Agenda item

Reserved matters relating to Buildings W1 and W2 comprising 12 to 17 storeys of mixed use accommodation for 140 Open Market residential units on the upper floors of Building W1 and 8 storeys of residential accommodation for 36 General Needs Social Rented, 23 Intermediate and 19 Open Market units at the upper levels of Building W2; four retail units at lower ground floor and podium levels (flexible class A1-A4); and associated cycle and disabled car parking, loading bay, refuse stores, storage, plant areas provided with the shared lower ground floor/basement area, as required by conditions 2, 4, 6, 9-20 and 22-30 of outline planning permission reference P041261 granted 22 July 2008 (subject to a S106 agreement) for a comprehensive, phased, mixed-use development of part of the former railway lands within the Camden King’s Cross Opportunity Area and an Islington Area of Opportunity.

(Planning application number: P2016/1030/RMS)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The planning officer advised that Recommendation A of the officer report should refer to the approval of reserved matters being subject to conditions and the discharge of relevant associated conditions.

·         The committee was informed that Camden Council had granted approval for an identical application.

·         Members queried why the number of intermediate units had decreased from 48 to 23 units. The planning officer advised that the affordable housing had been agreed through a legal agreement with Camden Council as the block containing affordable housing was in Camden. A deed of variation had been submitted to Camden Council and the affordable housing provision was varied in March 2016. Islington Council had been consulted and commented that the number of social rented units would remain the same and although there would be a reduction in intermediate units, the floorspace would not reduce. Therefore the council did not object.

·         Concern was raised that there were no details about Building W3, the building that would provide community facilities. The applicant confirmed that this part of the scheme had not been designed in detail. Discussions on the right provision were still taking place with the councils. The applicant hoped to complete Building W3 after Buildings W1 and W2.

·         The planning officer stated that it was usual in a scheme of this size for the applicant to submit details on a phased basis.

·         The applicant had provided indicative details of landscaping but had not provided any detail.

·         The planning officer advised that since the scheme was submitted to the Design Review Panel, accessibility had been addressed in more detail and had been secured in the S106 agreement and there was now some information on the emerging landscaping strategy.

·         The Design Review Panel had advised that a co-ordinated scheme should be delivered.

·         Concern was raised about most of the balconies being smaller than the 5m specified in policy. The applicant stated that the site was a complicated one and different design requirements had been balanced. As well as the balconies there would also be garden provision. If balconies were made bigger, the internal space would be decreased.

·         Concern was raised that 40% of the units were not dual aspect. The planning officer advised that there were constraints within the site and the application was submitted before the policy on dual aspect units was in place. There were no single aspect north facing units.

·         The planning officer confirmed that all habitable rooms had natural light. Some bathrooms did not.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to defer the consideration of the application to enable the applicant to do further work to address concerns in relation to the single aspect units and lack of clarity on outdoor space, landscaping, playspace and Building W3. This was seconded by Councillor Nicholls and carried.

RESOLVED:

That consideration of the application be deferred for the reasons outlined above.