Agenda and draft minutes

To note any changes to the membership.

1.1           Councillor Patrick Lilley was present as a substitute for Councillor Nafsika Butler-Thalassis.

1.2           Councillor MD Shamsed Chowdhury was present as a substitute for Councillor Jason Williams.

1.3           It was also noted that Councillor Paul Fisher had been erroneously omitted from the front page of the meeting agenda. It was confirmed that Councillor Fisher had received all the meeting papers, had attended the relevant site visit, and would be taking part in the meeting.

To receive declarations by Members and Officers of the existence and nature of any pecuniary interests or any other significant interest in matters on this agenda.

2.1      The Chair explained that a week before the meeting, all Members of the Sub-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 emails containing objections or giving support. Members of the Sub-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 Sub-Committee, it did not mean that the issue had been ignored. Members would have read about the issue and comments made by correspondents in the papers read prior to the meeting.

2.2      All Committee Members declared that they had attended a site visit with officers in the week preceding the meeting in respect of agenda item 2.

2.3      Councillor Robert Rigby declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 1 as he had sat on the Sub-Committee making a previous decision on the site in March 2020. Councillor Rigby also declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 2 as he had met with the applicant in March 2022 as the Chair of Planning at the time. It was confirmed that he had not declared any opinion with regard to the applications.

2.4      Councillor Jim Glen noted that he had also previously sat on Sub-Committees making decisions with regard to the application sites on the meeting agenda.

2.5      Councillor Patrick Lilley highlighted that both application sites fell within his ward, West End.

2.6      Councillor Paul Fisher highlighted that both application sites fell within his ward, West End. Councillor Fisher also declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda items 1 and 2 having met with the applicant for item 1 in May 2023, and the applicant for item 2 in 2022; it was highlighted that no opinions had been expressed with regard to the applications.

2.7      Councillor Ruth Bush noted that she had received a briefing on agenda item 1 along with the relevant Cabinet Member and confirmed that no opinions were expressed. It was also highlighted that Councillor Bush was a Trustee of the Westminster Tree Trust.

2.8      All Committee Members remained in the room and took part in the vote for each of the agenda items.

To sign the minutes of the last meeting as a correct record of proceedings.

RESOLVED:

3.1      That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 February 2024 be signed by the Chair as a correct record of proceedings.

Applications for decision

1                SITE COMPRISING 53-63 NEW BOND STREET - 5-17 - 17A BROOK STREET, LONDON, W1S 1RJ

Alteration and extension of the existing buildings, including partial demolition and retention and retrofit to provide a building with basement, ground and ten upper floors, setback at fifth to eighth floors with terraces, setback at ninth floor with terrace and plant, and a roof terrace with lift over run and pavilion at the tenth floor, with satellite dish, green roof and solar photo voltaic panels on its roof, and associated works, to provide for retail (Class E (a)) and office (Class E(g)(i)) uses together with associated ancillary spaces to those uses.

Late representations were received from Lazari Investments (28.03.2024).

The Presenting Officer tabled the following amendments to the recommendation and the recommended conditions:

Recommendation 

1. Grant conditional permission subject to the views of the Mayor of London and subject to a S106 legal agreement to secure the following planning obligations:… 

a) A financial contribution of £150,480 £157,280 (index linked) towards the carbon Off Set Fund (payable prior to the commencement of the development); 

[rest of recommendation as set out in the report]

Revised Planning Conditions: 

10 - Before any demolition or excavation is carried out at or below the level of the floor in the basement, you must:

(a) apply to us for approval of a written scheme of investigation for a programme of archaeological work as agreed by the Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS). This must include details of the approved methodology and the suitably qualified person or organisation that will carry out the archaeological work. You must not start work until we have approved in writing what you have sent us. 

[rest of condition as set out in the report] 

22 – The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Energy Strategy (prepared by Buro Happold; dated November 2023 and subsequent revision) and shall achieve regulated carbon dioxide emission savings of not less than 25% 22% for emissions beyond the Target Emissions Rate of Part L of Building Regulations 2021, and of not less than 64% 63% for emission beyond Notional specification for existing buildings. The energy efficiency and sustainability measures set out there in shall be completed and made operational prior to the first occupation of the development and retained for the lifetime of the development. (C17CA)  

31 - No development (with the exception of demolition and temporary works) shall commence until hydraulic flood modelling drainage calculations, planning drawings and design drawings (including any flooding that occurs when taking into account climate change for the 1 in 100 critical storm event)are submitted and approved by the Local Authority, to demonstrate that the proposed development will not impact upon wider drainage network. 

41 Details of the precise scope of the  extent of the parts of the buildings to be retained and the method for securing and lifting the retained parts of the building, including structural alterations and deconstruction etc, must be submitted for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

1                SITE 1 – DEVELOPMENT SITE AT 18 - 20 SAVILE ROW, LONDON

SITE 2 – 17 SAVILE ROW, LONDON

Application 1 at Development site at 18-20 Savile Row

Demolition of all existing buildings, excavation to deepen existing basement, and redevelopment to provide an eight storey building plus one storey basement comprising flexible retail (Class E(a)) and/or restaurant (Class E(b)) floorspace and tailoring floorspace (Class E(a), Class E(g)(ii) & Class E(g)(iii)) at part ground floor; and office floorspace (Class E(g)(i)) at part ground and on all upper floors; external terraces and associated hard and soft landscaping; cycle parking; replacement of commemorative plaque and other associated works.

Applications 2 and 3 at 17 Savile Row

Extension to the chimney stack at No. 17 Savile Row, underpinning of boundary wall to No. 18 and other associated works.

Late representations were received from the Savile Row Bespoke Association (25.03.2024), The Pollen Estate (27.03.2024 and 28.03.2024), Fathom Architects (28.03.2024), the Residents’ Society of Mayfair & St James’s (25.03.2024), and the Mayfair Neighbourhood Forum (20.03.2024).

The Presenting Officer tabled the following corrections to the report:

p.122

Mayfair Neighbourhood Plan Policy MR6.1 states, “Proposals for new Creative Originals retail development in Mayfair will be encouraged”, whilst Policy MR6.2 states, “Proposals which involve the loss of Creative Originals floorspace should be resisted unless being replaced nearby”.

p.139

In terms of how these figures relate to the benchmarks contained within the GLA’s WLC guidance:

·       The upfront carbon emissions (i.e. Modules A1-A5) is 18.4% lower than the GLA’s WLC benchmark of 950 kg/Co2e/m2 and 29.2% above the GLA’s WLC aspirational benchmark of 600kg/Co2e/m2.

·       The whole life carbon impact of the development for Modules A-C (excluding B6 and B7) is 15.1% lower than the GLA’s WLC benchmark of 1,400kg/Co2e/m2 and 26.4% 22.5% above the GLA’s WLC aspirational benchmark of 970kg/Co2e/m2.

Given that the applicant is able to demonstrate that actions have been taken to reduce life-cycle carbon emissions from the proposed development and that the expected whole life cycle emissions are 30.0% 15.1% lower than the GLA’s WLC benchmark, the development is compliant with London Plan Policy SI 2.

p.147

Table 4 – Cycle parking requirements and provision

Jenny Casebourne, representing The Pollen Estate, addressed the Sub-Committee in support of the application.

Mark Henderson, representing the Savile Row Bespoke Association, addressed the Sub-Committee in support of the application.

Upon a vote, application 1 was resolved with the passing of the Chair’s casting vote. Applications 2 and 3 were resolved unanimously.

RESOLVED:

Application 1

That, subject to the views of the Mayor of London, the application be refused on the following grounds:

a)    The demolition of the existing building and the erection of a replacement building failed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.