[email protected] Mr Chris Jackson

Foireviews@Camden.Gov.Uk Mr Chris Jackson

Date: 09 December 2016 Your Reference: Our Reference: 20685364 Enquiries to: Andrew Maughan Email: [email protected] Law & Governance London Borough of Camden Town Hall Mr Chris Jackson Judd Street London, WC1H 9JE [email protected] Tel 020 7974 5656 [email protected] www.camden.gov.uk

Dear Mr Jackson

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 I have considered your appeal against the decision in relation to your request for access to information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I have also considered information from the departments that provided information regarding the Council’s response to your request. My decision is that your appeal is partially upheld. The reasons for my decision are set out below. I partly uphold this appeal. There were some technical difficulties in sending the redacted documents and parts were redacted which should not have been. I attach a version which only has those parts redacted which we consider are covered by an exemption. On the other parts you consider were not answered you have received all the information we have other than our failure to record meeting dates. A list is now attached. All notes are kept electronically. Those with the title Senior are still relatively junior employees whose identities’ we would not reveal. If you are not satisfied with the manner in which your appeal was handled you should contact the Information Commissioner within two months of receiving this letter. The Information Commissioner will not consider complaints outside of this timeframe, except under exceptional circumstances. He can be contacted at the Information Commissioner’s Office Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Telephone: 01625 545 700 or email: [email protected].

Yours sincerely

Andrew Maughan Borough Solicitor

After searching our electronic system we can confirm:

A visit to Museum House on 15/07/16 at 14:00PM in relation to the planning application 2016/3411/P – conversion; and on 03/10/16 at 15:00PM in relation to the application for approval of details 2016/4388/P

As well as:

2013/4368/P – 07/08/13 11.00am 2013/6937/PRE – 26/11/13 10.25am 2013/7239/P – information not held – not retained after case officer left the Council 2015/3700/PRE P – information not held – not retained after case officer left the Council 2015/5169/P P – information not held – not retained after case officer left the Council 2016/3411/P – 15/07/16 2pm

2 July 2013

Museum House - Office Availability Schedule Report

1. New Oxford Street WC1A 1

Lease: New lease direct from the landlord Size: 1,700 - 3,400 sq ft Rates: £17.00 Rent: £22.50 psf Service charge: £7.00

Building Description/Comments: Comfort cooling Raised floors Suspended ceiling 2 x Passenger lifts. New lease available for a term by arrangement.

2. New Oxford Street WC1A 1

Lease: 1-6 years Size: 1,000 - 2,000 sq ft Service charge: £5.00 Rent: to be confirmed

Building Description/Comments: Central heating, newly redecorated. New lease/s available for a term by arrangement.

3. Russell Square House WC1B5

Lease: Short Term Lease Size: 1,750 - 1,750 sq ft Rent: to be confirmed

Building Description/Comments: Air conditioning, metal tiled suspended ceiling, raised floor, secondary glazing, manned ground floor reception.

4. Gray's Inn Road WC1X 8

Lease: New lease direct from the landlord Size: 1,700 - 8,682 sq ft Rates: £17.00 Rent: £24.50 psf Service charge: £8.00

Building Description/Comments: Part Ground and first floor (6,982 sq ft) benefits from B1/D1 dual use and is self-contained, accessed from its own entrance at Verulam Street; third Floor circa 1,700 sq ft of newly refurbished, fitted out space. 1

Schedule of Areas:

Floor sq ft sq m £/sq ft £/sq m

1st 5,617 522 25 264 Pt Ground 1,365 127 25 264 Pt 3rd 1,700 158 25 264 TOTAL 8,682 807 74 791

5. 1 Emerald Street, Bloomsbury, London WC1N 3

Lease: A New Full Repairing & Insuring Lease For A Size: 887 - 1,780 sq ft Rates: £9.00 Rent: £32.50 psf Service charge: £7.50

Building Description/Comments: Victorian Converted Warehouse - To Be Refurbished - Good Natural Daylight - Good Floor to Ceiling Heights - Open Plan Floors - Exposed Brickwork - Self-Contained Male & Female WC's - New Modern Lighting - Original Concrete Floors .

6. Great Russell Street WC1B 3

Lease: By Arrangement Size: 1,610 - 1,610 sq ft Rates: £12.65 Rent: £39.75 psf

Building Description/Comments: Comfort Cooling / Heating, Shower, Capped-off services, Male and Female WC’s, Entry phone system, Alarm.

7. Drury Lane WC2B 5

Lease: A new direct from the landlord 20 Size: 1,984 - 1,984 sq ft Rates: £20.00 Rent: £47.50 psf Service charge: £12.54

Building Description/Comments: The building was extensively refurbished in 2009 and the 4th floor has been fitted out to a high standard and is available on a new lease direct from the landlord. Amenities include: High quality fit out to include reception area, 3 meeting rooms, kitchenette area and coms / post room, VRF air conditioning, raised flooring and perimeter trunking, plasterboard ceiling and inset lighting, passenger lift, shower facility, commissionaire.

Schedule of Areas:

Floor sq ft sq m £/sq ft £/sq m

4th floor 1,984 184 48 511 TOTAL 1,984 184 48 511

8. Little Russell Street, London WC1A 2 2

Lease: By Arrangement Size: 1,580 - 1,580 sq ft Rates: £11.88 Rent: £32.50 psf Service charge: £4.00

Building Description/Comments: Self-contained office/studio divided into two large open plan areas with feature, vaulted ceiling, kitchen and WC's. *Central heating *Laminate wood effect flooring *Kitchen *Own male/female toilets *Entryphone *Good natural light.

9. Jockeys Fields, WC1R 4

Lease: 2 years Size: 800 - 800 sq ft Rent: to be confirmed

Building Description/Comments: Manned reception, leading to 2 lifts. The suite has air con, raised floors, new carpets, access to a large roof terrace, an underground car park.

______

10. High Holborn WC1V 6

Lease: A new lease for a term by arrangement. Size: 1,128 - 1,128 sq ft Rates: £15.87 Rent: £35.00 psf Service charge: £8.42

Building Description/Comments: 11th Floor. Air Conditioning- 2 x Passenger Lift- Superb Natural Light- Car Parking- Comissionaire- Balcony - 24 Hour Access.

11. Bedford Square WC1B 3

Lease: A lease to Feb 2015 Size: 1,800 - 1,800 sq ft Rent: £61.00 psf

Building Description/Comments: A short term furnished open plan office available for a term to Feb 2014. Very quiet location. Meeting rooms available for hire.

12. Russell Square WC1B 4

Lease: Flexible - 1 year min Size: 765 - 765 sq ft Rates: £14.00 Rent: £39.00 psf Service charge: £7.00

Building Description/Comments: Fully fitted office available with furniture on flexible term. Period building with modern interior offers excellent working environment. Shower / kitchen / garden (use of) / lift / meeting and board room available for hire.

13. 4 Russell Square WC1B 4

Lease: Sub-lease minimum term 1 year Size: 1,100 - 1,100 sq ft Rent: £60.00 psf (fully inc)

Building Description/Comments: Conference rooms available on request - Kitchenette - Passenger lift - Good natural light - Flexible terms.

14. Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8

Lease: A new lease directly from the freeholder Size: up to 1,102 sq ft Rates: £7.50 Rent: £20.00 psf Service charge: £1.00

Building Description/Comments: Flexible Terms - Economic Rent - Low outgoings – Kitchen.

15. High Holborn WC1V 7

Lease: New lease available from landlord Size: 2,100 sq ft Rates: £16.24 Rent: £39.50 psf Service charge: £7.78

Building Description/Comments: Self contained, second floor office benefitting from high ceilings, wood panelling and stain glass windows. Passenger lift; Wood floors; Concierge.

16. Red Lion Square WC1R 4

Lease: New lease available from landlord Size: 703 - 703 sq ft Rates: £14.29 Rent: £34.50 psf Service charge: £5.78

Building Description/Comments: Grade II listed Georgian terrace property; Perimeter and underfloor trunking kitchenette Access to toilets and a shower; Space will be refurbished prior to tenant moving in.

Schedule of Areas:

Floor sq ft sq m £/sq ft £/sq m

TOTAL

17. Boswell Street, London WC1N 3

Lease: New short form of lease to expire Jan 2015 Size: 800 - 800 sq ft Rates: £11.70 4

Rent: £25.00 psf Service charge: £8.90

Building Description/Comments: The unit comprises an open plan area with two private offices, with use of communal Kitchen and WC's. Amenities include: *Central Heating*Under Floor Trunking*Suspended ceiling*Entryphone*Shared Kitchen*CAT V Cabling*Storage by Arrangement*Commissionaire.

18. Kingsway, WC2 WC2B 6

Lease: A new lease(s) for a term by arrangement Size: 538 - 1,401 sq ft Rent: £37.50 psf

Building Description/Comments: Part 5th floor - 1,371 sq ft - Undergoing refurbishment. Part 3rd floor - 1,401 sq ft - Fully refurbished part 2nd floor - 5,38 sq ft - Undergoing refurbishment; 2x lifts Comfort Cooled Perimeter trunking, Kitchenettes.

19. Tottenham Court Road W1T 7

Lease: Lease for a term to expire 31st January 2017 Size: up to 1,053 sq ft Service charge: £5.00 Rent: £28.50 psf

Building Description/Comments: Fitted out Comfort Cooled - Perimeter Trunking - 24 hour access - Central Heating - Excellent natural light - Plaster board ceiling - Passenger lift - Part Secondary Glazing.

20. Bedford Square WC1B 3

Lease: For a term to Feb 2014 Size: 400 - 790 sq ft Rent: £55.00 psf (fully inc)

Building Description/Comments: Period style offices; central heating; fully carpeted.

21. Gray's Inn Road WC1X 8

Lease: New sublease for a term to January 2017 Size: 850 - 850 sq ft Rent: £25.00 psf

Building Description/Comments: Perimeter Trunking Kitchenette, Passenger Lift, CAT 5 Cabling (untested), Central Heating, Wood Flooring.

22. Bedford Row WC1R 4

Lease: New lease from the Landlord Size: 1,001 - 3,122 sq ft Rates: £12.70 Rent: £36.50 psf

Building Description/Comments: Lwr gnd, gnd & 1st floors, Fully refurbished to inc air con, perimeter trunking, feature lighting, passenger lift, refurbished entrance hall.

23. Long Acre, Covent Garden WC2E 9

Lease: Sub leases until July 2015. Alternatively the Size: 934 - 7,221 sq ft Rates: £17.00 Rent: £37.50 psf Service charge: £12.00

Building Description/Comments: Contemporary offices with a feature atrium and interconnecting walkways. A combination of open plan and cellular offices with the following amenities:- Large glazed atrium; Feature staircase; Air conditioning / comfort cooling; Passenger lift; Raised floors; Perimeter trunking; Roof terrace on 4th. Schedule of Areas:

Floor sq ft sq m £/sq ft £/sq m

4th floor 934 87 3rd floors 2,150 200 2nd floor 2,750 255 1st floor 1,388 129 SUB TOTAL 7,222 671 TOTAL 7,222 671

24. Macklin Street WC2B 5

Lease: New lease ready for occupation early Summer Size: up to 7,778 sq ft Rent: £47.00 psf

Building Description/Comments: Own entrance with attractive reception and lift * large boardroom/directors office * raised floors * suspended lighting * air con * two decked terraces * new windows * floor to ceiling glazed top floor.

25. Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8

Lease: A new lease(s) available by arrangement Rent:Si 954£32.503 274psf ft ServiceR t £13 charge: 91 £4.54

Building Description/Comments: Refurbished office accommodation. Features include: - LG7 compliant lighting - Perimeter trunking - Passenger lift - VRV air conditioning - Modern WCs throughout - Plastered ceilings.

Schedule of Areas:

Floor sq ft sq m £/sq ft £/sq m

4th Floor 954 3rd Floor 1,165 2nd Floor 1,155

TOTAL 3,274

From: To: Subject: RE: Museum Street (Ref: 2013/4368/P) Date: 30 July 2013 10:02:03 Attachments: E1-001 Existing Ground first and third Floor core plan.pdf

Ok thanks. An existing ground floor plan was submitted with the application, and I enclose a further copy for convenience.

Director for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

This email and any attached files are intended solely for the addressee/s, and may contain confidential or priviledged information If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email/attachments If you have received it in error please telephone the sender immediately We try to ensure that this email/attachments are free from viruses, but the recipient is solely responsible for confirming this by their own means Neither the company nor sender will accept any liability whatsoever for damage claimed to have arisen from the use of this email/attachments

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 30 July 2013 09:51 To: Subject: RE: Museum Street (Ref: 2013/4368/P)

None that I have picked up, but I haven’t been able to look at the plans in any detail yet.

Planning Officer (East Area Team)

Telephone: 020 7974

From: [mailto: prime-planning.co.uk] Sent: 30 July 2013 09:48 To: Subject: RE: Museum Street (Ref: 2013/4368/P)

I will take instructions on this and come back to you. Before I do, please can you just confirm there are no other issues arising out of the application.

Regards,

Director

for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 29 July 2013 11:16 To: prime-planning.co.uk' Subject: Museum Street (Ref: 2013/4368/P)

Dear I have liaised with my transport colleague in respect of the proposed cycle store and the feedback was that it was considered to be unacceptable in the location given the doors that have to be entered through and the proposed access staircase down into the basement area. As such he has requested that an existing ground floor plan is submitted in order to ascertain whether it can be re-located at ground floor level. Would it be possible for you to submit an existing ground floor plan for consideration please?

Regards

Planning Officer (East Area Team) Planning and Public Protection Culture and Environment London Borough of Camden

Telephone: 020 7974 Web: camden.gov.uk

6th Floor Town Hall Extension (Environment) Argyle Street London WC1H 8EQ

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or 12/08/2013

Team Case Conference

Raised the issue of overlooking into existing terraces and windows and the consensus was that if the site were not in an exclusion zone then the development would be PD. Given that the windows overlook the terrace and that there is no direct overlooking into the windows of the site facing the application site it was considered that the proposal was acceptable in terms of the nature of the overlookign that would be created 12/08/2013

Team Case Conference

Attended transport surgery and raised concerns in respect of the proposed location of the cycle storage at lower ground floor level. Advised that I request a ground floor plan to ascertain whether it could be better located at ground floor level. 29/07/2013

Additional plan requested of existing ground floor layout. Liaised with at transport surgery on Friday 26/07 who expressed that he was unhappy with the cycle storage being at basement level given that they would have to navigate 2xdoors and a staircase. He wanted to look at the ground floor plan to ascertain whehter bike store could be re-located there. 06/08/2013

Further discussed issue of the cycle storage area with at transport surgery yesterday (05/08)and it was conclued that should there be no option to relocate the bike store at ground floor level then we should agree to it being stored at basement level although it should be made explicit in any report that this is an exception to the rule.

From: To: Planning Subject: Request for Pre-Application Advice - Cheque in Pre-app folder. BV 28/10/2013 Date: 23 October 2013 13:24:02 Attachments: 20130072 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 23.10.2013.pdf Museum House - Site Location Plan.pdf P1-107 Proposed Fifth Floor_revA.pdf Draft Design and Access Statement.pdf Draft Heritage and Townscape Assessment.pdf

To whom it may concern

Please see attached. This is being sent via email as the client will be sending a cheque direct to the Council in respect of the relevant fee.

Yours faithfully,

Director for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

PRIME 2 Parkhill Barns Larkwhistle Farm Road Planning & Development Limited West Stratton Intelligent Hampshire SO21 3QY Innovative Incisive Telephone: 01962 Email: [email protected]

Regeneration and Planning London Borough of Camden 6th Floor Camden Town Hall Extension Argyle Street London WC1H 8EQ

Our Ref: 20130072 Your Ref: -

Date: 23 October 2013

Dear Sir or Madam

LONDON WC1A – MUSEUM HOUSE, MUSEUM STREET WC1A REQUEST FOR PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE (MEDIUM DEVELOPMENT)

We act on behalf of Devonshire Metro Limited, freeholder of this property, and are instructed to seek pre-application advice in respect of a proposed new fifth floor roof extension to the property for use as a single residential dwelling (class C3 use).

Attached to this letter are:

• A site location plan at 1:1250 scale;

• A draft Design and Access Statement (incorporating photographs, plans and drawings of the relevant parts of the building as existing, and as proposed);

• A draft Heritage and Townscape Assessment; and

• A cheque for the relevant pre-application fee in the sum of £1,400, payable to “London Borough of Camden” (this will be sent under cover of separate letter direct from the freeholder’s managing agent).

We request that this matter be dealt with by way of a meeting with officers, followed by written advice from officers.

In this letter we set out: the background to the proposal being contemplated; details about the building, occupiers, and planning history; commentary in respect of relevant planning policies; and, details of the advice sought from officers of the Council.

20130072 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 23.10.2013

Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Off ce at 1 Gloster Court, Whittle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Property Background, and the Development Proposal

Museum Street is a building arranged over six floors (basement, ground, and floors 1-4 above). The ground floor is occupied by a gift shop, a hairdresser, an estate / lettings agency, and a café.

The first floor is occupied for part residential purposes (pursuant to planning permission granted in 1976), and part office use. Part of the second, and all the third floor of the building are utilised as office accommodation. The basement is utilised as ancillary storage space.

The remainder of the property (part of the second floor, and all of the fourth floor) is vacant. Pursuant to a very recent planning permission (ref: 2013/4368/P dated 15 October) it is anticipated that these parts of the building will soon be converted to three residential flats.

The application premises were constructed in about 1890. We anticipate the property would originally have been constructed as a single private residence. The building is located within the Bloomsbury conservation area. The building is not Listed.

The proposed fifth floor residential apartment would comprise a three bedroom apartment (albeit of course that a bedroom could, say, be used as a home office/study – as indicated on the layout drawing). In total, the apartment would comprise 155sq.m. (gross internal).

Access would be via the existing stair access core. Presently, the core provides access to the flat roof area of the building, and the access would be adapted to provide a self-contained, secure and private access to the apartment. Access via passenger lift to the half-landing on the floor below the apartment would remain as at present.

Relevant Planning Policies

We have examined the adopted Camden Core Strategy, and separate Development Policies local development document (LDD) (both November 2010), along with the Council’s (supplementary) Planning Guidance (CPG1) in respect of design (April 2011), and CPG2 in respect of housing (September 2013). We comment on each of these below as appropriate.

Separately, the draft Heritage and Townscape Assessment has had regard to the relevant conservation area documents, including the Bloomsbury Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy (April 2011).

A) The Principle of (Class C3) Residential Use

There can be no doubt whatsoever that residential development in this location is appropriate. Part of Museum House is already in residential use, and other parts have permission for conversion to residential use (see above). Moreover, other properties within Museum Street are in residential use, particularly on the upper floors of buildings.

20130072 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 23.10.2013 2 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Core Strategy

Policy CS6(e) confirms housing as being “the” priority land-use of the Council’s Local Development Framework. We recognise that paragraph 6.18 of the Core Strategy states that “The priority the Council gives to housing will not override, but will be considered alongside, inter alia, the characteristics of specific areas, sites and properties.” As noted above, the property is located within a conservation area, and we therefore consider the design and heritage issues associated with the proposal below.

Development Policies LDD

Policy DP2 seeks to maximise housing supply within the Borough. This reflects Policy CS6 above.

In respect of affordable housing (Policy DP3) we confirm the owner of the property would be prepared to enter into a s106 agreement, similar to that entered into as part of the granting of planning permission ref: 2013/4368/P dated 15 October.

Camden Planning Guidance (CPGs 1 and 2)

We consider that the proposed roof extension would be consistent with the advice and requirements of section 5 (roofs, terraces and balconies) of CPG1.

We note that CPG2 (housing) is considered to relate primarily to development that:

• Provides an additional 1,000sq.m. or more of residential floor space;

• Provides an additional 200sq.m. or more of non-residential floor space in certain locations;

• Provides affordable housing; or

• Involves the loss and replacement of affordable housing.

None of the above applies to the proposed development.

B) Design and Heritage Matters

Submitted as part of this pre-application submission are a draft Design and Access Statement, and a draft Heritage and Townscape Assessment. These documents are intended to show how the proposal would achieve a high quality design, and respect the conservation area setting of Museum House.

Having examined the Core Strategy and Development Policies LDD we consider the relevant design and conservation policies would be:

• Policy CS5: managing the impact of development;

• Policy CS14: promoting high quality places and conserving heritage;

20130072 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 23.10.2013 3 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

• Policy DP5: size of new residential units;

• Policy DP6: all new residential to meet Lifetime Homes standards;

• Policy DP18: car and cycle parking standards;

• Policy DP24: securing high quality design;

• Policy DP25: conserving Camden’s heritage;

• Policy DP26: managing the impact of development;

We would ensure the application proposal complies with all of the above policies, so far as possible. Via this pre-application enquiry we seek confirmation that no other policy matters would be relevant to the proposed development.

We consider the proposed development would produce a roof extension of high quality design, complementing (rather than competing with) the design of Museum House.

We consider that the proposed development would have no harm to the significance of the Bloomsbury Conservation Area, and that any visual change within the area would be minimal. As a consequence, no heritage assets (such as Listed Buildings) within the vicinity of the proposed development would be adversely affected.

Indeed, overall the proposal would offer the opportunity to improve an unsightly flat roof area of an attractive Victorian building, and provide a vantage point from which to secure close-up views of the spire of St George’s Church.

For the avoidance of doubt, the proposed roof extension would be designed to ensure that there would be no overlooking of the rear of residential properties located at lower level immediately to the southwest of Museum House. This would include no clear-glazed windows, and / or building up the parapet wall as appropriate.

Summary and Pre-Application Guidance Sought

Having regard to the above the specific guidance sought is as follows:

• Guidance as to the likely acceptability of the proposed roof extension;

• Feedback on the proposed design of the development, including any modifications the Council would like to see incorporated;

• Confirmation the Council agrees that there would be no impact on the significance of the conservation area, and nearby Listed Buildings;

• Confirmation of all other policy matters required to be addressed by the proposal; and

• Confirmation of all documents and drawings required to support the application.

20130072 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 23.10.2013 4 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

We trust that you have all the information necessary to progress this request for pre-application advice as soon as possible. Should you require any further information please contact of this office in the first instance.

Yours faithfully,

Prime Planning & Development Limited

Email: prime-planning.co.uk

20130072 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 23.10.2013 5 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH Produced 25 Jan 2013 from the Ordnance Survey National Metres Geographic Database and incorporating surveyed revision available at MUSEUM HOUSE this date. Reproduction in whole or part is prohibited without the prior permission of Ordnance Survey. © Crown Copyright 2013. MUSEUM STREET 1:1250 LONDON Ordnance Survey and the OS Symbol are registered trademarks of Ordnance Survey, the national mapping agency of Great Britain. Supplied by: Stanfords WC1A Reference: OI527157 The representation of a road, track or path is no evidence of a right Centre coordinates: 530158 181516 of way. The representation of features as lines is no evidence of a property boundary.

Version 1.0 14012:14042MS PDF

2 Contents

1.0 Introduction 1.1 Introduction

2.0 Site 2.1 Appearance (Architectural Response) 2.2 Views: Roof Deck

3.0 Evaluation and Design Evolution 3.1 Precedents 3.2 Concept Development 3.3 Proposed Section in Context 3.4 Proposed Layout 3.5 Proposal Overview 3.6 Visual Impact Assessment (Street views) 3.7 Visual Impact Assessment (Street views) 3.8 Visual Impact Assessment (Street views) 3.9 Visual Impact Assessment (Street views) 3.10 Visual Impact Assessment (Street views)

17-19 Foley Street London W1W 6DW t: 020 7580 3490 e: @. w: www.colladocollins.com

ColladoCollinsArchitects Museum House, Museum Street 3

2. Site

2.1 Appearance (Architectural Response)

The building was constructed around 1890 and is a brick faced, flat roofed five storey building fronting Museum St and Little Russell St. At present it has retail uses at ground floor level and a mix of residential and office use to the upper floors. There is a basement to the building which consists of ancillary spaces for storage and common plant for use by the upper floor tenants.

The images on this page show the main elevations to Museum St and Little Russell St.

Museum St elevation Little Russell St elevation

Museum House, Museum Street 5

3. Evaluation and Design Evolution

3.1 Precedents

01-03: A contemporary rooftop penthouse in Berlin.

04: 01 02 Modern rooftop addition in Knightsbridge London.

03 04

Museum House, Museum Street 7

HeritageCollective

Pre-Application Heritage and Townscape Assessment

Museum House, Museum Street, London, WC1A

Introduction

1. This assessment has been carried out on behalf of Devonshire Metro Limited, owners of Museum House, an unlisted building located in the Bloomsbury Conservation Area within the London Borough of Camden (LB Camden). The Pre-Application Document prepared by Collado Collins Architects provides details of the proposed works, which are confined to the creation of a roof extension on this five storey building.

2. In assessing the potential impact of the proposed roof extension the application site and surrounding area was visited to ascertain the likely visual effects of the proposal. This includes the effect on the building itself, identified as a positive contributor within the conservation area and the effect on the character and appearance of the conservation area. It also takes into consideration the effect of the development on the setting of adjacent listed buildings.

Bloomsbury Conservation Area

3. First designated in 1968 the Bloomsbury Conservation Area has been extended on several occasions to include development beyond the Georgian core of the area. An appraisal was produced by LB Camden in 2011 and is adopted supplementary planning guidance. The area covers up to 160 hectares and incorporates what is considered to be an internationally important example of town planning based on formal landscaped squares located on a grid of streets. There is much uniformity in the townscape of the area, despite changes in the use of the buildings from residential to office and commercial uses during the 19th and 20th century. Cultural institutions and educational establishments also form a significant part of the area.

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 1 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

4. The application site is within sight of the British Museum to the north and is located within the Museum Street/Great Russell Street sub-area identified within the LB Camden appraisal document (pages 51-57). Views of note that are highlighted within the appraisal are those looking northwards up Museum Street towards the British Museum, which is glimpsed in views northwards from many of the streets running parallel to Museum Street.

5. A predominant character attribute of the area is the 17th and 18th century town houses constructed of stock brick (exposed or covered with stucco). Many were refronted during the mid 19th century which has introduced a less uniform elevation treatment along terraced streets. Later red brick buildings in the form of mansion blocks and hotels have been introduced into the area and tend to be taller with more roof level interest than the uniform terraces of the earlier periods.

Museum House

6. Museum House is a five storey red brick building dating from 1890 (see date on side elevation). Historic maps indicate it replaced a number of terraced houses on Museum Street and Little Russell Street (although the maps appear to suggest that it did not replace them until the mid 20th century which is not accurate). The building is used for commercial and residential purposes (shops at ground floor level with offices and residential above). A change of use from office to residential for part of the second floor and fourth floor of the building has been recently granted planning permission (App Ref: 2013/4368/P).

7. The building is described as a positive contributor within the conservation area and is mentioned within the appraisal document as;

“The northern end of Museum Street has considerable visual consistency derived from the four-storey, stucco-faced mid 19th century terraces which turn the corner into Great Russell Street. Tavistock Chambers is situated at the junction with Bloomsbury Way and is seen together with Nos (consec) Museum Street, since they are both red brick mansion blocks with residential uses above ground-floor shops. They continue the theme of strong parapet lines, vertically proportioned fenestration, horizontal banding and rustication along the street.”

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 2 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

8. Museum House is a non-designated heritage asset. It has architectural interest as a well proportioned red brick, late 19th century building. The ground floor timber shopfronts, although altered, retain their original character, as do the main front and side elevations. The decorative brickwork on the Little Russell Street elevation is of particular interest in architectural terms and adds to the historical interest of the building. The building reads as three sections, a ground floor indicated by the timber dentilled cornice and Ionic capitals, dividing the shopfronts, a two storey rusticated section divided with a projecting brick band from the upper two storey plain section. The hierarchy of the building is indicated by the form of the brickwork both on the elevations and in the window surrounds rather than the size of the windows, which are all the same dimensions.

9. To the rear the building is finished in glazed bricks, a common late Victorian treatment for internal lightwell spaces and rear elevations. Alterations such as the lift shaft, which is clad in corrugated iron, detract from the rear elevation. The access onto the roof is also a modern alteration, located between two chimney stacks. This rear elevation is of much less interest than the front and side elevation and the flat roof is of no interest, nor are the modern interiors of the building.

Listed Buildings

10. Nos. 42-47 Museum Street is a grade II listed building located opposite the application site. It forms a terrace of six c.1700 townhouses which were refronted in 1855. They look onto Museum House and are four storeys high. Immediately adjacent to this terrace is the unlisted red brick mansion block at 49 Museum Street, which is also five storeys and dates from 1888.

11. The rest of the terraces to the north of the application site (Nos. 27 the Plough Inn and Nos.31-34) are grade II listed, as are the buildings that form a terrace on the east side of Museum Street. All of these buildings have a similar appearance in terms of architectural detailing, use of stucco frontages, four storeys with a balustraded parapet. They contribute to the setting of each other and have group value, forming a coherent townscape, linked by the pedestrianized character of the upper part of the street and the proximity to the British Museum. Museum House contributes to the setting of all the buildings on the street by virtue of its historical and architectural interest. It has a vertical

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 3 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

and horizontal rhythm that allows it to fit in well with the historic streetscene. The other red brick building at No.49 is more flamboyant in its use of architectural devices and has a more prominent corner location on the street.

12. The most prominent listed building in the immediate vicinity, apart from the British Museum is the Church of St George on Bloomsbury Way. The stepped ziggurat design of the spire to this church is a distinct and important part of the Bloomsbury skyline and is visible above the parapet lines of the Georgian terraces from Museum Street. It is not visible over the top of Museum House from street level. The proposed extension will enable relatively close views of the sculptural detailing on the spire that is not enjoyed normally, creating a vantage point that does not currently exist. However, the roof extension will in no way compete with the prominence and interest of St George’s.

Legislative and Planning Framework

13. The Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 forms the legislative backdrop to development affecting conservation areas in England. Section 72 of the Act states that special regard is to be had to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of a conservation area. Section 66 also states that special regard is to be had for the desirability of preserving the special interest and setting of listed buildings.

14. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in March 2012 is a material consideration in planning decisions. There is a slight difference in the wording between the Act and the NPPF in respect of conservation areas. The Act refers to the character and appearance of conservation areas. In establishing the planning balance between harm and benefit, the NPPF refers to significance rather than character or appearance. Within this assessment, character and appearance have been treated as components of significance that are part of the architectural, archaeological, historical and artistic qualities of the conservation area.

15. Paragraphs 132, 133 and 134 deal with the issue of harm to designated heritage assets, in this case the Bloomsbury Conservation Area and the listed buildings

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 4 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

close by. Harm is defined as change that erodes the significance of an asset, not just change in itself.1

16. Paragraph 133 deals with substantial harm or total loss of significance whereas Paragraph 134 deals with less than substantial harm, stating that the level of harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposed development.

17. Paragraph 135 deals with applications affecting non-designated heritage assets, which can be taken as building with some heritage significance to warrant consideration within the planning process. Again a balanced judgement is recommended as to the effect of changes and the benefits bought about by them and the overall proposed development.

London Plan (2011)

18. The London Plan (July 2011) provides city wide context within which individual boroughs must set their local planning policies. Policy 7.4 states that development should have regard for local character and its component parts. Policy 7.8 seeks to safeguard heritage assets and Policy 7.9 requires the need for development to recognise the significance of heritage assets and their contribution to regeneration.

London Borough of Camden’s Local Development Framework (LDF)

19. The Local Development Framework is made up of a number of documents. With the Core Strategy (2011), and the Development Policies (2011) being of most relevance.

20. The Core Strategy aims to conserve the historic environment through the promotion of high quality development. CS14 - Promoting high quality places and conserving our heritage states:

The Council will ensure that Camden’s places and buildings are attractive, safe and easy to use by:

a) requiring development of the highest standard of design that respects local context and character;

1 English Heritage, Conservation Principles, (2008), para. 84.

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 5 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

b) preserving and enhancing Camden’s rich and diverse heritage assets and their settings, including conservation areas, listed buildings, archaeological remains, scheduled ancient monuments and historic parks and gardens;

policy continues…

21. Development Policy 25 deals with Heritage, stating that in order to maintain the character of Camden’s conservation areas, the Council will:

a) take account of conservation area statements, appraisals and management plans when assessing applications within conservation areas;

b) only permit development within conservation areas that preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the area;

policy continues…

Supplementary Planning Guidance

22. There is a Character Appraisal and Management Strategy for the Bloomsbury Conservation Area (April 2011) which is relevant to an assessment of the development proposals.

Proposed Development

23. Collado Collins Architects has designed a lightweight roof extension for Museum House, accessed off the existing staircase within the building. It sits well back from the front and side parapet lines of the building thus reducing visibility from the street and enabling the new residential unit to have amenity space. The roof of the extension has been deliberately pitched to reduce the visibility of the extension from the street yet further.

24. The effect on the fabric of the building will be limited to the removal of the brick flues dotted about the roof. These are no of specific heritage interest and play no role in the architectural significance of the building. Adding a floor to the building will not disrupt the ratio of floors, which is currently 1:2:2. By adding an additional storey it ‘bookends’ the two middle sections of the building (floors 1-4). The extension will read as a modern addition, when seen from the surrounding buildings (at second and third storey height within the buildings

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 6 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

opposite), subservient in terms of height, width and detailing to the main building. Retaining this sense of architectural hierarchy is an important element of how the building is read as a set piece and the roof extension will not intrude on that architectural language.

25. By extending the building some views of it from the wider conservation area will change, which is only harmful if it affects the heritage interest of the conservation area. In stepping the extension back from the front elevation the strong parapet line established on Museum Street will be preserved. This parapet line is actually largely at fourth storey level as opposed to fifth storey level, but when standing in the street the application site does not easily read as a taller structure than the surrounding 18th century terraces. The visual consistency referred to within LB Camden’s appraisal will be preserved and there will be no impact on the group value of No.49 Museum Street when the two buildings are seen together from the New Oxford Street Junction.

26. The viewpoints set out within the Collado Collins document demonstrate the very limited visibility of the proposed roof extension from north, south, east and west. Where the new extension will be most visible is from Little Russell Street, looking eastward. This is not a view of particular heritage significance and it is characterised by a much less uniform streetscape with plenty of roof level features (evident on No.31 Coptic Street, which turns the corner into Little Russell Street). The modern building occupying Nos. 31 Coptic Street and Nos. 1-15 Little Russell Street (directly adjacent to the application site) include a five storey corner block and a sixth storey set back at roof level, which would be echoed by Museum House on the opposite corner of the block.

27. There are other examples of roof level extensions in the area that recede from views because they are set back. Nos. 28-30 Little Russell Street, to the north- east of the application site is a five storey brick building with a sixth mansard storey which is only evident in oblique views close to the building. Further afield the Kingsway Hotel, an opulent late 19th century red brick hotel is seven storeys.

28. In considering the architectural and historical interest of the Bloomsbury Conservation Area this assessment has shown that it will be preserved by this proposed roof extension. No harm will come to the understanding or character of the built environment in Museum Street as a result of the addition of this

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 7 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

HeritageCollective

modest and well designed roof extension. This is due to the very limited visibility of the extension from street level, its design as a contemporary addition, readable as such rather than a pastiche copy of the main building and its location in an area characterised by larger 19th century buildings interspaced around the earlier terraces.

29. Views from the listed terrace opposite Museum House will change as a result of the proposed extension, but not to a great extent given that the top floor windows of these buildings are set below the height of the existing fourth floor windows of Museum House. Views from these top floor windows are therefore focused on the existing elevation of Museum House and the surrounding roof scape. Seeing a well designed contemporary addition to Museum House will not harm the character of the setting of the listed terrace which includes views towards modern buildings in an urban context.

30. The proposed extension will enable relatively close views of the sculptural detailing on the spire of St George’s Church that is not enjoyed normally, creating a vantage point that does not currently exist. However, the roof extension will in no way compete with the prominence and interest of St George’s, which will remain the key skyline feature in the area.

31. This assessment concludes that paragraphs 132-134 of the NPPF would not be engaged because there will be no harm to the heritage significance of either the Bloomsbury Conservation Area or the nearby listed buildings on Museum Street. Although there will be very minimal visual change to some views within the conservation area, this will not result in any harm to the heritage significances identified. In accordance with Policy 25 of the Camden development plan this proposal will preserve the conservation area and not affect the attributes of Museum Street described in the conservation area appraisal document.

Liz Stephen 23.10.2013

Pre-Application Heritage Museum House, On behalf of Devonshire October 2013 © 8 and Townscape Museum Street, London, Metro Limited Assessment WC1A

From: To: Subject: RE: 2013/6937/PRE - Museum Street Date: 11 February 2014 10:49:44

Sorry, I am working from home today as the train line between Reading and Paddington is part flooded, meaning it would have taken at least 2 hours to get in/out…………….

Hence we will need to postpone the mentoring session until Thursday. I can do before 10am or after 12noon until 2-3pm.

Re Museum St pre-app, this is well written and nothing significant for me to add. All I would add is in:

- section 5 (sustainability), tell them that the cfsh design stage and post construction reviews would be secured via s106 legal agreement. Please add this in. - section 6 – other planning obligations – for the education and open space contributions, word it that we ‘may’ (instead of would) seek contributions, as I’m not sure if they queried this whether it could be justified by us under the CIL regs… hence need to sit on the fence a little at this time, but seek it at application stage and see what their reaction at the time is.

This is fine to be sent out without me seeing it again – feel free to cut and paste this into the visits tab as evidence of moderation, and close it down on m3.

Thanks,

Principal Planning Officer

Telephone: 0207 974

From: Sent: 06 February 2014 10:41 To: Subject: 2013/6937/PRE - Museum Street

See draft of pre-app response for above address – let me know if any queries. There were revised drawings for this which I’ve added onto m3.

Thanks

Planning Officer (East Area Team) Regeneration and Planning Culture and Environment

Date: 11th February 2014

Ref: 2013/6937/PRE Development Management Contact: Planning Services Direct Line: 020 7974 London Borough of Camden E-mail: camden.gov.uk Town Hall Argyle Street

London WC1H 8ND

Tel 020 7278 4444 Fax 020 7974 1975 Prime Planning & Development Limited [email protected] 2 Parkhill Barns www.camden.gov.uk/planning Larkwhistle Farm Road West Stratton Hampshire SO21 3QY

Dear Mr

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Re: Museum House, Museum Street

Thank you for your pre-application enquiry validated on 28th October 2013 in relation to the above site. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding.

I have discussed the proposals with colleagues within the team, including a Design and Conservation Officer, and offer the following comments on their merits.

Site Description The site comprises a five-storey plus basement end of terrace building, located on the west side of Museum Street. It is currently in mixed commercial/residential uses comprising office/storage uses in the basement, retail use on the ground floor, part office and residential on the first floor, and office use on the second, third and fourth floors. Part of the first floor is currently vacant.

To the north of the site on the opposite side of the road lies a three storey building on the junction of Museum Street and Little Russell Street that is currently in use for a public house on the ground floor with residential accommodation situated above. The south the site is adjoined by a four storey building which appears to be in office use above a ground floor retail unit; to the east of the site on the opposite side of Museum Street, lies three-storey buildings containing a mix of commercial use on the ground floors (retail, café, offices), with residential accommodated located on the upper floors. To the west of the site lies a part four-storey, part six-storey residential block.

The site is not listed, but is identified as a positive contributor to the Bloomsbury Conservation Area.

Planning History Permission was granted on 15 h October 2013 for the partial change of use from office (Class B1a) to residential (Class C3) at fourth floor and part second floor levels to provide 3 x 2 bedroom flats, and change of use of an office at lower ground floor level for use as a bike store.

Permission was also granted on 17th September 1976 for the conversion of part of the first floor from offices into two self-contained flats.

An application for the conversion of the change of use of part of the first floor from offices (Class B1) to 1x 2-bed flat (Class C3), with associated cycle storage at lower ground floor level, is currently pending consideration.

Planning Assessment The key considerations have been identified as the following:

- The design of the proposed mansard roof extension - The quality of proposed residential accommodation - Amenity - Transport - Sustainability - Section 106 / CIL contributions

Revised drawings and proposed visuals were submitted on 16 h December following a visit to the pre-application site on 26th November, and subsequent discussions with design and conservation officers. The Council’s comments are largely based on these revised drawings, and are as follows.

1. Design

As referred to above, the pre-application site is identified as a making a positive contribution to the Bloomsbury Conservation Area, occupying a prominent corner site on the junction of Museum Street and Little Russell Street. The Bloomsbury CA Appraisal and Management Strategy also recognises that views looking north from Museum Street towards the British Museum are important, and this must be considered in the assessment of any roof extension.

Museum Street currently sits one storey taller than the buildings to its immediate south ( Museum Street) and west (1-15 Little Russell Street); although the Grade II listed buildings to the immediate north ( Museum Street) are also five storeys tall. In this context, it is considered that any roof extension to the building must be significantly hidden from public views. This is to ensure that any extension would remain subservient to the host building, and not detract from the character and appearance of the wider conservation area.

Following initial concerns that this would not be achieved, the revised visuals submitted on 16th December indicate that the main bulk of the extension would be concealed from views on surrounding streets (including views looking east from the western side of Little Russell Street, looking west from the eastern side of Little Russell Street, and looking south from the northern side of Museum Street). The proposed floor plans show a set back of approximately 2.1m in depth from the Little Russell Street elevation, and approximately 2.3m in depth from the Museum Street elevation; this should be considered the minimum extent to which any extension should be recessed from the two principal elevations of the building.

In terms of its detailed design, there are still some concerns that the extent/appearance of any balustrading in connection with the proposed roof terrace has not been illustrated on the elevations/visuals attached. While it may be that there is sufficient height between floor and parapet level (1.1m) to meet building regulations, any glazed or metal balustrade could result in additional clutter at roof level which would be visually prominent in surrounding views. This would need to be assessed as part of any future application.

With regard to materials, no details have been provided; although it would appear from the proposed visuals that a traditional mansard (i.e. slate-clad) design would be followed, with glazing to the principal elevations. It is likely that this would be appropriate taking into account the surrounding architectural context, and to ensure that it would be as a subservient addition to the main building.

Regard should be had to policies DP24 and DP25 of the LDF, the detailed advice given in CPG1, and the recommendations of the Bloomsbury CA Appraisal and Management Strategy before any application is made.

2. Housing mix / standard of residential accommodation

In line with the priorities set out in policy CS6, policy DP2 seeks to maximise the supply of additional homes within the borough. The principle of an additional residential unit in this location is therefore acceptable.

The proposed 3-bed unit (approximately 155 sqm in size) would technically fail to meet the requirements of policy DP5, which states the priority size of dwellings across Camden is for 2-bed units. However it is likely that the proposed family-sized dwelling would be acceptable on the basis that only one unit is being proposed, and due to site constraints it would be difficult to provide more than one unit in this location.

The proposed floorspace easily meets the minimum requirements for 5/6-person units (84/93 sqm) which is set out in CPG2: ‘Housing’ and the Mayor’s Housing SPG. It is also considered that sufficient levels of natural daylight and outlook would reach the proposed unit. The proposal would also comply with paragraph 4.29 of CPG2 as it would provide a roof terrace of approximately 75 sqm.

Paragraph 4.19 of CPG2 states that all accommodation should have sufficient internal storage space to meet likely needs and requirements of potential occupiers. 1 and 2-person dwellings should have a minimum floor area of 0.8 sqm for storage cupboards, and this needs to be integrated into any scheme at application stage.

Policy DP6 requires all development proposals to be lifetime homes compliant. Any future submission should therefore be accompanied by a Lifetime Homes statement showing how each of the LH standards will be met. You should aim to meet all of the standards that are practically possible within the constraints of the site and provide reasoned justification for any that cannot be met.

The proposal does not meet the threshold for affordable housing/contributions; however the building is capable of providing 10 residential units or 1000m2 of residential floorspace. It is noted that permission has already been given for three new units on the site (part second floor and part fourth floor) in October 2013 (ref. 2013/4368/P), and is also likely to be granted for an additional unit at part first floor level (subject to a section 106 agreement) in February 2014 (ref. 2013/7239/P). On this basis, it is considered reasonable to request the applicant to enter into a section 106 agreement to ensure that should there be any further permissions be submitted for residential floorspace or units at the site, which in aggregate with this application and the previous permissions exceed the affordable housing thresholds, there will be a requirement to secure a contribution towards the provision of affordable housing.

3. Residential amenity

In terms of amenity matters, you are advised to consider the proposals against LDF policies CS1, CS5 and DP26 (and supplementary guidance in CPG6: ‘Amenity’).

It is considered that the additional height and bulk created by the proposed roof extension would not cause any material loss of daylight/sunlight or increased sense of enclosure to neighbouring occupiers of residential properties/offices in the immediate vicinity, and in particular flats to the immediate rear in Coptic Street and Little Russell Street.

Concern was raised following a visit to the site (standing at roof level) that the proposed roof terrace and significant amount of glazing to the extension would cause overlooking issues to neighbouring properties. However, after reviewing relevant planning history and assessing the relationship of the terrace with neighbouring residential windows and terraces, it is not considered that the proposed terrace (as shown on the proposed fifth floor plan) would result in any material loss of privacy to neighbouring occupiers. A significant extent of the terrace would look immediately onto both Museum Street and Little Russell Street; some obscure views would be possible into terraces to the immediate south and west of the site. Regard has also been had to the existing situation, and the levels of overlooking already afforded by residential windows on lower floors of the application site.

4. Highways/Parking

Policy DP18 seeks to limit the availability of car parking throughout the Borough in order to encourage more sustainable modes of transport. In locations with good access to public transportation facilities, the Council expects developments to be car- free. The site is located in an area with ‘excellent’ access to intermodal public transport (PTAL 6a). As no car-parking appears to be proposed within the scheme, it complies with policy DP18. In order to ensure that this remains the case and to limit the availability of on-street parking for future occupants of the scheme, should an application be submitted, the applicant would be required to enter into a Section 106 Legal Agreement for a car-free development which would prohibit car-parking on site and limit the availability of residents to obtain on-street parking permits from the Council.

Camden's Parking Standards (DP17 and Appendix 2 of the Council’s Development Policies) states that one storage or cycle parking space is required per residential unit. It appears that as a result of previous planning approvals on the site, space for cycle parking has been provided at basement level, and it should be possible for a further cycle to be accommodated in this area.

5. Sustainability

LDF policies CS13 and DP22 promote higher environmental standards in design and construction and provide details of the sustainability standards the Council expects development to meet. In line with policy DP22, new build housing is currently expected to meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4, achieving a minimum 50% credits in the energy, water and materials categories. A sustainability assessment would be required as part of any application to demonstrate this will be achieved. This should include a code for sustainable homes pre-assessment.

It is likely that the applicant would be required to enter into a S106 Legal Agreement to secure a commitment to meet Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes as indicated in the pre-assessment and post-construction review. Further guidance is available in CPG3: ‘Sustainability’.

6. CIL / other planning obligations

As the proposals involve the creation of new residential dwellings they are liable for contributions towards the Mayor of London’s Community Infrastructure Levy in respect of the uplift in additional useable space. The contribution will be calculated from the information given in any prospective planning application, including the CIL Additional Information Form and is charged in the Borough at a tariff of £50 per sqm.

Please note that this would be secured separately from the planning application submission, although informatives would be provided on any decision notice indicating that the proposals are CIL liable. It is recommended that the supporting commentary submitted with the application is particularly clear in the Gross Internal Area's (GIA) and Gross External Area's (GEA) of the proposed new build.

With regard to other planning obligations, you are advised that – taking into consideration previous permissions (or likely permissions) on the site – the creation of an additional residential unit at roof level would in effect result in a development of five new units. On this basis, we may seek the relevant open space and education contributions required by such a development.

The guidance in CPG6 requires the provision of 9sqm of open space per person for residential developments providing 5 or more additional dwellings. The Council initially expects for open space provisions to be provided on site. Where a site cannot provide open space provision on site the preferred option would be to provide suitable open space off-site, but at a maximum of 400m from the development. Having considered the existing constraints of the site it is clear that open spaces can not be provided on site. If we do seek this contribution, a sum of £8,850 to improve existing pubic open spaces or towards the provision of new public open spaces within the area would be payable. This contribution would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement.

All residential developments involving a net increase of 5 or more units will normally be expected to provide a contribution towards education provision in the Borough. The contribution sought is proportionate to the size of dwellings proposed, and is not sought for single-bed units, as these are unlikely to house children. Again, such a contribution would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement.

Further guidance can be found within CPG8: ‘Planning Obligations’ which is available on the Council’s website.

7. Procedural matters Please see the following link for the national and local area requirements for submitting a valid planning application: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/navigation/environment/planning-and-built- environment/planning-applications/making-an-application/supporting-documentation-- requirements-/

Type of scale drawings and plans – see http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/environment/planning-and-built- environment/two/planning-applications/making-an-application/supporting- documentation/scale-drawings-and-plans/types-of-scale-drawings-and-plans.en

In particular please note the need to show the relative level and extent of neighbouring / nearby properties alongside the proposals.

Reminder regarding minimum types of plans required:

 Site Location Plan (1:1250 scale) / Site Block Plan (1:200 scale) – showing the application site in red and any other land owned by the applicant close to or adjoining the site in blue  All existing elevations (1:50 scale)  All proposed elevations (1:50 scale)  All existing plans including roof plans (1:50 scale)  All demolition plans / elevations / sections (1:50 scale)  All proposed plans including roof plans (1:50 scale)  Existing and proposed sections (1:50 scale)  It would be useful if plans could be submitted in an A3 format as well as to the scale outlined above.  These plans should also detail the extent of neighbouring buildings  All plans should indicate a scale bar on the actual plans.

Regarding the planning application fee, please see: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/environment/planning-and-built- environment/two/planning-applications/making-an-application/fees.en

Prior to submitting any application you should also read the guidance from the following link for submitting a valid application: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/navigation/environment/planning-and-built- environment/planning-applications/making-an- application/;jsessionid=0A413F62C5C5AEC5D4C7F21C3E1FA7DC

8. Conclusion

In overall terms it is considered that the proposals are broadly acceptable to officers, and the principle of the roof extension in connection with additional residential accommodation would be supported. However this would be subject to the applicant entering into a section 106 agreement to secure some/all of the terms outlined above.

I trust the above provides a useful summary, however should you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me by telephone on 020 7974

Please note that the information contained in this letter represents an officer’s opinion and is without prejudice to further consideration of this matter by the Development Management section or to the Council’s formal decision.

Yours sincerely

Planning Officer – East Area Team

02/12/2013

Take to to discuss principle of extension in design and conservation terms. Amenity likely to be ok - check resi properties to back re overlooking from terraces Check planning history related to lower floors - be wary of piecemeal approach to converting lower floors to resi, affordable housing triggered? 02/12/2013 principle of roof extension could be ok but need to see more detailed elevations and also should ensure it is completely invisible from any street views, given this is a sensitive and prominent location within CA 10/02/2014 see email from on file - feedback following on from draft response

04/12/2013

Site notice displayed. 16/12/2013

1:1 with mentor

COU likely to be acceptable in principle but check amenity issues S106 to secure car-fee - memo to legal be aware of other apps on site - cumulative impact of applications for COU to resi - more than 5 units would have implications also pre-app currently on site for roof extension to provide additional unit 23/01/2014

previous approval on site in October 2013 - s106 also included clause to ensure affordable housing contributions should resi floorspace exceed 1,000m2 on the site as a result of subsequent permissions 31/01/2014 pushed back due to section 106 being set up and being on leave for 2 weeks over christmas/new year 20/03/2014

Amended Target Decision From: To: Planning Subject: 2015/3700/PRE - Request for Pre-Application Advice Date: 29 June 2015 16:52:53 Attachments: 20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015.pdf Museum House - Site Location Plan.pdf P1-000 Proposed changes - Lower Ground Floor plan.pdf P1-102 Proposed changes - Second Floor plan.pdf P1-103 Proposed changes - Third Floor plan.pdf Pre-app D&A.pdf

To whom it may concern

Please see the attached covering letter and documentation. The relevant fee will follow under cover of separate letter via normal post.

Yours faithfully,

Director for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

PRIME 2 Parkhill Barns Larkwhistle Farm Road Planning & Development Limited West Stratton Intelligent Hampshire SO21 3QY Innovative Incisive Telephone: 01962 Email: [email protected]

Regeneration and Planning London Borough of Camden 6th Floor Camden Town Hall Extension Argyle Street London WC1H 8EQ

By email to: [email protected]

Our Ref: 20130049 Your Ref: -

Date: 29 June 2015

Dear Sir or Madam

LONDON WC1A – MUSEUM STREET REQUEST FOR PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE (MINOR DEVELOPMENT)

We act on behalf of Devonshire Metro Limited, freeholder of this property, and are instructed to seek pre-application advice in respect of the proposed change of use of part-second and the third floor of the property from class B1 (office) use to class C3 (residential) use.

Attached to this letter are:

• A site location plan at 1:1250 scale;

• Drawing number P1-000 Rev P1 - proposed lower ground floor plan;

• Drawing number P1-102 Rev P1 – proposed second floor plan;

• Drawing number P1-103 Rev P1 – proposed third floor plan;

• A draft Design, Access and Lifetime Homes Statement (incorporating floor plans and photographs); and

• A cheque for the relevant pre-application fee in the sum of £960, payable to “London Borough of Camden” (to follow via normal post).

We request that this matter be dealt with by way of a meeting with officers, followed by written advice. The fee submitted reflects our understanding of the Council’s relevant charging schedule i.e. that the proposed development would involve the conversion (with no extension) of existing floor space for three apartments, and total floor space of less than 499sq.m. 20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015

Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Off ce at 1 Gloster Court, Whittle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

In this letter we set out: the background to the proposal being contemplated; details about the building and occupiers; the planning history of the building; commentary in respect of relevant planning policies; and, details of the advice sought from officers of the Council.

Background to the Proposal

Museum Street is a building arranged over five stories plus basement. The ground floor is occupied by a gift shop, a hairdresser, an estate / lettings agency, and a café.

The first floor has a long-established lawful use for part residential purposes (pursuant to planning permission granted in 1976), and part office use albeit with permission to convert to residential use – to be implemented soon. Part of the second and all the fourth floor of the building are vacant with planning permission for residential use to be implemented soon. The remainder of the second floor and all the third floor of the building are utilised as office accommodation. The basement is utilised as ancillary storage space for all occupiers of the building.

It is considered that the office suites within the building are no longer suited to modern office requirements. Indeed, over the last few years various tenants have departed the building, and it is anticipated the remainder will follow in 2016. It is considered that residential use of the building offers the only long-term prospect of beneficial use of the building (other than at ground floor level).

It is proposed that the part-second and third floors be reconfigured, so far as possible, in order to accommodate self-contained residential flats. The latest layout thinking is shown within the draft Design and Access Statement. This indicates three two-bed flats. The gross internal areas of the flats would be:

• Unit 2b (two bed) 99sq.m. • Unit 3a (two bed) 123sq.m. • Unit 3b (two bed) 99sq.m.

It should be noted that the interior of the building, particularly structural walls, restricts internal reconfiguration to a significant extent. This applies, of course, whatever the use. It is beyond doubt that the building is not suitable for wider B1 use (light industry), B2 use (heavy industry), nor B8 use (storage and distribution). For example, the property has no service area or car parking, standard residential floor to ceiling heights, standard floor loading capacities for a building of this type, and only a light-weight passenger lift for access to the upper floors.

Relevant Planning History

The property was originally constructed in about 1890. We anticipate it may initially have been utilised as a single large residence, before commercial and office uses took over, possibly in the inter-war years.

Moving forward, as noted above planning permission was granted in 1976 for use of part of the first floor for residential purposes. This was implemented, and is therefore a long-standing use of that part of the building.

20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015 2 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Turning to the modern era, planning permission has recently been granted for the following:

• Change of use from office to residential use of the fourth floor and part- second floor – October 2013 (ref: 2013/4368/P);

• Change of use from office to residential use of part of the first floor – October 2014 (ref: 2013/7239/P); and

• Erection of fifth floor extension for use as a self-contained flat – March 2015 (ref: 2014/4117/P).

Thus, planning permission for residential use of the remainder of the second and third floors of the building would be entirely consistent with this recent pattern of consents.

Relevant Planning Policies

A) Loss of Office (B1) Use

We have examined the adopted Camden Core Strategy, and separate Development Policies local development document (LDD) (both November 2010), and also the Council’s Planning Guidance (CPG5) in respect of town centres, retail and employment (September 2013). We comment on each of these below.

Core Strategy

The most relevant policy is Policy CS8. This sets out a broad-brush policy approach, and criterion (b) confirms that existing employment premises will be safeguarded “that meet the needs of modern industry and employers”. As noted above, we do not consider the subject premises meet this test.

In such circumstances paragraph 8.8 of the plan states that “The Council will consider proposals for other uses of older office premises if they involve the provision of permanent housing…” Reference is then made to Policy DP13 for more detail on the policy approach. It should be noted here that the subject premises were constructed in about 1890.

Development Policies LDD

Policy DP13 sets out the more detailed approach to changes of use from office to residential use. There are two main criteria to be addressed:

a) that the site or building is no longer suitable for its existing business use; and

b) there is evidence that the possibility of reusing the site for similar or alternative business use has been fully explored over an appropriate period of time.

The policy goes onto state that when ‘unsuitability’ has been demonstrated for any business use “other than” (our underlining) B1(a) offices, the Council will favour permanent residential use in the first instance. Put another way, subject to

20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015 3 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited meeting any separate and relevant residential policies and criteria the policy is permissive of change of use from office to residential use when other class B uses cannot be accommodated in the premises.

Paragraph 13.5 confirms that where a change of use to a non-business use is proposed, as in this case, the applicant must demonstrate that there is no realistic prospect of demand to use the site for an employment use.

Camden Planning Guidance (CPG5)

Notwithstanding the above CPG5 sets out more detailed requirements for those proposing change of use from offices. Paragraph 7.4 sets out a detailed list of matters to be considered. Generally, these relate to the age and condition of the premises, and their quality by reference to modern standards and the requirements of occupiers.

Again, there is an apparent contradiction with the requirements of Development Policies LDD (paragraph 13.5) in that paragraph 7.5 of CPG5 states that when it would be difficult to assess a property in terms of the paragraph 7.4 criteria the Council “may” (our underlining) ask for a ‘marketing assessment’.

Paragraph 7.18 of CPG5 provides more information on marketing requirements. Although the fourth bullet point refers to the two year marketing period, it is confirmed that shorter marketing periods for office premises will be considered.

In practical terms the recent planning history of the property has clearly illustrated how such can be addressed. This is via the submission of an ‘office available schedule’ (see, for example, the schedule dated July 2013 submitted with application reference 2013/7239/P). We propose that an up to date schedule would be submitted with the contemplated planning application, and thus as part of this pre-application enquiry we seek the Council’s confirmation that this would continue to meet the requirements of the relevant policies outlined above.

B) Suitability for (C3) Residential Use

As well as addressing the requirements of employment policies it would be necessary for any application for residential use to demonstrate compliance with relevant policies, and suitability for use.

Having examined the adopted Core Strategy and Development Policies LDD we consider the relevant policies would be:

• Policy CS5: managing the impact of development;

• Policy CS6: housing as “the priority land use” of the LDF, and provision of affordable housing;

• Policy DP2: maximising housing supply;

• Policy DP3: affordable housing contributions from all schemes for 10 or more units;

• Policy DP5: size of new residential units;

20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015 4 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

• Policy DP6: all new residential to meet Lifetime Homes standards;

• Policy DP18: car and cycle parking standards; and

• Policy DP26: the impact of development, and adequacy of premises for use.

We consider that the specific matter of affordable housing provision must be addressed via the pre-application process.

Affordable Housing Provision

The Council’s policies on affordable housing are set out within Core Strategy Policy DP3, and Camden Planning Guidance CPG2 (September 2013). We are aware that the Council has recently consulted on a draft replacement Core Strategy Policy (known as Policy H4) however this involves no material change to the requirements or relevant policy thresholds.

Our client does not consider that the proposal would breach the Council’s affordable housing threshold, nor therefore engage the requirement to provide any affordable housing within the building (or financial contribution in lieu). In summary this is because:

• The contemplated planning application would only comprise three residential units, or about 321sq.m. (GIA) floor space;

• Even if added together with all recent permissions granted in the period 2013-15 the total floor space of permitted residential development would comprise 923sq.m. (or 8 units), well below the Council’s threshold of 1,000sq.m. (or 10 units);

• Moreover, we do not consider that the permitted fifth floor roof-top apartment (ref: 2014/4117/P) can legitimately be included within any affordable housing equation. This is because the relevant s106 agreement is absent the required legal clauses, unlike the s106 agreements for earlier permissions 2013/4368/P and 2013/7239/P. The result of this would be to reduce the applicable area of the building to about 774sq.m. (or 7 units), substantially below the Council’s threshold; and

• Under no circumstances would it be appropriate to include the existing first floor residential floor space within the affordable housing equation, this 1976 consent pre-dating the relevant policies by 34 years.

We seek the Council’s confirmation that no affordable housing contribution would be required.

20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015 5 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Registered Office at 1 Gloster Court, Wh ttle Avenue, Segensworth West, Fareham PO15 5SH

PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Summary and Pre-Application Guidance Sought

Having regard to the above the specific guidance sought is as follows:

• Guidance as to the likely acceptability of the proposed change of use from office to residential use;

• Confirmation that an updated office availability schedule would satisfy the requirements of Policies CS8 and DP13, and CPG5;

• Agreement that no affordable housing contribution would be triggered by the proposal;

• Confirmation of all other policy matters required to be addressed by the proposal;

• Confirmation of any documents required to support the application; and

• Confirmation of drawings required to support the application.

Yours faithfully,

Prime Planning & Development Limited

Email: prime-planning.co.uk

20150098 London WC1A - Museum Street - Pre App Request - 29.6.2015 6 Prime Planning & Development Limited Registered in England Number 7335163

Version 1.0 14012:14042MS PDF

Museum House Design, Access & Lifetime Homes Statement

ColladoCollinsArchitects June 2014

Contents

1.0 IntroducƟ on 1.1 Introduc on

2.0 Site 2.1 Appearance (Architectural Response) 2.2 Internal Views - Second and Third Floor

3.0 EvaluaƟ on and Design EvoluƟ on 3.1 Lateral Apartments 3.1.1 Second Floor 3.1.2 Third Floor 3.2 Layout and Impact on Exis ng Fabric 3.2.1 Second Floor 3.2.2 Third Floor

4.0 Access 4.1 Pedestrian Access 4.2 Access for Cyclists and Storage 4.3 Waste Management

5.0 LifeTime Homes 5.1 LifeTime Homes Assessment

6.0 Sustainability 6.1 Sustainability

17-19 Foley Street London W1W 6DW t: 020 7580 3490 e: [email protected] w: www.colladocollins.com ColladoCollinsArchitects

2. Assessment

2.2 Internal Views - Second and Third Floor

These images of the interior of the second and third ﬂ oor show that there is li le character in terms of period details within the exis ng oﬃ ce spaces.

The exis ng oﬃ ce spaces are small compared to modern spa al requirements, are heavily compartmentalised, cellular in nature and with limited capacity either to change or to adapt them for current requirements.

Second ﬂ oor

6 12041 Museum House Third ﬂ oor

Third ﬂ oor

12041 Museum House 7

5.0 Life Time Homes

5.1 Life Time Homes Assessment

This is an exis ng building set within a conserva on area and the conversion to apartments seeks to minimise the impact on the fabric at all mes.

The table below gives an assessment for the 3 apartments being proposed.

Item Criteria Compliance notes 01 Wide car parking space No 02 Access from car parking to dwelling YesͲ Level pavement and car parking available at pavement side within the location but no disabled spaces. 03 Approach to entrances Yes – level pavements 04 Entrances No – this is an existing entrance within a conservation area. 05 Communal stairs and lifts No – existing stair and lift within the building is to remain 06 Widths of internal doorways and hallways No – partially achieved in new openings only but existing openings do not 07 Other circulation space Yes 08 Entrance level living space Yes 09 Potential temporary bedͲspace at entrance level Yes 10 Wheelchair accessible entrance level WC and drainage No – existing structure does not for shower allow for these 11 WC and bathroom wall capable of supporting grabrails Yes 12 Potential for stair lifts/through floor lifts N/A 13 Potential for fitting hoists and bathroom bedroom Yes relationship 14 Ease of access in bathroom No 15 Glazing and window handle heights No – existing window arrangement has to remain due to conservation area status 16 Location of service controls Yes

12041 Museum House 17 6.0. Sustainability

6.1 Sustainability

As part of the proposed works there will be a number of upgrades to the exis ng building fabric and services which will improve the energy usage within the building.

Fabric The external walls of the apartments will be lined with insulated plasterboard to improve the thermal performance of the units.

HeaƟ ng Element The apartments will have a modern gas condensing boiler ﬁ ed to provide hot water and hea ng.

LighƟ ng The electrics will be replaced and ligh ng provided will be of a low energy type.

18 12041 Museum House 12041 Museum House 19 ColladoCollinsArchitects From: To: Subject: RE: Member"s Briefing 15th August Date: 15 August 2016 12:12:07

I think (unfortunately) it will have to go to next week’s MB – but at least the work will have all been done.

I’m also off all this week anyway (I’m just logged in for a few hours today) so it wouldn’t make any difference to the timing regardless.

Kind regards,

Senior Planning Officer

From: Sent: 15 August 2016 12:10 PM To: Subject: RE: Member's Briefing 15th August

I had a read through the comments and as you advised I will take the application tomorrow at the team case conference. If we’ll come to the same conclusion and I address the raised concerns would it be possible for the application to still be accepted?

Many thanks,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: Sent: 15 August 2016 11:59 To: Subject: FW: Member's Briefing 15th August

Your app has raised a few issues from cllrs – please see comments below, I’ll forward Cllr Sue Vincent’s comments too.

I thought the marketing evidence seemed to cover only a short period too, i think it’s normally 2 years that we require? It might be a case of having to pull this one from MB this week and seek advice at a case conference or from a manager about whether it’s definitely the correct decision and if they have provided sufficient evidence.

If you think the cllr concerns can be addressed send me some comments and I’ll forward them on.

Cheers,

Senior Planning Officer

From: Freeman, Roger (Councillor) Sent: 14 August 2016 1:30 PM To: Rea, Flick (Councillor); Johnson, Heather (Councillor) Subject: RE: Member's Briefing 15th August

Thank you

Museum Street Following on from Sue Vincent 's email I do not see this as a DC candidate but happy to be outvoted. I note her suggested condition and would request for clarity from the Officers as to the dimensions involved. Also the marketing period seems rather short..what are our guidelines??

The others For the record , about 9 months ago I was visited at a Surgery by some of the residents of Woodchurch but did not compromise myself.

I need to say that on this I am at a loss to understand why we cannot prevent this being a roof terrace given that we say in Lyncroft that permission would be need for a roof terrace and we say the same in Maresfield and in Chester we recognise we need to give permission. Look forward to clarification and have no other comments on any of them.

From: Sent: 11 August 2016 17:22 To: Rea, Flick (Councillor); Freeman, Roger (Councillor); Johnson, Heather (Councillor) Subject: Member's Briefing 15th August

Dear Councillors,

Please find attached the agenda for the 15th August Member’s Briefing Panel and the packs here

I will be on leave next week, whilst I will be checking my emails periodically on Monday if there is any chance you could get your comments to me by Sunday or early Monday it would be most appreciated – however the usual request of by midday Monday still stands.

Kind regards,

Senior Planning Officer Regeneration and Planning Culture and Environment London Borough of Camden

Telephone: 020 7974 Web: camden.gov.uk 2nd floor 5 Pancras Square 5 Pancras Square London N1C 4AG

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: To: Subject: FW: Member"s Briefing 15th August Date: 15 August 2016 12:01:04

Sue Vincent’s comments below – quite a lot to address, so as I say, may be better to pull it from this week, consider her comments and seek a second opinion?

From: Vincent, Sue (Councillor) Sent: 12 August 2016 2:12 PM To: Rea, Flick (Councillor); Freeman, Roger (Councillor); Johnson, Heather (Councillor) Cc: Olad, Awale (Councillor); Fulbrook, Julian (Councillor) Subject: RE: Member's Briefing 15th August

Heather/Roger/Flick

I am very concerned about the ‘creeping’ change of use at Museum House, Museum Street coming to your members briefing on Monday.

There seems to be two matters for consideration given that upper floors remain in office use (until a subsequent application?)

1. The loss of medium sized business space and employment use – please request office loss in this particular area for comparisons and ask what comparisons have been made as to the marketing price per sqm to other similar business use in the CAZ as we require a range of types within policy. 2. The loss of any provision towards local housing as a creeping cou

The business space, being ‘shared with residential’ (at the applicants request), ‘lacking modern specifications’ (within the applicants control) and ‘not DDA compliant’ (all historic Bloomsbury lacks this) would then attract a rental value that reflects these characteristics.

It appears that no caveats have been included to take into account of further potential subsequent approvals; the applicant here has made a ‘partial change of use at second floor level’ to ensure keeping below the 1000sqm threshold of providing affordable housing contributions. This application takes C3 to 920sqm.

I therefore request that this application comes to DC for debate and decision.

However, if you are minded to grant permission for this please add that any subsequent sub-division or change of use must trigger the usual mechanisms for housing, contributions towards open spaces, schools and local community and other infrastructure. This seems like a gaping omission and a financial hand out to the applicant - perhaps this is exactly what our current national policies have in mind, but how are we to provide local amenities and on-going costs for community resources if applicants have no obligations other than self-interested profit?

Councillor Sue Vincent Holborn & Covent Garden Ward 0779 530

From: Sent: 11 August 2016 17:22 To: Rea, Flick (Councillor); Freeman, Roger (Councillor); Johnson, Heather (Councillor) Subject: Member's Briefing 15th August

Dear Councillors,

Please find attached the agenda for the 15th August Member’s Briefing Panel and the packs here

Kind regards,

Senior Planning Officer Regeneration and Planning Culture and Environment London Borough of Camden

Telephone: 020 7974 Web: camden.gov.uk 2nd floor 5 Pancras Square 5 Pancras Square London N1C 4AG

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

Your app has raised a few issues from cllrs – please see comments below, I’ll forward Cllr Sue Vincent’s comments too.

If you think the cllr concerns can be addressed send me some comments and I’ll forward them on.

Cheers,

Senior Planning Officer

From: Freeman, Roger (Councillor) Sent: 14 August 2016 1:30 PM To: Rea, Flick (Councillor); Johnson, Heather (Councillor) Subject: RE: Member's Briefing 15th August

Thank you

The others For the record , about 9 months ago I was visited at a Surgery by some of the residents of Woodchurch but did not compromise myself.

From: Sent: 11 August 2016 17:22 To: Rea, Flick (Councillor); Freeman, Roger (Councillor); Johnson, Heather (Councillor) Subject: Member's Briefing 15th August

Dear Councillors,

Please find attached the agenda for the 15th August Member’s Briefing Panel and the packs here

Kind regards,

Senior Planning Officer Regeneration and Planning Culture and Environment London Borough of Camden

Telephone: 020 7974 Web: camden.gov.uk 2nd floor 5 Pancras Square 5 Pancras Square London N1C 4AG

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals.

Development Management Date: 25/08/2015 Regeneration and Planning Our ref: 2015/3700/PRE Culture & environment directorate Contact: London Borough of Camden Direct line: 020 7974 Town Hall Email: camden.gov.uk Argyle Street London WC1H 8EQ

Tel: 020 7974 camden.gov.uk www.camden.gov.uk/planning

Email: prime-planning.co.uk

Dear Mr.

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Re: Museum Street, London WC1A

Thank you for your enquiry received on the 12th of July 2015, regarding:

Change of use of part-second and the third floor of the property from class B1 (office) use to class C3 (residential) use.

This letter represents the Council’s initial view of your proposals based on the information available to us at this stage. It should not be interpreted as formal confirmation that your application will be acceptable nor can it be held to prejudice formal determination of any planning application we receive from you on this proposal.

Overview of the Site and Proposal

The application site is an end of terrace five-storey plus basement building, located on the west side of Museum Street. The site is not listed but lies within the Bloomsbury Conservation Area and is identified as making a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

The building currently has a mix of commercial/residential uses. There are office/storage uses in the basement, retail use on the ground floor, part office and residential on the first floor, and office use on the second, third and fourth floors and there is part vacant office on the second and fourth floor. There are a number of approved but not implemented planning permissions:

2013/4368/P: ‘Partial change of use from office (Class B1a) to residential (Class C3) at fourth floor and part second floor levels to provide 3 x 2 bedroom flats, and change of use of an office at lower ground floor level for use as a bike store.’

Approved 15/10/2013 – not implemented

2013/7239/P: ‘Change of use of part of the first floor from offices (Class B1) to one self-contained residential flat’ (Class C3).

Approved 29/10/2014 – not implemented

2014/4117/P: ‘Erection of a 5th floor roof extension for use as a self-contained flat (Class C3) with roof terrace and cycle storage at lower ground floor’. Approved 11/03/2015 – not implemented

Land Use

The proposed development would result in the loss of office space. Policy DP13 of the Camden Core Strategy and Development Management Policies states that: ‘The Council will resist a change to a non-business unless:

(a) It can be demonstrated to the Council’s satisfaction that a site or building is no longer suitable for its existing business use; and (b) There is evidence that the possibility of retaining, reusing or redeveloping the site or building for similar or alternative business use has been fully explored over an appropriate period of time

Policy CS8 of the Camden Core Strategy and Development Management Policies aims to: ‘support Camden’s industries by safeguarding existing employment sites and premises in the borough that meet the needs of modern industry and other employers’. Paragraph 7.4 of CPG5 (town centres, retail, and employment) of the Camden Planning Guidance also lists the considerations when converting office space to non-business use:

• the criteria listed in paragraph 13.3 of policy DP13 of the Camden Development Policies;

• the age of the premises. Some older premises may be more suitable to conversion;

• whether the premises include features required by tenants seeking modern office accommodation;

• whether there are existing tenants in the building, and whether these tenants intend to relocate;

the location of the premises and evidence of demand for office space in this location; and

• whether the premises currently provide accommodation for small and medium businesses.

It is put forward by the applicant that the existing office space is no longer suitable for the requirements of modern occupiers. Supposing that the existing office space is no longer suitable for modern occupiers, it would need to be demonstrated that similar or alternative business use has been fully explored over an appropriate period of time. Citing the previous application 2013/4368/P it has been suggested by the applicant that an ‘office available schedule’ could be submitted to help demonstrate the viability of future office use of the application premises. This information would be helpful but would not be sufficient to justify the loss of office use. As the proposed change of use will represent further loss of office space to the loss approved under planning permission 2013/4368/P further justification of the loss of this use including marketing information and statements from relevant property professionals would be needed in order to demonstrate the lack of viability of the continued office use.

Assuming that the above criteria (a) and (b) of Policy DP 13 can be satisfied, policy CS6 and policy DP2 of the Camden Core Strategy and Development Management Policies state that the Council’s priority is to maximise the supply of additional homes within the borough. Quality of Residential Accommodation

The proposed units would be one 2 bed flat on the second floor and two 2 bed flats on the third floor. The proportion of 2-bed units accords with the housing mix of units prescribed in policy DP5 and the proposed apartments would appear to receive sufficient natural light and the rear lightwells would appear to provide sufficient outlook and light for primary accommodation that is separated from the street frontage.

The removal of the internal non load bearing partitions would improve the internal layout of the proposed apartments. The proposed 2 bed apartment on the second floor would have a floorspace of 99.38 m2 and on the third floor, the proposed 2 bed apartments would have a floorspace of 123m2 and 99.38 m2. These proposed floorspaces exceed the minimum residential standards for 4 person dwellings set out in DP 2 of the Camden Planning Guidance as do the proposed bedroom sizes of the various apartments. Overall, it is considered that the proposed apartments would be satisfactory in terms of providing quality accommodation for future occupiers.

Impact on Amenity and Character of the Area:

The proposed development does not alter the external appearance of the building hence it is considered the proposed change of use would not harm the appearance of the host building or represent harm to the Bloomsbury Conservation Area. The proposed alterations to facilitate the room layouts would be provided by the removal of internal walls. The proposed apartments do not themselves create unneighbourly arrangements except possibly on the third floor where judging from information provided one or maybe both of the rear windows of the bathroom facing onto the lightwell may need to be obscured glazed to avoid creating views into the newly created bedroom on the other side of the lightwell.

Lifetime Homes Standards

In accordance with the requirements of policy CS11 of the London Borough of Camden Local Development Framework Core Strategy and policy DP17 of the London Borough of Camden Local Development Framework Development Policies, 2 cycle parking spaces would need to be provided per apartment, hence 6 in total. It has been indicated that a section of the ground floor would be converted to a cycle store which would need to accommodate this cycle parking provision. The proposed development would also be car free by means of a Section 106 agreement and Lifetime Homes Standards will be required to be met where possible.

Affordable Housing

The planning permission 2013/4368/P for ‘Partial change of use from office (Class B1a) to residential (Class C3) at fourth floor and part second floor levels to provide 3 x 2 bedroom flats, and change of use of an office at lower ground floor level for use as a bike store.’ has a clause in the Section 106 Agreement that states that should the proposed development and any ‘subsequent development’ of the building result in residential floorspace greater than 1000m2 then the overall development may result in an affordable housing contribution.

The clause of the Section 106 Agreement is part of the planning approval for 2013/4368/P. It is considered that ‘Subsequent Development’ would include the following:

2013/7239/P: Change of use of part of the first floor from offices (Class B1) to one self-contained residential flat (Class C3). Approved 29/10/2014 – not implemented

2014/4117/P: Erection of a 5th floor roof extension for use as a self-contained flat (Class C3) with roof terrace and cycle storage at lower ground floor.

Approved 11/03/2015 – not implemented

And the current proposed change of use: for Change of use of part-second and the third floor of the property from class B1 (office) use to class C3 (residential) use.

(It is this officer’s opinion that ‘subsequent development’ does not includes historical permissions 21828 and 22896)

However, adding together the residential floorspace proposed and ‘subsequent development’ (mainly approved but not implemented), it is calculated that the combined residential floorspace created would fall short of 1000m2 and hence would not be subject to affordable housing contribution.

Conclusion

It is considered that should it be demonstrated that the current office use is not viable, that the principle of conversion to residential units would be acceptable. From the information provided, the proposed apartments would meet the Council’s residential standards and would not have a detrimental impact on neighbouring amenities or on the Bloomsbury Conservation Area. It is this officer’s opinion that the proposed development and related ‘subsequent developments’ would fall short of triggering an affordable housing contribution however the combined proposed floorspace in question is close to reaching the 1000m2 threshold and any future application would need to further investigate this question.

How to submit your application Please submit you application electronically via the national planning portal.

When submitting a planning application, the following information will be required:  An appropriate fee  Site location plan  All existing elevations (including the front and the side), floor plans, roof plans and sections  All proposed elevations (including the front and the side), floor plans, roof plans and sections  Planning Statement  Design and Access Statement  Lifetime Homes Statement  Marketing Statement/information

After you submit your application It would be useful if you could let me know when you have submitted the application along with the planning portal reference number. I will then pick the application up as the case officer.

We are legally required to consult on the application with individuals who may be affected by the proposals. We will notify your neighbours by letter, put up a notice on or near the site and, advertise in a local newspaper. The Council must allow 21 days from the consultation start date for responses to be received.

All consultation responses will be available to view on the Council's website using the planning application search page. It is likely that an application of this size would be determined through delegated powers.

I trust the above provides a useful summary; however should you have any queries about the advice contained in this letter please contact on 020 7974

It is important to us to find out what our customers think about the service we provide. To help, we would be very grateful if you could take a few moments to complete our pre application enquiry survey. We will use the information you give us to monitor and improve our services.

Thank you for using Camden’s pre-application advice service. Kind Regards,

Planning Officer

(Planning Solutions Team) Regeneration and Planning Culture and Environment London Borough of Camden 2nd Floor, 5 Pancras Square London N1C 4AG

PH: 020 7974

The lower ground floor plan indicates 16 cycle parking spaces are to be provided. The number of spaces meets the London Plan’s minimum cycle parking requirement. However the proposed cycle parking facilities would be located at basement level and would be accessed via a set of stairs. This contravenes Paragraph 9.8 of Camden Planning Guidance document CPG7 (Transport) which states:

 “The route to cycle parking from street level should be step free. Cycle parking inside buildings should be at the entrance level of the building or accessible by a ramp or lift from street level that can accommodate a bike.”

Therefore the proposed cycle parking plans are unacceptable and should be amended. The applicant should consider providing cycle storage facilities with step free access from street level. The applicant should provide an explanation if this is not possible.

Details of the cycle parking facilities, access routes and cycle store would need to comply with the guidance provided within CPG7 and should be submitted to Transport Strategy for consideration prior to determination of this planning application. CPG7 is available on the Council’s website at the hyperlink below: http://camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/environment/planning-and-built- environment/two/planning-policy/supplementary-planning-documents/camden- planning-guidance.en

Managing the impacts of construction on the surrounding highway network Camden Development Policy DP20 states that Construction Management Plans should be secured to demonstrate how a development will minimise impacts from the movement of goods and materials during the construction process (including any demolition works). Camden Development Policy DP21 relates to how a development is connected to the highway network. For some development this may require control over how the development is implemented (including demolition and construction) through a Construction Management Plan (CMP). However, a CMP is not necessary for the site based on the scale of the proposal and the type of work involved.

Some highway licenses may be required to facilitate the proposed works. The applicant would need to obtain such highway licences from the Council prior to commencing work on site. Details for the highway licences mentioned above are available on the Camden website at the hyperlink below:  http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/business/business- regulations/licensing-and-permits/licences/skips-materials-and-building- licences/building-licences/

Highway and Public Realm Improvements directly adjacent to the site The summary page of Development Policy DP21 states that ‘The Council will expect works affecting Highways to repair any construction damage to transport infrastructure or landscaping and reinstate all affected transport network links and road and footway surfaces following development’. The footway directly adjacent to the site is likely to be damaged as a direct result of the proposed works. We would therefore need to secure a financial contribution for highway works as a section 106 planning obligation if planning permission is granted. This would allow the proposal to comply with Development Policy DP21. A cost estimate for highway works has been requested from our Highways Delivery Team and will be forwarded once received.

Summary of Section 106 Planning Obligations The following section 106 planning obligations would be required if planning permission is granted:  Car free development  Financial contribution for highway works

From: To: Cc: Subject: RE: Museum House, Museum Street (Planning Application Ref: 2015/5169/P) Date: 23 December 2015 15:20:52

I’ve had a quick look and I think the rents they quote at 5.3 are quite low for the area where I think really good quality space probably would go for over £40 per sq ft – although it’s not really a discount as the cost reflects the quality of the space. They say the cost of refurbishment is not justified ‘at current rental levels’, but of course, as they say, they would get higher rents if they did the refurbishment. I can’t judge whether the refurbishment costs they’ve sent in are reasonable, but at that cost it would take more than three years for the applicant to make their money back, even at higher rents.

Have you seen the space? Is it as unsatisfactory as the report suggests?

The fact that the space is occupied makes it difficult to accept their argument that it isn’t suitable for continued business use. The fact that the tenants are leaving may reflect the end of the leases and the applicant’s intention to covert, rather than dissatisfaction with the premises. Lower quality, and therefore cheaper premises are attractive to smaller businesses and we know there is considerable pressure on space that is suitable for small businesses in Camden.

Business Growth and Partnerships Manager

Telephone: 020 7974 From: Sent: 23 December 2015 10:22 To: Subject: FW: Museum House, Museum Street (Planning Application Ref: 2015/5169/P)

It is an office down on museum street which is currently occupied and the agent is trying to demonstrate that it’s not a viable office space i.e they say they already giving 50% discount. Just in the attached document paragraphs 5.2 to 5.7 in particular, how plausible are those figures quoted , lease rates etc?

I’ll also send on a breakdown of the 400,000 figure in a separate email. Our basic argument is that we not convinced there’s enough evidence that this is no longer a viable office use especially since its currently occupied.

Thanks

Planning Officer

Telephone: 020 7974

We want to hear your views on the changes we are proposing to how we consult on planning applications. To find out more and have your say visit www.camden.gov.uk/sci. Consultation closes on the 20 January 2016. From: [mailto: prime-planning.co.uk] Sent: 15 December 2015 14:26 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Museum House, Museum Street (Planning Application Ref: 2015/5169/P)

Dear Mr

Further to my email below I now attach an Employment Policy Statement. The document should be self-explanatory, however if you have any queries do please let me know.

Regards,

Director for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: prime-planning.co.uk] Sent: 07 December 2015 12:51 To: Cc: ' Subject: RE: Museum House, Museum Street (Planning Application Ref: 2015/5169/P)

Dear Mr

Thank you for your email. My client is grateful for the opportunity to submit additional information, and we intend to let you have this no later than 18 December.

Regards,

Director

for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 04 December 2015 16:14 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Museum House, Museum Street (Planning Application Ref: 2015/5169/P)

Dear Mr Hartley Raven,

In response to your points set out below, we will allow a period of time for additional information to be provided to help put forward a case for approval.

The key policy in this case is the following

Policy DP13 of the Camden Core Strategy and Development Management Policies states that: ‘The Council will resist a change to a non-business unless:

(a) It can be demonstrated to the Council’s satisfaction that a site or building is no longer suitable for its existing business use; and

(b) There is evidence that the possibility of retaining, reusing or redeveloping the site or building for similar or alternative business use has been fully explored over an appropriate period of time.’

There is evidence that the current site is no longer suitable for its current use (a) however in line with (b) it would need to be shown that there is no possibility of retaining the existing use on site or similar business uses. Paragraph 7.4 of CPG 5 sets out the factors that help demonstrate this or not demonstrate this as is the case. Please see paragraph 7.4 below:

There are a number of considerations that we will take into account when assessing applications for a change of use from office to a non- business use, specifically:

• the criteria listed in paragraph 13.3 of policy DP13 of the Camden Development Policies; • the age of the premises. Some older premises may be more suitable to conversion; • whether the premises include features required by tenants seeking modern office accommodation;

• the quality of the premises and whether it is purpose built accommodation. Poor quality premises that require significant investment to bring up to modern standards may be suitable for conversion; • whether there are existing tenants in the building, and whether these tenants intend to relocate; • the location of the premises and evidence of demand for office space in this location; and • whether the premises currently provide accommodation for small and medium businesses.

It is not considered that a robust marketing exercise can be done in the immediate future, however if further information can be provided in reference to the criteria above then we are willing to hold off on the current recommendation for refusal for a period of 2 weeks (18th of December) to allow this information to be submitted. The information submitted so far (a letter from a commercial estate agent) is inadequate. More in depth information about the current occupiers, their rents, their lease status as well as demonstration of the current limitations of the premise both physically and financially would be beneficial to demonstrating the case above.

Once this information is submitted we will review whether this new information along with existing information amounts to convincing evidence to justify the loss of the current use. If not we will continue with our recommendation for refusal.

Thank you for your assistance

Planning Officer Planning Solutions Team Regeneration and Planning Culture and Environment London Borough of Camden

Telephone: 020 7974 Web: camden.gov.uk 5 Pancras Square 5 Pancras Square London N1C 4AG

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

We want to hear your views on the changes we are proposing to how we consult on planning applications. To find out more and have your say visit www.camden.gov.uk/sci. Consultation closes on the 20 January 2016. From: [mailto: prime-planning.co.uk] Sent: 27 November 2015 14:30 To: Cc: Subject: Museum House, Museum Street (Planning Application Ref: 2015/5169/P)

Dear Mr

I act on behalf of Devonshire Development (UK) Limited in respect of the above planning application. Following discussions with the case officer, Mr it has been agreed that I would send this email to you. The applicant is very concerned that your Council is contemplating refusal of the application, and before any decision is reached we would be grateful if you could review matters.

By way of very brief background, Museum House is a domestic-scale building (constructed circa 1890) comprising ground floor commercial uses (gift-shop, estate agent etc.), mostly vacant office accommodation on floors 1-4 above, and storage at basement level. Over the last few years it has become apparent that the property is not well suited to modern office requirements. Indeed, all of the office tenants have now vacated save for two – one occupying the third floor, and the other part of the second. These last two tenants will vacate the property in mid 2016 when their leases expire, or possibly before as the landlord has now agreed to accept an early surrender. The advice of various commercial property agents has been taken and it is clear that the property’s numerous shortcomings, especially when compared with other properties available in the locality, make future office use a forlorn prospect. The intention is therefore to convert the upper floors to residential use. Indeed, works to the other floors have commenced, and work in relation to the lift shaft will occur during 2016 pursuant to extant permissions (see below).

It is against this background that the above planning application has been submitted, seeking change of use from office to residential use. The application only relates to those parts of the building that remain occupied, as consent has already been granted for change of use of the other floors (via permissions dated October 2013 and 2014 respectively). As with those previous applications the current application is accompanied by a report from an active, local commercial agent providing an assessment of the inadequacies of the relevant floor space, and the prospects of re-letting.

As we understand it the Council is proposing to refuse the application primarily on the basis that no formal marketing exercise has been undertaken. This is very hard to understand for the following reasons:

1. Under the same local policy context (Policies CS8 and DP13) five very similar applications have all been approved. None of these applications were required to present evidence of a formal marketing exercise. For convenience the references are:

· 31 Museum Street (2011/5960/P); · 28 Museum Street (2011/6466/P); · Museum Street (2013/4368/P); · Museum Street (2013/7239/P); and · 37 Museum Street (2014/6799/P).

(The most recent of these was approved on 28 October 2015).

2. The commercial agent’s report submitted with my client’s latest application concludes that such are the shortcomings of the property (even in the context that the property is not Listed) a formal marketing exercise would “likely be a fruitless exercise”. You will I am sure appreciate that reputable commercial property agents do not utilise such language except in the most clear-cut of circumstances.

My client is keen to work with your Council. An appeal against a refusal would likely only be determined about the same time as the two remaining office tenants vacate. We could therefore be heading towards the somewhat farcical situation whereby the current proposal is either withdrawn only to be re-submitted in summer 2016, or alternatively refused and appealed. In light of the evidence above either would seem to be completely unnecessary, nor justified. In short, we simply cannot understand why the very well established pattern of decision-taking above, and consistent interpretation of Policies CS8 and DP13, is seemingly to be set aside in respect of my client’s latest application. We consider an Inspector would equally struggle with this.

Accordingly, we respectfully request that you and your officers review this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Director for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

Our Ref: RHW/mh STEF Property Management Limited 12 South Molton Street London W1K 5QN 28 July 2016

Dear

MUSEUM HOUSE, MUSEUM STREET, LONDON WC1

Please find below a summary of all the marketing that has taken place since marketing commenced in March and interest generated.

MARKETING

Board

A colour letting board stating OFFICES TO LET and including our details has been attached prominently on the hoarding around the building.

Email Announcement

An email flyer incorporating photographs and appropriate text has been circulated directly to some 650 individual agents active in the West End market on three separate occasions.

Marketing materials

In house details, being an expanded version of the flyer above, have been created and circulated on our network of approximately 500 agency practices across Central London on two occasions.

Internet advertising

Details of the property have been posted on our website and added to a variety of property marketing sites including Showcase, EACH and Property Link

INTEREST

I have conducted inspections with a number of potential occupiers which I would summarize as follows:-

8 July: Management Consultants. Good location but insufficiently flexible layout. They need a single floor where all staff in open plan are clearly visible to each other and this cannot be achieved here.

2 & 16 July: US Charity. Liked the location and weren’t overly concerned about the layout of the floor but do not want to be in a mixed use building, particularly one where the upper parts are divided between office and residential with a shared lift and accessed from the same common parts.

3 May: Locally based Consultants. Initial tour of inspection. Subsequent feedback was that they felt they could obtain better quality, more modern space that better suited their needs.

At present the proposed location of the ‘Sheffield’ stands do not provide adequate clearance and thus the layout does not comply with Camden’s CPG7 design guidance. The ‘Sheffield’ stands adjacent to the wall on the eastern side require an offset of 300mm from the wall. All other ‘Sheffield’ stands in the store require a 750mm offset from any obstruction, such as a wall, and 1000mm spacing between adjacent stands in order for both sides of the stand to be used. In addition to this 1800mm is required in front of all stands to allow for adequate manoeuvrability of cycles within the store.

Where cycle stores are accessible via a door an absolute minimum width of 900mm for doors are required. It is preferred however to have larger doors of 1200mm width together with either automatic or power assisted capabilities. The current plans are contrary to policy and thus the applicant must revise the proposal in order to gain approval.

Revised details of the cycle parking facilities and access arrangements would need to comply with the guidance provided within CPG7 and should be submitted to Transport Strategy for consideration prior to determination of this planning application. For specific reference with regards to the layout of ‘Sheffield’ stands the applicant should refer to figures 3, 4 and 5 of CPG7 which is available on the Camden website at the hyperlink below: http://camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/environment/planning-and-built- environment/two/planning-policy/supplementary-planning-documents/camden- planning-guidance.en

Once the proposal is deemed acceptable in terms of transport approval should be granted subject to the following conditions:  16 cycle parking spaces (or otherwise as per the new layout of the cycle store) to be installed to CPG7 standards (appropriate facilities, doorway widths etc);  The cycle store to be accessible via a locked door;  At least 6 of the proposed cycle parking spaces to be dedicated to the residents in the proposed units as part of this application; and  ‘Wheel Ramps’ to be installed on the stairs to access the cycle store at basement level.

Car Parking Development policy DP18 states that the Council seeks to ensure that developments provide the minimum necessary car parking provision. The Council expects development to be car free in the Central London Area, the town centres of Camden Town, Finchley Road/Swiss Cottage, Kentish Town, Kilburn High Road and West Hampstead, and other areas within Controlled Parking Zones that are easily accessible by public transport.

The site is located in the Bloomsbury conservation area and the Holborn and Covent Garden controlled parking zone (CA-C) which operates between 0830 and 1830 hours on Monday to Saturday. Our records indicate that the CPZ suffers from parking stress with a ratio of parking permits to parking spaces of 1.08 (i.e. 108 parking permits issued per 100 parking spaces). In addition, the site has a PTAL rating of 6a which means it is highly accessible by public transport.

Policies CS11, DP18, DP19 and CPG7 collectively require new (or additional) residential developments to be car-free in areas that are easily accessible by public transport. Sites with a PTAL rating of 4 or above are generally considered to be easily accessible by public transport.

The proposals do not seek to introduce on-site car parking and thus are in keeping with policies CS11, DP18, DP19 and DP21. However, if planning permission were to be granted it must be subject to a section 106 planning obligation requiring the 3 new residential units to be fully car-free. The developer will have an obligation to then tell any future occupiers of the car-free dwelling that it is car-free and that occupiers will be unable to apply for residential car parking permits.

“For car free developments, the Council will:

 not issue on-street parking permits;  use planning obligations to ensure that future occupants are aware they are not entitled to on-street parking permits; and  not grant planning permission for development that incorporates car parking spaces, other than spaces designated for people with disabilities, and a limited number of spaces for car capped housing in accordance with Council's Parking Standards.”

Highways Contribution The summary page of Development Policy DP21 states that ‘The Council will expect works affecting Highways to repair any construction damage to transport infrastructure or landscaping and reinstate all affected transport network links and road and footway surfaces following development’.

The proposed works could lead to damage to the footways and carriageway directly adjacent to the site. Camden would need to undertake highway remedial works following completion of the proposed development and a financial contribution for highway works should be secured as a Section 106 planning obligation.

As per the previous application (2015/5169/P) the highways financial contribution quote requested from our Highways Delivery Team will remain at £12,147.15. This should be secured as part of the Section 106 agreement if planning permission is granted.

Management of Construction Impacts on the Public Highway in the local area It is not anticipated that the proposal would need a Construction Management Plan however it is likely that the proposal will involve scaffolding, hoarding and parking bay suspensions

The developer must seek and acquire all relevant licences from Network Management to facilitate the development. Details for highway licences are available on the Camden website at the hyperlink below: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/business/business-regulations/licensing- and-permits/licences/skips-materials-and-building-licences/building-licences/

Summary The proposal is acceptable in terms of transport and highways impacts subject to a section 106 agreement including the following obligations:

 A condition requiring the provision of a minimum of 6 covered, secure and fully enclosed cycle storage/parking spaces dedicated for residents of the new residential units together with the installation of ‘Wheel Ramps’ on the stairs to give access to the cycle store at basement level.

The cycle parking facilities should be designed to Camden Council’s design specifications as detailed in CPG7 and the ongoing retention of this facility, details of which will need to be submitted and approved, and approval should be reserved by condition.

 A Section 106 planning obligation to secure the 3 new residential units as fully car free. It should be noted that residents will not be eligible to apply for on-street parking permits from the Council.

 A Section 106 planning obligation to secure a financial contribution of £12,147.15 to cover the cost of highway works in the general vicinity of the site and associated amendments to existing traffic management orders.

In addition, all relevant highway licences to be acquired by the applicant. From: To: Subject: Museum House Museum Street London WC1A Date: 15 August 2016 21:44:08 Attachments: Screenshot 2016-08-05 17.59.58.png

Dear Ms

Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to me today.

As I mentioned I had gathered from the website (screenshot attached) that we had until the 26th August to submit our comments. However I understand from our call that actually the deadline is today. The applicant hadn’t consulted us prior to the application, so we haven’t had a lot of time to get our comments together.

Broadly we have a number of concerns stemming from the fact that we share an entrance with the proposed development and will need to co-exist with residents rather than businesses if permission is granted.

As I mentioned, we had not been consulted prior to the application and we are still trying to find out from the owners of the building what plans they have to ensure our continued use of the space. To be frank, we don’t want to get into conflict with the owners and I had hoped to have had a discussion with them before deciding whether to object or not. But the discovery that the deadline is, in fact, today has cut that process short.

I wonder, therefore, if I could register our potential objection and request the opportunity to put our comments to the planning committee. Please forgive me, however, for not being able to submit our detailed comments at this stage. I am still hopeful that we can have some sort of consultation with the owners that puts our mind at rest.

Kind regards

Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Replay Film & New Media www.replayfilms.co.uk

25 Museum St London WC1A

Tel +44 (0)7956

From: To: " Subject: RE: Museum House - 2016/3411/P Date: 19 August 2016 13:50:58 Attachments: image002.jpg image003.jpg

Dear

Many thanks for your email and comments below, and for giving us the opportunity to respond. I have discussed with and also the letting agent, and we are able to respond readily on all the matters raised. I note however that you shall be away from the office from 24 August until 5 September, and likewise I shall be on leave as from today. Therefore, we propose to let you have our response no later than Friday 9 September.

In the circumstances I am instructed to agree to the extension of the determination period for the application until 30 September.

I trust the above is all in order.

Regards,

Director

for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 18 August 2016 16:03 To: Subject: RE: Museum House - 2016/3411/P

Dear and

I have received the members comments and I had reviewed furthermore your proposal. As I previously informed you the main concerns were in relation to the level of marketing undertook and the provision of affordable housing contribution under s106.

Marketing: More detailed information has been requested to show what comparisons have been made as to the marketing price per sqm to other similar business use in the Central Activity zone. Considering that in the Council’s Development Plan Policies, paragraph 13.5 it states that the marketing should be done for at least 2 years, you should provide as much information as possible to show the lack of interest in the premises as an office.

I had a look the history for this site and also reviewed your Planning Statement which is a bit misleading. Paragraph 3.4 states that “As a consequence the majority of the floor space in the upper (first to fourth) floors of the buildings has residential use. This latest application therefore represents a final, logical and (in our view) non-contentious proposal that would facilitate the change of use of the remainder of the upper floor areas”. Under the planning application 2013/7239/P permission was granted for half of the first floor to be a self-contained flat. There are no other planning applications to convert the other half. Is it the other half of the 1st floor still used as an office? Is it your intention to convert that part as well in the future? Considering that the first floor is still used as an office it undermines your argument of the space not being suitable for office, given the fact that you do not have the 2 years marketing.

S106: In the submitted Planning Statement Para 5.31 says that “The proposal would not breach the threshold that would trigger the need for the provision of an affordable housing element”, which appears to be false.

Camden Development Policies paragraph 3.8 states that “The Council considers that a floorspace of 1,000 sq m (gross) is capable of accommodating 10 family dwellings, and will expect all residential developments that would provide additional built residential floorspace of 1,000 sqm (gross) to make a contribution to the supply of affordable housing.”

CPG2 Housing, paragraph 2.27 states that “The floorspace thresholds relating to Development Policies DP1 and DP3 refer to additions to gross floorspace (and are assessed in terms of Gross External Area – GEA – including each floor, including the thickness of external walls, partition walls and common areas).”

As I suppose you are aware under the s106 agreement for planning application 2013/4368/P condition 4.2.1 states that “If at any time after the date of this Agreement a Subsequent Planning Permission is granted which gives consent to the development of all or part of the Remaining Floorspace for residential proposes and/or additional residential units (“the subsequent development”) and the aggregate of the floorspace of the Development and the Subsequent Development (or Subsequent Developments if there is more than one) is greater than 1000m2 the Subsequent Planning Permission shall be subject to an agreement with the Council (“the Subsequent Agreement”) to secure either: (a) That an appropriate percentage of the residential units permitted by the Subsequent planning permission are allocated as affordable housing such percentage to be applied to the aggregate of the floorspace of the Development and the Subsequent Development (or Subsequent Developments if there is more than one); or (b) A contribution towards off-site affordable housing to be calculated on the basis of the aggregate of the floorspace of the Development and the Subsequent Development (or Subsequent Developments if there is more than one).

Considering the gross floor space of all the already approved and proposed residential units, the area exceeds 1000sqm, and therefore you will have to comply with condition 4.2.1 of the previous legal agreement. I advise you to check CPG8 (Planning Obligations) which explains how you can calculate the contribution.

I think that more time is needed in order to make this proposal acceptable so I suggest to agree to an extension of time. I will be on leave from the 24th of August and I will be back on the 5th of September. As the application will still have to go to members briefing, further delays might occur. For now, I propose to extend the life of this application up to 30th of September. Please confirm.

Best Regards,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: [mailto: prime-planning.co.uk] Sent: 16 August 2016 17:32 To: Subject: RE: Museum House - 2016/3411/P

Dear

Many thanks indeed for keeping and I informed. Do please let us know as and when you have any further feedback. We would very much appreciate the opportunity to address any concerns prior to the application being determined. Just to say that I shall be on leave for ten days as from this Saturday (20 August).

Many thanks,

Director

for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 16 August 2016 15:59 To: Subject: RE: Museum House - 2016/3411/P

Dear

Thank you for your email. I have been informed that the members have raised several concerns in relation to your proposal generally regarding the level of marketing and s106 and therefore the application has not been decided yet. I am still waiting for their comments and I will need to have a discussion with my manager before giving you any feedback.

I will email you as soon as I have more information.

Best Regards,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

Dear

I would be most grateful if you could just let and I know if there is any feedback from the Members Briefing yesterday.

Many thanks,

Director for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 11 August 2016 09:20 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Yes, the application was accepted and hopefully we will have a response on Monday. If not we will have to agree an extension of time when the members will be ready to give us their response.

Will keep you informed.

Best Regards,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: Hawes [mailto: hawesprice.co.uk] Sent: 10 August 2016 17:31 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

I appreciate you are busy with your report and just wondered if when you get time you could let me know if the application has been accepted for the members briefing next Monday please.

Many thanks

Kind regards

Hawes Price Limited

Tel: 0207 Fax: 0207 409 0056 Mob: Email hawesprice.co.uk www.hawesprice.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 09 August 2016 17:43 To: Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Thank you for your email and attachment. I have forwarded the information to the transport officer and will get the comments tomorrow morning.

Will let you know if we need more information or if the application has been accepted for the members briefing next Monday.

Best Regards,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: [mailto: hawesprice.co.uk] Sent: 09 August 2016 17:21 To: Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Good Afternoon

Please find the drawing attached hereto and I shall be grateful if you are able to confirm you now have everything you need to enable this matter to be discussed with members on the 15th August 2016.

Many thanks.

Kind regards

Hawes Price Limited

Tel: 0207 Fax: 0207 409 0056 Mob: Email hawesprice.co.uk www.hawesprice.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 09 August 2016 15:38 To: Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Sorry, I need to run on a site visit. Everything needs to be done by tomorrow 12pm if not will be going to the next Members Briefing on the 22nd. So I will need them some time in advance so I can finish the report and update all necessary in the system.

Best Regards,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: [mailto: hawesprice.co.uk] Sent: 09 August 2016 15:25 To: Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Good Afternoon

I have just left you a voicemail message as we will be able to provide this but unfortunately the architect is out on site at the moment so I am unable to advise how quickly we can get this to you.

Can you let us know the deadline you require this for please.

Many thanks

Kind regards

Hawes Price Limited

Tel: 0207 Fax: 0207 409 0056 Mob: Email hawesprice.co.uk www.hawesprice.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 09 August 2016 14:02 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Dear

Thank you for your response in relation to all the points raised by the transport officers and for attached document.

Can you please send me an updated basement plan on scale with the proposed cycle storage?

Best Regards,

Planning Officer Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals. From: [mailto: prime-planning.co.uk] Sent: 09 August 2016 13:50 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

Dear

Thank you for forwarding the observations of your transportation colleagues on the application. We have carefully considered the various matters raised, and I can respond as follows:

· I attach a document showing a revised basement cycle parking arrangement. There is sufficient headroom (2.51m) in order to be able to double-stack cycles (using a Josta two-tier system or similar) allowing a more efficient use of space. The cycle stands have been reconfigured to meet the Council’s circulation space standards, and likewise so have door opening widths;

· The number of cycle stands has been reduced from 16 to 12. This is to assist achieving the required circulation space. I note that your transport colleagues have commented that they would approve to 16 spaces “or otherwise as per the new layout of the cycle store”. Moreover, they have confirmed that the requirement is for 6 spaces for this application, and the previous recent permissions create a combined number of 12 spaces required to meet policy;

· My client is happy to agree in principle the concept of providing a wheel ramp on the stairs between ground and basement level, however further technical work would be required to confirm exactly what is practicable. I therefore suggest that this matter be dealt with via condition attached to any permission; and

· My client is prepared to agree to a financial contribution of £12,147.15 towards highways works to be carried out within Museum Street / Little Russell Street. This would need to be subject to the standard clause as to a time-limit for the expenditure of the money (or, if not, repayment to the applicant).

For the avoidance of doubt, has already confirmed via separate email that the development can be ‘car free’ via the relevant s106 provisions.

I trust the above is of assistance. Do let me know if you need any further information. I shall be grateful for confirmation the application will be considered by the Members Panel on Monday 15 August.

Regards,

Director

for and on behalf of PRIME Planning & Development Limited

Telephone: 01962 Mobile: Email: prime-planning.co.uk

From: [mailto: camden.gov.uk] Sent: 08 August 2016 10:36 To: Clark Cc: Subject: FW: Transport Obs: 2016/3411/P

In addition, please find attached comments from Transport officers. In order to make the proposal acceptable amendments are needed to the cycle parking store.

I would expect to receive this by tomorrow afternoon as well.

Best Regards,

Planning Officer

Telephone:

You can sign up to our new and improved planning e-alerts to let you know about new planning applications, decisions and appeals.

This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. This e-mail may contain information which is confidential, legally privileged and/or copyright protected. This e- mail is intended for the addressee only. If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer.

12/07/2016

2 Site Notices -Please post one site notice in front of Museum House, on the corner of Museum Street with Little Russell Street -Please post one site notice on the corner of Coptics Street and New Oxford Street