Agenda item
Call In: 2 Gladstone Place: Granting of Development Lease
(Time allocated: 30 Minutes)
Minutes:
Councillor Alibor Choudhury in the chair for this agenda item.
Before the Call-in was presented Suki Binjal, Head of the Non-Contentious Legal Team, gave clarification regarding Committee members who were also members of the Development or Strategic Development Committee. She informed the Committee that the planning application regarding the development was still pending. As a result planning applications could not be discussed at the meeting. The item in question was related to the lease only.
The stand-in Chair, Councillor Alibor Choudhury, invited Councillor Marc Francis on behalf of the Call-in Members to present his reasons for the Call-in.
Councillor Francis explained that the Call-in Members viewed the decision to authorise agreement of final terms on the lease arrangement as precipitate and felt that Cabinet authorisation should be withheld for a period of three months or until a planning application was submitted that supported the requirements of local residents.
He further explained to Committee members that the site had been closed since November 2005. This had left a demand for a major supermarket in the area by local residents, forcing them to travel longer distances to supermarkets in the surrounding area. Councillor Francis informed the Committee that there was widespread local concern regarding the proposed development. He considered that a final decision should not be taken until full public consultation had taken place and that the Cabinet decision of January 2008 would reduce the Council’s ability to influence the shape of the development.
Committee Members put their questions to Councillor Francis. Councillor Stephanie Eaton enquired how definite the proposals were about providing a supermarket. Councillor Francis informed her that this could not be guaranteed, but despite this he did believe a revision of the development was required as the number of flats being proposed were detrimental to the needs of the local area.
Councillor Mohammed Abdus Salique enquired whether with the current shortage of housing Councillor Francis was happy with the housing and retail development being proposed. Councillor Francis informed him that it was important that the general mix was correct and that the Council should use its power in order to ensure an agreed solution is reached.
Councillor Shahed Ali enquired whether the loss of a car park on the existing site would hinder existing business in the area. Councillor Francis explained that the Council should be able to use its powers to influence the number of parking spaces retained.
In his response to the Call-in Councillor Joshua Peck detailed the main reason for giving a development lease to Reef Estates Ltd/Goldquest. He explained that as the freeholder of the site the Council owned the land but could not dictate what could be built there. This could only be achieved through negotiation of the lease. Councillor Peck added that a condition in the lease was that if planning permission had not been granted within 14 months of the lease agreement, the development proposal could be rescinded.
Questions were then posed to Councillor Peck from the Committee. Councillor Alibor Choudhury enquired whether Reef Estates Ltd had stated they would pull out of the negotiation of the lease if the consultation period was extended to three months. Councillor Peck informed him that he was not aware that this was the case. The Cabinet’s decision on the lease had been taken not on this basis but in order to facilitate the provision of a suitable development including a supermarket.
Councillor Choudhury further enquired if restrictions had been imposed on the number of flats that could be built on the site. Councillor Peck explained that this was a matter for the Strategic Development Committee to determine. The lease did not place an upper limit on the number of flats.
Following debate the Committee voted on whether to refer the item back to Cabinet for further consideration. It was RESOLVED
That the report be referred back to the Cabinet for further consideration of the alternative course of action proposed in the Call-in requisition as follows:
‘That this item should be re-presented to Cabinet, along with a summary of the views of local residents on the proposed redevelopment, details of the planning requirements of the Roman Road Conservation Area, a further update on the progress of the formal planning application and a full explanation of why LBTH is in a stronger negotiating position than is usual with a developer.
Cabinet should withhold authorisation for the Interim Service Head of Asset Strategy, Capital Delivery & Property Services to agree final terms on the lease rearrangements for a period of three months or until a planning application is submitted that appears likely to enjoy the support of local residents’.
Supporting documents:
-
Call in cover sheet Gladstone Place, item 6.1
PDF 28 KB
-
2 Gladstone Place Call In Report, item 6.1
PDF 38 KB