The Canonbury Society has concerns about the lighting and layout of the gardens of the recently licensed Canonbury. Concert was expressed in a recent letter to the Council's Public Protection and Development Management..

4th September 2009

 Public Protection and Development Management,
Islington Council
PO Box 3333
222 Upper Street N1 1XR

 For the attention of Joe Wilson

Dear Sir or Madam,

Retrospective Planning Application for garden works at The Canonbury Public House in Canonbury Place. Application Number P091520 (North/South Area)

 On behalf of the Canonbury Society and its executive committee (which represents some 400 members), we would like to OBJECT to this application for retrospective planning permission for hard and soft landscaping in the rear garden of The Canonbury Public House on the following grounds.

1. The sheer extent of the paved and decked hard surfaces and their suspected lack of water permeability. In their apparent construction we are not convinced that either material is sufficiently permeable to water and therefore represents a real threat to the health and vitality of the five mature trees situated in the garden which are subject to Tree Preservation Orders. The suspected lack of water penetration is also likely to inhibit the growth of the three semi-mature trees which will replace the three trees removed for the extension of the building. The Planning Design and Access Statement does little to reassure us that the thin butt joints adopted for both paving and decking will actually allow sufficient water seepage in the right places. We think the onus of proof of water permeability should lie with the Applicant and his advisers.
   
2. The materials chosen for the decking and paving are both artificial and unsuitable in the context of a Conservation Area and in direct opposition to UDP Policy D24. This policy states ‘in considering applications for extensions and refurbishments in Conservation Areas, the Council will normally require the use of traditional materials'. This is important in this case because we are dealing with a particularly fine early Victorian building which is listed and situated in a Conservation Area.
    
   1. The chosen paver is the Bradstone textured paving stone which is a moulded replica of a natural flagstone. These composite yellow pavers are particularly unsympathetic. A more traditional material such as York Stone would be far more appropriate. There are some excellent examples of the use of York Stone paving in the area including the recent external works carried out by the Islington Council to Islington Town Hall and to numerous pavements in Canonbury and the resurfacing of the Willow Bridge where a riven York Stone was used. In all these instances, excellent slip resistance was achieved but more importantly, the paving was an enhancing feature for the immediate listed built environment.
      
   2. The Millboard replica oak plastic decking is manufactured from Lastane - a Glass Fibre Reinforced Polyurethane Plastic and constitutes the other hard landscaping. It is totally inappropriate. The use of decking is controversial anyway but its proximity to the listed Victorian building means in our view that any decking should be constructed of wood, a natural material.
      
3.  The design of the raised boxed decking relates awkwardly to the railings and to the magnificent Tree of Heaven and is incongruous to the garden setting.
   
4.  The current level of illumination from the external lighting is set unnecessarily high and is far too harsh. It needs to be toned down to minimise light pollution and be much more sympathetic to the setting of the building and the garden. Although not strictly a landscape issue, it appears that the new lighting to the Canonbury Place façade was never shown on the plans or approved in the original planning and listed building consents.

 Whilst it is not a ground for objection, we are concerned about the choice of species of the three semi-mature trees to replace those felled when the building works to The Canonbury took place. One of the defining features of Canonbury Conservation Area is the quality and quantity of its native, forest-scale trees such as Hornbeam, London Plane and Ash, all of which develop large but not too dense canopies. We would like some reassurance that trees such as these will be chosen.

 With the exception of the lighting, we welcome the refurbishment work the Applicant has carried out to the building (and the external railings) to bring it back into use. We urge you however to REJECT this retrospective application for landscaping works so that the garden can be brought into a more harmonious relationship with the listed building and the Conservation Area in which it is located.

Yours faithfully

 Philip Walker

Chairman - The Canonbury Society

 Copies: Cllrs. Lucy Watt, Barbara Smith and Paula Belford,