Proposal

Mixed use redevelopment of site including part demolition, part retention, part extension of existing buildings alongside erection of complete new buildings ranging in height from four to eight storeys above a shared basement, to contain a maximum 9 residential units (Class C3) up to 10,739m2 (GIA) hotel floor space (Class C1) up to 3,529m2 (GIA) employment floorspace (Class B1), up to 358m2 (GIA) flexible office and retail floorspace at ground level (Class A1, A2, A3 and B1) and provision of Public House (Class A4) along with associated landscaping and public realm improvements, cycle parking provision, plant and storage.

Recommendation

Grant planning permission subject to conditions and s106 agreement

Update report was tabled.

Councillor Kevin Brady proposed and Councillor Kahar Chowdhury seconded a proposal to remove the 12 month restriction on the opening hours of  the A4 public house. On a vote of 2 in favour and 2 against with the Chair using a casting vote against, this proposal was not accepted.

On a vote of 4 in favour and 0 against the Committee RESOLVED:

1.             That subject to any direction by the Mayor of London, planning permission is GRANTED at 114 - 150 Hackney Road, London, E2 7QL for the following development:

·       Mixed use redevelopment of site including part demolition, part retention, part extension of existing buildings alongside erection of complete new buildings ranging in height from four to eight storeys above a shared basement, to contain a maximum 9 residential units (Class C3) up to 10,739 m² (GIA) hotel floorspace (Class C1) up to 3,529 m² (GIA) employment floorspace (Class B1),  up to 358 m² (GIA) flexible office and retail floorspace at ground level (Class A1, A2, A3 and B1) and provision of Public House (Class A4) along with associated landscaping and public realm improvements, cycle parking provision, plant and storage.(PA/20/00034)

2.             Subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report dated 14^th January 2021.

3.             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.

4.             That the Corporate Director of Place is delegated the power to impose conditions and informatives to address the matters set out in the Committee report dated 14th January 2021 and the additional conditions set out in the Committee reported dated 11^th February 2021.

[1]      Prior to occupation of the hotel and the bar as identified on Drawing 1129_PL-GA-100 Rev E hereby approved, a Hotel Operation Management Plan (HBOMP) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The HBOMP shall include as a minimum, written details of the following information:

                        i.         Statement of Intent;

                       ii.         Hours of operation and licensable activities permitted;

                      iii.         Organisational responsibility for the hotel (including its bar) and the management team structure;

                     iv.         Typical staffing rota and staff qualifications;

                       v.         Details of the 24/7 front of house staffing level arrangement including details of door staff arrangements 

                     vi.         Security strategy (e.g. entry policy, drugs and intoxication policy);

                    vii.         Physical and managerial noise controls processes and procedures to deal with customer dispersal strategy, customer queue management controls and management of smoking area;

                   viii.         In collaboration with the Class A4 unit operator, details of a community liaison group including terms of reference which, for the avoidance of doubt, will include representation from the Columbia Tenants and Residents Association;

                     ix.         Details of a complaints and investigation log including who takes ownership of serving as lead point of contact for dealing and responding  ...  view the full decision text for item 4

Update report was tabled.

Gareth Gwynne introduced the report for the mixed use redevelopment of  the site to provide a maximum 9 residential units, hotel floor space, commercial space, the provision of Public House along with associated works. He advised of the issues raised in the update report, containing additional representations.

Daria Halip (Planning Services) presented the application, providing a brief overview of the scheme and the surrounding area.

This application for planning permission was considered by the Development Committee on 14^th January 2021.

The application was deferred by Members for a committee site visit.

The committee also sought information on the following items:

a.       The condition limiting the late night opening hours of the Public House to 12 months

b.       The rent levels for the Public House with a view to providing longer term affordable rents

c.        Review the radius for the provision of the meanwhile off site temporary venue for the Public House

d.       Daylight/ Sunlight Impacts on Vaughan Estate, particularly with regard to the existing architectural constraints

e.       Conditions regarding the use of the roof top area

f.         Management of the footfall from the scheme including details of the joint management for the operation of A4 and the hotel bar

The report and presentation addressed each of these issues as set out below:

Consultation

The Committee were reminded of the details of the statutory consultation carried out by the Council and the applicant’s which was set out in the report.

It was confirmed that the Council’s consultation went above and beyond requirements involving engagement with George Loveless House. 109 letters were sent to all registered properties in this development.

In addition, the Applicant had carried out non statutory consultation including a public exhibition and had offered to meet with the Columbia Tenants and Residents Association. The applicant had also engaged with the Friends of Joiners Arms.

Therefore it was considered that adequate consultation had been carried out.

Daylight/ sunlight impacts, Vaughan Estate

The Committee were reminded of the outcome of the assessment as detailed in the report, particularly the issues around:

·       The existing site constraints that acted as a barrier to sunlight and daylight exposure.

·       Details of the gains and losses in daylight/ sunlight, compared to the extant scheme.

Overall, it was considered that the proposed development would have a minor adverse impact onto the daylight/ sunlight conditions to these properties.

Furthermore, when taking the extant consent as material planning consideration and the significant public benefits secured with the current scheme, the impact is considered to be on balance acceptable.

Management of the Hotel Bar and the Public House

The Committee noted details of the separate conditions regulating the above, including the requirement to submit an  Operation Management plan and to establish a Community Liaison group to deal with any issues. The wording of the condition for the hotel was set out in the updated Committee.

Use of rooftop area

The Committee were reminded of the restrictions on the use of the rooftop area.

A compliance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4

Proposal:

Mixed use redevelopment of site including part demolition, part retention, part extension of existing buildings alongside erection of complete new buildings ranging in height from four to eight storeys above a shared basement, to contain a maximum 9 residential units (Class C3) up to 10,739m2 (GIA) hotel floor space (Class C1) up to 3,529m2 (GIA) employment floorspace (Class B1), up to 358m2 (GIA) flexible office and retail floorspace at ground level (Class A1, A2, A3 and B1) and provision of Public House (Class A4) along with associated landscaping and public realm improvements, cycle parking provision, plant and storage.

Recommendation:

Grant planning permission subject to conditions and s106 agreement

Update report tabled.

Councillor Abdul Mukit MBE proposed and Councillor Kahar Chowdhury seconded that the consideration of the application be deferred for the reasons set out below.

On a vote of 4 in favour and 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED:

1.       That the consideration of the planning application is DEFERRED at 114 - 150 Hackney Road, London, E2 7QL for a Committee Site Visit to better understand the site and its context, the impact on residents and the consultation.

The Committee also sought further information on:

·       The condition limiting the late night opening hours of the Public House to 12 months.

·       The rent levels for the Public House with a view to providing longer term affordable rents.

·       Review the radius for the provision of the meanwhile off – site temporary venue

·       Daylight/ Sunlight Impacts on Vaughan Estate, particularly with the view of the existing architectural constrains

·       Conditions regarding use of the roof area

·       Management of the footfall from the scheme including details of the joint management for the operation of A4 and the hotel bar.

Update report tabled.

Jerry Bell introduced the report for the mixed use redevelopment of the site to provide a maximum 9 residential units, hotel floor space, commercial space, the provision of Public House along with associated works.

Daria Halip (Planning Services)  presented the application, describing the site and surrounds and details of the extant planning permission. Consultation had been carried out. The presentation summarised the outcome of the objections and that they mainly related to the impacts from the proposed hotel use, amenity issues, the highway impacts and other issues.

Officers drew to the Committee’s attention  the following points:

·       All the land uses had been established as acceptable in principle with the extant consent, the hotel use is the only new use introduced with this proposal

·       The similarities with the extant scheme in terms of the height, massing and the design. The amenity impacts were considered to be broadly comparable to the extant consent with only some limited minor additional impacts surrounding daylight/sunlight.

·       Details of the heritage assessment. The public benefits of the scheme are considered to outweigh the identified harm to heritage, (that would be at the lower end of less than substantial harm), and satisfies the relevant policy tests.

·       That the provision of the hotel use satisfied the relevant tests in policy, given the size, and scale of the scheme, it’s location and the  distance with nearby visitor accommodation and the adequate servicing arrangements. Officers drew attention to the challenges of providing residential development at the site. In view of this, it is not considered the scheme compromises the supply of housing land.

·       Officers were mindful of the concerns around noise and ASB from the new hotel. Due to the mitigation measures (around controlling this), which were detailed, Officers considered that these issues can be successfully managed. 

·       The scheme would result in a number of public benefits that go beyond those set out in Council’s Planning Obligations SPD. Some of the main benefits included:  Provision of financial contributions for affordable housing and the re-provision of a Public House for the LGBT+ community, to replace the former Joiner’s Arms Public House, (with a better internal layout and a contributions towards fit out costs including to deal with acoustic breakout controls), and a financial obligation towards provision of meanwhile use space for the Friends of the Joiners Arms to operate temporarily during construction period and until the permanent venue is made available on site.

·       Other benefits included: new public realm and landscaping, bespoke Section 106 obligations in relation to careers program, working with local HE and FE colleges and construction & end phase training and apprenticeship programs

·       Transport matters were acceptable.

·       In view of the merits of the application, Officers considered that it should be granted planning permission.

The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the Committee.

Penny Creed and Kevin Mckenna  addressed the Committee  in objection, as members of a local Tenants and Residents Association . They expressed concern about:

·        The proposed night time economy orientated hotel, which was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5