Agenda item
2 Jubilee Street, London E1 3HE (PA/16/02806)
Minutes:
An update report was tabled.
The Chair informed all present that a late speaking request had been made by the proprietor of the Grade II listed premises The George Tavern who wished to speak against the application. He advised that he had exercised discretion to permit the objector to make a representation since, hearing from those in the community on how the proposal would affect the vicinity would help the Committee in its decision making.
The Area Planning Manager (East) then introduced the report which concerned the refurbishment of an existing office building and a single-storey roof extension and demolition of part of the existing buildings to the north and redevelopment to create a six-storey residential block together with amenity areas cycle parking and refuse recycling stores and new B1 office floor space at 2 Jubilee Street London E1. The proposed redevelopment of the site would deliver a mixed-use facility. The Planning Case Officer then presented the report highlighting the salient features which included re-provision of business space, provision of 37 dwellings with amenity areas and an affordable housing contribution of 35% equating to 9 residential units. The application site neighboured the Grade II listed The George Tavern and the Commercial Road conservation area. The relevant planning matters were land use, design, amenity, highways and legal contributions. Members were informed that there were some impacts on amenity and sunlight on the neighbouring developments but these were accessed acceptable as these impacts did not affect habitable rooms.
Responding to Members’ questions the Planning Case Officer provided the following additional information:
- Referencing Para.8.130 of the report and loss of light issues, the Committee was informed that the BRE guidance does not specify levels around loss of light for non-habitable rooms; notwithstanding Officers had assessed these. The windows that would be impacted in the zone R7 at figure 9 of the report (namely the non-residential premises adjacent to the George Tavern) were small.
- Concerning ventilation and noise disturbance mitigation measures, the Noise Specialist informed Members that the design of the residential premises included exchange ventilation and purge ventilation mechanisms. These would mitigate noise disturbance and overheating in the residential units and eliminate the need to open windows for ventilation and cooling. The mechanisms to be installed would be a mix of mechanical and passive ventilation to insure that costs could be kept down.
- Concerning the height of the proposed development comparative to its surroundings, the Committee was informed that the height of the development would be 5 storeys plus 1 set-back storey. The proposal was comparable to the height of properties in nearby which were between 4 and 7 storeys.
- Concerning integration of the proposed development into its existing surroundings, the Committee was informed that objections associated with design would be addressed through the use of sympathetic materials.
- Highways impacts had been dealt with via a construction management plan and fire safety provision complied with regulations.
- Consultation with the neighbouring estate (around impacts of loss of light) had been carried out by means of statutory consultation required to be undertaken by the Council. All properties had been sent individual letters.
The Committee then heard from the objector. She informed the Committee that:
· She was the proprietor of The George Tavern.
· The premises were licensed to provide live entertainment until 2:30am on Thursdays and until 3:00am on Fridays and Saturdays.
· The proposed development would cause some overlooking to her property on the north-side; in particular the first and second floors of the property would be affected. Additionally, on the third floor there would be some loss of light to north-facing rooms.
She thanked to the Council for recommending the Deed of Easement against the proposed development which had recently been agreed.
The Objector, responding to Members’ questions, also provided the following additional information:
- Mitigation against future noise complaints would be addressed via a Deed of Easement on the proposed residential dwellings.
- She had been late in making a request to speak because she had been absent at the time that the Planning meeting notification letter had been delivered.
The Committee then heard from the Agent on behalf of the Applicant. He informed Members that:
· TheAapplicant had worked to overcome noise issues through the provision of the exchange ventilation mechanisms described. These would enable those intending to occupy the residential units to coexist with the nearby entertainment venue.
· The existing office unit adjacent to the venue would be refurbished and would act as a further noise buffer between the residential units and the George Tavern.
· The proposal would bring benefit to the area in that it would enhance and regenerate the otherwise derelict site.
Responding to Members’ questions, the Agent provided the following additional information:
- The Deed of Easement would form part of the legal agreement. The Legal Adviser to the Committee informed Members that, since the Council had sold its party to this site (this was a former Council premises), it could not be party to the Deed of Easement. He further advised that the Deed of Easement would be effective upon the residential dwellings and its purpose was to give legal permission to the George Tavern to continue its activities reference noise generated by live events.
- The freehold of the site belonged to the Council and a199 year leasehold had been purchased by the applicant.
- The Deed of Easement had not been referenced before this time since it had been agreed in December 2018. It concerned permissions related to levels of noise emerging from the George Tavern.
- Concerning highway safety during the construction period, the Committee was informed that no concerns had been raised by Highways during the consultation period.
Having heard all representations, the Committee indicated that it did not wish to discuss or debate the application further and moved to vote on the recommendation. The Chair proposed and on an unanimous vote in favour, the Committee:
RESOLVED
That the application at 2 Jubilee Street, London E1 3HE be GRANTED for Demolition of part of the existing buildings (to the north) containing 517sqm of floor space; retention and refurbishment of remaining existing office (665sqm) building (on southern part of site) and single storey roof extension (195sqm) to create new B1 office floor space; creation of a new build six storey (with setback top floor) residential block to the north to provide 37 dwellings (6 x studio, 15 x 1 bed, 12 x 2 bed, 2 x 3 bed, 2 x 4 bed units) together with amenity areas, cycle parking and refuse/recycling stores subject to obligations and informatives and conditions outlined in the report.
Supporting documents:
- 2 Jubilee Street Committee Report (PA-16-2806), item 4.2 PDF 2 MB
- 2 Jubilee Street Appx 1 and 2, item 4.2 PDF 229 KB
- 2 Jubilee Street Appx 3, item 4.2 PDF 1 MB
- Update Report - 4.2, item 4.2 PDF 57 KB