Agenda item
City Hotel, 12-20 Osborn Street, London, E1 6TE (PA/19/01301)
Proposal:
Part 4, 5 and 6 storey rear extension plus partial basement and associated internal changes to the existing hotel to create an additional 153 rooms, external alterations to the Osborn Street elevation, cycle parking facilities, disabled car parking, plant, demolition of rear buildings within car park and other associated works.
Recommendation:
Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions
Minutes:
An update report was tabled.
Gareth Gwynne introduced the application for part 4, 5 and 6 storey rear extension plus partial basement and associated internal changes to the existing hotel to create an additional 153 rooms, external alterations to the Osborn Street elevation, cycle parking facilities, disabled car parking, plant, demolition of rear buildings within car park and other associated works.
Adam Garcia (Planning Services) presented the report describing the nature of the site and the surrounding area, and the outcome of the consultation, resulting in the receipt by the Council of 37 Letters of representation, 37 letters of objection and 1 petition in objection of 60 signatures. Mr Garcia summarised the comments raised in objection to the proposal.
Mr Garcia briefly summarised the results of the assessments relating to:
· Land use
· Design and heritage
· Impact on amenity of the surrounding residential properties, including the impacts on sunlight and daylight;
· Overshadowing and impact on outlook, privacy and sense of enclosure at Green Dragon Yard; and
· Impact on outlook, privacy and sense of enclosure at 22-30 Osborn Street.
Finally Mr Garcia provided a summary of proposed transport and servicing procedures and outlined the proposed planning obligations.
Officers considered that the application, complied with policy so should be granted.
The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.
Matt Cassini and Ahmed Boudeffeur expressed concerns about the scheme regarding the following issues:
· The application included little effort to mitigate the impact on local residents.
· Applicant’s public engagement had been inadequate and misleading.
· The proposal would have a detrimental impact on community safety.
· Assumptions in the application have gone unchallenged.
· There is insufficient evidence for an increased demand for hotel rooms.
· Concerns about fire risks and escape routes.
· Construction noise and dust and impact on air pollution.
· Vehicles would cause an obstruction when turning in the street.
· Overshadowing and loss of daylight to neighbouring residents.
· Loss of residents’ privacy by being overlooked.
· Access to Green Dragon Yard would be hindered.
· Detrimental impact on waste management.
· Detrimental impacts on biodiversity and health.
Gareth Jackson and Kevin Francis addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant and made the following points:
· Consultation with residents had been thorough.
· Demand for increased hotel places is evident.
· The applicant has made changes to the proposals to address residents’ concerns.
· Significant efforts have been taken to ensure fire safety.
· Whilst the applicant had made genuine efforts to obtain floor plans of Green Dragon Yard, none were available.
· Daylight tests indicate only moderate loss of daylight with levels consistent with those in the locality as indicated in the officer’s report.
Questions to Officers
In response to questions, officers explained that the Highways Service had reported no significant concerns with potential impact on the street including parking, turning, impact on local businesses etc. Officers provided further detail on the tests used to determine the loss of daylight and sunlight to affected properties. Further to questions regarding fire risk concerns of objectors, officers advised that fire strategies were outside the scope of planning and are addressed at building control stage. Officers also responded to questions around land use, specifically as to why this site is considered suitable for a hotel and would prove challenging to provide housing.
Questions to Applicants team
In response to question about the refuse arrangements the applicant’s representative provided details of how the hotel’s proposed refuse management would mitigate the impact on neighbouring roads through a ‘just in time’ system’.
On a vote of 2 in favour 2 against, with the Chair exercising a casting vote in favour, the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That planning permission be GRANTED at City Hotel, 12-20 Osborn Street, London, E1 6TE (PA/19/01301) SUBJECT to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the following planning obligations set out in paragraphs 8.2 and 8.3 of the report
2. That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to negotiate the legal agreement. If within three months of the resolution the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director for Place is delegated power to refuse planning permission.
3. That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to impose conditions and informatives to address the matters set out in paragraphs 8.6 and 8.7 of the report.
Supporting documents:
- PA1901301 - Arbor City Hotel, item 5.1 PDF 3 MB
- PA1901301 - Arbor City Hotel -Update Report 10 October 2019, item 5.1 PDF 142 KB
- Case Officer's Presentation - City Hotel, item 5.1 PDF 3 MB