Consultation Statement - Islington Council

www.islington.gov.uk/LDF 

Development 

Management Policies 

Regulation 25 

Consultation Statement 

October 2011

Contents 

1 Overview 3 

2 Issues and Options consultation 7 

3 Direction of Travel consultation 21 

Appendix 1 38 

Appendix 2 40 

Development Management Policies: Regulation 25 Consultation Statement Islington Council

1 Overview 

Development Management Policies: Regulation 25 Consultation Statement Islington Council 

2

1 Overview 

1 Overview 

1.0.1 This statement sets out how the London Borough of Islington (LBI) has sought participation 

from communities and stakeholders during preparation of the Development Management 

Policies Development Plan Document (DPD). It sets out how LBI has notified each of the 

‘specific consultation bodies’ and ‘general consultation bodies’ as to the subject of the 

Development Management Policies DPD and invited representations on what the document 

should contain. It also details how residents and businesses have been consulted. 

1.0.2 LBI has complied with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Local 

Development) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008. Under regulation 30(d) LBI is 

required to prepare this statement and set out: 

which bodies and persons were invited to make representations under Regulation 

25; 

how these bodies and persons were invited to make representations under Regulation 

25; 

a summary of the main issues raised by the representations, and 

how representations have been taken into account. 

1.0.3 Participation in the development of the document has had three main components: 

formal consultation on the Issues and Options document (26th October – 7th December 

2009) 

formal consultation on a Direction of Travel draft version of the document (8th 

November 2010 – 31st January 2011) 

informal consultation was also undertaken at various stages during policy development 

1.0.4 The Issues and Options stage of consultation satisfied Regulation 25. The Direction of 

Travel consultation was an additional (non-statutory) stage. 

1.0.5 The 'specific consultation' bodies that LBI consulted (as defined in the Regulations) are 

listed in Appendix 1. The 'general consultation' bodies that LBI consulted are listed in 

Appendix 2. 

1.0.6 In addition, LBI consulted local residents and businesses, including hard-to-reach groups, 

by post and/or email. The mail-out list is derived from identification of key stakeholders, 

hard-to-reach groups, those identified as likely to have an interest in planning policy 

development and those who have responded to previous policy consultation exercises, 

such as in relation to the Core Strategy. As well as direct mail-outs, consultation was also 

undertaken using a number of methods detailed in the following sections. 


3

1 Overview 

Issues and Options consultation 

1.0.7 Specific and general consultation bodies were contacted directly by post or email and a 

mail-out was sent to residents and stakeholders as detailed above. Approximately 2,500 

letters and 750 emails were sent. People were invited to respond in writing, by email to 

the dedicated LDF mailbox or by commenting via the policy team's online comments 

system. 

1.0.8 In addition, a number of other consultation methods were used, in accordance with the 

Council's Statement of Community Involvement. These consultation methods were as 

follows: 

public notices in the Islington Gazette and Islington Tribune; 

an article in Islington Life (LBI residents’ magazine); 

an insert in the Islington Chamber of Commerce newsletter; 

online versions of the document and online summaries available on the council's 

website 

consultation leaflets sent to borough libraries, community groups, doctors and dentists, 

accompanied by a poster and letter (further copies sent periodically to refresh stocks); 

hard copies of the documents distributed to statutory consultees, councillors and 

borough libraries and available to view at the council’s offices; 

briefings to councillors and staff; 

public drop-in sessions, which took place on 25th November (12-8pm) and 28th 

November (11-4pm) at the Municipal Offices, 222 Upper Street. 

Direction of Travel consultation 

1.0.9 Specific and general consultation bodies were contacted directly by post or email and a 

mail-out was sent to residents and stakeholders as detailed above. Approximately 2,900 

letters and 1,150 email were sent out. In addition, a number of other consultation methods 

were used, in accordance with the Council's Statement of Community Involvement. These 

consultation methods were as follows: 

public notices in the Islington Gazette and Islington Tribune; 

articles in Islington Life (LBI residents’ magazine), Islington Life Blog, Voluntary Action 

Islington On-target Magazine and Disabled Action Islington newsletter; 

an insert in the Islington Chamber of Commerce newsletter; 

online versions of the document and online summaries available on the council's 

website; 

consultation leaflets sent to borough libraries, community groups, doctors and dentists, 

accompanied by a poster and letter (further copies sent periodically to refresh stocks); 

hard copies of the documents distributed to statutory consultees, councillors and 

borough libraries and available to view at the council’s offices; 

briefings to councillors and staff; 

4 

Islington Council Development Management Policies: Regulation 25 Consultation Statement

1 Overview 

public drop-in sessions: 27th November 11am-4pm (Municipal Offices and Finsbury 

Library), 8th December 3-6pm (St Luke’s Centre), 9th December 3-8pm (Archway 

Library and Finsbury Library), 17th December 12-2pm (Whitecross Street Market) 

a number of youth consultation events at various Pupil Voice Network Meetings in 

Barnsbury, Canonbury, Finsbury, Highbury, Holloway, Hornsey and at the Secondary 

School network (November-December 2010) 

On-going discussion and input 

1.0.10 In addition to formal consultation periods, the council discussed policy development with 

various consultees and stakeholders as part of on-going policy development. This included 

the following workshops and meetings: 

workshop with the BME forum, May 2011 - in relation to the community facilities policy 

community groups workshop, 24th May 2011 

engagement with the Women's Design Service 

meetings and walkabouts with the Town Centre Management Boards for Nag's Head, 

Angel and Archway subsequent to the Direction of Travel consultation 

liaison with representatives from FinFuture, a community and business group in 

Finsbury Park 

discussions with the Theatres Trust 

internal discussions, including with the licensing team, building control, public health 

and the play development officer 

ongoing meetings and discussions were undertaken with English Heritage 

1.0.11 The policy team also had a number of meetings with the Development Management team 

to discuss all policies in detail, to ensure details of practical implementation were fully 

considered in policy drafting. These meetings took place regularly between May and 

August 2011. 


5

2 Issues and Options consultation 


6



Summary of representations and responses 

2.0.1 A total of 318 comments were received from 54 respondents in relation to the Issues and 

Options document. Comments can be viewed online at 

www.islington.gov.uk/planningpolicyconsultations. 

2.0.2 The main issues raised during the consultation, and the council's response to these, are 

summarised in Table 1, below. 

Table 1 

Option/Issues 

Summary comments 

Response/Action 

Urban Design and Heritage 

Option 1 - 

Design 

Criteria 

General support from wide range 

of consultees, including the GLA, 

English Heritage, planning agents, 

developers, amenity groups and 

individuals. 

Most consultees wanted more 

criteria added to address amenity 

issues (privacy, loss of light), and 

high quality design and local 

distinctiveness. 

The GLA and others wanted criteria 

for tall buildings to also be included. 

English Heritage wanted more 

robust policy wording focused on 

understanding the character of the 

site and its surroundings, and 

suggested new policy wording 

The revised policy wording for the Direction 

of Travel stage was based on English 

Heritage's suggested text and incorporated 

the additional criteria, including amenity 

issues. 

The start of the new policy text set out that 

high quality design was required of all 

development. 

Criteria for tall buildings was not added to 

policy text for the Direction of Travel, because 

the Core Strategy policy addresses this issue 

(although this has been addressed in the 

Proposed Submission policy text - see 

Direction of Travel consultation response) . 

Options 2, 3 

and 4 - 

Local Views 

Strong support from a wide range 

of consultees, including English 

Heritage, City of London and the 

GLA, for retaining LV2 to LV8. 

Option 3A was taken forward into policy as 

retains the historic view of St Paul’s Cathedral 

including from Farringdon Lane, which 

provides some of the valuable view 

opportunities. The new view also addresses 


7


There was confusion as to what 

option 3 (changes to Local View 

LV1) was proposing, with a general 

resistance to the loss of the view 

including from the GLA and the City 

of London. The local land owner 

(ING) that proposed option 3B 

supported it. 

An agent on behalf of a site that 

previously had a taller building 

(CardinalTower) in the view corridor 

but has subsequently been 

demolished for Crossrail wanted 

the policy to exempt sites that 

obstruct or previously obstructed 

part of the view with a tall building. 

Thus allowing their redevelopment 

with another tall building that would 

also obstruct part of the view. 

Option 4 (new protected views) was 

supported. 

the existing inconsistencies with the City of 

London’s St Paul’s Heights and thus this 

option is supported by the City of London and 

is also the reason option 3C was not taken 

forward. 

Option 3B was not take forward as it would 

significantly reduce the places where St 

Paul’s Cathedral could be viewed and have 

a detrimental impact on the townscape of the 

area. Although diminishing the views of St 

Paul’s Cathedral would potentially increase 

development opportunities for new floorspace 

by allowing buildings over the railway this 

was not considered to outweigh the damage 

to the public views of St Paul’s Cathedral and 

the townscape. Other sites in the area were 

found to be able to accommodate the future 

planned growth in this London Plan area for 

intensification, without the need to infringe of 

the views of St Paul’s Cathedral. 

Views policies are intended to operate for a 

very long time, to preserve and enhance 

important public views for generations to 

come. When an opportunity arises to remove 

an obstruction within the viewing corridor (e.g. 

the redevelopment of a building that has 

partially obstruct the view for a period of time, 

after the view was first recognised as worthy 

of protection) the views policy seeks for the 

redevelopment to not continue to obstructing 

the view. 

Option 5 

Conservation 

Options 6 

and 7 

General support for all parts (A, B 

and C) of option 5. English Heritage 

wanted a policy that recognises the 

diversity of the borough’s heritage 

assets and sets out key parameters 

by which they should be managed. 

Support for continuing to protect 

the views of the listed landmarks 

and the future identification of new 

landmarks. 

English Heritage’s suggested wording has 

formed the basis of the heritage policy. 

The protection of the listed landmarks has 

been taken forward. 

8 



Sustainability 

Option 8 A - 

Sustainable 

Design and 

Construction 

Statements 

Some objections form developers 

to SDCSs and Energy Statements 

for minor applications. Some 

support for a threshold 

GLA support SDCSs and Energy 

Statements but suggest flexibility 

over level of detail 

The Direction of Travel policy excludes a 

range of the least significant applications, but 

most minor applications are still included. 

The level of detail can be proportionate to the 

scheme and the SDCS may be included in 

the Design and Access Statement. An Energy 

Statement is only required 'where relevant'. 

Further details, including on information 

requirements, will be set out in the 

Sustainable Design SPD. 

Option 8 B - 

Carbon 

targets 

English Heritage and the 

Canonbury Society were concerned 

with heritage impacts from carbon 

targets, including householder 

extensions. 

Land Securities called for different 

targets for heritage assets and for 

minor applications 

Some developers raised concerns 

over viability and/or called for 

viability and technical evidence. 

Land Securities stated the Building 

Regulations are sufficient. A flexible 

approach was preferred by some. 

Policies exist in relation to heritage assets. 

DM officers will use professional judgement 

to assess the relationship between these 

policies in each case. 

Requirements for the existing building, in the 

case of extensions, are limited to an 

encouragement for energy efficiency 

measures. 

Detailed viability evidence has been produced 

and was available for the Direction of Travel 

consultation. 

Option 8 C, 

D, E - 

Decentralised 

Energy 

Land Securities objected to 

different targets close to existing 

networks. Future proofing for new 

networks. Higher carbon targets 

where connecting to DEN could 

discourage connection.Workspace 

objected to rigid targets for 

connection due to viability issues. 

GLA - ability to connect should be 

considered on a case by case 

basis. Suggest sites should explore 

The Direction of Travel policy set out detailed 

criteria for when connection to a DEN would 

be required; however, in order to allow for 

flexibility it also set out feasibility criteria and 

a requirement for a preferred and alternative 

energy strategy. 

Where connection to a DEN is considered 

feasible higher Carbon targets are required 

because the cost of this is less and this is 

therefore consider viable. 


9


energy strategies with and without 

connection, where a network may 

be in place by time of construction. 

Option 8 F - 

Sustainable 

Design 

Standards 

Some developers objected to 

standards in excess of building 

requirements, citing potential 

viability issues. 

Environment Agency supported an 

increase in standards over time. 

Sustainable design standards have been 

subject to viability testing and are considered 

likely to be viable for the majority of cases. 

Option 8 G 

EA support measures to increase 

water efficiency., given issue of 

water intensity. EA do not support 

use of groundwater in all cases. 

2 developers raised issues with the 

targets 

DM policies Submission document does 

relate non-residential water efficiency targets 

to BREEAM credits 

Use of groundwater is not specifically 

encouraged by DM policies 

Option 8 H, 

I 

Option 8 J 

GLA supports cooling hierarchy 

LS considers overheating criteria 

unnecessarily replicates building 

regs 

EA and Thames Water support 

SUDS. Thames Water notes they 

are not appropriate in all areas. 

Land Securities consider SUDS not 

practical in an urban environment 

The cooling approach is supported by the 

GLA. We have specific issues in Islington, 

such as the UHI, which require a more 

tailored approach than national Building Reg, 

which are not very detailed in relation to 

passive heating and cooling. 

SUDS is practical and has been implemented 

in urban environments, including in Islington. 

Minor developments have lower requirements 

given that it may be difficult to implement 

SUDS on very constrained sites. 

Option 9 

and 10 - 

movement 

hierarchy 

and 

transport 

Support for movement hierarchy by 

Clerkenwell Preservation Society 

Met University supports Option 10 

GLA request reference to cycle 

hire, Construction Logistics Plans 

and Delivery and Service Plan 

References are made to cycle hire, 

Construction and Logistics Plans and Delivery 

and Service Plans in the Proposed 

Submission document 

10 



Other 

comments 

Various comments received from 

the Council’s Access Officer, in 

relation to Sustainability 

Communities in a broader sense. 

Policies should not be too inflexible 

in terms of technology solutions 

EA commented on need for land 

contamination policies, referencing 

GP3, CLR11 and Council’s 

contaminated land policies 

Sustainability comments addressed in other 

sections of the DM policies document, where 

relevant. Chapter title altered to avoid 

confusion between sustainable communities 

and environmental sustainability. 

The policies do not prescribe particular 

technologies, except for DEN given that this 

is a very cost-effective means to reduce 

Carbon Dioxide emissions 

Contaminated land is addressed in the 

Proposed Submission document 

Housing 

Option 11 

Housing 

Space 

standards 

GLA support for housing space 

standards 

Some objections from developers 

(including Registered Providers) 

about minimum space standards 

and perceived impacts on 

affordability and viability. Some 

comments that standards should 

be applied flexibly. 

LBI Access Officers commented 

about detailed accessibility 

considerations, that should be 

addressed 

English Heritage state that space 

standards should be considered in 

the context of heritage issues. 

Housing space standards were included in 

the Direction of Travel document. The impact 

on viability and affordability was considered 

by the GLA. Subsequently housing space 

standards have been adopted within the 

London Plan and therefore any issues of 

affordability and viability will be limited by the 

London-wide impact of the policy. 

Policies for the Direction of Travel document 

were drafted in partnership with LBI Access 

Officers. 

Heritage assets are addressed in the 

Direction of Travel document. 

Option 12 

GLA support private outdoor space 

provision 

General support for private outdoor 

space and balconies; however, 

some developers objected to strict 

standards and were concerned with 

potential impacts on viability 

The space standards evidence base includes 

consideration of impact on viability. 

The space standards are intentded to provide 

a good quality of life for all. 


11


High Speed 1 and London 

Continental Railways do not 

consider it appropriate to extend 

minimum space standards across 

all development 

Option 13 

GLA support policy in relation to 

noise 

Some support for control of noise 

Option 14 

English Heritage stated that 

conversions should consider 

heritage value 

HS1 Object to housing space 

standards for conversions 

Design policies apply to conversions 

The space standards are intentded to provide 

a good quality of life for all. 

Option 15 

Other 

Southern Housing Group supports 

an assessment based on quality 

but also suggests that there shoudl 

be specific criteria, and supports a 

policy based on need 

GLA suggest policies on affordable 

housing, mix of units and density 

Some objections from residents' 

groups in relation to comments 

about acceptable densities being 

in the highest London Plan range 

London Metropolitan University and 

University College Lonodon request 

statement in support of student 

housing and detailed student policy 

Direction of Travel policy resists loss of 

HMOs. Submission version clarifies that the 

loss of good quality HMOs will be resisted. 

The supporting text provides further 

information about what is considered good 

quality. Need is not referred to given that 

Density is addressed by the London Plan. 

Affordable housing is addressed by the Core 

Strategy though there is a policy on 

affordable rented accommodation in the 

Submission version. There is a policy on mix 

of units. 

Student accommodation is addressed within 

the Core Strategy. The Submission version 

of DM Policies does provide further detail. 

Employment 

12 



Option 16 - 

Retaining 

existing 

employment 

spaces 

& 

Option 17 - 

Redevelopment 

of existing 

employment 

space 

Some developers object to 

minimum marketing periods. Some 

developers considered options 16 

and 17 too restrictive. Jones Lang 

LaSalle prefer a market demand 

assessment and refurbishment 

viability assessment instead of a 

marketing assessment. 

A number of developers requested 

more detailed policies, including in 

relation to the marketing period and 

the definition of 'significant 

increase' 

Some support for expansion of 

employment uses. 

2 comments objecting to use of 

floorspace as a measure, rather 

than number of employees 

La Salle Management Ltd called for 

more flexibility for loss outside the 

CAZ 

LMU and High Speed 1 definition 

of employment is too narrow and 

ignores PPS4 

Marketing provides more direct and reliable 

evidence compared to a market demand 

assessment and the marketing period allows 

adequate opportunities for alternative 

employment uses to be established where 

possible. The strategic protection of 

employment land is important for long-term 

sustainability. Assessing the viability of 

refurbishment could be undertaken as part 

of the marketing evidence. Properties should 

be marketed at a price appropriate to their 

condition. 

The Direction of Travel policy was more 

specific about marketing and about the level 

of increases expected. The Submission 

document includes an appendix giving 

detailed requirements for marketing. 

It is difficult to confirm the number of 

employees, existing or proposed. Floorspace 

is a more practical measure. Users can also 

change within the same Use Class and this 

leads to variations in employment densities. 

Direction of Travel policies refer specifically 

to CAZ and non-CAZ locations 

The definition is addressed in the Core 

Strategy. PPS 4 does not define 'employment' 

but defines 'economic development'. 

Option 18 - 

New 

employment 

space 

Workspace Group supports 

promotion of SMEs and flexible 

design 

A number of developers consider 

that servicing should be assessed 

on a site by site basis and that 

off-street may not be possible in 

some cases. 

The policy is considered sufficiently flexible. 

There is strong evidence about the failure of 

live-work to provide genuine employment 

space and about the significant pressures for 

live-work units to change Use to residential 


13


Comments from one resident: 

Object to restriction / ban of 

live/work. Object to separation of 

employment and residential land 

uses. 

Other 

GLA have stated that an increase 

in office floorspace should provide 

for a mix of uses. A number of 

comments were also received from 

developers in relation to mixed-use 

sites, including in relation to the 

principal of mixed uses and in 

relation to viability issues. 

The Direction of Travel policy states that a 

mix of uses should be provided as part of 

developments providing business floorspace. 

Shops, Leisure and Services 

Option 19 - 

Town centre 

boundaries 

Tesco supports the extension of the 

Angel Town Centre Boundary 

northwards. 

Highbury Fields Association 

support extension to Nags Head 

but would prefer Angel to be 

extended up to Highbury Corner. 

London Metropolitan University 

support extension of Nag's Head 

but suggest inclusion of University 

buildings on Holloway Road. 

Highbury Corner is not considered to be an 

integral part of the Angel Town Centre, given 

the distance from the Primary and Secondary 

Frontages. Further changes have been made 

to the Angel Town Centre boundary for the 

proposed Submission version. 

Further changes have been made to the 

Nag's Head Town Centre boundary for the 

proposed Submission version. University 

uses are not considered main town centre 

uses. The Site Allocations document refers 

to the potential for active ground floor uses 

for some University sites. 

Option 20 - 

Managing 

Town 

Centres 

Option 21 - 

Primary 

Frontage 

& Option 22 

- Secondary 

Frontage 

GLA support use of SPDs to 

manage Town Centres 

Tesco support Option 21 A and 

Option 22 A 

Metropolitan Police support Option 

22 B and Option 23 B but wording 

should relate to Police facilities 

Policies to promote A Uses in Primary and 

Secondary frontages have been included in 

the Direction of Travel and Submission 

versions 

14 



& Option 23 

- Local 

shopping 

areas 

Canonbury Society support flexible 

approach (Option 23 B) to uses 

within local shopping areas 

Land Securities supports Option 23 

B 

Highbury Fields Association 

supports Option 23 C, an 

evidence-based approach to the 

provision of A1 

Policies relating to frontages and local 

shopping areas give a degree of flexibility for 

non-A1 uses appropriate to the role of the 

frontage or shopping area. 

The Direction of Travel policy refers to a 

range of non-A1 Uses that may be 

considered suitable where A1 Change of Use 

is accepted in line with criteria set out. The 

Submission version allows for an appropriate 

mix and balance of uses, where loss of A1 is 

accepted in line with criteria set out. This 

approach gives some flexibility regarding 

alternative uses. 

Option 24 - 

Concentration 

of Uses 

Some support for policy controlling 

concentration of uses, from 

residents and resident associations 

Metropolitan Police object to Option 

24 on the ground that they wish to 

expand the number of police shops 

/ community facilities 

Royal Mail Group Ltd object to 

control anywhere in Islington 

because lots of uses do not have 

adverse impacts 

Option 24 relates to particular non-A1 uses 

that may be considered to have a harmful 

impact on amenity. Direction of Travel and 

Submission versions of the document provide 

more detail. 

The policy refers to concentration of use only 

refers to concentrations that are considered 

to have adverse impacts 

Option 25 - 

Hotel 

locations 

One resident states that hotels 

should be concentrated in the CAZ. 

Another resident states that a 

concentration of hotels should be 

avoided. 

London Metropolitan University 

support the possibility of hotel use 

on its Holloway Road buildings 

Some developers support Option 

C - no restriction on location of 

hotels 

The Core Strategy, Finsbury Local Plan and 

Development Management documents all 

refer to hotels and clarify the Council's 

position 


15


GLA support Option A but state that 

is should also refer to public 

transport accessibility and to 

opportunity areas. 

Option 26 - 

Islington's 

Cultural and 

Community 

Uses 

Some support from residents for 

Option 26 A and B, subject to 

consideration of amenity. 

The Theatres Trust support 

protection and promotion of 

community and cultural facilities 

and suggest glossary definition. 

Workspace Group support 

community and cultural uses within 

mixed-use developments. 

GLA support resistance to loss and 

encouragement of new provision, 

including in new developments. 

St Lukes Parachial Trust support 

Option 20 A and B but state that 

this should be based on protection 

of net floorspace rather than on 

protection of individual facilities, to 

allow for rationalisation. 

Metropolitan Police also consider 

that some loss should be allowed 

as part of rationalisation. 

Glossary definition is included in the 

Submission version. 

The Submission version policy supports new 

facilities, particularly for major mixed use 

developments and where developments 

result in additional need for community 

facilities. 

The Submission version clarifies the 

approach to community facilities and includes 

an approach to loss of community facilities 

in appropriate circumstances, which may 

include rationalisation plans. 

Other 

LBI Access Officers have made 

various comments about 

accessibility. GLA stated that 10% 

of hotel rooms should be 

wheelchair accessible. 

English Heritage stated that Town 

Centre policies should make explicit 

reference to the historic 

environment 

GLA have requested more details 

in relation to night-time, cultural and 

leisure uses. 

Policies have been developed in partnership 

with the Access Officers. Includes 

requirement for 10% of hotel rooms to be 

wheelchair accessible. 

The historic environment is addressed by 

policies in the Urban Design and Heritage 

section. Policies apply to all sites in the 

borough and there is no need to repeat them 

in relation to Town Centres. 

The approach to these uses is detailed in the 

Direction of Travel and Submission versions. 

16 



GLA has requested a presumption 

against retail outside Town 

Centres. 

GLA has requested an approach to 

affordable shops. 

London Metropolitan University do 

not consider that University uses 

should be considered community 

uses. 

The Submission version addressed this issue. 

The Direction of Travel promotes small and 

independent shops. Small shops are more 

affordable and this is considered the most 

practical way to address this issue. 

Universities are considered to provide a 

community facility given that they provide 

education to members of the public and 

facilities. 

Open Space, Play and Sports 

Option 27 - 

Protecting 

existing 

open 

spaces 

& 

Option 

Option 28 - 

Providing 

new open 

space and 

maximising 

biodiversity 

British Waterways support 

reference to canals as open space, 

including Blue Ribbon Network 

General support for protection of 

open space and trees, particularly 

amongst resident groups 

Some objections to policy options, 

from developers, on basis that 

policy should be more flexible, less 

demanding and recognise benefits 

of development. Open space 

requirements could be contrary to 

efficient use of land. 

GLA strongly support protection 

and promotion of open space. 

English Heritage - the heritage 

value of open spaces should be 

recognised 

Some objections to requirement for 

a Landscape Plan for small 

developments and in a separate 

document 

Reference is made in Submission document 

to waterways 

Policy does allow some flexibility e.g. 

payment in lieu in certain circumstances. 

Case officers will balance competing 

interests, such as efficient use of land. 

The Core Strategy refers to the heritage value 

of open spaces. The Design and Heritage 

section provides a strong policy framework 

for heritage assets. 

Landscape Plans are only required for major 

developments, in the Submission version 


17


Option 29 - 

Play space 

Some concern from developers 

over level of detail required at 

planning application and over 

requirement for a management and 

maintenance plan 

Land Securities raised concern 

over ability to provide new play 

space and supported references to 

improving existing play space 

GLA support Option 29 D in relation 

to design principles and best 

practice 

Management and maintenance plans are 

important to ensure that play space is 

useable into the future. Detailed design is 

required for major applications. Detail for 

minor applications is subject to the scale of 

development. 

Play space is required on site in most 

circumstances, but the policy also outlines 

an approach to a financial contribution 

towards off-site provision in certain 

circumstances. 

Option 30 - 

Sport and 

recreation 

Other 

Some resident support for sport 

and recreation facilities 

Natural England support council's 

intention to produce and Open 

Space and Green Infrastructure 

Strategy 

Implementation and Monitoring 

Option 31 - 

Planning 

obligations 

British Waterways stated that 

waterways should be included as 

a recipient of investment for 

improvements 

GLA have stated that Crossrail 

contributions should be referred to 

Some support for Option 31 

amongst residents 

Her Majesty's Court Service 

requests planning obligations be 

used to invest in court services as 

a community facility. St Lukes 

Parachail Trust request use of 

planning obligations to fund 

community centres. 

The definition of infrastructure in the 

Submission version includes transport, public 

realm, open space, leisure and recreation 

infrastructure. Waterways can be considered 

to perform some or all of these functions. 

Crossrail is referred to in the Submission 

version 


Submission version includes community 

facilities 


Submission version includes the emergency 

services 

18 



Metropolitan Policy request that 

police facilities are referred to. 

Some comments re. Statutory tests 

for planning obligations, 

assessments of viability and site 

specific circumstances 

English Heritage request historic 

environment be recognised as a 

priority for planning obligations 

funds 

The statutory tests are specifically referred 

to. Financial viability is specifically referred 

to. All cases will be assessed in relation to 

their individual circumstances, against 

relevant planning policies. 

Where proposals impact on the historic 

environment this will be assessed with 

reference to relevant policies. Policy DM 52 

of the Submission version refers to 

compensation or mitigation for loss or 

damage associated with development. 


19

3 Direction of Travel consultation 


20



Summary of representations and responses 

3.0.1 A total of 236 separate comments were received from 61 respondents, in relation to the 

Direction of Travel draft. Comments can be viewed online at 

www.islington.gov.uk/planningpolicyconsultations 

3.0.2 The main issues raised during the consultation, and the council's response to these, are 

summarised in Table 2, below. 

Table 2 

Policy / Issues 

Design and Heritage 

DM 1 - Design Criteria 

DM1 - Design Criteria 

and DM4 - Heritage 

DM 2 - Landscape 

Summary comments 

English Heritage requested an 

explicit reference to tall 

buildings inserted at the end of 

policy DM 1 to state: 'Any 

proposals for tall buildings 

should meet these criteria, as 

well as having regard for 

criteria set out in English 

Heritage/CABE's Guidance on 

Tall Buildings (2007).'. 

English Heritage suggested 

text changes to DM 1 and DM 

4 to ensure the definition and 

words used in the policy 

reflected and clearly linked to 

PPS5. 

A number of developers sought 

clarification on what was 

required in a landscape plan 

and if outline applications 

would need to submit one. 

They also suggested that these 

could be conditioned and not 

asked for at the start of the 

process. 

Response/Action 

DM 1 was amended 

accordingly 

DM 1, DM 4 and supporting 

text were amended accordingly 

Landscaping should be 

considered from the start of the 

design process. Outline 

planning application should 

submit a landscape plan and 

it should contain as much detail 

as is given about the buildings. 

Details are provided in the 

Submission version about what 

a Landscape Plan should 

demonstrate. 


21


DM 5 - Protected Views 

ING have been seeking for LV1 

At Farringdon to St Paul’s to 

be significantly reduced and 

object to Council’s proposed 

continued protection of the 

view. The Direction of travel 

policy did lower the viewing 

point on St Paul’s from 58m to 

52.1m. ING highlight that some 

existing buildings in the City 

would block this lower view of 

St Paul’s. 

The GLA discussed this view 

with Islington and City officers 

and the Mayor supports 

Islington’s proposed protection 

of the existing view and 

support its improvement from 

Farringdon Road if there is a 

future opportunity. 

ING’s proposed option has 

been thoroughly explored 

through the process of 

developing the DM policies. It 

has been concluded that their 

amendment to the views is not 

an acceptable policy approach. 

However the height of the 

viewing point on St Paul’s will 

be amended back to 58.1 to be 

in line with the City’s St Pauls 

Heights protection. 

DM 7 - Advertising 

DM 8 - Telecommunications 

Some developers/agents 

objected to a blanket ban of 

advertising hoardings and 

boards in conservation areas. 

Mobile Operators Associations 

objected to blanket restriction 

of telecommunications 

equipment on listed buildings 

and conservation areas, and 

to the restriction of phone 

masts within 300m of schools 

and pre-schools. 

Advertising hoardings and 

boards will not general 

preserve or enhance 

conservation areas and are not 

considered acceptable. 

Policy wording has been 

amended to indicate the 

council generally considers 

telecommunications equipment 

in appropriate on listed 

buildings and conservation 

areas. 

Policy wording has been 

amended to refer to beam of 

greatest radio frequency. 

Managing Environmental Resources 

22 



DM 10 - Sustainable Design 

and Construction Statements 

& DM 11 - Sustainable 

materials, waste minimisation 

and construction impacts. 

DM 12 - Carbon Dioxide 

reduction targets & DM 14 - 

Sustainable Design Standards 

Some developers were 

concerned about the 

practicalities of implementing 

elements of these policies, 

particularly with regard to 

Green Performance Plans and 

selection of materials. 

Some developers sought clarity 

on Building Regs and 

BREEAM standards which will 

be used given that these will 

change over the life of the plan 

and how new technologies may 

impact on policy. 

Some developers preferred 

Building Regulations to be 

complied with only, rather than 

more onerous requirements. 

Concerns were raised about 

viability and delivery. 

GLA have stated that part C is 

not in line with policy 5.2 of the 

draft replacement London Plan 

Green Performance Plans are 

considered reasonable and 

materials considerations are 

already considered as part of 

the planning application 

process. 

Clearly identify standards to be 

used, and consider flexibility of 

approach to allow for new 

(improved) technologies to be 

used. 

Feasibility and viability has 

been tested, and the policy is 

broadly in line with the London 

Plan 

Part C has been removed and 

the London Plan policy for 

non-domestic buildings will be 

a relevant consideration. 

DM 13 Decentralised Energy 

Some developers suggested 

that requirement to connect to 

DEN should be more flexible. 

Issues with feasibility and 

viability were raised. 

GLA have stated that Carbon 

targets for DEN should reflect 

those in the London Plan policy 

5.2 

Feasibility and viability has 

been tested. There is a degree 

of flexibility within the policy, 

including the provision of 

preferred and alternative 

Energy Strategies. 

DEN enables greater Carbon 

reduction at a similar or 

reduced cost and it is therefore 

considered that the policy 

position is reasonable. 

DM 14 - Sustainable Design 

Standards 

Some developers requested 

flexibility for issues of feasibility 

and viability and that BREEAM 

2008 should be referred to 

specifically. 

Technical feasibility and 

financial viability are referred 

to as relevant considerations. 


23


DM 17 - Sustainable Drainage 

Support from Natural England. 

An agent stated that SUDS 

may be difficult within an urban 

environment. 

SUDS are generally achievable 

within an urban environment. 

DM 18 - Landscaping and 

biodiversity 

Natural England support policy. 

Land Securities support part A. 

DM 19 - Private Open Space 

Other 

GLA support presumption 

against loss of back gardens. 

The Environment Agency 

support the general 

commitment to sustainability 

and support individual policies. 

Request policy on land 

contamination. 

The GLA stated that the draft 

development management 

policies effectively 

communicate London Plan 

policies 

English Heritage request 

references to retro-fitting of 

existing stock, particularly in 

historic buildings 

Thames Water requested 

reference to water efficiency in 

residential developments and 

a reference to the sequential 

approach to surface water 

disposal. 

Policy on land contamination 

added to the Submission 

version. 

The Design and Heritage 

section includes policies on 

historic environments that are 

applicable in all circumstances, 

including in relation to 

proposals for retro-fitting. The 

Sustainable Design SPD will 

give guidance on appropriate 

climate change mitigation for 

listed buildings. 

This is addressed in the Core 

Strategy. DM 39 reflects a 

sequential approach to surface 

water. 

Transport 

DM 21 - Managing transport 

impacts 

The GLA require a reference 

to Crossrail contributions and 

to construction logistics plans 

and service and delivery plans 

Inserted 

The policy is very clear on this 

issue and calls for impacts to 

be assessed and addressed, 

24 



Upper Street Association 

consider impact of 

developments on public 

transport is not adequately 

addressed 

including through a Transport 

Assessment and Travel Plan 

where appropriate 

DM 22 - Walking and cycling 

infrastructure 

Some developers stated that it 

should be made clear that 

planning obligations should 

only be sought in the context 

of Circular 05/2005 and Reg. 

122 of the Community Levy 

Regulations (2010) 

GLA request reference to cycle 

hire, cycle superhighways and 

wayfinding 

English Heritage state that 

public realm improvements 

should refer to Better Streets 

and Streets for All 

British Waterways consider 

that the Regent's Canal should 

be identified as a cycling route 

This has been made clear in 

the Submission version 

Inserted 

Noted 

It is acknowledged that the 

canal is used by cyclists and 

pedestrians; however, the 

network map shows on-street 

routes. 

DM 23 (Cycle parking and 

end-of-trip facilities) 

Some developers have stated 

that applications should be 

assessed on a site by site 

basis and that proposed 

standards may be difficult to 

deliver 

CTC consider cycle parking 

requirements insufficient. 

City University London require 

justification for higher cycle 

parking provision for 

universities compared with 

other institutions. 

Cycle parking standards have 

been re-drafted. Cycle parking 

is considered to be a good way 

to promote sustainable 

transport. Space-efficient cycle 

storage options are available. 

It is not considered that cycle 

parking should be applied on 

a site by site basis, but that 

there should be uniform 

standards across the borough. 

Cycle parking standards are 

improved compared to existing 

standards and are based on 

local mode-share statistics. 

The council has communicated 


25


with CTC and they have only 

limited evidence to support a 

higher cycle parking 

requirement. 

It is considered that that 

proposed standards are 

reasonable in relation to cycle 

usage. 

DM 23 (Cycle parking and 

end-of-trip facilities) 

DM 24 (Vehicle parking, 

delivery and servicing for new 

developments) 

‘Wheels for Wellbeing’ support 

reference to accessible cycle 

parking, consider that 

accessible cycle parking 

should be required as part of 

an application 

Canonbury Society support 

presumption against the loss 

of parking in front gardens, 

except for houses with large 

gaps between. A flexible 

approach is requested. 

Car Club contributions must be 

in accordance with 

Regulation122 of the 

Community Infrastructure 

Regulations 2010 

Parking may be required for 

business use 

Submission version policy 

addressed accessible cycle 

parking and uses evidence 

supplied by Wheels for 

Wellbeing 

It is not clear how the gap 

between a property justifies a 

loss of front gardens. Policy 

DM 49 of the Submission 

version allows flexibility for 

disabled people, where 

appropriate. 

Noted 

The Submission version policy 

refers to essential parking for 

non-residential uses. 

Other 

Housing 

DM 25 - Housing Mix 

Some comments were 

received in relation to car-free 

developments. 

Some developers consider the 

housing mix policy too 

inflexible and that this should 

be assessed on a site-by-site 

basis. Issues regarding viability 

and delivery of new units have 

been raised. 

The car-free policy was 

established in the Core 

Strategy. 

Housing mix standards are 

based on the Local Housing 

Needs Assessment and the 

North London Strategic 

Housing Market Assessment. 

The Submission version of the 

policy does refer to site specific 

26 



The GLA support this policy 

Pocket Housing support the 

Intermediate housing mix. 

circumstances in the 

supporting text, in response to 

the concerns raised. 

Noted; however, this refers to 

intermediate affordable 

housing, not to market housing. 

DM 26 - Conversion of Houses 

Some developers believe this 

policy may prevent the 

conversion of many dwelling 

houses to provide flats. 

Policy provides the potential 

for on-site car parking. 

GLA support policy DM 26 

The policy is required to 

maintain a supply of family 

housing. 

Policy has been amended to 

address this inconsistency. 

DM 27 - Residential space 

standards 

Some developers consider 

aspects of the housing policies 

too detailed and onerous, and 

would like flexibility. Viability 

and delivery of units were 

raised as concerns. 

Healthy Urban Development 

Unit supports DM 27 

Some developers are 

concerned about the 

application of space standards 

to conversions, due to 

constrains that may existing 

within existing buildings 

GLA support policy DM 27 

One developer has objected to 

separate storage requirements 

Policies need to set clear 

requirements to achieve good 

quality housing. Space 

standards generally reflect 

London Plan standards. 

Islington has chosen to use the 

evidence to support the 

London Housing Design Guide 

(LHDG), rather than adopt the 

Interim London Housing 

Design Guide verbatim. 

Elements which are priorities 

for Islington, have been 

included regardless of the 

priorities set out in the LHDG. 

The costs and viability 

implications of the 

requirements set out in the 

Interim London Housing 

Design Guide were evaluated 

in the ‘London Housing Design 

Guide: Cost and Delivery 

Impact Assessment’ report. 


27


DM 28 - Private outdoor space 

Some developers consider the 

requirements onerous and are 

concerned about impacts on 

densities, viability and delivery. 

The implications for the 

conversion of existing buildings 

is referred to. 

The requirement will ensure a 

reasonable standard of 

amenity for future occupants. 

Private open space provides a 

different function than 

communal space, giving future 

occupants ‘a place of retreat’ 

to provide for privacy of the 

home. 

The requirement for ground 

floor units has been amended 

so that a minimum of 15m2 is 

required for 1-2 person units 

and 30m2 for family housing. 

DM 31 - HMOs and student 

accommodation 

A reference to how the 

council’s core strategy policy 

and strategic requirements 

work together. 

Some objections to 10% 

wheelchair housing for student 

units. 

Need to reference the Core 

Strategy policies on student 

accommodation. 

The criteria for HMOs will also 

be used for considering student 

accommodation in the two 

locations identified in the Core 

Strategy. 

This principle established in the 

Core Strategy paragraph 

3.3.26. 

Other 

Employment 

DM 32 - Redevelopment of 

existing business space & DM 

33 - New employment space 

The Canonbury Society 

objection to high residential 

densities 


concerned that the policies are 

too prescriptive and inflexible 

and do not allow for a mix of 

uses, particularly residential. 

There is a need for more 

homes and businesses to meet 

growth projections. Housing 

space standards and amenity 

space standards will ensure a 

good quality of development. 

The policy requires a mix of 

uses and is therefore 

considered to have an element 

of flexibility. The policy allows 

a loss of business floorspace 

where a lack of demand is 

28 



Applications should be 

assessed on a site-by-site 

basis. 


concerned that the marketing 

requirement is too onerous. 

Lazari investments consider 

that the Archway should allow 

more flexibility for 

non-business employment 

uses. Core Strategy Policy CS 

demonstrated by marketing. 

The policy has some flexibility 

whilst giving protection for 

business floorspace that could 

perform a useful function, but 

which may be lost due to 

higher rental and sales values 

of some other uses. The 

council has a responsibility to 

plan for economic growth and 

the loss of business space 

without consideration of 

demand over a good period of 

1 is referred to. Cushman and time would be contrary to this. 

Wakefield have referred to the 

relationship between site 

allocations and DM 32. 

Workspace Group objected to 

DM 32 and stated that higher 

employment densities and 

home-working mean a reduced 

need for office space. 

Residential is needed in some 

cases to increase viability of 

employment uses. 

GLA support DM 32 but 

suggest that the reference to 

mix of uses including retail 

should be clearer in supporting 

text. 

Craft Central support the 

protection of existing 

employment space. Henerson 

Global Investors support DM 

32 A. 

Drivers Jonas Deloitte consider 

that employment numbers are 

more relevant than floorspace. 

The policy also allows 

reprovision of floorspace where 

the condition of existing 

floorspace is not attractive to 

potential occupiers. 

CS 1 states that the Archway 

core site should be a 

mixed-use site that retains a 

significant proportion of office 

space, alongside other uses. 

DM 32 allows for a mix of uses. 

Due to forecast population and 

employment growth, even with 

more efficient use of floorspace 

in some circumstances, new 

floorspace and the protection 

of existing floorspace is 

important to the economic 

sustainability of the borough. 

The policy allows for a mix of 

uses. 

Mix of uses is clearer referred 

to. Text has been revised for 

Submission version. 

See comment in relation to 

Issues and Options 

consultation. 


29


DM 33 - New employment 

space 

Drivers Jonas Deloitte sought 

clarity as to what aspects of 

residential policy would be 

used to assess apart-hotels, 

and disagreed with the policy 

approach. 

Some organisations support 

flexibility of accommodation 

and accommodation suitable 

for small and medium 

businesses. 

The Submission version notes 

that policy DM 12 - Housing 

Space Standards will be used. 

Other 

Criticism of evidence base, that 

it is out of date. 

The DM Employment policies 

implement the Core Strategy 

that has been adopted, and 

draws on the same evidence 

base. 

The Islington Employment 

Study is the most up-to-date 

evidence. 

Shops, Leisure and Services 

DM 34 Local Shops 

Amwell Society support 

Craft Central support 

Overall support, including from 

the GLA, for local shops 

however some developers 

have concerns about flexibility 

/ limitations of local shops 

policy. 

Some developers have raised 

concerns with viability, 

particularly where regeneration 

is required. 

Retain policy as drafted 

Viability is not consider likely 

to be problematic given that 

vacancy rates in town centres 

is relatively low and fit-out 

costs are normally not me by 

the developer. 

DM 35 Concentration 

Some support for restriction on 

betting shops. Costas Jacovou 

Support for protection of 

theatres in the borough. 

Theatres Trust 

Estates agents are not referred 

to in the proposed Submission 

version. 

Para 7.0.12 include reference 

to ‘Managing the night-time 

economy’ Best Practice 

guidance 

30 



Some disagreement on 

including ‘estate agents’ with 

other licensed uses, estate 

agents considered better than 

vacant shops 

To strengthen this policy the 

GLA have recommended 

including reference to the 

‘Managing the night-time 

economy’ Best Practice 

guidance. 

The Healthy Urban 

Development Unit support this 

policy. 

DM 36 - Development within 

Town Centre boundaries 

Map 7.1 Angel Town centre 

boundary, primary and 

secondary frontages 

The GLA support policy DM 36 

but state that the vibrancy and 

attractiveness of town and local 

centres should be referred to. 

Town Centre Manager and 

Board and Met Police disagree 

with the ‘Direction of Travel’ 

boundary proposed and would 

like to see this amended to 

reflect the adopted Angel Town 

Centre Strategy and Issues 

and Options consultation and 

to include the policy station. 

Sager House Almeida Ltd 

supports the extension to 

include 

The Town Centre Manager and 

Board would also like to see 

some amendment to the 

shopping frontages. 


consider that shops and 

restaurants on the north side 

of Upper Street, north of 

The police station is not 

considered to be located so as 

to be an integral part of the 

town centre. The town centre 

boundary is focused on retail 

provision and the vitality and 

viability of the town centre. 

Some amendments to the 

frontages have been made. 

Secondary frontages have a 

retail focus, whereas their are 

lots of restaurants along this 

section of Upper Street and it 

is not considered that the 


designation would be 

appropriate. 


31


Berners Road, should be 

classified as secondary 

frontages. 

Map 7.2 Nag’s Head town 

centre boundary, changes to 

primary and secondary 

frontages 

Town Centre Manager and 

Board disagree with the 

‘Direction of Travel’ boundary 

proposed. Would like to see 

this amended to reflect the 

adopted SPD and include the 

Holloway tube station and the 

Metro. Would also like to see 

some small amendments to the 

shopping frontages. 

Morrisons Supermarkets 

suggest that the Hertslet Road 

frontage and other frontages 

to Morrisons be designated as 

a primary frontage 

Amend town centre boundaries 

to reflect the SPD for the town 

centre. 

Some changes to the frontages 

have been made. 

Map 7.3 Archway town centre 

boundary, primary and 


Disagreement from local 

businesses, Better Archway 

Forum and Town Centre 

Manager on the proposed town 

centre boundary and some 

comments regarding primary 

and secondary frontages. 

Some respondents would like 

the boundary to extend further 

down Junction Road. 

Archway Market traders 

consider that the market should 

be protected. 

Boundary has been extended 

further south, along Junction 

Road. 

The market is included within 

the town centre boundary. 

Map 7.4 FinsburyPark town 

centre boundary 

Boundary supported by 1 

developer 

32 



DM36 Development within 

Town Centre boundaries 

GLA request reference to 

promoting vibrant and 

attractive town and local 

centres, in line with London 

Plan policies 3D.1, 3D.2 and 

3D.3 and DRLP 2.15 

Police request amendment to 

Para 7.0.19 to include policing 

facilities. 

Include additional point to Part 

C of DM36 ‘promote vibrant 

and attractive town centres’ to 

make this more explicit. 

In the last sentence of para 

7.0.19 add the following: ‘such 

as policing facilities’ after 

‘advice centres’ 

DM 37 - Primary frontages 

& 

DM 38 - Secondary frontages 

Support for policy to 

discourage shops reverting to 

residential use. 

Metropolitan Police state that 

policing facilities should be 

considered acceptable within 

frontages. 

No action required 

Policies relating to frontages 

and local shopping areas give 

a degree of flexibility for 

non-A1 uses appropriate to the 

role of the frontage or shopping 

area. 

DM 40 - Individual (Local) 

Shops 

A comment was received 

stating that local shopping 

parades should be extended 

on Hornsey Road. 

A comment was received 

stating that, where retail 

changes to residential, the 

standard of accommodation 

should be high, 

Local Shopping Parade 24 (23 

in Submission version) has 

been extended. 

The Submission version of the 

policy requires a high standard 

of residential accommodation 

in all cases and specifically 

refers to this in reference to 

conversions from retail to 

residential, where this would 

be an appropriate change of 

use. 

DM 41 - Shop fronts 

Some objections to restrictions 

on signage design and 

requirement for active 

frontages. 


supported restriction of 

internally-illuminated box signs, 

particularly in relation to 

heritage assets. 

The Submission version of this 

policy is more flexibly worded 

with regards to window 

displays/active frontages. The 

objections and support to the 

restrictions are both noted. 


33


DM 42 - Markets 

Some support for the policy but 

would also like have reference 

to Camden Passage market 

and Archway market. 

GLA support the policy. 

It is not considered necessary 

to include specific mention of 

all markets within the borough. 

DM 44 - Hotels in the CAZ 

A number of Agents, the Angel 

Town Centre Manager and the 

GLA highlight that hotels 

should be in the CAZ. Some 

agents think hotels should also 

in major transport hubs, 

existing employment locations 

and some mixed-use 

developments. 

The GLA highlights locations 

within town centre, opportunity 

areas and the CAZ, near to 

good transport access to 

London would be in 

accordance with the London 

Plan and Draft Replacement 

London Plan. 

One agent highlights the 

Bunhill & Clerkenwell Area 

Action Plan identifies sites 

which are suitable for hotel 

development, so to avoid 

confusion this should also be 

mentioned in this policy. 

The Submission version policy 

refers to areas within the 

Central Activities Zone that are 

in close proximity to national 

railway hubs. 

The Bunhill and Clerkenwell 

Area Action Plan is referred to. 

DM 45 - Community uses 

The Theatres Trust, Craft 

Central and the Metropolitan 

Police support the policy, which 

seeks to protect existing 

cultural, community and social 

facilities and encourage new 

facilities. 

It is considered that there 

should be evidence to 

demonstrate that the facility is 

no longer required, to enable 

the council to protect services. 

34 



London Fire and Emergency 

Planning support the policy but 

request greater flexibility to 

allow for loss without evidence 

of a lack of demand. 

Healthy Living 

DM 46 - Healthy Development 

DM 47 - Protecting existing 

open space 

HUDU suggested text changes 

to refer to planning obligations 

for healthcare faculties and 

services. They also suggested 

providing more detail on what 

is required for HIA. 

GLA and English Nature 

support policy approach 

GLA consider that this policy 

should mention the Blue 

Ribbon Network as the 

Regents Canal runs through 

Islington. 

Duncan Terrace Residents 

Association request protection 

of Duncan Terrace Gardens. 

Submission version has altered 

text, including references to 

planning obligations and CIL. 

The supporting text to the open 

space refers to areas of water 

as open space, where there is 

an amenity and/or sport and 

recreation value and/or wildlife 

habitat value. 

Duncan Terrace Gardens is 

listed as an open space in the 

Submission version Appendix 

4 and indicated on the map. 

DM 48 - New open space 

DM 49 - Play space 

Lazari Investments Ltd support 

flexibility with regards to 

hard-landscaped civic space. 

GLA support this policy 

Infrastructure and Implementation 

DM 51 - Infrastructure 

GLA consider it appropriate to 

mention the requirement for 

Crossrail contributions. 

Thames Water request the 

inclusion of a requirement for 

a drainage strategy and 

contributions towards to water 

and wastewater infrastructure 

where necessary. 

Crossrail is referred to within 

the transport section. The 

Infrastructure and 

Implementation section refers 

to transport infrastructure in 

general terms. 

The definition of infrastructure 

given in the Submission 

version includes utilities. 


35


Policy DM 52 (Planning 

Obligations) 

Developers consider that this 

policy should be more flexible, 

be applied on a site-by-site 

basis and take account of 

viability 

The Submission version refers 

to statutory tests and viability 

considerations. 

36 


Appendix 1 


37

Appendix 1 

Appendix 1 

Specification consultation bodies 

Name 

David Joyce 

Adam Paterson 

Sule Nisancioglu 

Peter Rees 

Mike Wise 

Andrew Adonis 

- 

Karen Foster 

Claire Craig 

Lisa Walduck 

Brian Green 

- 

Boris Johnson 

- 

Carmelle Bell 

Carolyn Wilson 

Rachel Tyndell 

Alex Lessware 

Stephen Carnaby 

- 

- 

- 

Organisation 

London Borough of Camden 

London Borough of Hackney 

London Borough of Haringey 

Corporation of London 

Metropolitan Police 

Secretary of State for Transport 

London Development Agency 

Environment Agency 

English Heritage 

Natural England 

National Grid 

Coal Authority 

Mayor of London 

Homes and Communities Agency London 

Thames Water 

Mono Consultants on behalf of Mobile Operators 

Association 

NHS Islington 

Government Office for London 

The Planning Inspectorate 

H20 Networks Limited 

Mapesbury Communications Ltd 

euNetworks 

38 


Appendix 2 


39

Appendix 2 

Appendix 2 

General consultation bodies 

• 2 Care 

• Access Committee for England 

• Access to Sports Project 

• Action 19 

• Action Group for Irish Youth 

• Adrain Salt and Pang 

• Advisory Centre for Education (ACE) 

• Adzido Pan African Dance Ensemble 

• AFASIC 

• Afghan Community 

• African Council of Churches for Immigration 

and Social Justice 

• African Dance Project for Young People 

• African Refugee Project 

• African Swahiliphone Refugee Project 

• African Youth Trust 

• Age Concern 

• Age Concern Islington 

• Aiwerowa Organisation 

• Akina Mama Wa Afrika 

• Akwaaba Women's Club 

• Alamo Housing Co-operative 

• Alan Conisbee and Associates 

• ALERT 

• Algerian British Connection (ABC) 

• Algerian Refugee Centre 

• All Saints Church 

• Allies in Islington 

• Almeida Theatre 

• Alone in London 

• Amwell Society 

• Anand Mandal Asian Elderly Group 

• Anchor Housing Association 

• Ancient Monuments Society 

• Andover Tenant & Resident Association 

• Andover Women's Health Project 

• Andover Youth and Community Trust 

• Andrew Scott Associates 

• Andrews Downie & Partners 

• Andrews Sherlock & Partners 

• Angel Association 

• Angel BID 

• Angel Improvement Trust 

• Angel Property 

• Anglo-Asian Women's Organisation 

• Anglo-Hellenic and Cypriot Law Association 

• Anthony Blee Consultancy 

• Anti Racism. Anti Discrimination Organisation 

• Apcar Smith Planning 

40 


Appendix 2 

• Aquaterra Leisure 

• Arachne Greek Cypriot Womens Group 

• Arch TMO 

• Arch-Elm Co-op 

• Archway Business Community Association 

• Archway Drop-in Centre 

• Archway Herbal Clinic 

• Archway Library Reference Section 

• AR-CK design 

• Argent 

• Arnaouti 

• Arriva London 

• Arsenal Independent Supporters Association 

• Art and Clay 

• Arthur Simpson Library Reference Section 

• Arts & Media School 

• Ashburton Grove Area Business Group 

• Ashley Road Centre 

• Ashurst Morris Crisp 

• Asian Lone Parents' Association 

• Assisted Living 

• Association for Conservation of Energy 

• Association in Islington 

• Association of London Government 

• Atis Real 

• Aubert Court 

• Aubert Court Community Centre 

• B.H Blackwell Ltd 

• Bardon Estates 

• Barnado's Young Women's Project 

• Barnsbury Action Group 

• Barnsbury Housing Association 

• Barnsbury Wood Co-op 

• Barratt East London Land and Planning 

• Barton Willmore Planning 

• Bassment Music Workshop 

• Battlebridge Tenants Association 

• Bavaria Road/Hornsey Road Tenants 

Association. 

• Beacon Club 

• Beechcroft & Jack Walker 

• Bell Cornwell Partnership 

• Bellway Homes 

• Bellway Homes North London Division 

• BELMO (Barnsbury Estate Local Management 

Association) 

• Bemerton Villages Management Group 

• Bennet Court 

• Bennets Urban Planning 

• Bentham Estate TRA 

• Berkeley Homes (Capital) Plc 


41

Appendix 2 

• Berkeley Homes Planning Department 

• Bermerton Tenants Association 

• Better Archway Forum 

• Biodiversity Group Greater London Authority 

• Biscoe Craig Hall 

• Black Employment Initiative Forum 

• Black Environment Network 

• Blackstock Est TMO 

• Blessed Sacrament Parish 

• Blues Sky Planning 

• Bone Wells Associates 

• Boston & Nailour TRA 

• Bowerman Court Tenants Association 

• Bowerman Court TRA 

• BPTW 

• Brady & Mallalieu Architects 

• Braithwaite House TMO 

• Brecknock Road Estate TRA 

• British Association of Settlements and Social 

Actions Centres 

• British Gas plc North Thames 

• British Telecom plc 

• British Toilet Association 

• British Waterways 

• British Youth Council 

• Broadlands 

• Broadway Malyan 

• Brooke Park TMO 

• Brunswick Close TMO 

• Brunswick Estate TMO 

• BTCV 

• Buckley Gray Architects 

• Building Solutions for Islington London 

Borough of Islington 

• Burder Close & Boleyn Road TRA 

• Burder Close/ Boleyn Road Tenants' & 

Residents Association 

• Business Design Centre 

• Business Link for London 

• C/o 1 Alwyne Place 

• c/o Hargrave Park School 

• c/o The Factory Community Project 

• CABE 

• CAITS 

• Cally Rail Group 

• Cally Traders 

• Camden & Islington Mental Health and Social 

Care Trust 

• Camden and Islington Mental Health and 

Social Care Trust 2nd Floor, East Wing 

• Camden and Islington Providers' Forum 

• Camden and Islington Providers' Forum 

• Camden Black Sisters Group 

42 


Appendix 2 

• Campaign to Protect Rural England 

• Campbell Ress Partnership 

• Canal Museum Trust 

• Canonbury Baptist Church 

• Canonbury Society 

• Capita Symonds (formerly Buchanan 

Consulting Engineers) 

• Capital Housing 

• Cara Irish Housing Association 

• Cardozo and Freegrove TRA 

• Caribbean Community Centre 

• Caribbean Pensioners and Friends 

• Carila Latin American Welfare Group 

• Caris Islington: Islington Churches 

Homelessness Project 

• Castle 

• Caxton House Community Centre 

• CEA@Islington 

• Centaur Project 

• Central Foundation Boys' School 

• Central Library Reference Section 

• Central London Partnership 

• Centre 404 

• CETRA 

• CETTIE (Cultural Exchange Through Theatre 

in Education 

• CgMs Consulting 

• Charles Rowan House TRA 

• Charteris Co-op 

• Charteris Neighbourhood Tenant Co-operative 

• Chassay & Last Architects 

• Chief Operating Officer - Streets TfL Street 

Management 

• Children's Hope Foundation 

• Children's Services Islington Council 

• Chris Thomas Ltd 

• Church Commissioners 

• Church Commissioners 

• Church of England 

• Church of England in Islington 

• Circle 33 Housing Trust 

• Circle Anglia 

• Citizen's Advice Bureau (Holloway) 

• City & Islington College Islington Campus 

• City and Hackney NHS 

• City and Islington College 

• City and Islington College Finance and 

Corporate Planning 

• City and Islington College Sixth Form Centre 

• City Fringe Partnership The Safeguarding 

Team 

• City Hall 

• City Industrial Ltd 

• City of London City Surveyor's Dept. 


43

Appendix 2 

• City Piazza Residents Association 

• City University 

• Civil Aviation Authorityof African Carribean 

WomenClaremont Project 

• Clerkenwell (The) Triangle TRA 

• Clerkenwell Christian Centre 

• Clerkenwell Green Preservation Group 

• Clerkenwell Preservation Society 

• Clifford Chance 

• Clifton & Haden TRA 

• Clod Ensemble 

• Cloudesley Association 

• Cluse Court TRA 

• Cluttons LLP Planning and Regeneration 

• CMA Planning 

• CMO Productions 

• Colliers CRE 

• Colliers Erdman Lewis 

• Commission for Architecture and the Built 

Environment 

• Commission For Racial Equality 

• Communities and Local Government 

• Community Housing Association 

• Community Language Network 

• Community Safety Partnerships Unit 

• Community Self Build Agency 

• Compassion in World Farming 

• Confederation of British Industry 

• Convent of St John 

• Convent of St John of God 

• Copenhagen Neighbourhood Forum 

• Copenhagen Play and Youth Partnership 

• Copenhagen Youth Project 

• Council for British Archaeology 

• Craft Central 

• Crafts Council 

• Crest Nicholson 

• Crime Concern - Mentoring Plus Islington 

• Cross Rail Links Limited 

• Cross Street Baptist Church 

• Crossfire 

• Crouch Hill Community Centre (Recreation 

Centre) 

• Crown and Manor Boys' Club 

• Crumbles Castle Adventure Playground 

• Cryus House TRA 

• Culpeper Community Garden Association 

• Culpeper Community Garden Association 

• Cummings Estate TRA 

• Cunnane Town Planning 

• Cushman and Wakefield 

• CZWG Architects 

44 


Appendix 2 

• Da Vinci House Residents Association 

• Dalton Warner Davis 

• Dartmouth Park CA Advisory Committee and 

Chetwynd & Twisden Roads Residents Assoc. 

• David Gibson Architects 

• David Hicken Associates 

• David Lock Associates 

• Dawson and Co 

• Decherts 

• Denton Hall 

• Denton Wilde Sapte 

• Department for Education and Skills 

• Department of Trade and Industry 

• Departure for Culture, Media and Sport 

• Derwent London Plc 

• Development Plan Partnership 

• Development Planning & Design Service 

• Development Planning Partnership 

• Development Planning Services 

• DGA Architects 

• Director 

• Disability Action 

• Disability Action Islington 

• Dive Girl 

• Dixon Clark Court Management Limited 

• DLP consultants 

• Domestic Violence Matters 

• Donaldsons 

• Dorcas Project 

• DP9 Planning 

• DPDS 

• DPP 

• Drakeley & Tawney Court TRA 

• Drayton Park Crisis Centre 

• Dress for Success 

• Drivers & Norris Surveyors 

• Drivers Jonas 

• DTZ Consulting & Research 

• Duncan Terrace Associaton 

• East London Bus & Coach Company Ltd 

• EC1 Music Workshop 

• EC1 New Deal for Communities 

• EDAW 

• EDF Energy 

• Education for Choice 

• Elfrida Society 

• Elim Pentecostal Church 

• Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School 

• Ellington Street Residents' Association 

• Elthorne First Co-Op 

• Elthorne Housing Task Force 


45

Appendix 2 

• Elthorne Learning Centre 

• Empty Homes Agency 

• Enabling Concepts 

• Environment Agency 

• Eric Fletcher, Ashby House 

• Eritrean Community UK 

• Eritrean Relief Association 

• Ethiopian Advice and Information Bureau 

• ETSU 

• Evangelical Brotherhood Church 

• Evelyn Oldfield Unit LVSC 

• Exchange Plaza 

• Factory Asian Elderly Pensioners Group 

• Factory Community Project and Youth Centre 

• Factory Refugee Mothers' Support Group 

• Fairbridge TRA 

• Fairdene Court TRA 

• Fairview New Homes Ltd 

• Family Mosaic 

• Farebrother Chartered Surveyors 

• Farringdon Road Residents Association 

• Farringdon Road Residents' Association 

• Fast Track 

• Federation of Iranian Refugees 

• Federation of Islington Tenants Association 

• Federation of Italian Workers and Families 

• Fibbens Fox Associates 

• Finance and Property Services 

• Finsbury and Clerkenwell Volunteers 

• Finsbury Estate TRA 

• Finsbury Estate TRA 

• Finsbury Library Reference Section 

• Finsbury Park Business Forum 

• Finsbury Park Housing Co-op 

• Finsbury Park Partnership 

• Finsbury Park Street Drinkers' Initiative 

• Finsbury Society 

• First London East 

• Firstplus Planning 

• Forrest Court TRA 

• Foundation for Pediatric Osteopathy 

• Frampton 

• Freight Transport Association Limited 

• Freightliners City Farm 

• Friends of Gillespie Park 

• Friends of Paradise Park 

• Friends of Paradise Park 

• Frogmore 

• Fusion Online Ltd 

• GALOP 

46 


Appendix 2 

• Gambier House TMO 

• Gems Outreach 

• General Aviation Awareness Council 

• General Welfare of the Blind 

• Genesis Housing Group 

• Georgian Group 

• Gerald Eve LLP 

• Gibson Square Residents Association 

• Gifford and Rufford Residents Associations 

• Gifford and Rufford Residents Associations 

• Girdlestone Estate Tenants Association 

• Girdlestone TRA 

• GL Hearn 

• Glorious Backstage Arts 

• GML Architects 

• Goldcivil Ltd 

• Goldcrest Land plc 

• Gollifer Langston Architects 

• Graham Seabrook Partnership Chartered 

Architects 

• Great Wall Society Home for Chinese Older 

People 

• Greater London Authority 

• Greater London Authority 

• Greek and Cypriot Cultural Community, Youth, 

Legal and IT Centre 

• Greek Cypriot Elderly Day Centre 

• Greenpeace 

• Greenspace & Leisure 

• Greenwood Wilmington & Farringdon TRA 

• Grimthorpe Crayle & Partridge TRA 

• Groundwork 

• Groundwork North London 

• Guardian, The 

• GVA Grimley Ltd 

• Halfmoon Crescent Co-op 

• Hamlets English Partnerships London 

Regional Office 

• Hanley Crouch Community Association 

• Hargrave Hall Community Association 

• Hargrave Park Primary School 

• Harry Weston Co-op 

• Harvist Road Tenants' Association 

• HASLAC 

• Haslam Close TRA 

• Hathersage TRA 

• Hawthorne Close TRA 

• Haxworth Architects 

• HDG Limited 

• Health & Wellbeing Partnership 

• Health and Safety Executive 

• Healthy Islington 

• Heat Architects 


47

Appendix 2 

• Help the Aged 

• Hemingford Road Association 

• Hepher Dixon 

• Herbert Smith 

• Highbury and Islington Express 

• Highbury Community Association 

• Highbury Community Association 

• Highbury Estate TRA 

• Highbury Fields Association 

• Highbury Fields School 

• Highbury Grove Crisis Project 

• Highbury Grove School 

• Highbury Hill Residents' Group 

• Highbury Quadrant TRA 

• Highbury Roundhouse 

• Highbury Terrace Mews Residents 

Association 

• Highbury Vale Blackstock Trust 

• Highbury Vale Neighbourhood Forum 

• Highcroft & Highlands TRA 

• Highgate Society 

• Highways Agency 

• Hilldrop Area Community Association 

• Hilldrop Crescent TRA 

• Hillside Clubhouse 

• Hillside TRA 

• HM Prison Service 

• HMP Holloway 

• HMP Holloway 

• HMP Pentonville 

• Hoktiff 

• Holbrooke Court TRA 

• Hollins, McCall & Darren Court TRA 

• Holloway Neighbourhood Group 

• Holloway Police Station 

• Holloway Policy Station 

• Holloway Road 

• Holloway School 

• Holloway Seventh Day Adventist Church 

• Holloway Society 

• Holly Park Estate TRA 

• Home Builders Federation 

• Home Library Service Reference Section 

• Homes for Islington 

• Homestart Islington 

• Honourable Artillery Company 

• Hood Court TRA 

• Horn of Africa Refugee Crisis Intervention 

Project 

• Hornglade Projects Ltd 

• Hornsey Lane Estate Community Centre 

• Hornsey Lane Estate Management Board 

48 


Appendix 2 

• Hornsey Lane Tenants' Association 

• Hornsey Rise & Manchester Mansions TRA 

• Housing Corporation 

• Howard J Green Chartered Surveyor and 

Planning Consultant 

• Hutchinson Studio 

• Iceni Projects 

• IEA 

• IFF Project 

• Ilex House Tenants' Association 

• IMECE Turkish Speaking Women's Group 

• Imperial Hall Residents Association 

• In Touch - Islington Blind Association 

• Indo-Pakistan Cultural Centre 

• ING Real Estate Investment Management 

• Inga-Cgil 

• Inland Waterways Association London Region 

• Insignia Richard Ellis 

• Institute of Directors 

• Intro Homes (division of John Laing 

Partnership) 

• Ioeni Projects Limited 

• Ionic Plan & Design Ltd 

• Iranian Community Centre 

• Irish Commission for Prisoners Overseas 

• Isledon Village Community Project 

• Islington Access Group 

• Islington African Project 

• Islington Alert 

• Islington and Shoreditch Housing Association 

• Islington Archaeological & History Society 

• Islington Art Circle 

• Islington Arts Factory 

• Islington Bangladeshi Association 

• Islington Boat Club 

• Islington Boat Club 

• Islington Boys' Club 

• Islington Building Preservation Trust 

• Islington Business 

• Islington Carer's Forum 

• Islington Central Reference Library 

• Islington Chamber of Commerce 

• Islington Chamber of Commerce and Trade 

• Islington Childcare Trust 

• Islington Children's Rights Project 

• Islington Chinese Association 

• Islington Chinese Association Womens Group 

• Islington Community Network 

• Islington Community Transport 

• Islington Congregation of Jehovah's 

Witnesses 

• Islington Connexions 


49

Appendix 2 

• Islington Conservation Advisory Committee 

• Islington Conservatives 

• Islington Cycle Action Group 

• Islington Cypriot Community Association 

• Islington Enterprise Agency 

• Islington Friends of the Earth 

• Islington Gazette 

• Islington Green Party 

• Islington Green School 

• Islington Indian Association 

• Islington Labour Group 

• Islington Law Centre 

• Islington LGBT Community Forum 

• Islington Liberal Democrats 

• Islington Mencap 

• Islington Mental Health Befriending Scheme 

• Islington Mental Health Employment Forum 

• Islington Mental Health Forum 

• Islington MIND 

• Islington Museum Trust 

• Islington Music Workshop 

• Islington Muslim Association 

• Islington North Constituency 

• Islington Park Walk Action Committee 

• Islington Pensioners Forum 

• Islington Peoples Rights 

• Islington Play Association 

• Islington Police Station 

• Islington Primary Care Trust 



• Islington Project 

• Islington Scout Centre 

• Islington Society 

• Islington Somali Community 

• Islington South and Finsbury Constituency 

• Islington South Labour Party 

• Islington South Labour Party Women's Section 

• Islington Sports Council 

• Islington Stadium Communities Alliance 

• Islington Turkish and Kurdish womens group 

• Islington Turkish Cypriot Elderly Group 

• Islington Unity Church 

• Islington Voluntary Action Council 

• Islington YMCA 

• Islington Zairean Refugee Group Advice and 

Learning Centre 

• Ivac/ Islington Pensioners Forum 

• Ivory Gate U.K. Ltd 

• J Murphy and Sons Ltd 

• J Sainsbury plc 

50 


Appendix 2 

• Jehovah’s Witnesses Holloway 

• JMP Consulting 

• Job Centre Plus 

• John Baker Associates 

• John Barnes Library Reference Section 

• John Grooms Housing Association 

• John Jones Ltd 

• John Kennedy Court TRA 

• John Kennedy Lodge 

• John Spencer Square Management Group 

• Joint Council for the Welfare of immigrants 

• Jonathan Shattock 

• Jones Lang LaSalle 

• Joseph Trotter Tenants' Association 

• Kanlungan 

• Kate Greenaway Nursery 

• Keighley & Stavely TRA 

• Kemsley Whiteley & Ferris 

• Kenwoods 

• Kerridge Court TRA 

• Kick it Out 

• King Sturge & Co 

• King's Corner Project 

• King's Cross Action Group 

• King's Cross Asian Women's Group 

• King's Cross Community Development Trust 

• Kings Cross Development Forum 

• Kings Cross Environment 

• King's Cross Family Centre 

• King's Cross Partnership 

• King's Cross Railway Lands Group 

• King's Head Outreach 

• Kings Square TRA 

• Kinson Architects 

• Kohn Pedersen Fox 

• Kokayi Supplementary School 

• Kurdish Disability Organisation 

• Kurdish Information Advocacy Centre 

• Kurdistan Refugee Women's Organisation 

• Lagonier House TRA 

• Lambert Smith Hampton 

• Lambo Mental Health Resource Centre 

• Land Securities 

• Land Use Consultants 

• Landmark 

• Landmark Architecture Ltd. 

• Lanka Information Centre 

• Larkspur Developments 

• Latin American Elderly Sabatin School 'Rafael 

Pombo' 

• Latin American Women's Rights Service 


51

Appendix 2 

• Lawn Tennis Association 

• Leap Confronting Conflict 

• Learning and Skills Council 

• Lee Valley Regional Park Authority 

Countryside Service 

• Leith Planning 

• Levitt Bernstein Associates 

• Levvel Policy and Research 

• Lewis Carroll Library Reference Section 

• Lexington Apartment Management Ltd 

• LFEPA Democratic Services 

• Licensed Taxi Drivers Assoc. 

• Lights in the Sky 

• Lisa Shell Architects 

• Littman and Robeson 

• Livability Housing 

• Living Streets 

• Locum IFF Project Manager 

• London & Middlesex Archaeological Society 

• London Ambulance Service 

• London Arts 

• London Asian African Caribbean Centre 

• London Borough of Barking & Dagenham 

• London Borough of Barnet Planning 

Department 

• London Borough of Bexley 

• London Borough of Brent Planning Services 

• London Borough of Bromley 

• London Borough of Croydon 

• London Borough of Ealing 

• London Borough of Enfield 

• London Borough of Greenwich 

• London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham 

• London Borough of Harrow 

• London Borough of Havering 

• London Borough of Hillingdon 

• London Borough of Hounslow 

• London Borough of Lambeth 

• London Borough of Lewisham 

• London Borough of Merton 

• London Borough of Newham 

• London Borough of Redbridge 

• London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames 

• London Borough of Southwark 

• London Borough of Sutton 

• London Borough of Tower Hamlets 

• London Borough of Tower Planning 

• London Borough of Waltham Forest 

• London Borough of Wandsworth 

• London Centre for Christian Meditation 

• London Chamber of Commerce & Industry 

52 


Appendix 2 

• London City Airport 

• London City YMCA 

• London Congolese Arts 

• London Cycling Campaign 

• London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority 

• London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority 

North Area Fire Safety Branch 

• London Fire and Emergency Planning 

Authority 

• London Fire Brigade 

• London Fire Brigade 

• London First 

• London Friend 

• London Housing Unit 

• London Lesbian and Gay Switchboard 

• London Metropolitan University 

• London Metropolitan University Chaplaincy 

• London Metropolitan University School of 

Architecture 

• London Oneproperties Ltd 

• London Regeneration Network 

• London TravelWatch 

• London Underground Limited Safeguarding 

Team 

• London Underground Ltd Borough 

Partnerships 

• London United & London Sovereign 

• London Voluntary Service Council 

• London Walking Forum 

• London Wildlife Trust Central Office 

• London Women and Manual Trades 

• Lonsdale Square Society 

• Lough Road Communities Association 

• Lovells Planning 

• Lower Hilldrop Community RA 

• Lower Hilldrop Tenants' Association 

• Ludlow Thompson Ltd 

• Lumpy Hill Adventure Playground (Kidsactive) 

• Lyons Sleeman and Hoore 

• M.V.M Planning 

• Mackwest TRA 

• Manna 

• Manor Gardens Advocacy Project 

• Manor Gardens Welfare Trust 

• Margery Street TRA 

• Margery Street TRA 

• Mark Bowden Design 

• Market House Residents Assoc 

• Market House Residents Assoc 

• Marldon 

• Marquess (Western Isles) TRA 

• Martin Luther King Adventure Playground 

• Martin Robeson Planning Practice 


53

Appendix 2 

• Martineau 

• Matrix Feminist Architectural Cooperative 

• Maytree 

• Mayville Community Centre 

• Mayville Estate TRA 

• Mayville Youth Centre 

• McCarthy & Stone Developments 

• McCarthy & Stone Developments 

• McDonnell Associates 

• Melmerc TRA 

• Mencap 

• Mental Health Media 

• Mental Health Resource Centre 

• Mersey Estate TRA 

• Metropolis Planning and Design 

• Metropolitan Police 

• Metropolitan Police Authority Property 

Services 

• Mica House Management Company Ltd 

• Michael Sierens Associates 

• Mike Rhodes Trust 

• Mildmay Befriending Scheme 

• Mildmay Library Reference Section 

• Mildmay Tenant Co-operative 

• Mill House Lt Barnfield 

• Minik Kardes Day Nursery 

• Ministry of Defence 

• Miranda Estate TMO 

• Mitchells Roberton 

• Moelwyn Hughes TRA 

• Montagu Evans 

• Montagu Evans Planning 

• Montague Evans 

• Moorefields Eye Hospital 

• Morley House 

• Morley House 

• Mosaic 

• Moseley & Webb 

• Mount Carmel School 

• Muslim Welfare House 

• Nag's Head Community Trust 

• Nag's Head Town Centre Forum 

• Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners 

• Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners 

• National Children's Bureau 

• National Deaf Children's Society 

• National Federation of Gateway Clubs 

• National Market Traders Federation 

• National Playing Fields Association 

• Nationwide-Anglia Swindon Administrative 

Centre 

• Natural England 

54 


Appendix 2 

• Naturewise 

• NCH Action for Children 

• Network Rail 

• Network Rail (Town Planning Policy) 

• Network Rail Thameslink 2000 

• New Court Christian Centre 

• New River Action Group 

• New River Company Ltd 

• New Swift Housing Co-operative 

• Newbery House Co-op 

• Newbury House Co-op 

• Newington Green Action Group 

• Newington Green Black Senior Citizens Group 

• Newlon Housing Group 

• Newlon Housing Trust 

• NHS Camden 

• NHS Harringey 

• NHS Islington 

• NHS London 

• NHS London Healthy Urban Development 

Unit 

• Nitro 

• North East Society 

• North East Thames Architectural Society 

• North Islington Welfare Centre 

• North LibraryReference Section 

• North London Central Mosque 

• North London Mentor Trust 

• North London Progressive Jewish Community 

• North London Waste Authority 

• Northampton Square Residents Association 

• Northchurch, Ecclesbourne, Elmore TRA 

• North-East Thames Atchitectural Society 

• Notting Hill Housing 

• NPower Ltd Planning 

• NTL Plant Protection 

• Oak House 

• Obsessive Action 

• Off the Streets and into Work 

• Old Royal Free Forum 

• Olden Garden Community prokect 

• Oldfield King Planning 

• One-to-One 

• Open Door Young People's Consultation 

Service 

• ORMS Architects and Designers 

• Oromo Community (UK) 

• Oromo Mother Tongue and Culture Education 

Project 

• P.R.C Planning 

• PACE (the Project for Advice for Counselling 

and Education) 

• Palace for All 


55

Appendix 2 

• Palmers Estate TRA 

• Panos Institute London 

• Papa Architects Ltd 

• Papaloizou Architects 

• Paradise Project 

• Parents Workshop 

• Parish of Our Most Holy Redeemer 

• Parish of St Mary Magdalen and St David 

• Park View TRA 

• Patchwork Community Housing Association 

• Patrick Coman Tenants' Association 

• Paul Adams Associates 

• Paul Davis & Partners 

• Paul Whitley Architects Ltd 

• Payne Baker Rees Architects 

• Peabody Trust 

• Peabody Trust Design Group 

• Peacock & Smith 

• Peel Institute 

• Penn Road Residents Association 

• Penrose Housing Association 

• Peregrine House TRA 

• Peter Bedford Housing Association 

• Peter Brades Architects 

• Peter Pan Park Action Group 

• Peter Pendleton Associates Ltd 

• Philippine Resource Centre (Kunlungan 

Filipino Consortium) 

• Places for People North British Housing 

• Planning Aid for London 

• Planning and Regeneration Ltd Planning 

Bureau Ltd 

• Planning Potential 

• Planning Publications Ltd 

• Pleasance Theatre 

• Pleasant Place TRA 

• Pleydell Estate TMO 

• Pleydell TMO 

• Pocket 

• Polish Roman Catholic Church 

• Pollard Thomas & Edwards Architects 

• Popham Estate TRA 

• Positively Women 

• Post Office Counters Ltd North London District 

Office 

• Post Office Property Holdings 

• Potiwal Housing Group 

• Presentation HA 

• Project Design Partners 

• Project Fresh Start 

• Providence Baptist Chapel 

• PRP Architects 

56 


Appendix 2 

• Quadrant Brownswood Tenant Co-op 

• Quadrant Community Association 

• Quadrant Gardening Club 

• Quadrant Gardening Club 

• Quaker Court TMO 

• Quaker Social Action 

• Queensland Multi-Media Arts Centre 

• Quill Street Residents Association 

• RADAR: the Disability Network 

• Rapleys LLP 

• RB Kensington & Chelsea 

• RB Kingston upon Thames 

• Red Brick Housing Co-op 

• Redbrick Estate TMO 

• Redevelopment Office 

• Reeves & Partners 

• Regenerating Mildmay 

• Regents Canal Group 

• REU 

• Revolving Doors Islington 

• Ricability 

• Richard Raper Planning Ltd 

• Richards Butler 

• Rights 

• Rigpa Tibetan Buddhist Meditation Centre 

• RMJM 

• Roger Mears Architects 

• Rolfe-Judd 

• Room 111 

• Room@RTPI 

• Rose Bowl Youth Club 

• Rowan Arts Project 

• Royal London Asset Management Ltd. 

• Royal Mail Group Ltd 

• Royal Mail Property Holdings Town Planning 

& Legislation Unit 

• RPS Chapman Warren 

• RPS Planning 

• RTPI Library 

• SACRE 

• Sadler's Wells 

• Safe in the City (Islington Project) 

• Salvation Army Lodge Central Divisional HQ 

• Samuel Lewis Foundation 

• Sandro Lewis 

• Save Barts Patient Campaign 

• Savilles 

• Savills 

• Savills (incorporating Hepher Dixon) 

• Scarman Trust in London 

• Scope 


57

Appendix 2 

• Seaforth Crescent TRA 

• Second Chance Shop 

• Sense: the National Deaf, Blind and Rubella 

Association 

• Seventh Day Adventist Church 

• Shaftesbury Housing Group 

• Shakespeare Residents Association 

• Shape in Islington 

• Shape London 

• Shelter 

• Shian Housing Association 

• Shoosmiths Solicitors 

• Sickle Cell and Thalassaemia Centre 

• Simon Powell Architects 

• Single Homeless Project 

• Siren Project 

• Six Acres TRA 

• SLD Housing Association 

• Smithfield Trust 

• Socialist Environment & Resource Association 

(SERA) 

• Society for the Preservation of Ancient 

Buildings 

• Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings 

• Sofala 

• Somali Education Centre 

• Somali Speakers' Association 

• Sotheby Mews Day Centre 

• Sotheby Road Conservation Society 

• South Library Reference Section 

• South Mildmay Tenants' Co-op 

• Southern Housing 

• Spa Green Management Organisation 

• Spa Green TMO 

• Spaced Out Ltd 

• Sport England Greater London Region 

• St Aloysius' College 

• St Andrews Church 

• St Bartholomew's Hospital 

• St Gabriel's Church 

• St Giles' Christian Mission 

• St Ignatius' Housing Association 

• St James Homes 

• St John's Church 

• St Jude and St Paul's Church 

• St Lukes Centre 

• St Lukes Estate TRA 

• St Lukes Parochial Trust 

• St Mark's Church 

• St Martin of Tours HA 

• St Martin of Tours Housing Association 

• St Mary's Church Community Centre 

58 


Appendix 2 

• St Mary's Neighbourhood Centre 

• St Mary's Parochial Church Council 

• St Modwen Developments Ltd 

• St Mungo's Community Housing Association 

• St Pancras and Humanist Housing Association 

• St Pancras Hospital 

• St Paul's Church 

• St Pauls Conservation & Residents Society 

• St Pauls Rd Traffic Action Group 

• St Stephen's Church 

• St. Luke's Trust 

• St. Mary Magdalene Association 

• St. Mungo's Housing Association 

• Stafford Cripps TMO 

• Stephen’s Ink 

• Stewart Ross Associates 

• Stock & Partners 

• Stock Woolstencroft 

• Stonewall Housing 

• Stonham Housing Association 

• Strategic London Forum of Amenity and Civic 

Societies 

• Stress Project 

• Strutt and Parker 

• Stuart Low Trust 

• Suite 2a, Joseph's Well 

• Sunnyside Community Gardens 

• Sussex Close TRA 

• Sutton Housing Trust 

• Tamasha Theatre Company 

• Tasou Associates 

• Taverner & Peckett Square TMO 

• Taylor Nichol Solicitors 

• Terence O'Rourke plc 

• Tesco 

• Tesco Stores Ltd 

• Tetlow King Planning 

• TfL 

• Thames Architectural 

• The Big Issue 

• The British Wind Energy Association 

• The Church of England 

• The Exchange 

• The Guiness Trust 

• The London Planning Practice 

• The Prince's Foundation 

• The Royal Town Planning Institute 

• The Theatres Trust 

• The Theatres Trust 

• The Triangle TRA 

• The Tyler-Parkes Partnership 


59

Appendix 2 

• The Vestry 

• Theberton Association 

• Thornhill Square Association 

• Thornhill Square Residents Association 

• Tibbalds (Planning and Urban Design) 

• Timbuktu Adventure Playground 

• Tollington Community Association 

• Tollington Park Action Group 

• Tollington Park Action Group 

• Tompion & Earnshaw TRA 

• Tony Thorpe Associates 

• Town and Country Planning Association 

• Town Hall 

• Town Planning Consultancy 

• Toynbee Housing Association 

• TP Bennett architects 

• Tracks to Employment 

• Transcend in London 

• Transco North London Ldz 

• Transformation 

• Transport 2000 

• Transport Committee for London ALG 

Taxicard 

• Transport for London Land Use Planning 

• Transport for London Land Use Planning 

Team 

• Traveller Law Reform Project 

• Tribal MJP 

• Tribal Property Services 

• Turkish Cypriot Community Association 

• Turkish Education Group 

• Turkish Speaking Womens Group 

• Turnmill St Residents Association 

• Udichi Bengali Progressive Cultural 

Organsisation 

• Ujima Housing Association 

• UMS 2001 

• UNDUGU African Swahiliphone Refugee 

Project (A.S.R.E.P) 

• Union of Muslim Families 

• Union Railways (North) Limited 

• Unite 

• United House Ltd 

• University of Westminster Project Support 

Centre 

• Unreported Crime Project - Finsbury Park 

• Upper Street Association 

• Upper Street Business Association 

• Upper Street Multicultural Counselling Centre 

• Urban Initiatives 

• Urban Jungle 

• Vaudeville Court TRA 

• Victorian Society 

60 


Appendix 2 

• Victorian Terrace Energy Reduction 

• Visit London 

• Waitrose 

• Wakelin Association 

• WAND UK (Womens Association for African 

Networking and Development) 

• Warwick Business Management Limited 

• Warwick Technology Park 

• Waste Watch 

• Weatherall, Green and Smith 

• Wedmore Estate TRA 

• Wedmore Street Estate Tenants' Association 

• Wenlake Estate TMO 

• Wesley's Chapel and Leysian Mission 

• West & Partners 

• West Library Reference Section 

• Western Isles (Marquess) TRA 

• Westminster City Council Planning and City 

Development 

• Whittington Park Community Association 

• William Sutton Islington Estate 

• Willingale Associates (Architects) 

• Winged Fellowship Trust 

• Women for Health Project (Andover) 

• Women's Alcohol Centre (Alcohol Recovery 

Project 

• Women's Design Service 

• Women's National Commission 

• Women's Therapy Centre 

• Woodbridge Tenants Association 

• Woodford Planning Partners 

• Workspace Group 

• York Central Residents Association Ltd. 

• York Way Court Tenants Association 

• Youth Clubs UK 

• Yurky Cross Chartered Architects 

• YWCA 

• Weston Rise TMO 

• Whistler Street Residents Association 

• Whitbread Estate TRA 

• Whitecross TRA 

• Whitehall Park Area Residents Association 

• Whitehall Park Conservation Area Group 

• Whittington Hospital 


61

Consultation Statement - Islington Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?