# Pavement outside 608 Holloway Road, Islington

- **Decision:** dismissed, 4 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: N Teasdale
- **Authority:** Islington (London)
- **Appeal reference:** 6008154
- **Application reference:** P2025/3485/FUL
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** BT Street Hub 3 replacing a phone kiosk (planning; advert consent decided separately)
- **Site context:** inside-settlement, conservation-area
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** HE6, HE4, S4(1)
- **Development plan policies:** London Plan 2021 D3, D4, HC1, T2, Islington Local Plan 2023 PLAN1, DH1, DH2, T4, ST3
- **Main issues:** conservation area setting, public safety
- **Tags:** tier-2, s4-within-settlement, s4-substantially-outweighed, telecoms, bt-street-hub, conservation-area, heritage-harm-decisive, transitional-no-consultation

## Summary
A BT Street Hub replacing a kiosk on Holloway Road, opposite a conservation area, was dismissed. The inspector gave substantial weight to CO1's connectivity benefits. The harm to the CA's setting was nonetheless "at the higher end of the spectrum" (DL ¶17), and the benefits' "magnitude ... is not sufficient to outweigh" it (DL ¶21). Under S4 the benefits were "substantially outweighed" (DL ¶29). There was no public safety harm.

## What made the difference
A larger, darker, monolithic unit on an already cluttered footway, read against a Victorian CA frontage. The inspector distinguished the weight of a benefit (substantial under CO1) from its size: a single hub is a small benefit (DL ¶21).

## Policy findings
- **HE6: harm (substantial weight).** harm to setting of Mercers Road/Tavistock Terrace CA "at the higher end of the spectrum" (of less than substantial) from a taller, monolithic hub adding clutter (DL 13-17, 21)
- **CO1: benefit (substantial weight).** substantial weight to connectivity benefits but magnitude insufficient (DL 20-21)
- **S4(1): fail.** benefits substantially outweighed (DL 29)

## Key facts
- Hub about 2.9m by 1.2m, taller and wider than the kiosk it replaces; the CA is across the road (DL 6-7)
- No re-consultation on the Framework - changes "not substantive or determinative" (DL 3)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6008154
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/0e7538e8-c47c-484a-a735-41edffdd82d4

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6008154.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.