Greenwich Council

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Rooms 4 & 5, Town Hall, Wellington Street, Woolwich SE18 6PW. View directions

Contact: Jasmine Kassim 

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence from Members of the Board.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillors Hayley Fletcher, Sajid Jawaid, and Chris Roberts.

2.

Urgent Business

The Chair to announce any items of urgent business circulated separately from the main agenda.

Minutes:

There were no items of urgent business.

3.

Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 42 KB

Members to declare any personal and prejudicial interests in items on the agenda.  Attention is drawn to the Council’s Constitution; the Council’s Code of Conduct and associated advice.

 

Minutes:

Resolved –

 

That Councillors’ memberships as Council appointed representatives on outside bodies, joint committees and school governing bodies, be noted.

4.

Delta Wharf, Tunnel Avenue, Greenwich, SE10 pdf icon PDF 215 KB

The Board is requested to consider granting planning permission for a change of use of the site as a beach for a temporary period of 5 years, subject to the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement and the conditions and informative set out in section 3.2 and 3.3 of the report.

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved –

 

Unanimously

 

That planning permission be granted for a change of use of the site as a beach for a temporary period of 5 years

 

Subject to:

 

(i)       The satisfactory completion of a legal agreement

 

And

 

(ii)               Conditions and informative set out in section 3.2 and 3.3 of the report, in light of amendments and additional Conditions tabled at the meeting as follows:

 

·        Amendments to Condition 1:

 

Prior to the commencement of the development, a scheme to protect the users of the development from external noise, dust and lighting (all with particular reference to Victoria Deep Water Terminal (including the site immediately to the south of Delta Wharf) and other river users) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with the PLA).  The development shall thereafter be implemented in strict accordance with the details of the scheme as may be approved.  The development shall not be occupied until tests have been conducted demonstrating that the mitigation measures set out in any scheme as may be approved have been achieved, a verification report detailing the tests and results has been submitted to the local planning authority for approval and the local planning authority (in consultation with the PLA) has provided written confirmation of its satisfaction with the verification report and the tests and results contained therein. 

 

Additional Conditions:

 

Condition 28

 

Restriction during Olympic period

 

A maximum of 500 people shall be allowed on the site during the 2012 Olympic period (28th July – 12th August 2012).

 

Reason:  In order to maintain the character and amenities of the area and to safeguard the Games Time operations and to ensure compliance with Policy SC2 and E1 of the Unitary Development Plan 2006 and Policy 2.4 of the London Plan 2011.

 

Condition 29

 

Restriction of Events

 

No more than 12 events shall take place in any given calendar year unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of neighbouring properties and the area generally and in order to comply with Policy E4 of the Unitary Development Plan and Policy 7.15 of the London Plan 2011.

Minutes:

`The Principal Planning Officer gave an illustrated presentation to the report, recommending to the Board to approve planning permission for a change of use of the application site to a beach, for a period of five years.

 

An addendum report, which consisted of a consultation response by PDE Consulting Limited on behalf of H Sivyer (Transport) Limited, together with an amendment to Condition 1, plus additional requirements as Conditions 28 and 29, which were circulated at the meeting.

 

The Board noted the report and information circulated at the meeting.  It was recognised that the application site was located on the Greenwich Peninsula, to the north of Victoria Deep Water Terminal, and approximately 400 metres south of the O2 and the North Greenwich Underground Station.

 

A resident from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets addressed the meeting with an objection to the proposal.  He stated that residents in his borough whose properties were close to the application site were not consulted about the proposal, in spite of the fact that the activities would impact on their living conditions.  The resident advised the Board that the neighbouring residents were concerned about high noise levels from beach activities when the site becomes operational.  The attractions would likely attract anti-social behaviour and other criminal activities, especially after 11.00pm.  Furthermore, the land had been earmarked for residential developments.  In conclusion, the resident suggested that the Board approve the proposal for a period of two years in the first instance, in order to allow time to monitor the impact of the operations upon the lives of people living close to the site.

 

The Officer responded to questions raised by clarifying to the Board that the restricted hours of operations at the proposed site would be between 10.00am and 1.00am, Monday to Sunday.  No activity would take place after 11.00pm on any day that would be audible at the nearest residential property without prior written agreement with the Council.

 

The applicant also addressed the meeting.  He advised the Board that when consulted about the proposal, officials within the Environmental Team at the London Borough of Tower Hamlets raised no objection.  It was stated that a Noise Management Plan would be produced once the temporary use of the site had been granted.  A telephone line would also be installed for residents and customers to report inappropriate activities when the site becomes operational.  The applicant reiterated to the Board that the application was possible because the owner of the land was not intending to develop the site in the immediate future.

 

Members noted the submissions made at the meeting.  It was stated that the decision to implement the residential development on the site was outside the remit of the Council.  Members welcomed information that the Noise Management Plan would be consulted upon, and agreed with the Council and relevant parties prior to operational activities on the site.  It was also acknowledged that the application was within planning guidelines, and that the owner of the land had agreed that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Blackheath Gate, Greenwich Park, Charlton Way, SE10 pdf icon PDF 183 KB

The Board is requested to consider granting planning permission (Ref: 11/2396/F) and Listed Building Consent (Ref: 11/2397/L) for the repositioning of the park gates subject to conditions set out in section 4.2 of this report.

 

 

 

 

Decision:

Resolved –

 

Unanimously

 

That planning permission and Listed Building Consent be granted for the repositioning of the park gates

 

Subject to:

 

Conditions set out in section 4.2 of the report, and additional Conditions circulated at the meeting as follows:

 

Condition 6

 

No Development shall take place within the application site until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological recording of the standing historic building(s), in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason:  The site lies within an area where archaeological remains have been identified and in accordance with Policies D30 and D31 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2006.

 

Condition 7

 

No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme for investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall only take place in accordance with the detailed scheme pursuant to this condition.  The archaeological works shall be carried out by a suitably qualified investigating body acceptable to the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason:  The site lies within an area where archaeological remains have been identified and in accordance with Policies D30 and D31 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2006.

 

Condition 8

 

The central gates shall remain closed whilst the two vehicle gates are open.  Whilst the central gates open the vehicle gates shall remain closed.

 

Reason:  In order to safeguard the safety of users of central and vehicular gates and ensure compliance with Policy M33 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2006.

Minutes:

The Area Planning Manager (West) gave an illustrated presentation to the report, recommending to the Board to approve the proposal.

 

The Board noted the report.

 

In response to a question, the Officer advised Members that all objections to the proposal were addressed and dealt with prior to the meeting in view.

 

A resident who addressed the meeting stated that the objections to the proposal were withdrawn because the consultation exercise had been adequate.  She commented that the Board ought to recognise the successful working relationship between local community groups and the Council for the benefit of residents.

 

A representative addressed the meeting on behalf of both the Greenwich Conservation Group and the Blackheath Society.  He stated that although earlier objections to the proposal were withdrawn, concerns about the use of the gate for construction purposes by the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG) remained.

 

Members considered submissions made, and were of the view that the proposed construction activities via the gate was a matter for LOCOG and Royal Parks’ officials to deal with.  It was recognised that issues pertaining to planning matters had been adequately addressed in the report and, it was

 

Resolved –

 

Unanimously

 

That planning permission and Listed Building Consent be granted for the repositioning of the park gates

 

Subject to:

 

Conditions set out in section 4.2 of the report, and additional Conditions circulated at the meeting as follows:

 

Condition 6

 

No Development shall take place within the application site until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological recording of the standing historic building(s), in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason:  The site lies within an area where archaeological remains have been identified and in accordance with Policies D30 and D31 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2006.

 

Condition 7

 

No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme for investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall only take place in accordance with the detailed scheme pursuant to this condition.  The archaeological works shall be carried out by a suitably qualified investigating body acceptable to the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason:  The site lies within an area where archaeological remains have been identified and in accordance with Policies D30 and D31 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2006.

 

Condition 8

 

The central gates shall remain closed whilst the two vehicle gates are open.  Whilst the central gates open the vehicle gates shall remain closed.

 

Reason:  In order to safeguard the safety of users of central and vehicular gates and ensure compliance with Policy M33 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2006.

6.

2012 Olympic Games at Greenwich Park, Greenwich, SE10 pdf icon PDF 312 KB

The Planning Board is requested to agree to discharge planning conditions 1,4,5,6,7,8,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27 and 28 and partially discharge condition 36 relating to the main Olympic events (11/2604/SD) to be held in Greenwich Park pursuant to the planning permission dated 29/3/2010 (Ref. 09/2598/F) for the temporary use of land at Greenwich Park, National Maritime Museum, the Old Royal Naval College, SE10 and the Blackheath Circus Field, SE3 for the 2012 Olympics Equestrian and Modern Pentathlon events and Paralympics Dressage subject to the informatives detailed in the report.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved –

 

That it be agreed to discharge planning conditions 1,4,5,6,7,8,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27 and 28 and partially discharge condition 36 relating to the main Olympic events (11/2604/SD) to be held in Greenwich Park pursuant to the planning permission dated 29/3/2010 (Ref. 09/2598/F) for the temporary use of land at Greenwich Park, National Maritime Museum, the Old Royal Naval College, SE10 and the Blackheath Circus Field, SE3 for the 2012 Olympics Equestrian and Modern Pentathlon events and Paralympics Dressage subject to the informatives set out in the report.

Minutes:

The Strategic Development Co-ordinator gave an illustrated presentation to the report, recommending to the Board to agree to the proposal.

 

The Board noted the report and an amendment which was circulated at the meeting in relation to paragraph 7.3 of the report.

 

In response to questions raised, the Officer reiterated to Members that full planning permission was granted for the temporary use of Greenwich Park to host the Olympic and Paralympic events.  The Council had already discharged a range of conditions linked to the preparation of the cross-country activities and the test event.  The proposal in the report related to the submission of details to further discharge planning conditions in relation to the approved application for the main Olympic events this summer.

 

The meeting was addressed by a resident who expressed an objection to the proposal, commenting that the Officer’s presentation was misleading.  She stated that a conflict of interest seemed to have occurred between the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG) and the purpose for which the application site should be used.  In particular, the report stipulated that no trees would be lost, yet, the proposal included the felling of two trees in order to erect temporary pedestrian bridges.  The pruning of additional trees was outside the parks’ maintenance programme.  The Board was asked to note that the only legacy to be left by LOCOG appeared to be those planned for the improvement to the children’s play area.

 

The resident continued by advising the Board that plans to erect security fences at the back of residential homes, and the likelihood of chemical spillages on the grounds of Circus Field were causes for a concern.  The security lightings to be located close to residential dwellings would create light pollution, and that would impact adversely on people’s privacy.  In closing, the resident suggested that the Board should defer the proposal until an independent assessment had taken place in respect of the reinstatement plan for the application site.

 

Another resident who addressed the meeting with an objection expressed a concern of potential breach of fire regulations, as the number of tickets sold had exceeded the maximum number of people allowed on the application site at any one time.  She stated that ticket holders and the horses to be used in the events would be severely restricted to move around.  The pedestrian traffic lights would be inadequate to deal with the high level of congestion likely to occur during the events  The resident commented that the reputation of Greenwich Park and its history could be damaged in an effort to secure commercial gains for LOCOG.  The Board was asked to include a condition to the proposal in order to prevent the potential breach.

 

In addressing the meeting, a representative from the Westcombe Society registered an objection on behalf of residents, as the Park area would be disadvantaged.  The Board was asked to note that the likelihood of significant congestion in the Westcome Park area and the surrounding roads was high.  Also,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.