Planning application · Hackney
2023/1684.
Flat 1, 79 Kingsland High Street, Hackney, London, E8 2PB
Full / Other Planning at Flat 1, 79 Kingsland High Street, Hackney, London, E8 2PB, received 23 Jul 2023 — refused on 29 Jan 2024 (delegated, Catherine Nichol).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHackney profile →
Refused
Outcome
29 Jan 2024
27 wks
Decision time
19 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
12
Documents
12 linked
0
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Hackney planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Erection of first and second floor rear extensions, to provide 2 x 1 bedroom self-contained residential units.
Reference
2023/1684
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
23 Jul 2023
Validated
20 Sep 2023
Target date
15 Nov 2023
Decision date
29 Jan 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Reference
2023/1684
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 17 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
23 Jul 2023
Validated
20 Sep 2023
Target date
15 Nov 2023
Decision date
29 Jan 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Hackney portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 29 Jan 2024, delegated decision by Catherine Nichol — 27 weeks from submission (19 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
23 Jul 2023
Application received
20 Sep 2023
Application validated
15 Nov 2023
Statutory target date
29 Jan 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Catherine Nichol
23 Jul 2023
Application received
20 Sep 2023
Application validated
15 Nov 2023
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
29 Jan 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Catherine Nichol
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed rear extension at first and second floor level, by reason of
excessive bulk, scale, massing, detailed design, position and location would
result in an obtrusive and incompatible form of development which would fail
to respect the character and appearance of the subject property, terrace of
which it forms part and would fail to preserve or enhance the character and
appearance of the Dalston Conservation Area. As such the proposed
development is contrary to policies D3 (Optimising Site Capacity through the
Design-led Approach) and HC1 (Heritage Conservation and Growth) of the
London Plan 2021, LP1 (Design Quality and Local Character), LP3
(Designated Heritage Assets) and LP17 (Housing Design) of the Hackney
Local Plan 2033, and the guidance contained within Hackney Residential
Extensions and Alterations SPD 2009.
2
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate the proposed
development has fully considered the sustainability and addressed mitigation
of climate change contrary to Policy LP54(Overheating) and LP55(Mitigating
Climate Change) of the Hackney Local Plan (2020).
3
The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement to secure
car-free housing, would be likely to promote the use of non-sustainable
modes of transport and contribute to air pollution and congestion in the
surrounding area, contrary to policies T6 (Car Parking) of the London Plan
(2021), policy LP45 (Parking and Car Free Development) of Hackney’s Local
Plan 2033 (2020) and Hackney's S106 Planning Contributions SPD (2020).
4
The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement to secure
a contribution towards affordable housing fails to deliver the maximum
reasonable amount of affordable housing and is therefore contrary to Policy
H4 (Delivering affordable housing) of the London Plan (2021) and Policy
LP13 (Affordable housing) of Hackney’s Local Plan 2033 (2020) and
Hackney's S106 Planning Contributions SPD (2020).
5
The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement to secure
a contribution towards a construction management plan monitoring fee,
would be likely to result in adverse impacts upon the highways in the
surrounding area, contrary to policy LP43 (Transport and development) of
Hackney’s Local Plan 2033 (2020) and Hackney's S106 Planning
Contributions SPD (2020).
6
The proposed development has failed to demonstrate the current occupiers
to the first floor rear studio of No.79 Kingsland High Street would not
experience an undue loss of light as a result of the proposed development to
the detriment of their amenity, contrary to LP2 (Development and Amenity) of
the Hackney Local Plan (2020).
7
The proposed development would result in a loss of outlook for the
occupiers of the first floor rear studio of No.79 Kingsland High Street to the
detriment of their amenity, contrary to LP2 (Development and Amenity) of the
Hackney Local Plan (2020).
1
The proposed rear extension at first and second floor level, by reason of
excessive bulk, scale, massing, detailed design, position and location would
result in an obtrusive and incompatible form of development which would fail
to respect the character and appearance of the subject property, terrace of
which it forms part and would fail to preserve or enhance the character and
appearance of the Dalston Conservation Area. As such the proposed
development is contrary to policies D3 (Optimising Site Capacity through the
Design-led Approach) and HC1 (Heritage Conservation and Growth) of the
London Plan 2021, LP1 (Design Quality and Local Character), LP3
(Designated Heritage Assets) and LP17 (Housing Design) of the Hackney
Local Plan 2033, and the guidance contained within Hackney Residential
Extensions and Alterations SPD 2009.
2
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate the proposed
development has fully considered the sustainability and addressed mitigation
of climate change contrary to Policy LP54(Overheating) and LP55(Mitigating
Climate Change) of the Hackney Local Plan (2020).
3
The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement to secure
car-free housing, would be likely to promote the use of non-sustainable
modes of transport and contribute to air pollution and congestion in the
surrounding area, contrary to policies T6 (Car Parking) of the London Plan
(2021), policy LP45 (Parking and Car Free Development) of Hackney’s Local
Plan 2033 (2020) and Hackney's S106 Planning Contributions SPD (2020).
Show all 7 rows
4
The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement to secure
a contribution towards affordable housing fails to deliver the maximum
reasonable amount of affordable housing and is therefore contrary to Policy
H4 (Delivering affordable housing) of the London Plan (2021) and Policy
LP13 (Affordable housing) of Hackney’s Local Plan 2033 (2020) and
Hackney's S106 Planning Contributions SPD (2020).
5
The proposed development, in the absence of a legal agreement to secure
a contribution towards a construction management plan monitoring fee,
would be likely to result in adverse impacts upon the highways in the
surrounding area, contrary to policy LP43 (Transport and development) of
Hackney’s Local Plan 2033 (2020) and Hackney's S106 Planning
Contributions SPD (2020).
6
The proposed development has failed to demonstrate the current occupiers
to the first floor rear studio of No.79 Kingsland High Street would not
experience an undue loss of light as a result of the proposed development to
the detriment of their amenity, contrary to LP2 (Development and Amenity) of
the Hackney Local Plan (2020).
7
The proposed development would result in a loss of outlook for the
occupiers of the first floor rear studio of No.79 Kingsland High Street to the
detriment of their amenity, contrary to LP2 (Development and Amenity) of the
Hackney Local Plan (2020).
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
Objections
0
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.