Camden Council Approves Primrose Hill Rooftop Apartments After 30-Year Planning Battle

Camden Council has approved plans to construct eight new two-to-three-bedroom apartments with private terraces on the rooftops of Darwin Court in Primrose Hill. The decision, made by the council's planning committee on Thursday, August 21, concludes a planning process that has lasted for three decades, during which previous applications were refused.

Resident Objections and Council Justification

The proposals by developer Airspace Group faced significant opposition from residents, with 150 households objecting in 2024 and a dozen more urging rejection at the recent meeting. Concerns raised included the potential for substantial increases in service charges, disruption caused by construction, and doubts about the building's capacity to support the weight of the new structures. Teri Olins, a resident, urged the council to "protect the people already living here" rather than approve the "prospective" luxury penthouses.

Despite these objections, Camden Council's planning officers argued that the scheme's public benefits justified the approval. These benefits include a £500,000 contribution to the council's affordable housing fund, along with planned landscaping upgrades and the installation of new platform lifts within the building. The council also noted that the local need for housing in Camden has increased since the initial applications were submitted.

A Long Planning History

The planning history for rooftop extensions at Darwin Court is extensive. A planning inspector dismissed an appeal in 1996 against the council's refusal, stating that increased height and massing would make the buildings "even more dominant and overbearing." An application in 2010 was also refused, following a petition signed by local households. Although Camden approved the plans in November 2024, a further consultation was required after residents alerted HS2 to an unconsulted proposal for underground digging, which has since been dropped. HS2 did not object to the current plans but requested detailed documentation from the developer before construction commences.

The council's planning committee ultimately upheld its earlier decision to grant permission, concluding that the public benefits outweighed the "less than substantial harm" to the local conservation area.