Skip to main content

Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Please note that this will be a virtual meeting

Contact: Georgina Wills, Committee and Governance Officer  Email:  gwills@westminster.gov.uk; Tel: 07870 548348

Media

Items
No. Item

1.

MEMBERSHIP

To report any changes to the membership

Minutes:

1.1       Election of Deputy Chairman

 

1.2       The Chairmen proposed that Councillor Jim Glen be appointed as Deputy      Chairman for the duration of the Meeting.

 

            There being no other nominations it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

That Councillor Jim Glen be appointed as Deputy Chairmen for the duration of the Meeting

 

2.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

To receive and record declarations of interest.

Minutes:

2.1       Cllr David Boothroyd declared that he was Head of Research and Psephology   for Thorncliffe, whose clients were companies applying for planning permission from various local authorities. No current schemes were in             Westminster; if there were he would be precluded from working on them        under the company’s code of conduct.

 

3.

MINUTES pdf icon PDF 260 KB

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

Minutes:

3.2       Matters Arising from the Minutes

 

3.2.1    Minutes 3.2.2 Point 5.4 - Site Visits

 

            Members were advised that site visits will be considered on a case-to-case       basis and was scheduled to fully resume after 21 June 2021. It was noted that           developers of large planning schemes had been able to ensure that site visits         could be undertaken safely.

 

3.2.2    Minutes 3.2.3  Point 5.7 – Hybrid Meetings

 

            Members were advised that Officers were working collaboratively with the IT     Service and an external Provider to ensure that Hybrid Meetings can take      place and be broadcasted from City Hall. The Sub-Committee were informed             that local authorities were still awaiting guidance from Central Governments             about Legislative provisions in relation to Hybrid meetings. 

 

3.2.3    Minutes 3.2.4 Point 5.9 / 5.9- Public Comments on Planning Portals. 

 

Members were informed that software which enable public comments to be re-edited on the public access systems and ensures that offensive postings are not published on public portals was to be put in place in the forthcoming weeks. The software will categorise and group offensive comments. The Committee was informed that the software will be used for applications which are considered as being contentious and likely to attract inappropriate postings.

 

3.2.4    4    Annual Update On Planning Applications and Appeals Performance             2019/20

 

            Members were informed that a small number of Planning Applications        determined by the Planning Sub-Committees went against Officer recommendations. These determinations were reported to amount to 5% of      Planning Applications.

 

4.

PROPOSED CLASS E TO RESIDENTIAL PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS pdf icon PDF 324 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

4.1       The Committee received a report which provided an overview of the proposed             changes to permitted development rights to enable changes of use from           Class E uses to residential use without the need for planning permission, which the Government recently consulted on during December 2020 and             January 2021. The proposed permitted development right would result in the             council having significantly less planning policy levers with which to deliver      sustainable economic growth through planned growth of existing commercial    clusters. Should the Government not introduce the mitigation measures        recommended in the council’s consultation response, the principal impacts of             the new right are likely to be:

 

·       Large scale commercial floorspace within the CAZ could be lost to residential impacting in the unique contribution the city makes to the local and national economy.

·       Uncontrolled increases in residential floorspace in the CAZ at the expense of commercial floorspace, irrespective of whether it is vacant or surplus to current demand, would undermine its unique character and function of the area.

·       Uncontrolled loss of retail and complementary town centre uses at ground floor level within our international, major, district and local shopping centres leading to a loss of overall commercial character and function and an erosion of their vitality and viability. Initial analysis suggests most significant impacts could be in local and district centres outside the CAZ where the offset between commercial and residential property values is typically greater.

·       Permitted development schemes could be brought forward without the need to provide any affordable housing or infrastructure to support the increased population, unlike schemes granted planning permission.

·       The council’s efforts to address the climate emergency would be undermined as permitted development schemes, which would not be required to comply with higher energy performance and sustainability standards in the London Plan and City Plan.

·       Permitted development schemes would not be required to optimise the use of residential land leading to inefficient development that fails to meet identified housing demand.

 

4.2       Members noted the following: -

 

·       That there were there had been limited studies to date looking at the size of floor plates and the potential loss of office units under the proposed permitted development rights scheme for Class E. Members noted that the data which was available focused on London and looked at various grades of office accommodation. The Sub-Committee were reminded that the CAZ within Westminster and other areas in London such as Canary Wharf and City of London had large floor plates and were subject to Article 4 Directions and therefore it was difficult at this stage to determine potential loss of commercial units or demand for conversions.

 

·       That prior-approval schemes had a shorter determination period and had a limited range of criteria in relation to suitability.  Members noted that applicants would be required to apply for a full planning application if they fail to meet the prior approval criteria and noted that the prior approval requirements were not as expansive compared to the planning regime.

 

·       That the mitigation measures recommended in the council’s consultation response include  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

DRAFT EARLY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT GUIDANCE pdf icon PDF 337 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

5.1       The Committee received a report which provided an overview of the Draft      Early Community Engagement Guidance. Over recent years local       communities have raised concerns that they are regularly consulted too late in   the planning pre-application process by developers, or in some instances not        consulted at all. Often the engagement that is undertaken amounts to      presentation of a finalised scheme, which is shortly after submitted as a formal application without scope for the community engagement to influence        the proposal. In this context, officers have developed a draft Early Community      Engagement Guidance Note.

 

5.2       The purpose of the draft guidance is to ensure that developers are aware of the Council’s expectation that community engagement is undertaken as early    as possible during the planning preapplication phase using methods that             maximise meaningful engagement with all parts of the local community.

 

5.3       The draft guidance sets out examples of good practice and provides a             template timeframe for engagement to show how community engagement         should be scheduled relative to other pre-application engagement with other           stakeholders and officers. It also explains the level of information that should      be submitted with pre-application requests to officers and with formal planning             applications to demonstrate the community engagement that has been             undertaken and how the engagement has helped to refine the finalised development proposal.

 

5.4       The guidance seeks to ensure that all engagement is compliant with the      Equality Act 2010 and is inclusive, engaging traditionally disengaged groups     as well as those who are more frequently engaged in planning matters.             Informal consultation on the draft guidance was undertaken between 15             February and 12 March. In addition to the invitation to provide written     comments on the draft guidance officers held discussion forums with      residents’ groups and the Westminster Property Association during w/c 1      March. The following groups were consulted: -

 

        Amenity Societies

        Neighbourhood Forums

        Other semi-recognised residents groups

        Business Improvement Districts (BIDs)

        Queens Park Community Council

        Westminster Property Association (WPA)

 

5.5       Members held a discussion and noted the following: -

 

  • That 5 amenity societies, 7 neighbourhood forums, 2 (BIDs) and the WPA had responded to the consultation.

 

  • That Residents Groups, BIDs and the WPA supported the main principles of the draft guidance, i.e. to deliver more meaningful, transparent and inclusive community engagement. There were also recommendations that the guidance should highlight the importance of engaging with alterative groups, such as youth forums and employees and workers.

 

  • Members agreed that developers engaging in separate consultations with alternative groups should be encouraged. The guidance should encourage developers to use appropriate formats for these discussions, such as digital platforms.

 

  • Consultees considered that greater emphasis should be placed on the importance of the ‘planning balance’ and the accordance of proposals with adopted planning policies to manage expectations.

 

  • That Neighbourhood Forums responded to consultation to raise concern that their importance as a consultee in the planning process, particularly where they have adopted a Neighbourhood Plan, was not suitably reflected.

 

6.

ANY OTHER BUSINESS WHICH THE CHAIRMAN CONSIDERS URGENT

Minutes:

 

6.1       The Chair reminded the Committee that they were scheduled to receive          training on sustainability, Planning Updates and the City Plan. 

 

6.2       The Committee was informed that the Urban Design London had an annual             training programme and that members could enrol on their courses. The       Training Programme will be circulated to the Sub-Committee.

 

7.

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

·       22 July 2021

·       25 October 2021

Minutes:

·       22 July 2021

 

·       25 October 2021