Agenda item

Retention and alteration of the Former Lotus Motor Racing Car Factory, the demolition of all other buildings and structures on site, and the construction of a mixed-use development, comprising Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) (Sui Generis), flexible industrial floorspace (Classes E(g)(iii) and B8), and a café / community use (Classes E, F1 and F2), alongside the delivery of a service road, a landscaped public square, public realm improvements and ancillary works

Valerie Okeyi, Principal Planning Officer, introduced the report for retention and alteration of the Former Lotus Motor Racing Car Factory, the demolition of all other buildings and structures on site, and the construction of a mixed-use development, comprising Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) (Sui Generis), flexible industrial floorspace (Classes E(g)(iii) and B8), and a café / community use (Classes E, F1 and F2), alongside the delivery of a service road, a landscaped public square, public realm improvements and ancillary works. 

The following was noted in response to questions from the Committee: 

• The applicant advised that car ownership amongst students was expected to be very low. This approach had been developed in consultation with Transport Officers and the Greater London Authority (GLA). No student car ownership was anticipated due to the site’s accessibility and public transport connections. 

• One parking space was proposed for wheelchair users and accessible drop-off purposes. The applicant stated that residents would generally not be expected to own cars whilst living in the development. 

• In relation to affordable housing, the applicant advised that 35% of the 518 purpose-built student accommodation rooms would be provided at affordable rents in accordance with GLA requirements, equating to approximately 181 rooms. 

• Members noted that 10% of rooms would be wheelchair accessible whilst only one Blue Badge parking space was proposed. The applicant acknowledged this and advised that the number of accessible parking spaces would be reviewed further as the proposal progressed. 

• The applicant advised that all its developments typically included community space at ground-floor level. These spaces were generally made available to community interest companies (CICs) and charities either rent-free or at heavily discounted rates. 

• A community organisation had not yet been identified for the space, although discussions with potential operators were ongoing. 

• The applicant advised that the space would be available free of charge for community events at certain times, with discounted rental arrangements applying at other times. 

• In relation to transport impacts, the applicant confirmed that engagement had taken place with Transport for London (TfL) during the pre-application process and that further discussions would continue as the application progressed. 

• The applicant advised that neighbouring buildings on the opposite side of the railway were 14 storeys in height, whereas the proposed development would be 16 storeys, making it two storeys taller. 

• Secure cycle storage would be provided to the rear of the workspace area, with separate and secure access arrangements for students. 

• The applicant advised that London Plan policy allowed developments retaining industrial capacity on industrial sites to follow the Fast Track Route where 35% affordable housing was provided. The GLA had agreed with the applicant’s methodology during pre-application discussions. 

• As the proposal would aim to meet the 35% affordable housing threshold, the applicants considered that no viability assessment would be required and the affordable provision would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement. 

• The applicant confirmed that calculations relating to industrial capacity included the service yard, which would be reserved solely for industrial users. This approach had been discussed and agreed in principle with the GLA during the pre-application process. 

• The applicant advised that a number of design iterations had been undertaken with input from officers and the Quality Review Panel (QRP), resulting in a significant reduction in the perceived massing of the scheme. 

• Further subdivision of the building mass had been explored but would have required additional cores and lift infrastructure, increasing the overall bulk and complexity of the development. 

• The applicant also stated that splitting the development into additional buildings would increase the wall-to-floor ratio and carbon footprint, making the proposed arrangement the more sustainable option. 

• In relation to industrial reprovision, the applicant advised that GLA policy required either the reprovision of existing industrial floorspace or 65% plot ratio industrial capacity, whichever was greater. 

• The applicant advised that, in this case, the 65% plot ratio requirement exceeded the existing industrial floorspace and therefore formed the basis of the proposal. 

• Approximately 3,020 square metres of industrial capacity would be reprovided through a combination of industrial floorspace and the dedicated industrial service yard. 

• The applicant stated that this approach had been adopted on a number of other London schemes and was consistent with discussions held with the GLA. 

• In response to comments regarding fenestration and design detailing, the applicant agreed to review these matters further alongside other design comments received. 

• The applicant outlined a programme of community engagement undertaken throughout the pre-application process. 

• Public exhibitions had been held in January 2025 and June 2025, supported by the distribution of more than 2,000 consultation leaflets to local residents and businesses. 

• The applicant reported positive levels of attendance and engagement at both exhibitions. 

• Feedback indicated strong interest in the retention and celebration of the Lotus heritage buildings and proposed public realm improvements. 

• Whilst some concerns had been raised regarding building height, the applicant advised that residents generally recognised the wider public benefits delivered by the scheme once the proposals had been explained. 

• The applicant confirmed that engagement had taken place with a number of local organisations, including representatives of the Crouch End Festival and the Campsbourne Community Collective. 

• The applicant had also facilitated temporary community use of the Little Lotus building, including events relating to the history of Lotus. 

• Community groups had highlighted a shortage of affordable community space within the local area. 

• The applicant committed to supporting local employment opportunities during both the construction and operational phases of the development. 

• Employment and training obligations would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement to maximise opportunities for local residents and businesses. 

• It was noted that a date for the next Quality Review Panel (QRP) meeting had not yet been confirmed. 

• The Head of Development Management confirmed back to Members a summary of the main comments they had made to ensure a clear understanding.