Agenda item

Ben Johnson, Career Grade Planner gave a presentation on policy. In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         In the current policy there were four town centres (TC) and central activities zones (CAZ) (Angel, Archway, Nags Head and Finsbury Park). There were also 40 local shopping areas. Existing retail was protected across the borough and new, small shops of 80sqm or less were supported.

·         Town centres were identified in the Mayor’s London Plan.

·         Retail uses were directed to town centres in the first instance. This reflected government policy.

·         Core retail areas were protected in relation to primary frontages (where the aim was to maintain 70% retail) and secondary frontages (where the aim was to maintain 50% retail).

·         Specialist shopping areas covered areas of unique function e.g. Fonthill Road and Camden Passage.

·         There was a strong protection and enhancement of cultural uses such as theatres, cinemas and arts venues in town centres and the CAZ.

·         There were 40 areas across the borough designated by the local authority as local shopping areas. These were of differing sizes between 4 units and 200 units. They generally met day-to-day needs and were essential shops or provided essential services although there was also a distinct leisure role. 

·         A1 units were protected but Local Shopping Areas had more flexibility of uses than town centres. There was no threshold of A1 units to try and retain.

·         The Finsbury Local Plan covered the CAZ in the south of the borough. There was a broad mix of uses in this area but significant development pressure. There was a global employment function (e.g. office space) but a need to provide services for local residents also.

·         The local plan review updated the evidence base, continued the protection of core retail areas in some form but with recognition of the changing retail landscape. Development in town centres would be prioritised in the first instance and the specific role of each centre would be recognised. The Local Plan was currently out to consultation which had started on 25 November and would run for three months. 250 groups on the planning policy database had been asked to contribute as had other groups and in addition posters and leaflets were distributed. If members were aware of any other groups that could be consulted, they could inform officers. The last review had received approximately 400 responses. The consultation gave people the opportunity to make suggestions about Islington’s future and how it should develop in the next 15 years.

·         In response to questions about the status of Essex Road and a comment about the number of DIY shops along the road, the officer advised that part of Essex Road was part of the Angel Town Centre and further down the road there were two local shopping areas. DIY shops were classed as A1 so would be protected where there was a threshold.

·         In Whitecross and Exmouth markets there was a 35% threshold for A1 use so the council would seek to resist planning applications for a change of use if the level went lower than the threshold.

·         Concern was expressed at the number of pubs being replaced with flats. The officer advised that there was a pub policy to help protect against their loss. Pubs had permitted development rights unless they were designated as a community asset. However there were strict regulations and not every pub was suitable for this. Planning had asked for pubs being sold to be marketed as pubs but had lost appeals on this.

MartijnCooijmans, Team Leader – Planning and Projects E/W gave a presentation. In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         Place making was about improving places for people to come together and to strengthen retail areas.

·         At the Archway the gyratory was being removed and a new public space was under construction. There would be a new heart for Archway town centre and the potential for a market and other street trading. In the new year a new square would be built and the shops that were on the island would be more easily accessible.

·         Subject to the plans for Highbury Corner being taken forward, the roundabout would be removed and a new public space and park created. It would create a new gateway to Upper Street and Holloway Road and the potential for some street trading.

·         Subject to the plans for Old Street being taken forward, the roundabout at Old Street would be removed and a new public space would be created which would provide a new gateway to Old Street, Whitecross Street market and Shoreditch. There would be the potential for some retail and street trading.

·         In Farringdon, there would be a new Crossrail station and improved public space. There would be a new gateway to ‘Mid-Town’ and a potential for some street trading.

·         There was a masterplan for Central Street which included public space improvements to the King’s Square shopping area.

·         Clerkenwell Green was being redesigned with the ‘car park’ being used to provide improved public space.

·         Finsbury Park would have new public space as part of the City North development. There would be a new pedestrian street leading to a new station entrance and new retail provision.

·         The council was working with TfL to look at the possibility of removing the gyratory at King’s Cross and making improvements to the Caledonian Road high street.

·         The council was working with TfL to look at the possibility of removing the gyratory at the Nag’s Head and making improvements to the Seven Sisters Road high street. This scheme was unlikely to go ahead as the scheme was the most problematic.

·         In the Spring there would be a full consultation of the town centre strategy for Angel.

·         Martijn and his team were thanked for his ongoing work in relation to the plans for the borough.

·         In response to a question about the plans for the existing shopping centre including the supermarket at the Nag’s Head, the officer advised that the landowner had not submitted a planning application. The site allocations would be revisited and engagement would take place with the landowner.

·         In response to a query about whether the tree pits on the Archway public square were large enough, the officer advised that there were.

·         Concern was raised that the new bus stops at Archway could mean bus users were unsure which bus stop to wait at for the next bus to their destination. The officer advised that some bus routes that had previously stopped at the same stop would now stop at different stops but some buses that previously stopped at different stops would now stop at the same stop. TfL would be putting an electronic board in Archway station advising people which bus stop the next bus would arrive at. Due to the high frequency of buses, even if a bus user did not go to the bus stop where the next bus was due to stop, they would not have to wait very long for the next bus to arrive at their stop.

·         Work would take place with the Town Centre Management Team and the local community on the design of the public space at the Archway early in the new year. In response to a member asking if independent coffee shops could be prioritised over chain ones, an officer advised that it was not possible to differentiate in planning terms.

Gemma Aked, Town Centre Development Manager gave a presentation. In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         The town centre development function was established in 2015. It was restructured from the Chief Executive’s Directorate to the Environment and Regeneration Directorate in October 2016. It was currently externally funded through the New Homes Bonus. There was a commitment to ongoing funding for staff.

·         Key functions were 1) the strategic overview of town centres, 2) to increase footfall in the town centres, 3) To manage the council’s relationship with town centre businesses, 4) To provide a gateway to other council services for businesses, 5) To provide business support advice, guidance and training, 6) To provide brokerage and partnership development, 7) To undertake project management and delivery of strategic projects and programmes, 8) To lever additional investment into town centres.

·         There was a direct town centre management function to Archway, Finsbury Park and Nag’s Head and an indirect town centre management function to the Angel. Funding support was provided by the council to the Angel Business Improvement District (BID) covering two seconded staff posts.

·         Core priorities were drawn up following a survey of over 300 businesses. They were 1) Business Engagement and Support which included business support programmes, Town Centre Management Groups and Traders Associations, 2) Town Centre Environments including cleaner, greener and safer, improving public realm and transport infrastructure; 3) Thriving Town Centre Economies included developing the town centre offer, key development sites and engaging investment partners including the GLA and London Councils to ensure a link into funding schemes and into other projects, 4) Unlocking wider opportunities including employment and skills e.g. asking businesses to provide local employment and skills training, community cohesion and tourism and 5) Galvanising and promoting strong town centre offers and animating town centres.

·         The core priorities had driven the projects that had been undertaken in the last 18 months.

·         The current programme included delivering the Town Centre Partnership’s Business Plans 2016/17, supporting the development of the Economic Development Strategy and delivering core projects funded by NHB and GLA High Streets Programme.

·         Projects included maintaining (and establishing in Finsbury Park) Town Centre Management Groups, the Shop Front Improvement Programme in Finsbury Park (engaging with 35 businesses), Marketing and Promoting Town Centres, (Focussing on Finsbury Park to establish brand identity, website and promotional campaign), Developing Business Support Programme (Business rates/marketing/visual merchandising), Festive Lighting and Events programme, supporting the delivery of Archway Square.

·         Key challenges included a potential increase in business rates for small businesses in March 2017 (businesses would be offered workshops and one to one sessions, an increase in rents for small business and general land value increases, managing relationships with key landowners and developers, parking (identified by businesses as a problem, although evidence had shown 80% of their customers did not drive to visit them), retail and office space to residential, capacity and managing expectations, resources for strategic posts, programmes and ongoing commitments, promoting town centres and making the most of the wider offer.

·         In response to a member’s question about whether the team mentored new businesses, the officer advised that this had not taken place as it was not in the core priorities but this might be considered in the future.

·         95% of the businesses who attended the town centre management groups were independent. Chains generally engaged through the Chamber of Commerce.

·         In response to a member of the public’s suggestion that Essex Road was being neglected, the officer advised that the Angel Business Improvement District’s boundary was being extended to Essex Road station. Any suggestions for improvements could be sent in and would be considered.

RESOLVED:

That the presentations be noted.