

§  Pleased that the scheme is now be car free.

§  Feels that the number of units should be reduced to 10, with dual aspect.

 

10.5  Ben Thomas (Savills), Andy Heath (BBTW Architects) and Same Ohene (Genesis Housing Group) spoke in support of the scheme, their comments are summarised as follows:-

 

§  They had been involved in numorous pre-application meetings with the planning service within the last 4 years, during which time they had responded to a number of concerns.

§  The scheme had also been considered by the Design Panel and it had benefited from the suggestions made.

§  Providing 100% affordable housing.

§  The scheme will include a brown roof and rain water harvesting.

§  Reduced carbon emissions by 80%.

§  Car free development.

§  There had previously been no interest in the communal amenity space, which was now not included within the application.

§  The amount of amenity space provided with balconies and private gardens is deemed acceptable.

§  The issue of density was not a stand alone consideration.

§  Meets the need for affordable housing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

11.

London Olympic Site - Land North of Stratford Town Centre, East of the Lea Valley Navigation, South of Eastway and the A12 and West of the Lea Valley Railway pdf icon PDF 93 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED that:-

 

The London Borough of Hackney (LBH) supports the proposed Telecommunications Statement.

 

Minutes:

Observations to the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) regarding the submission of details for a partial discharge of condition OD.0.24 (Telecommunications) pursuant to 07/90010/OUMODA dated 29 September 2007.  Specifically, details of temporary telecommunications masts and equipment during Games Mode and potential sites within the Olympic Park for permanent telecommunications equipment in Legacy Mode.

 

11.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

 

11.2  There being no questions from Members, the Chair moved to the vote.

 

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

 

The London Borough of Hackney (LBH) supports the proposed Telecommunications Statement.

 

INFORMATIVE

 

The LBH would expect that any proposal to attach telecommunications equipment on to the permanent IBC/MPC and/or the MSCP buildings would be considered at the design stage of such structures to minimise their visual appearance and mitigate any potential environmental health effects through appropriate siting of such equipment.