|Address:||Proposed Development Site At 54-62, 66 And 68 Oxford Street And 51-58 Rathbone Place, W1|
|Proposal:||Demolition and redevelopment behind retained facades of Nos 54-62 Oxford Street and 51-58 Rathbone Place, including a two storey roof extension and redevelopment of Nos 66 & 68 Oxford Street to provide retail use (A1) and office use (B1) at part basement, part ground and part first floors, and flexible dual use retail (A1) and / or Office (B1) uses on floors two to seven, and associated works. (Linked application – 17/05284/LBC)|
|Case Officer:||Josephine Palmer|
|Click for further information|
|Name:||Mr Nick Bailey on behalf of Fitzrovia neighbourhood Forum|
|Commenter Type:||Local Group|
|Stance:||Customer objects to the Planning Application|
|Reasons for comment:|
|Comments:||These comments are submitted in my role as secretary of the Fitzrovia West Neighbourhood Forum. This application was discussed at our meeting on 4 July 2017.
We wish to object to the application for the following reasons:
Loss of 66 Oxford Street
We note in particular that Historic England say in their evidence that the loss of No. 66 ‘would cause serious harm’.
New Replacement for 66-68 Oxford Street
The redevelopment will also further reduce the provision for small shops along Oxford Street and accommodation for small businesses which have traditionally occupied buildings on this site and in Fitzrovia as a whole.
Our Neighbourhood Plan will include policies to protect existing floorspace for small business users and to ensure it is replaced in redevelopment proposals.
We welcome the fact that no car parking is provided in the new development and the provision of PV panels on the roof. But why not go further and create a genuinely green roof which could be accessed by shoppers and/or employees?
In particular we do not feel that an acceptable case has been made in relation to policy S25:
Recognising Westminster’s wider historic environment, its extensive heritage assets will be conserved, including its listed buildings, conservation areas, Westminster’s World Heritage Site, its historic parks including five Royal Parks, squares, gardens and other open spaces, their settings, and its archaeological heritage. Historic and other important buildings should be upgraded sensitively, to improve their environmental performance and make them easily accessible.
While the uses may be appropriate to the West End and Oxford Street, the proposed development replaces many small units with one or a combination of major A1/B1 uses including courtyards for loading and unloading which are of particular value to small business users.
For these reasons the application and LBC should be refused.
I agree with the above statements. In particular the lack of green initiatives and consideration for the surroundings, including pavement overcrowding, Fitzrovia businesses and small business units and buildings, steps to mitigate environmental impact if the build and building.