16 council homes at Depot, Hornsey, London N6

What was proposed

The application proposed replacing a car wash with 16 council homes, including flats, wheelchair homes and two houses, with associated access, storage and landscaping.

“Proposal: Redevelopment of existing car wash site to provide 16 new council homes comprising a 4-storey building fronting Archway Road and two 2-storey houses fronting Bakers Lane, with associated refuse/recycling stores, cycle stores, service space, amenity space and landscaping.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was a previously used car wash on an island plot beside Archway Road, Bakers Lane and North Hill, within the Highgate Conservation Area.

“The site specifically fronts onto the busy Archway Road (A1) to the east and Bakers Lane to the south, which in turn intersects with North Hill to the immediate west. Within the application site are low-lying structures of no heritage value, and immediately to the north lies a large petrol filling and service station with retail. To the west, the application site adjoins a row of 19th-century terraced houses (Nos. 96–108 North Hill), each with small rear gardens.”

“The site is located within a moderate Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) area, with a rating of 3. Several bus routes are accessible within a short walking distance, and Highgate Underground Station is approximately 11 minutes away on foot to the south.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the scheme sustainable development providing affordable homes, improving townscape, protecting neighbours acceptably and meeting transport, carbon, biodiversity and air-quality objectives.

“The scheme is considered to be sustainable development on previously developed land, which will deliver 16 much-needed affordable homes in a part of the borough where larger development sites are limited.”

“The proposal is not considered harmful to the character or appearance of the Highgate Conservation Area or nearby heritage assets and would additionally raise the architectural and townscape quality of this site within the conservation area. The scheme will deliver modest public benefits, including the provision of affordable homes and improvements to townscape quality.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A resident spoke against the application on behalf of local residents, followed by a councillor who raised safety, access, flooding, privacy and consultation concerns.

Members’ discussion

Members questioned drainage, pedestrian crossings, building height, consultation, pollution, council governance, flooding and whether the housing mix was appropriate.

“- Members had questioned how the drainage would be managed. Officers advised that the submitted details for sustainable urban drainage were comprehensive and appropriate. - Concerns had been raised about the zebra crossings, which were described as potentially difficult to use and not pedestrian-friendly. They asked whether further evaluation would take place.”

“- Members noted that the scheme had been reported to the Quality Review Panel a number of times and that the scheme responded successfully to their comments. - Officers advised that there was a clear distinction between officers acting as the applicant and those acting as the Local Planning Authority, with appropriate working relationships taking place.”

Minutes

The vote

The Chair moved approval after the recommendation was summarised, and the committee approved it unanimously.

“- The Chair asked Catherine Smyth, Head of Development Management and Enforcement Planning to sum up the recommendation. The Chair moved that the recommendation be approved following a unanimous vote.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to conditions, informatives and completion of an agreement securing the required planning obligations by the specified deadline.

“That the Committee authorise the Head of Development Management or the Director of Planning and Building Standards to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions set out below, and informatives, and the completion of an agreement satisfactory to the Head of Development Management or the Director of Planning and Building Standards that secures the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms below.”

“It is recognised that the Council cannot enforce against itself in respect of breaches of planning conditions, and so prior to issuing any planning permission measures will be agreed between the Council’s Housing service and the Planning service, including the resolution of non-compliance with planning conditions by the Chief Executive and the reporting of breaches to portfolio holders, to ensure compliance with any conditions imposed on the planning permission for the…”

Minutes

Conditions and obligations

The decision required conditions and agreements covering highways, carbon, travel, construction, affordable housing, employment, energy, biodiversity, landscaping and monitoring.

“Carbon offset contribution: • Estimated carbon offset contribution (and associated obligations) of £10,830 (indicative), plus a 10% management fee; carbon offset contribution to be re- calculated at £2,850 per tCO2 at the Energy Plan and Sustainability stages • ‘Be Seen’ commitment to upload energy performance data 2. Car-Capped Agreement including a £4,000 contribution to amend the Traffic Management Order 3.”

“4) Hard and soft landscaping 5) Living Roof 6) Cycle parking 7) Part M4(2) Accessible and Adaptable Dwellings and M4(3) Wheelchair Homes 8) Energy Strategy 9) Water Butts 10) Water consumption 11) BNG Plan 12) BNG Monitoring 13) NRMM 14) Section 278 Agreement 15) Land contamination 16) Unexpected contamination 17) Demolition and Construction management plan (DCMP) 18) Demolition and Construction Environmental Management Plan (DCEMP) 19) Removal of permitted development…”

Minutes