Agenda item

Change of use of Nos. 457-463 Holloway Road from office (Use Class B1) to residential (Use Class C3) to provide 14 residential units, part excavation of basement and light wells, demolition of the single storey rear extension, erection of a mews comprising 2 residential units (Use Class C3) and associated cycle and refuse storage and landscaping.

(Planning application number: P2016/3157/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         Members were informed that an updated Aboricultural report had been submitted and the Council’s Trees Officer had advised that although the tree immediately adjacent to the proposed Mews unit might survive the proposed works, there was a likelihood that ongoing post-development pressure from occupants might require the need to lop the tree.

·         Members were informed that concerns regarding access to the proposed scheme had been resolved as the applicant had submitted details of an easement over the access road that adjoins the site. The Officer advised that there was concern that the owner of the access road could have erected a boundary enclosure in front of windows to the Mews units resulting in daylight amenity and fire safety implications

·         The Planning Officer informed Members that although the Council’s Energy Advisor was still awaiting the correct carbon reduction figure to be inserted into condition 14 this information would not alter the proposed energy efficiency and renewable energy measures.  Members were informed that should Members resolve to grant planning permission, the Chair’s authority to update this condition with the correct figure would be sought.

·         The Planning Officer advised Members that the scheme was significantly compromised in policy terms and the quality of the dwellings.

·         The Agent informed Members that although it was a challenging site, the proposal would ensure that the building was brought back into use by delivering 16 residential units with a reasonable standard of internal accommodation instead of leaving a locally listed building vacant.

·         In response to questions about the low financial contribution in lieu of affordable housing being proposed, the agent advised that if there was an increase in the valuation of the dwellings the Council would benefit in the future as the financial contribution received by the council would be re-calculated to reflect the market prices. Members were advised that this would be secured by a S106 legal agreement to ensure it was binding.

·         Members acknowledged the challenges with the existing building, it’s state of disrepair both internally and externally and the cost involved in bringing the building back to use but were concerned with the quality of the proposed dwellings and the inadequate provision of communal private amenity space.

·         Concerns were also raised with regards to the siting of the bin and cycle storages in the front garden area onto Holloway Road which would be harmful to the character and appearance of the Mercer’s Road Conservation Area.

Councillor Donovan-Hart proposed a motion to refuse planning permission for the following reasons;

·         The proposal would represent an overdevelopment of the site which would result in an inadequate standard of residential accommodation with an unsatisfactory mix of units contrary to Policies 3.1, 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 of the Council’s Development Management Policies Document (2013) and CS12 of Islington's Core Strategy 2011 

·         The proposal would represent an overdevelopment of the site resulting in harm to the character and appearance of the Hilmarton Conservation area contrary to policy CS3, CS9 of Islington's Core Strategy 2011, Policies 2.1 and 2.3 of the Council’s Development Management Policies Document (2013).    

·         The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development will provide the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing taking account of the borough-wide strategic target of 50%, and the methodology approach to financial viability assessments as set out in the Mayor of London's Affordable Housing and Viability SPG 2017 and Islington's Development Viability SPD 2016.  The proposal is therefore contrary to policy 3.12 of the London Plan 2016, policy CS12 of Islington's Core Strategy 2011.

This was seconded by Councillor Ward and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused for the reasons set out above, the wording of which was delegated to officers.