Agenda item

CONVOYS WHARF, PRINCE STREET SE8 3JH

The Chair proposed and it was agreed, that there was no need to discuss the confidential financial viability report as this is already covered in the recommendations and Appendices which are attached to the public Agenda.

The Chair advised Members that this meeting was to consider outstanding planning issues relating to the application, listen to the concerns of local groups and members of the public and ensure that a comprehensive overview of the Council’s position is sent to the Mayor of London for his consideration.

An Addendum had been prepared clarifying paragraph 5.4.7 of the report, together with a document submitted by the Sayes Court Garden Group tabled for Members before the meeting.

John Miller (The Head of Planning) provided background information on the development and reiterated to Members that, the effect of the Mayor of London’s decision to act as local planning authority in this case is that the London Borough of Lewisham has no formal planning powers in the determination of this application, the grant (or refusal) of planning permission, the scope of conditions or the content of any S106 agreement.  The GLA has however invited the Council to participate in discussions with the applicant, Hutchison Whampoa, prior to the GLA determining the application.

He also reported to Members that additional emails had been  received following completion of the report. The Lenox Project requested amendments to the end of paragraph 7.5.6: in the report stating that: 

‘The resulting practical challenges, increased cost and reduction in visitor numbers would render the project unviable on the protected wharf.'

And an email was received from a resident stating that, they are unable to attend the meeting, but is in favour of the redevelopment if an extension of the Thames path is created the full length of the site with sufficient leisure facilities and the scheme can be accessed by non residents.

Councillor Hall requested that The Head of Planning give an undertaking to inform Members at every stage of the process.

The Head of Planning assured Members that this will be done.

The Committee received verbal representations from Dame Joan Ruddock MP, who read from a prepared statement, confirming that she first became involved with Convoys Wharf 13 years ago. She also stated that the development should retain the vibrancy of Deptford, not to be gated, the planning officers should maintain close contact with the local community to address the issues of affordable housing, transport, employment and apprenticeship programs within the Deptford and New Cross areas. 

She also requested that the developers go further in addressing the issues and the council to make sure they do.  

The Committee received verbal representations from a number of individuals who read from prepared statements on behalf of local groups as follows:

·           Build the Lenox                                 - Julian Kingston

·           The Sayes Court Garden Group     - Roo Angell and Bob Bagley

·           People Before Profit                         - Ray Woolford

·           The Pepys Community Forum       - Malcolm Cadman

·           The Tenants Action Group              - Dave Fleming

Difficulties in getting the developers to engage with the local community.

The history of the development site from the 17^th century - 19 century, the gardens should be open to the public, there should be more open green space for this urban development, the development does not reflect the history of Sayers Court and Henry the Vlll dockyard in Deptford and that there is an opportunity not to be missed in bringing an Eden project or something similar to Deptford.

The green connection between Sayers Court need to be longer to connect with Canary Wharf.

Support a clause in the lease which would allow local residents to purchase apartments at a reasonable price, rubbish should be turned into energy for local residents, work towards eradicating unemployment in Lewisham and addressing the lack of local businesses within the area.

No consultation with the people of Deptford, the Victoria Wharf access onto Evelyn Street and the height of the proposed blocks.

Councillor Foxcroft spoke Under Standing Orders and on behalf of local residents, stating that she fully supports comments made by Dame Joan Ruddock and various representatives of the groups.

She also questioned the reasoning behind why this application was called in by the Mayor and stated that this application should go before Full Council to add weight to the community concerns when the decision is taken forward to the Mayor.

Kath Nicholson (Head of Legal) advised Members that, if Members were minded to, they could add an additional recommendation that their decision be referred to Full Council at the earliest possible opportunity for noting as an information item.

She further suggest that if Members are minded to, they can strengthen their concerns by adding an informative and request that this proposal be added to the agenda for the next Full Council meeting, in so doing if the meeting is held before or after this proposal appears before the Mayor it is noted.

The Head of Planning agreed that this could be added as an informative or to Recommendation (B) for more strength. 

Councillor John Paschoud (Chair) of the Committee requested that Members vote for clarity, to refer this matter as an Informative, together with amendments to No.5 under Recommendation (A) to Full Council.

Members voted  unanimously in favour of this proposal.

Councillor Till moved a motion to accept the officer’s recommendations with amendments and an additional (iii) to the Recommendation (B), which was seconded by Councillor Maines.

Members voted  as follows:

FOR:                     Councillors John Paschoud (Chair), Amrani, Curran, Egan,Hall, Maines, Maslin and Till.

RESOLVED        that in respect of Application No. DC/13/83358:-

(i)      Members are recommended to resolve that the Mayor of London be advised that the Council:

          Supports the principle of mixed use development of the site in accordance with Policy SSA2 of the Core Strategy

          Considers that in its current form the application should not be approved and that amendments should be secured prior to determination in relation to the following matters:

1.            Scale, Massing and Relationship with Historic Buildings and Spaces

         Reducing the scale and massing of selected development parcels as outlined in the report to achieve an acceptable urban scale and an appropriate relationship of new buildings with historic buildings and spaces, in particular in relation to the Olympia Building, former Master Shipwrights House and site of John Evelyn’s House.

2.            Sayes Court Garden and The Lenox

         The approach to Sayes Court fails to provide a meaningful green link between the site of the Gardens with the remains of Sayes Court House. The opportunity to link these two historically significant spaces should be fully explored.  The Lennox preferred building location is either within the Double Dry Dock or Olympia Warehouse

These options need to be explored further, as does the future use of the Olympia Warehouse and an agreement reached on the deliverability of the double dry dock or Olympia Warehouse as options for constructing the Lennox.

3.            Building in the Scope for Design Flexibility, Evolution and Innovation

         The Design Guidelines should either be significantly streamlined to identify what is essential (mandatory) in terms of providing guidance for reserved matters applications and what is to specific/constraining, or should become ‘for information’ only.

4.            Transport Issues

         The site has a relatively low level of public transport accessibility and it is essential that car parking is minimised and the opportunity to provide and ensure access to public transport, pedestrian and cycle links are maximised.  This includes the widening of New King Street to allow for two-way bus movement and improved pedestrian and cycle access and the re-design of the New King Street/Evelyn Street/Deptford High Street junction to provide a direct single all-red phased pedestrian crossing.  TfL needs to satisfy itself of the robustness of the data and that the modelling outputs can be resolved.

5.            Community Benefits

         Securing appropriate social infrastructure and the maximum possible amount of genuinely affordable housing to meet the needs of Lewisham residents.  There is an identified need for investment in affordable housing and a range of community infrastructure projects directly attributable to the impact of the new development including the need for a new primary school, additional secondary school capacity, GP facilities, jobs and training for local people and open space.  A number of questions remain about the applicants' assumptions on costs and future values in their viability statement, changes to which could support additional S106 payments and affordable housing.

         The Council considers that to ensure policy compliance and safeguard amenity, and in addition to any conditions and planning obligations that are imposed or agreed, the following are matters on which clarification and appropriate commitment is required from the applicant prior to determination of the application.  The GLA must also satisfy itself that it has the relevant information on which to determine the application.

6.      Clarifications, Commitments and Procedural Compliance

         Operation of the wharf.  Process and timing of reducing the area of the safeguarded wharf. Retail floorspace impacts. Housing mix. Transport Assessment modelling. Car parking management. School capacity. Delivery of projects set out in the Cultural Strategy. Mechanism to ensure a mix of uses and affordable business space is secured across the site. Lifetime Homes Standard, wheelchair and housing design standards. Decentralised energy network connection. CfSH Level 4 and BREEAM ‘Excellent'. Environmental Impact Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment. Financial review mechanism.

7.      Construction

         Ensure there is a Code of Construction Practice to manage and mitigate construction impacts and maximise the use of the river for construction materials and waste from the commencement of the project.

At 9:45 pm Councillor John Paschoud (Chair) moved Under Standing Orders to extend the meeting beyond 10:00pm and this was unanimously agreed by Members.

Members voted  unanimously in favour of Recommendation (B)

(ii)               Authorise the Head of Planning to continue to negotiate with the GLA and the applicant to secure the amendments highlighted in this report and to present a further report to the Mayor at the representations hearing ahead of determination of the application, updating the Council’s position in the light of those negotiations.

(iii)       Refers the decision to Full Council at the earliest possible opportunity for noting as an information item