Battle to save Beaux Arts Building lobby is lost

A LAST-DITCH attempt to stop developers building inside an ornate lobby area – described as an architectural gem – inside a block of luxury flats has ended in failure.

Residents of the Beaux Arts Building in Holloway, including the lifestyle guru Carole Caplin and the theatre director Max Stafford-Clark, have been battling for more than a year to preserve the lobby, which was created in the style of Grand Central Station in New York.

On Tuesday more than 60 residents crammed into a planning hearing at Islington Town Hall in a final bid to stop the development, but they were left “furious” as planners said they had no powers to stop the proposals.

The controversy surrounding the former GPO building has rumbled on for more than a year. Built in 1911 in the style of the Beaux Arts movement, the building was converted to 162 luxury flats in 1995. 

Over the years the owners have added an extra 28 flats and now want to build one more where on the site of what is currently the porter’s office and a mail room. Those utility rooms would be relocated to the ornate lobby area, which the Beaux Arts Residents’ Association says would damage it architecturally.

Carole Caplin des­cribed the plans in the Tribune last week as “greedy” while Mr Stafford-Clarke said: “This is corporate greed. They’ve already been refused one scheme and they want to try again. It’s totally out of keeping with the building.”

Although the building isn’t listed by English Heritage it is mentioned by the conversation body as a “historic feature” and is Grade A on the council’s conservation list.

At Tuesday’s meeting resident Sharat Dua said the change would “have a huge impact on the appearance, ambience and character of the entrance hall”. The Town Hall’s development policy, he pointed out “states there should be respect for the architectural char­acter and detail of the original buildings and should not erode the good qualities of an existing building.”

Michael Carlees of the residents’ association added that residents already had no open space or places for children to play. 

“This is a planning application without a plan.  We urge you to defer this decision. The applicant has talked of protecting the foyer but we have no details. The foyer has been regarded as an historic feature of the building by English Heritage. There is no indication that it will be preserved.”  

Mary Campbell said the application to build the flat breached the Town Hall’s own policies on density and allowed the developer to squeeze more and more flats into the block.

They were all applauded by their co residents, but to no avail. The councillors on the planning committee said their complaints needed to be made to their landlords. 

“The loss of amenity is a civil matter between the landlord and the freeholder,” said committee chairman Councillor Joe Caluori. “It is regrettable that the freeholder has not consulted them and regrettable that they feel beholden to introduce new accommodation against the wishes of the leaseholders. But there is nothing under planning that means we can reject this proposal. If we did we would certainly lose an appeal. The mood of the committee is to grant with a heavy heart.”

After the meeting Mr Dua said he was “furious”. “It makes planning law seem a bit of farce,” he said. “The communal space is going to be gone just so they can make £250 or £350,000. It’s extremely frustrating.”

The developers Bloom­fold declined to appear at the meeting. But last week they told the Tribune:  “In addition to the works associated with the application, we intend to refurbish the entrance foyer in a sympathetic way that will respect the history and splendour of the existing interior.” 

Published: 15th July, 2011
by ANDREW JOHNSON