Comments on planning application: 36 to 40 Langham Street and 94 Great Portland Street

Planning application: 14/08576/FULL | Demolition behind retained front facade of No.36 and No.94, including the demolition of existing rear basement and ground extensions and roofs to Nos.36-40. Minor excavation to the rear of Nos. 36-40, and rebuilding to provide part 4 and part 5 storey (above ground) buildings at No.36 and No.94. Erection of mansard roof to Nos.38-40 in connection with the use of part of basement and ground for either office (Class B1), retail (Class A1) or restaurant (Class A3) and the use of the remaining buildings as 17 residential units. Associated external alterations including rear terrace at first, second, fourth and roof level. New windows and plant. | Development Site 36 To 40 Langham Street And 94 Great Portland Street London.

Comments: Our association while welcoming the refurbishment of these buildings (which are a very important part of the 2 conservation areas) has a number of concerns with this application. 

1. We object to the loss of small business premises at 36 to 40 Langham Street. We would have preferred that office space was retained at ground and basement levels and in accordance with the City Council’s mixed-use policies.

2. We object to the additional height of 36-40 Langham Street as despite assurances from the applicant, important local views from outside the BBC and in Foley Street of the roofscape will be damaged.

3. We have concerns about the proximity of the rear extension of 36-40 and its closeness to the neighbouring 42 Langham Street.

4. We are disappointed not see affordable housing included on this site, as required by policy. We expect the council to require a full policy requirement financial contribution to the city’s affordable housing fund and would like to see this spent to create homes in Fitzrovia.

5. While we welcome refurbishment of 94 Great Portland Street, the retention of the facades, and the improvement to the shop front, we strongly object to the proposed A3 usage at this site. This is a highly residential area and A3 usage is not appropriate here and would have an accumulative (due to nearby A3 uses) negative impact on local residents. If the committee is minded to approve, it should be controlled by condition to limit hours to ensure all customers and staff are off the premises no later than 11.30pm. We would prefer A1 usage on this corner.

%d bloggers like this: