Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Lotis Bautista, Tommy Gale, Robert Thompson and Sue Vincent.

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

Councillor Tom Simon declared for transparency in relation to item 7(8) 50 Maresfield Gardens that he had email exchanges with both the applicant and objectors, he had not given a view and was able to consider the application with an open mind.

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.

Withdrawal of the Alexandra Road Estate Applications 7(4+5+6+7) from this evenings agenda

The Chair also announced that the applications for Alexandra Road Estate on the Planning Committee Agenda had been withdrawn from the agenda and would not be considered at the meeting this evening. This was because officers had advised that there was an error with the certificate of ownership submitted with the application and the Council could not be certain that all those with a legal interest in the land had been made aware of the application. The applications were expected to be heard at the Planning Committee meeting on 23^rd January 2025 if the matter had been satisfactorily resolved.

The Head of Development Management informed the Committee that the updated version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) had just been published, however officers were of the view that this had no impact on their assessment or recommendation on any of the applications being considered tonight.

(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.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 4^th November 2024.

Consideration was given to the Minutes of the 4 November 2024 meeting.

RESOLVED –

THAT the Minutes of the meeting held on 4^th November 2024 be agreed and signed as an accurate record of the meeting.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

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

Application no: 2024/0436/P      Officer: Christopher Smith

Proposal: Erection of a two-storey extension forming a new step free entrance at street level; works to car parking area and addition of new floor to create 55 new hotel bedrooms at levels 1&2; infilling of under croft at level 3 and new flat roof link to extend existing hotel bar/restaurant; and other ancillary works.

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

Consideration was also given to the supplementary information contained within the supplementary agenda.

The Planning Officer introduced the application and advised that a late written submission had been received from a local resident which raised issues relating to the transport and privacy impacts of the scheme as well as outlining support for the access and design benefits of the scheme noting that these matters had been addressed in the committee report.

A Committee member welcomed the proposed change to the frontage of the building commenting that it was much more welcoming, providing easy accessibility for people to enter and exit the hotel.

On being put to the vote, it was unanimously in favour of the officer recommendation

RESOLVED –

THAT Planning Permission be granted subject to conditions and Section 106 obligations, as set out in the agenda.

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

Application no: 2023/3419/P      Officer: Christopher Smith

Proposal: Addendum to application previously presented to Planning Committee on 15/2/2024 (resolution to grant conditional planning permission subject to completion of a Section 106 legal agreement).

Partial demolition, refurbishment and extension of existing office building to provide commercial floorspace (Class E) at 2 Waterhouse Square including external alterations, reconfiguration of entrances and servicing arrangements, new hard and soft landscaping, provision of cycle parking and other ancillary works.

Reason for return to Planning Committee: Proposed amendment to Condition 1 to extend commencement date for permission from three years to five years.

Application no: 2023/3420/L       Officer: Christopher Smith

Proposal: Addendum to application previously presented to Planning Committee on 15/2/2024 (resolution to grant listed building consent).

Partial demolition, refurbishment and extension of existing office building to provide commercial floorspace (Class E) at 2 Waterhouse Square including external alterations, reconfiguration of entrances and servicing arrangements, new hard and soft landscaping, provision of cycle parking and other ancillary works.

Reason for return to Planning Committee: Proposed amendment to Condition 1 to extend commencement date for consent from three years to five years.

Consideration was also given to the written submission contained within the supplementary agenda.

The Chair provided the Committee with some background information on this application informing members that these applications were reported to planning committee in December 2023 and again in February 2024. Noting that the applications were part heard and deferred at the December 2023 committee to obtain additional information. At the February 2024 meeting discussions on the case resumed from where they had left off and only those members who were present during the original discussion were able to participate. The committee resolved to grant permission and listed building consent subject to conditions and a S106 agreement.

The Committee was informed that the application had been brought back to planning committee because of the need to amend 1 condition, which would allow the permission to have a life of 5 years rather than the previously specified 3 years. That was the only change to the scheme. Committee procedures did not set out how an application which was returning to planning committee for this reason should be dealt with. In view of that it was felt that it would be best practice for the application to be heard afresh, this would allow all members of the Planning Committee to participate in decision making. In view of this although the only change was the condition, the presenting officer would give an overview of the scheme to assist those members who were not present when the application was heard previously. Members were advised that the earlier committee resolution to grant permission and consent was a material consideration which should be given significant weight.

The Planning Officer introduced the application.

Responding to members questions the Planning Officer provided the following information.

·       The extension of the permission time frame would not affect the heads of terms.

·       With respect to public consultation, the change was to amend the condition to allow for the permission to last longer which was not something the Council would normally reconsult on. It was not a significant change to the original proposal.

On being put to the vote, with 1 abstention and 6 votes in favour of the officer recommendation

RESOLVED –

THAT

(i)            Conditional planning permission be granted subject to S106 agreement with proposed amendment to condition 1 to extend commencement date for permission from 3 years to 5 years.

(ii)           Conditional listed building consent be granted with proposed amendment to condition 1 to extend commencement date for consent from 3 years to 5 years.

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

Application no: 2023/5339/P      Officer: Elaine Quigley

Proposal: Replacement of existing single glazing with double glazing and associated works.

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

These applications were withdrawn from the agenda for the reason explained in item 3.

Application no: 2023/0286/L       Officer: Elaine Quigley

Proposal: Replacement of existing single glazing with double glazing, removal of domestic hot water cylinders and installation of new heating interface units, emitters and associated internal works.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant listed building consent.

Application no: 2023/5338/P      Officer: Elaine Quigley

Proposal: Replacement of the existing estate-wide heating distribution infrastructure including removal of redundant pipework; installation of two new sub-plant rooms; installation of cold-water storage tank rooms; replacement of existing site hoarding and installation of new replacement infrastructure pipework.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a s106 legal agreement

Application no: 2024/0091/L       Officer: Elaine Quigley

Proposal: Replacement of the existing estate-wide heating distribution infrastructure including removal of redundant pipework; installation of two new sub-plant rooms; installation of cold-water storage tank rooms; replacement of existing site hoarding and installation of new replacement infrastructure pipework

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional listed building consent

Application no: 2023/3017/P      Officer: Miriam Baptist

Proposal: Replacement side extension behind new brick wall, basement extension with lightwells to the rear, new fenestration and roof form, soft and hard landscaping, garden shed/bike store and plant enclosure to house Air Source Heat Pumps.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a s106 legal agreement

Consideration was also given to the deputations contained within the supplementary agenda.

The Planning Officer introduced the application.

Invited to comment on the impact of the basement construction on the neighbouring property, Campbell Reith Independent Basement Consultant remarked that

·       They had not considered any documentation or made any assessment as to what would happen to the neighbouring property if the basement was not built and could only comment on the current situation.

·       They had considered the objections received from the neighbouring property at 48 at the start of the audit process for the construction of the basement. On top of the robust audit process and the normal checks and balances carried out by Campbell Reith, the questions and issues raised by the neighbour at number 48  were put to the applicant and their engineers. This had resulted in the applicant completing 6 revisions to their original assessments and providing more detail on issues of land stability and groundwater flow.

·       The assessments completed by the applicant’s team was in line with best practice, the information provided was enough to make a reasonable assumption of ground conditions. The construction process should create less movement and fewer impacts than predicted which assumed a well-managed, well designed ongoing construction process checked by an independent engineer all the way through the process. Everything the applicant had done so far had been carried out in accordance with best practice.

Responding to further questions, Planning Officers provided the following information:

• In terms of rectifying any damage caused by the basement construction, there would be provision in the Basement Construction Plan (BCP) to repair any damage caused.

• From the Council’s perspective the best outcome was that there was no movement from the baseline position and the applicant was not required to carry out any work to rectify damage.

• From the listed building consent perspective controls were in place to protect the listed building.

• In terms of what was required of the applicant, normally a structural survey of the neighbouring property would not be required before granting planning permission neither would it be requested during the course of the planning process. This however was a particularly complex situation with a listed building next door which was the reason officers had recommended a Basement Construction Plan (BCP) and additional measures to ensure the right checks and balances were in place to ensure the neighbour’s property had no damage as a result of the work.

• In terms of damage mitigation measures, the Basement Construction Plan on this application covered and included additional requirements to the normal standard basement condition.

• The surveys would be carried out and in the process of construction the methodology would be adapted if required.

• In terms of to what extent the new draft local plan should be taken into account when considering this application, the Head of Development Management advised that as set out in the report, although the new emerging local plan held some weight, it was fairly limited because of the point it was at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7(8)

Application no: 2024/3493/P      Officer: Josh Lawlor

Proposal: Change of use of existing building from commercial use (Class E) to apart hotel use (Class C1), extension and remodelling of upper storeys to accommodate further Class C1 apart hotel floorspace, including new 8th floor, provision of ancillary facilities and retention of Class E commercial unit at ground floor level and associated works including refurbishment of façade.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a s106 legal agreement

Consideration was also given to the supplementary information contained within the supplementary agenda.

Responding to a question about why the Council was not asking for on-site housing component, officers commented that the uplift on the floor space was only about 200 square metres, any sort of housing would need a separate core from the office. It was difficult to get on site housing in this type of context.

A Committee member commented that they welcomed the ban on coach party bookings and ban on coaches dropping off outside the hotel and would be useful if this could be applied to some of the older hotels in the area.

.

On being put to the vote, it was unanimously in favour of the officer recommendation

RESOLVED –

THAT Planning Permission be granted subject to conditions and Section 106 obligations, as set out in the agenda.

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

Application no: 2024/2732/P      Officer: Ewan Campbell

Proposal: Refurbishment and extension of the existing building to provide additional commercial, business and service use (Class E) including nine storey front extension, replacement of roof extension and introduction of a rooftop terrace, new entrance, external alterations, new hard and soft landscaping, provision of cycle parking and bin store, provision of separate cafe unit (Class E), and other associated works.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a s106 legal agreement

Consideration was also given to the supplementary information contained within the supplementary agenda.

A Committee member commented that they welcomed the proposals to declutter the building and in developing the Holborn Vision in areas such as Theobald’s Road which had a large number of buildings, they would like to see more granular uses and more human scale interactions at ground floor level in the future.

.

On being put to the vote, it was unanimously in favour of the officer recommendation

RESOLVED –

THAT Planning Permission be granted subject to conditions and Section 106 obligations, as set out in the agenda.

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

There was none.