Finsbury Park Station Area around Hand Car Wash

Tomtom

<p class="MsoNormal">Hi,<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I got a letter yesterday in the post informing me about a planning application http://tinyurl.com/a9tmeho .<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It is for the area around the hand car wash by Finsbury Park Station. Does anybody know more about this? <o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Thanks<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Tom<o:p></o:p></p><div><b style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br></b></div>

Arkady

There’s some discussion of it here: http://www.stroudgreen.org/discussion/3664/stroud-green-planning-applications#Item_45<br><br>I thought the consultation ended on 08/11/2012?<br><br>This application replaces a previous one that was withdrawn. The earlier application was very similar, but specified that it was a temporary structure. Presumably this was because that whole block is earmarked for future redevelopment by the owners, City North, who will shortly be commencing work on the massive redevelopment on their main site above Finsbury Park station. This application is, therefore, a tad perplexing. If it’s temporary I don’t have any objections to it, if it is permanent then I do. I wonder whether they have been advised to pretend it’s permanent to get it through planning for odd legal reasons, but that’s pure speculation.<br>

andy

<div>LOL - from the design statement</div><div><br></div>"<span style="font-size: 10pt;">In the proposal, roof form, fenestration and doorways as well as </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">other elevational treatment and or ornaments will be relied on to bring human scale and verticality to address this potential ‘boredom’ in what </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">is already a very uninteresting part of town. "</span><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Look pretty permanent from the drawings.</span></div>

quince

Easily one of the maddest things I've seen in a while.  I read the whole document and am still not entirely sure what it's going to be.  Although, having said that, I did notice that one of the diagrams in section 4 features a yellow starburst with 'surprise' in the middle.  So perhaps they're not sure either.  <div><br></div><div>The same diagram also has the label 'high volume pedestrian traffic', describing an amenity one would, more briefly, call a pavement. </div>

yagamuffin

With A1 to B1 use I'm not sure what the shop owners on SGR will think. Personally a selection of new shops next to the station is quite exciting, maybe we'll finally get that elusive deli  

Roy

<i>If it’s temporary I don’t have any objections to it, if it is permanent then I do.<br><br></i>@Arkady; it seems a hell of a lot better than what's there now.  Anything to address the run down nature of the area.  What's your objection to it?<br>

Arkady

Yes, much better than what's there now, but a missed opportunity.<br><br>The proposal is an underdevelopment.  Given the height of the John Jones development, and the forthcoming FP towers, anything built on this block should 'step up' to mediate between the two heights.  This would help to create a 'cluster', an excellent way of dealing with the juxtaposition between high-rise and surrounding Victorian residential. I'd also like to see arcading here to help with pedestrian flows.<br>

Roy

Thanks, that makes sense.<br><i><br>I wonder whether they have been advised to pretend it’s permanent to get it through planning for odd legal reasons, but that’s pure speculation.<br><br></i>I wonder whether Islington weren't willing to grant permission on the basis of a temporary structure unless there was a clearly stated duration for its presence.  Which could have resulted in the daft situation of the developers being forced to demolish the temporary building even without having funding in place for the subsequent redevelopment.<br><br>roy<br><br><br>