Transcript

My name is Councillor Toby North, and I'll be chairing this evening's meeting. Please note that we are not expecting a far alarm test this evening, so if the arm is sounded, please follow my instructions and evacuate the building. I'm going to start by asking my fellow members of the committee and officers to introduce themselves. I'm going to start my right, the members. Councillor Chutter, Cloud Tafflam Park Ward. Councillor Blyham, Dash Highbury Ward. Councillor Hannah Mckew, St Mary, St James Ward. And officers. And now Baker Head of Development Management. Jake Schills, Acting Deputy Team Leader, Planning Applications Team. Fear McLean, Committee Clerk. Laura Avery, Legal Advisor. Thank you. We have one apology for this evening, which is Councillor Paul Convery, and no substitution members. Do we have any declarations of interest? No, thank you. On to the order of business. We only have one item on the agenda this evening, so the order of business will be as printed in the agenda. On to the minutes of the last meeting, is everyone happy to agree those? Thank you. A note on procedure, please note this is not a public meeting, it is a meeting of the Planning Subcommittee held in public, or a march, therefore be addressed through me as chair. The procedure for this evening's committee is that each item will be introduced by a planning officer. Subcommittee members may then ask questions with the officer. Objectors will then be invited to speak, followed by the applicant. The object in the applicant will normally be allowed to speak for no more than three minutes each. After the objectors have spoken, the applicants will have a similar length of time to reply. The subcommittee will deliberate on the application, only as the invited to speak at this stage will then be allowed to do so. When the subcommittee has finished its deliberations, I shall read out the officer recommendations and proceed to vote. Once the item has been taken, there can be no further discussion of the item. On to item B1, then, Management Suite 21 Parkfield Street N1. What's over to officers for their presentation? Evening all, this is the presentation for item B1, prior to presenting the scheme, officers would like to provide an update to members and the Planning Committee regarding additional information on welfare facilities by curious from the applicant. A condition has been suggested and should members be minded to approve the application and officers have drafted the following. Prior to the occupation of the use here by approved details, including a scale drawing 1-100 or 1-200 shall be provided to clearly welfare facilities for curious staff within the site which shall be retained in perpetuity for the use, unless otherwise agreed by the local authority. Once this is complete in terms of the condition wording, this can be circulated to members for consent. Officers would also seek to make amendments to condition 9 to allow the applicants the flexibility of Class E, which is existing use, which are sort within a submission application form. This is the current use of the site. Officers don't see that to be any conflict with policy and seek to amend the wording as such. Again, this can be circulated to members following completion. Thank you. The application site is relevant to the basement area of the Angel Central Shopping Centre located on Parkfield Street. The map on the screen shows the extent of the applicant site area which contains the Shopping Centre and the land associated in blue. The red marking shows the extent of the site access and the basement unit relevant to the application. Next slide. The aerial view with red arrow here indicates the site access to the basement area from street level and its connection with upper street in the background. The existing antoleary retail area of 365 square metres is that basement level would be converted into a space to serve a storage space for the distribution of grocery goods for a dark suit market supplier. The dark suit market will cater exclusively for online grocery shopping. As seen in the image, the spaces have been vacant since the refurbishment of Shopping Centre in 2018 and has not been taken up by H&M who trade at ground and first floor. Next slide. Beyond the unit itself, two existing car parking spaces outside the unit would serve electric bike and bike set down associated to the proposed use with nine cycle parking spaces. A pickup hatch would be formed in the flank wall of the unit to serve goods to drivers and there is existing double doors allowing access to the unit. The dark suit market area as shown in the slides previous would be accessed via the existing car park vehicle access. The access ramp down to the site area is shown in this image with arrows showing entry and exit. In regards to servicing, the use would utilise the Shopping Centre's two off street servicing bays marked as A and B. In regards to the proposal, the applicant has proposed a use of electric or pedal bikes as part of the electric and pedal bikes as part of the courier service. These would be the only vehicles that enter and exit the car parking area as shown in the proposed plan. The use of non motorised bike vehicles is also conditioned at condition 5. Next slide. Thank you. The cycle parking spaces access to the unit and the relationship with the other units and the car parking area are shown in this wider plan. As shown in the plan, the plan utilises the lifts and the corridors within the service and area of the consentor which allow movement of goods from street level to the basement area below. Next slide. A full assessment has been carried out considering the impacts to residential property, particularly the residential uses closest to the site on Bromfield Street. This has included a noise impact assessment and far a review of the trip generation and impacts on the use of the highway. The operational hours of the use have been closely considered from the pre-application advice and assessment during this application at least have been conditioned to ensure the use does not have any adverse impact on the community. A full operational management plan was bridged up during the application process to provide further clarity on procedures in relation to delivery servicing and the management of courier's riders which support the proposed use. Next slide. The transport assessments provided have detailed the predicted trip generation associated to the use, the movement and predicted trips have been calculated from other dock supermarket operators. The trip movement analysis has considered a 5km local catchment area for expected deliveries and the split of travel evenly between Parkford Street, Burners Road and Bromfield Street. The trip movement has been reviewed during the course of the application with data presented to clarify to clearly show the peak levels of travel and their impacts. Officers have detailed this within the assessment. As noted in the slides above, the use would utilise two existing off-street service scenarios. The delivery and servicing site would have the hours conditioned to those currently in situ at the shopping centre in order to protect residential meaner to the application he's recommended for approval. Thank you very much, questions from members of the committee? Councillor LANDERSCH. I just wanted to check that I heard something properly, was it 55 metres, square metres, the space of it is 365 square metres, I've definitely said, that's a thank you. Thank you very helpful presentation. I just wondered if you could say a bit more about the operational management plan and to walk us through what has already been indicated to you by the applicant will be included in that. You can give the sort of high level the types of things but it would be helpful to hear that spelled out. Councillors interjecting. Yes, in terms of the full operational management plan that we have now, we wanted to address the issue of loitering and ensuring that courier drivers did not loiter or use the highway area outside of the site. So, say the operational management plan includes a statement that the future operator will ensure all drivers are not allowed to loiter. So, when they go down to pick up and collect goods and groceries, they will have a dedicated service in bay and that is where they will be expected to wait for the groceries and then make their way back up through the ramp, up the ramp, sorry, and then out to the various properties for delivery. In regards to the other sort of sections of the operational management plan, there will be a site manager on site and they will be there to ensure that deliveries are maintained and managed in an appropriate way so there is no build up or traffic on the highway. And again, that will also be programmed to avoid waste recycling collections and other deliveries that may be coming into the site. Again, the site manager will have the sort of full operational capability to manage deliveries and also the courier's just to make sure there is no loitering outside of the application site area. Thank you, so one big concern is loitering and I'm pleased that's already included. Another concern that I have is that I'm aware especially when we have bicycles and e-bikes which aren't caught by the measures we take to reduce the flow of traffic, particularly on stub roads in the neighbouring area, there's a risk of safety, there's a risk of a lot of traffic coming quickly around corners like onto Bromfield Street, that sort of area. So I wondered if you could just comment if it's agreeable or if it would be even feasible for us to ask to include something like traffic management or advice given to riders or something that this site manager on site could actually maintain an oversight of how those bikes are moving in and out. As it's an operational management plan, you have got the ability to, if you're reminded to grant updated via condition and ask for specific details. Obviously the area we're talking about is outside of the site but because as you've said it's about messaging to riders, I think it's entirely reasonable if you wanted to, to update one of the conditions or suggested conditions to require details of how riders will be informed of access to the site and sort of precautionary measures for safety. In terms of enforceability, just for complete transparency, it would be if riders proceeded to not operate in accordance with that, we'd obviously expect site manager to in the first instance address that. I'd probably suggest as well as some sort of contact number available to local residents for reporting that as well and if there was a persistent breach that we can demonstrate, we would have means to take enforcement action. One from me, how's the applicant submitted any details or welfare facilities either for careers or for the staff working within the unit as part of the application state? So today we don't have that information but to say we have got a condition that we could agree and again the wording can be circulated if agreed in terms of providing a plan which clearly shows the welfare facilities within the site and whether that be within the unit, that's something that can be clarified but we can propose a condition just to ensure that we do have those details before any decision is fully made. Thank you, Councillor McLACHLAN. Thanks to the National Planning Policy Framework 2023 seeks to secure positive growth in a way that effectively balances economic, environmental and social progress for this and future generations, the NPPF is a material consideration and has been taken into account as part of the assessment of these proposals but I would just like you to go back to that slide with the basement view too. Yeah, that one, you just gone past it, yeah, yeah, yeah, that one, that's it. So you know if we're balancing economic environment on social progress for this and future generations that is not a happy picture, it's very grim. So as the planning officers, would you expect more detail from this company that wants to work in there as to the operating conditions, the working conditions for the people that would be in there and what have you included in what conditions have you put in that will make sure that the workers that are actually working inside there and the chairs already asked for facilities for the NPPF services which I totally agree with but I'm interested in also in ventilation and lighting and heating and you know could you please elaborate on what you would expect for workers in a situation like that? I agree it's not your typical workspace but we have to be conscious of the fact that this has a class of use now and could be used and operated within any of the suite of a class so it could be a shop, it could be retail, it could be offices and because it's a change of use we don't have the same level of control as a new build where we would ask for such things as energy statements about the heating and the quality of the space, we have to take as a material consideration what can currently be useful and also the fact of how much we can reasonably require as part of a planning application so whilst I completely agree it would be great to have more detail on what goes in there, I don't think it's reasonable for us to ask so deliveries to the site go up to, I propose to be up to 10 o'clock which strikes me pretentious quite late, is there any reasons why that condition has been applied? So the conditions have been applied in regards to the hours that we have here in the condition in regards to, they are in regard to the existing operational hours that operate for the Angel Centre so there's existing retailers H&M and Wagga Mommers who also have deliveries within those hours and I'd say we have got the updated transport assessment which details various deliveries that do take place during the day and the evening, we consider the hours proposed and the condition to be suitable given a commercial area of the site and we consider it reasonable to condition those hours similar to other retailers and occupiers within a shopping centre. Just going back to the trip generation figures, I'm very mindful that this is a relatively new and growing use, you said that we'd taken examples of other similar operations and I wish confident that they're very bust, are they recent, you know, they have a similar sort of square footage in terms of the amount of space they've got to work from? Yeah so in terms of that response we have received information from the applicant that they have based their predicted trip generation on other dark supermarket operators such as Getty and Gorillaz, we don't have the specific locations that they have provided but the applicants are here as well as the transport processor who may be able to provide further comment in terms of the specifics but they have analysed a number of data from existing dark supermarket and these are the predicted numbers that they have produced. Yeah, Councillor CLOCK? Yeah, to carry on from that, so you know, objectors have talked about six times the traffic flow in their streets between 10 and 11pm and I used satisfy that, there's a satisfy, that the noise assessment is good enough and could we make a condition asking that all vehicles are electric that go into this site? So in regards to the noise and the impact to immunity, the noise assessment was fairly reviewed by officers including the public protection officer, they raised no objections based on the DV levels produced from the bikes and electric bikes based on an assessment made by the assessor. As I say, we are satisfied, broken down in terms of six additional cycles on Bromford Street per hour split across the entire operational hours and again the applicant throughout the application process has updated their transport statements to detail the peak hours and they have shown within those that the passing by of cycles whilst it may be visible wouldn't be harmful or adverse to the immunity of adjoining neighbours and so on that record was satisfied. So just answer your second question as well, we have got a condition requiring it only to be a bicycle or two wheeled electric vehicles only, so there's no petrol powered vehicles going up here. Sorry, can you clarify, because I'm asking about delivery vehicles, you know, the... So not the couriers on the bikes, okay, so obviously we've got an existing servicing area here, there will be additional deliveries and they're in the same hours as the other units at the building currently, as per Councillor HAMM, that's your question in terms of why we've gone with that 10 o'clock time. There's two aspects to this one, we have assessed it with our noise, sorry, pollution colleagues who have an acoustic officer and they're fine with this because it's a typical situation for a street that goes into a servicing area anyway. The other pointers as well, from an enforceability point of view, if we were to try and restrict this even further than the existing centre, because this is a collective servicing yard, it would be extremely difficult to identify which buildings are servicing this unit or which vehicles are servicing H&M or any of the other units in there, so I think it would present a difficulty. If it's a, you know, we've already talked about this being a new type of supermarket in this area, can't we insist that as a new development, we haven't had one of these before there, that we can make a requirement that they use electric vehicles, you know, that we can set this sort of precedent. You technically could make a motion to put a condition on to how delivery vehicles to be electric, but I think in terms of assessing that and reasonable in terms of the MPPF, we have to ensure that conditions are enforceable and entirely reasonable, and on the reasonable point we do have policies about sustainable vehicles and maximising that, and we'd have to make an assessment of whether it's reasonable considering the predominant use of the site is using sustainable vehicles in terms of push bikes and electric bikes, but I think it comes down to again the electric vehicle, and we have an open site here with a clear parking area for only that one, I think that would be an enforceable condition because we could say where's the vehicle come from, it's clearly parked at your site, again here we would have to monitor every vehicle that services as an entire shopping centre, and I don't think that is something we could reasonably enforce against, so it would fail the test and the enforceability. Councillor Eke. Thanks. I am extremely concerned that the peak time is going to be between 10pm and 11pm, and it does say one cycle passing every three minutes, that is quite an incredible amount of cycles for that time of night, and I appreciate you've answered on the point of the impact on amenity, sees of the acoustics and sound, but the other impacts which immediately come to mind is safety, is there sufficient lighting on Bromfield Street, are you satisfied with that assessment, and what are the kinds of impacts you perceive potentially having quite a dangerous flow of traffic late at night there, yes, I'd just like to hear more about what else has been assessed, and if you're satisfied with that. So it obviously has been looked at by our highways team, and they haven't raised a highway safety issue, but I completely understand where you're coming from, the way that the street comes in, and there's a narrows, and then you can come through around the corner. So as I say, we haven't got an identified highway safety issue, there are quite a number of bikes, and if you were concerned about it, you could look at, again, well, one, somebody made the suggestion, sorry, already about the EDP, about how vehicles come to push bike deliveries and electric bikes come to this site, and I suppose it could be something you could look into conditioning in terms of highway safety and vehicle movements to the site, you could expand upon that operational management plan, sorry, the reason I've struggled a bit is because this sits outside of the application site, we have no physical powers to actually require physical changes to the street, and it's obviously we'd have to, again, go through our highways department and look at the actual feasibility of making those changes, so within the power of this application, it would probably be limited to some sort of update to one of the conditions to require the provider of the dark supermarket to ensure that their riders are coming in a responsible manner. Thank you, that's really helpful. The other concern I have with a way from the flood roads, but actually now I'm thinking about the Angel Centre, I'm curious to know, and I'll be asking the applicant about their correspondence too, but curious to know if you've had feedback from the Angel Centre, I'm particularly interested in the safety concerns they have, if any bikes should pass through the Angel Centre, that would obviously cause issues, and whether or not the demand will be on the Angel Centre, which I think already need the resource, they have a patrol coming round to police that area, which suffers, unfortunately, from a lot of petty crime and other disturbances, I'd hate for their resources to be lost to policing this area, so yeah, have you heard from the Angel Centre, and do you think that's incorporated well into this document? We haven't heard from the Angel Centre in regards to that matter, so the applicants may have over-information on that point. One hopefully quite straightforward question for me, when the condition refers to e-bikes and pedal bikes, that's electrically assisted bicycles, not electric vehicle motorcycles, yeah, great. Okay, unless there's any other questions of officers, we will move on, do we have any objectives here to speak on this application? Yeah, okay, welcome. If you'd like to just come forward to one of the microphones, you will have three minutes to speak, whatever you will, yeah, whatever, yeah, and you will have your timer on the big clock here. I live on the corner of Ronford Street, and we are, without doubt, kept awake continually by the deliveries from the EMBON Centre, they are interested in the idea of a site manager because they constantly queue up on Ronford Street, on Parkville Street, delivering. They don't seem to adhere to timelines at all, unfortunately. They will go into the early hours, seven in the morning is too early, because the noise of clattering of deliveries onto the metal barriers and everything else, it just wakes up. There's a very tight little area to have more congestion coming in. At the moment, the EMBON Centre can't manage the number of deliveries they already have there. There's, I mean, I've sent, I'm interested in the highways because we've sent loads of photos to the highways saying this is ridiculous. We have anything after, when they have O2 club nights there, the road is absolutely packed. Lory's queue up along the back of that road, honking, and have to reverse down the road to get out. So the idea of more congestion, more lory's, more deliveries just seems absolutely insane on something that's so tight, you know, it's just madness. I can't quite understand the idea of having it recommended. If people have been up there at night and seen the deliveries, it's pretty crazy. Our little junction at the Bromfield Street is constantly having motorbikes and deliveries already going down that road saying we're going to have more guys, you know, they're doing their job. They're always in a rush. They don't look at, it's not, it is a public footpath going across, the crossing is pretty narrow. Bikes go up and down there. I can't see how that's going to be made safe for residents long term. On the other side, our Bromfield Street is a great two-listed building, intensifying more deliveries, heavy lory's going down there, shaking the buildings. They already, you know, quite a lot of them already have cracks down there, you know, because of the intensification that we've been having unfortunately. So as an object to living on Bromfield Street, I can only say I just hope you just doesn't go through because it's really, you're not, as a council, we're not being protected. We've had five years of complaining to the highways, they said they can't put lights or they can't put a video camera on the end of the road because they haven't got enough funding. We're constantly right to enforcement office and they said in the previous planning application, they haven't had 10pm set on the other applications, so we have deliveries, as I said, and I'm happy to send you hundreds of photos of deliveries that go through the night, and it's, to say they have a site manager who looks after the deliveries is slightly comical, not even slightly, absolutely hysterical. That's me. So I object. Thank you, members may have questions for you in a few moments. We've got the applicant team, brilliant. So you also have three minutes with which be useful if you try to address some of the objections made by the objector. Thank you, Chair. The opportunity to respond to the local resident we've just heard from. We understand the concern from resident, both now, when we consulted prior to the submission, as part of the application we've worked extensively with officers to address these points. To be clear, the Art Day Car Park within Angel Central was reduced as part of the previous application to refresh the shopping centre. This was intended as storage space, but it's not been used as imagined and it's been vacant for six years. As you've heard, we're proposing a grocery delivery store located in this vacant space, despite some marketing as a storage space, the only interest has come from delivery companies. As acknowledged by officers, as a unit, as no front door windows, its potential uses are limited. The use known as a dark supermarket seeks to meet an identified demand for rapid convenience goods delivered direct to local resident stores. A delivery radius of 5km is outlined and given the deliveries we made by e-bike or conventional bike, they are required to be made in a 30-minute window. No vehicles will be used to deliver products to customers. The proposed use provides a local service to deliver top-up grocery items to become increasingly popular in recent years. The site is located located within the existing basement unit of the shopping centre to address this need. To respond to concerns regarding trip generation and associated impacts on immunity, we would like to reiterate that 90% of additional movements will be associated with delivery of grocery items by bicycles and e-bikes, very small percentage of the delivery of the goods to the units. Servicing and delivery of the goods to the unit will be made in line with the approved conditions of the 2017 consent. The reason on site manager, who obviously we can raise some of these concerns with and the operational management plan that's going to be secured by condition, sets out how deliveries can be consolidated and this will be effectively managed through this condition and obviously we can raise these concerns that have been flagged here tonight so that they can be picked up with the site manager. For supporting statements prepared by the Transport Consultant, by key market operators such as Getter, Gorilla and Weezy, given the use of cycles to deliver the impact of proposed trips will be indecitable to those living to neighbouring residential streets and the noise impact was submitted to demonstrate this. In summary, the proposals would put in our activities a long-standing vacant unit within the Angel Central Shopping Centre and provide local employment for young people as well as a local service to the community. Any operator will have to be committed to the use of cycle deliveries to customers and the terms of the operational management plan submitted. Thank you. Questions for members of the committee, either for objectives or for the applicant, Councillor Clark. Can I just ask the officers question? So after hearing the objector talk about vehicles delivering all through the night, what's your response to that? Because ten o'clock is supposed to be the deadline for the whole centre. It's absolutely something I've made a note of it and I'm going to raise you with our planning enforcement team tomorrow. If there's hours in place there that they should be doing it by and they're exceeding that and it's clear evidence of it, we will do something about it. Councillor interjecting. Great. I've been keen to just ask the objective actually, what kind of hours might you observe kind of peak hearing time is kind of happening. I'd be interested to know when you see kind of Laurie's back here. Thanks. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ thank you. ‑‑ would it be fair to say the regularity and unpredictability of busyness is also part of the stressor? ‑‑ I would just remind to the committee that we can only consider the application in front of us even if there are issues that need to be picked up by enforcement about the wider permissions. ‑‑ so I guess you've heard a little bit about concerns about working conditions. So I'd be keen to understand perhaps particularly in reference to health and safety guidelines about how this will be a working tradition that meets guidelines about temperature, about light, about safety, about space for work and what kind of thought has been put into that.

Sure, in terms of the environment of the unit, obviously it has to store kind of convenience and kind of food items so it has to be appropriate for that climate but there will be positive working practices on‑site, regular breaks, obviously it will have to be signed off from a health and safety perspective to allow people to work there so that will look ‑‑ and obviously these are also the people that are interested in the site get a gorilla there or kind of ‑‑ they have other sites where they've done this before so they would be wanting to enforce similar practices in this unit and would ‑‑ obviously they'd want their staff to stay there so they'd have to make it an enjoyable place to work. I'm not as confident about a labour market but in terms of kind of workers that, hand workers would be working there on an ad for a shift, do you know about that number? Yeah, we've been informed that in the unit itself it should be six and then with the drivers it should go up to about 20 in total so 20 in total including the six within the unit. Sorry, so you're projecting that only one time there would be 20 riders on‑site? No, no, sorry it would be 14, so six people working within the unit and then 14 drivers. Okay, but my understanding is there's nine Sheffield stand places for nine bikes? Because the drivers are going backwards and forwards if there's 14 drivers not all of them will be there at any one time. Thank you, Councillor, thank you. Thank you, I have a question for the applicant too actually. So I'm curious to hear how you plan or you would intend for the relationship management to take place. So would you, for instance, have a dedicated person who could take feedback and complaints from residents? Would you, how would you have a relationship with the angel centre and other stakeholders? What do you anticipate that will look like? So the on‑site manager would have a close relationship and they've had direct input into the operational management plan that is secured by the condition. So the items that were listed by the planning officer earlier have all had an input from the site manager. So he could be involved with any kind of training of any staff and all of the drivers on‑site before. So the safety concerns mentioned earlier and how they conduct themselves when they leave the centre could be enforced to every new employee at the site. So they're aware of every element that's within the operational management plan and they continue to enforce that and drive safely in and out of the site and when they're making deliveries. So will the site manager be on‑site always while there's operation and also just to ask again, will he have a relationship directly with residents too, will there be a contact number, how will complaints be dealt with? Yeah, he will have ‑‑ I don't know if he's on‑site 24/7, but he seems to be there quite a lot and he works quite closely with the security that will be on‑site 24/7. And then, yeah, of course, his phone number could be excessively accessible by residents and it seems like contact has already been made with him in the past. So I'm point of clarification, I don't know if it's officer or someone else. I actually had understood the site manager was someone who was going to be appointed. But there is presently a site manager appointed. The angel center has a site manager and I'll be honest, the way the operational management plan is written, it says the site manager that you could interpret that to be the angel one or you could interpret that to be just for this site, so I would clarify it with the applicant. I'm sure there will be a site manager at the use who could obviously go through all the operational management plan, but there is also the angel central site manager. And they can work very closely together and the number of the angel central site manager can be put in the operational management plan document to be secure by the condition. It's confusing. I can see why it's difficult for residents to know who to contact. I think it's something really important for us to understand who the point of contact is specifically for this new service and actually, yeah, it was interesting to hear what you said about training and enforcement, but if we don't understand how often the site manager will be present, how will we know how they're monitoring, will they be there at peak hours like 10 to 11 p.m., for instance? The site manager of angel central has been referenced because there is an operator currently obviously to complete the operational management plan, so we've gone on the key measures of the angel central site manager who will be there to kind of enforce these items. But I don't know if he won't be there 24/7, but obviously with training, he can enforce these, the principles that are set out in the operational management plan, and then there will be a manager when they're delivered, the dark supermarket is enforced, is occupied. Sorry. Okay, so just to try and clarify that, so there will be a manager specific to the dark supermarket who provides training, but the monitoring enforcement you can see being done by the site manager of the whole angel central. Correct, yes. And then when the dark supermarket is confirmed, their name could be put in an operational management plan and confirm to anybody who needs it if there is a reason to submit any complaints. Just a question for officers, what kind of follow-up can we have on that? So it seems like we're having one discussion with the applicant about this specific site and then there's a third party, the angel site manager, who I don't know is even involved in these discussions and will they follow up on this? Can we enforce on this? Can we ensure that they meet these standards? So in terms of the operational management plan, if members of the committee were minded to approve it and wanted to amend the development condition, you could require a part of that as part of an operational management plan full details of availability and who the site manager will be responsible to, so we would have it defined in writing exactly if it's the site operator who provides the site manager availability of their times and also a detailed complete management process, we do actually normally require that and normally the much larger case, but we normally do require part of our MPs that they have details of who you can complain to, what time, phone numbers and email addresses. So that could be a requirement if members were minded to grant them wanted to update the condition. Thanks. I hope I see the chair noting that down. You can come back to it, thank you. Just to pick up the objectors' point about the, it's quite obvious that the residents around there are suffering greatly at the moment with the amount of traffic and this dark supermarket is going to increase the amount of traffic and the point that was made by the objectors was that seven o'clock is too early and I just wondered if it would be possible for you to work from eight o'clock on that point and then would it be also, would you consider making sure that all your delivery vehicles are electric because in the application you talk about using many transit vans, not many transit vans, but you know, because the difference between an HTV and an electric transit van is huge. So would you consider using electric vehicles to make your deliveries? And then finally, you've got 20 employees operating from this site, including the couriers, which is good news that there will be employees of, who will there be employees of actually? Could you clarify who will be the actual employer of these people and what wage they'll be getting paid? Hello, so I can answer the first two, but I might have to pass to a colleague for your last question, so I'm the transport consultant involved. In terms of the traffic hours involved, I think we just need to be clear that the delivery hours for stocking the unit begin at 8am, whereas operationally, it would begin at 7am, but that would be limited to cycles and e-bikes. So from our perspective, we consider that to have less of an impact than you would consider for a delivery vehicle or a delivery van. That would be people exiting from the basement when they've collected the goods and cycling on local streets. In terms of equipment to electric vehicles for deliveries, so in conversation with various occupies that could take the unit, we got lots of data back in terms of the deliveries, and there's a wide range of supply and logistics that go behind this certain. Supplies will just use electric vehicles as their standard. Others would rather use a slightly larger vehicle and only do one delivery a day, and it depends on the supply chains involved. So there will already be some supplies who will commit to electric vehicles, but there will be other supplies who, because of their network, would prefer to use one larger truck, which would obviously have sustainability benefits of consolidation. Just to pick up on the other question, yeah. So they have interested operators, such as Novuizi, Gorilla, Gete, but there's been no confirmation of kind of operator yet, because obviously any offer would be subject to planning. So I am unable to confirm anticipated wages, but they would assume that they would be at least a minimum wage or more. Just to say, you know, isn't it a London living wage? London living wage, then, yeah. Sorry, they're lending a living wage, then, thank you. Not on that point, but on the transport, as I said, if you were minded to, I know I've suggested a lot of conditions, I'm just that if you were minded to approve and you wanted to have full details of the delivery and servicing, you could require a delivery and servicing plan with details of how sustainable motor transport have been maximised. Now that would entail the applicant submitting details to officers, we'd make an assessment, and if it was clearly justified that they couldn't do it, we might be in a position where we have to approve it, but it might also require them to look into, as they said, if they had not already remained by that time, they could actually potentially commit to electric vehicles at that point. So that would be reasonable. Any other questions, Councillor HOWARD. Great. If I could ask a question of your transport expert, actually, thank you. I just wondered when you were looking at the research of current traffic flows, to what degree you kind of observed current amounts of delivery queuing, and how compatible that might be, perhaps, with the peak hours of the number of cycles that you're kind of imagining coming out of there. Yeah, it's a good question. So we undertook traffic surveys of Parkfield Street, so the entrance into the estate and burners road, we would consider that to receive actually quite a low level of traffic when considering other streets in this area, but I appreciate it's a matter of perspective. In terms of the peak hours, because of the type of collections that we're having, they would actually fall outside of what we would consider your usual peak hours for deliveries, so you would often find that deliveries would like to get in early in the morning, or a second one in the evening, whereas for collections, it's about when people would like to have their groceries delivered, so actually, we don't consider that the net peak for people needing deliveries meets with the cycles exiting. Let me tell you any further questions, or should we move to deliberation? Okay. I can sense there's a lot of unease amongst members, and I think that principally comes from the fact that this is a relatively new use, and it's one that's growing quite significantly, so we're in uncharted territory as a committee, and indeed as a planning authority. I think from my perspective, there's a lot of unknowns around the operational management at the site, around delivery and servicing. I want to be clear on that point that we can only consider and condition for the delivery and servicing around this one unit, even if there are issues with the wider centre, but that has given us our assurance that that would be taken away and raised with enforcement colleagues. Given these concerns, I think there are some conditions that we can suggest to strengthen, so I particularly would like to see a condition that the officer mentioned around stipulating of welfare facilities for staff both working within the unit and those riders who are collecting from the unit. I also would like to pick up Councillor McKew's point around having a single named point of contact for residents if there are any concerns around the operation of the unit. But I think coming back to the transport point, given it's a new and growing use, I'm really concerned that the figures that we're basing, the trip generation figures, may not be robust given it's relatively new, so I'm considering whether we should look at conditions that would require a new transport statement and perhaps even a new OMP and delivery and servicing plan to be submitted and approved by the planning authority after one year of operation, just so we can have absolute certainty that if we give this permission or recommendation this evening, then we do have a full back position if the operation does not run as we would expect with the high standards that we expect in order to mitigate impact on residents. So that's where I'm at, but I'm going to open up for any other contributions, Councillor Cluck. Yeah, I mean, it's really obvious that this is a highly congested area already, that there are five supermarkets serving that immediate vicinity and this is an added, it's going to be an added impact on the residential area around it. I agree with you, Chair, about making this management plan and reviewing it in a year. I think that's a good thing to ask for, but I really, and the other point you've made, so I just think that we need to be really conscious that there's a stress point now on that area and that we really need to be listening to the residents and to be as has been proposed, but that we don't want too much extra stress on that point in that area. The applicant made the point that, oh, it's a, you know, it's very low traffic. Well, that's what we want in this, actually, that is exactly what we want, low traffic neighbourhoods, so I would really, you know, if we could put into your traffic management that we would encourage, we'd like to encourage electric vehicles and no HDVs, if we could put that in, you know, see how that is going at the end of that year, that would be good. And the point about the employees is welcome, that these careers are going to be direct employees of the company, can we put that in as well, that we want to make sure that those people are employed on good terms and conditions at the end of that year. I'm going to refer to colleagues, I don't believe that would be a material planning consideration. Councillor MOOKU. Thank you. I have two major frustrations, both of which, Chair, you've alluded to, are somewhat beyond our control. First, there are clearly wider issues around management of the area, and now I'm very glad you'll be taking it up with highways, and I think it's a learning point for us as a Council. How are we in touch with the management of this obviously touch point area? The second frustration I have is around the lack of power we have to talk in a deeper sense about working conditions. I was quite shocked to hear that that space could be used for office use, that is really startling. But I am reassured by the conditions we've already discussed, so conditions around working conditions, also around management plans, and as the Chair mentioned, the one year stipulation that we can refer back to regarding traffic flows. I haven't been convinced that there's a very clear grasp on how these management plans are going to be introduced and monitored, so I would hope that, should this be approved, there would be a consultation ongoing, either with the Chair or some representative, to make sure that these management plans actually do end up looking sensible and are going to be enforced carefully and closely. And I think finally one thing which I would like to comment on, which is while I would prefer to see traffic reduced in the area, I do appreciate that, largely, this is going to be relying on bikes and e-bikes, which to some extent is in the right direction of moving away from carbon emitting transport. So on balance I can't see anything here which would, to a significant enough extent, contravene the material consideration will be significantly, material considerations. So it would be minded to approve, but very much with those conditions and stipulations in mind. Thank you. So I am struck by the constraints that we have in approving or reviewing this application based on the overall kind of constraints or guidelines given to the overall scheme, down to the overall building. I think if we were looking at the entire building as an entire site I'm not sure we would be looking at those hours and I think we'd be looking at a more comprehensive transport management plan. So I'm very conscious on the limitations of trying to put constraints on this development alone and how enforceable that would be. And so I say that with some disappointment and I am struck by the impact of even if it is one HDV and the extra kind of traffic and size of those vehicles are not the things that I'd like to be encouraging in London and that I'd love for whoever does operate that site to think about really meaningfully about reducing that kind of vehicle and looking at electric vehicles but as planning authority our own force ability on that is quite limited. I would really urge, I mean, the objective is if the current planning is not being listened to and developed, I'd love to hear it as a council and I'd love to hold our planning authority to account on why the current hours aren't being managed and to raise that as a councilor because it's not acceptable but it is not material grounds in this case. And so I just started, you know, I'm disappointed, I think, to see these kind of jobs being created. I don't think they're good jobs. I think they are another example of exploitative work in Islington not delivering good quality pay but again, it's not material quality but it would be minded to support the development sadly. Councillor McLACHLAN. Yeah, I just want to clarify about this working conditions. So we can't make the conditions for the work, for the careers and the people working there but we need to think about health and safety and, you know, ventilation and can we make any sort of condition on those conditions? Councillor interjecting. What I'd probably suggest there is in planning we're not meant to overstep our market terms of things that are covered by the legislation and obviously there's a health and safety executive nationally who would be responsible for an appropriate place of work so my advice would be that we wouldn't be able to condition that but I would assure you that the HSE do have a strict guidelines on what you can and can't have in a workplace so they wouldn't be applicant or the successful occupier would have to meet those standards. Councillor interjecting. I think we're reaching conclusion so I will in a moment move the recommendation to approve subject conditions but I do just want to clarify those amended conditions which we've discussed. So firstly, I believe that we would like to condition and I will delegate the exact wording of these two offices subject to consultation with the Chair and require submission of an amended OMP with details of the welfare facilities provided for staff before operation. I would also like to at a point of contact for residents to raise any concerns about the management of the premises and then I would also like to propose a condition that we require a new delivery and servicing plan OMP and transport statements submitted after one year of the operation of the site including things like real trip data and say that we can ensure that the management is happening in a responsible way and not causing detrimental impact on residents. Do I have a seconder on that? Councillor interjecting. Yes. Could we add that that it's through agreement with you for that and also about bike storage that is done to agreement with you because you know the plan that the condition on bike storage is agreed through you as well. Yeah. I'll second. Thank you. Okay, in which case can I move to a vote those in favour of approving the application? That's unanimous. Thank you very much. There are no move on to item C. Are there any urgent non-exempt matters? No. In which case I declare the meeting closed, thank you for your attendance. Thank you. Thank you. for your attention. of the city. of the city. of the city. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. of the city. Thank you. the city. the city. Thank you. [BLANK_AUDIO]

Transcript

My name is Councillor Toby North, and I'll be chairing this evening's meeting. Please note that we are not expecting a far alarm test this evening, so if the arm is sounded, please follow my instructions and evacuate the building. I'm going to start by asking my fellow members of the committee and officers to introduce themselves. I'm going to start my right, the members. Councillor Chutter, Cloud Tafflam Park Ward. Councillor Blyham, Dash Highbury Ward. Councillor Hannah Mckew, St Mary, St James Ward. And officers. And now Baker Head of Development Management. Jake Schills, Acting Deputy Team Leader, Planning Applications Team. Fear McLean, Committee Clerk. Laura Avery, Legal Advisor. Thank you. We have one apology for this evening, which is Councillor Paul Convery, and no substitution members. Do we have any declarations of interest? No, thank you. On to the order of business. We only have one item on the agenda this evening, so the order of business will be as printed in the agenda. On to the minutes of the last meeting, is everyone happy to agree those? Thank you. A note on procedure, please note this is not a public meeting, it is a meeting of the Planning Subcommittee held in public, or a march, therefore be addressed through me as chair. The procedure for this evening's committee is that each item will be introduced by a planning officer. Subcommittee members may then ask questions with the officer. Objectors will then be invited to speak, followed by the applicant. The object in the applicant will normally be allowed to speak for no more than three minutes each. After the objectors have spoken, the applicants will have a similar length of time to reply. The subcommittee will deliberate on the application, only as the invited to speak at this stage will then be allowed to do so. When the subcommittee has finished its deliberations, I shall read out the officer recommendations and proceed to vote. Once the item has been taken, there can be no further discussion of the item. On to item B1, then, Management Suite 21 Parkfield Street N1. What's over to officers for their presentation? Evening all, this is the presentation for item B1, prior to presenting the scheme, officers would like to provide an update to members and the Planning Committee regarding additional information on welfare facilities by curious from the applicant. A condition has been suggested and should members be minded to approve the application and officers have drafted the following. Prior to the occupation of the use here by approved details, including a scale drawing 1-100 or 1-200 shall be provided to clearly welfare facilities for curious staff within the site which shall be retained in perpetuity for the use, unless otherwise agreed by the local authority. Once this is complete in terms of the condition wording, this can be circulated to members for consent. Officers would also seek to make amendments to condition 9 to allow the applicants the flexibility of Class E, which is existing use, which are sort within a submission application form. This is the current use of the site. Officers don't see that to be any conflict with policy and seek to amend the wording as such. Again, this can be circulated to members following completion. Thank you. The application site is relevant to the basement area of the Angel Central Shopping Centre located on Parkfield Street. The map on the screen shows the extent of the applicant site area which contains the Shopping Centre and the land associated in blue. The red marking shows the extent of the site access and the basement unit relevant to the application. Next slide. The aerial view with red arrow here indicates the site access to the basement area from street level and its connection with upper street in the background. The existing antoleary retail area of 365 square metres is that basement level would be converted into a space to serve a storage space for the distribution of grocery goods for a dark suit market supplier. The dark suit market will cater exclusively for online grocery shopping. As seen in the image, the spaces have been vacant since the refurbishment of Shopping Centre in 2018 and has not been taken up by H&M who trade at ground and first floor. Next slide. Beyond the unit itself, two existing car parking spaces outside the unit would serve electric bike and bike set down associated to the proposed use with nine cycle parking spaces. A pickup hatch would be formed in the flank wall of the unit to serve goods to drivers and there is existing double doors allowing access to the unit. The dark suit market area as shown in the slides previous would be accessed via the existing car park vehicle access. The access ramp down to the site area is shown in this image with arrows showing entry and exit. In regards to servicing, the use would utilise the Shopping Centre's two off street servicing bays marked as A and B. In regards to the proposal, the applicant has proposed a use of electric or pedal bikes as part of the electric and pedal bikes as part of the courier service. These would be the only vehicles that enter and exit the car parking area as shown in the proposed plan. The use of non motorised bike vehicles is also conditioned at condition 5. Next slide. The cycle parking spaces access to the unit and the relationship with the other units and the car parking area as shown in this wider plan. As shown in the plan, the plan utilises the lifts and the corridors within the service and area of the consentor which allow movement of goods from street level to the basement area below. Next slide. A full assessment has been carried out considering the impacts to residential properties particularly the residential uses closest to the site on Bromfield Street. This has included a noise impact assessment and far a review of the trip generation and impacts on the use of the highway. The operational hours of the use have been closely considered from the pre-application advice and assessment during this application at least have been conditioned to ensure the use of does not have any adverse impact on the community. A full operational management plan was bridged up during the application process to provide further clarity on procedures in relation to delivery servicing and the management of courier's riders which support the proposed use. Next slide. The transport assessments provided have detailed the predicted trip generation associated to the use, the movement and predicted trips have been calculated from other dock supermarket operators. The trip movement analysis has considered a 5km local catchment area for expected deliveries and the split of travel evenly between Parkford Street, Burners Road and Bromfield Street. The trip movement has been reviewed during the course of the application with data presented to clarify to clearly show the peak levels of travel and their impacts. Officers have detailed this within the assessment. As noted in the slides above, the use would utilise two existing off-street service scenarios. The delivery and servicing site would have the hours conditioned to those currently in situ at the shopping centre in order to protect residential meaner tea. The application is recommended for approval. Thank you. Thank you very much. Questions from members of the committee? Councillor MURPHY. Councillor MURPHY. I just wanted to check that I heard something properly. Was it 55 metres, square metres, the space of it? It is 365 metres. Square metres. It is 365 metres, I would definitely miss it. Councillor MURPHY. Councillor MURPHY. Thank you, very helpful presentation. I just wanted to say a bit more about the operational management plan and to walk us through what has already been indicated to you by the applicant will be included in that. You can give the sort of high-level types of things but it would be helpful to hear that spell out. Thanks. Yes, in terms of the full operational management plan that we have now, we wanted to address the issue of loitering and ensuring that courier drivers did not loiter or use the highway area outside of the site, so to say the operational management plan includes a statement that the future operator will ensure all drivers are not allowed to loiter, so when they go down to pick up and collect goods and groceries, they will have a dedicated service in bay and that is where they will be expected to wait for the groceries and then make their way back up through the ramp, up the ramp, sorry, and then out to the various properties for delivery. In regards to the other sort of sections of the operational management plan, there will be a site manager on site and they will be there to ensure that deliveries are maintained and managed in an appropriate way, so there's no build-up of traffic on the highway. And again, that will also be programmed to avoid waste recycling collections and other deliveries that may be coming into the site. Again, the site manager will have the sort of full operational capability to manage deliveries and also the courier's just to make sure there is no loitering outside of the application site area. Thank you. So one big concern is loitering and I'm pleased that's already included, and another concern that I have is that I'm aware especially with advice calls and e-bikes which aren't caught by the measures we take to reduce the flow of traffic, particularly on stub roads in the neighboring area, there's a risk of safety, there's a risk of a lot of traffic coming quickly around corners like onto Bromfield Street, that sort of area. So I wondered if you could just comment if it's agreeable, if it would be even feasible for us to ask to include something like traffic management or advice given to riders or something that this site manager on site could actually maintain an oversight of how those bikes are moving in and out. As it's an operational management plan, you have got the ability to, if you're reminded to grant updated via condition and ask for specific details. Obviously the area we're talking about is outside of the site, but because as you said it's about messaging to riders, I think it's entirely reasonable if you wanted to, to update one of the conditions or suggested conditions to require details of how riders will be informed of access to the site and sort of precautionary measures for safety. In terms of enforceability, just for complete transparency, it would be if riders proceeded to not operate in accordance with that, we'd obviously expect site manager to in the first instance address that. I'd probably suggest as well as some sort of contact number available to local residents for reporting that as well, and if there was a persistent breach that we could demonstrate, we would have means to take enforcement action. One from me, has the applicant submitted any details or welfare facilities, either for careers or for the staff working within the unit as part of the application state? So today we don't have that information, but say we have got a condition that we could agree and again the wording can be circulated if agreed in terms of providing a plan which clearly shows the welfare facilities within the site, whether that be within the unit. That's something that can be clarified, but we can propose a condition just to ensure that we do have those details before any decision is fully made. Thank you. Councillor McLACHLAN. Thanks, Chair. The National Planning Policy Framework 2023 seeks to secure positive growth in a way that effectively balances economic, environmental and social progress for this and future generations. The NPPF is a material consideration and has been taken into account as part of the assessment of these proposals. But I would just like you to go back to that slide with the basement view too. Yes, that one, it's just gone past it, yes, yes, that one, that's it. So if we balance the economic environment on social progress for this and future generations, that is not a happy picture, it's very grim. So as the planning officers, would you expect more detail from this company that wants to work in there as to the operating conditions, the working conditions for the people that will be in there? And what have you included in, what conditions have you put in that will make sure that the workers that are actually working inside there, the chairs already ask for facilities for the welfare facilities, which I totally agree with, but you know, I'm interested in also in ventilation and lighting and heating and, you know, could you please elaborate on what you would expect for workers in a situation like that? Yeah, I agree, it's not your typical workspace, but we have to be conscious of the fact that this has a class of use now and could be used and operated within any of the suite of classes so it could be a shop, it could be retail, it could be offices, and because it's a change of use, we don't have the same level of control as a new build where we would ask for such things as, you know, energy statements about the heating and the quality of the space. We have to take as a material consideration what can currently be useful and also the fact of how much we can reasonably require as part of a planning application so whilst I completely agree, it would be great to have more detail on what goes in there, I don't think it's reasonable for us to ask so. Councillor Anderson. Deliveries to the site go up to, I've proposed to be up to 10 o'clock, which strikes me potentials quite late, is there any reasons why that condition has been applied? Yes, so the conditions have been applied in regards to the hours that we have here in the condition in regards to, they are in regard to the existing operational hours that operate for the Angel Centre, so there's existing retailers, H&M and Wagamommas who also have deliveries within those hours and I'd say we have got the updated transport assessment, which details sort of various deliveries that do take place during the day and the evening. We consider the hours proposed and the condition to be suitable given the commercial area of the site and we consider it reasonable to condition those hours similar to other retailers and occupiers within a shopping centre. Councillor interjecting. Just going back to the trip generation figures, I'm very mindful that this is relatively new and growing use. You said that we'd take in examples of other similar operations and I wish confident that they're very bust, are they recent, you know, of a similar sort of square footage in terms of the amount of space they've got to work from? Yes, so in terms of that response, we have received information from the applicant that they have based their predicted trip generation on other dark supermarket operators, such as Getty and Gorillas. We don't have the specific locations that they have provided, but the applicants are here as well as the transport processor who may be able to provide further comment in terms of the specifics, but they have analysed a number of data from existing dark supermarkets and these are the predicted numbers that they have produced. Councillor CLOCK? Yes, to carry on from that, so you know, objectors have talked about six times the traffic flow in their streets between 10 and 11pm and I use satisfied that there's a status that the noise assessment is good enough and could we make a condition asking that all vehicles are electric that go into this site? So in regards to the noise and the impact to immunity, the noise assessment was fairly reviewed by officers, including the public protection officer, they raised no objections based on the DB levels produced from the bikes and electric bikes based on an assessment made by the assessor. As I say, we are satisfied, broken down in terms of six additional cycles on Bromford Street per hour split across the entire operational hours and again the applicant throughout the application process has updated their transport statements to detail the peak hours and they've shown within those that the passing by of cycles whilst it may be visible wouldn't be harmful or adverse to the immunity of adjoining neighbours, so on that record we're satisfied. So just answer your second question as well, we have got a condition requiring it only to be a bicycle or two-wheeled electric vehicles only, so there's no petrol-powered vehicles going up here. So can you clarify, because I'm asking about delivery vehicles, you know, the... So not the couriers on the bikes, okay, so obviously we've got an existing servicing area here, there will be additional deliveries and they're in the same hours as the other units at the building currently, as per Councillor HAMM, that's your question in terms of why we've gone with that 10 o'clock time. There's two aspects to this, one, we have assessed it with our noise, sorry, pollution colleagues who have an acoustic officer and they're fine with this because it's a typical situation for a street that goes into a servicing area anyway. The other pointers as well, from an enforceability point of view, if we were to try and restrict this even further than the existing centre, because this is a collective servicing yard, it would be extremely difficult to identify which buildings are servicing this unit or which vehicles are servicing H&M or any of the other units in there, so I think it would represent a difficulty. We've already talked about this being a new type of supermarket in this area, can't we insist that as a new development, we haven't had one of these before there, that we can make a requirement that they use electric vehicles, you know, that we can set this sort of precedent. You technically could make a motion to put a condition on to how delivery vehicles to be electric, but I think in terms of assessing that and reasonable in terms of the MPPF, we have to ensure that conditions are enforceable and entirely reasonable, and on the reasonable point we do have policies about sustainable vehicles and maximising that, and we'd have to make an assessment of whether it's reasonable considering the predominant use of the site is using sustainable vehicles in terms of push bikes and electric bikes, but I think it comes down to again the electric vehicle, and we have an open site here with a clear parking area for only that one, I think that would be an enforceable condition because we could say where's the vehicle come from, it's clearly parked at your site, again here we would have to monitor every vehicle that services as an entire shopping centre, and I don't think that is something we could reasonably enforce against, so it would fail the test and the enforceability. Councillor interjecting. Councillor interjecting. Thanks. I am extremely concerned that the peak time is going to be between 10pm and 11pm, and it does say one cycle passing every three minutes, that is quite an incredible amount of cycles for that time of night, and I appreciate you've answered on the point of the impact on amenity, vis-a-vis acoustics and sound, but the other impacts which immediately come to mind is safety, is there sufficient lighting on Bromfield Street, are you satisfied with that assessment, and what are the kinds of impacts you perceive potentially having quite a dangerous flow of traffic late at night there, yes, I'd just like to hear more about what else has been assessed, and if you're satisfied with that. So it obviously has been looked at by our highways team, and they haven't raised a highway safety issue, but I completely understand where you're coming from, the way that the street comes in, and there's a narrows, and then you can come through around the corner. So as I say, we haven't got an identified highway safety issue, there are quite a number of bikes, and if you were concerned about it, you could look at, again, well, one, somebody made the suggestion, sorry, already about the EMP, about how vehicles come to push bike deliveries and electric bikes come to this site, and I suppose it could be something you could look into conditioning in terms of highway safety, and vehicle movements to the site, you could expand upon that operational management plan, sorry, the reason I've struggled a bit is because this sits outside of the application site, we have no physical powers to actually require physical changes to the street, and it's, obviously, we'd have to, again, go through our highways department and look at the actual feasibility of making those changes, so within the power of this application, it would probably be limited to some sort of update to one of the conditions to require the provider of the dark supermarket to ensure that their riders are coming in a responsible manner. Thank you, that's really helpful. The other concern I have with the way from the stub roads, but actually now I'm thinking about the Angel Centre, I'm curious to know, and I'll be asking the applicant about their correspondence too, but curious to know if you've had feedback from the Angel Centre, I'm particularly interested in the safety concerns they have, if any bikes should pass through the Angel Centre, that would obviously cause issues, and whether or not the demand will be on the Angel Centre, which I think already need the resource, they have a patrol coming around to police that area, which suffers, unfortunately, from a lot of petty crime and other disturbances, I'd hate for their resources to be lost to policing this area, so yeah, have you heard from the Angel Centre, and do you think that's incorporated well into this document? We haven't heard from the Angel Centre in regards to that matter, so the applicants may have other information on that point. One hopefully quite straightforward question for me, when the condition refers to e-bikes and pedal bikes, that's electrically assisted bicycles, not electric vehicle motorcycles, yeah, great. Okay, unless there's any other questions of officers, we will move on. Do we have any objectors here to speak on this application, yeah, okay, welcome. If you'd like to just come forward to one of the microphones, you will have three minutes to speak, wherever you will, yeah, wherever, yeah, and you will have your time on the big clock here. I live on the corner of Robville Street, and we are without doubt kept awake continually by the deliveries from the N1 Centre, they are interested in the idea of a site manager because they constantly queue up on Robville Street, on Parkville Street, delivering. They don't seem to adhere to timelines at all, unfortunately, they will go into the early hours. Seven in the morning is too early because the noise of clattering of deliveries onto the metal barriers and everything else, it just wakes up, it's a very, very tight little area to have more congestion coming in. At the moment, the N1 Centre can't manage the number of deliveries they already have there. I mean, I've sent, I'm interested in the highways because we've sent loads of photos to the highways saying this is ridiculous, we have anything after when they have O2 club nights there, the road is absolutely packed, lorries queue up along the back of that road, honking and have to reverse down the road to get out. So the idea of more congestion, more lorries, more deliveries just seems absolutely insane on something that's so tight, it is just madness, I can't quite understand the idea of having it recommended. If people have been up there at night and seen the deliveries, it's pretty crazy. Our little junction at the Bromfield Street is constantly having motorbikes and deliveries already going down that road saying we're going to have more guys, they're doing their job, they're always in a rush, they don't look at, it is a public footpath going across, the crossing is pretty narrow, bikes go up and down there, I can't see how that's going to be made safe for residents long term. On the other side, our Bromfield Street is a great two-listed building, intensifying more deliveries, heavy lorries going down there, shaking the buildings, they already, you know, a lot of them already have cracks down there, you know, because of the intensification we've been having, unfortunately. So as an object to living on Bromfield Street, I can only say I just hope you just doesn't go through because it's really, you're not, as a council, we're not being protected, we've had five years of complaining to the highways, they said they can't put lights or they can't put a video camera on the end of the road because they haven't got enough funding. We're constantly right to enforcement office and they said in the previous planning application, they haven't had 10pm set on the other applications, so we have deliveries, as I said, and I'm happy to send you hundreds of photos of deliveries that go through the night and it's, it, to say they have a site manager who looks after the deliveries is slightly comical, not even slightly, absolutely hysterical, that's me, so I'm Jake. Thank you, members may have questions for you in a few moments, we've got the applicant team brilliant, so you also have three minutes with which be useful if you tried to address some of the objections made by the objector. Thank you, Chair. The opportunity to respond to the local resident we've just heard from, we understand the concern from resident both now when we consulted prior to the submission, as part of the application we've worked extensively with officers to address these points. To be clear, the after a car park within Angel Central was reduced as part of the previous application to refresh the shopping centre. This was intended as storage space but it's not been used as imagined and it's been vacant for six years. As you've heard, we're proposing a grocery delivery store located in this vacant space despite a sense of marketing as a storage space, the only interest has come from delivery companies, as acknowledged by officers, as a unit, as no frontage or windows, as potential uses are limited. The use known as the dark supermarket seeks to meet an identified demand for rapid convenience goods delivered direct to local resident stores, a delivery radius of 5 kilometres is outlined and given the deliveries we made by e-bike or conventional bike, now required to be made in a 30-minute window, no vehicles will be used to deliver products to customers. The proposed use provides a local service to deliver top-up grocery items to become increasingly popular in recent years. The site is ideally located within the existing basement unit of the shopping centre to address this need. To respond to concerns regarding trip generation and associated impacts on immunity, we would like to reiterate that 90% of additional movements will be associated with the delivery of grocery items by bicycles and e-bikes, a small percentage of the delivery of the goods to the units. Searching and delivery of the goods to the unit will be made in line with the pre-conditions of the 2017 consent. The reason on site manager, who obviously we can raise some of these concerns with and the operational management plan that's going to be secured by condition, sets out how deliveries can be consolidated and this will be effectively managed through this condition and obviously we can raise these concerns that have been flagged here tonight so that they can be picked up with the site manager. For supporting statements prepared by the Transport Consultant, grouped by key market operators such as Getter, Gorilla and Weezy, given the use of cycles to deliver the impact of proposed trips will be indiscernible to those living to neighbouring residential streets and the noise impact was submitted to demonstrate this. In summary, the proposals would put in our active use, a long-standing vacant unit within the Angel Central Shopping Centre and provide local employment for young people as well as a local service for the community. Any operator will have to be committed to the use of cycle deliveries to customers and the terms of the operational management plan submitted. Thank you. Thank you. Questions for members of the committee either for objectives or for the applicant, Councillor Muck. Can I just ask the officer's question? So after hearing the objector talk about vehicles delivering all through the night, what's your response to that? Because ten o'clock is supposed to be the deadline for the whole centre. Absolutely. Something I've made a note of it and I'm going to raise you with our planning enforcement team tomorrow. If there's hours in place there that they should be doing it by and they're exceeding now and there's clear evidence of it, we will do something about it. Councillor interjecting. Great. I've been keen to ask the objector actually, what kind of hours might you observe peak queuing time is happening. I'd be interested to know when you see kind of Lori's back here. Thank you. a lot. a lot of people. a lot of people. A lot of people talk about this. I'd be interested to know when you see the information that you're seeing. I'm going to ask the report. I'm going to ask the question. What are the questions for you? Just ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. Can I ask the question? I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. Is there a question for the question? I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. Just to pick up the objectors' point about the... It's quite obvious that the residents around there are suffering greatly at the moment with the amount of traffic. This dark supermarket is going to increase the amount of traffic. The point that was made by the objector was that seven o'clock is too early and I just wondered if it would be possible for you to work from eight o'clock on that point. Would you consider making sure that all your delivery vehicles are electric? Because in the application you talk about using many transit vans, not many transit vans, but because the difference between an HTV and an electric transit van is huge. Would you consider using electric vehicles to make your deliveries? And then finally, you've got 20 employees operating from this site, including the couriers, which is good news that there will be employees of... Who will there be employees of actually? Could you clarify who will be the actual employer of these people and what wage they'll be getting paid? Hello. So I can answer the first two, but I might have to pass to a colleague for your last question. So I'm the transport consultant involved. In terms of the traffic hours involved, I think we just need to be clear that the delivery hours for stocking the unit begin at 8am, whereas operationally it would begin at 7am, but that would be limited to cycles and e-bikes. So from our perspective, we consider that to have less of an impact than you would consider for a delivery vehicle or a delivery van. That would be people exiting from the basement when they've collected the goods and cycling on local streets. In terms of a commitment to electric vehicles for deliveries, so in conversation with the various occupies that could take the unit, we got lots of data back in terms of the deliveries, and there's a wide range of supply and logistics that go behind this certain. Supplies will just use electric vehicles as their standard. Others would rather use a slightly larger vehicle and only do one delivery a day. It depends on the supply chains involved. So there will already be some supplies who will commit to electric vehicles, but there will be other supplies who, because of their network, would prefer to use one larger truck, which would obviously have sustainability benefits of consolidation. I think I'll just pick up on the other question. Yeah, so they have interested operators such as Novwese, Gorilla, Gete, but there's been no confirmation of kind of operator yet because obviously any offer would be subject to planning. So I am unable to confirm anticipated wages, but they would assume that there would be at least a minimum wage or more. Just to say, you know, isn't it a London living wage? London living wage then. Well, yeah, sorry, they're not living wage then. Not on that point. But on the point that the transport expert said, if you were minded to, I know I've suggested a lot of conditions here, just if you were minded to approve and you wanted to have full details of the delivery and servicing, you could require a delivery and servicing plan with details of how sustainable motor transport have been maximised. Now that would entail the applicant submitting details to officers. We'd make an assessment and if it was clearly justified that they couldn't do it, we might be in a position where we have to approve it, but it might also require them to look into. And as they said, if they had an operator in mind by that time, they could actually potentially commit to electric vehicles at that point. So that would be reasonable. Any other questions, Councillor Anderson. Great. If I could ask a question with transport expert, actually, thank you. I just wondered when you were looking at the research of current traffic flows. To what degree you kind of observed current amounts of delivery queuing and how compatible that might be, perhaps with the peak hours of the number of cycles that you're kind of imagining coming out of there. Yeah, it's a good question. So we undertook traffic surveys of Parkfield Street, so the entrance into the estate and Berners Road. We would consider that to receive actually quite a low level of traffic when considering other streets in this area. But I appreciate it's a matter of perspective. In terms of the peak hours, because of the type of collections that we're having, they would actually fall outside of what we would consider your usual peak hours for deliveries. So you would often find that deliveries would like to get in early in the morning, or a second one in the evening. Whereas for collections, it's about when people would like to have their groceries delivered. So actually, we don't consider that the net peak for people needing deliveries meets with the cycles exiting. Let me tell you any further questions. Should we move to deliberation? OK. I can sense there's a lot of unease amongst members, and I think that principally comes from the fact that this is a relatively new use and it's one that's growing quite significantly. So we're in uncharted territory as a committee, and indeed as a planning authority. I think from my perspective, there's a lot of unknowns around the operational management at the site, around delivery and servicing. I want to be clear on that point that we can only consider and condition for the delivery and servicing around this one unit, even if there are issues with the wider centre. But that has given us our assurance that that would be taken away and raised with enforcement colleagues. Given these concerns, I think there are some conditions that we can suggest to strengthen. So I particularly would like to see a condition that the officer mentioned around stipulating of welfare facilities for staff, both working within the unit and those riders who are collecting from the unit. I also would like to pick up Councillor McKew's point around having a single named point of contact for residents if there are any concerns around the operation of the unit. But I think coming back to the transport point, given it's a new and growing use, I'm really concerned that the figures that we're basing, the trip generation figures may not be robust, given it's relatively new. So I'm considering whether we should look at conditions that would require a new transport statement, and perhaps even a new OMP and delivery and servicing plan to be submitted and approved by the Planning Authority after one year of operation, just so we can have absolute certainty that if we give this permission or recommendation this evening, then we do have a full-back position if the operation does not run as we would expect with the high standards that we expect in order to mitigate impact on residents. So that's where I'm at, but I'm going to open up for any other contributions, Councillor CLARK. Yeah, I mean, it's really obvious that this is a highly congested area already, that there are five supermarkets serving that immediate vicinity, and that this is an added, it's going to be an added impact on the residential area around it. I agree with you, Chair, about making this management plan and reviewing it in a year. I think that's a good thing to ask about, and the other point you made. So I just think that we need to be really conscious that there's a stress point now on that area and that we really need to be listening to the residents and to be, as has been proposed, but that we don't want any more, we don't want too much extra stress on that point in that area. The applicant made the point that, oh, it's very low traffic. Well, that's what we wanted, isn't it? Actually, that is exactly what we want, low traffic neighbourhood. So I would really, if we could put into your traffic management that we would encourage, we'd like to encourage electric vehicles and no HDVs, if we could put that in, and see how that is going at the end of that year, that would be good. And the point about the employees is welcome, that these careers are going to be direct employees of the company. Can we put that in as well? That we want to make sure that those people are employed on good terms and conditions at the end of that year? I'm going to refer to colleagues. I don't believe that would be a material planning consideration. Councillor Mckew. Thank you. I have two major frustrations, both of which, Chair, you've alluded to, are somewhat beyond our control. First, there are clearly wider issues around management of the area, and I'm very glad you'll be taking it up with highways, and I think it's a learning point for us as a council. How are we in touch with the management of this obviously touchpoint area? The second frustration I have is around the lack of power we have to talk in a deeper sense about working conditions. I was quite shocked to hear that that space could be used for office use, that is really startling. But I am reassured by the conditions we've already discussed. So conditions around working conditions, also around management plans, and as the Chair mentioned, the one-year stipulation that we can refer back to regarding traffic flows. I haven't been convinced that there's a very clear grasp on how these management plans are going to be introduced and monitored, so I would hope that, should this be approved, there would be a consultation ongoing, whether with the Chair or some representative to make sure that these management plans actually do end up looking sensible and are going to be enforced carefully and closely. And I think finally one thing which I would like to comment on, which is while I would prefer to see traffic reduced in the area, I do appreciate that largely this is going to be relying on bikes and e-bikes, which to some extent is in the right direction of moving away from carbon emitting transport. So on balance, I can't see anything here that would, to a significant enough extent, contravene the material consideration would be significantly material considerations. So it would be minded to approve of very much with those conditions and stipulations in mind. Thank you. I'm going to come to Council Hand House and I'll come back to you, Council. So I am struck by the constraints that we have in approving or reviewing this application based on the overall kind of constraints or guidelines given to the overall scheme, down to the overall building. I think if we were looking at the entire building as an entire site, I'm not sure we would be looking at those hours. And I think we'd be looking at a more comprehensive transport management plan. I'm very conscious on the limitations of trying to put constraints on this development alone and how enforceable that would be. And so I say that with some disappointment and I am struck by the impact of even if it is one HDV and the extra kind of traffic and size of those vehicles are not the things that I'd like to be encouraging in London. And I'd love for whoever does operate the site to think about really meaningfully about reducing that kind of vehicles and looking at electric vehicles. As planning authority, our own force ability on that is quite limited. I would really urge, I mean, the objective is if the current planning is not being listened to and developed, I'd love to hear it as a Council and I'd love to hold our planning authority to account on why the current hours aren't being managed and to raise that as a Councillor because it's not acceptable, but it is not material grounds in this case. And so I just started, you know, I'm disappointed, I think, to see these kind of jobs being created. I don't think they're good jobs. I think they are another example of exploitative work in Islington, not delivering good quality pay, but again, it's not material quality, but I'd be minded to support the development sadly. Well, yeah, I just want to clarify about this working conditions. So we can't make conditions for the work, for the careers and the people working there. But we need to think about health and safety and, you know, ventilation. And can we make any sort of condition on those conditions? And what I've probably said yesterday is in planning, we're not meant to overstep our work in terms of things that are covered by the legislation. And obviously, there's a health and safety executive nationally who would be responsible for an appropriate place of work. So my advice would be that we wouldn't be able to condition that. But I would assure you that the HSE do have a strict guidelines on what you can and can't have in a workplace. So they wouldn't be applicant or the successful occupy would have to be those standards. I think we're reaching conclusion. So I will in a moment move the recommendation to approve subject conditions. But I do just want to clarify those amended conditions, which we've discussed. So firstly, I believe that we would like to condition and I will delegate the exact wording of these two officers subject to consultation with the chair. And require submission of an amended OMP with details of the welfare facilities provided for staff before operation. I would also like to point of contact for residents to raise any concerns about the management premises. And then I would also like to propose a condition that we require a new delivery and servicing plan OMP and transport statement submitted after one year of the operation of the site. Including things like real trip data and say that we can ensure that the management is happening in a responsible way and not causing detrimental impact on residents. Do I have a seconder on that? Yes. Could we add that it's through agreement with you and also about bike storage that is done to agreement with you because you know the plan that the condition on bike storage is agreed through you as well. Thank you. Okay, in which case can I move to a vote those in favor of approving the application. That's unanimous. Thank you very much. And there are no move on to item C. Are there any urgent non-exempt matters? No. In which case I declare the meeting closed. Thank you for your attendance. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [BLANK_AUDIO]