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: