This meeting of Hackney Council’s Planning Sub-Committee was scheduled to consider two planning applications, one for the construction of a new dwelling on land to the rear of 64 Middleton Road, and another for the re-provision of a playing pitch at Woodberry Down. The Sub-Committee was also scheduled to note decisions that had been made by officers under delegated powers since their last meeting on 31 July 2024. It is important to note that the reports only tell us what was scheduled to be discussed, not what was actually discussed, or whether any decisions were actually made.

2024/0657: Land adj Woodberry Down Early Years Centre Springpark Drive, Hackney, London, N4 2NP

The most significant item scheduled to be discussed was a planning application for the construction of a new 3G football pitch on land adjacent to the Woodberry Down Early Years Centre on Springpark Drive, submitted by Berkeley Homes (North East London) Ltd.

The proposed pitch is to replace an existing pitch that is to be demolished as part of phase five of the Woodberry Down regeneration scheme. The new pitch is to be larger than the one it replaces, and will have an improved 2:1 ratio.

The pitch will be enclosed by a 3m green weldmesh fence, and will include 1m high rebound panels and eight cycle parking spaces. The pitch will be lit, and the lighting will be directed away from nearby ecologically sensitive areas, and switched off at 9pm.

The application has proved controversial, with objections raised by The Stoke Newington Conservation Areas Advisory Committee and local residents.

The Stoke Newington Conservation Areas Advisory Committee objected on the grounds that one pitch would not be sufficient for the growing population in the area, and argued that the new pitch should be built in addition to the existing one.

Local residents raised concerns about a number of issues including:

• Whether the pitch was necessary
• Why the pitch was to be used for football and not other sports
• Whether the pitch would be properly maintained
• Whether the pitch would cause noise and light pollution
• Whether the pitch would lead to an increase in antisocial behaviour
• Whether the construction of the pitch would have a negative impact on the area
• Whether the fencing around the pitch would be visually intrusive
• Whether the pitch would have a negative impact on local ecology
• Whether the pitch would cause traffic congestion and parking difficulties

The report to the Sub-Committee acknowledges that the proposed site is on Metropolitan Open Land. It notes that new buildings in Metropolitan Open Land are generally considered inappropriate, but argues that this proposal is acceptable because it meets one of the exceptions to this rule, the provision of “appropriate facilities for outdoor sport”, and because it “preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it”.

The report argues that the design and materials of the pitch will preserve openness through the use of a weldmesh fence, the fact that the pitch will be sunken into the ground, and new planting around the pitch.

2022/0963: Land to the rear of 64 Middleton Road, London, E8 4BS

The other planning application scheduled to be considered was for the construction of a two-storey, three-bedroom dwelling on land to the rear of 64 Middleton Road. The application was submitted by Andrew Wright of JA Property Lets Limited. The site currently contains a vacant car repair garage.

The proposed dwelling would have an internal area of 134 sqm, with a large north-facing garden and a small south-facing terrace. The dwelling would be clad in a mixture of stock brick, timber and equitone.

This application has also been controversial, with 88 objections received from 46 residents. Their concerns include:

• That the proposed building would be out of keeping with the Albion Square Conservation Area, where it would be situated
• That the proposed building would be overbearing and out of scale with the existing buildings in the area
• That the proposed development would cause overshadowing and loss of light to neighbouring properties
• That the proposed development would cause overlooking and loss of privacy to neighbouring properties
• That the proposed development would increase noise and disturbance to the area
• That the proposed development would result in a loss of views from neighbouring properties
• That the proposed development would increase traffic in the area
• That the proposal does not include enough green space
• That the application does not include enough information about the materials to be used

The report argues that the application is acceptable, and should be approved because:

• The proposed dwelling would be of a high quality design, and would preserve the character of the Albion Square Conservation Area
• The proposed dwelling would provide a good standard of accommodation
• The proposed development would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of light, overshadowing, outlook, privacy, noise and disturbance
• The proposed development would not cause unacceptable harm to nearby trees
• The proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact on traffic and parking

The report recommends that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions including:

• The development being started within three years
• Details of materials being submitted for approval
• A green roof being provided
• A construction logistics management plan being submitted for approval
• Cycle parking being provided
• Sustainable drainage being provided
• Flood resilient and resistant construction details being submitted for approval
• The removal of permitted development rights
• Swift boxes being installed
• No new pipes and plumbing being fixed to the external faces of the building
• Obscure glazing being provided to certain windows
• A restriction on the use of the flat roof

The report also recommends that a Section 106 legal agreement be entered into, to secure:

• A payment of £50,000 towards affordable housing
• A payment of £1,500 towards carbon offsetting
• The development being car free
• A payment of £8,501.19 towards Section 278 works, which are carried out by developers, but paid for by local authorities
• The developer signing up to the Considerate Constructors Scheme
• A payment of £4,720 towards monitoring costs

Delegated Decisions

Finally, the Planning Sub-Committee was scheduled to note decisions made by officers under delegated powers since the previous meeting. These included decisions on applications for:

• Works to trees in conservation areas
• Householder planning permission
• Certificates of Lawful Development¹
• Prior approval for larger home extensions²
• Non-material amendments³ to planning permissions
• Discharge of conditions attached to planning permissions