Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Mary Durcan, Dawn Frampton, Deputy Marian Fredericks, Deputy Brian Mooney, Ian Bishop-Laggett, Deputy Michael Cassidy, Deputy Natasha Lloyd-Owen, Deputy Alastair Moss and Shailendra Umradia.

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes of the meeting held on 27 June 2023.

The Sub-Committee considered the public minutes of the last meeting held on 27 June 2023 and approved them as a correct record.

Report of the Planning & Development Director.

The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Planning and Development Director concerning demolition of the existing building and the erection of a part-63 storey (284.68 AOD) and part-22 storey (112.30 AOD) building plus basement, including office use (Class E); a publicly accessible multi-purpose space at ground floor level, part Level 02 and part Level 03 for a flexible use including: retail, food and beverage, drinking establishment, learning, community use, exhibition and/or performance space (Sui Generis); a public viewing gallery (Sui Generis), public realm improvements, cycle parking, servicing, vehicle lifts, refuse facilities and other works associated with the development including access and highways works.

The Town Clerk referred to those papers set out within the main agenda pack as well as the Officer presentation slides and an addendum that had been separately circulated and published.

Officers presented the application, highlighting that the application site was located on the west side of Bishopsgate adjacent to Tower 42, within the Eastern Cluster in the current Local Plan and also within the Eastern Cluster in the emerging Local Plan. It was also in the Renewal Opportunity Area.

Members were shown images of the existing cluster showing the nature of tall buildings in the immediate vicinity and the future Eastern Cluster with permitted schemes. Members were informed that 8 Bishopsgate had recently opened and 40 Leadenhall was close to completion. The Officer stated that the site was not in a conservation area but on the opposite side of Bishopsgate was St Helen’s Place Conservation area and there were other listed buildings and heritage assets in the immediate vicinity.

Members were informed that the existing building was built in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It was a well-mannered building in this location and was typical of many commercial buildings in the City and across

The Sub-Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director detailing development and advertisement applications determined by the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director or those so authorised under their delegated powers since the report to the last meeting.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director detailing development applications received by the Department of the Built Environment since the report to the last meeting.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

A Member stated that on the planning portal, the application noted in the current list for Cripplegate for “repairs and minor alterations to the existing windows and window framing of Crescent House, including stripping, repairing and redecorating existing window frames; replacement of existing single glazing with vacuum glazing panels and associated works” had a number of objections. 

The Member stated that a year ago, the Committee had approved a pilot project to test three options for the window and facade refurbishment of the Grade II* listed Crescent House.  She stated that the project was yet to deliver any results and the heritage glass had yet to arrive on site to enable the first part of the pilot to be completed and tested. The Member stated that residents felt they had waited for the pilot project proposed by the applicant and it was premature for an application to be submitted and considered before the results were known and Historic England, The Twentieth Century Society and residents have seen the results. 

The Member asked Officers to advise on the position of the pilot project, the requirement for it to be completed and the timeline for the new application, including whether it was likely to come to Committee before phase one of the pilot was completed and tested.

An Officer stated that the pilot project was being considered and worked through in tandem with the current application and was focussing on the vacuum glazing. Samples would be delivered on site later in the summer and there would be an opportunity at that time, for Officers, the Twentieth Century Society, Historic England and residents to view these samples in situ. Depending on the outcomes of the testing and the aesthetics of the proposal, the current application which had been submitted would be submitted to

There were no additional urgent items of business for consideration.