®Planning appeal decision
Procter-Rihl, 63 Cross Street, London, N1 2BB
Planning appeal 3336764 at Procter-Rihl, 63 Cross Street, London, N1 2BB (London Borough of Islington) was dismissed on 12 September 2024 by Inspector Skelly C, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: The effect of the proposed mansard roof extension and roof level Air Source Heat Pump on the character and appearance of the building and the surrounding area including its effect on the significance of 63 Cross Street as a non-designated heritage asset, whether or not it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Cross Street Conservation Area and whether it would preserve the setting of the Grade II listed building known as 61 Cross Street.
a deep energy retrofit to include erection of a mansard extension with PV panels, installation of roof level Air Source Heat Pump, replacement windows to front and rear elevations, external insulation to rear elevation
- Authority
- London Borough of Islington
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Other minor developments
- Inspector
- Skelly C
- Postcode
- N1 2BB
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effect of the proposed mansard roof extension and roof level Air Source Heat Pump on the character and appearance of the building and the surrounding area including its effect on the significance of 63 Cross Street as a non-designated heritage asset, whether or not it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Cross Street Conservation Area and whether it would preserve the setting of the Grade II listed building known as 61 Cross Street
- The effect of the proposed mansard extension and roof level Air Source Heat Pump on the living conditions of the occupiers of No 294, 295 and 296 Upper Street with particular reference to privacy, outlook, daylight and sunlight and potential for noise
What decided it
The proposal would fail to preserve the special historic interest setting of the Grade II Listed Building and the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, and would cause unacceptable harm to neighbouring living conditions in respect of outlook, daylight, sunlight and noise, with public benefits insufficient to outweigh these harms.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy HC1 of the London Plan (2021)Policy DH1 of the SDMPPolicy DH2 of the SDMPPolicy PLAN1 of the SDMP
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 209Paragraph 205Paragraph 206Paragraph 208
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in London Borough of Islington
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Allowed22 October 20266006605131 - 132 Upper Street, London, N1 1QP
- Dismissed24 September 202660055902 Highbury Grove Court, Highbury Grove, London, N5 2NG
- Notice varied and upheld10 September 20263355155204 Blackstock Road , London, N5 1EN
- Dismissed28 August 2026600262872 Prebend Street, London, N1 8PR
- Dismissed4 March 2026337333172 Prebend Street, London, N1 8PR
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.