planning report PDU/0138/02
10 October 2001
Arsenal FC Developments at Highbury
Stadium; Ashburton Grove & Eden Grove/
Lough Road, London N5 & N7
in the London Borough of Islington
planning application nos. POO/2501; PO1/1500 &
Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London
Authority Act 1999; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order
2000 – strategic planning application stage I referral
Redevelopment to provide a new 60,000 capacity stadium (including a
Learning Centre), an Arsenal shop and museum, bars/restaurants, local
convenience shops, a replacement Arsenal Community Sports Centre
(including 2 additional outdoor five-a-side pitches), 2 gym/health clubs,
573 homes for keyworkers and/or students, 1,835 other new homes
(including other “affordable housing”), 51 live-work units, a new Waste
Recycling Centre, around 24,000 square metres of new business space, 4
community health facilities, 2 children’s nurseries, a new park and an
extension to an existing park.
1 In June 2001 Islington Council initially consulted the Mayor of London on proposals
submitted by Arsenal Football Club (AFC) for the above mixed-use developments on the
above sites. Amended proposals were subsequently submitted on 14 September 2001.
Under the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000 the
Mayor has the same opportunity as other statutory consultees to comment on the proposals.
This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what comments to make.
2 The applications are referable under Categories 1A, 1B(c), 1C(1c), 2B, 3B, 3E and 3F
of the Order 2000: “1A(a) development which comprises or includes the provision of more, than 500
houses, flats, or houses and flats"; 1A(b) “development which comprises or includes the provision of
flats or houses and the development occupies more than 10 hectares”; 1B(c), “development which
comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings outside Central London and with a total
floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres”; 1C(1c), “development which comprises or includes the
erection of a building which is more than 30 metres high and outside the City of London”; 2B “Waste
development to provide an installation with capacity for a throughput of more than 50,000 tonnes per
annum of waste produced outside the land in respect of which planning permission is sought”;
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 1
3B(1)(a), “development which occupies more than 4 hectares of land which is used for a use within
Class B1 (business), B2 (general industrial) or B8 (storage or distribution) of the Use Classes Order;
and 3B(1)(b), which is likely to prejudice the use of that land for any such use”; 3E(1), “development
which does not accord with one or more provisions of the development plan in force in the area in
which the application site is situated and (a) comprises or includes the provision of more than 2,500
square metres of floorspace for a use falling within any of the following Classes in the Use Classes
Order – (i) class A1 (retail); (iii) class A3 (food and drink); (iv) class B1 (business); (vii) class C1
(hotels); 3E(1)(b) “development which does not accord with one or more provisions of the development
plan in force in the area in which the application site is situated and comprises or includes the
provision of more than 150 houses and flats”; and 3F(1) “development for a use, other than residential
use, which includes the provision of more than 200 car parking spaces in connection with that use”.
3 The Highbury Stadium application has been referred under category 1A. The
Ashburton Grove application has been referred under categories 1A, 1B, 1C, 3B, 3E and 3F.
The Eden Grove/Lough Road application has been referred under categories 1A, 1B, 1C, 2B,
3E and 3F.
4 The application is complex and for reasons of clarity, it is described as 3 separate
sites: the existing Highbury Stadium site; Ashburton Grove and Eden Grove/Lough Road.
5 AFC occupies a small stadium dating from the 1930s, with a seating capacity of
approximately 38,000. It has aspirations to compete with the top European teams
(Manchester United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan, Juventus) and needs a stadium of
60,000. The existing site cannot be suitably extended to accommodate the increased
capacity. AFC has submitted a planning application for a new, relocated stadium, together
with applications for inter-related developments consequent upon the new stadium. AFC
want to stay local and Ashburton Grove was the most suitable of such sites. The Eden
Grove/Lough Road application is required to accommodate the replaced and relocated waste
transfer station, industrial and storage uses from Ashburton Grove, although it is not clear
why there is a need to provide such a large amount of residential accommodation.
6 If Islington Council subsequently decides that it is minded to grant planning
permission, it must first allow the Mayor an opportunity to decide whether to direct the
Council to refuse permission.
7 The Mayor of London’s comments on this case will be made available on the GLA
Details of the proposal
(See Appendix 1 for full description of development proposals)
8 Below is the summary table that sets out the schedule of the development floorspace.
Proposed Gross Net Units
l (sq.m) (sq.m)
Local convenience retailing 2,256 1,805
A1 Club Shop 2,540 2,032
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 2
A1 (Retail)/A2 (Professional & Financial Services)/A3 700 560
(Food and drink)
A1 (Retail)/A3 (Food and drink) 1,397 1,118
A3 (Food and drink) 4,010 3,208
B1 (Business Use) 14,788 11,831
B1 (Business Use) for Arsenal Football Club 3,255 2,604
B1 (Business Use) for Islington Council 1,241 993
B1 (Business Use)/B2 (General Industrial) commercial 2,950 2,360
ICSL 14,034 11,227
Residential – new build 167,946 133,739 1,820
Residential - refurbishment 1,404 1,123 15
Intermediate Housing 12,382 9,906 573
Live/Work 6,475 5,180 51
Stadium (includes open seating areas) 98,107 78,486
Arsenal Football Club Museum/A3 (food and drink) 1,000 800
Arsenal Sports & Community Centre 1,645 1,316
Arsenal Football Club boardroom/entertainment suite 520 416
Health Club 2,801 2,241
Leisure 2,370 1,896
Ticket collection point 210 168
Children’s Nursery 1,010 808
Community Health Facility 4,460 2,248
Opthalmologist/Pharmacist/Chiropodist 160 128
North London Waste Authority 6,290 5,032
Civic Amenity Area 1,435 1,148
Storage/Covered car parking, of which: 38,459 38,459
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 3
Commercial, health, etc 854
Surface car parking, of which:
Commercial, health, etc 15
TOTAL 393,845 320,830
9 See Appendix 2 for table of schedule of total employment floorspace for development
10 A hybrid planning application in detail and outline form has been submitted to
incorporate part conversion and part redevelopment of the site.
11 The proposal includes the retention and conversion of two of the existing four stands
(the statutorily listed East stand, and locally listed West stand) to housing. The application
will provide a total of 542 new build residential units with 15 refurbished units, to
incorporate affordable housing of at least 25% (habitable rooms) and up to 35% (subject to
further negotiations about the extent of the planning and transportation obligations
associated with the scheme); new business space (1,812 square metres gross); a community
health facility (1,050 square metres gross); a health club (1,001 square metres gross); and
children’s nursery (630 square metres gross) and associated parking of 528 bicycle spaces
and 486 car spaces including 471 underground spaces (6 for the community health facility, 1
for the new business space, 3 for the children’s nursery staff and 461 for the residential) and
15 surface spaces (3 for the community health facility and 12 for the residential).
12 See Appendix 3 for table of floorspace accommodation schedule for Highbury element
13 A hybrid planning application in detail and outline form has been submitted for the
comprehensive redevelopment of the site.
14 The proposal will include the provision of a 60,000 seat stadium with bar/restaurant
facilities, function rooms, media/community education facility, commercial food production
and associated covered parking; a landscaped podium with stepped and ramped access to a
lower pedestrian plaza adjacent to Hornsey Road /Benwell Road junction with 2 pedestrian
bridges accessing Drayton Park and an emergency access road to Gillespie Road; a
multi-purpose building, 1 to 9 storeys high above the podium comprising a new community
sports centre, 253 key-worker/student residential accommodation units with retail and/or
food and drink uses to the north of the stadium known as the “northern triangle
development”; a series of 3 to 6 storey high buildings containing a community health facility
and 258 residential flats with associated basement car parking and retail and/or food and
drink uses on Drayton Park; to the south of the new stadium, a replacement road (roughly in
the position of the existing Queensland Road) with development either side comprising a
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 4
multi-purpose building (business use, retail, food and drink uses at ground floor level; food
and drink, AFC museum and leisure and assembly uses at first floor level; roof gardens and
four blocks of residential flats comprising 173 units rising to a total height of 10 to 13
storeys) between the new road and the stadium and a 4 storey high, serpentine plan building
comprising business, retail, food and drink and community health accommodation on the
ground floor with 113 upper floor residential units and associated basement parking between
the new road and properties on Bryantwood Road; a mixed-use building adjacent to the
plaza, comprising retail and/or food and drink uses at ground and podium level with a
further 6 storeys of business use accommodation including AFC offices, to be known as the
15 See Appendix 4 for table of floorspace accommodation schedule for the Ashburton
Grove element of scheme.
Eden Grove/Lough Road
16 A hybrid planning application in detail and outline form has been submitted to
incorporate a conversion of part (the former Mount Carmel school) and the comprehensive
redevelopment of the remainder of the site.
17 The proposals will include the extension of Hornsey Street to provide a new
cul-de-sac and improvements to the existing Holloway Road/Hornsey Street junction; a
series of 5 to 7 storey high buildings with business use accommodation on the ground floor
and 51 live-work units on the upper floors with associated parking on the northern side of
the extended Hornsey Street; a part 7 and part 8 storey high building with a ground floor
health club and 320 student residential units on the upper floors also on the northern side of
the extended Hornsey Street; 3 mixed-use buildings (2 are linked by a first-floor pedestrian
bridge) between 4 to 10 storeys high with predominant ground floor use for business
accommodation with smaller amounts of retail, professional and financial services, and food
and drink uses and a community health facility (within only one block) will be on the
southern side of the extended Hornsey Street. The upper floors are proposed to be in
residential use comprising a total of 447 flats. Each of the blocks will have associated
parking and external amenity space; the former Mount Carmel School will be converted to
provide 24 residential units with a children’s nursery within part of the ground floor; an area
of public amenity space is proposed between the mixed-use 4 to 10 storeys high building; the
formation of a new cul-de-sac off Caledonian Road including the closure of the existing Piper
Close/Caledonian Road junction; a 10 storey mixed-use building with business use on the
ground floor and 72 residential flats on the upper floors and basement parking on the
northern side of the new cul-de-sac; to the south of the new cul-de-sac there is to be a series
of 4 to 10 storey high mixed-use buildings with ground floor business use,
retail/professional and financial services/food and drink uses, business use on 2 upper floors
and the remaining floors in residential use to provide 103 flats and to the south of the block a
new area of public open space; to the west of the existing electricity sub-station there will be
a 20 metres high multi-functional building to be served by the 2 new culs-de-sac which will
accommodate waste transfer operations, waste recycling, civic amenity facilities, garaging,
workshops and other accommodation for various services operated by or on behalf of
Islington Council; Adjacent to the multi-functional building there will be a series of 4 to 8
storeys high, single-aspect residential buildings that will provide 95 units; the re-ordering
and landscaping of a section of Piper Close; and highway improvements to the junction of
North Road, Hillmarton Road, Caledonian Road and Stock Orchard Street.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 5
18 See Appendix 5 for table of floorspace accommodation schedule for the Eden
Grove/Lough Road element of scheme.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 6
(See maps of the three development sites that are attached to this report)
19 The site covers an area of approximately 3.3 hectares and comprises of four stands, a
museum and shop, the Arsenal Sports and Community Centre (an indoor sports centre,
incorporated within the South Stand, which includes an indoor football pitch and function
room available for hire to the general public) and a number of residential properties. The
stands have a combined capacity of approximately 38,500. The West Stand was constructed
in 1932 and the East Stand in 1936; both are approximately 22.5 metres high. The East
Stand is statutorily listed (Grade II) whilst the West Stand is locally listed. The South
Stand was constructed in 1990 and is approximately 19.1 metres high, while the North
Stand, constructed in 1993, is approximately 23 metres high with support structures rising
higher. The site also incorporates the former Metrocolour site – a small industrial site,
squeezed between the stadium and residential properties to the north on Gillespie Road.
20 There are approximately 105 off street parking spaces underneath the Arsenal Sports
and Community Centre, with access from Avenell Road. There are four main pedestrian
accesses to the stands: from Avenell Road, adjacent to the East Stand; under an arch at
numbers 137 – 139 Highbury Hill; through a gap between numbers 115 – 121 Gillespie
Road. AFC own the properties at 133 – 139, 187 and 191 Highbury Hill. These are
mostly used for residential purposes with 191 providing accommodation for an Islington
Council youth project.
21 The surrounding area is predominantly residential with some local shops and small
pockets of light industry. To the north, the stadium backs onto the rear gardens of 3 storey
houses in Gillespie Road. To the east is Avenell Road, which comprises mainly 3 storey
houses with some 4 and 5 storey blocks of flats and Aubert Court, which rises to 7, 8 and 9
storeys. The 4 storey residential block of Aubert Court adjoins the site to the south; and to
the west is Highbury Hill with its 2 and 3 storey houses. Highbury Hill and Avenell Road
fall approximately 5 metres south to north along the longest axis of the ground. Aubert
Park, in turn, falls approximately 13 metres east to west, down to Drayton Park. Arsenal
Underground Station is approximately 60 metres from the Lower West (Highbury Hill) and
North Bank (Gillespie Road) pedestrian accesses to the stands. Gillespie Park lies to the
north of Arsenal Underground Station.
22 The proposed development site covers approximately 13.53 hectares. The site
comprises 2 distinct areas, Ashburton Grove/Queensland Road and Drayton Park, separated
by operational railway land. The operational railway land runs north to south and
accommodates Drayton Park Station and 2 railway cuttings, which are approximately 9
metres below Bryantwood Road in the south and 4 metres below Drayton Park in the north.
The cuttings accommodate the West Anglia Great Northern (WAGN) railway line services
between Moorgate and Welwyn. The grassed area between the cuttings has no public
access and is designated by Islington Council as a Site of Nature Conservation Interest of
Metropolitan Significance and accommodates railway-signalling equipment, accessed via
Gillespie Park in the north.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 7
23 The Ashburton Grove/Queensland Road area is roughly triangular in shape, being
bounded to the south by the rear gardens of residential properties in Bryantwood Road; to
the north and west by a retained railway embankment and Benwell Road/Hornsey Road;
and to the east by the WAGN outer suburban railway line within 2 railway cuttings.
Access to the area is from the west only, where Ashburton Grove, Albany Place and
Queensland Road feed off Benwell Road and Hornsey Road. The railway embankment is
approximately 7.5 metres above Hornsey Road, reducing in height to approximately 5.5
metres above the north-western part of the area. The embankment accommodates a disused
track-bed (designated as a Site of Nature Conservation Interest of Metropolitan Significance
by Islington Council), the East Coast Main Line (Great Northern and Eastern Railway
services between King's Cross and Edinburgh) and outer suburban railway lines (WAGN
services between King’s Cross and Welwyn). The area is currently used for a wide range of
industrial, office, waste transfer and storage operations, together with some residential
accommodation, a multi-media arts centre and a Post Office delivery office. The buildings
are generally 2 or 3 storeys high with the Albany Place Depot rising to a height of 6 storeys.
The area is generally level, although the former railway goods yard in the south-east corner
of the site is approximately 9 metres below Bryantwood Road and Queensland Road. The
environmental quality of the area is poor with undistinguished buildings.
24 The Drayton Park area is a strip of land bounded to the west by the WAGN outer
suburban railway line within 2 railway cuttings; to the north by Gillespie Park; to the east
and south by predominantly residential properties on Drayton Park. The area
accommodates a range of motor repair garages, plant hire, a builders merchants and
warehouse uses together with a London Underground Limited (LUL) electricity sub-station.
AFC’s retailing warehouse is accommodated within the site. Islington Council has
designated sections of the site as being a Site of Nature Conservation Interest of
Metropolitan Significance (the area of land between Gillespie Park and LUL’s electricity
sub-station) and a Site of Nature Conservation Interest of Borough Grade 1 a thin strip of
railway embankment land in the south-west corner of the area).
Eden Grove/Lough Road:
25 The Lough Road area is a relatively flat site and covers approximately 7.35 hectares.
It lies between the major distributors of Holloway Road (a trunk road) and Caledonian Road.
It comprises numbers 263 - 299 Holloway Road; 2 - 60 Eden Grove; 1 – 32 Hornsey Street;
1 – 6 Piper Close; 474 Caledonian Road; the former Central Electricity Generating Board
site; the Pitt and Scott site; the former Mount Carmel School and various industrial
buildings on Eden Grove and Hornsey Street and Railtrack land. The site is bounded on
the north by the East Coast Main Line railway; on the east by Holloway Road; on the south
by Eden Grove, Piper Close and the Catholic Church of the Sacred Heart of Jesus; and on the
west by Caledonian Road. The Piccadilly Line runs under the length of the site with
stations at each end on the main roads (Holloway Road and Caledonian Road Stations).
26 The land use of the immediate locality is mixed with areas to the north (beyond the
East Coast Main Line railway) and south being predominantly residential. The site
contains some retail uses with parts of the site having remained under-developed and
under-exploited for many years: The eastern end for more than a decade; and the western
end (former British Railways Marshalling yards) for more than twenty years. Other
existing uses comprise a mixture of low employment density industrial and warehousing
premises. The site is located near the Nag’s Head Town Centre (lies to the north-east and
is centred upon Holloway Road and Seven Sisters Road) and other protected local shopping
frontages on Caledonian Road and some other more local roads. The Angel and Camden
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 8
Town Centres are approximately 2 kilometres distant to the south and west respectively.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 9
27 Islington Council has prepared three separate planning briefs for the three
development sites to help highlight the Council’s main requirements for the development of
the sites and to act as a guide in considering the merits of the development proposals
28 The oldest of the three planning briefs was issued in December 1997 for the site
known as Eden Grove/Lough Road. It was done in draft consultation form only and was
prepared primarily to deal with the then identified aspiration for retail use on the site (by
Sainsbury’s); the desire for campus development for the University of North London; the
desire to provide a new access road between Holloway Road and Caledonian Road; and a
desire to make provision for an industrial or distribution facility which incorporated rail use.
29 The other two planning briefs (Highbury Stadium & Adjoining Land; and Ashburton
Grove Area) were formally adopted in April 2000 and August 2000 respectively and
constitute Supplementary Planning Guidance. The planning brief for Highbury Stadium
and Adjoining Land was prepared to provide guidance for the future of the Stadium, if AFC
was to build a new stadium in Ashburton Grove. The planning brief for Ashburton Grove
was prepared to provide guidance in response to AFC’s interest in developing a new stadium
within the Ashburton Grove area.
30 Both the Ashburton Grove area and Highbury Stadium are within the Finsbury Park
Partnership Area, where the Finsbury Park Partnership, established under the auspices of
the Government’s Single Regeneration Budget initiative, is co-ordinating a regeneration
strategy to cover a period of 7 years (1999 to 2006).
31 A summary of the planning history for Eden Grove/Lough Road from 1964 to 1997
demonstrates a variety of development proposals for industrial; warehousing; external
storage; trade exhibition centre; indoor leisure facility; business units; educational use;
community centre; supermarket with petrol filling station; car showroom; and new road.
32 Woolwich Arsenal Football Club first moved to Highbury in 1913, having secured a
lease for the current site (formerly playing fields belonging to St. John’s College of Divinity)
from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. The Club bought the freehold interest of the
ground in 1925 and redevelopment began in 1931, with the construction of covered
terracing at the North Bank. The West Stand, designed by Claude Waterlow Ferrier and
W.B. Binnie, opened in 1936. The south (Clock) end remained as open terraces until the
construction of the south stand in 1990. The area sustained considerable bomb damage
during World War 2 and the North Bank was destroyed, as was the former college buildings
behind the Clock End. These were redeveloped as Aubert Court flats in the late 1940’s to
the designs of E.C.P Monson. In recent years AFC has carried out a number of
developments at the Stadium. These include building an indoor practice pitch and function
room (The JVC Centre) in 1989, the South Stand and boxes in 1990 and the North Stand in
33 Queensland Road (formerly Queens Road) and Albany Place were first developed
around 1840 as predominantly residential streets, with Emily Place and the former Victoria
and Albert Places to the north being developed for housing in the 1850’s. At this time,
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 10
Ashburton Grove remained as fields, crossed by the Hackney Brook. The Drayton Park,
Bryantwood Road and Benwell Road areas were offered for building leases between 1855
and 1870. The Great Northern Railway’s Canonbury spur line, opened in 1874 close to the
west side of Drayton Park, stimulated the development of railway sidings and depots along
Drayton Park, to the west of Drayton Park Station and in the area of Ashburton Grove.
The railway also attracted industry, including a gas works and paper staining works to the
north of Queensland Road. Council depots first appeared in the area in 1937. The area
was heavily bombed during World War 2 and the London County Council compulsorily
purchased land for slum clearance purposes in the 1950’s.
34 A total of seven planning applications were originally submitted in November 2000
for three sites (Highbury Stadium; Ashburton Grove and Lough Road) to Islington Council
by AFC and were the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment with an
Environmental Statement having being submitted. Six of the applications were referred to
the Mayor. The seventh application was for listed building consent at Highbury Stadium.
The three main components – a new football stadium at Ashburton Grove, redevelopment of
Lough Road and redevelopment of Highbury Stadium – were proposed to be implemented in
sequence. The first was to have been Lough Road (the Waste Transfer Station and
Islington Council accommodation –an one year building project with the remaining
development being constructed over a two year period); to be followed by the new stadium at
Ashburton Grove (a 26 month building project after the waste transfer station and Islington
Council depot had been completed and decanted from Ashburton Grove); with finally
Highbury Stadium, another two year building project (after the new stadium at Ashburton
Grove has been completed and the use commenced).
35 In May 2001 a report was presented to the Mayor to provide information on the
November 2000 applications and emerging proposals. The presentation was done to inform
the Mayor of the general development proposals and not to reach a decision. As such, it
was considered to be inappropriate to draw any firm conclusions except to acknowledge the
development proposals’ World-City implications; the complexity of the package of
applications and their interrelationships; the local impact; and the impact on public transport.
Subsequent to that report, a non-prejudicial letter was sent to Islington Council and Arsenal
Football Club to provide an in principle “steer” to help inform the negotiations. The Mayor
recognised the potential opportunities afforded by the development to support and enhance
London’s World-City role. The Mayor concluded that:
“Having being initially minded to direct refusal, he now recognises the positive regenerative and
wider community benefits that promise to accrue from the developments; and the significance of the
developments in ‘World-City’ terms.
He would welcome an increase in the proportion of affordable housing within the schemes. If no
increase is made then Islington Council will need to justify this stance with an assessment of local
Given the significant increase in crowds attending the stadium and a requirement to get the
majority of these people onto public transport, the Mayor expects there to be a significant increase
in the funding of public transport by the applicant (above and beyond the sum required for the
improvements necessary to Holloway Road station currently being suggested to ensure that it
remains open and usable by non-spectators and spectators alike). This should include measures to
ensure additional improvements at Finsbury Park and Highbury & Islington Stations, and
further measures to enhance the usage of public transport.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 11
There is concern about car parking controls generally and in particular their implementation as
associated with the use of the football stadium.
He is opposed to the 30 metres height restriction as set out in the adopted Islington UDP. The
proposed and emerging Spatial Development Strategy (London Plan) will oppose such blanket
restrictions. Unitary Development Plans will be required to acknowledge the potential benefits of
tall buildings, and to include policies to be used in development control to assess whether proposals
are acceptable or not and to identify areas which are suitable/unsuitable for high buildings. The
Mayor has no objection to the proposed stadium being higher because there would appear to be no
adverse impact on neighbouring residents. It is recognised that the roof has been ingenuously
designed to comply with the height restriction. However, if a more traditional design could be
used, without adversely affecting the integrity of the design, the construction savings could help to
fund wider benefits for affordable housing and public transport.
If there is to be a landmark building at Ashburton Grove near Queensland Road it can be taller
than the one currently suggested as long as it was more elegant. A slab tower would not fit that
The Mayor is unconvinced by the form and layout of the proposed residential development at
Queensland Road and Lough Road East and is concerned with its setting and relationship to the
36 The revisions that were submitted by AFC to Islington Council in June 2001 resulted
in a reduction in the number of applications from seven to a total of four, including the listed
building consent application.
Draft heads of agreement for planning obligations package under Section
37 A draft section 106 agreement has been prepared by Islington Council and is the
subject of negotiations with AFC. The heads of agreement relate to the three sites and
cover the following:
Replacement Islington Council depot and offices
North London Waste Authority (NLWA) waste transfer station
Relocation of businesses and Queensland Multi-Media Arts centre
Use of New Stadium
Selling season tickets to local people
Selling tickets locally
Public toilets on concourse
Arsenal Community Sports Centre
Community Use Plan
Modal split targets
Retention of visitors at “major events”
Holloway Road Underground Station
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 12
Event day parking scheme
On-site event day parking
Drayton Park Station
Finsbury Park Station
Pedestrians crossing Seven Sisters Road and Highbury Corner
Bus Priority Measures
Stadium Car Parking
Phasing of development
General Business Space
Community Health Facilities
Environmental Education Programme
Breeding Bird Survey
Procurement of Goods and Services
Rights of Way
Environmental Safety Audit
Eden Grove/Lough Road:
Waste & Recycling Centre
General Business Space
Coach Parking in Waste Recycling Centre
Relocation of Businesses
Community Health Facilities
Pedestrians crossing Caledonian Road
Hornsey Street Extension and Western Access Road
Rights of Way
Service Yards & Parking Areas
Environmental Traffic Management Schemes
Holloway Road Measures
Public Open Spaces
Compensatory Nature Conservation Measures
Phasing of development
General Business Space
AFC Community Sports Centre
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 13
Community Health Facilities
St John’s Primary School Improvements
Access to the former pitch area
Rights of Way
Nag’s Head Youth Centre
Residents’ Parking Permit
Site Management Scheme
Protection of trees from development and during construction works
Common Issues for the three sites:
Code of Construction Practice
Construction – Community Programme
Maintenance Costs – New Public Open Space
Green Travel Plans
Health Needs Survey
Employment & Training
Legal & Professional Fees
Restoration of Land
38 At the GLA officers request AFC has submitted information for scrutiny regarding
the viability of the overall scheme including demolition, remediation and infrastructure costs
along with a valuation of the potential benefits of the planning obligation package. The
information is included within Appendix 6.
Relevant strategic planning policies
39 The following strategic planning policy guidance is considered relevant:
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 14
Planning Policy Guidance Note 1 (PPG1) “General Policy and Principles”, February
Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 (PPG3) “Housing”, March 2000
Planning Policy Guidance Note 4 (PPG4) “Industrial and Commercial Development and
Small Firms”, November 1992
Planning Policy Guidance Note 9 (PPG9) “Nature Conservation”, October 1994
Planning Policy Guidance Note 10 (PPG10) “Planning and Waste Management”,
Planning Policy Guidance Note 13, (PPG13) “Transport”, March 2001
Planning Policy Guidance Note 15, (PPG15) “Planning and the Historic Environment”,
Planning Policy Guidance Note 17, (PPG17) “Sport and Recreation”, September 1991
Planning Policy Guidance Note 21, (PPG21) “Tourism”, November 1992
Planning Policy Guidance Note 23, (PPG23) “Planning and Pollution Control”, July
Planning Policy Guidance Note 24, (PPG24) “Planning and Noise”, September 1994
Regional Planning Guidance 3 (RPG3) “Strategic Guidance for London Planning
Regional Planning Guidance 9 (RPG9) “Regional Planning Guidance for the South
East”, March 2001
“Towards the London Plan: Initial proposals for the Mayor’s Spatial Development
Strategy”, May 2001
Report of the Mayor’s Housing Commission 2000
“The Mayor’s Transport Strategy”, July 2001
“London’s Economic Development Strategy: success through diversity”, July 2001
“The Mayor’s Draft Air Quality Strategy for public consultation”, September 2001
“Connecting with London’s Nature: The Mayor’s Draft Biodiversity Strategy”,
“The Mayor’s Draft Municipal Waste Management Strategy: Assembly and Functional
Bodies Consultation Draft”, July 2001
Analysis of strategic planning issues
40 The main strategic policy areas relate to world-city role; affordable housing; housing
density; architectural quality and urban design; new public open space and routes; transport;
car parking; impact on the public transport network; impact on the strategic road network;
pedestrian routes; environmental statement; environmentally sustainable development;
waste and recycling; bio-diversity; the loss of existing industrial land and the deliverability
of the scheme.
41 The planning applications represent the largest combined development proposals in
Islington for many years and are strategically significant both in terms of their scale, impact
and regenerative effects for the borough and this part of North London.
42 In terms of sport, tourism and the international recognition of this high profile
Premier League football club, the relocation and improvement of the stadium is a strategic
issue for London in terms of its World City role.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 15
43 The development schemes combined will have a dramatic effect on the area and is
likely to create large-scale regeneration potential for what is currently a run down part of
North London. Despite some very attractive residential streets, the area and particularly
pockets of Holloway, suffers from environmental, social and economic problems thereby
losing out on development opportunities despite the relative affluence of the south of
Islington. Both the Ashburton Grove area and Highbury Stadium are within the Finsbury
Park Partnership Area, where the Finsbury Park Partnership, established under the auspices
of the Government’s Single Regeneration Budget initiative, is co-ordinating a regeneration
strategy to cover a period of 7 years (1999 to 2006).
44 The schemes, as well as proposing a world class stadium development, has the
potential to create a significant number of new jobs and secure existing ones, despite the
need for displacement and relocation of some smaller businesses. The scale of investment
and size of the developments are such that there would be likely to be significant wider
effects to the surrounding area leading to a potential catalyst for further regeneration.
45 The schemes propose developments containing a mix of uses including: sports,
notably a 60,000 person capacity stadium, leisure and tourism uses, high density housing
plus affordable housing, student and/or key-worker accommodation, restaurants, shops, new
business units, offices, relocated and improved waste transfer station, children’s nursery and
community health facilities.
46 There is potential for further development in the surrounding area and links to
locally established organisations and institutions, including the University of North London.
The London Development Agency has plans, including financial investment, to facilitate
such regenerative work in partnership with Islington Council, local businesses and
47 A significant issue is the architecture, the scale of buildings and urban design of
the development proposals. This is of paramount importance in ensuring that the need to
significantly improve the quality of the surrounding environment is achieved. There are
pockets of land and buildings that suffer real dereliction and/or visual decline. The
proposed developments offer a significant opportunity in providing a new urban quarter with
real benefits to North London. Islington Council’s well-established Unitary Development
Plan policy of a general embargo on buildings over 30 metres height throughout the
borough is in clear conflict with the Mayor’s vision for London as established through the
proposed and emerging London Plan (Spatial Development Strategy). The existence of
such a policy can clearly help to inhibit the creativity and imagination of the development
industry and if used without flexibility fail to deliver suitably high-quality, high-density,
modern and exciting new development or to maximise the site’s development potential.
48 The schemes provide high-density housing with AFC currently offering an
unspecified amount between 25% and 35% affordable housing, in terms of habitable rooms.
The affordable housing elements will be dispersed and available on all 3 sites. AFC
estimates that there will be a total of 2,459 residential units incorporating 573 intermediate
housing units (key-worker and/or student accommodation), 51 live-work units and 1,835
general housing units. AFC is under the impression that the Islington Council base-line
adopted figure for affordable housing of 25% includes an element of shared equity housing.
Islington Council officers have explained that this interpretation is incorrect and that the
adopted 25% figure relates solely to social rented housing. AFC has not yet committed to a
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 16
final figure of 25% social rented housing and awaits continued negotiations on the overall
planning obligations package and its final cost. The Mayor’s target of 50% affordable
housing is made up of 35% social rented housing with the “additional” 15% being
intermediate housing, including shared equity, key-worker and student accommodation.
The Mayor’s general stance has been to only accept less than 50% where there are
significant other public benefits as part of any negotiated planning obligations package.
49 The proposed new public open spaces and routes at all three sites and their
significant public realm improvements offer significant benefits to the area.
50 The issues of transport including car parking, pedestrian routes, highway safety,
the impacts on the public transport and strategic road networks are dealt with below
within the Transport for London (TfL) section.
51 An Environmental Statement (ES) for the purposes of the Town and Country
Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999 was submitted with the
planning applications. This generally takes an integrated approach to the assessment of the
impacts resulting from the developments on the three sites and includes analysis of
cumulative impacts. The ES is comprehensive, including many aspects of best practice and
covers all the potentially significant impacts identified at the scoping stage.
52 The ES was scrutinised by the GLA and officer level technical comments
highlighting omissions, errors and raising queries for clarification were sent to AFC and
Islington Council in April 2001. A number of key changes were made to address the
environmental concerns in the revisions to the initial submission. This resulted in the ES
being substantially revised in May 2001. Most of the GLA officer level technical comments
were addressed and satisfactorily resolved in the revised ES. There are still some minor
areas of concern, for example, the methodology used to assess air quality impacts. This
concern relates to the formation of a base line using a basic monitoring period of 3 months
(July, August and September). This could mean that the predicted air quality levels with the
developments are under-predicted. Data collected for base line monitoring should be for a
period of at least 6 months (3 in winter and 3 in summer) to prevent results being unduly
affected by weather conditions.
53 The overall scheme generally complies with Islington Council’s adopted parking
standards, notably more restrictive than those set out in existing planning guidance. With
the incorporation of sufficient financial contributions towards public transport (to be further
discussed below and agreed with Islington Council and AFC); the enhanced provision of
suitable non-private car modes of transport; the high-density and mixed-use nature of the
development should result in an environmentally sustainable development.
54 The proposed Waste Recycling Centre (WRC) will provide a significantly
improved facility in terms of size and quality. The WRC will allow for the on-site
processing of waste as well as a replacement civic amenity and waste transfer station facility.
The WRC has been designed with sufficient external space to allow the future provision of a
rail freight facility. Islington Council and the NLWA continue to examine the design
specification of the WRC to confirm whether this is possible. There is a long-term benefit
in ensuring that a rail freight facility can be made on the site, where there is a reduction for
the need of and reliance upon road transport. However, the implementation of this facility
will really be a matter for the waste and rail authorities. It is anticipated that the on-site
processing of waste will help to reduce the amount of road transport leaving the site. It will
therefore make a positive contribution in reducing the need for the unsustainable landfill of
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 17
London’s municipal waste and therefore compliance with a chief plank of the Mayor’s waste
55 The loss of industrial/warehouse land at Ashburton Grove and Eden
Grove/Lough Road although an important local borough issue is not strategically
important. The London Planning Advisory Committee’s ‘Strategic Employment Sites
Framework’ was established in 1994 and the subject of regular review from 1998. The
framework was established primarily to protect and promote London’s principal locations for
manufacturing and warehouse activity. There are no Strategic Employment Sites within
56 The proposal at Ashburton Grove will have an adverse impact on bio-diversity as a
result of the losses of land on the railway embankment (to ensure sufficient circulation space
on the podium around the new stadium to assist safe crowd management); and a section of
Gillespie Park (to allow the new emergency vehicles route onto the podium). These losses
are regrettable but are partly mitigated by the proposed extension to Gillespie Park, as
advocated through the Section 106 agreement.
57 This complex planning application has been subject to independent appraisal by
Sustainable Property Consultants on behalf of the GLA, with particular reference to the
nature and content of the Planning Obligation package being proposed and thus the
deliverability of the scheme. SPC has conducted a detailed review of the proposals with
special emphasis on the financial details, albeit excepting Arsenal’s Business Plan which was
not made available; and a Confidentiality Agreement which restricts the nature of what can
be reported publicly. Having said that, AFC and its advisors, in particular Gouldens
(lawyers) and Hepher Dixon (Planning Consultants) have been open and positive in what
have been lengthy negotiations.
58 The product of those discussions can be summarised as follows;
Having examined the financial calculations presented by AFC (excepting the
Business Plan), it appears that the overall scheme falls short of being profitable in the
short to medium term.
There are some elements of the Planning Obligation package that could not be
required by Islington Council and if removed, would offset those losses to some
(small) degree (for example, public art).
The affordable housing element based on the lost opportunity cost of open market
value housing (not being able to sell the housing at open market values) is ill-founded
and meaningless and has been acknowledged as such in negotiations. The impact of
real additional costs generated by the inclusion of Affordable Housing is certainly
less than the sum of £53.7m currently being presented. There are several factors to
bear in mind;
a. The figure of £53.7m reflects opportunity cost and not the actual cost of providing
the affordable housing.
b. The availability of social housing grant aid would offset this cost to whatever degree
Islington Council agrees.
c. Some affordable housing – notably intermediate housing – would generate some
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 18
d. Ultimately land values – including Islington Council’s holdings – would reflect these
59 However, the most important consideration centres on the timing of the provision of
the affordable housing element. Any deferral of the provision will reduce the real cost
especially over an extended build period. If the affordable housing element was delayed
until the latter part of the build period (5-6 years), then a very substantial discount would
apply to the real cost which would significantly counter real losses. This could equate to a
reduction in value of 30-40% depending on the date of delivery (this reduction presupposes
that there is no grant aid) and would clearly present an apparently loss-making proposal in a
very different light.
60 It is SPC’s view that there is at present insufficient detail attached to the funding of
the affordable housing element for a reasoned evaluation to be made and that further
justification should be required. As a result, the ability of the scheme to pay for other
consequential infrastructure, not least the transport elements (which AFC presently claim
are minimal) cannot be reasonably determined. This is not to suggest that the proposals do
not have merit. They clearly do but the supporting financial calculations are capable of
Local planning authority’s position
61 Islington Council proposes to meet on 26 November 2001 to formally determine the
development proposals and would like to receive clear strategic guidance from the Mayor.
Views of other organisations
62 English Heritage has been consulted, solely on the Highbury Stadium scheme and
has given its general support.
63 CABE has written to generally support the proposal. It’s original comments, made
in January 2001were as follows:
“We commend the scale of the club’s ambitions for a new stadium, and welcome the fact that it has
seized an opportunity to redevelop close to the present stadium. We acknowledge the care with which
the jigsaw of planning applications has been assembled. (We should make it clear, however, that the
committee only considered the application for the new stadium on the Ashburton Grove site, and our
comments apply only to this site. We are aware of the wider context of the associated applications for
the Lough Road and Highbury Stadium sites but are not offering any comment on them; this should be
read literally, as ‘no comment’, rather than as an endorsement of those applications).
In our view, the design would in its own right clearly achieve the club’s ambition for a world-class
new stadium in terms of its facilities and the environment provided for players and spectators….It is
clear that the project has the potential to deliver significant regeneration benefits; these will not,
however, flow automatically from the construction of a new stadium.
We recognise the skill and experience which have gone into the design of the stadium building as an
object. The undulating tops of the stands are an elegant and attractive feature, especially as they flow
directly from the logic of the plan geometry. Nevertheless, we think there are ways in which the design
could be improved. While the roof form appears well resolved and elegant within the limits imposed,
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 19
we think it may be over-restrained as a result of a height restriction which was presumably not
conceived with a structure such as this in mind. There is not much point in trying to disguise a
60,000-seat stadium, and we think that a slightly more confident and direct approach to the expression
of the architecture and engineering would result in a better building.
In spite of our generally positive view of the architecture of the stadium itself, there is little in the
design of the lower parts of the exterior which distinguishes this from any other large modern
corporate building. While we acknowledge that the spirit of a football club is not primarily to do
with its buildings, nevertheless we think it is disappointing that it appears that this stadium could be
anywhere and could belong to any top-flight club. This seems particularly unfortunate in view of the
club’s success in finding a site so close to the existing ground, which is so distinctive in its architecture
and its setting.”
64 Following amendments in May 2001 and August 2001 to the original scheme, the
Ashburton Grove scheme was reviewed again by CABE who had previously expressed
concern about the quality of the podium, and its approaches (steps from the south and
bridges from the east) which appeared unresolved and unconvincing as architecture or urban
design. It was felt that the public realm had not been as carefully shaped as the stadium and
as a result would fail.
“We welcome the decisions made in the light of the comments made at the previous presentation to the
committee and by other consultees, particularly relating to the development of the environs of the
stadium to make these areas work on non-match days. The present scheme is far more convincing in
the way it relates to its site and surroundings than the previous version, and in our view it has the
potential to deliver the regeneration benefits that AFC and the local authority wish to achieve from the
development of the stadium. We consider this to be an intelligent plan that will transform this
difficult brownfield site.
We think that this setting is one that can take new architecture with a strong presence. The character
of the housing design will relate it to the stadium. We welcome the fact that the social housing
elements have not been designed to be seen as separate or different, and could be accommodated in any
of the blocks. The regeneration of Drayton Park is a particularly welcome aspect. The landscape
design, planting trees as small coppices rather than a single row along Drayton Park, is distinctive, yet
is within the spirit and principle of providing a boulevard feel to the street. We think that this aspect
of the proposals is a success.
We still have some concerns about the very large area of the podium itself on non-match days. There
is a risk of it appearing very barren, and we think that at some times of day it may not feel an entirely
safe place to be, although the development north of the stadium will certainly help. The isolated
nature of the location makes this a difficult problem to solve, but if the same quality of thinking that
has been applied since we last saw the scheme were applied to this area, it could become a model for
facilities of this kind wherever they are built. We hope that the local authority will continue to look at
this aspect closely.
In summary, we believe that the revised application deals successfully with the points raised after the
previous presentation to the Design Review Committee. The new proposals seem to us to be
appropriate to the nature and to the setting of this high profile project.”
65 The London Development Agency welcomes the regenerative benefits of the
overall scheme and will work closely with AFC, Islington Council, the University of North
London and other organisations within Holloway and the wider North London area to
further secure regenerative benefits.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 20
66 Transport for London (TfL) continues to express broad support for the principle of
AFC relocating to a site such as Ashburton Grove, which has good public transport
accessibility. However, significant concerns are raised as to the ability of the existing
transport networks to cope with the levels of activity that are projected
67 AFC’s general approach to transport is that there is sufficient capacity to absorb the
additional trips and customers who will use and visit the new stadium development.
However, the scale of the proposals will result in a significant change to the number of users
and thus make AFC’s initial ‘hands-off’ approach unsustainable. The AFC funding appears
to maintain a stand-still situation in some areas and a worsening in others.
68 AFC assumes that 18,000 (30%) of the capacity crowd will remain in (3,000) or
around (15,000) the stadium post-match. These figures appear high and there has been
insufficient evidence submitted to support these assumptions. It may therefore be more
realistic to plan for a figure of 80 to 90% dispersal. In this case, severe constraints exist in
the transport network. It would not be able to move the crowd within the post-match hour.
Using the 70% dispersal figure implies an almost doubling of the numbers of passengers the
Underground will be required to deal with.
69 Some 7,000 supporters are envisaged to use Holloway Road Station in the post-match
hour. This is significantly higher than current peak hour usage, and higher than its
capacity to allow people to move between street and platform level. If no improvements
were made, the station would be likely to have to close for periods in order to manage flows
of people. AFC has made an offer of £5m funding, ostensibly for capacity enhancement at
Holloway Road Underground Station, but for use elsewhere if Holloway Road does not
consume it all. LUL would use this to provide an additional staircase, open up more of the
station entrance and open up currently unused passageways below ground. These combine
to double the current capacity of the station and more importantly to allow it to remain open
when an event is on at the Stadium. Given the complexities of the Public Private
Partnership arrangement, there is no guarantee from LUL that the works would cost this
amount. The cost of the works could vary to be either lower or higher. There is also no
guarantee that the works could be done in time for the opening of the new stadium.
70 Some 14,000 people are envisaged to use Finsbury Park in the post-match hour.
Around 7,000 would use mainline trains and around 7,000 the Underground. This is less
than its current peak hour usage, but the flows occur in different parts of the station. AFC
has tabled £250,000 towards station enhancements at Finsbury Park. This would be the
first phase of a wider and grander Finsbury Park scheme that has yet to be finalised. The
first phase is a £6.7m scheme, with only just over £1m committed from SRB funds. Other
funding, including £3.5m from TfL is not yet confirmed.
71 Some 7,000 people are envisaged to use Highbury & Islington Station in the
post-match hour. This is some 40% more than the current peak hour. Increased
congestion will occur and below ground passageways are the prime pinch-points. The
options for alleviating this are expensive. A scheme to open up another station entrance on
the other side of the road has been estimated at £12,000,000 and whilst it would provide
some relief of crowds crossing Holloway Road, does not provide ideal relief to the in-station
below ground problems. Highbury & Islington Station continues to be the subject of
separate, unrelated development proposals, although nothing is imminent. It is possible
that the entire block containing the station could be redeveloped in the next decade. Such a
scheme would ideally build in capacity enhancements. Islington Council has acknowledged
this with its preparation of a planning brief for the site. The time-scales are such that this
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 21
could be only shortly after AFC’s operations commence at the new stadium. In TfL’s view
it remains prudent to require AFC to contribute to a congestion relief scheme at Highbury
and Islington Underground Station. AFC could contribute to a fund, which if not spent by
a specific time would either be spent elsewhere or refunded. Such an improvement scheme
would be a requirement from AFC’s relocation, although a period without it, due to
complexities of land ownership and other matters, whilst undesirable, may be an unfortunate
reality of the development process.
72 Drayton Park Station, on the doorstep of the new stadium, is not being used. It does
not currently have services on Saturdays, Sundays or week –day evenings (post 8pm).
WAGN, the train operator, is prepared to consider these. AFC now appears to accept that
there is a potential for football ‘specials’ to be run, but questions the need for large
73 It is understood that AFC has tabled up to £500,000 for enhancements to Drayton
Park Station, but Islington Council is believed to be seeking capacity improvements to the
station that its consultants have identified as costing up to £4,000,000.
74 Arsenal Underground Station is expected to cope with 7,700 people peak-hour
post-match. A level that it can cope with. No financial contribution is offered by AFC or
requested by TfL or LUL at this stage.
75 London Buses remain concerned at possible delays to services, caused either by large
pedestrian flows or by traffic associated with the developments. Additional bus lanes on
Holloway Road, proposed by AFC, as part of their proposals, will help counter this problem,
although the timings of the operation of all bus lanes in the area will need reviewing. There
is also some concern that services will be simply overloaded immediately post-match, but
given the service frequency in the bus corridors here, the problem is envisaged to be only
76 Progress appears to be being made on a match-day Controlled Parking Zone, with
Islington Council and local residents. This would cover between 1-1.5 miles from the
stadium. As regards the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) and Red Route, TfL
still needs to determine if a match-day type scheme should be introduced, or the hours of
control amended in general, at AFC’s cost.
77 Concern is also expressed at the proposed 600 parking spaces under the stadium.
These could be significantly reduced and coach parking introduced to replace them. This
would help solve some of the coach parking problems. The majority of car parking spaces
should then not be available on non-match days, for the conferences or other events at the
78 AFC assumes a growth of 100% in coach use and the issue of coach drop-offs, parking
and pick-ups need clarification. Greater use can and should be made of the area underneath
the stadium but this cannot cope with all the demand. Certain roads in the area that have
previously been suggested are for one reason or another ‘sensitive’, and an ultimate solution
is still required.
79 Crowd management around the stadium is ultimately a police issue, but has an
impact upon other transport modes and is an issue in its own right in terms of pedestrian
safety. AFC suggests that up to 23,000 people will exit onto Hornsey Road with up to
20,000 wishing to cross Holloway Road and approximately 14,000 crossing Seven Sisters
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 22
Road to get to Finsbury Park Station. A match day analysis has recently been provided for
the first time, which needs review in detail. Further information is still awaited from the
80 The provision of 486 parking spaces (at a ratio of 0.87 spaces per unit) on the
Highbury Stadium site is greater than desirable. It would be preferable if it was at the
lower end of the Council’s residential standards, and more akin to the approach adopted by
the applicants at the Eden Grove/Lough Road site (less than 0.5 spaces per unit). However,
if taken as a whole, the developments appear to have a residential standard of 0.52 spaces per
unit, which is generally acceptable.
81 The decision to remove the proposed Holloway Access Road (as proposed in the
November 2000 application) from the revised application proposals is both welcomed and
82 TfL has not received any clarification from the Strategic Rail Authority, Railtrack, or
NLWA that the WRC can be served by rail. Further examination of the ability to, leading
to the actual operation of, rail sidings to serve the site, needs to be carried out.
83 Under the arrangements set out in the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of
London) Order 2000 and Circular 1/2000 ‘Strategic Planning in London’, the Mayor is
provided with an opportunity at this stage to make representations to Islington Council. If
the latter subsequently decides that it is minded to grant planning permission, it must allow
the Mayor an opportunity to decide whether to direct it to refuse planning permission.
There is no requirement at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions
regarding a possible direction.
84 If the Mayor decides to direct refusal and an appeal is lodged against his decision
then a public inquiry is likely to be held. Each party is expected to pay their own costs
except where it is proved that unreasonable behaviour has occurred, for example, failure to
adhere to appeal timetable. However, there are no financial implications at the present
Equal opportunities considerations
85 There has been and continues to be due consideration to the issue of equal
opportunities due to the complexity and mixed-use nature of the development proposals; and
the on-going negotiations regarding the planning obligations package under Section 106 of
the Planning Act.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 23
86 The proposed development package is complex and offers an excellent opportunity to
provide significant private investment within an area of London that has failed to attract
such investment historically. The planning applications represent the largest combined
development proposals in Islington for many years and are strategically important both in
terms of the scale, impact and regenerative effects for the borough and this part of North
London. The application proposals offer significant remediation and high-density
development of a significant area of brownfield land.
87 In terms of sport, tourism and the international recognition of this high profile
Premier League football club, the relocation and improvement of the stadium to a world
class stadium development is a strategic issue for London in terms of its World city role.
88 The schemes offer a significant amount of housing accommodation in an appropriate
high-density manner. The provision of good quality affordable housing with a minimum
25% social rented housing plus intermediate housing will be essential in securing strategic
support for the development proposals. The fact that the affordable housing will be
designed as not being different or separate from the open market housing, and could be
accommodated within any of the blocks is welcomed. Nevertheless, the designs of the new
residential buildings need to be of the highest standard to ensure that there are real amenity
benefits rather than mere numerical ones. The benefits provided by the new public open
spaces and routes are welcomed.
89 It is essential to resolve the issues of transport and thereby ensure that significant
strategic benefits, including environmentally sustainable development, accrue as an integral
part of the development proposals. TfL is still assessing both the merits and impacts of the
scheme. It would appear at this juncture that the financial contribution being offered by
AFC is inadequate to resolve the problems caused by the development. The financial
contribution will need to be negotiated but should cover the stations at Holloway Road,
Drayton Park, Highbury & Islington and Finsbury Park.
90 The methodology used for the Environmental Statement is considered to be robust
and has resulted in a comprehensive assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed
developments. The Environmental Statement is comprehensive, includes many aspects of
best practice and covers all the potentially significant impacts identified at the scoping stage.
91 The proposed Waste Recycling Centre will result in a significantly improved facility
in terms of its size and quality, including its range of operations.
92 The overall section 106 package appears comprehensive and it is important that there
is sufficient balance in its negotiation to ensure that the benefits proffered by the
development proposals are harnessed; that the negative impacts are ameliorated; and that the
scheme is delivered in a timely and effective manner.
93 The applicant, AFC, is required to provide the additional information requested by
the GLA, TfL and Islington Council as it relates to finance, transport, design layout and
other matters in an urgent manner to ensure that both the Mayor of London and Islington
Council are able to carry out a proper and more full assessment of these important strategic
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 24
for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit:
Giles Dolphin, Planning Decisions Manager
020 7983 4271 email firstname.lastname@example.org
Stewart Murray, Team Leader Development Control
020 7983 4493 email email@example.com
Paul Ricketts, Case Officer
020 7983 4310 email firstname.lastname@example.org
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 25
Detailed description of proposed developments:
Highbury Stadium Site:
A mixed use development involving:
(a) Conversion of the East Stand to residential flats and provision of gym/health club
and B1 accommodation at basement level (detailed application);
(b) Conversion of the West Stand to residential flats and basement storage (detailed
(c) Creation of an underground vehicle parking and storage area between the retained
Stands; and a landscaped garden providing play space areas and a memorial garden,
with peripheral walkways, on a platform at approximately the level of the existing
football pitch (detailed application);
(d) Demolition of the North Stand and associated buildings and structures, and their
replacement with (I) a block of residential flats with basement storage and
refuse/plant accommodation, comprising part 4 and part 7 storeys above the former
pitch level, and lower ground and basement levels below; (ii) a shared
pedestrian/light vehicle route and courtyard, linking Avenell Road and Gillespie
Road; (iii) a ¾ storey block containing residential flats; and (v) a 2/3 storey western
boundary block containing residential flats and nursery, with disabled parking
provision outside (outline application);
(e) Demolition of the South Stand and associated buildings and structures, and their
replacement with (I) a block of residential flats with basement storage, comprising
part 4 and part 7 storeys above the former pitch level, and a basement level below; (ii)
a shared pedestrian/light vehicle accessway; (iii) a 2/3 storey block of mews houses
(7 No.); a 4 storey building fronting Avenell Road, containing residential flats and a
community health facility, and with 3 No. car parking spaces for use by medical staff;
(iv) a 4 storey southern boundary block containing residential flats fronting onto
Aubert Court; and (v) alteration of the existing cul-de-sac access road within Aubert
Court, and creation of disabled parking spaces (outline application);
(f) Construction of a block of 2 No. 3 storey houses between 185 and 191 Highbury Hill
(g) Refurbishment and change to residential use of 191 Highbury Hill, 89 Gillespie Road
and 58 Avenell Road (detailed application);
(h) Development of a 3 storey house between 81 and 83 Gillespie Road and at 95
Gilles[pie Road (outline application); and
(i) Alterations to the external elevation of 133-135 Highbury Hill, and reinstatement of
original features of the frontage of 137-139 Highbury Hill, both sets of works
connected with the refurbishment of the existing residential flats. Alterations to the
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 26
pedestrian route running under 137-139 Highbury Hill from pedestrian walkway to
private amenity space (outline application).
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 27
Ashburton Grove Site:
Site between the East Coast main line and west side of Drayton Park including all
land either side of Ashburton Grove, Queensland Road, Queensland Place, Albany
Place and Emily Place, London N5 and N7.
Demolition of existing buildings and structures, and comprehensive redevelopment with:
(a) 60,000 seat stadium rising from a landscaped podium. The podium is raised above
existing ground level across much of the site, and linked (by steps and ramp) to a
lower level pedestrian plaza adjacent to the Hornsey Road/Benwell Road junction.
Under the podium and within the stadium building itself are located a full range of
associated facilities, including restaurants, cafeterias and bars; function rooms;
Arsenal Football Club’s shop; parking for coaches, outside broadcast vehicles and a
limited number of disabled and patrons’ cars; a press centre cum community
education facility; a commercial food production facility. Vehicular access is via
ramps from Queensland Road and Hornsey Road (detailed application).
(b) A pedestrian bridge, with emergency/maintenance vehicle access across the
Moorgate to Finsbury Park railway tracks, linking the podium with Drayton Park
near to Drayton Park Station; and a pedestrian bridge crossing the same railway
tracks and linking the podium with the northern part of Drayton Park, the descent to
Drayton Park being via two flights of steps (detailed application).
(c) A shared surface route leading from the existing roadway through Gillespie Park,
across railway land and a new railway bridge, to the northern part of the main
development site; this being solely used to allow emergency access to the northern
part of the stadium. Widening of the existing junction of the roadway with Drayton
Park (detailed application).
(d) A multi-purpose building located on land to the north of the stadium (known as the
“northern triangle development”). Rising from 1 – 9 storeys above podium level, it
will comprise a new community sports centre (the Arsenal Sports and Community
Centre - ASCC), intermediate accommodation (253 units) plus a small amount of
Class A1 and/or Class A3 accommodation at podium level (outline application).
(e) To the west of Drayton Park, between Drayton Park Station and the northern
pedestrian bridge, a series of 3 – 6 storey buildings containing a community health
facility and residential accommodation (38 units) at ground floor level; and residential
flats (220 units) above. Vehicular access will be provided off Drayton Park, opposite
Aubert Park, and car parking at basement level (outline application).
(f) Redevelopment of the area to the south of the proposed stadium. A new roadway is
to be built, in approximately the position of Queensland Road. To its north will be a
multi-purpose building comprising Class B1, A1 and A3 accommodation at ground
level; Class A3 and D2 space and the Club’s museum (combined with Class A3 use) at
first floor level (facing north, onto the podium); and roof gardens and four blocks of
residential flats (173 units) above (rising to a total height of between 10 and 13
storeys). To its south, will be a 4 storey building with a serpentine plan, comprising
Class B1, A1 and A3 accommodation plus a community health facility at ground floor
level, and residential flats (113 units) above. Car parking will be provided at the
basement level (accessed from the new access road) (outline application).
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 28
(g) Adjacent to the plaza, partially bordered by the main access ramp to the podium, a
multi-purpose building (the “plaza” building). It will have an entrance, ancillary
accommodation and parking at plaza level (being linked to the service level car park
of the development described at (a) above) and Class A1 and/or A3 use provided at
podium level; above these levels a further six storeys containing the Club’s offices and
commercial office (Class B1) space (outline application).
Eden Grove/Lough Road Site:
Land bounded by the East Coast main line, Holloway Road, Hornsey Street, Mount
Carmel School, Eden Grove, the Electricity sub-station, Piper Close and Caledonian
Road, London N7
Demolition of existing buildings and structures, and development of:
Holloway Road Part
(a) The extension of Hornsey Street to provide a new cul-de-sac, and the improvement of
the existing junction of Holloway Road with Hornsey Street (detailed application).
(b) To the north of the extended Hornsey Street, a series of 5 – 7 storey buildings
containing Class B1 accommodation at ground floor and first floor level and
live/work accommodation (51 units) above, with vehicular access and vehicle parking
(c) To the north of Hornsey Street and immediately to the east of buildings referred to
in (b), a part 7 and part 8 storey building providing a health club at ground floor level
and student accommodation (320 units) above (outline application).
(d) To the south of the extended Hornsey Street and at the Lough Road end of the
development area, two ‘D’ plan blocks containing mainly Class B1 (plus a small
element of Class A1 and/or A2 and/or A3 accommodation, and a community health
facility) accommodation and residential flats (346 units) above; these are between 4
and 10 storeys in height. The blocks are separated by an area of public amenity
space adjacent to Hornsey Street. The blocks are linked by a pedestrian bridge at
first floor level. In the middle of each block, the semi-basement and raised ground
floor is occupied by car parking (accessed from Hornsey Street) surmounted by a
deck which is landscaped as residents’ communal amenity space (outline application).
(e) Retention of the remains of the façade of an electricity sub-station, located at the
western end of Eden Grove.
(f) To the east of (d), a 4 – 10 storey ‘C’ plan block is proposed, containing Class B1 (plus
a small amount of Class A1 and/or A2 and/or A3 accommodation) at ground floor
level and residential flats (101 units) above. In the middle of the block, the
semi-basement and raised ground floor is occupied by car parking (accessed from
Hornsey Street), surmounted by a deck which is landscaped as public amenity space
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 29
(g) To the east of (f), the main building of the former Mount Carmel School will be
converted to residential use (24 units), with a children’s nursery in part of the ground
floor. Rear extensions will be demolished, and replaced with part nursery, part
residential use and external courtyard space (detailed application).
(h) Between the buildings described in (d) and (f) a large area of public amenity space will
be laid out
Caledonian Road Part
(i) The formation of a new cul-de-sac off Caledonian Road, including closing the
existing Piper Close/Caledonian Road junction (detailed application).
(j) To the north of the new cul-de-sac referred to in (I), and to the east of Caledonian
Road, a 10 storey building providing Class B1 accommodation at ground floor level
and residential flats (72 units) above. Vehicle parking to be provided at basement
level, with access from the proposed cul-de-sac (outline application).
(k) To the south of the cul-de-sac and fronting Caledonian Road, a series of buildings
ranging from 4 to 10 storeys in height. The ground floor space will be used partly
for Class B1 and partly for Class A1 and/or A2 and/or A3 purposes; adjacent to the
waste and recycling centre (see below) there will also be Class B1 accommodation on
2 additional floors; otherwise, the upper floors will be occupied by residential flats
(103 units). To the south of this block, it is proposed to lay out an area of public
amenity space (outline application).
(l) To the west of the electricity sub-station, a multi-functional building to accommodate
(1) waste transfer operations, waste recycling and civic amenity facilities; and (2)
garaging, workshops and other accommodation for various services operated by or
on behalf of the London Borough of Islington. The building will rise to about 20
metres above ground level and will be served from both new cul-de-sacs described in
(a) and (I) above (detailed application).
(m) Adjacent to, and to the south of, the building referred to in (l), a series of
single-aspect residential buildings (95 units), ranging from 4 to 8 storeys in height
(n) Re-ordering and landscaping of the section of Piper Close, and its continuation
towards Lough Road, lying to the south of the development described in (m) and the
public amenity space described in (k) (outline application).
North Road/Caledonian Road junction
(o) Improvements to the junction of North Road, Hillmarton Road, Caledonian Road and
Stock Orchard Street (detailed application).
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 30
Class B Employment Floorspace Gross external
B1 (Business Use)/B2 (General Industrial) commercial food 2,950
B1 (Business Use) for Arsenal Football Club - expansion 1,530
B1 (Business Use) for Plaza Building 2,580
Queensland Road North 2,030
Queensland Road South 3,450
Highbury Stadium 1,812
Lough Road (Caledonian Road) frontage 701
Lough Road (Holloway Road) ground floor 3,535
Lough Road (Holloway Road) North of Hornsey Street 3,260
Lough Road (Holloway Road) live/work – work element 2,595
Sub total 24,443
B1 (Business Use) for Arsenal Football Club - replacement 1,725
B1 (Business Use) for Islington Council 1,241
Sub total 2,966
GRAND TOTAL 27,409
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 31
Proposed Gross 1 Net 2 Units Hab.
external internal rooms
Residential – new build 44.843 35,875 542 1707
Residential - refurbishment 1,404 1,123 15 55
B1 (Business Use) 1,812 1,450
Health Club 1,001 801
Children’s Nursery 630 504
Community Health Facility 1,050 840
Bicycle Spaces 528
Parking/Underground Storage: 3 of which: 13,751 13,751
Community Health Facility 6
B1 (Business Use) 1
Children’s Nursery 3
Community Health Facility 3
TOTAL 64,491 54,343
1. Estimated gross, calculated by adding 5% to gross internal figures. 2. estimated net internal space. 3. parking figure is gross
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 32
Ashburton Grove summary floorspace schedule of accommodation:
Proposal Gross Net 1 Units Hab.
external internal rooms
Stadium (includes open seating areas) 98,107 78,486
B1 (Business Use)/B2 (General Industrial) 2,950 2,360
commercial food production
A1 (Retail) Club Shop 2,140 1,712
Car Parking 2, 3 600
B1 (Business Use) for AFC - replacement 1,725 1,380
B1 (Business Use) for AFC - expansion 1,530 1,224
B1 (Business Use) offices 2,580 2,064
AFC Boardroom/Entertainment Suite 520 416
A1 (Retail)/A3 (Food and Drink) 1,030 824
Car Parking for B1 (Business Use) 4
Arsenal Sports & Community Centre 1,645 1,316
Intermediate Housing 3,402 2,722 253 253
A1 (Retail)/A3 (Food and Drink) 367 294
Disabled Parking for Northern Triangle 4
NE Bridge Building
Local convenience retailing 600 480 2
AFC satellite shop 400 320
Ticket collection point 210 168
TOTAL 117,206 93,765
1. Estimated net internal space. 2, 3. Car park accounts for 14,250 sq.m of floorspace, included in the overall stadium figure. Includes
23 spaces for Arsenal offices.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 33
Queensland Road Element Gross Net 1 Units Hab.
external internal rooms
AFC Museum/A3 (food and drink) 1,000 800
A3 (food and drink) 2,870 2,296
Leisure 2,370 1,896
B1 (Business Use) 2,030 1,624
A3 (food and drink) 450 360
Residential 21,150 16,920 173 476
Local convenience retailing 330 264
Car parking 2, 3 of which:
A3 (food and drink) 690 552
B1 (Business Use) 3,450 2,760
Local convenience retailing 550 440
Residential 10,150 8,120 113 304
Car parking 2 of which:
Community Health Facility 3
Community Health Facility 450 360
TOTAL 52,240 43,232
1. Estimated net internal space. 2. One 160-space car park of 7,200 sq.m serves Queensland Road North and South buildings. Spaces
are allocated as shown on this schedule. 3. Car parking figures calculated in net floorspace.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 34
Drayton Park Element Gross Net Units Hab.
external internal rooms
Community Health Facility 1,200 960
Residential 25,240 20,192 258 774
Car parking: of which:
Community Health Facility 5
TOTAL 30,490 25,202
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 35
Lough Road/Eton Grove summary floorspace schedule of accommodation:
Lough Road (Caledonian Rd part) Proposal Gross Net Units Hab.
external internal rooms
ICSL 14,034 11,227
NLWA 6,290 5,032
Civic amenity area 1 1,435 1,148
B1 (Business Use) 701 561
Local convenience retailing 776 621
B1 (Business Use) for Islington Council 1,241 993
Residential 22,608 17,468 268 743
Parking (residential) 2, 3 4,358 4,358 126
Parking (ICSL) 4 219
TOTAL 51,443 41,408
1. Gross internal area given instead of gross external. 2. Car parking figures calculated in net floorspace. 3. Figure includes ramps,
plant rooms and other ancillary accommodation within the main basement floor of the Waste & Recycling Centre. 4. ICSL parking
space accounts for 6,298 sq.m of floorspace, included in the overall ICSL figure.
Lough Road (Holloway Road part proposal Gross Net Units Hab.
external internal rooms
Ground floor A1 (retail)/A2 (professional and 700 560
financial)/A3 (food and drink)
Ground floor B1 (Business Use) 3,535 2,828
Opthalmologist/Pharmacist/Chiropodist 160 128
Health Club 1,800 1,440
Children’s Nursery 380 304
General B1 (Business Use) – North of Hornsey 3,260 2,608
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 36
Live/Work – live element 3,880 3,104 51 153
Live/Work – work element 2,595 2,076
Intermediate housing (including live/work) 8,980 7,184 320 320
Residential 43,955 35,164 466 1377
Community Health Facility 1,760 1,408
Enclosed parking (calculated in net floorspace): of 9,100 9,100
Residential (including live/work) 292
Surface level parking: of which
Community Health Facility 6
TOTAL 80,105 65,904
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 37
Town Planning Considerations as set out by AFC
1. The whole financial model rests upon certain planning assumptions. These are set
out in Annex 1.
2. The local planning authority and the Greater London Authority wish to achieve
substantial planning benefits from the scheme. The ability of the scheme to
support these depends upon the overall value/cost relationship, and the cost (actual
or opportunity) of the benefits.
3. When assessing the scope for planning gain, it is common practice to first assess
the viability of a scheme on a “clean site” basis, then to deduct the cost of
remediation of contamination, the installation of basic infrastructure and other site
preparation costs. For this scheme, these latter items are as set out in Annex 3.
4. At this stage, there is more discussion still to take place about the provision of
planning benefits. At Annex 4, however, we set out the items which have so far
been identified as potential candidates, and a preliminary assessment of the cost in
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 38
APPENDIX SIX: ANNEX 1
Initial Assumptions underlying the AFC financial model
1. The “intermediate housing” is granted subject to a condition no more restrictive than
the one reproduced as Annex A.
2. LBI will apply at least 50% Housing Corporation grant to the affordable housing.
The grant will cover all costs other than the land.
3. If the building of affordable housing is delayed or prevented due to factors outside
AFC’s control, this will not be allowed to delay progress with the development of the
stadium or market housing.
4. There will be no impediment to early development of housing on any of the sites.
5. There will be no impediment to immediate commencement of development of the
Waste & Recycling Centre (WRC). AFC will use reasonable endeavours to secure
the building of the proposed housing adjacent to the south face of the WRC and the
re-ordering of Piper Close at an early date.
6. Housing development shall not start until an Affordable Housing Scheme has been
agreed (subject to LBI not unreasonably withholding their consent). The objective
of the AHS will be to provide for the development of affordable housing generally in
step with the provision of market housing, and the ultimate achievement of the
7. The new park off Piper Close will be laid out at the same time as the development
8. Whilst AFC will use reasonable endeavours to construct and bring into use at an
early date the two new access roads and their junctions with Caledonian Rd and
Holloway Rd, and to put in place funds towards the implementation of the traffic
calming schemes focussed on Mackenzie and Hillmarton Roads, and the
improvement of the North Rd junction, construction and operation of the
WRC/Council depot (and any associated housing development) will not be held up
subject to satisfactory temporary arrangements being made.
9. The amount of car parking provision, and its use, throughout the scheme, will be as
10. The business/commercial space within the mixed use blocks will be brought into use
and marketed actively at the same time as the residential accommodation is occupied.
Otherwise, there will be no requirement for business space to be built before
11. Once planning permission is granted, there will be no impediment (other than the
securing of reserved matters approval and other statutory authorisations) to property
being demolished and new development commenced.
12. Development (other than that directly associated with the stadium) at Queensland
Road will not be commenced until a building contract has been let for the building of
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 39
13. There will be no planning restrictions on the operating hours or use of any of the
proposed Class A1/A2/A3/B1 space.
14. Non-football events in the main stadium will be limited as provided for in the
Planning Brief: i.e. a maximum of 6 per year, of which no more than 3 shall be
musical performances. For this purpose, events are taken as involving an attendance
of at least 10,000 people.
15. Where planning permission has been sought for alternative uses, there will be no
planning restriction on change between these uses.
16. The WTS at Ashburton Grove will be closed as soon as the new WRC is available
for use. Similarly, the Council depots will be closed as soon as the new facilities have
been made available for use. The initial relocation may involve short term premises.
17. Once licenced, there will be no planning restriction on the opening of the stadium.
The opening of the stadium could be phased, with the south stand being completed at
a later date than the rest.
18. There will be no restriction on the use of the indoor areas of the stadium for
conferences, exhibitions, banquets and similar events.
19. There will be no restrictions on the opening and operation of the restaurants and
other hospitality accommodation within the stadium.
20. Once fully operational, there will be no planning restrictions on AFC’s ability to play
football at the stadium, at any time, to its full spectator capacity.
21. The opening of the stadium will not be dependent upon the carrying out of works at
railway stations. However, AFC will need to have made appropriate arrangements
to guarantee their financial contribution, and interim contingency arrangements may
need to be made through the event management plan for spectator management.
22. The opening of the stadium will not be dependent upon the match day CPZ being
fully in force, provided reasonable endeavours have been used by AFC to bring it into
23. After opening, modal split will be monitored annually for an agreed period against
the target of 80% travelling otherwise than by private car, and AFC will be expected
to fund reasonable extensions to the CPZ if these are agreed as necessary up to an
24. The stadium will not open until the event management plan has been agreed, subject
to LBI not withholding their consent unreasonably.
25. The stadium will not open until the pre-opening package of measures identified
through the Environment & Safety Audit have been agreed (subject to LBI not
withholding their consent unreasonably) and implemented.
26. The stadium will not be opened until satisfactory arrangements have been made for
coach parking. This may involve temporary sites in the early stages.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 40
27. No unusual restrictions will be placed on building operations. Night and weekend
working will be allowed for fitting out purposes, and for essential external work
(especially where railway land is involved), subject to reasonable measures to protect
28. Redevelopment of Highbury Stadium will not start until the new stadium is
29. Once AFC have relocated to the new stadium, and it is operational at its full capacity,
Highbury Stadium will not be used for major spectator events.
30. The pedestrian route through the Highbury Stadium central garden area, and the
memorial garden, will be made available by the time the scheme is completed. The
public will be allowed to use the route during times broadly corresponding with
daylight hours. The general public will not have a right to be admitted to the
garden area, though the Section 106 agreement will provide for local schools to
request access on an occasional basis.
31. The developer will offer to plant trees in the gardens of certain properties fronting
Highbury Hill (subject to a scheme to be agreed), and will effect the planting, before
the dwellings in the West Stand are occupied.
32. Reasonable measures will be taken to rectify interference with television signals as
each phase of the development is built. Satisfactory rectification should be achieved
within 6 months of the completion of each development.
33. As and when the buildings are built which contain space identified for healthcare or
nursery purposes, the relevant service providers will be given a “first refusal” option
exercisable during a period of 12 months from the commencement of development,
subject to them paying a commercial rent for their use. They will be offered space
on a “shell and core” basis.
34. The land owned by LBI will be sold on a freehold or virtual freehold basis.
35. LBI will use their best endeavours to ensure that any land which cannot be acquired
by negotiation, is acquired compulsorily. Similarly they will endeavour to ensure
that all necessary Traffic Orders, Road Closure Orders, etc are made and confirmed.
36. AFC will grant a long lease to LBI for the land adjacent to their warehouse on
Drayton Park at a peppercorn rent. This land is valued at £500,000, reflecting its
future possible development potential.
37. AFC will use reasonable endeavours to ensure that the Learning Centre is
operational within 6 months of the stadium opening at full capacity.
38. The amounts spent on the items set out in Annex B (or the opportunity cost, as the
case may be), will be no greater than indicated.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 41
APPENDIX SIX: ANNEX 2
Condition applicable to intermediate housing
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the approved
accommodation shall be occupied primarily by:
(i) students, including healthcare students;
(ii) key workers employed by Healthcare Trusts, the social services, the fire service,
the police service, public transport providers, and local education authorities;
(iii) visiting healthcare students, healthcare workers and healthcare academics, and
(iv) and by any other organisation or body in the public or private sectors previously
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 42
APPENDIX SIX: ANNEX 3
Demolition, Remediation and Infrastructure Costs
Lough Road West
Site clearance and demolition £2,985,900
Junction works £1,110,000
Roads and pavements £1,110,000
Lough Road East
Site clearance and demolition £310,000
Asbestos removal £8,800,000
Ground slab removal
Demolition and decontamination £1,500,000
Demolition etc £1,800,000
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 43
APPENDIX SIX: ANNEX 4
Potential Planning Benefits
Cost Sub-total Notes
A Physical infrastructure to enable the stadium (regeneration catalyst) to operate
Ramp and podium, inc CCTV b
Rectification of television signals
Holloway Rd and Finsbury Pk stations c
Drayton Park station
Match day CPZ
Traffic calming and other off-site road works d
Traffic monitoring studies
Contribution to parking controls
Road access improvements e
Cycle parking provision f
Environment and safety audit measures g
Public route through HS development h
Lough Rd pedestrian route
C Waste Management
Upgrading waste management, inc allowing for rail access I
D Community Benefits
Health facilities j
Gillespie Park extension k
Children's nursery facilities l
Open space (LRE) m
Upgrading of Ringross Estate environment n
Training and employment opportunities schemes
Aubert Court improvements
CCTV away from podium o
E Affordable housing
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 44
a Improved permeability, encouraging walking/cycling
b Large area of public realm space.
c Stadium use just a few days each year; most benefit to people living/working in the area
d Contributes to discouraging car use; improves residential amenity
e Benefits to all road users e.g. better pedestrian/cyclist facilities at Holloway Rd junction
f Encourages cycling
g General improvement to the appearance and safety of the area
h Improved permeability, encouraging walking/cycling
I Much higher environmental standards, recycling capability, rail access option
j Proposals go far beyond what the scheme itself requires
k General community benefit
l Proposals go far beyond what the scheme itself requires
m General community benefit to provide public rather than communal space
n Relates to a particularly debased area of the urban environment
o Will improve security at all times
p Detailed breakdown to be supplied separately
S/Planning Decisions/Cases/0138PR08 (Stage 1 Report) page 45