Agenda item

22 Hanover Square, London, W1S 1JA

Minutes:

Demolition and redevelopment to provide a new building on three basement levels, lower ground, ground and first to ninth/eleventh floors to provide a hotel with ancillary bars / restaurants / leisure facilities and private dining / meeting rooms (Class C1), up to 81 residential units (Class C3), flexible / alternative restaurant (Class A3) / hotel restaurant (Class C1) / retail (Class A1) use on part ground and part lower ground floors, basement car and cycle parking, plant at basement and roof levels, alterations to existing access on Brook Street and associated works.

 

A late representation was received from Clivedale (undated).

 

The Planning Officer circulated the following proposed amendments to the conditions:

 

Amendment to Condition 50

 

You must apply to us for approval of

 

i)             Plans showing the layouts of the flats hereby approved, or amended plans showing the revised flat layouts should fewer than 81 units be provided, and

 

ii)            Key plans and detailed drawings showing the location and design of the proposed interstitial blinds, which accord with the proposed flat layouts under i)

 

You must not start any work on these parts of the development until we have approved what you have sent for us.

 

You must then carry out the work according to these approved drawings. (C26DB)

 

No change to reasons for conditions.

 

New Condition 54

 

This permission must be commenced no later than 28 April 2019

 

Reason

 

As requested as part of the application, due to the special circumstances of this case and because we cannot grant planning permission beyond the expiry of the planning permission granted on 29 April 2015 (RN 15/09372/FULL), which must be commenced no later than the above date, because it would not meet S1 and S20 of Westminster’s City Plan (November 2016).

 

 

 

 

RESOLVED:

 

1)            That the Committee considered, in view of the previous scheme which provided 41 flats and delivered £12m of S106 contributions for affordable housing and public realm improvements, that the applicant’s total proposed contribution of £12m for affordable housing, public realm improvements and CIL (£2,476,452) was acceptable.

 

2)            That the Committee considered that, as previously, £2m should be directed to public realm improvements.

 

3)            That subject to 1 and 2 above and referral to the Mayor of London conditional permission be granted subject to the revised conditions tabled and a S106 legal agreement to secure:

 

i)             A contribution of £7,523,548 towards the City Council's affordable housing fund (index linked and payable upon commencement of development) and £2m towards public realm improvements in Hanover Square.

 

ii)            Costs relating to highways works around the site to facilitate the development (including creation of a relocated crossover).

 

iii)           Provision of unallocated residential parking.

 

iv)           Lifetime car club membership (minimum 25 years) for each residential unit payable on first occupation.

 

v)            A lift management and maintenance plan.

 

vi)           An employment and training opportunities strategy.

 

vii)         Monitoring costs.

 

4)            That if the S106 legal agreement had not been completed within six weeks of the date of the Committee resolution then:

 

a)            The Director of Planning shall consider whether the permission can be issued with additional conditions attached to secure the benefits listed above. If this is possible and appropriate, the Director of Planning is authorised to determine and issue such a decision under Delegated Powers; however, if not

 

b)         The Director of Planning shall consider whether permission should be refused on the grounds that it has not proved possible to complete an agreement within an appropriate timescale, and that the proposals are unacceptable in the absence of the benefits that would have been secured; if so, the Director of Planning is authorised to determine the application and agree appropriate reasons for refusal under Delegated Powers.

 

Councillor Boothroyd dissented from the decision.

Supporting documents: