Agenda item

Demolition of the existing building and redevelopment of the site to provide a six storey (plus basement) office building (use class B1a) involving 3,021sqm of commercial floorspace including 446sqm (NIA) of flexible space (use class A1/A2/A3/B1/D1) on part of the ground floor and basement; provision of refuse storage, cycle storage and plant; and re-location of the substation from ground to basement level.

(Planning application number: P2019/2791/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The Planning Officer noted two updates required as follows: (a) to paragraph 7.1 of page 17 of the agenda pack, as four objections had been received, rather than the three stated in the report and (b) Condition 10 on page 52 of the agenda pack, by the inclusion of the following: “including the proposed windows closest to 9 Clerkenwell Green at 3^rd and 4^th floor level"(to be obscured)

·       A member of the Committee noted that, as part of the proposal “Sandy coloured brick is proposed as the main material for the façade and a light grey glazed brick for the ground floor” (paragraph 5.4 of the report) and, given that this was an iconic area, queried how the new building would look compared to those around it?   The Planning Officer replied that the site was bordered on one side by brick-built mixed use residential/commercial buildings, a 5-storey residential building with commercial use on the ground floor. The buildings on Clerkenwell Green were generally finer grain Victorian or pre-Victorian buildings in commercial and office use, but there were larger early 20th century warehouse buildings in Aylesbury Street.  The proposed building offered a transition between the two and was considered to be a compromise.  The original proposal had included a copper roof, but this had now been revised to red brick.

·       A member of the Committee asked whether the basement excavation would be affected by underground water. The Planning Officer stated that the development was not in a flood risk zone in which flooding was considered to be a risk.  “Small scale” in paragraph 10.136 referred to relative to the site size.  A Basement Impact Assessment had been submitted. There was an existing basement.

·       A member of the Committee noted that the red bricks and light buff bricks needed good contextualisation. The Planning Officer noted that the Design and Conservation Team were happy with the building materials.

·       A member of the Committee queried why there was a roof terrace on an office block. A question was also asked about water collection from the roof and whether it became stagnant. The Planning Officer replied that this was covered by Condition 7, which dealt with the drainage strategy for a sustainable urban drainage system, which would have to be approved by the Council.

·       One of the objectors, who lived next to the site, referred to the obscured windows at the rear of the building which looked into his living room. He asked whether the Committee agreed that those windows should be obscured? He would prefer the second and third floor windows to be obscured. He suggested that it would be easy to achieve this and would make a difference to him.  He also noted a mention of a possible café/restaurant use and queried whether an alcohol licence would be granted?

·       An objector asked about the plant noise assessment, pointing out that plant noise assessments needed to be carried out at 8 Clerkenwell Green

·       The Founder and Director of the Clerkenwell Green Preservation Association stated her objections to the proposed plan, including that it was “bulky”, that it would dwarf the surrounding buildings and that the proposal was not contextual within Clerkenwell Green.

·       A member of the Committee asked  why the applicant had found the use of PV panels to be feasible, but had not specified their use and queried how they would achieve the Council’s zero carbon by 2030 target.  The applicant said that the development was meeting the London Plan and Islington’s carbon reduction targets without their need. The applicant said that there would be space for one line of PV panels on the roof, which would not be worthwhile in a building of this size.

·       In response to the question from a local resident about windows, the Planning Officer confirmed that the windows closest to 9 Clerkenwell Green at 3^rd and 4^th floor level would be obscured.

·       In response to the question from a local resident about café/restaurant use at the site, the Chair pointed out that this would be subject to the usual alcohol and saturation zone policy.  The resident would be able to object to any application for an alcohol licence at the premises and to attend the Committee where the application was considered.

·       The roof terrace was to be installed for office users and was a feature of new builds and their use was conditioned in Condition 14.  It was for use during office hours only for office workers to use during their break and to take some fresh air away from their desks. The applicant confirmed that, as part of the fire strategy for the building, a no-smoking policy would be in operation.

·       Referring to paragraphs 10.115 (“more roof space that could accommodate more green roof”) and 10.116 (“Thames Water have not raised objections to the proposal in relation to foul or surface water drainage subject to informatives. Further details of Sustainable Urban Drainage would be required…”)  on page 41 of the agenda pack, a member of the Committee expressed dismay that the applicant appeared reluctant to include more carbon eliminating elements on the development.

·       A member of the Committee queried whether, in response to that, it might be possible to demark the areas specified for green/brown biodiversity roofs in Condition 13.  If it was for the use of office workers to take breaks, it need not be so large.

·       A Planning Officer said that an increase in PV panels would affect the appearance and visual impact of the area.  The current suggested provision was compliant with policy.  The green roof was not visible from the street, but the relevant condition would ensure that the area of green roof would be maximised.

RESOLVED:

1. That following consideration of the case officer’s report (the assessment and recommendations therein), the presentation to Committee, submitted representations and objections provided verbally at this meeting, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report, as revised, and subject to the prior completion of a Deed of Planning Obligation made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing the heads of terms as set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report.

2. That Planning Officers review all facing materials in consultation with the Chair as set out in condition 3.

3. That the proposed windows closest to 9 Clerkenwell Green at 3^rd and 4^th floor level be obscured, in addition to those already specified in the report.

4. That Condition 13 be reviewed with a view to adjusting and increasing the area of green roof.