Agenda item

Application under Section 73 (minor material amendment) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) to amend condition 16 and condition 17 of planning permission ref: P2018/2463/S73, dated 5 December 2019, that granted:  Application under Section 73 (minor material amendment) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) to amend condition 2 (approved drawings and documents), condition 1 (plans) of planning permission ref: P2013/2697/S73. (The proposed minor material amendments relate to the amalgamation of 10 units across second, third, fourth and fifth floors resulting in the creation of larger units (and involving the loss of 5 units overall) within Block A, together with layout changes to existing ground floor retail units 5 and 6.)The proposed amendments seek to vary the wording of condition 16 and condition 17 to allow vehicles servicing the commercial tenants of Islington Square to enter and leave the site via the Almeida Street access. The Studd Street access would be used only to access the residential parking at Blocks A and B and for vehicles servicing the apartments on the site.

(Planning application number: P2021/3433/S73)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·       Planning Officer informed the meeting that as both items B2 and B3 are interlinked and are on the same site it will be assessed together. 

A number of updates provided by the Planning Officer, that Heads of Terms is to be included in the Appendix 1 of the report as it was omitted and it should  read ‘That planning permission be granted subject to 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 red land and the blue land (including mortgagees) in order to secure the following planning obligations 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’ : The submission of a delivery and servicing plan (DSP) to be approved by the Council in writing (in consultation with TfL) (including a review mechanism) prior to commencement of the development and the reversion at the end of the temporary planning permission period to the previous (i.e. one-way) delivery and servicing arrangements’ .

·       Meeting was advised that site comprises mixed-use redevelopment including residential, retail, commercial and leisure uses, that there are number of elements which make up the wider Islington Square site, including the former sorting office block (Block A), the former distribution building (Block B) a part-six/part-seven storey new build (Block C), the Grade II listed Post Office fronting Upper Street at No. 116 Upper Street (Block D) and the single storey associated buildings at the northern end of the site (Block F).

·       In addition to the above, the Planning Officer noted that all of the buildings had been subject of historic planning approvals for change of use, conversion and extension to provide for a mixed use development and the site falls within the boundaries of the Upper Street (North) Conservation Area (CA19) while the wider sites northern, southern and western boundaries meet the Barnsbury Conservation Area (CA10).

·       It was also noted that the surrounding area is mixed use in character and form, with commercial development along Upper Street and residential in the streets to the west of Upper Street, including Studd Street, Moon Street and Almeida Street.

·       Members were advised that applicants are seeking to amend two conditions relating to planning permission P2018/2463/S73, dated 5 December 2019, that the proposed amendments seek to vary the wording of condition 16 and condition 17 to allow vehicles servicing the commercial tenants of Islington Square to enter and leave the site via the Almeida Street access. In addition Studd Street access would be used only to access the residential parking at Blocks A and B and for vehicles servicing the apartments on the site.

·       On the proposed amendment to conditions 16 and 17, the Planning Officer advised that this seeks to facilitate the vehicle movement via Almedia and Studd Street and that applicants are seeking for the measures to be in place only for a temporary period until 14th August 2024.

·       Proposed condition 16 relates to vehicles servicing the commercial tenants of Islington Square shall only enter and leave the site via Almedia Street access, that no traffic associated with the commercial tenants shall use the Studd Street access.

·       Condition 17 require details of measures including signage, barriers, traffic lights, intercom and any other relevant measures required to implement the temporary two-way vehicle access arrangements at Studd Street and Almedia to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

·       With regards to item B3, Islington Square, operation of the Boulevard Market in Esther Anne Place (the piazza) of Islington Square on Fridays , Saturdays and Sundays and Bank Holidays meeting was advised that applicant is seeking a temporary consent.

·       Planning Officer advised that items B2 & B3 have been assessed together on issues such as land use, design and conservation, operation management and highway issues and impact on neighbouring amenity.

·       On land use consideration, meeting was advised that the Market is acceptable in principle as the site is located within the Angel Town Centre where new markets are encouraged, that this will result in increased footfall and help to maintain and enhance the retail function of the town centre.

·       It was also noted that the market would enhance the longer-term vitality and viability of the other businesses within the Islington Square development, that the market’s retail offer and its location is not regarded as a commercial risk to the vitality and viability of existing markets at Chapel Market or Camden Passage.

·       In terms of design and conservation, meeting was advised that site is within the Upper Street North Conservation Area, that the market is supported by Design and Conservation Officers in principle as it would preserve the lively retail nature of the area and that the temporary market stalls would be designed to a consistent branding and quality.

·       It was also noted that the operation of the market and its associated structures are not considered to cause harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

·       In terms of the management of the market, Planning Officer reiterated the operation hours as detailed in the report as Fridays (12:00- 19:00), Saturday (10:00-17:00) and Sunday and Bank Holidays: (11:00-17:00). In terms of the operating hours of the market set up and dismantling of the market stalls , Friday : 08:00- 20:00, Saturday : 08:00-18:00 and Sunday and Bank Holidays :09:00 -18:00.

·       Meeting was advised that changes to servicing and delivery arrangements would result in the rebalancing of trips into and out of the site, noting that although the overall number of trips would be unchanged as the uses remain unchanged it would result in the reduction in commercial vehicle trips along Studd Street and an increase in commercial trips along Almeida Street.

·       In terms of the neighbouring amenity impacts, the Planning Officer highlighted the concerns of residents of Studd Street/Moon Street, Almedia Street and Islington Square and included issues such as noise and disturbance, fumes and pollution and parking congestion and traffic management.

·       With regards to noise and disturbances due to vehicle movements in and around the site, market set ups, operations and pack up and servicing and delivery to commercial units, fumes and pollution meeting was advised of the applicants Parking Congestion and Traffic Management to address any concerns.

·       In terms of amenity impacts, meeting was reminded that Studd Street is a narrow one-way residential road with parking along one side and terraced houses fronting immediately onto the pavement, noting complaints from neighbouring residents received by Planning Enforcement around the Studd Street entrance due to noise nuisance as a result of vehicles reversing from unauthorised early morning/late night deliveries and traffic movement associated with the commercial tenants outside permitted hours.

·       It was also noted that the removal of commercial traffic from the narrow Studd Street access would be considered a benefit by some of the residents at Studd Street and the eastern end of Moon Street. 

·       It was noted that the proposed two-way movements from the Studd Street access would require vehicles leaving the site to turn right into Moon Street, which currently should not receive traffic associated with the Islington Square development. Also as Moon Street is a narrow residential road with terraced houses fronting immediately on to the pavement and parking along one side, the proposal would therefore result in an increase in vehicles using Moon Street, albeit those associated with the residential element (private cars, taxis, delivery vans etc.). Nevertheless, this raises the potential for residents living along Moon Street experiencing noise and disturbance from an increase in traffic.

·       Meeting was advised that it is being proposed that the Almeida Street access would take all the commercial traffic associated with delivery and serving at the site. It was also noted that there are also on street delivery bays associated with the commercial activity at the junction with Upper Street and the Almeida Theatre, that Highways have raised concerns that Almeida Street is not wide enough to accommodate two-way traffic for large delivery vehicles, which could result in large vehicles either reversing down Almeida Street or reversing back onto Upper Street.

·       Planning Officer stated that Almeida Street access is wider than the Studd Street access and is therefore arguably better equipped to act as a site entrance for frequent commercial traffic and larger commercial vehicles, that the more generous width of the Almeida Street entrance road would accommodate an onsite holding bay for a delivery vehicle, rather than vehicles having to back up onto Almeida Street. This access point is also closer to the ramp for the large basement servicing area beneath the site. 

·       With regards to the Islington Square development, the Planning Officer noted that the proposed amendments would remove the one-way servicing arrangement from Esther Anne Place, resulting in fewer vehicle trips running through the centre of the site past the centrally located residential properties, noting that there would be an intensification of vehicle activity at the southern end of Esther Anne Place adjacent to the Studd Street access where vehicles may have to wait briefly before being signalled to move-away. Likewise, the northern end of Esther Anne place would experience potential noise and disturbance from an intensification of commercial vehicles coming and going to the basement servicing yard.   

·       Meeting was advised that the proposed changes to the access arrangements would also free up the servicing road through the centre of the site and allow the applicant to close Esther Anne Place to hold street markets and potentially other events aimed at increasing footfall and supporting commercial activity within the site.

·       Meeting was advised that separate consultation was carried out on each of the sites and in both instances 7 objections raised issues such as noise and nuisance to local residents; impeding pedestrian access to the shops and cafes; Almedia street not being wide enough to allow commercial vehicles to pass and too narrow for large lorries; narrow pavement creating an increased safety risk to children attending nearby nurseries

·       Similarly with regards to Studd Street, concerns as a result of the proposed amendments include increase in noise and disturbance, narrow for vehicles to enter and leave through, that it is more suited to commercial access (rather than Almeida Street), being further from the pedestrianised section of Esther Ann Place and also better able to cope having a one way system which then feeds onto Theberton Street.

·       The Planning Officer advised that 13 letters of support were received with comments that the proposal will support the vitality and viability of Angel Town Centre and Islington Square; that there would be no harm the character and appearance of the Upper Street North Conservation Area; that amenity impacts would be carefully manged through hours restrictions, operational management plans and delivery and servicing controls 

·       The Planning Officer reiterated that both consents are seeking limit to a temporary period to monitor operational controls and any undue impacts.

·       Concerns have been raised by Highways Officers that the proposed changes could create highway safety issues along Almeida Street/ Upper Street and unduly increase the experiences of noise and disturbance to residents to the north of the site. The proposal could also implicate additional residents to the south at Moon Street with undue amenity impacts from an increase in vehicle traffic.

·       As such, taking into consideration the Town Centre location and the issues with the existing servicing arrangements, trialling the proposed changes through a temporary consent is considered to be reasonable in this instance given the specific circumstances. This would enable the impacts on highway safety and the amenity of neighbouring residents to be monitored and reviewed before a permanent change to the servicing arrangements is considered.

·       A resident and Chair of the Residents Association of Studd/Moon Street welcomed the scheme but reminded members that the site has a history of non-compliance especially with monitoring and enforcement of delivery vehicles within the site and surrounding area, requesting that changes to the route would need to be rigorously enforced.

·       Objector welcomed the suggestion that the introduction of a two way route would be trialled for over a year and had concerns with inadequate signage and its visibility which needs to be addressed, and had concerns about damage to trees by large vehicles moving around the site and noise and pollution which has an adverse impact on the amenity of residents.

·       Another resident living close to the barrier at Studd Street raised issues about its management, with cyclist using pavements and raising concerns about safety of pedestrians and residents. Also resident suggested that if committee is minded to grant planning permission, that vehicles waiting behind the barrier should be encouraged to turn off their engines

·       The agent in response stated that the proposals will allow for the segregation of deliveries and vehicle movements to the commercial units from those going to the residential units, that the existing ‘one-way’ vehicle route through the centre of the site would be ended and the access points at Studd Street and Almeida Street would operate as ‘two-way’. Agent welcomed the trial period of a year and confident that changes being proposed would benefit both residents and commercial occupiers of both sites.

·       During deliberations, Chair noted that there were no concerns with and around the market but with the management of the traffic on site, reiterating developers argument that the new proposals would lead to improvements within the two sites. The Chair also noted the proposed changes and its impact to neighbours who live close to the site. In addition the Chair suggested that if minded to approve, the temporary trial period should be increased to a 18 month period so as to allow applicants sufficient time to put the measures in place and for officers to monitor its effectiveness.

·       A member welcomed the experimental scheme and encouraged applicants to engage with residents in particular on improving signage for cyclist which has been a long standing issue with resident’s. Chair moved a motion to amend the heads of terms to include a traffic management order, Cllr North seconded the motion. The wording of this to be delegated to officers.

·       The Chair’s suggestion to be involved in the review process of the Operation Management Plan before it is submission for approval and prior to commencement as noted in condition 9 was agreed by the Committee.

·       On the issue of a possible Traffic Management Order (TMO), Chair noted residents contribution stating that if required residents will have an opportunity to participate in a public consultation.                 

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to grant planning permission subject to the amended conditions and the inclusion of the heads of terms in the legal agreement.  This was seconded by Councillor North and carried.

RESOLVED:

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 amended conditions and informatives set out in amended Appendix 1 of the officer report 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 the amended Appendix 1 of the officer report.