Agenda item

PE/01081/19 - FORMER ICE RINK SITE, ROM VALLEY WAY, ROMFORD

Report attached.

Minutes:

The Committee received a developer presentation from the Robert Whitton (Chairman -Impact Capital Group), Nick Shattock (CEO Impact Developments, Karen Jones (Planning Consultant RPS), Scott Lawrie (Architect Ethos), Joanna Ede  (Townscape Turley), Pierre Chin-Dickey (Landscape McFarlane), Alec Philpott (Transport – Mayer Brown) and Kay Blair.

 

The main issues raised by Members for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application were:

 

·         A wish to understand more about the tenure type and split in relation to key workers and the Build to Rent product.

·         The importance of affordable housing nomination rights for borough residents.

·         Further details of unit mix were sought and a concern expressed about the low level of 3 bed units.

·         More details of child yield were sought.

·         A keenness to ensure the safe movement of pedestrians across Rom Valley Way, especially as future social infrastructure would be on the opposite side of Rom Valley Way.

·         If there would be adequate space between the blocks to provide quality children’s play area.

·         The proposed integration with Queens Hospital (in terms of floorspace and key worker homes) was welcomed.

·         The current shortage of sufficient parking spaces for people visiting and working at Queens Hospital and how traffic access to the site during and post construction would be managed.

·         Further details were sought on the timing of the phasing and the practicalities of construction given the proximity to the hospital.

·         Further details of the refuse storage arrangements were sought.

·         A wish to understand how the estate would be managed following completion.

·         The ‘necklace’ approach to Oldchurch Park access was welcomed. The developer was encouraged to ensure access to it was promoted.

·         The need for the Oldchurch Park footpath to be lit after dusk.

·         A wish to see a visual comparison between the approved scheme and the proposed scheme.

·         A wish to visuals from the opposite side of Rom Valley Way.

·         A keenness to understand the impact upon neighbouring occupiers in more detail.

·         Whether a daylight and sunlight analysis have been undertaken for the public realm and a reassurance that these spaces would have good light levels.

·         What was the justification for the proximity of the blocks to the site boundaries.

·         What was the justification for the tallest blocks.

·         Whether there would be sufficient dual aspect units.

·         The applicant must ensure that the Air Ambulance flight path would not be  impeded

·         If was there a need for a warning beacon on top of the tallest buildings given the Air Ambulance flight path.

 

FEEDBACK RECEIVED FROM MEMBERS POST SPC PRESENTATION

 

A member raised the following issues:

 

·         The robustness of the explanation that viability was the reason the original scheme was not built out.

·         The logic behind the hybrid nature of the application.

·         The proximity of the blocks to the site boundaries.

·         What were the justification for the tallest blocks.

·         The number of family units were significantly short when compared to policy.

·         The robustness of the explanation that dual aspects concerns have been addressed.

·         Further evidence were needed to reassure that pedestrians, especially school aged children, could move across Rom Valley Way safely.

Supporting documents: