Agenda item

The council's Statement of Case for appeals in relation to New City Court 4-26 St Thomas Street, SE1 9RS - 2021 scheme (21/AP/1361 and 21/AP/1364)

Minutes:

The planning officer presented the report to the committee.

 

There were no ward councillors present to speak.

 

The committee discussed this report and asked further questions of planning officers.

 

A motion to agree the recommendations in the report and addendum was moved, seconded and put to the vote and declared carried.

 

RESOLVED:

 

1.  That it be noted that appeals for non-determination have been received in respect of planning application reference 21/AP/1361 and application for listed building consent reference 21/AP/1364, that these major applications which would normally have been considered and determined by planning committee but will now be determined by the Secretary of State.

 

2.  Note that a planning inspector has been appointed to report to the Secretary of State and that a planning inquiry has been listed with a time estimate of 14 days commencing on the 19 July 2022.

 

3.  That the Statement of Case at Appendix 1 which has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate and includes the likely reasons for refusal of the applications had they not been appealed for non-determination has been considered and endorsed. These likely reasons for refusal relate to the following topics:

 

-  The proposed development would give rise to less than substantial harm to a number of designated heritage assets, and the harm is not outweighed by public benefits.

 

-  Poor design, harm to townscape and local character (including sustainable design matters)

 

-  Lack of a section 106 agreement.

 

-  Other matters where the proposal does not comply with development plan policies (daylight and sunlight impacts to surrounding properties)

 

-  In the absence of an appropriate planning permission for replacement extensions and external elements that would ensure the grade II listed buildings are made weather-tight (following demolition of the modern extensions) and are rebuilt with a scheme in an appropriate design, materials and detailing, the proposal fails to safeguard the special historic and architectural interest of the listed buildings on the site.

 

Supporting documents: