Skip to content

Questions on matters relating to the work of the committee


COLPAI Project on former Richard Cloudesley School site

A Member stated that she understood that the developer of the COLPAI project on the former Richard Cloudesley School site had requested to discharge Condition 5, which required the retention of the trees in the boundary of the site adjoining the Golden Lane Estate allotments. The developer was now of the view that these could not be saved. The Member asked the Chairman if he was able to confirm that all the correct consultation would be undertaken and that proper consideration of possible changes during detail design had been explored to enable the trees to be retained.


The Chairman confirmed that an application to discharge Condition 5 had been submitted to both the City and Islington to seek the removal of the existing trees. He informed the Committee that an arboricultural report had been submitted which concluded that the trees need to be removed to enable the development to be built. In accordance with standard procedures, Open Spaces had been consulted on the submission and it was anticipated the it would be determined under delegated authority in due course.


The Chairman went on to state that he was aware that approximately 30 letters of objection to the submission had been received to date despite the fact that no neighbourhood consultation was carried out as it was not required for the discharge of conditions.


A Member commented that, given that the developer in this case was the City of London, he was very disappointed that the designs could not be changed to allow the trees to remain.


The Chairman stated that he intended to discuss this matter further with the Chief Planning Officer going forward.


A Member questioned whether the developer might consider planting replacement trees on the site. Officers noted this suggestion.


Another Member agreed that it was unfortunate that the existing trees could not be retained and asked that consideration be given to bringing the matter to this Committee for further discussion.


‘The Tulip’

A Member questioned if the Committee were able to have a briefing on this project now that it was in the public domain.


The Chairman reported that the developer had notified the City Corporation that their application would be submitted in the last week and that they were happy for the details of this to go public. A standard press response was provided from the City Corporation at this stage. The application was now going through the usual processes and it was anticipated that this would come before the Committee for formal consideration in April 2019.


Back to top of page