There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 8^th July 2019.

The Committee RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 8th July 2019 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To RESOLVE that:

1)   in the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and

2)   in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

3)    To NOTE the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Strategic Development Committee.

The Committee RESOLVED that:

1)         In the event of changes being made to recommendations by the Committee, the task of formalising the wording of those changes is delegated to the Corporate Director, Place along the broad lines indicated at the meeting; and

2)         In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Corporate Director, Place is delegated authority to do so, provided always that the Corporate Director does not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

3)         To note the procedure for hearing objections at meetings of the Development Committee and the meeting guidance.

There were none.

There were none.

Proposal:

Demolition of the existing Hatton House (Student Accommodation Use Class C2) and No.357 Mile End Road (Use Class D1 Non-Residential Institution) and the construction of a new building for teaching and educational purposes (Use Class D1) along with associated access, public realm works, landscaping and cycle parking

Recommendation:

That the Committee resolve to APPROVE planning permission subject to Any direction by The London Mayor, the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure planning obligations and conditions.

Click for case file here

Paul Buckenham (Development Manager, Planning Services) introduced the application for the demolition of the existing Hatton House (Student Accommodation Use Class C2) and No.357 Mile End Road (Use Class D1 Non-Residential Institution) and the construction of a new building for teaching and educational purposes.

Patrick Harmsworth (Senior Planning Officer) presented the application, providing an overview of the site location, the existing buildings and the local heritage issues. Public consultation had been carried out resulting in 7 representations in objection, as set out in the Committee report and the update report. The concerns related to a number of issues around lack of active frontage along Mile End Road, the loss of No.357 Mile End Road as a historically significant building, bulk and height of the proposed development amongst other issues.

The Committee were advised of the public benefits of the proposals in terms of  the:

•           high quality education and research facilities;

•           new public access to the west bank of Regent’s Canal from Mile End Road along with a widened canal-side path;

•           public realm and landscaping enhancements across the site including two new public squares;

•           the provision of a new community space facility.

In terms of land use, the policy supported the growth of good quality education facilities to meet demand and offer educational choice. It was also noted that the existing Hatton House student accommodation was no longer fit for purpose. In the longer term, it was intended that the student accommodation, lost through this application, would be re – provided, as part of the University’s wider student accommodation strategy. Officers were therefore satisfied that the loss of the student accommodation in this instance was acceptable

Regarding the heritage issues, officers noted the proposals had been designed to preserve and enhance the setting of the Lock Keeper’s Cottage.

Regarding the loss of No.357 Mile End Road, Officers drew attention to the modern day alterations and extension to the building, the lack of historic internal features and the limitations on its use given its proximity to a railway line.

In view of the above, Officers considered that proposal and the loss of No 357. Mile End Road would result in less than substantial harm to the Regents Canal Conservation Area and the setting of the Clinton Road Conservation Area.

With regards to the public benefits test, it was considered that the key public benefits of the scheme (as highlighted above, along with the plans to jointly producing a masterplan framework for the QMUL campus) would outweigh any harm to heritage assets.

Regarding the amenity issues, the proposal would not give rise to any undue privacy and overlooking issues. In terms of the sunlight and daylight issues, the development would broadly be policy compliant.

In highways, servicing and transportation terms, the scheme was considered acceptable subject to the use of appropriate conditions.

The Committee also noted the planning obligations. Officers were recommending that the application was granted planning permission.

The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.1