Agenda item
Land Known As Bishopsgate Goods Yard
Minutes:
6.1 The designated Planning Officer briefly introduced the application. The proposal relates to the reserved matters for Plot 1 of the Bishopsgate Goodsyard development. Plot 1 would be an office building on the northern boundary of the site. The building would cross the Borough boundary, with the western part in London Borough of Hackney (LBH) and the eastern part in London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH).
6.2 There were current negotiations around the reserved matters involving some aspects outside of the parameters set out in the approved Design Guide for the hybrid application. These aspects would need to be decided by a Non Material Amendment (NMA) application to LBH and a similar application to LBTH. These changes to the design guide were the focus of this pre application meeting.
6.3 Jonathan Clarke, representing the architecture firm Gensler, addressed the Sub-Committee giving a presentation on the current proposals.
The designated Planning Officer stated confirmed that following publication of the meeting papers options under consideration had been narrowed down to one. A higher plinth. However, this resulted in the proposals being now within the agreed parameters and therefore the plinth was no longer under consideration. The Sub-Committee was now only considering what had been outlined with the minimum and maximum parameters e.g. curved corners, and the lobby space inside near to the TfL infrastructure.
The Sub-Committee noted that they were not considering any proposals related to plot 2.
The representatives for the applicant had brought with them an architectural model which Committee Members briefly examined.
6.4 During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the following points were noted:
· Responding to a question about the TfL box, the applicant replied that it as unclear as why it was set that way that it was. It was understood that there was a previous architectural model with the minimum and maximum parameters set around that model and that was locked in around the TfL box. It was noted that there was a two metre offset from TfL that had to be respected with access and safety and the applicant could build around it that could be temporary which require some screening elements to be removed once every year and once every five years for maintenance;
· Replying to a question about how much affordable office space would be offered, the designated Planning Officer responded that currently that detail was not yet available. The applicant added that 7.5% of the area would be discounted 60% in the LBH (approximately 3000 square metres);
· The Sub-Committee noted that under the proposals that the majority of the office space was in the LBH and the housing was in the LBTH
· Responding to the question about whether there was a need for all the proposed office space, in light changes in working habits i.e. more working from home and less time spent in the office, the designated Planning Officer replied that that the site was in a priority office area and would deliver a lot office space to meet a need as identified in the local plan.
In light of the Sub-Committee members now having to consider less aspects of the application going forward, the Sub-Committee agreed unanimously that the future application should not come back to Committee. It would instead be decided by delegated authority.
END OF MEETING
Duration of the meeting: 6.30pm - 8.33pm
Date of next meeting: 6 December 2023 (Planning Sub-Committee meeting)
Councillor Steve Race
Chair of the Planning Sub-Committee
Contact:
Gareth Sykes,
Governance Officer
Email: governance@hackney.gov.uk.
Supporting documents:
PDF 116 KB