The Development Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Monday 23 August 2021 and refused a planning application for a new six-storey co-working space on Hanbury Street. The committee also discussed meeting procedures and terms of reference.

Refusal of Planning Application for 68-80 Hanbury Street

The committee unanimously refused a planning application for the erection of a new six-storey building to provide co-working space at 68-80 Hanbury Street, London E1 5JL. The proposal included 1,248 square metres of use Class E co-working space, an ancillary cafe, and on-site servicing facilities.

The primary reasons for refusal centred on the development's impact on the character and appearance of the Brick Lane and Fournier Street Conservation Area. Councillors expressed concerns that the proposed design, materiality, and colour were not in keeping with the historic character of the area, which includes Grade II listed buildings.

Significant concerns were also raised regarding the impact on neighbouring residents' amenity. Specifically, the proximity of the proposed building to residential properties on Princelet Street, with a minimum distance of 11 metres to habitable room windows, was deemed unacceptable. This was seen to contribute to a sense of enclosure, loss of light, and potential loss of privacy for residents. While the applicant's agent highlighted that the 18-metre separation distance mentioned in council policy primarily applies to residential-to-residential overlooking and that historic streets in the area are often narrower, councillors remained unconvinced that the 11-metre proximity was acceptable, particularly for ground-floor residents.

The committee also noted that while the proposal offered affordable workspace, exceeding adopted policy requirements, this did not outweigh the concerns regarding design, heritage, and amenity. Councillors indicated a willingness to consider a revised scheme that addressed these issues, particularly the proximity to neighbouring properties and the design's compatibility with the conservation area.

During the discussion, Councillor David Edgar noted that while the site is currently a vacant car park and service yard, and it was positive to see development proposed, he shared concerns about the design's suitability for the area and the proximity issues raised by objectors. Councillor Kyrsten Perry echoed these concerns, particularly regarding the 11-metre distance and its impact on residents' daylight and sense of enclosure. Councillor Kahar Chowdhury also raised questions about the affordable workspace provision and the disruption to existing businesses during construction.

The applicant's agent, Adam Williams, and representatives from Second Home, the applicant, argued that the design was contemporary and of high quality, intended to complement the evolving character of the area. They highlighted the provision of affordable workspace, which they stated exceeded policy requirements, and the positive social and economic benefits the co-working space would bring. Ignacio Pedro from DOSIS Architects and Richard Howarth from Second Home were present to answer questions.

Meeting Procedures and Terms of Reference

The committee also confirmed the minutes of the previous meeting held on 27 April 2021. The election of a vice-chair for the committee was deferred until the September Council meeting. Paul Buckenham, Head of Planning Policy and Enforcement, presented the meeting guidance, outlining the process for considering reports, public speaking, and decision-making. The committee also noted the Development Committee Terms of Reference, Quorum, Membership, and Date of Meeting report.