Agenda and minutes

Councillor Khan welcomed everyone to the meeting. Members of the Committee and officers introduced themselves.

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no substitute members.

If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest* in an item of business:

§  if it is not yet on the council’s register, you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent;

§  you may choose to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest that is already in the register in the interests of openness and transparency. 

In both the above cases, you must leave the room without participating in discussion of the item.

If you have a personal interest in an item of business and you intend to speak or vote on the item you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent but you may participate in the discussion and vote on the item.

*(a)     Employment, etc - Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

(b) Sponsorship - Any payment or other financial benefit in respect of your expenses in carrying out duties as a member, or of your election; including from a trade union.

(c) Contracts - Any current contract for goods, services or works, between you or your partner (or a body in which one of you has a beneficial interest) and the council.

(d) Land - Any beneficial interest in land which is within the council’s area.

(e) Licences- Any licence to occupy land in the council’s area for a month or longer.

(f) Corporate tenancies - Any tenancy between the council and a body in which you or your partner have a beneficial interest.

 (g) Securities - Any beneficial interest in securities of a body which has a place of business or land in the council’s area, if the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body or of any one class of its issued share capital. 

This applies to all members present at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

The order of business would be as per the agenda.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting on 20 January 2015 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Demolition of all existing structures onsite (forecourt shop, canopy and pumps) and the erection of a  8 storey building plus basement levels comprising of a 212 bedroom hotel (Class C1), 5 self contained residential units (facing onto and entrances onto St John’s Square comprising of 4 x 3 beds & 1x 2 bed), the creation of 93 sq metres of office /workshop space (Class B1), 250 sq metres of flexible commercial floorspace (Retail A1 use & Restaurant A3 uses) with a new pedestrian access from Clerkenwell Road to St John’s Square, cycle storage provision, landscaping and associated alterations.

(Planning application number: P2014/0373/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         7.5 tonnes was the maximum size of vehicles permitted to use the square and a qualified banksman would be employed at all times to manage and monitor the servicing/delivery vehicles entering and exiting the square. These points were included in the Service and Delivery Plan which would form part of the Section 106 agreement.

·         If the development had an internal servicing bay, this would fundamentally change the scheme.

·         The Design Review Panel had reviewed the scheme three times.

·         The servicing plan would be reviewed after 6 and 12 months.

·         The hotel would have an interest in keeping the square organised as the hotel’s restaurant faced the square.

Councillor Gantly proposed that the “updated Servicing and Delivery Management Plan” as proposed to be secured within the S106 agreement, should include additional measures to ensure vehicles turned in the south west corner of the square and that reversing vehicles turned off their beeping reversing noise when turning in the square. This was seconded by Councillor Fletcher and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives in the case officer’s report and the additional measures to be secured within the S106 agreement as outlined above, plus the prior completion of a Deed of Planning Obligation made under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 between the Council and all persons with an interest in the land (including mortgagees) in order to secure the planning obligations included in Recommendation A of the case officer’s report to the satisfaction of the Head of Law and Public Services and the Service Director, Planning and Development/Head of Service – Development Management or, in their absence, the Deputy Head of Service.

Erection of a 6-storey (plus basement) building fronting Turnmill Street and a 5-storey (plus basement) building fronting Benjamin Street connected by a 4-storey linked building, comprising retail [Class A1] and office [Class B1a] uses and 4 residential units [Class C3], cycle parking, refuse storage, rooftop plant and landscaping works to Faulkner's Alley, following the demolition of all existing buildings.

(Planning Application Number: P2014/2950/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The officer stated that the first paragraph of Condition 14 of the case officer’s report should be amended to read, ‘The energy measures as outlined within the approved Energy Strategy (including but not limited to energy efficient fabric and connection to Citigen District Heat Network) shall together provide for no less than a 41% on-site total CO2 emissions reduction in comparison with total emissions from a building which complies with Building Regulations 2013.’

·         Daylight/sunlight issues had been addressed by the developer. There was one breach of the BRE guideline but this was to a room which currently received a good level of light so with a reduction of 25%, there would still be an adequate level of light.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives in the case officer’s report and an agreement between the Director of Housing and the Service Director, Planning and Development in order to secure the planning obligations in Recommendation A of the case officer’s report to the satisfaction of the Head of Law and Public Services and the Service Director, Planning and Development/Head of Service – Development Management or, in their absence the Deputy Head of Service.

Reconfiguration of the existing building to provide 12 self-contained flats, alterations to the building to provide cycle storage.

(Planning Application Number: P2014/1792/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         Policy DM3.8B stated that the council would resist the loss of care homes unless it could be demonstrated that the existing accommodation was unsatisfactory for modern standards and/or nor fit for purpose and that the proposed development would provide accommodation to meet an identified acute need, which might include social rented housing.

·         The proposals showed the care home could be improved and could remain in use as a care home.

·         A member advised that since the inspector’s decision in February 2014, there had been two offers to buy the care home.

·         The care home did not meet the policy requirement for the loss of a care home.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to refuse planning permission due to the breach of Policy DM3.8B. This was seconded by Councillor Poyser and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused for the reason outlined above, the wording of which was delegated to officers in consultation with the chair.

This wording has been provided by officers following the meeting and is included here for completeness.

MINUTE 81

602A HOLLOWAY ROAD, N19 3PN

Reason for refusal: The proposal fails to demonstrate that the existing accommodation is either unsuitable or unable to be reasonably adapted for modern care home (C2) standards and, in addition, fails to demonstrate that the need for the proposed residential accommodation could be identified as being acute and as such the proposal fails to comply with policy DM3.8b iii of Islington's Development Management policies adopted in June 2013.