Appeal to be lodged after refusal of plans to add 22 extra apartments to Luton flats

An appeal is set to be lodged over a decision to reject an amended housing project, near Luton town centre.

Applicant Philip Philippou, of Stef and Philips London Limited, submitted full plans to provide 22 extra apartments at Milliners Court in Milliners Way.

A new floor of accommodation would be provided in five blocks of flats on the two-acre site through a mansard roof arrangement, according to a report to the borough council’s development management committee.

The site is in walking distance of the town centre and no addition is proposed to the 109 parking spaces, added the report.

Planning officer Naila Malik said: “There would be four one-bedroom and 18 two-bed apartments. The extra properties would be provided by using the new roof arrangements. It results in an overintensive form of development, which would dominate the appearance of the current blocks.

“Windows in two of the blocks would overlook properties in Althorp Road and Dorrington Close, leading to a loss of privacy for those residents.

“Three flats, each in a different block, fall short of the national space standard, creating an unacceptable living environment for future occupiers.

“By the mix of housing, and scale, design and layout of the development, it represents a format which is unacceptable in principle.”

Agent for the applicant Andy Macdougall said: “This follows the granting of planning permission in May 2019 and two non-material amendments in March and April 2022.

“Unfortunately because of Covid and the increase in build costs delivering this much-needed housing and estate improvements wasn’t possible within the permitted deadlines of the previous application.

“The applicant resubmitted the plans in 2023, looking to provide mainly family properties. It’s almost identical in bulk and scale to that allowed in 2019.

“There’s been no change in local authority planing policy, so the U-turn taken by the council is unreasonable. The previous scheme was considered to meet the test of high quality design, so to suggest today it doesn’t match the same standard would be perverse.

“The applicant would be willing to amend the plans to ensure internal standards are met. For the council to consider issues of loss of privacy and overlooking would result can’t be justified.

“In rejecting this, an opportunity for estate regeneration would be lost. Should it be refused, the decision will be tested at appeal.

“Matters of amenity and housing mix are local issues and can be resolved. The applicant would be willing for a deferment enabling talks to take place.”

LBC’s head of planning Sunny Sahadevan explained: “We’ve made a conscious effort not to accept previous design quality just because we’ve done so in the past.

“We’re striving towards improving the design quality in the town, which means taking a harder stance even on applications we’ve approved before.”

Liberal Democrat Barnfield councillor David Franks said: “There are a number of issues with this. The floorspace standards aren’t met on at least two flats.

“The mix of one- and two-bed flats isn’t really what we’re looking for, while mansard roofs are pretty ugly and aren’t my idea of a well-designed building.”

Councillors unanimously refused the development.