To receive declarations by members and officers of the existence and nature of any personal or prejudicial interests in matters on this agenda.
Minutes:
2.1 Councillor Melvyn Caplan explained that a week before the meeting, all four Members of the Committee were provided with a full set of papers including a detailed officer’s report on each application; together with bundles of every single letter or e-mail received in respect of every application, including all letters and e-mails containing objections or giving support. Members of the Committee read through everything in detail prior to the meeting. Accordingly, if an issue or comment made by a correspondent was not specifically mentioned at this meeting in the officers’ presentation or by Members of the Committee, it did not mean that the issue had been ignored. Members will have read about the issue and comments made by correspondents in the papers read prior to the meeting.
2.2 Councillor Caplan then made the following further declarations as they related to the specific applications on the agenda:
Item 1: That he had attended the site visit on 1 March 2017.
Item 9: That he had sat on the Committee that had considered a previous application on 7 June 2016.
2.3 Councillor Tim Mitchell declared that any Members of the Majority Party who had or would make representations in respect of the applications on the agenda were his friends. He also advised that in his capacity as a Councillor for St James’s Ward, and as Cabinet Member for Finance, Property and Corporate Services responsible for the City Council’s property portfolio, he regularly met with members of the planning and property industry as well as residents’ associations and amenity groups.
2.4 Councillor Mitchell then made the following further declarations as they related to the specific applications on the agenda:
Item 1: That he had attended the site visit on 1 March 2017.
Items 4, 6 and 7: That he had sat on the Committee that had considered previous applications.
2.5 Councillor Louise Hyams made the following declarations as they related to the specific applications on the agenda:
Item 1: That she had attended the site visit on 1 March 2017.
Item 6: That she was a part time consultant for a planning consultancy involved in the application, however she had no involvement in this application.
2.5 Councillor David Boothroyd declared that he is Head of Research and Psephology for Thorncliffe, whose clients are companies applying for planning permission from various local authorities. No current clients are in Westminster, and if there were, he would be precluded from working on them under the company’s code of conduct.
2.6 Councillor Boothroyd further declared that some Thorncliffe clients have engaged planning consultants who are also representing the applicants at the meeting: Bidwells on item 1, DP9 on items 2, 3, 4 and 6, and Rolfe Judd on item 7. However, he advised that he does not deal directly with clients or other members of project teams, and there is no financial link between the planning consultants and his employers.
2.7 Councillor Boothroyd then made the following further declarations as they related to the specific applications on the agenda:
Item 1: That he had attended the site visit on 1 March 2017; that he knows some of the objectors who had written in about this application, including Karen Buck MP and Councillor Adam Hug, who have forwarded objections, and; that he has also sat on various committees deciding the application to redevelop garages at Grove Hall Court.
Item 4: That he was a member of the committees deciding the application for the refurbishment of the building.
Item 6: That he has watched films at the cinema.
Item 7: That he was a member of some of the previous committees deciding applications on this site.
Item 8: That Councillors Ruth Bush and Paul Dimoldenberg are friends; that as he has helped the resident of 4 Marylands Road over this case, he considers it best to withdraw from consideration of this item and he left the room whilst this application was being considered.