26 affordable homes at Former Boiler House, Belper Court, London E5

The site and surroundings

The vacant site was a former boiler house in a mainly residential area, with buildings nearby ranging from two to eight storeys.

“The site is vacant. Prior to the demolition authorised under 2017/3512, it comprised a vacant boiler house, located on the south western corner of the junction of Pedro Street and Rushmore Road, Clapton.”

“The site lies within a predominantly residential context, with the exception of a mixed use shopping parade (Gilpin Square) to the east and some sporadic community uses to the north and west. Surrounding built form varies from 2 to 8 storeys in height.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions approved the residential development and later amendments, while the report records no relevant enforcement or appeal history.

“Application Number: 2025/1564 Decision Date: Non material amendment to planning permission 2017/3512 (as amended) dated 08/08/2018, comprising changes to the development description to remove reference to the building height and add a condition in this regard; and to change the number of residential units from 28 to 26 to reflect the approved drawings.”

“No relevant enforcement or appeal history.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions and a deed of variation, finding the scheme acceptable in design, housing, amenity, transport and sustainability terms.

“The proposal is considered to be in line with the parent permission and is acceptable in planning terms in all other respects, including the impact on amenity of adjoining residents, transport impact and car parking provision, sustainability and energy efficiency measures and biodiversity.”

“The proposal is, on balance, therefore deemed to comply with pertinent policies in the Hackney Local Plan 2033 (2020) and the London Plan (2021), and the granting of permission therefore is recommended subject to conditions and completion of a Deed of Variation to the Unilateral Undertaking.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Two objections cited amenity, infrastructure, parking, construction noise and dust, while consultees generally raised no objection or supported the proposal subject to conditions.

“Letters of consultation were sent to 264 adjoining owners/occupiers, a site notice was erected on 22 September 2025 and a press notice placed in the Hackney Citizen. At the time of writing the report (4 November 2025) two written objections had been submitted, which is summarised below: ● Impact on neighbouring amenity, including loss of daylight/sunlight and increased overlooking. ● Impact of additional occupants on local infrastructure/services.”

“Conditions requiring the provision of cycle parking, demolition, construction and delivery/servicing plans have been recommended, written to require compliance with previously approved documents where applicable, along with Unilateral Undertaking clauses restricting future residents from applying for parking permits, Blue Badge spaces, compliance and adoption of a Travel Plan containing a Parking Design Management Plan and Highway Works.”

Officer report

Who spoke

No one registered to object, and a council development manager spoke in support of the application.

What members discussed

Members discussed daylight and sunlight, parking, infrastructure, balconies, the youth club, a possible mural and the difficulty of retaining the housing mix.

“During a discussion a number of points were raised including the following: • In response to concerns about loss of daylight and sunlight, the Planning Sub-Committee noted that existing levels of sunlight in adjacent buildings were already quite low due to building arrangement, and the impacts from the new six-story building were not significantly greater than what was expected with the original approval; • The development was car-free, and the Council’s transport…”

“The Planning Officer explained that local infrastructure impact would be mitigated through a Section 106 agreement and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments, which are deemed more than adequate; • The Planning Service confirmed that all first, second, third, fourth, and fifth-floor units would have balconies; • The Council was in regular contact with the nearby Pedro Youth Club, which was also currently undergoing its own building work soon, to discuss minimising…”

Minutes

The decision

The committee resolved to grant planning permission subject to conditions and a deed of variation to the unilateral undertaking.

“To grant planning permission subject to conditions and a deed of variation to the Unilateral Undertaking.”

Minutes