Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, please see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are reminded to declare the nature of the interest and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it’s the Members’ responsibility to declare any interests form and to update their register of interest form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of your interest, you are advised to seek advice prior to the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services

contact: Linda Walker, Director of Legal and Monitoring Officer, Tel: 0207 364 4348

Although no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made; the following Members received emails from residents regarding the submitted applications: Councillor Iqbal Hossain, Councillor Amin Rahman, Councillor Shubo Hussain, Councillor Gulam Kibria Choudhury and Councillor Kamrul Hussain.

Councillor Kamrul Hussain also noted that he is a Member of the Whitechapel Art Gallery but was not involved in any discussions regarding item 5.2.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Development Committee held on 13 November and 25 November 2024.

To follow

The minutes of the Strategic Development Committee meeting held on 13 November 2024 were approved and signed by the Chair. The minutes of the meeting held on 25 November will be submitted at a future meeting.

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 Housing and Regeneration 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 Housing and Regeneration 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 Housing and Regeneration 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 Housing and Regeneration 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 for the Strategic Development Committee.

There were no deferred items for consideration.

Update Report noted.

Paul Buckenham introduced the applications for the redevelopment of the site to provide an embassy (Sui Generis use class), involving the refurbishment and restoration of the Johnson Smirke Building (Grade II listed), partial demolition, remodelling and refurbishment of Seaman's Registry (Grade II listed), with alterations to the west elevation of the building, the retention, part demolition, alterations and extensions to Murray House and Dexter House, the erection of a standalone entrance pavilion building, alterations to the existing boundary wall and demolition of substation, associated public realm and landscaping, highway works, car and cycle parking and all ancillary and associated works.

Mr Buckenham informed the Committee that on 14 October 2024, the Secretary of State for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, Rt Hon Angela Rayner, requested that these applications be referred to her for consideration. A local inquiry will be held on 11 February 2025 for approximately eight days. The Committee were requested to confirm to the Secretary of State, that had the Council had the opportunity to determine the applications;

-      Planning Permission would have been granted subject to planning

conditions and obligations, and

-      Listed Building Consent would have been granted subject to conditions.

After the Committee has made its decision, the Secretary of State will be notified.

Ronan Murray, Principal Planning Officer, provided a presentation to accompany the application, including the location, road network, surroundings, neighbouring residential estate and existing buildings, two of which are Grade II listed. Mr Murray then gave background details on the site and noted that planning permission was granted in 2017 for an office-led redevelopment but it was not implemented and permission expired in 2020.

In 2021, an application was submitted for use as an Embassy and Officers recommended the Strategic Development Committee to grant it. This was refused by the Committee in 2022. This current application is identical to the previous one. At that time reasons for refusal were noted as:

·       Adverse impacts on safety and security, which would place increased strain on local police resources.

·       Adverse impacts on local tourism due to concerns over the effect of potential protests, acts of terrorism and related security mitigation measures on the backdrop of national significant tourist attractions.

·       Increased congestion of the local highway network, vehicular and pedestrian activity, due to potential protests and events.

·       Adverse impacts on heritage related assets, as a result of potential protests, acts of terrorism and related security mitigation measures.

The Committee affirmed that although the aforementioned reasons for refusal for the 2021 application are a material planning issues for Officers, there has been no sufficient evidence to support these reasons. No clear evidence has been presented that an Embassy Land use would cause these adverse impacts.

Mr Murray outlined the proposed design, which is smaller than the initial application and has better views of the listed building. The Committee were then informed of the main issues regarding the proposal, which include:

-      Public Consultation

-      Land Use

-      Heritage and Design

-  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.1

Under the planning code of conduct;  Members must hear the entire application and must withdraw from the Committee if they arrive whilst it is being heard. Although Councillor Kamrul Hussain and Councillor Amin Rahman were late to return to the Chamber, the Chair agreed to restart the application.

Update report noted.

Paul Buckenham introduced the application  for the demolition of 101 Whitechapel High Street, 6 Commercial Street and the western annex of the Canon Barnett Primary School; partial demolition and partial retention of 102 - 105 Whitechapel High Street (with internal alterations) and 2 – 4 Commercial Street (façade retained); and redevelopment to provide buildings ranging from ground plus 17 storeys, comprising office floorspace (Class E(g)), community hall (Class F2); relocation and expansion of the existing school playground and School Annex (Class F1); associated car and cycle parking, hard and soft landscaping and other associated works. The Officer’s recommendation is to refuse the application.

Robin Bennett provided a presentation to accompany the application, which included the site and surroundings. The application relates to two plots, plot 1 will from Commercial Street and Whitechapel Road was proposed as office building, 18 stories high building, with a single storey community hall. Plot 2 proposed a part-single part 5 storey extension to Canon Barnett Primary School, and a new school playground.

Members were informed that an earlier proposal on this site for an office building of up to 15  storeys, was refused by the Strategic Development Committee on 22 March 2022. Reasons for refusal were;

-      its impact on Whitechapel High Street Conservation Area and heritage impact.

-      the scheme was outside the Tall Buildings Zone.

-      the development caused very severe adverse daylight and sunlight impacts.

-      the loss of a language school.

Supporters of the scheme believe the proposed height is in context, it is well designed and respects the conservation area. Other responses highlighted the economic benefits, the school benefits and the improvements to public safety. Objectors to the scheme believe it is inappropriately located outside a Tall Buildings Zone and taller than the proposal that was refused. The scheme has adverse design and heritage impacts, adverse daylight/sunlight and privacy impacts. It was noted that Historic England and the Victorian Society also raised objections.

Mr Bennett informed the Committee of the acceptable land use for the proposed site and the anticipated loss of retail if the scheme were to be granted. It also contradicts several Development and Local Plan policies. Details on the loss of existing education and training spaces resulting from the proposal were noted. Those specific uses are protected under Community Facilities policies.

The Committee were informed that the proposed use of the Community Hall has not been defined. Mr Bennett noted that the scheme does not fall within a designated Tall Buildings Zone, nor enhance the character of the area and detracts from heritage assets and key views. This contravenes Local Plan (2020) Policy D.DH6, London Plan (2021) Policies D3, D9, HC1 and SD4.

The detailed designs  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.2