Agenda item

Application for continued use of the building as a Non-Residential Institution (use Class D1) to be personal to City University and successor bodies (and to revert to B1 [Business] in the event of the cessation of the University's use

(Planning application number: P2019/3742/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The Planning Officer highlighted an amendment required to line 2 of Condition 3 on page 87 of the agenda pack, by the addition of a comma and the words “of London” after the words “City University”  to read “City, University of London”

·       The Planning Officer also proposed an amendment to the planning obligations on page 86 of the agenda pack, Recommendation A to read as follows: “Approval recommended (consent personal to City, University of London), subject to conditions and the satisfactory conclusion of the legal agreement to secure the following planning obligations and in consultation with the Chair of the Planning Committee:

·       A detailed plan, updated on a biannual basis that sets out quantifiable education, training and employment opportunities, as well as support for small businesses, ring-fenced for Borough small businesses and residents from the Council’s priority groups and aligned with the councils existing services and programmes (including the Council’s Inclusive Economy Team) together with an annual planning and quarterly monitoring meeting.

·       Submission and agreement of a Green Performance Plan.

·       Submission and agreement of a framework Travel Plan with set targets.”

·       A member of the Committee suggested that it would be important to maintain reference to “social and economic benefits” in (revised) bullet point 1 of Recommendation A above and the Planning Officer suggested that it be incorporated into the planning obligations above and that a version be included in the S106 Statement.

·       A member of the Committee suggested that the second bullet point in the planning obligations was too vague “Submission and agreement of a Green Performance Plan” and queried what it would contain.  The Planning Officer stated that this would need to be assessed and agreed by the Council. Advice and a recommended framework was contained in the Environmental Design SPD.

·       Mr Graham Oliver, representing the City University of London Federation, stated that the use would be complementary to the economy of the area and would support the central London economy. It was an exciting opportunity. There had been no objections to the proposals. With reference to the S106 agreement, they had been satisfied with the original wording on benefits and would need to review the new wording to ensure there was sufficient flexibility.

·       The Chair emphasised the need for further work on the Social and Economic Statement.  It would be important to have a statement with measurable outcomes.  The applicants were asking the Council to set aside planning policy, so the onus was on them to provide exceptional reasons in the Social and Economic Statement to justify this, for example by the inclusion of additional education programmes.

·       In response to a question from the Chair as to whether the applicant was prepared to robustly revisit the document to quantify what would be done to produce measurable outcomes in the Social and Economic Statement, the applicant replied that he would meet with officers. In response to a further question from the Chair, the applicant’s representative confirmed that the application was committed to the building being solely for the use of the Cass Business School.

·       A member of the Committee concurred with the view that the social and economic statement needed to be “smart” and sought reassurance from the applicant’s representative that only the Cass Business School would occupy the building. He noted that the Core Strategy (CS7) mentioned educational premises and that, if this was a new application, it would be compliant.  He sought reassurance that the Council was prepared to lose B1 use of this building.   The Chair stated that it would have to be a policy balance of supporting an education use in an area designated for B1 use.

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, including measurable outcomes in the Social and Economic Statement.

2. That the revised Social and Economic Statement be submitted and approved, in consultation with the Chair, prior to permission being granted.

3. That recommendation 3 be amended to make it clear that planning permission has been granted on a personal basis to the City, University of London - Cass Building School, who will occupy the whole building.