You are here: Agenda item

Agenda item

Land at Turk's Head Yard, 75a Turnmill Street, London, EC1M 5SY


Proposed erection of new four storey building providing office (Class E) floorspace, with associated landscaping and servicing.


(Planning application number: P2021/3732/FUL)


In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The planning officer advised that an additional objection had been received and members had been updated.

·       A member asked planning officers to comment on the floor area being 3 square metres lower than the threshold for a major scheme. The planning officer stated that the floor area had been reviewed with the applicant and this had taken into account the prior permission and constraints such as the requirement to provide ramp access, structural constraints at basement level and a legal requirement for a turning circle. The courtyard had also been enlarged to improve amenity. Officers were satisfied with the justification and the information provided.

·       A member stated that objectors had raised concern about the noise abatement report. The planner stated that the noise officer had seen the application and with the noise criteria outlined in the report and the two noise conditions, officers were satisfied that noise concerns had been addressed.

·       In response to a member’s question about the landscaping being provided, the planning officer stated that a courtyard and garden had been proposed and green roofs had been included in the application.

·       In response to a member’s concern about the undercroft entrance and the lack of separation between vehicles and pedestrians, the applicant stated that they had no legal right to the undercroft area and that the development was car-free. More details could be provided. A member asked the legal officer if it would be possible to state that the scheme could not be commenced until a scheme demonstrating how the pedestrian and vehicle access would be managed had been submitted and agreed. The legal officer stated that it would not be possible to impose a condition on an element outside of the applicant’s control. 

·       In response to a member’s question about potential light pollution, the applicant stated this would be reduced as the currently fully glazed north elevation of the neighbouring building would be blocked with the minimal glazing of the proposal. The planning officer advised that Condition 15 related to light pollution.

·       In response to a member’s question about whether there were any plans to harvest, reuse and recycle water, the applicant stated that there were no plans to do so as this would require a large number of water storage tanks. However, there were sustainability measures in place such as green roofs which would reduce the flow of rainwater.

·       A member asked about the apprenticeship programme and whether the numbers of apprentices could be increased. The applicant stated that it was difficult on a scheme of this size to ensure apprentices carried on working there. The planning officer stated that they considered one apprentice working on the scheme at any one time acceptable.


Councillor Klute proposed a motion to include investigations into landscaping the entrance in the landscaping plans for pedestrian priority. This was seconded by Councillor Convery and carried.


Councillor Clarke proposed a motion to add a green wall into the Green Performance Plan and for consideration to be given to the installation of a recycling and reusing water scheme. This was seconded by Councillor Convery and carried.



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 and the additional conditions outlined above.

Supporting documents: