Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Lotis Bautista, Danny Beales, Edmund Frondigoun, Lloyd Hatton and Tom Simon.

Members will be asked to declare any pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in respect of items on this agenda.

There were none.

Webcasting of the Meeting

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record and film public meetings, I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on DVD upon request.

If you are seated in the Chamber it is likely that the Council’s cameras will capture your image and you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast unless you have already indicated that you do not wish this to happen.

If you wish to avoid appearing on the Council’s webcast you should move to one of the galleries.”

Any Other Announcements

Webcasting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available to those that requested them.  Those seated in the Chamber were deemed to be consenting to being filmed.  Anyone wishing to avoid appearing on the webcast should move to one of the galleries.

(i)       Written Communications

The Committee will be asked to receive written submissions in respect of items on the agenda, if any.

(ii)      Deputations

The Committee will be asked to receive requests for deputations in respect of items on the agenda, if any.

RESOLVED –

THAT the written submissions and deputation requests contained in the supplementary agenda be accepted.

There was no such business.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

Application no: 2023/5103/P      Officer: Sam FitzPatrick

Proposal: Change of use of existing deep level tunnels (Sui Generis) to visitor and cultural attraction (F1), including bar (Sui Generis); demolition and reconstruction of existing building at 38-39 Furnival Street; redevelopment of 40-41 Furnival Street, for the principle visitor attraction pedestrian entrance at ground floor, with retail at first and second floor levels and ancillary  offices atthird andfourth levelsand excavationof  additional basement levels; creation of new, pedestrian entrance at 31-33 High Holborn, to provide secondary visitor attraction entrance (including principle bar entrance); provision of ancillary cycle parking, substation, servicing and plant, and other associated works.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

Consideration was also given to the information provided in the Supplementary Agenda, referred to in Agenda Item 4 above.

The Planning Officer introduced the application highlighting to the Committee that the information in the Supplementary Agenda corrected figures quoted in the transport section of the main report and minor inconsistencies in the drawing numbers listed in the report asking that the Committee grant officers delegated authority to correct these in the final decision notice.

The Committee inspected a model of the proposals. Officers identified the location of the site in relation to key landmarks such as Kingsway and the tube stations as well as showing the two different entrance points and the location of the bar in the tunnels. Members asked questions around fire evacuation, capacity numbers and the scale of the tunnel. It was noted that there were 4 different fire evacuation points, 3 to ground level, the bar had a capacity of 160, with the wider site having a larger capacity which was to be controlled by condition. It was confirmed that the structure of the tunnel was to remain as it was.

Invited to comment on how people with disabilities and mobility access issues would be evacuated in emergencies, the applicant remarked that this was considered as part of the fire strategy, which was still in the early design stage, but it would need to comply with building regulations and was being designed using the same fire safety measures used in tube stations. However, as part of the consideration they would be providing places of refuge so that people with disabilities could wait in a safe environment until they were escorted by staff members during evacuation of the building.

Responding to a follow up question the applicant informed the Committee that there would be a Fire Management Plan with procedures on how to evacuate wheelchair users and people with mobility issues safely out of the building as well as the building being provided with fire suppression systems and safety systems to enable all evacuees to safely exit the building.

Also commenting on fire safety, the Head of Development Management informed the Committee that the Fire Brigade had been involved in discussions and there was still more work to be done in relation to the proposals, however officers had included a condition were permission to be granted, that required the applicant to provide a fire statement with further information around means of escape for all building users including those with disabilities and accessibility issues.

Answering further questions the applicant team provided the following responses:

• In relation to regular intersection points within the tunnels, this would be discussed with the design team in collaboration with the Fire Brigade as part of the Fire Compartmentation Strategy which would be considered in the next stage of the design.
• The fire compartmentation had been designed and outlined, this would however be improved with feedback received from the fire authority. This was an additional feature and was separate to the passageways which allowed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6(1)

Application no: 2022/3553/P      Officer: Sofie Fieldsend

Proposal: Demolition of existing petrol filling station and associated convenience store (sui generis), and erection of a six-storey building (plus plant) comprising ground floor commercial space (Class E) and flexible commercial/educational space for UCS Pre-Prep (Class E/F1), and 31 flats (Class C3) (15x 1-beds, 13x 2-beds and 3x 3-beds) above.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Planning Officer introduced the application highlighting to the Committee that information in the Supplementary Agenda tidied up a few things in the main report such as striking out duplicated paragraphs and added a new condition relating to access to the school which although mentioned in the report was omitted from the conditions list.

A member expressed the view that this was a largely positive application as it was a good example of the Council’s planning policies and site allocations being met.

Responding to questions, officers provided the following information:

• In relation to mitigation measures required for the metropolitan line underground tunnels, the protection of the tunnel infrastructure was covered by condition 4 which dealt with risks associated with development and required consultation with TfL. The section 278 agreement related to a highway agreement with TfL, as they were the highways authority responsible for repairs on Finchley Road and concerned the public realm.
• It was recommended that a late-stage review mechanism should be put in place to require a deferred contribution if the viability situation changed when it was built. The deferred contribution was capped at £7,000,000 which represented 50% affordable housing. The late-stage review mechanism was done using actual cost and sales values and would be done at a point which might allow for ground floor units to be flipped to intermediate rent or a contribution made to the Affordable Housing Fund. It was noted that whilst the applicant disagreed with the BPS Independent Adviser’s figures, they had agreed to use those figures for the purpose of the S106 legal agreement.

The BPS Independent Adviser invited to comment on reasons for disagreeing with the applicant over the figures, explained to the Committee that the 2 main reasons for the disagreement with BPS figures were the assessment of site value because of the inclusion of a landowner premium in the evaluation and consideration of what was a reasonable profit target. However as already indicated the applicant was willing to adopt the proposed figures.

Upon being put to the vote, it was 5 votes that unanimously

RESOLVED –

THAT planning permission, subject to a section 106 legal agreement and conditions as set out in the agenda, be granted.

ACTION BY: Director of Economy, Regeneration & Investment                                 Borough Solicitor

Application no: 2024/1444/P      Officer: David Fowler

Proposal: Use of the existing ground floor entrance, first to fourth floors and ninth floor of 125 Shaftesbury Avenue as immersive theatre space, and ancillary events space (sui generis) for a temporary period between 1 September 2024 to 30 September 2025.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant temporary conditional planning permission subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Planning Officer introduced the application informing the Committee that a late representation had been received from the Culture Lead of the GLA in support of the proposals.

Upon being put to the vote, it was 5 votes that unanimously

RESOLVED –

THAT temporary planning permission be granted subject to conditions as set out in the agenda,

ACTION BY: Director of Economy, Regeneration & Investment   Borough Solicitor

Application no: 2023/4757/P      Officer: Ewan Campbell

Proposal: Demolition of existing lean-to structures along the eastern boundary, erection of infill extension, alterations to the exterior of the building including replacement/alteration of windows and doors, removal of external services and plant, improvement of some external finishes, replacement of sections of roof, recladding of external stair case, installation of vents and over-cladding to plant room, refurbishment of bridge structure, installation of air intake/exhaust features associated with ventilation/heating/cooling systems, external courtyard landscaping works and replacement of entrance gates.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission.

Consideration was also given to the information provided in the Supplementary Agenda, referred to in Agenda Item 4 above.

The Planning Officer introduced the application informing the Committee of a late representation received from Councillor Ajok Athian, Primrose Hill Ward Councillor objecting to the application which raised similar issues covered by other deputees relating to noise levels, mitigation measures and the environmental impact of the larger air conditioning units. Also asking that the Committee grant officers delegated authority to amend the wording of condition 4 further post committee to avoid any ambiguity about the permitted noise levels.

Invited to comment on the residents’ objections about the noise levels that would emanate from the industrial plant, the applicant remarked that the intention of the policy and the condition was that any noise emitted would be at a level which was imperceptible against the existing background noise levels.

Invited to clarify their objections to the proposals, the deputees representative informed the Committee that the objections related to the lack of information that had been provided as to the actual noise impact on residents gardens in close proximity to the plant and in relation to the noise conditions and the achievability of complying with the noise standards.

Commenting further about statements attributed to the manufacturer about reduced noise levels being unachievable, the applicant informed the Committee that there had been detailed discussions with the manufacturer on a number of occasions about the proposed units and although they were generally used in external conditions there was nothing stopping them from being used inside in an attenuated environment such as this. The units had been specifically designed for this situation.

Responding to further members questions, the applicant advised that:

• in relation to consultation with residents,’ letters were delivered to the neighbourhood and residential blocks surrounding the site notifying of a public consultation event that took place in July 2023. Residents were also notified by letter prior to submission of the application about changes to the scheme since the public consultation. Additionally direct contact was made with the Conservation Area Advisory Committee and Councillor Cooper prior to submission of the application.
• In relation to measurability and enforcement the Council’s Environmental Health Officers were the arbitrators of how noise levels would be measured.

Responding to questions, officers provided the following information:

• In relation to the noise compliance, the condition had been added to ensure the plant met noise compliance standards, if these were exceeded enforcement action could be taken.
• In terms of noise levels not being achievable, the condition included a post installation noise assessment to be carried out to demonstrate compliance. Delegated authority was sought by officers to amend the wording of condition 4 further to make sure there was no ambiguity about the noise standard that was required to be met which should be in line with Council policy.
• In response to on-going concerns in the Community about noise levels, officers had put in the post installation measurements condition, that was not a standard  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6(4)

There was none.