Skip to content

Agenda item

179 Hornsey Road, London, N7 6RA


Partial demolition of the former school building and structures, conversion and change of use of one of the retained buildings (Block B), including the erection of a 3 storey rear extension and the erection of a new detached 4-storey building to provide 9 residential units (Use Class C3, 4no. 2 bed, 5no. 3 bed), retention and refurbishment of a second retained building to provide replacement Class D1/ D2 community use (148sqm (GIA)) and associated landscaping.
(Planning application number:


In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The Planning Officer informed the meeting that due to formatting issues with paragraph 8.3, each bullet point is to be amended to read as-


-        The demolition and building works would affect the operation of the site at 97-101 Seven Sisters Road, particularly in terms of noise and the duration of the construction (para. 10.57)


-        The proposal would have a detrimental impact on neighbouring residents in terms of noise and disturbance (para. 10.57)


-        The proposed design has no respect to the architectural quality of the surrounding buildings, as well as unsympathetic materials (para. 9.22 – 9.39)


-        There will bea lossof privacydue toincreased overlooking (para. 10.52 – 10.54)


-        The proposal would lead to an unacceptable loss of daylight and sunlight, and increasing sense of enclosure to neighbouring residential occupiers as well as overshadowing of the residents’ garden (para. 10.28 – 10.51)


-        The application would result in an unacceptably high housing and population density (para.9.22 – 9.31)


-        The proposal would have a negative impact to the air quality of the area (para. 10.94 – 10.96)


-        Request integrated swift nest box bricks/blocks are installed near roof level which would protect the swifts and improve the local biodiversity (para. 10.97 – 10.99)


·         In addition the Planning Officer advised that a plan stated within condition 2 which should be deleted from the report.

·         Planning Officer advised that the proposal is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring residential amenity in terms of loss of daylight, sunlight, outlook, privacy, noise and disturbance or an increased sense of enclosure.

·         Issues raised by a neighbouring resident included loss of privacy and overlooking concerns and its impact on their amenity. In addition there were concerns about the quality of the proposed materials for the external part of the building as it would be out of character of the neighbouring area.

·         In response to objectors concerns, the applicant advised that bringing the building back into use would be beneficial for the area considering that it had been left vacant for a number of years after many unsuccessful attempts to market the building. In addition the applicant advised that following consultation with planning officers, both building A and the rear extension of Building B would comprise of terracotta cladding as the main external material.  

·         In response to concerns about the expected use of the community building and its long term sustainability, the agent advised that this would be disposed and not part of the charity’s plans.

·         With regards to the marketability of the building, the meeting was advised that the condition of the building and the size of the D1/D2 unit were considered to be  disadvantages to attracting prospective users/occupiers as smaller sized units were preferred.

·         In response to concerns that the community building could be converted into another use in the future, Members were advised that condition 3 had been included to prevent changes from D1/D2 use by using permitted development rights.

·         In response to concerns that the applicant had not provided specific management plans with regards to the D2 use, a suggestion that the D2 element of the proposal be removed was agreed.


Councillor Convery proposed a motion to grant planning permission subject to the removal of the D2 use element from the description of development due to concerns over future management. This was seconded by Councillor Nathan and carried.





That following consideration of the case officers report (the assessment and recommendations therein), the presentation to Committee, submitted representations and objections provided verbally at this meeting, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions (as amended) and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report and subject to the prior completion of a Deed of Planning Obligation made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing the heads of terms as set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report


Supporting documents: