Hi,
Yesterday we received planning notice app through our door on Moray Road, regarding City North Islington Trading Estate, Fonthill Road and 8-10 Goodwin Street, N4 regarding the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a mixed development comprising two 21 storey (yes it says 2 x 21 storey) building above ground floor plinth, 10 storey building above ground and first floor plinth; and 3 storey building above ground floor plinth for 335 residential dwellings, office space restaurant cafe, gym etc... Application no PO92492 at Islington.gov.uk planning dept.
I thought this sounded shocking and along with what is planned over the way on sgr it would seem the area is up for quite a few potential sky scrapers and change landscape.
Comments
Search for P092492 (with a zero after P)
Or use this deep link instead - <a href="http://bit.ly/citynorth">http://bit.ly/citynorth</a>
It looks like the tenants of the 10th and 11th floor duplexes will have 3 toilets and 2 bath tubs in each 2 bedroom apartment. Either there's a large market for incontinent but hygiene-conscious city dwellers that's being targeted, or not much effort has gone into the design so far.
They're going to have fun getting furniture up and down those spiral staircases too.
I really hope this development will be a success - the area around Fonthill Road/station is still a bit crimey and maybe if there are more people around, this will improve.
But I can completely understand where Close is coming from too. The last thing we need is another of those massive orange brick towers that look like huge prison toilet blocks or a blandarama glass and concrete effort.
Does anyone know anything about the architects for this scheme?
They have an unhealthy obsession with lavatories.
Trellick is nice to look at, and I don't live there, but having walked past a few times there we ne-er do wells loitering outside it. It's something of an anachronism in the area, even though as a piece of architecture it does look good in isolation.
Croydon already has modern buildings, so the council tower, lovely though it is, isn't quite the sore thumb 2 x 21 stories would be in an area of 2/3 story residentials and the City North tower.
I guess local residents and business were already gyped with the Emirates build and Govt. intervention, but hope their wishes are heard on this.
Consultation between 21-dec and 21-Jan. What form is that taking?
I guess it's a fluke of geography that Islington can throw up any building it likes right on the border of Haringey and no one on the other side of SGR would know anything about it were it not for this forum.
B
Being 21-storey I would have thought that shoving a wind turbine or three on the top would make sense, but it's been discounted without review in the planning application. It's just written-off.
What's the tallest building in North London currently?
As for Islington I thinmk they are dabbling with lots of develpments round F.Park in the hope they that can create a buzz in the private sector and find a willing partner/fool to stump up for re-developing the tube station with the long mooted piazza and entrance on Fonthill Road [ complete with naff mural no doubt] Hopefully it will be someone other than the berk responsible for the bus station on SS rd. side which looks like a scheme rejected by everywhere else since 1974 but available as a bargain since it looked old before it was finished - sort of built in distressed look for buildings. Either that or it's bit of marine salvage artfully re-purposed as a community sculpture.
A snotty phonecall tomorrow is in order methinks.
Looking at their public consultation document, it appears that there were 3,000 leaflets distributed, and only 20 people attended the public exhibition last summer, the document then basically goes on to say that the attendance was low because the scheme was not contentious. Not sure why the attendance would be so low? I suppose there could be a few reasons - summer holidays, it was only held on the actual business park, i didn't see any adverst for it etc. I live within a couple hundred yards from the site, but we didn't get a notice, i'd have gone to have a nosey.
I think the exhibiton could have been done a bit better. Change the venues every day, go somewhere where there's high foot-fall in the local area, leaflet a lot more people, engage the local press - local journos love a good 'exclusive'..
I've not yet made my mind up on this scheme though, I think Finsbury Park needs something, but I quite like the current 2-3 storey scale, it gives the place a bit of historical character.
1) The <a href="https://www.islington.gov.uk/onlineplanning/docserver/applications/2009/12Dec/P092492/(W03) Consultation Statement.pdf#page26">Area action plan boundry</a> draws a near perfect border encompassing predominantly business properties and stops before crossing over into significant residential areas. The cynic in me says this is to involve the least number of residents for a given number of total addresses, and that considering the scale of the development, the zoned area is very small.
2) Two pages further down on <a href="https://www.islington.gov.uk/onlineplanning/docserver/applications/2009/12Dec/P092492/(W03) Consultation Statement.pdf#page28">page 28</a> it then says "Appendix 5 – List of Consultees, Leaflets Delivered by Hand Residents / occupiers within AAP boundary" and lists several pages of the addresses within the boundry area. It then lists "Local residential estates" and basically lists the entire six acres and andover state by the look of it, but I for one have no recollection of receiving it. And this isn't within the marked boundry either.
3) The <a href="https://www.islington.gov.uk/onlineplanning/docserver/applications/2009/12Dec/P092492/(W03) Consultation Statement.pdf#page43">newspaper adverts</a> make no reference to the scale of the development at all, which would perhaps help to lower the interest of most people who read it.
Am I being overly cynical?
I've worked for local authorities, and my knowledge on planning is a little rusty, but I think there's a statutory obligation to consult in a 200 metre radius of the site. I recollect that you can't speak at the planning hearing if you are not within this radius, although you can make comments through the portal.
That list of community groups that were consulted with must have been supplied by the council or the local CVS, I'm guessing. I'm wondering why Stroudgreen.org isn't on there, because I'm sure it has more contact with local residents than some of the others. It seems such an antiquated way of consulting, just sending out leaflets. They were bound to get ignored along with the pile of junk mail in the numerous shared hallways around the area. No wonder they only had 20 people turn up.
Having said that I think the development looks really attractive, especially the podium bit, not sure about the sort of glass, post office tower looking thing and the other tall rectangular block, but maybe those are the bits that will bring in the revenue for the project.
30m is a minimum though, there may be reasons that this area would be increased.
It's possible Reg would put me right on this stuff. I have the feeling I may have sat opposite him at very boring Council meetings, but he was listening.
Arky
"Comments on this application should be made by 21-Jan-2010."
<a href="http://bit.ly/citynorth">Planning application</a>