AgendaFor enquiries on this agenda, please contact:Samuel Nicholls 020 8547 5533e-mail: sam.nicholls@kingston.gov.uk

This agenda is available on:www.kingston.gov.uk

Published on 17 November 2020

Development Control Committee

Date: Wednesday 25 November 2020

Time: 7:30 pm

An online meeting that can be viewed on the Council’s Youtube Channel

Members of the Committee

Councillor Malcolm Self (Chair)Councillor Kim Bailey (Vice Chair)Councillor Roy AroraCouncillor Mark BeynonCouncillor David CunninghamCouncillor Lorraine DunstoneCouncillor Simon EdwardsCouncillor Lesley HeapCouncillor Rebekah MollCouncillor Stephanie ArcherCouncillor Dave Ryder-Mills

Everyone is welcome to watch the meeting

This agenda is available to view on: www.kingston.gov.ukYou can also access this agenda through the Modern.gov app or by scanning the QR code with your smartphone.

2

3

Agenda

1. Apologies For Absence And Attendance Of Substitute Members

2. Minutes To confirm the minutes of the meetings held on 15 October 2020 and 4 November 2020.

3. Declarations of interest Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests and any other non-pecuniary interests (personal interests) relevant to items on this agenda.

4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS Appendix ATo consider the following planning applications:

20/02219/FUL 1 - 11 York Way & 122-144 Garrison Lane, Chessington KT9 2JU

20/02235/FUL – Garages 9-30 & Land To The Rear Of 1-44 Cumberland House, Kingston Hill, Kingston Upon Thames, KT2 7LH

5. Urgent items authorised by the Chair To consider any items which, in the view of the Chair, should be dealt with as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances in accordance withS100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

4

Welcome to this meeting.

A large print copy of the agenda can be requested in advance.

Webcasting of the meeting

This meeting will be webcast live on the Council’s Youtube Channel and a recording will also be available to watch back a few hours afterwards. Recordings are accessible for a period of 12 months.

Contact for further information - For further about Council Committees and meetings please contact: Samuel Nicholls 020 8547 5533, e-mail: sam.nicholls@kingston.gov.uk

5

Speaking on Planning Applications, Enforcement, or Tree Preservation Orders

There is a registration scheme for residents wishing to speak on planning applications, tree preservation orders or enforcement cases to be determined by the Committee.

The arrangements for speaking on applications are based on both sides having equal time to make their points to Councillors. To make sure that the meeting runs in a way which is fair to everyone, these arrangements will be followed without any exceptions being made. The full scheme is on the Council website at the ‘Council and Decision making’ webpages.

Everyone wishing to speak on an application, Enforcement Action or Tree Preservation Order must have registered THREE days before the meeting. Objectors must have responded to the consultation on an applicationRegistration deadline: 10:00am, Monday 30 November 2020

To register please contact: Samuel Nicholls 020 8547 5533, e-mail: sam.nicholls@kingston.gov.uk

Time for speaking - FIVE minutes is allowed for each side on each application. This time has to be shared by however many there are on each side. If there are a large number of speakers people must decide amongst themselves on a spokesperson or some other arrangement.

The Chair of the meeting has no discretion to extend the time limit.

Speakers may find it helpful to have made some notes on what they want to say, so that they make the most of the speaking time. The notes attached to the original consultation letter from the Planning Officer will have explained the things that the Committee can't take account of - loss of view, property values etc.

The order of speaking is:Planning applications Enforcement/Tree Preservation Orders

1. Planning Officer to present item Planning Officer to present item2. Objector(s) (5 minutes) Land/property owner (5 minutes)

3. Applicant (5 minutes) The Council as applicant and/or supporters of the action proposed (5 minutes)

4. Questions from Committee: Questions from Committee5. Objector(s) (5 minutes)

Applicant (5 minutes)Land/property owner (5 minutes)The Council as applicant and/or supporters of the action proposed (5 minutes)

6. Sweep up by Planning Officer7. Questions from Committee to Officers8. Debate and decision by Committee

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

25/11/2020

REPORT BY

Assistant Director of Strategic Planning & Infrastructure

INDEX

A1

ITEM NO

REGISTER NO

ADDRESS DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDATION PAGE NO

A1 20/02219/FUL 1 - 11 York Way & 122-144 Garrison Lane, Chessington KT9 2JU

Demolition of existing garage units to rear of 1-11 York Way and erection of 5-storey building comprising 19 residential dwellings with associated car parking, refuse,cycle storage, landscape, including landscaping improvements to existing communal amenity space serving York Way for the use of existing and proposed residents

PERMIT Approved, subject to planning conditions

and the completion of a Service level

agreement between the relevant Directors.

A1 Appendix A

REPORT BY THE

Assistant Director of Strategic Planning & Infrastructure

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Background Papers Item A1 Background Papers Application Reference 20/02219/FUL All Background Papers are available on the Council's website for review Planning Application Form dated 29.07.2020 31345 YW-A-P10-002 P01 - Block Plan 05440 York Way TCP 11.5.20 - Tree Constraints Plan 05440 York Way TPP 9.7.20 - Tree Constraints Plan 31345 CR-A-P12-001 PO1 - Proposed GA Sections P01 31345 L04 - Landscape Plan

Page A2

A2 20/02235/FUL

Garages 9-30 & Land To The Rear Of 1-44 Cumberland House, Kingston Hill, Kingston Upon Thames, KT2 7LH

Erection of 9-storey building comprising 41 self-contained residential units (12 x one-bedroom, 15 x two-bedroom and 14 x three-bedroom) (following demolition of existing garage units to rear of 1-44 Cumberland House;) with associated car parking, refuse and cycle storage and landscaping improvements to existing communal amenity space serving Cumberland House for use of existing and proposed residents

PERMIT Approved, subject to planning conditions

and the completion of a Service level

agreement between the relevant Directors.

A2

31345 YW-A-P11-001 PO1 - Proposed 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor Plans P01 31345 YW-A-P11-002 PO1 - Proposed Roof Plan P01 31345 YW-A-P11-GF PO1 Proposal Ground Floor Plan P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-E11-001 P01 Existing Plans P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-001 P01 Proposed East Elevation P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-002 P01 Proposed West Elevation P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-003 P01 Proposed South Elevation P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-004 P01 Proposed North Elevation P01 31345-YW-A-P10-001 P02 - Site Location Plan P02 Covering Letter From Barton Willmore dated 21/08/2020 YW Acoustic Assessment- 03.08.20 YW Arboricultural Impact Assessment 09.07.20 YW Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment YW Car Parking Management Plan YW Daylight and Sunlight Assessment YW Design and Access Statement -Part 4 YW Design and Access Statement -Part 5 YW Design and Access Statement -Part 6 YW Design and Access Statement -Part1 YW Design and Access Statement -Part2 YW Design and Access Statement -Part3 YW Design and Access Statement -Part7 YW Drainage Strategy YW Ecological Appraisal Aug 2020 YW Energy Statement - FINAL with Appendix 03.08.2020 YW Fire Strategy Statement YW Outline Travel Plan YW Planning Statement YW Statement of Community Involvement July 2020 YW Sustainability Statement - 03.08.20 YW Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment Part 1 YW Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment Part 2 YW Transport Statement YW Tree Survey 06.05.20 Item A2 Background Papers Application Reference 20/02235/FUL All Background Papers are available on the Council's website for review

CH-A-E11-001 Existing Floor Plans Rev P01 CH-A-P11-001 Proposed First Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-002 Proposed Second-Seventh Floor Plan Rev P01

Page A3

A3

CH-A-P11-003 Proposed Roof Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-GF Proposed Ground Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-LGF Proposed Lower Ground Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P12-001 Proposed Sections Rev P01 CH-A-P13-001 Proposed East Elevation Rev P01 CH-A-P13-002 Proposed west Elevation Rev P01 CH-A-P13-003 Proposed North Elevation Rev P01 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 6 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 7 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 8 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 9 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 10 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Townscape and Visual Assessment August 2020 CH-A-P13-004 Proposed South Elevation Rev P01 L03C Cumberland House Landscape Plan 05440 Cumberland House TPP 10.7.20 tree Protection Plan 05440 Cumberland House TCP 11.5.20 Tree Constraints Plan Air Quality Cumberland House Air Qality Assessment August 2020 Aspect Cumberland House Ecological Appraisal August 2020 Aspect tree Consultancy Cumberland House Arboricultural Impact Assessment Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 1 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 2 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 3 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 4 Barton Willmore CumberLand House Design and Access Statement Part 5 Barton Willmore Statement of Community Involvement August 2020 Barton Willmore Covering Letter CTP Cumberland House Drainage Strategy August 2020 Cumberland House Daylight and Sunlight Assessment August 2020 Cumberland House Planning Statement August 2020 Cumberland House Tree Survey 06.05.20 Hodkinson Cumberland House Energy Assessment August 2020 Hodkinson Cumberland House Sustainability Statement August 2020 Jeremy Gardner Associate Cumberland House Fire Strategy RPS Cumberland House Archaeological Desk based Assessment August 2020 Velocity Cumberland House Car parking Management Plan August 2020 Velocity Cumberland House Outline Travel Plan August 2020 Velocity Transport Statement Part 1 Velocity Transport Statement Part 2 CH-A-P10-002 Proposed Block Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P10-00 Site Location Plan Rev P02

Page A4

A4

Page A5

A5

Register No: 20/02219/FUL Address: 1 - 11 York Way & 122-144 Garrison Lane, Chessington, KT9 2JU

(c) copyright of applicant

[Please note that this plan is intended to assist in locating the development; it is not the site plan of the proposed development which may have different boundaries. Please refer to the application documents for the proposed site boundaries.]

Page A6

A6

Ward: Chessington South Description of Proposal: Demolition of existing garage units to rear

of 1-11 York Way and erection of 5-storey building comprising 19 residential dwellings with associated car parking, refuse,cycle storage, landscape, including landscaping improvements to existing communal amenity space serving York Way for the use of existing and proposed residents.

Plan Type: Full Application

Expiry Date: 18.12.2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing garage units (20) to the rear of 1-11 York Way and the erection of 5-storey building comprising 19x residential dwellings with associated car parking, refuse,cycle storage, landscape, including landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space serving York Way for the use of existing and proposed residents.

● A total of 11 car parking spaces would be provided comprising:

○ 7x on-site car parking spaces would be provided for residents of the proposed building

○ 3x spaces would be provided for existing residents; and, ○ 1x car club space would be provided for use by existing and

proposed residents. ● A total of 40 cycle parking spaces would be provided. ● The proposed development comprises a 5 storey building with a maximum

height of approximately 16m. ● The 19 dwellings would all be affordable units (100% affordable rent). ● The proposed unit mix would be as follows:

○ 9 x 3 bedroom (47%); and, ○ 10 x 2 bedroom (53%).

RECOMMENDATION; Approve subject to completion of relevant ‘Service Level agreement between the relevant Directors’, as specified in the legal agreements section, and to delegate to the Head of Development Management any consequent changes to conditions and

Page A7

A7

agreements to be agreed in consultation with the Chair of the Development Control Committee. Planning Application Fact Sheet

Page A8

Planning Issue

Proposed Relevant Standard Compliance with Development

Plan?

Affordable housing

100% Affordable Housing (Social

Rent)

50% of units to be provided as affordable

housing

Yes

Housing Mix 3 bedroom - 47% (9); and,

2 bedroom - 53%

(10)

A minimum of 30% of dwellings as 3 or more

bedroom units (this figure should be exceeded on

sites particularly suited to larger family housing)

Yes

Density 82u/ha 35-65 u/ha No - however, this is a guidance figure.

Cycle parking

40 (38 long stay, 2 short stay)

38 long stay, 1 short stay Yes

Car Parking 11 car parking spaces (7 for new

residents, 3 for existing residents, 1 car club space for use by both

existing and new residents)

A maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit (28.5 spaces)

Yes

Carbon Reduction

59% 35% with Offset contribution

Yes

A8

1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The application site comprises garages and land to the rear of Nos. 1-11

York Way and Nos. 122-144 Garrison Lane in the Chessington area of the Borough. In terms of constraints, the site is not host to any trees protected by Tree Preservation Orders (TPO), is not located within Fluvial Flood Zones 2 or 3 and is not host to any designated heritage assets.

1.2 In terms of planning designations, to the north-west of the site is Chessington

South Railway Station, the line of which is identified as a ‘Green Corridor’. Garrison Lane to the south is designated as being part of the Borough’s Strategic Walking and Cycling networks. York Way to the east is identified as an addition to the Strategic Cycle network. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 2 (Poor).

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing garage units

(20) to the rear of 1-11 York Way and the erection of 5-storey building comprising 19 residential dwellings with associated car parking, refuse,cycle storage, landscape, including landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space serving York Way for the use of existing and proposed residents.

2.2 The proposed dwellings would be 100% London Affordable Rent (LAR) and

would comprise the following mix of flat sizes:

2.3 The density of the proposed development would be 82.6dph. Each dwelling

would have access to private amenity space as well as approximately 859sqm of communal amenity space across the site which could be used by existing and future residents. It is indicated that the proposed sustainability measures could achieve a 59.3% reduction in regulated CO2 emissions over the Part L 2013 baseline.

Page A9

2 bedroom 10 (53%)

3 bedroom 9 (47%)

A9

Proposed Block Plan of the development site 3.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

None relevant.

Page A10

A10

4.0 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 4.1 Due to the Covid-19 outbreak, the developer conducted “remote” public

consultation consisting of leaflets being delivered to 288 addresses, placing an advert in the Surrey Comet, as well as public webinars which were held on the 24th and 25th of June followed by Question and Answer sessions. A dedicated project website, email address and phone line was also set up. Full details of public consultation can be found in the submitted Statement of Community Involvement.

5.0 CONSULTATION 5.1 Site notices were displayed on site and a Press Notice was included in the

Surrey Comet. 5.3 A total of 113 notification letters were sent to neighbouring properties. Below

is a summary of the responses:

Page A11

Number of letters Sent 113

Number of Responses Received 6

Number in Support 0

Number of Objections 6

Number of other Representations (neither objecting or supporting)

0

Grounds for support Grounds for objection

N/A

● Loss of car parking for existing residents (garages and hardstanding);

● Maximum car parking requirements should be met;

● Overspill car parking; ● Out of character with buildings in the

surrounding area; ● Incongruous design;

A11

Other consultee comments:

Page A12

● Solar panels need to be shown; ● The family dwellings should have

back gardens; ● Over-densification; and, ● Loss of outlook/visual intrusion.

Consultee Comments

Environment Agency (EA)

No comments at time of writing - any comments will be reported as late material

Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA)

No in principle objection - further information requested. Any comments will be reported as late material.

Design Review by Design South East

See Body of Report

RBK Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer

No objection - Subject to conditions

RBK Biodiversity Officer No objection subject to planning conditions relating to biodiversity enhancements and external lighting

Thames Water No objection subject to a Piling Method Statement being secured by planning condition

RBK Pollution Control Team

No objection in terms of land contamination or noise, however, and Air Quality Assessment is required.

RBK Trees and Landscapes Officer

No objection in principle.

Network Rail No objection - Subject to planning informatives

Greater London Archeological Advisory Service

No objection - No further assessment or conditions are therefore necessary.

A12

Page A13

Transport for London No Objection

South of the Borough Neighbourhood Committee

This planning application has been discussed as a consultation item at committee. There have been representations from CDRA (Chessington District Residents Association) and Cllr. Christine Stuart and Cllr. Patrica Bamford have brought forward questions and comments on behalf of residents. The following comments have been made by residents or on behalf of residents: 1) Concerns and objections regarding the height of the proposed development 2) Concerns and objections regarding the density of the proposed development 3) Concerns and objections in regards to the design of the proposed development 4) The proposed development is seen as "out of character" with the area 5) Concerns have been raised about the lack of parking for the proposed development 6) Concerns and objections have been raised about the flat roof of the proposed development 7) Concerns regarding the parking provision for existing residents 8) Concerns regarding flooding in the area of the proposed development Furthermore, elected members of the committee have discussed the planning application and the following points have been raised to be passed on to the Development Control Committee: 1) Generally it has been expressed multiple times that the development in principle is welcomed, as RBK would build council homes for the first time in over 40 years. 2) It has been welcomed that solar panels will be installed at the proposed development 3) Concerns have been raised about the scale and

A13

6.0 Policies 6.1 The Council as Local Planning Authority has a duty under Section 38 (6) of

the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to determine this application in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (1990 Act) requires local planning authorities when determining planning applications to “have regard to (a) the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, (b) any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application, and (c) any other material considerations”. At present in relation to this application the relevant parts of the Development Plan consists of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames LDF Core Strategy 2012, The Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan (AAP) 2008 and the London Plan March 2016.

6.2 The Draft London Plan was published in December 2017 and is a material

consideration in planning decisions. It gains weight as it moves through the process to adoption and the weight given to the policies is for the decision maker. The Plan is at an advanced stage. Policies contained in the Intend to Publish (ItP) London Plan published in December 2019 that are not subject

Page A14

height of the proposed development 4) Concerns have been raised that the proposed development would not be in keeping with the character of the area 5) Concerns regarding the design of the proposed development have been raised 6) Concerns regarding the flat roof of the proposed development have been raised 7) It has been raised that in reality (due to no near entry point to the train station (Chessington South Station) the access to the train station is more limited than it could be assumed from the geographical proximity. Furthermore it has been raised that train services are not always very reliable in the area. 8) Concerns regarding a lack of car parking provisions for existing and new residents have been raised. 9) Concerns regarding the windows (too small) in the middle section of the proposed development have been raised.

A14

to a direction by the Secretary of State carry significant weight.

6.3 The latest version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in February 2019. This document provides guidance to local planning authorities in producing local plans and in making decisions on planning applications. The NPPF is intended to make the planning system less complex and more accessible by summarising national guidance which replaces numerous planning policy statements and guidance notes, circulars and various letters to Chief Planning Officers. The document is based on the principle of the planning system making an important contribution to sustainable development, which is seen as achieving positive growth that strikes a balance between economic, social and environmental factors. The NPPF falls within the other material considerations of the s.38(6) test.

6.4 The Development Plan remains the cornerstone of the planning system.

Planning applications which comply with an up to date Development Plan should be approved. Refusal should only be on the basis of conflict with the Development Plan and other material considerations.

7.0 Assessment 7.1 The main considerations are:

● Principle of the Proposed Development; ● Housing Delivery; ● Affordable Housing; ● Design, Character and Appearance; ● Heritage; ● Archaeology; ● Standard of Accommodation; ● Trees and Landscaping ● Air Quality; ● Highways and Transportation; ● Environmental Sustainability; ● Ecology and Biodiversity; ● Flood Risk & Drainage; ● Land Contamination; ● Refuse; ● Legal Agreements.

8.0 Principle of Development

Page A15

A15

8.1 Paragraph 118 of the NPPF (2019) states that planning policies and decisions should “promote and support the development of under-utilised land and buildings, especially if this would help to meet identified needs for housing where land supply is constrained and available sites could be used more effectively".

8.2 Paragraph 123 of the NPPF (2019) goes on to say that “Where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities, and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential of each site.”

8.3 Paragraph 11 of the NPPF (2019) makes it clear that in terms of the presumption of sustainable development, and in relation to decision taking, development proposals which accord with an up to date development plan should be approved without delay.

8.4 Policies 3.3 and 3.4 of the London Plan (2016) emphasise that the Mayor recognises the pressing need for more homes in London, and will work with relevant partners to ensure that housing need is met.

8.5 At the local level LDF Policy CS10 of the Council's LDF Core Strategy (2012) sets out the Borough's housing targets as defined by the London Plan (2011). These have increased since the adoption of the Core Strategy and Kingston currently has a target of 643 new residential dwellings per year under the London Plan (2016).

8.6 The proposal seeks the demolition of the existing garages and the erection of a five-storey building comprising 19 flats, 100% of which would be London Affordable Rent (LAR). The principle of creating additional residential units within a predominantly residential area, on previously developed land, would be acceptable in principle, subject to compliance with Development Plan policies.

Conclusion on Principle of Development: 8.7 Overall, the principle of the development is acceptable subject to detailed

considerations of the proposal against other development plan policies. 9.0 Housing delivery 9.1 Policy 3.3 of the London Plan March 2016 states that the Mayor recognises

the pressing need for more homes in London in order to promote opportunity and provide a real choice for all Londoners in ways that meet their needs at a price they can afford. Working with relevant partners, the Mayor will seek to ensure the housing need identified in paragraphs 3.16a and 3.16b of the London Plan (49,000 (2015-2036) and 62,000 (2015-2026)) is met,

Page A16

A16

particularly through provision consistent with at least an annual average of 42,000 net additional homes across London which will enhance the environment, improve housing choice and affordability and provide better quality accommodation for Londoners.

9.2 Table 3.1 (Annual average housing supply monitoring targets 2015 - 2025) of

the London Plan requires the delivery of 6,434 dwellings within the plan period 2015-2025, a rate of 643 dwellings per year within the Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames which is almost double the previous rate of 375 dwellings per year identified in the 2011 London Plan.

9.3 Paragraph 73 of the NPPF directs that local planning authorities should

identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirement set out in adopted strategic policies.

9.4 Paragraph 11d of the NPPF 2019 indicates that where there are no relevant

development plan policies or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out of date (out of date includes, for applications involving the provision of housing, situations where the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites) planning permission should be granted unless:

● the application of policies in the Framework provide a clear reason for

refusing the development proposed, or ● any adverse impacts of doing so significantly and demonstrably outweigh

the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole

9.5 The Council cannot demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land as required

by the NPPF 2019, as such the tests set out in paragraph 11d must be applied. These considerations should be given considerable weight in the assessment of this planning application.

9.6 Policy CS10 of the Core Strategy 2012 states that the Council will seek to

ensure that a broad mix of accommodation options are available to residents and that a range of local housing needs are met. It continues that the Council will expect all new residential developments to positively contribute to the Borough’s existing residential environment and character, in accordance with the Borough Character Study 2010, whilst optimising housing output in line with London Plan density policies.

Page A17

A17

9.7 Table 3.2 of the London Plan (2016) sets out an indicative Unit per Hectare (u/ha) range of 35-65u/ha for a site within a suburban setting with a PTAL of 2-3. However, paragraph 3.28 goes on to state that Table 3.2 should not be applied mechanistically and that density ranges for particular types of location are broad, enabling account to be taken of other factors relevant to optimising potential such as local context, design and transport capacity as well as social infrastructure, open space and play space. The proposed development would have a density of 82u/ha, this is above the guidance in the density matrix. However, the site is located in the walking distance of Chessington South Railway station, providing access towards London and connecting stations to other parts of the capital, Surrey and beyond, and is also in walking distance of a bus stop providing access towards Kingston and Dorking. As such, the site is located in an area with access to services required to sustain sustainable living.

9.8 The delivery of 19 London Affordable Rent (LAR) dwellings, 47% of which

would be capable of family occupation, would contribute positively towards the Council’s housing targets at a time when the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply. The proposal would be in accordance with the relevant housing delivery policies in the development plan.

10.0 Affordable Housing 10.1 London Plan Policy 3.9 seeks to promote mixed and balanced communities

by tenure and household income and Policy 3.12 seeks to secure the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing. Policy H5 of the draft London Plan and the Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG page 5 set a strategic target of 50% affordable housing. Policy H6 of the draft London Plan and the Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG set out a ‘threshold approach’ whereby schemes meeting or exceeding a specific threshold of affordable housing (35% or 50% on industrial/public land) by habitable room without public subsidy and which meets other criteria are not required to submit viability information to the GLA, nor would the application be subject to a late stage review mechanism.

10.2 In support of this stance Core Strategy Policy CS10 seeks to maximise the

delivery of affordable housing. Furthermore, Policy DM15 requires 50% of the units to be provided as affordable housing and proposals departing from these requirements will be expected to justify any lower provision through the submission of a financial appraisal. DM15 also seeks to achieve a 70:30 tenure split between Social/affordable Rent and Intermediate housing. The

Page A18

A18

Mayor of London’s preferred Tenure split is 30% London Affordable Rent, 40% capped affordable rents and 30% intermediate.

10.3 The proposed development comprises 19 London Affordable Rent (LAR)

units. LAR units are defined under Policy H6 (Affordable Housing Tenure) of the Intend to Publish London Plan (2019) as being homes for households on low incomes where the rent levels are based on the formulas in the Social Housing Regulator’s Rent Standard Guidance. LAR rent homes are capped at benchmark levels by the Greater London Authority (GLA). Rents for LAR are significantly less than 80% of market rents, which is the maximum for Affordable Rent permitted by the NPPF (2019). The homes would be allocated in accordance with needed (based on the Borough’s allocations policy). Once substantially completed, the development would provide decant accommodation for residents of the Cambridge Road Estate which is scheduled for regeneration.

10.4 The provision of 100% LAR housing is welcomed. It is noted in the most

recent Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (2016) that across the Housing Market Area (HMA) over 80% of future annual demand will be for homes at social rent levels which include London Affordable Rent. Within this context it is considered that the proposed LAR tenure would be acceptable and would be in broad accordance with development plan policies.

11.0 Design, Character and Appearance 11.1 Paragraph 124 of the NPPF 2019 states that the Government attaches great

importance to the design of the built environment. It states that ‘The creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve’ and ‘Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities.’ Paragraph 130 states inter alia that where the design of a development accords with clear expectations in plan policies, design should not be used by the decision-maker as a valid reason to object to development.

11..2 Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy 2012 states that new development proposals will be required to incorporate principles of good design and those elements that are identified as contributing to the character and local distinctiveness of a street or areas which should be respected, maintained or enhanced.

11.3 Policy DM11 of the Core Strategy 2016 states that the Council should take a

Page A19

A19

more flexible approach to new development where the existing development lacks any identifiable or cohesive character and / or is located in a lower quality environment; in these circumstances it will seek a high quality development that creates its own distinctive character.

11.4 The Intend to Publish London Plan at paragraph 3.3.6 states that “Good design and good planning are intrinsically linked. The form and character of London’s buildings and spaces must be appropriate for their location, fit for purpose, respond to changing needs of Londoners, be inclusive, and make the best use of the city’s finite supply of land. The efficient use of land requires optimisation of density. This means coordinating the layout of the development with the form and scale of the buildings and the location of the different land uses, and facilitating convenient pedestrian connectivity to activities and services”.

11.5 The commentary text to Policy H16 directs that the units should be

appropriately sized to be comfortable and functional for a tenant’s needs and may include facilities such as en-suite bathrooms and limited cooking facilities. There are currently no minimum space standards for communal and private areas of this type of accommodation. Given the generally small size of the private space in these developments, the communal amenity spaces are important elements in ensuring that the quality of the overall residential amenity is acceptable.

11.6 The Kingston Character Study (2011) states in relation to the Garrison Lane

character area that it is a: ‘Comprehensive area of mostly post war housing comprising flats, maisonettes and semi detached properties. Area also includes Chessington South Station which has a quiet, low key character with little presence. Its poor legibility could be sensitively enhanced by public realm and building im-provement’.

11.7 Design Review Panel (DRP): The applicant undertook a design review held on 21 October 2020. In summary the Panel concluded: ‘We support this scheme in principle and are comfortable with a 5-storey proposal, but some adjustments are needed to the architectural language and detail, internal layout and landscape detail. The landscape proposal has vastly improved on the previous iteration of the scheme. We recognise community-expressed preferences for distinct amenity spaces, however, we question the separation between proposed and existing communal amenity and would prefer to see no boundary here

Page A20

A20

after all the development works has been completed. A softer, planted landscape boundary is preferred. New sitting areas outside the play area should be included for residents who prefer a quieter space. New raised beds for vegetable growing could also be included, perhaps to the south west of the main building. We welcome opportunities for food growing and allotments integrated into this scheme, which may require the inclusion of an outdoor tap. We reiterate the need to provide more landscape detail and tree species. We support the provision of additional play facilities and encourage communal amenity facilities to be extended to providing benches or similar for home-workers who may wish to use green spaces close to homes more intensively in the future. We support the height, scale and massing proposal. The proposal could be improved further if the architectural detail of the building was more restrained, and more thought given to public realm and landscape at the entrance of the building.’

11.8 No significant alterations to the scheme were recommended by the DRP and

no significant amendments have been proposed by the applicant to the scheme as submitted. It is considered that further details of communal amenity spaces (including seating, raised beds), the public realm and landscaping (including tree species) could be secured by way of a planning condition to ensure that the constructive feedback and suggestions from the DRP are incorporated into the final development.

11.9 In terms of local context, to the west of the site is Chessington South Train

Station, to the south-east are a number of three-storey blocks of flats with gable-ended dual-pitched roofs fronting onto Garrison Lane. To the north-east of the site are a number of four-storey blocks of flats fronting onto York Way with two-storey dwellings beyond. The application site is currently occupied by flat-roofed garages which are of no particularly architectural or townscape merit. It is noted that levels across the site fall from the south and north-east towards down towards the north-west boundary of the application site.

11.10 The proposed building would be a maximum of five-storeys with a maximum

flat roof height of approximately 16m. The materials for the building would comprise largely of brick with areas of recessed brickwork, alternating brick type and colour, and vertical brick course band detailing adding visual

Page A21

A21

interest to the building and softening its overall appearance. The position of external balconies and the good mass to void ratios and proportion of fenestration provides the development with a simple geometry and repetitive floor plans which create vertical order to the elevations. The use of simple brick and tonal variations is supported as it would be in keeping with the character of the surrounding context.

11.11 In terms of height, mass and scale, it is considered that the proposal would

relate well to its surroundings. Development to the south-east is three-storeys in height while flatted development to the north-east is four-storeys in height. The proposed five-storeys in this case would respect the scale of neighbouring developments and would sit comfortably within the site, especially with the falling ground level from neighbouring properties to the north-west boundary of the proposal. Furthermore, the combination of recessed and bolt-on balconies is representative of the wider estates character and the variety helps to articulate the buildings facade, breaking up the massing and creating shadows that would animate the elevations throughout the day.

11.12 In terms of the proposed site layout, the proposed footprint would be

representative of the surrounding urban grain and would be well sited to allow a comfortable amount of space for pedestrian and vehicular movement alongside the proposed public realm improvements. The proposal provides generous and clearly demarcated communal and private amenity spaces and the proposed play area would be integrated into the landscape to create a new central space that would better connect existing and proposed residents and would encourage the development of community activity.

11.13 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would be of an

acceptable character and design which would relate well to the character and appearance of the wider area. The proposal would be of an appropriate layout, form, and scale which would respond well to its local context. The proposed development would provide a play area alongside improved public realm and landscaping which would be a significant benefit of the scheme.

Page A22

A22

Computer Generated Image

Page A23

A23

Indicative Landscape Plan 12.0 Heritage 12.1. Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act

1990 states ‘In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses’.

12.2 Paragraph 193 of the Framework states that when considering the impact of

a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset great weight should be given to the asset's conservation. The NPPF defines a Heritage asset as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in

Page A24

A24

planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. It includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing)’. Significance (for heritage policy) is defined as ‘the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. The interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting’

12.3 The site is not located within a Conservation Area and the closest statutory

listed building to the site is Grade II listed St Mary’s Church approximately 480m to the north-east. The relatively modest scale and separation distance between the proposal and designated heritage assets is such that there would be no direct impact or harm to their significance.

13.0 Archaeology

13.1 The applicant has submitted an Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment

prepared by RPS to ensure that the proposed development properly assesses the potential effect on below ground archaeology

13.2 Policy 7.8 of the adopted London Plan requires developments to assess

heritage assets including assets with archaeological interest. Great weight should be given to the conservation of designated heritage assets. Part B of the policy states that development should incorporate measures to identify, record, interpret, protect and where appropriate present the site’s archaeology. Part E of the policy states that new development should protect archaeological resources, landscapes and significant memorials.

13.3 Emerging Policy HC1 of the New London Plan states that development

proposals affecting heritage assets and their setting should conserve their significance. Development proposals should seek to avoid harm and identify enhancement opportunities by integrating heritage considerations early on in the design process. Proposals should identify assets of archaeological significance and avoid harm or minimise it though design.

13.4 Policy DM12 states that the Council will protect remains of archaeological

importance by ensuring acceptable measures are taken proportionate to the significance of the heritage asset to preserve them and their setting, including physical preservation, where appropriate.

13.5 The site is not located within an Archaeological Priority Area and is not within

land designated as an Area of Archaeological Significance. The submitted

Page A25

A25

Desk-Based Archaeological Assessment indicates that the site is likely to have a modest archaeological potential for the Roman Period, but that past post-depositional impacts within the study site are considered likely to have had a modest negative archaeological impact. It is proposed that appropriate archaeological monitoring in association with relevant construction groundworks could be secured by way of a suitably worded planning condition.

13.6 Overall, it is concluded in the submitted Archaeological Desk-Based

Assessment that the proposed development would not have any direct archaeological impact on designated heritage assets subject to the implementation of mitigation measures to be secured by condition. The Historic England Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) has been consulted following the submission of the submitted Desk Based Assessment and they conclude that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on heritage assets of archaeological interest. They advise that no further assessment or conditions are therefore necessary.

14.0 Standard of accommodation 14.1 With regards to internal space standards Policy 3.5 of the London Plan

March (2016) sets out minimum internal floor areas required. All of the proposed units would comply with these minimum standards and in many cases exceed them.

14.2 Policy 3.8 of the London Plan 2016 states that 10% of new housing is

designed to be wheelchair accessible, or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users. In support of this position Standard 11 of the Mayor’s Housing SPG 2016 states that 90% of new build housing should meet Building Regulation requirement M4(2) “accessible and adaptable dwellings” with the remaining 10 per cent meeting Building Regulation requirement M4(3) “wheelchair user dwellings”. 2 of the proposed units (10%) would be wheelchair user dwellings, with the rest meeting M4(2) standard which would comply with this guidance.

14.3 The Intend to Publish London Plan (2019) Policy D4 3.4.4 advises that dual aspect dwellings with opening windows on at least two sides have many inherent benefits. These include better daylight, a greater chance of direct sunlight for longer periods, natural cross-ventilation, a greater capacity to address overheating,mitigating pollution, a choice of views, access to a quiet side of the building, greater flexibility in the use of rooms, and more potential for future adaptability by altering the use of rooms.

Page A26

A26

14.4 All of the proposed dwellings would comply with the internal space standards

set out by Policy 3.5 of the London Plan (2016) and each would be dual aspect. All proposed dwellings would have access to private amenity space and, where private amenity space provision is not in strict accordance with the Residential Design SPD (2013) policy guidance, any shortfall is incorporated into communal amenity space areas, as is required by the policy guidance. The number of units off a core is considered to be appropriate also and areas of public realm and communal amenity space are overlooked and are considered to be safe and secure.

14.5 The Mayor’s SPG “Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and

Informal Recreation” requires play facilities to meet the needs of the expected child population through the provision of 10sqm of playable space per child. The child yield for the development, as per the GLA’s Child Yield Calculator, requires 108sqm of play space specifically for doorstep play for 0 – 4 years olds. This would be met through the upgrade of the existing communal open space.

14.6 In terms of the noise and vibration, the applicant has submitted an Acoustic

Assessment which demonstrates that the internal noise levels are predicted to achieve the daylight and nighttime criteria of 35 and 30db LAeq T respectively. It is stated that the proposed scheme would incorporate standard (4mm/6mm/4mm) double glazing for habitable rooms and trickle ventilation which would ensure adequate background ventilation while allowing the windows to be kept closed.

14.7 Regarding vibration, the measured vibration dose value (VDV) levels during

the survey confirms that levels are very low and below the probability of adverse comment levels set out in BS 6472-1:2008. The existing vibration levels are therefore considered to be acceptable for the proposed use. In terms of levels of privacy and overlooking, the separation distances between the proposed dwellings and neighbouring dwellings along Garrison Lane and York Way are considered to be characteristic of properties in the area and would be sufficient to ensure satisfactory levels of privacy for the occupants of the proposed dwellings.

14.8 Overall, it is considered that the proposed dwellings would provide a good

standard of accommodation for occupants, subject to planning conditions requiring further details of landscaping and public realm improvements.

15.0 Trees and Landscaping

Page A27

A27

15.1 Paragraph 170 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should contribute

to and enhance the natural and local environment by, among other things, recognising the benefits of trees and woodlands

15.2 An Arboricultural Impact Assessment (and accompanying Tree Constraints

Plan) has been submitted as part of the planning application. The submitted information identifies trees to be removed, retained and as well as the location of Tree Protection Barriers. A number of Category B trees along the north-west boundary of the site would be retained while the Category B Weeping Willow located between the proposed building and neighbouring properties to the east would be retained also. The information shows that the Root Protection Area (RPA) of the protected Oak tree which lies outside the application site boundary would not be harmed by the proposed development, subject to the implementation of appropriate protection measures.

15.3 As part of the proposed development, a new play area and improved areas of

public realm and landscaping would be provided. The proposed amenity area would be centrally located between the proposed building and neighbouring flatted developments along Garrison Road and York Way and would help to better connect the surrounding residents and would encourage communal activity. The indicative soft and hard landscaping proposals shown on the submitted drawings are considered to be acceptable in principle and could vastly improve upon the existing situation. Details of hard and soft landscaping, including additional tree planting, would be secured by planning condition.

15.4 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable

in arboricultural and landscape terms, subject to planning conditions.

Page A28

A28

Indicative Landscape Plan 16.0 Impact on Residential Amenity of neighbouring sites 16.1 Paragraph 127 of the NPPF (2019) and Policy 7.6 of the London Plan (2016)

seek to ensure that development secures a good standard of amenity for all existing and future users (of land and buildings).

16.2 More specifically, Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy (2012) seeks to

safeguard residential amenity with regards to privacy, outlook, sunlight/daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance. Policy Guidance 17 states that the Council applies the ‘45 degree rule’ when assessing the impact a new building can have on neighbouring properties in terms of safeguarding daylight.

16.3 The submitted Daylight & Sunlight Assessment states that a good level of

daylight and sunlight would be retained at neighbouring dwellings and that the proposed development would be fully compliant with the BRE guideline recommendations in relation to impact on neighbouring properties with the exception of one bedroom window in Block 134-144 Garrison Lane.

Page A29

A29

16.4 Nos. 122-132 Garrison Way would see more noticeable reductions in daylight, however, this is against a baseline of almost total daylight at present (the existing buildings on the application site are single storey garages). While there would be a more noticeable reduction in daylight to these dwellings, the assessment shows that good levels of daylight would still be maintained and that the rooms affected are only bedrooms and kitchens which are less sensitive receptors. Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would maintain acceptable levels of daylight and sunlight at neighbouring residential dwellings.

16.4 In terms of loss of privacy and overlooking, the majority of the proposed

dwellings would maintain the separation distances between facing habitable rooms recommended in Policy Guidance 16 of the Residential Design SPD (2013).

16.5 The proposed development would fall short of the recommended distances in

two instances: firstly the distance to kitchen windows at Nos. 122-132 York Way would be approximately 18.1m; secondly, a 16m separation distance would be maintained between the proposal and Nos. 13-27 York Way to the north-east. While these separation distances would not be in strict accordance with the recommendations of the Residential Design SPD (2013), it is noted that the respective windows would not be directly facing and that there would not be any direct overlooking or loss of privacy to habitable room windows as a result of the proposal.

16.6 The proposed development comprises residential dwellings only. The

surrounding area is residential in character with the exception of Chessington Railway Station to the north-west. Within this context, it is not considered that the proposed development would result in any unacceptable adverse impact to neighbours in terms of noise or disturbance.

16.7 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would not have any

unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties.

Page A30

A30

Plan showing separation Distances

Page A31

A31

17.0 Air Quality

17.1 Paragraph 170 of the NPPF states that: "Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

e) preventing new and existing development from contributing to, being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability."

17.2 Paragraph 181 of the NPPF states Planning policies and decisions should

sustain and contribute towards compliance with relevant limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and Clean Air Zones, and the cumulative impacts from individual sites in local areas. Opportunities to improve air quality or mitigate impacts should be identified, such as through traffic and travel management, and green infrastructure provision and enhancement.

17.3. The Intend to Publish London Plan policy states measures to design out

exposure to poor air quality and noise from both external and internal sources, should be integral to development proposals and be considered early in the design process.

17.4 The Royal Borough of Kingston has declared the whole borough as an Air

Quality Management Area (AQMA). The declaration was based on the risk of the objectives for nitrogen dioxide and PM10 being exceeded.

17.5 At the request of the Council’s Environmental Health Air Quality Officer, the

applicant has submitted an Air Quality Assessment which concludes that, subject to appropriate mitigation measures, there would be no significant adverse impact in terms of dust from construction works subject to the a Dust Management Plan being secured as part of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which could be secured by planning condition.

17.6 The total development transport emissions are greater than the total

transport emissions benchmarks for both NOx and PM10. While the building would be better in terms of building emissions the car trip generation would exceed the air quality neutral benchmark derived for an average development in outer London. To mitigate this, the applicant has proposed the following mitigation measures:

● development of a residential travel plan, to encourage use of

sustainable means of transport (public, cycling and walking);

Page A32

A32

● provision of 40 cycle parking spaces; ● provision of one off-site car club space; ● access to 20% active and 80% passive electric vehicle charging points

for parking on-site; ● development of a car park management plan, including mitigation

measures to reduce the number of car trips and car ownership amongst residents. Specifically, residents of some units will not be permitted to park on-site, nor apply for on-street parking permits, should a Control Parking Zone (CPZ) be implemented in the future;

● use of a bespoke car ownership restriction agreement for some tenancy agreements, committing tenants to not owning private vehicles whilst living in the development. These will be assessed on a case-by-case basis by an appointed management company; and

● provision of welcome and information packs for new tenants, to provide notification of the terms of use for parking within the development.

17.7 Overall, it is concluded that air quality conditions for future residents would

be acceptable with concentrations well below the air quality objectives across the site. Emissions from the additional traffic would have a negligible impact on air quality conditions at all existing receptors along the road network and the overall operational air quality effects of the proposed development are considered to be ‘not significant’.

17.8 The Council’s Environmental Health Air Quality Officer has been reconsulted

following the submission of the Air Quality Assessment; their response shall be updated to the Planning Committee as ‘Late Material’.

18.0 Highways and Transportation 18.1. National planning policy directs that in considering developments that

generate significant amounts of movements, local planning authorities should take account of whether safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limits the significant impacts of the development. It continues by stating that development should only be prevented or refused on highway grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network are severe.

18.2 London Plan (2016) Policy 6.13 (Parking) states that the Mayor wishes to

see an appropriate balance being struck between promoting new

Page A33

A33

development and preventing excessive car parking provision that can undermine cycling, walking and public transport use.

18.3 Core Strategy (2012) Policies CS5, CS6, DM8 and DM9 are used to assess

the potential impact of new development upon the surrounding highway network.The policies aim to reduce the need to travel by locating major trip generating development in accessible locations well served by public transport.

18.4 Policy DM10 states that development proposals should have regard to local

traffic conditions and highway safety and ensure that they are not adversely affected. Policy DM9 states that new development should not contribute to congestion or compromise highway safety. Policy CS7 states that car use should be managed to ensure sustainability, road safety and reduce congestion, including car club schemes and the provision of electric vehicle charging points and managing on and off-street parking provision to promote sustainability and residential amenity.

18.5 The site has a PTAL score of 2 (Poor). Chessington South Train Station is

located approximately 25m to the west of the application site. Garrison Lane to the south is designated as being part of the Borough’s Strategic Walking and Cycling networks. York Way to the east is identified as an addition to the Strategic Cycle network. While there is no Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) currently in place on surrounding roads, it is stated that all future occupiers of the development would be precluded from obtaining a resident parking permit should one be introduced.

18.6 Cycle Parking: A total of 40 on-site cycle parking spaces are proposed

which would accord with the minimum cycle parking requirements set out in both the London Plan (2016) and the Intend to Publish London Plan (2019). The Council’s Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has confirmed that the proposed cycle parking layout and number of spaces would be acceptable.

18.7 Car Parking: A total of 11 on-site parking spaces would be provided as part

of the proposed development. 7 car parking spaces (of which 2 would be wheelchair accessible) would be for the use of the residents of the proposed building (a ratio of 0.36 spaces per flat), 3 spaces would be provided for existing residents and 1 car club space would be provided for use by both residents of the existing and proposed development. All of the car parking spaces would have Electrical Vehicle Charging Point (EVCP) provision (20% active, 80% passive).

Page A34

A34

18.8 The applicant has submitted a Car Park Management Plan which provides more detail about the allocation of spaces, monitoring and usage and security.

18.9 The existing 20 garages and hardstanding would be removed to facilitate the

proposed development. Of the 20 garages, it has been identified that only 3 are presently being used for car parking with a further 6 being rented for storage or other uses. These garages can be rented for any purpose by local residents or those from further afield. On this basis, the Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has accepted that the effective displacement by removal of the existing garages would equate to 3 vehicles. In addition to the garages, the hardstanding area fronting them, along with York Way is also used for informal car parking by a maximum of 12 vehicles overnight.

18.10 A Parking Beat survey was undertaken on two separate evenings (16 and 17

June 2020) to determine parking demand on site. Wider area surveys were undertaken on 7 and 8 July 2020. The submitted survey shows that the roads within the study area have capacity to accommodate 390 vehicles. The peak demand for on-street car parking was recorded on Wednesday 8 July with 315 vehicles parked on-street, resulting in 81% occupancy. The survey shows that there were 75 on-street car parking spaces available to park overnight, demonstrating that there is residual parking capacity in the surrounding area sufficient to accommodate any overspill demand from the loss of the existing garages and hardstanding on the application site.

18.11 The Neighbourhood Highway Engineer has reviewed the submitted

information responding that any vehicles displaced by the proposed development could be accommodated on surrounding roads. Subject to the following measures being secured by planning condition or by way of a Legal Agreement (or equivalent) the Neighbourhood Highway Engineer considers the proposed levels of car parking to be acceptable.

● Future occupiers being precluded from obtaining a resident parking

permit should a CPZ be introduced; ● A sum of £25,000 to be secured for the purpose of undertaking a

consultation on a CPZ or other parking scheme and, if supported, contributing to its implementation;

● Two years’ free membership of a car club scheme for all new residents

18.12 Highway and Traffic Impact: In terms of estimated trip generation, the

submitted Transport Assessment identifies that 22 additional vehicle

Page A35

A35

movements would be generated by the proposed development throughout the day, two of which would be generated in network peak hours. It is concluded that this level of vehicular trip would be ‘non-material’ and would not be expected to have a detrimental impact on the operation of the local road network. Notwithstanding the above, an Outline Residential Travel Plan has been submitted which would encourage residents to adopt more sustainable modes of travel.

18.13 The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed

development and raises no objection on highway safety or traffic impact grounds. They confirm that site layout and incorporated turning head would allow servicing and refuse collections to be accommodated safely within the application site. A pre-commencement planning condition requiring the submission of a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) would be required to ensure satisfactory control measures during the construction phase of development.

18.14 In conclusion it is considered that the proposed development would not have

any detrimental impact on the surrounding highway network, would not detrimentally impact on-street car parking stress and would provide sufficient on-site car and parking facilities. Subject to planning conditions and obligations to be secured by way of a Legal Agreement (or equivalent) it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of highways and transportation.

19.0 Environment and Sustainability 19.1 Paragraph 148 of the NPPF 2019 states that the planning system should

support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change. It should help to: shape places in ways that contribute to radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimise vulnerability and improve resilience; encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing buildings; and support renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure.

19.2 Policy 5.1 of the London Plan (2016) states that there is an aim to achieve an

overall reduction in London’s carbon dioxide emissions of 60 percent (below 1990 levels) by 2025. Furthermore, Policy 5.2 states that development proposals should make the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the following points; use less energy, supply energy efficiently, use renewable energy. The LP also requires all major residential developments to be net-zero carbon.

Page A36

A36

19.3 Policy 5.3 states that the highest standards of sustainable design and

construction should be achieved in London to improve the environmental performance of new developments and to adapt to the effects of climate change over their lifetime. Development proposals should also demonstrate that sustainable design standards are integral to the proposal, including its construction and operation, and ensure that they are considered at the beginning of the design process.

19.4 Policy DM3 states that design proposals should incorporate climate change

adaptation measures based on the type and extent of the main changes expected in the local climate throughout the lifetime of the development, this is likely to require a flexible design that can be adapted to accommodate the changing climate, e.g. provision of additional shading or cooling.

19.5 The application is supported by an Energy Assessment. The submitted

Assessment confirms that the proposal adheres to the adopted London Plan energy hierarchy of Be Lean, Be Clean and Be Green.

19.6 There are no planned district heating networks within the vicinity of the

proposed development, however, one may be planned in the future and as such, Officers consider that the development should be designed to allow future connection to a district heating network. This would be secured via conditions.

19.7 In the absence of availability of district heat network before delivery of this

scheme, the proposed building incorporates a district electric panel heating system which allows the development to achieve a reduction of 49.4% in Regulated CO2 emissions. Additionally, ‘Be Green’ renewable energy generating technologies with Solar Photovoltaic Panels (PV) incorporated to provide up to 23.5 kWp. The cumulative saving would be a 59.3% reduction when compared to the Building Regulations Part L 2013 Baseline. The estimated remaining residential Regulated CO2 emissions is calculated to be 9.8 tonnes per CO2 per annum. This remaining carbon would be offset by a cash in lieu contribution which is currently predicted to be £17,600.

Page A37

A37

Indicative Location of PVs

19.8 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in sustainability

terms, subject to conditions/legal agreements related to a Carbon Offsetting financial contribution, future connections to a District Heat Network and ensuring that the residential building meets its respective targets in terms of the relevant Building Regulations.

Page A38

A38

20.0 Ecology/Biodiversity 20.1 Policy 7.19 of the London Plan 2016 states that wherever possible

development proposals should be planning for nature from the beginning of the development process and taking opportunities for positive gains for nature through the layout, design and materials of development proposals and that development should make a positive contribution to the protection, enhancement, creation and management of biodiversity.

20.2 Policy DM6 of the Core Strategy 2012 states that new developments should

protect and promote biodiversity as part of sustainable design through the inclusion of sustainable drainage, tree planting, soft landscaping, habitat enhancement, green roofs and new or improved semi-natural habitats, where appropriate. The policy goes on to say that the Council requires an ecological assessment on major development proposals, or where a site contains or is next to significant areas of habitat or wildlife potential.

20.3 The site is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory nature conservation

designations. The proposal does however constitute a major development and therefore an Ecological Appraisal, based on the results of a desktop study and Phase 1 habitat and general faunal survey, has been submitted in support of the application. The Phase 1 habitat survey has established that habitats at the site are largely of low ecological value and do not form a constraint to development at the, with habitats of elevated value being retained under the proposed scheme. Similarly, opportunities for faunal species are limited, although the site provides potential habitat for bats, common birds and mammals (including Hedgehog).

20.4 The submitted Ecological Appraisal recommends a number of measures to

safeguard trees, bats and nesting birds, whilst recommendations are also made with respect to Hedgehog, in the unlikely event that they are present on the site, along with invasive species safeguards. In order to achieve a biodiversity net-gain, it is recommended that new planting should comprise of native species of local provenance and that bird boxes should be installed on retained trees or new buildings.

20.5 The Council’s Biodiversity Officer has reviewed the proposed development

and raises no objection subject to the biodiversity enhancement measures to be secured by planning condition.

20.6 It is further noted that the submitted Ecological Appraisal identifies the

importance of the tree line and railway corridor to the west of the site which

Page A39

A39

provides ‘... valuable habitat within an otherwise urban environment and is likely of value to a range of wildlife species such as bats and common bird species’. The Biodiversity Officer comments that it is essential that any external lighting associated with the proposed development should accord with the recommendations set out within paragraph 4.4.1 of the submitted assessment with regard to bat sensitive lighting. It is considered that control of external lighting could be established by a suitably worded planning condition.

20.7 Overall, it is considered that the proposals would not result in harm to

biodiversity and that enhancements would be secured as part of the proposed development. These would be captured by way of a planning condition. The proposal would therefore comply with 7.19 of the London Plan, Policies DM3 and DM8 of the RBK Core Strategy and Policies D8 and G6 of the intend to publish London Plan.

21.0 Flood Risk and Drainage

21.1 Starting with the NPPF, Paragraph 163 states that when determining any

planning applications, local planning authorities should ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere and that where appropriate, applications should be supported by a site-specific flood-risk assessment. Development should only be allowed in areas at risk of flooding where, in the light of this assessment (and the sequential and exception tests, as applicable) it can be demonstrated that:

● within the site, the most vulnerable development is located in areas of lowest flood risk, unless there are overriding reasons to prefer a different location;

● the development is appropriately flood resistant and resilient; ● it incorporates sustainable drainage systems, unless there is clear

evidence that this would be inappropriate; ● any residual risk can be safely managed; and ● safe access and escape routes are included where appropriate, as

part of an agreed emergency plan. 21.2 Paragraph 157 of National Planning Policy Framework indicates that the

current and future impacts of climate change should be taken into account within the Flood Risk Assessment.

21.3 Policy 5.12 of the London Plan 2016 requires development proposals to

comply with the flood risk assessment and management requirements set

Page A40

A40

out in the NPPF and the associated technical guidance on flood risk over the lifetime of the development.

21.4 Policy 5.13 states that developments should utilise sustainable urban

drainage systems (SuDS) unless there are practical reasons for not doing so and should aim to achieve greenfield run-off rates, ensuring that surface water run-off is managed as close to its source as possible. Drainage should also be designed and implemented in ways that deliver other policy objectives of the London Plan, including water use efficiency and quality, biodiversity, amenity and recreation.

21.5 Policy DM4 sets requirements for the submission of flood risk assessments

in line with the NPPF. These should address all sources of flooding, the future impact of climate change and take into account the findings of the Borough’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (“SFRA”), national guidance and good practice guidance. It also requires developments to include Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) to manage and reduce surface water run-off unless it can be demonstrated that such measures are not feasible.

21.6 The application site is not located within Fluvial Flood Zones 2 or 3, but is

identified as being at risk of surface water flooding. 21.7 In support of the application the applicant has submitted a Drainage Strategy

prepared by CTP Consulting Engineers. It is stated that for all new areas of hardstanding and the new roof, surface water would be discharged into the existing public sewer via a new connection. Flows would be restricted and attenuated in underground attenuation tanks. It is stated that the discharge rate would be limited to 5 l/s which would be a betterment of more than 50% for the brownfield site.

21.8 The Council’s Flood Risk Officer, in their Lead Local Flood Authority

capacity, has reviewed the submitted Drainage Strategy and has raised concern that no evidence has been provided to suggest that rainwater storage, infiltration techniques or above ground SuDS features have been considered in the development proposal. Infiltration testing should be carried out to determine the suitability of options such as permeable paving. Concerns were also raised that the greenfield runoff rate had not been submitted.

21.9 In response to the Flood Risk Officer’s comments the applicant has

submitted a new Drainage Strategy dated November 2020. It is confirmed that there would be no increase in impermeable areas. It is further stated why

Page A41

A41

certain forms of SuDS is not considered to be acceptable on the site, but that measures such as permeable paving could be utilised once the geo-environmental site investigation has been undertaken and the suitability of the ground conditions for infiltration has been assessed. It is stated that a greenfield run-off rate would not be feasible. A detailed Management and Maintenance Plan has also been submitted setting out required maintenance works as well as well as frequency.

21.10 The Council’s Flood Risk Officer has been re-consulted on the amended

Drainage Assessment and their comments shall be presented to the Planning Committee as Late Material.

22.0 Land Contamination: 22.1 Policy DM1 requires that new development should minimise air, noise and

contaminated land impacts in line with industry best practice. Development proposals for contaminated land should include remediation measures. 22.2 The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has been consulted and raises

no objection in terms of land contamination subject to a planning condition requiring works to be suspended and a detailed remediation strategy being submitted to the Local PLanning Authority for approval in writing, if any contamination is found on the site.

23.0 Refuse

23.1 London Plan Policy 5.7 (Waste Capacity) requires the provision of suitable

waste and recycling storage facilities in all new developments. Guidance states that refuse stores should be accessible to all residents and should satisfy local requirements for waste collection. As shown on the proposed plans, the scheme contains refuse and recycling storage as part of the ground floor plan of the proposed building. Full details would be reserved by condition.

24.0 Community Infrastructure 24.1 As of the 1st November 2015 the Council commenced the operation of a

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as a means of collecting monies to provide local infrastructure to offset the impact of developments. This replaced the S106 mechanism for collecting contributions for local infrastructure e.g. education and health with the exception of affordable

Page A42

A42

housing. For the avoidance of doubt S106 contributions can only be collected to resolve site specific issues as a result of the proposed development.

24.2 The application would be Kingston CIL liable. The application would also be

liable to pay Mayoral CIL.The CIL charges are subject to the national Tender Price Index. In the event that the All-in Tender Price Index ceases to be published, the index referred to is the retail prices index; and the figure for a given year is the figure for November of the preceding year.

24.3 It is noted on Section 5 (Exemption or Relief) of the submitted CIL - Form 1:

Additional Information that the applicant considers the development to include affordable housing which would qualify for mandatory or discretionary Social Housing relief. It is noted that if the applicant intends to claim CIL relief, ‘CIL Form 10: Charitable and/or Social Housing Relief Claim’ must be submitted to the Collecting Authority and any relief must be granted by them prior to the commencement of development. Otherwise the full CIL charge would be payable.

25.0 Legal Agreements 25.1. The applicant has agreed to enter into a legal agreement. As the applicant is

the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames and the Local Planning Authority cannot covenant with itself in a Section 106 Agreement. In this instance, a Service Level Agreement between the relevant Directors would be agreed to encompass the necessary obligations and contributions that are required to make the development acceptable in planning terms. The following Heads of Terms have been agreed :

○ Car capping - restricting residents from applying for on-street car

parking permits in any future CPZ ○ A financial contribution to offset any shortfall in CO2 emissions. ○ Travel Plan and monitoring fee ○ 2 years’ free car club membership for all new residents ○ Contribution to CPZ consultation and, potentially, implementation ○ Tenure of Affordable Housing

25.2 Subject to the signing of the Service Level Agreement the proposal complies

with policies 3.12, 5.1 and 5.2 of the London Plan, (2016) and policies CS10, DM9, DM10 and DM15, DM17 of the LDF Core Strategy, (2012).

26.0 Conclusion / Planning Balance

Page A43

A43

26.1 The Council is not able to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites, as such, unless the application of policies in the NPPF that protect areas or assets of particular importance (footnote 6 of the NPPF) provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

26.2 The proposed development would secure the redevelopment of suitable

brownfield land comprising under-utlised buildings for the delivery of dwellings. This carries substantial weight in favour of the development.

26.3 The proposed development would deliver 19 London Affordable Rent (LAR)

dwellings. This carries substantial weight in favour of the proposal. 26.4 The proposed development would replace the existing unattractive garages

with a high quality development that would deliver significant improvements to the quality of public realm and amenity spaces on the site through the delivery of a comprehensive landscaping scheme and play space.

26.5 The proposed development would deliver ephemeral economic benefits

associated with construction activities and the potential increased spend in local shops, this would carry moderate weight in favour of the proposal.

26.6 Officers note the concerns raised by the Neighbourhood Committee echoed

in parts by local residents, however, subject to the imposition of suitable conditions, the proposed development would provide a good standard of residential accommodation (both internal and external) for the occupants of the proposed flats; would not have any unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties; and whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed development differs in architectural style to existing properties in the immediate area, it would nonetheless represent a high quality development which makes efficient and effective use of an underutilised previously developed site.

26.7 Final consultation responses from Historic England GLAAS (Archaeology),

the Environmental Health - Air Quality Officer and Flood Risk Officer are awaited and will be presented to the Planning Committee as late material. However, it should be noted that the amended information requested by the above consultees has been submitted, no in principle objections have been raised by those consultees, and as such it is anticipated that the technical issues raised have been satisfactorily addressed.

Page A44

A44

26.8 Officers acknowledge that there would be some loss of light to some residents, however, a good standard of amenity would nonetheless be retained, it is further noted that separation distances would, on occasions, fall below the guidance of 21m, however, it is not unusual in a dense development for this to happen. Notwithstanding, officers conclude that a good standard of accommodation would be achieved for future and existing occupants.

26.8 In conclusion, officers consider that the proposed development would make

optimal use of an underutilised, previously developed site, for the delivery of much needed affordable homes. It is recognised that existing residents would witness a change in context and living conditions, and there would be a possible disruption of parking. However, on balance officers conclude that, subject to the conditions / agreement, the proposed development would be in accordance with the development plan and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.

Recommendation:

Approve subject to completion of relevant ‘Service Level agreement between the relevant Directors’, as specified in the legal agreements section, and to delegate to the Head of Development Management any consequent changes to conditions and agreements to be agreed in consultation with the Chair of the Development Control Committee, subject to the following conditions:

Page A45

1 Time Limit The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 3 years from the date of this decision. Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. (As amended)

2 Approved plans and documents The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 31345 YW-A-P10-002 P01 - Block Plan 05440 York Way TCP 11.5.20 - Tree Constraints Plan 05440 York Way TPP 9.7.20 - Tree Constraints Plan

A45

Page A46

31345 CR-A-P12-001 PO1 - Proposed GA Sections P01 31345 L04 - Landscape Plan 31345 YW-A-P11-001 PO1 - Proposed 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor Plans P01 31345 YW-A-P11-002 PO1 - Proposed Roof Plan P01 31345 YW-A-P11-GF PO1 Proposal Ground Floor Plan P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-E11-001 P01 Existing Plans P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-001 P01 Proposed East Elevation P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-002 P01 Proposed West Elevation P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-003 P01 Proposed South Elevation P01 31345-KSS-YW-A-P13-004 P01 Proposed North Elevation P01 31345-YW-A-P10-001 P02 - Site Location Plan P02 Covering Letter From Barton Willmore dated 21/08/2020 YW Acoustic Assessment- 03.08.20 YW Arboricultural Impact Assessment 09.07.20 YW Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment YW Car Parking Management Plan YW Daylight and Sunlight Assessment YW Design and Access Statement -Part 4 YW Design and Access Statement -Part 5 YW Design and Access Statement -Part 6 YW Design and Access Statement -Part1 YW Design and Access Statement -Part2 YW Design and Access Statement -Part3 YW Design and Access Statement -Part7 YW Drainage Strategy YW Ecological Appraisal Aug 2020 YW Energy Statement - FINAL with Appendix 03.08.2020 YW Fire Strategy Statement YW Outline Travel Plan YW Planning Statement YW Statement of Community Involvement July 2020 YW Sustainability Statement - 03.08.20 YW Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment Part 1 YW Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment Part 2 YW Transport Statement YW Tree Survey 06.05.20 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

A46

Page A47

3 Contamination

If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which has not been previously identified, work shall be suspended and additional measures for its remediation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation of the site shall incorporate the approved additional measures and a verification report for all the remediation works shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect human health, controlled waters, and the environment in line with Kingston’s Core Strategy (Adopted April 2012) Policy DM1.

4 Construction hours

The site and building works required to implement the development shall be only carried out between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays

Reason:To safeguard the amenity of neighbours in accordance with Policy DM10 of the Kingston Core Strategy (2012).

A47

Page A48

5 Secure by Design

The development hereby permitted shall incorporate security measures to minimise the risk of crime and to meet the specific security needs of the development in accordance with the principles and objectives of Secured by Design. Details of these measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of the development and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation.

Reason: In order to achieve the principles and objectives of Secured by Design to improve community safety and crime prevention in accordance with Policy CS 14 of Kingston Core Strategy: Safer Communities, Policy DM 22 Design for Safety and Policy 7.3 Designing out Crime of the London Plan.

6 Secure by Design Certification

Prior to occupation a Secured by Design final certificate shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to achieve the principles and objectives of Secured by Design to improve community safety and crime prevention in accordance with Policy CS 14 of Kingston Core Strategy: Safer Communities, Policy DM 22 Design for Safety and Policy 7.3 Designing out Crime of the London Plan.

7 Materials The development shall be completed in accordance with samples and/or manufacturing details where applicable for all visible facing materials including fenestration, balconies which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to above ground works (excluding demolition). The development shall then be built in accordance with these approved samples and completed prior to occupation Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for

A48

Page A49

New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

8 Architectural detailing Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans additional architectural detailing plans at scale 1:10 showing the balconies, windows, doors, overhangs, rainwater goods, ducts, fans and louvres and their associated reveals and their relationship with the walls/fascias shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to above ground works. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

9 Lighting strategy Prior to the installation of any external lighting, details of the external lighting, including its compliance with the recommendations of paragraph 4.4.1 of the submitted Ecological Appraisal (August 2020) and the Bat Conservation Trust Guidance Note 08/18 (Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK) (2018), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and thereby retained as such unless a variation is subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining residential occupiers and Bats in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

A49

Page A50

10 Landscaping plan Prior to the beneficial occupation of any unit of accommodation, a detailed landscaping (hard and soft) scheme including details of trees to be planted, wildflowers (the species, size and age to be agreed with the local planning authority in writing), details of the street furniture and play equipment, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within the first planting season following completion of the development and the tree planting and landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and also that the Local Planning Authority shall be satisfied as to the details of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

11 Cycle parking Before the first occupation of the building, details of secure cycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times. Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory cycle storage facilities and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy DM8 (Sustainable Transport for New Developments) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012

A50

Page A51

12 Refuse management Refuse storage facilities and recycling facilities shall be provided prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such facilities to be permanently retained at the site. The developer and/or their successors in title shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that all refuse and recyclable materials associated with the development shall either be stored within this dedicated store/area as shown on the approved plans, or internally within the building(s) that form part of the application site, and that no refuse or recycling material shall be stored or placed for collection on the public highway or pavement, except on the day of collection. Reason: To ensure the provision of refuse facilities to the satisfaction of the Council in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

13 Noise The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the Acoustic Design Statement dated August 2020, prepared by Hodkinson, prior to the occupation of the proposed dwellings and shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure a good standard of amenity for the occupiers of the proposed development in accordance with policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy

A51

Page A52

14 Energy and Sustainability Prior above ground works of the development hereby approved, details as to how the approved development has been designed to connect to a future District Heating Network in the surrounding area and provision for the development’s connection shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter permanently retained. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.][EP1]

15 Sustainability and Energy Prior to occupancy of 50% of the units of the development hereby approved, an assessment carried out by a suitably qualified professional, of the carbon reduction measures implemented within the Development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (March 2016) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

16 Biodiversity (Pre commencement) The development to which this permission relates shall not be commenced (with the exception of demolition) until a scheme to enhance the nature conservation interest of the site has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To safeguard the biodiversity and nature conservation value of the site, in accordance with policy 7.19 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS3 and DM6 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

A52

Page A53

17 Permitted Development Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order (England) 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no telecommunications equipment shall be installed on the roof of the development hereby approved without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

18 Car Parking The car parking shown on the approved plans shall be provided with a hard-bound, adequately-drained, dust-free surface prior to beneficial occupation of the development to which this permission relates and shall be permanently retained and kept free from obstruction thereafter. It shall not be used for any purposes other than the parking of vehicles for the occupiers of and visitors to the development. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

A53

Page A54

19 Construction Management Plan No development shall take place (including any works of demolition) until a construction management plan or construction method statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved plan/statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The statement shall provide for:

i) How the proposed development will be built; ii) Hours of working (which shall be limited to 08.00 to 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 to 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays); iii) The procedure for loading/unloading materials; iv) The route to and away from site for muck away and vehicles with materials; v) The protocol for managing deliveries to one vehicle at a time on sites with restricted access or space; vi) The protocol for managing vehicles that need to wait for access to the site; vii) Whether any reversing manoeuvres are required onto or off the public highway into the site and whether a banksman will be provided; viii) Temporary site access; ix) Signing system for works traffic; x) Whether site access warning signs will be required in adjacent roads; xi) Whether it is anticipated that statutory undertaker connections will be required into the site; xii) The storage of plant, materials and operatives vehicles; xiii) The potential for impacts from dust and emissions during the demolition and/or construction phase upon local air quality and surrounding residents; xiv) Measures for the laying of dust, suppression of noise and abatement of other nuisance arising from development works; xv) The location of all ancillary site buildings; xvi) The means of enclosure of the site, its erection and maintenance; xvii) Wheel washing equipment; xviii) The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; xix) Meeting the requirements of the Low Emission Zone for Non-Road Mobile Machinery (where relevant plant or vehicles are being used); and xx) The method of recycling and disposing of waste resulting from the demolition and/or construction phases

A54

Page A55

Deliveries/collections to and from the site shall use a route that is agreed with the highway authority and the agreed route shall be signed accordingly. Reason: These details are required prior to commencement of development because the relevant works would take place at the beginning of the construction phase in order to safeguard the amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

20 Electric Vehicle Charging Points Prior to the beneficial occupation of the development hereby approved, 4 car parking spaces shall be provided with active provision for electric vehicle charging points and 9 further spaces shall be provided with passive charging points. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

21 Travel Plan Prior to beneficial occupation of the development to which this permission relates, a detailed travel plan comprising immediate, continuing and long-term measures to promote and encourage alternatives to single-occupancy car use shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved plan shall then be implemented and monitored to the satisfaction of the local planning authority, having regard to the targets contained within it. Reason: To ensure that appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport are taken up, in accordance with policy 6.3 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS6 and DM8 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

A55

Informatives: 1. In dealing with the application the Council has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive way. We have made available detailed advice in the form or our statutory policies in the Core Strategy, Supplementary Planning Documents, Planning Briefs and other informal written guidance, as well as offering a full pre-application advice service, in order to ensure that the applicant has been given every opportunity to submit an application which is likely to be considered favorably. 2 Your attention is drawn to the need to comply with the relevant provisions of the Building Regulations, the Building Acts and other related legislation. These cover such works as - the demolition of existing buildings, the erection of a new building

Page A56

22 Car Park Management Plan The development hereby approved shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved ‘York Way Car Parking Management Plan - August 2020’. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

23 Piling No piling shall take place until a Piling Method Statement (detailing the depth and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential for damage to subsurface sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved Piling Method Statement Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground sewerage utility infrastructure. Piling has the potential to significantly impact / cause failure of local underground sewerage utility infrastructure.

A56

or structure, the extension or alteration to a building, change of use of buildings, installation of services, underpinning works, and fire safety/means of escape works. Notice of intention to demolish existing buildings must be given to the Council's Building Control Service at least 6 weeks before work starts. A completed application form together with detailed plans must be submitted for approval before any building work is commenced. 3 The Party Wall Act 1996 requires a building owner to notify, and obtain formal agreement from, any adjoining owner, where the building owner proposes to:

i.carry out work to an existing party wall; ii.build on the boundary with a neighbouring property; iii.in some circumstances, carry out groundworks within 6 metres of an adjoining

building. Notification and agreements under this Act are the responsibility of the building owner and are quite separate from Building Regulations, or Planning Controls. The Building Control Service will assume that an applicant has obtained any necessary agreements with the adjoining owner, and nothing said or implied by the Council should be taken as removing the necessity for the building owner to comply fully with the Party Wall Act. Further information and advice is to be found in "The Party Walls etc. Act 1996 - Explanatory Booklet". 4 Your attention is drawn to the fact that planning permission does not override property rights, and that if your proposal involves construction on or near the site boundary then you should take appropriate steps to ensure that you have correctly identified the position of the boundary, that you do not build over it, and that any works which affect a neighbours property in any way have the benefit of the appropriate agreement from the landowner. Failure to undertake the above steps may leave you liable to legal action by neighbouring landowners. If you require further information or advice, you should consult a solicitor. 5 The building/extension that you propose may affect a right of light enjoyed by the neighbouring property. This is a private right which can be acquired by prescriptive uses over 20 years; as such it is not affected in any way by the grant of planning permission. 6 When undertaking demolition and/or noisy building work, please be considerate to your neighbours and do not undertake work before 8am or after 6pm Monday to Friday, before 8am or after 1pm on a Saturday or at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Page A57

A57

7 You are advised that the Council does have formal powers to control noise and nuisance under The Control of Pollution Act 1974, the Clean Air Acts and other relevant legislation, and that any works undertaken which impact unreasonably upon the surrounding area may be subject to action by the Council's Environmental Health Department. 8 Please note that this planning application has been assessed against current planning legislation only. The applicant (or any subsequent owner or developer) is therefore reminded that the onus of responsibility to ensure the proposed cladding installation meets current fire safety regulations lies fully with them and that they are legally obliged to apply for the relevant Building Regulations. 9.The proposed development is located within 15m of Thames Water's underground assets, as such the development could cause the assets to fail if appropriate measures are not taken. Please read our guide ‘working near our assets’ to ensure your workings are in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you’re considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your-development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes. 11.the Council will require the applicant to undertake a road and footway condition survey before construction begins. This will take the form of a joint inspection with a member of the Highways Operation Team and will involve a photographic record and visual observation of the roads, verges and margins. The team would secure some deposit to ensure that repairing cost is covered should any damage result from the construction associated with this site. 12.A license from the Highways Operation will be required to erect off site direction signs. This same team will issue the hoarding license (if necessary) and seek appropriate deposits. 13. During construction, spoil could be carried from the site onto the public highway. The access into the site should be paved to minimise the carryover of spoil onto adjacent roads. We would also require the applicant to sweep and wash down the adjacent roads to ensure that the public highway is kept clear of debris. This is to ensure a satisfactory road surface for road safety reasons at all times. 14.The applicant should be advised to consider if a parking suspension might be needed to allow access for big delivery construction vehicles involved. To apply for parking suspension (if needed), the applicant should contact the Environment Contact Centre on 020 8547 5002.

Page A58

A58

15.Any parking that cannot be contained within the site must park considerately and safely, so as not to obstruct sightlines at junctions or site accesses. The applicant should be aware that any such parking will cause unnecessary concern and agitation within the local community; Should make full use of the site accesses to maximise the availability of off street parking 16.Reasonable efforts have been made to check that the plans submitted for the purposes of this planning application are consistent from one to the next, and that the development hereby approved can be implemented in accordance with all of the plans submitted. Should it transpire that this is not possible and that your plans are flawed, please be clear that it may be impossible to implement this permission, and that any development undertaken which relies on this permission may be unauthorised and subject to enforcement action if expedient. 17. The site is adjacent to the Network Rail corridor and the proposed route for the future delivery of Crossrail 2. The applicant should be aware that Crossrail 2 would result in a higher frequency of trains operating through Chessington South Station. In addition, works to deliver Crossrail 2 will be required at Chessington South Station. At present however, the Crossrail 2 project remains a proposal subject to future decisions by Government on both funding and powers to deliver the railway. 18. Due to the close proximity of the proposed works to Network Rail’s land and the operational railway, Network Rail requests the applicant / developer contacts Network Rail’s Asset Protection and Optimisation (ASPRO) team via AssetProtectionWessex@networkrail.co.uk prior to works commencing. Network Rail’s Asset Protection team will ensure the works can be completed without posing a risk to Network Rail’s infrastructure. The applicant / developer may be required to enter into an Asset Protection Agreement to get the required resource and expertise on-board to enable approval of detailed works. More information can also be obtained from our website https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/looking-after-the-railway/asset-protection-and-optimisation/.

Page A59

A59

Development Control Committee Date of Meeting: 25 November 2020

Register No: 20/02235/FUL

Site Address: Garages 9-30 & Land To The Rear Of 1-44 Cumberland House, Kingston Hill, Kingston Upon Thames KT2 7LH

[Please note that this plan is intended to assist in locating the development; it is not the site plan of the proposed development which may have different boundaries. Please refer to the application documents for the proposed site boundaries.]

Page A60

A60

Executive Summary:

Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing garage units and the erection of 9-storey building comprising 41 x residential dwellings with associated car parking, refuse, cycle storage, landscape, including landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space as well as formalised child play space serving for the use of existing and proposed residents. The proposed 41 dwellings would all be affordable dwellings (100% London affordable rent) and would comprises the following dwelling mix:

● 3 bedroom - 14 (34%); ● 2 bedroom - 15 (36%); and ● 1 bedroom - 12 (29%)

The application includes the provision of 15 car parking spaces for proposed residents (2 accessible spaces) and a further 12 spaces for existing residents. 20% of the car parking space would have active ECP and 80% passive ECP.

The application includes 83 cycle spaces, spread across 2 floors, including 6 spaces for visitors. The proposed development comprises a 9 storey building with a maximum height of approximately 30m.

Page A61

Ward: Coombe Hill

Description of proposal: Erection of 9-storey building comprising 41 self-contained residential units (12 x one-bedroom, 15 x two-bedroom and 14 x three-bedroom) (following demolition of existing garage units to rear of 1-44 Cumberland House;) with associated car parking, refuse and cycle storage and landscaping improvements to existing communal amenity space serving Cumberland House for use of existing and proposed residents

Plan Type: Full Application

Expiry Date: 18/12/2020

A61

1.0 Relevant Planning History: 1.1 None of relevance 2.0 Site and Surroundings: 2.1 The application site comprises garages and land to the rear of Nos. 1-44

Cumberland House, Kingston Hill. The site comprises 2 areas of flat land both at different elevations.

Page A62

Planning Issue

Proposed Relevant Standard Compliance with

Development Plan?

Affordable housing

100% Affordable Housing (Social

Rent)

50% of units to be provided as affordable

housing

Yes

Housing Mix 34% 3 bedroom units

A minimum of 30% of dwellings as 3 or more

bedroom units (this figure should be exceeded on

sites particularly suited to larger family housing)

Yes

Density 322 hr/ hectare, 106 units/ hectare

Urban: 150–250 hr/ha, 50–95 u/ha

No - however this is guidance

Cycle parking

83 79 (76 long-stay and 3 short-stay)

Yes

Car Parking Max 0.37 spaces per unit (15 spaces)

Max 0.5 spaces- 1.5 spaces (20.5- 61.5

spaces)

Yes

Carbon Reduction

59% 35% with Offset contribution

Yes

A62

2.2 The site contains 21 garages and 18 car parking spaces. 2.3 In terms of constraints, the site is not host to any trees protected by Tree

Preservation Orders (TPO), is not located within Fluvial Flood Zones 2 or 3 and is not host to any designated heritage assets.

2.4 In terms of planning designations, the site falls within an Area of

Archaeological Significance and a site of Strategic Area of Special Character. To the north of the site is Liverpool Road Conservation Area. Kingston Hill to the south is designated as being part of the Borough’s Strategic Walking and Cycling networks. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 1b (Poor).

Proposed Block Plan of the development site 3.0 Proposal:

Page A63

A63

3.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing garage units

and the erection of 9-storey building comprising 41 x residential dwellings with associated car parking, refuse, cycle storage, landscape, including landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space as well as formalised child play space serving for the use of existing and proposed residents.

3.2 The proposed 41 dwellings would all be affordable dwellings (100% London

affordable rent). 3.3 The proposed dwelling mix would be as follows:

● 3 bedroom - 14 (34%); ● 2 bedroom - 15 (36%); and ● 1 bedroom - 12 (29%)

3.4 4 dwellings would be constructed to Building Regulation Standard M4(3)

Wheelchair User Dwellings, with the remaining dwellings constructed to Building Regulation Standard M4(2) Accessible and Adaptable Dwellings.

3.5 The application includes the provision of 15 car parking spaces for proposed

residents (2 accessible spaces) and a further 12 spaces for existing residents.

3.6 The application includes 83 cycle spaces, spread across 2 floors, including 6

spaces for visitors. 3.7 Each dwelling would have access to private amenity space as well as

communal amenity across the site which would be used by existing and future residents.

3.8 The density of the proposed development would be 106dph. Each dwelling

would have access to private amenity space as well as communal amenity across the site which could be used by existing and future residents. It is indicated that the proposed sustainability measures could achieve a 59% reduction in regulated CO2 emissions over the Part L 2013 baseline.

4.0 Consultations:

Neighbour notifications: 380 letters were sent to neighbouring properties, site notices were displayed around the site and a press notice was published in the Surrey Comet. 38 letters of objection were received and the material

Page A64

A64

planning concerns raised are summarised as follows:

● Loss of Parking ● Loss of Playspace ● Impact on Biodiversity ● Loss of Trees ● Over development ● Design of the proposed development ● Loss of daylight/Sunlight

1 Letter of support was received raising the following point

● The development would deliver much needed affordable housing Transport for London: No objections.

Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service: Field evaluation work is needed to determine appropriate mitigation. Conditions are required.

Thames Water: No objection.

RBK Highways Officer and Sustainable Travel Officer: No Highways objections subject to conditions securing Construction Logistics Plan and Full Travel Plans and Section 106 Agreement to include monitoring. RBK Ecology Officer: No Objection subject to suitable conditions

RBK Trees and Landscape Officer: Mitigation conditions proposed

RBK Flood Risk Officer: Information regarding run off and drainage hierarchy being assessed. A further response will be provided as late material. RBK Environmental Health Officer: No objections subject to noise, air quality and land contamination conditions being attached.

Designing Out Crime Officer: No objection subject to conditions Design Review Panel : No objection - see body of report

Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committee - To be reported as Late Material

5.0 Policies 5.1 The Council as Local Planning Authority has a duty under Section 38 (6) of

the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to determine this application in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations

Page A65

A65

indicate otherwise. Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (1990 Act) requires local planning authorities when determining planning applications to “have regard to (a) the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, (b) any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application, and (c) any other material considerations”. At present in relation to this application the relevant parts of the Development Plan consists of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames LDF Core Strategy 2012, The Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan (AAP) 2008 and the London Plan March 2016.

5.2 The Draft London Plan was published in December 2017 and is a material

consideration in planning decisions. It gains weight as it moves through the process to adoption and the weight given to the policies is for the decision maker. The Plan is at an advanced stage. Policies contained in the Intend to Publish (ItP) London Plan published in December 2019 that are not subject to a direction by the Secretary of State carry significant weight.

5.3 The latest version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in February 2019. This document provides guidance to local planning authorities in producing local plans and in making decisions on planning applications. The NPPF is intended to make the planning system less complex and more accessible by summarising national guidance which replaces numerous planning policy statements and guidance notes, circulars and various letters to Chief Planning Officers. The document is based on the principle of the planning system making an important contribution to sustainable development, which is seen as achieving positive growth that strikes a balance between economic, social and environmental factors. The NPPF falls within the other material considerations of the s.38(6) test.

5.4 The Development Plan remains the cornerstone of the planning system.

Planning applications which comply with an up to date Development Plan should be approved. Refusal should only be on the basis of conflict with the Development Plan and other material considerations.

6.0 Assessment 6.1 The main considerations are:

● Principle of Development; ● Affordable Housing; ● Design, Character and Appearance; ● Heritage;

Page A66

A66

● Archaeology; ● Standard of accommodation; ● Trees and Landscaping; ● Impact on Residential Amenity of Neighbouring Sites; ● Air Quality; ● Highways and Transportation; ● Flood Risk & Drainage; ● Environment and Sustainability; ● Ecology/ Biodiversity; ● Land Contamination; ● Refuse; ● Fire Strategy; ● Legal Agreements

7.0 Principle of Development 7.1 Paragraph 118 of the NPPF (2019) states that planning policies and

decisions should “promote and support the development of under-utilised land and buildings, especially if this would help to meet identified needs for housing where land supply is constrained and available sites could be used more effectively".

7.2 Paragraph 123 of the NPPF (2019) goes on to say that “Where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities, and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential of each site.”

7.3 Paragraph 11 of the NPPF (2019) makes it clear that in terms of the presumption of sustainable development, and in relation to decision taking, development proposals which accord with an up to date development plan should be approved without delay. The Council cannot currently demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites. The “tilted balance” as set out in paragraph 11 of the NPPF is, therefore, engaged.

7.4 Paragraph 11d of the NPPF 2019 indicates that where there are no relevant development plan policies or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out of date (out of date includes, for applications involving the provision of housing, situations where the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites) planning permission should be granted unless:

● the application of policies in the Framework provide a clear reason for refusing the development proposed, or

Page A67

A67

● any adverse impacts of doing so significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole

7.5 The Council cannot demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land as required

by the NPPF 2019, as such the policies which are most important for determining the application are considered out of date (tilted balance) and the tests set out in paragraph 11d must be applied. These considerations should be given considerable weight in the assessment of this planning application.

7.6 Policy 3.3 of the London Plan March 2016 states that the Mayor recognises the pressing need for more homes in London in order to promote opportunity and provide a real choice for all Londoners in ways that meet their needs at a price they can afford. Working with relevant partners, the Mayor will seek to ensure the housing need identified in paragraphs 3.16a and 3.16b of the London Plan (49,000 (2015-2036) and 62,000 (2015-2026)) is met, particularly through provision consistent with at least an annual average of 42,000 net additional homes across London which will enhance the environment, improve housing choice and affordability and provide better quality accommodation for Londoners.

7.7 Table 3.1 (Annual average housing supply monitoring targets 2015 - 2025) of the London Plan requires the delivery of 6,434 dwellings within the plan period 2015-2025, a rate of 643 dwellings per year within the Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames which is almost double the previous rate of 375 dwellings per year identified in the 2011 London Plan.

7.8 Policy CS10 of the Core Strategy 2012 states that the Council will seek to ensure that a broad mix of accommodation options are available to residents and that a range of local housing needs are met. It continues that the Council will expect all new residential developments to positively contribute to the Borough’s existing residential environment and character, in accordance with the Borough Character Study 2010, whilst optimising housing output in line with London Plan density policies.

7.9 The proposal seeks the demolition of the existing garages and the erection of a nine-storey building comprising 41 flats, 100% of which would be London Affordable Rent (LAR). The principle of the loss of the garages is acceptable in principle subject to consideration of the impact on parking. Creating additional residential units within a predominantly residential area on previously developed land would be acceptable in principle, subject to compliance with Development Plan policies.

7.10 Table 3.2 of the London Plan (2016) sets out an indicative Unit per Hectare (u/ha) range of 50-95 units per hectare for a site within an Urban setting with

Page A68

A68

a PTAL of 0-1. The density of the proposal exceeds these figures with 106 units per hectare. The site is adjacent to buildings of 8-10 storeys, which shares some of the central characteristics within the London Plan, which would give a guidance density figure of 50-110 units per hectare. Paragraph 3.28 goes on to state that Table 3.2 should not be applied mechanistically and that density ranges for particular types of location are broad, enabling account to be taken of other factors relevant to optimising potential such as local context, design and transport capacity as well as social infrastructure, open space and play space. THe application site is located along a main arterial route and benefits from easy access to a number of Bus routes providing access to Kingston Town Centre and beyond, and is within walking distance of Norbiton Railway Station. As such, whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed development exceeds the guidance figure in the London Plan, the site is in a sustainable location with ready access to the services and facilities required to support sustainable development.

7.11 The delivery of 41 London Affordable Rent (LAR) dwellings, 34% of which

would be capable of family occupation, would contribute positively towards the Council’s housing targets at a time when the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply. The proposal would be in accordance with the relevant housing delivery policies in the development plan.

8.0 Affordable Housing 8.1 London Plan Policy 3.9 seeks to promote mixed and balanced communities

by tenure and household income and Policy 3.12 seeks to secure the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing. Policy H5 of the draft London Plan and the Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG page 5 set a strategic target of 50% affordable housing. Policy H6 of the draft London Plan and the Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG set out a ‘threshold approach’ whereby schemes meeting or exceeding a specific threshold of affordable housing (35% or 50% on industrial/public land) by habitable room without public subsidy and which meets other criteria are not required to submit viability information to the GLA, nor would the application be subject to a late stage review mechanism.

8.2 In support of this stance Core Strategy Policy CS10 seeks to maximise the

delivery of affordable housing. Furthermore, Policy DM15 requires 50% of the units to be provided as affordable housing and proposals departing from these requirements will be expected to justify any lower provision through the submission of a financial appraisal. DM15 also seeks to achieve a 70:30

Page A69

A69

tenure split between Social/affordable Rent and Intermediate housing. The Mayor of London’s preferred Tenure split is 30% London Affordable Rent, 40% capped affordable rents and 30% intermediate.

8.3 The proposed development comprises 41 London Affordable Rent (LAR)

units. LAR units are defined under Policy H6 (Affordable Housing Tenure) of the Intend to Publish London Plan (2019) as being homes for households on low incomes where the rent levels are based on the formulas in the Social Housing Regulator’s Rent Standard Guidance. LAR rent homes are capped at benchmark levels by the Greater London Authority (GLA). Rents for LAR are significantly less than 80% of market rents, which is the maximum for Affordable Rent permitted by the NPPF (2019). The homes would be allocated in accordance with need (based on the Borough’s allocations policy). Once substantially completed, the development would provide potential decant accommodation for residents of the Cambridge Road Estate which is scheduled for regeneration.

8.4 The provision of 100% LAR housing is welcomed. It is noted in the most

recent Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (2016) that across the Housing Market Area (HMA) over 80% of future annual demand will be for homes at social rent levels which include London Affordable Rent. Within this context, and the function that the proposed accommodation could serve in facilitating the regeneration of the Cambridge Road Estate through providing decant accommodation for existing tenants, it is considered that the proposed LAR tenure would be acceptable and would be in accordance with development plan policies.

9.0 Design, Character and Appearance 9.1 Paragraph 124 of the NPPF 2019 states that the Government attaches great

importance to the design of the built environment. It states that ‘The creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve’ and ‘Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities.’ Paragraph 130 states inter alia that where the design of a development accords with clear expectations in plan policies, design should not be used by the decision-maker as a valid reason to object to development.

9.2 Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy 2012 states that new development proposals will be required to incorporate principles of good design and those elements that are identified as contributing to the character and local

Page A70

A70

distinctiveness of a street or areas which should be respected, maintained or enhanced.

9.3 Policy DM11 of the Core Strategy 2016 states that the Council should take a more flexible approach to new development where the existing development lacks any identifiable or cohesive character and / or is located in a lower quality environment; in these circumstances it will seek a high quality development that creates its own distinctive character.

9.4 The Intend to Publish London Plan at paragraph 3.3.6 states that “Good design and good planning are intrinsically linked. The form and character of London’s buildings and spaces must be appropriate for their location, fit for purpose, respond to changing needs of Londoners, be inclusive, and make the best use of the city’s finite supply of land. The efficient use of land requires optimisation of density. This means coordinating the layout of the development with the form and scale of the buildings and the location of the different land uses, and facilitating convenient pedestrian connectivity to activities and services”.

9.5 The commentary text to Policy H16 directs that the units should be

appropriately sized to be comfortable and functional for a tenant’s needs and may include facilities such as en-suite bathrooms and limited cooking facilities. There are currently no minimum space standards for communal and private areas of this type of accommodation. Given the generally small size of the private space in these developments, the communal amenity spaces are important elements in ensuring that the quality of the overall residential amenity is acceptable.

9.6 Design Review Panel (DRP): The applicant undertook a design review held

on 21 October 2020. In summary the Panel concluded that:

‘We are supportive of both the principle of this scheme and the proposed design, which could result in a high-quality scheme. The scale, height, massing, internal layouts and indicative detail are successful. The proportion of openings and development of an architectural language that is responsive to the existing buildings is highly successful, while our previous comments regarding landscape have been addressed. The scheme could be progressed through minor tweaks. Landscape

Page A71

A71

The landscape and open spaces have been carefully considered. Our previous concerns regarding a loss of trees has been more fully explained through the conclusion of a tree survey and demonstration that some of the trees of most value are being retained. We would however encourage consideration of pollarding of some of the Sycamores and Yews due to be removed, as it may be possible to retain them with a reduced height. Blending native and non-native trees is encouraged to improve biodiversity, including a range of height and form in the wider green space. We encourage a reduction in the extent of tarmac or mitigating planting and green buffers between the existing and proposed buildings. Where there is potential to plant outside of the basement zone, we encourage additional planting to be considered, such as cut leafed small trees and large shrubs, balancing new planting with the requirement for daylight to ground floor units. Careful consideration of phasing is required to ensure access to play equipment is maintained during construction. Play should be provided throughout the process and therefore may need to be delivered upfront. The proposed pathway to the south-east of the proposed block currently serves the proposal only. We would prefer to see a more equitable route that serves both existing and proposed blocks equally and enables residents of both blocks to access the shared amenity space from their homes with comparable ease. Architecture

The architectural proposal is high-quality. The scale, height, massing, internal layouts and indicative design detail are all promising. The development of an architectural language that is responsive to the existing buildings and proportion of openings is highly successful. While the architectural details are encouraging and positive, they will require careful building services We welcome the defensible space provided at lower ground level which buffers proposed homes from the communal spaces successfully. While we are comfortable with the proposal’s relationship with the existing building, it would be helpful to see direct views from homes in the existing

Page A72

A72

blocks toward the proposal. This could be helpful for post-submission communications.’

9.7 No significant alterations to the scheme were recommended by the DRP and

no significant amendments have been proposed by the applicant to the scheme as submitted. It is considered that further details of communal amenity spaces (including seating, raised beds), the public realm and landscaping (including tree species) could be secured by way of a planning condition to ensure that the constructive feedback and suggestions from the DRP are incorporated into the final development.

9.8 In terms of local context, to the south and east of the site are three post-war

apartment blocks which make up the Cumberland development. The existing Cumberland House buildings range from 6-8 storeys in height and are constructed from a red/brown brick. To the south-west is a ten-storey apartment block known as ‘High Ashton’.

9.9 To the north-west of the application site is proposed development at

Kingston Riding Centre (ref: 19/02455/FUL) which proposes the demolition of the existing riding school buildings and the erection of 2 apartment blocks to accommodate 52 residential apartments with associated car parking and landscaping. The proposals as currently submitted are of a maximum of four-storeys in height. The Development Control Planning Committee resolved to grant planning permission on 21 May 2020 subject to the signing of a legal agreement.

9.10 The proposed building would be a maximum of nine-storeys in height with a

maximum flat roof height of approximately 30m. The main building would be red multicolour brickwork with light coloured mortar with alternating projecting brick detail providing visual interest. The entrance area would comprise precast patterned panels, fenestration would be aluminium composite while light colour precast cill detailing would add further visual interest.

9.11 The use of simple brick is supported as it would reflect the character of the

existing Cumberland House buildings and surrounding context. The proposed material palette for the entrance way, windows and window cill complement one another and are supported. The scheme has adopted a vertical rhythm along the facade that reflects the rhythm of the facade on the existing Cumberland House and surrounding area, especially along Kingston Hill. It is considered that the scheme demonstrates a simple geometry and repetitive floor plans and balconies which create vertical order to the elevations.

Page A73

A73

9.12 In terms of the overall height, massing and scale, it is considered that the

proposal adheres to the existing Cumberland House development and neighbouring High Ashton block of flats. The recess in the facade along the west elevation helps to break up the massing.

9.13 Regarding the proposed site layout, it is considered that the building footprint

would make positive use of the site and that the proposed building lines sit parallel to the wider Cumberland House and neighbouring properties. The entrance would be clearly defined and accessible and communal and private spaces would be well defined.

9.14 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would be of an

acceptable character and design which would relate well to the character and appearance of the wider area. The proposal would be of an appropriate layout, form, and scale which would respond well to its local context. The proposed development would provide a play area alongside improved public realm and landscaping which would be a significant benefit of the scheme.

Computer generated image

Page A74

A74

Page A75

A75

Indicative Landscape Plan 10.0 Heritage 10.1. Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act

1990 states ‘In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses’. A similar provision at Section 72 of the Act covers Conservation Areas.

10.2 Paragraph 193 of the Framework states that when considering the impact of

a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset great weight should be given to the asset's conservation. The NPPF defines a Heritage asset as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape

Page A76

A76

identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. It includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing)’. Significance (for heritage policy) is defined as ‘the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. The interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting’

10.3 The site is not located within a Conservation Area and the closest statutory

listed building to the site is Grade II listed Gateway, approximately 261.4m to the north-east of the proposed building up Kingston Hill. Approximately 130m to the north-west of the proposed building is the Liverpool Road Conservation Area. Approximately 335m to the south-west of the site are St Paul's Church, The Vicarage and Vicarage End (including the garden wall and gates) and the Kingston Hill War Memorial (all of which are Grade II listed).

10.4 Due to the substantial separation distances between the application site and

the above Grade II listed heritage assets, as well the tight urban grain and scale of buildings between the two sites, it is not considered that the proposed development would affect these listed buildings and their settings.

10.5 Regarding the Liverpool Road Conservation Area to the rear, it is noted that

the special architectural and historic interest of this area derives primarily from the individually designed detached and semi-detached houses dating from the 1850s set in a mature landscape on the edge of Richmond Park. While the proposed building would be visible from certain points within the Conservation Area, it would be viewed within the context of existing larger buildings such as the ten-storey High Ashton, the eleven-storey Lakeside as well as existing eight-storey Cumberland House buildings. Within this existing built form context, it is not considered that the proposed building would harm the significance of the Liverpool Road Conservation Area.

10.6 The site falls within a Strategic Area of Special Character, a non-designated

heritage asset. For the reasons set out elsewhere in this report, officers conclude that the design of the proposal would preserve the special character of this part of Kingston Hill.

11.0 Archaeology

Page A77

A77

11.1 The applicant has submitted an Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment prepared by RPS to ensure that the proposed development properly assesses the potential effect on below ground archaeology

11.2 Policy 7.8 of the adopted London Plan requires developments to assess

heritage assets including assets with archaeological interest. Great weight should be given to the conservation of designated heritage assets. Part B of the policy states that development should incorporate measures to identify, record, interpret, protect and where appropriate present the site’s archaeology. Part E of the policy states that new development should protect archaeological resources, landscapes and significant memorials.

11.3 Emerging Policy HC1 of the New London Plan states that development

proposals affecting heritage assets and their setting should conserve their significance. Development proposals should seek to avoid harm and identify enhancement opportunities by integrating heritage considerations early on in the design process. Proposals should identify assets of archaeological significance and avoid harm or minimise it though design.

11.4 Policy DM12 states that the Council will protect remains of archaeological

importance by ensuring acceptable measures are taken proportionate to the significance of the heritage asset to preserve them and their setting, including physical preservation, where appropriate.

11.5 The site is located within the south-western boundary of the Kingston Hill

Archaeological Priority Area with available information indicating an archaeological potential within the study site for the later prehistoric periods. Past post-depositional impacts within the study site are considered likely to have had a modest negative archaeological impact. It is proposed that appropriate archaeological monitoring in association with relevant construction groundworks could be secured by way of a suitably worded planning condition.

11.6 The Historic England Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service

(GLAAS) has reviewed the proposed development and advises that the development could potentially cause harm to archaeological remains without field evaluation to determine appropriate mitigation. Accordingly, it is recommended that a two-stage pre-commencement planning condition is imposed on any permissions to require a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) prior to any demolition or development works taking place.

Page A78

A78

11.7 Subject to the imposition of the pre-commencement planning condition requested by GLAAS, it is considered that the proposed development would not have any direct negative archaeological impact.

12.0 Standard of accommodation 12.1 With regards to internal space standards Policy 3.5 of the London Plan

March (2016) sets out minimum internal floor areas required. All of the proposed units would comply with these minimum standards and in many cases exceed them.

12.2 Policy 3.8 of the London Plan 2016 states that 10% of new housing is

designed to be wheelchair accessible, or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users. In support of this position Standard 11 of the Mayor’s Housing SPG 2016 states that 90% of new build housing should meet Building Regulation requirement M4(2) “accessible and adaptable dwellings” with the remaining 10 per cent meeting Building Regulation requirement M4(3) “wheelchair user dwellings”. 4 of the dwellings would be constructed to M4(3) with rest constructed to M4(2)

12.3 Intend to Publish London Plan (2019) Policy D4 3.4.4 advises that dual aspect dwellings with opening windows on at least two sides have many inherent benefits. These include better daylight, a greater chance of direct sunlight for longer periods, natural cross-ventilation, a greater capacity to address overheating,mitigating pollution, a choice of views, access to a quiet side of the building, greater flexibility in the use of rooms, and more potential for future adaptability by altering the use of rooms.

12.4 All of the proposed dwellings would comply with the internal space standards

set out by Policy 3.5 of the London Plan (2016) and the majority of the proposed units would be dual-aspect. In principle, single aspect units are not supported, however, it is noted that the single aspect units in this instance are not north facing. All proposed dwellings would have access to private amenity space and, where private amenity space provision is not in strict accordance with the Residential Design SPD (2013) policy guidance, any shortfall is incorporated into communal amenity space areas, as is required by the policy guidance. The number of units off a core is considered to be appropriate also and areas of public realm and communal amenity space are overlooked and are considered to be safe and secure.

12.5 The Mayor’s SPG “Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and

Informal Recreation” requires play facilities to meet the needs of the

Page A79

A79

expected child population through the provision of 10sqm of playable space per child. The child yield for the development, as per the GLA’s Child Yield Calculator, requires 176sqm of play space specifically for doorstep play for 0 – 4 years olds. This would be accommodated through the upgrading of the existing equipment on site.

12.6 It is acknowledged that the proposed development would encroach onto

existing open space and some soft landscaping would be replaced with parking spaces, resulting in an overall loss of green space. However, the remaining 9351sqm of greenspace would provide sufficient open space for the residents of the proposed and existing development.

12.7 Overall, it is considered that the proposed dwellings would provide a good

standard of accommodation for existing and proposed occupants, subject to planning conditions requiring further details of landscaping and public realm improvements.

13.0 Trees and Landscaping

13.1 Paragraph 170 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should contribute

to and enhance the natural and local environment by, among other things, recognising the benefits of trees and woodlands

13.2 A Tree Survey and accompanying Tree Constraints Plan and Tree Protection

Plan have been submitted in support of the planning application. A number of Category B and C trees would be removed along the north-western boundary of the site and more centrally where the proposed building would be built. The large Category A ‘T1’ Cedrus Deodora would be retained to the south of the proposed building and a number of Category B trees, namely ‘T9’, ‘T11’ and ‘T12’ would be retained between the existing Cumberland House building and the proposed building.

13.3 The Council’s Tree Officer has reviewed the submitted information and raises

no objection in principle, subject to the submission of a detailed landscaping and tree planting scheme to be secured by planning condition. An Arboricultural Method Statement is requested in the first instance as part of the current application to better understand how construction works would be carried out close to trees without causing damage to the crown or root system. However, Officers consider that this information could be secured by way of a pre-commencement planning condition given that no objection has been raised to the submitted Tree Protection Plan which shows details of tree

Page A80

A80

protection fencing as well as special protection areas and Construction Inclusion Zones (CIZ).

13.4 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable

in terms of its impact on trees, subject to planning conditions securing an Arboricultural Method Statement and a detailed scheme of landscaping and tree planting.

14.0 Impact on Residential Amenity of Neighbouring Sites 14.1 Paragraph 127 of the NPPF (2019) and Policy 7.6 of the London Plan (2016)

seek to ensure that development secures a good standard of amenity for all existing and future users (of land and buildings).

14.2 More specifically, Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy (2012) seeks to

safeguard residential amenity with regards to privacy, outlook, sunlight/daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance. Policy Guidance 17 states that the Council applies the ‘45 degree rule’ when assessing the impact a new building can have on neighbouring properties in terms of safeguarding daylight.

14.3 In support of the application, the applicant has submitted a Daylight &

Sunlight Assessment which assesses the impact of the proposed development on adjacent sensitive receptors. In relation to Lakeside to the north-west and High Ashton to the south-west, the submitted assessment concludes that acceptable levels of daylight and sunlight would be maintained.

14.4 Regarding planning application ref: 19/02455/FUL which has a resolution to

grant planning permission subject to the entering into of a legal agreement, the submitted assessment indicates that only 16 windows of 52 tested at proposed ‘Block B’ would not achieve 27% Vertical Sky Component (VSC) and would obtain ratio reductions ranging between 0.36-0.59 their former value. The reason for these relatively low values is that proposed Block B would be located very close to the site boundary with the application site.

14.5 In the current scenario where the proposed development at a neighbouring

site is very close to the boundary, the BRE guidelines suggest flexibility is adopted to the target criteria when neighbouring developments are not “good neighbours” taking more than their fair share of light. It is also noted that, of the 36 windows which would not achieve 27% VSC, 28 of the 36 windows

Page A81

A81

light rooms which are dual aspect. As such, the VSC results would need to be read in conjunction with the daylight distribution assessment.

14.6 The daylight distribution (DD) results show 8 rooms out of 16 tested adhere

to the BRE guidelines, obtaining ratio reductions 0.8 times their former value or higher. Of the 8 rooms falling below the BRE guidelines recommendations, these are single aspect bedrooms with ratio reductions ranging between 0.15 and 0.36. All 8 of the living/kitchen/dining rooms adhere to the BRE guidelines. In terms of Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH), the assessment concludes that all but one of the test windows would adhere to the BRE guidelines and that the sole window which which would fall short of the 25% APSH target by 1% is a bedroom window which is considered to be a less sensitive receptor.

14.7 Regarding 46-84 and 1-44 Cumberland House, it is concluded that the

affected windows would maintain acceptable levels of daylight and sunlight and would broadly accord with the BRE guidelines. In the instances where the target VSC of 27% would not be achieved there are site specific circumstances allows for a degree of flexibility such as overhead balconies which already limit light received or that the affected windows serve dual-aspect rooms. The DD results show that the vast majority of affected rooms would adhere to the BRE guidelines. In the case of 1-44 Cumberland House, only 9% of rooms tested would fall below BRE guidelines in terms of DD, but it is stated that these rooms are likely to be less sensitive uses such as kitchens. It is concluded that acceptable levels of daylight and sunlight would be maintained at Nos. 1-84 Cumberland House.

14.8 In terms of loss of privacy and overlooking, the majority of the proposed

dwellings would maintain the separation distances between facing habitable rooms recommended in Policy Guidance 16 of the Residential Design SPD (2013). Separation distances of over 23m would be maintained between the proposed building and Nos. 1-44 Cumberland House.

14.9 The proposed building would be set separated from habitable room windows

at proposed ‘Block B’ of planning application ref: 19/02455/FUL by approximately 16.9m at its closest point, increasing to 18.5m and 19m as the building progresses south-westward. While this would not be in strict accordance with Policy Guidance 16, it is noted that the proposed development to the north is sited approximately 5-7m from the shared boundary whereas the building proposed by the current planning application is set-away from the shared boundary by between 10-14m. It is further noted that the application building has been designed so that there are no

Page A82

A82

balconies on this north-west facing elevation and that the proposed windows on this elevation serve less intrusive uses such as bedrooms and that most of these windows serve dual-aspect rooms. Within this context, it is considered that the proposed separation distances would be acceptable.

14.10 The proposed development would result in kitchen windows on the

south-west elevation being within 15.3m of a ground floor terrace door at High Ashton. However, it is not considered that this would result in any significant or unacceptable loss of privacy to the existing boundary wall, the less intrusive kitchen use proposed and that the room in question at High Ashton is triple aspect.

14.11 The proposed development comprises residential dwellings only. The

surrounding area is residential in character. Within this context, it is not considered that the proposed development would result in any unacceptable adverse impact to neighbours in terms of noise or disturbance. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has reviewed the proposal and raises no objection subject to planning conditions controlling working days and hours and a condition to requiring the submission of a piling method statement.

14.12 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would not have any

unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties, subject to planning conditions.

Page A83

A83

15.0 Air Quality

15.1 Paragraph 170 of the NPPF states that: "Planning policies and decisions

should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

e) preventing new and existing development from contributing to, being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability."

15.2 Paragraph 181 of the NPPF states Planning policies and decisions should

sustain and contribute towards compliance with relevant limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and Clean Air Zones, and the cumulative impacts from individual sites in local areas. Opportunities to improve air quality or mitigate impacts should be identified, such as through traffic and travel management, and green infrastructure provision and enhancement.

15.3. The Intend to Publish London Plan policy states measures to design out

exposure to poor air quality and noise from both external and internal sources, should be integral to development proposals and be considered early in the design process.

Page A84

A84

15.4 The Royal Borough of Kingston has declared the whole borough as an Air

Quality Management Area (AQMA). The declaration was based on the risk of the objectives for nitrogen dioxide and PM10 being exceeded.

15.5 The applicant has submitted an Air Quality Assessment (AQA) in support of

the planning application. The submitted assessment demonstrates that future residents of the development would experience acceptable air quality, with pollutant concentrations below the air quality objectives. The proposed development would provide heat and hot water through the use of mains electricity and there would therefore be no significant point of source emissions. Overall, it is concluded that the construction and operational air quality effects of Cumberland house would be ‘not significant’.

15.6 The Environmental Health - Air Quality Officer has reviewed the submitted

AQA and has raised no objection to the proposal subject to the planning conditions requiring the submission of a Damage Cost Assessment as well as well as details of how dust and emissions during construction and demolition would be controlled, prior to the commencement of development. Subject to the planning conditions requested by the Air Quality Officer, it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of air quality.

16.0 Highways and Transportation 16.1. National planning policy directs that in considering developments that

generate significant amounts of movements, local planning authorities should take account of whether safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limits the significant impacts of the development. It continues by stating that development should only be prevented or refused on highway grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network are severe.

16.2 London Plan (2016) Policy 6.13 (Parking) states that the Mayor wishes to

see an appropriate balance being struck between promoting new development and preventing excessive car parking provision that can undermine cycling, walking and public transport use.

16.3 Core Strategy (2012) Policies CS5, CS6, DM8 and DM9 are used to assess

the potential impact of new development upon the surrounding highway network.The policies aim to reduce the need to travel by locating major trip

Page A85

A85

generating development in accessible locations well served by public transport.

16.4 Policy DM10 states that development proposals should have regard to local

traffic conditions and highway safety and ensure that they are not adversely affected. Policy DM9 states that new development should not contribute to congestion or compromise highway safety. Policy CS7 states that car use should be managed to ensure sustainability, road safety and reduce congestion, including car club schemes and the provision of electric vehicle charging points and managing on and off-street parking provision to promote sustainability and residential amenity.

16.5 The site has a PTAL score of 1b (Poor) which is based on bus services 85

and K3 available from bus stops on Kingston Hill Road. The applicant notes that the WebCAT calculation does not consider train services from Norbiton Train Station (approximately 960m to the south-west of the site) or the bus services available in the vicinity of Kingston Hospital (approximately 460-550m to the south-west). Crescent Road to the north and George Road to the east are identified as part of the Borough Strategic Walking Network while Kingston Hill forms a part of the Borough Strategic Cycling and Walking Networks. The site itself does not fall within a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) but to the north of the site is the Canbury (Outer Area Two) CPZ while to the south is the Kingston Hill (Zone H) CPZ.

16.6 Cycle Parking: A total of 83 on-site cycle parking spaces (77 long-stay, 6

short-stay) are proposed which would accord with the minimum cycle parking requirements set out in both the London Plan (2016) and the Intend to Publish London Plan (2019). The Council’s Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has confirmed that the proposed cycle parking layout and number of spaces would be acceptable.

16.7 Car Parking: A total of 15 on-site car parking spaces would be provided for

the proposed development, 2 of which would be wheelchair accessible, which would result in a parking ratio for the proposed development of 0.37 spaces per unit which is is within the 0.5 spaces per unit maximum standard set out in the Intend to Publish London Plan (2019) for an Outer London Opportunity Area. Residents would be restricted from applying for residents on-street car parking permits for the neighbouring CPZs, this would be secured by Legal Agreement or equivalent.

16.8 The existing 21 garages would be demolished to facilitate the proposed

development. It is stated that the existing lock-up garages are not in use as

Page A86

A86

car parking but are instead used for storage. It is further stated that the dimensions of the garages are such that they would struggle to accommodate modern vehicles. It is further noted that the hardstanding area to the rear accommodates up to 18 car parking spaces which would also be lost as part of the proposal. The applicant seeks to offset this loss through the provision of an additional 10 replacement car parking spaces (including a car club space) for the use of the existing residents of Cumberland House. A Car Park Management Plan has been submitted which details how spaces would be allocated and managed. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has reviewed the submitted Car Park Management Plan and considers it to be acceptable.

16.9 The Parking Surveys took place on 16th - 17th June 2020 noted a total car

parking provision across the wider Cumberland House site of 109 spaces. On both survey days, 95 parked vehicles were recorded overnight with a residual (spare) capacity of 14 spaces. The total car parking on site would be reduced to 91 spaces as a result of the proposed development. Parking Surveys were also undertaken on the surrounding residential roads on 7th and 8th July which identified that there is between 30-40% approximate residual capacity that could potentially be used by existing residents.

16.10 The Neighbourhood Highway Engineer has reviewed the submitted

information responding that any vehicles displaced by the proposed development could be accommodated on surrounding roads. They further note that the application site is well connected in terms of pedestrian and cycle access and has relatively good access to public transport which belies its 1b PTAL (Poor) rating. An Outline Travel Plan has been submitted with the application and it is considered to be acceptable as such.

16.11 Highway and Traffic Impact: A trip generation has been undertaken and

forecasts that the development will generate a total of 49 car trips per day (arrival and departures) and no more than five car trips in the network peak hours. This level of traffic is considered to have a non-material impact on the operation of the local highway network. It is further set out that residents of the proposed building would not be permitted to apply for on-street car parking permits and that an additional bespoke agreement would apply to some of the tenancy agreement where residents would be required to commit not to purchase or own vehicles when living within the development.

16.12 The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer notes that no changes are proposed to

the existing vehicular access arrangements which utilise the existing private Cumberland House circulatory road. Servicing and refuse collections would

Page A87

A87

take place via the Cumberland House internal access road (private) and the applicant has provided swept path drawings to illustrate how this would be achieved. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer therefore concludes that proposed development would be acceptable in terms of highway and traffic impacts, subject to planning conditions and a Legal Agreement or equivalent mechanism being entered into to incorporate the following:

● Occupiers being precluded from obtaining a resident parking permit

within neighbouring CPZs ● Two years’ free membership of a car club scheme for all new

residents ● Provision for Monitoring of a Full Travel Plan (to be secured by a

prior-to-occupation planning condition) 16.13 In conclusion it is considered that the proposed development would not have

any detrimental impact on the surrounding highway network, would not detrimentally impact on-street car parking stress and would provide sufficient on-site car and parking facilities. Subject to planning conditions and obligations to be secured by way of a Legal Agreement (or equivalent) it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of highways and transportation.

17.0 Flood Risk & Drainage 17.1 Starting with the NPPF, Paragraph 163 states that when determining any

planning applications, local planning authorities should ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere and that where appropriate, applications should be supported by a site-specific flood-risk assessment. Development should only be allowed in areas at risk of flooding where, in the light of this assessment (and the sequential and exception tests, as applicable) it can be demonstrated that:

● within the site, the most vulnerable development is located in areas of lowest flood risk, unless there are overriding reasons to prefer a different location;

● the development is appropriately flood resistant and resilient; ● it incorporates sustainable drainage systems, unless there is clear

evidence that this would be inappropriate; ● any residual risk can be safely managed; and ● safe access and escape routes are included where appropriate, as

part of an agreed emergency plan.

Page A88

A88

17.2 Paragraph 157 of National Planning Policy Framework indicates that the current and future impacts of climate change should be taken into account within the Flood Risk Assessment.

17.3 Policy 5.12 of the London Plan 2016 requires development proposals to

comply with the flood risk assessment and management requirements set out in the NPPF and the associated technical guidance on flood risk over the lifetime of the development.

17.4 Policy 5.13 states that developments should utilise sustainable urban

drainage systems (SuDS) unless there are practical reasons for not doing so and should aim to achieve greenfield run-off rates, ensuring that surface water run-off is managed as close to its source as possible. Drainage should also be designed and implemented in ways that deliver other policy objectives of the London Plan, including water use efficiency and quality, biodiversity, amenity and recreation.

17.5 Policy DM4 sets requirements for the submission of flood risk assessments

in line with the NPPF. These should address all sources of flooding, the future impact of climate change and take into account the findings of the Borough’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (“SFRA”), national guidance and good practice guidance. It also requires developments to include Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) to manage and reduce surface water run-off unless it can be demonstrated that such measures are not feasible.

17.6 The application site is not located within Fluvial Flood Zones 2 or 3, and only

part of the site is identified as being a low risk of surface water flooding. 17.7 In support of the application the applicant has submitted a Drainage Strategy

prepared by CTP Consulting Engineers. It is stated that for all new areas of hardstanding and the new roof, surface water would be discharged into the existing public sewer via a new connection. Flows would be restricted and attenuated in underground attenuation tanks. It is stated that the discharge rate would be limited to 5 l/s which would be a betterment of more than 50% for the brownfield site.

17.8 The Council’s Flood Risk Officer, in their Lead Local Flood Authority

capacity, has reviewed the submitted Drainage Strategy and has raised concern that no evidence has been provided to suggest that rainwater storage, infiltration techniques or above ground SuDS features have been considered in the development proposal. Concerns were also raised that the

Page A89

A89

greenfield runoff rate had not been submitted and that the existing (brownfield) runoff rate for the 1 in 1-year storm needs to be submitted.

17.9 In response to the Flood Risk Officer’s comments the applicant has

submitted a new Drainage Strategy dated November 2020 which seeks to address the concerns raised. The Council’s Flood Risk Officer has been re-consulted on the amended Drainage Assessment and their comments shall be presented to the Planning Committee as Late Material.

18.0 Environment and Sustainability 18.1 Paragraph 148 of the NPPF 2019 states that the planning system should

support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change. It should help to: shape places in ways that contribute to radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimise vulnerability and improve resilience; encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing buildings; and support renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure.

18.2 Policy 5.1 of the London Plan (2016) states that there is an aim to achieve an

overall reduction in London’s carbon dioxide emissions of 60 percent (below 1990 levels) by 2025. Furthermore, Policy 5.2 states that development proposals should make the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the following points; use less energy, supply energy efficiently, use renewable energy. The LP also requires all major residential developments to be net-zero carbon.

18.3 Policy 5.3 states that the highest standards of sustainable design and

construction should be achieved in London to improve the environmental performance of new developments and to adapt to the effects of climate change over their lifetime. Development proposals should also demonstrate that sustainable design standards are integral to the proposal, including its construction and operation, and ensure that they are considered at the beginning of the design process.

18.4 Policy DM3 states that design proposals should incorporate climate change

adaptation measures based on the type and extent of the main changes expected in the local climate throughout the lifetime of the development, this is likely to require a flexible design that can be adapted to accommodate the changing climate, e.g. provision of additional shading or cooling.

Page A90

A90

18.5 The application is supported by an Energy Assessment. The submitted Assessment confirms that the proposal adheres to the adopted London Plan energy hierarchy of Be Lean, Be Clean and Be Green.

18.6 There are no planned district heating networks within the vicinity of the

proposed development, however, one may be planned in the future and as such, Officers consider that the development should be designed to allow future connection to a district heating network. This would be secured via conditions.

18.7 In the absence of availability of district heat network before delivery of this

scheme, the proposed building incorporates a district electric panel heating system which allows the development to achieve a reduction of 47% in Regulated CO2 emissions from Be Lean energy efficiency technologies and ‘Be Green’ renewable energy generating technologies with Solar Photovoltaic Panels (PV) incorporated to provide up to 30.5 kWp. The cumulative saving would be a 59% reduction when compared to the Building Regulations Part L 2013 Baseline. The estimated remaining residential Regulated CO2 emissions is calculated to be 19 tonnes CO2 per annum. This remaining carbon would be offset by a cash in lieu contribution which is currently predicted to be £34,200.

Page A91

A91

Indicative Location of PVs

18.8 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in sustainability

terms, subject to conditions/legal agreements related to a Carbon Offsetting financial contribution, potential for future connection to a District Heat Network and ensuring that the residential building meets its respective targets in terms of the relevant Building Regulations.

19.0 Ecology/Biodiversity 19.1 Policy 7.19 of the London Plan 2016 states that wherever possible

development proposals should be planning for nature from the beginning of the development process and taking opportunities for positive gains for

Page A92

A92

nature through the layout, design and materials of development proposals and that development should make a positive contribution to the protection, enhancement, creation and management of biodiversity.

19.2 Policy DM6 of the Core Strategy 2012 states that new developments should

protect and promote biodiversity as part of sustainable design through the inclusion of sustainable drainage, tree planting, soft landscaping, habitat enhancement, green roofs and new or improved semi-natural habitats, where appropriate. The policy goes on to say that the Council requires an ecological assessment on major development proposals, or where a site contains or is next to significant areas of habitat or wildlife potential.

19.3 The site is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory nature conservation

designations. The proposal does however constitute a major development and therefore an Ecological Appraisal, based on the results of a desktop study and Phase 1 habitat and general faunal survey, has been submitted in support of the application. The Phase 1 habitat survey has established that habitats at the site are largely of low ecological value and do not form a constraint to development. The site provides potential habitat for bats, birds and mammals (including Hedgehog).

19.4 The proposal would incorporate bird boxes; a green roof; planting plan for

the terraces including a diverse range of native wildflower species to support urban pollinator populations.

19.5 The submitted Ecological Appraisal confirms that no statutory or

non-statutory nature conservation designations are present within or adjacent to the survey area, and none of the designations within the surrounding area are likely to be adversely affected by the proposals. The Phase 1 habitat survey has established that habitats within the survey area largely appear to be of low ecological value and do not form a constraint to development, with habitats of elevated value being largely retained under the proposals. A number of mitigation measures have been proposed to minimise the risk of harm to protected species, with compensatory measures proposed, where appropriate, in order to maintain the conservation status of local populations. A number of measures are recommended to safeguard trees, bats and nesting birds, whilst recommendations are also made with respect to hedgehogs, in the unlikely event that they are present during construction works. A number of ecological enhancements are also recommended to be included under the scheme.

Page A93

A93

A Bat Survey report confirms that no evidence of roosting bats was recorded during the specific survey work undertaken of tree T6 and provides a number of precautionary measures to minimise any risk to roosting bats.

19.6 The Council’s Biodiversity Officer has reviewed the proposed development

and raises no objection subject to the biodiversity enhancement measures to be secured by planning condition.

19.7 It is further noted that “If the recommendations are delivered in their entirety,

I am confident a biodiversity net gain can be achieved and there will not be an infringement with the existing wildlife legislation.”

19.8 Overall, it is considered that the proposals would not result in harm to

biodiversity and that enhancements would be secured as part of the proposed development. These would be captured by way of a planning condition. The proposal would therefore comply with 7.19 of the London Plan, Policies DM3 and DM8 of the RBK Core Strategy and Policies D8 and G6 of the intend to publish London Plan.

20.0 Land Contamination: 20.1 Policy DM1 requires that new development should minimise air, noise and

contaminated land impacts in line with industry best practice. Development proposals for contaminated land should include remediation measures. 20.2 The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has been consulted and raises

no objection in terms of land contamination subject to a planning condition requiring works to be suspended and a detailed remediation strategy being submitted to the Local PLanning Authority for approval in writing, if any contamination is found on the site.

21.0 Refuse

21.1 London Plan Policy 5.7 (Waste Capacity) requires the provision of suitable

waste and recycling storage facilities in all new developments. Guidance states that refuse stores should be accessible to all residents and should satisfy local requirements for waste collection. As shown on the proposed plans, the scheme contains refuse and recycling storage to the north-west of the proposed building. Full details would be reserved by condition.

Page A94

A94

22.0 Fire Strategy 22.1 Policy D12 of the London Plan- Intend to Publish Version states “All major

development proposals should be submitted with a Fire Statement, which is an independent fire strategy, produced by a third party, suitably qualified assessor.” A fire strategy document has been submitted which sets out the building’s fire safety features and firefighting access facilities.

23.0 Legal Agreements 23.1 The applicant has agreed to enter into a legal agreement. As the applicant is

the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames and the Local Planning Authority cannot covenant with itself in a Section 106 Agreement. In this instance, a Service Level Agreement between the relevant Directors would be agreed to encompass the necessary obligations and contributions that are required to make the development acceptable in planning terms. The following Heads of Terms have been agreed :

○ Car capping - restricting residents from applying for on-street car

parking permits in any future CPZ ○ A financial contribution to offset any shortfall in CO2 emissions. ○ Travel Plan and monitoring fee ○ 2 years’ free car club membership for all new residents ○ Tenure of Affordable Housing

23.2 Subject to the signing of the Service Level Agreement the proposal complies

with policies 3.12, 5.1 and 5.2 of the London Plan, (2016) and policies CS10, DM9, DM10 and DM15, DM17 of the LDF Core Strategy, (2012).

24.0 Planning Balance/Conclusion: 24.1 The Council is not able to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable

housing sites, as such, unless the application of policies in the NPPF that protect areas or assets of particular importance (footnote 6 of the NPPF) provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

24.2 The proposed development would secure the redevelopment of suitable

brownfield land comprising under-utlised buildings for the delivery of dwellings. This carries substantial weight in favour of the development.

Page A95

A95

24.3 The proposed development would deliver 41 London Affordable Rent (LAR) dwellings. This carries substantial weight in favour of the proposal.

24.4 The proposed development would replace the existing unattractive garages

with a high quality development that would deliver significant improvements to the quality of public realm and amenity spaces on the site through the delivery of a comprehensive landscaping scheme and play space.

24.5 The proposed development would deliver ephemeral economic benefits

associated with construction activities and the potential increased spend in local shops, this would carry moderate weight in favour of the proposal.

24.6 The proposed development would result in removal of a number of trees and

a reduction in the total greenspace across the site, however, subject to conditions requiring the carrying out of a detailed landscaping strategy, ecological enhancements, and the upgrading of the existing playspace, officers consider that the resultant open space would provide a good standard of amenity for both future and existing residents.

24.7 Officers acknowledge that there would be some loss of light to some

residents, however, a good standard of amenity would nonetheless be retained, it is further noted that separation distances would, on occasions, fall below the guidance of 21m, however, it is not unusual in a dense development for this to happen. Notwithstanding, officers conclude that a good standard of accommodation would be achieved for future and existing occupants.

24.8 In conclusion, officers consider that the proposed development would make

optimal use of an underutilised, previously developed site, for the delivery of much needed affordable homes. It is recognised that existing residents would witness a change in context and living conditions, and there would be a possible disruption of parking. However, on balance officers conclude that, subject to the conditions / agreement, the proposed development would be in accordance with the development plan and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.

Recommendation: Approve subject to completion of relevant ‘Service Level agreement between the relevant Directors’, as specified in the legal agreements section, and to delegate to the Head of Development Management any consequent changes to conditions and

Page A96

A96

agreements to be agreed in consultation with the Chair of the Development Control Committee, subject to the following conditions:

Page A97

1 Time Limit The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 3 years from the date of this decision. Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. (As amended)

2 Approved plans and documents The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: CH-A-E11-001 Existing Floor Plans Rev P01 CH-A-P11-001 Proposed First Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-002 Proposed Second-Seventh Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-003 Proposed Roof Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-GF Proposed Ground Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P11-LGF Proposed Lower Ground Floor Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P12-001 Proposed Sections Rev P01 CH-A-P13-001 Proposed East Elevation Rev P01 CH-A-P13-002 Proposed west Elevation Rev P01 CH-A-P13-003 Proposed North Elevation Rev P01 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 6 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 7 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 8 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 9 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 10 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Townscape and Visual Assessment August 2020 CH-A-P13-004 Proposed South Elevation Rev P01 L03C Cumberland House Landscape Plan 05440 Cumberland House TPP 10.7.20 tree Protection Plan 05440 Cumberland House TCP 11.5.20 Tree Constraints Plan Air Quality Cumberland House Air Quality Assessment August 2020 Aspect Cumberland House Ecological Appraisal August 2020 Aspect tree Consultancy Cumberland House Arboricultural Impact Assessment

A97

Page A98

Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 1 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 2 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 3 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 4 Barton Willmore Cumberland House Design and Access Statement Part 5 Barton Willmore Statement of Community Involvement August 2020 Barton Willmore Covering Letter CTP Cumberland House Drainage Strategy August 2020 Cumberland House Daylight and Sunlight Assessment August 2020 Cumberland House Planning Statement August 2020 Cumberland House Tree Survey 06.05.20 Hodkinson Cumberland House Energy Assessment August 2020 Hodkinson Cumberland House Sustainability Statement August 2020 Jeremy Gardner Associate Cumberland House Fire Strategy RPS Cumberland House Archaeological Desk based Assessment August 2020 Velocity Cumberland House Car parking Management Plan August 2020 Velocity Cumberland House Outline Travel Plan August 2020 Velocity Transport Statement Part 1 Velocity Transport Statement Part 2 CH-A-P10-002 Proposed Block Plan Rev P01 CH-A-P10-00 Site Location Plan Rev P02 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3 Contamination

If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which has not been previously identified, work shall be suspended and additional measures for its remediation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation of the site shall incorporate the approved additional measures and a verification report for all the remediation works shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect human health, controlled waters, and the environment in line with Kingston’s Core Strategy (Adopted April 2012) Policy DM1.

A98

Page A99

4 Construction hours

The site and building works required to implement the development shall be only carried out between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays

Reason:To safeguard the amenity of neighbours in accordance with Policy DM10 of the Kingston Core Strategy (2012).

5 Secure by Design

The development hereby permitted shall incorporate security measures to minimise the risk of crime and to meet the specific security needs of the development in accordance with the principles and objectives of Secured by Design. Details of these measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of the development and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation.

Reason: In order to achieve the principles and objectives of Secured by Design to improve community safety and crime prevention in accordance with Policy CS 14 of Kingston Core Strategy: Safer Communities, Policy DM 22 Design for Safety and Policy 7.3 Designing out Crime of the London Plan.

6 Secure by Design Certification

Prior to occupation a Secured by Design final certificate shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to achieve the principles and objectives of Secured by Design to improve community safety and crime prevention in accordance with Policy CS 14 of Kingston Core Strategy: Safer Communities, Policy DM 22 Design for Safety and Policy 7.3 Designing out Crime of the London Plan.

A99

Page A100

7 Materials The development shall be completed in accordance with samples and/or manufacturing details where applicable for all visible facing materials including fenestration, balconies which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to above ground works (excluding demolition). The development shall then be built in accordance with these approved samples and completed prior to occupation Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

8 Architectural detailing Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans additional architectural detailing plans at scale 1:10 showing the balconies, windows, doors, overhangs, rainwater goods, ducts, fans and louvres and their associated reveals and their relationship with the walls/fascias shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to above ground works. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

A100

Page A101

9 Lighting strategy Prior to the installation of any external lighting, details of the external lighting, including its compliance with the recommendations of paragraph 4.4.1 of the submitted Ecological Appraisal (August 2020) and the Bat Conservation Trust Guidance Note 08/18 (Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK) (2018), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and thereby retained as such unless a variation is subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining residential occupiers and Bats in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

10 Landscaping plan Prior to the beneficial occupation of any unit of accommodation, a detailed landscaping (hard and soft) scheme including details of trees to be planted, wildflowers (the species, size and age to be agreed with the local planning authority in writing), details of the street furniture and play equipment, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within the first planting season following completion of the development and the tree planting and landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and also that the Local Planning Authority shall be satisfied as to the details of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

A101

Page A102

11 Cycle parking Before the first occupation of the building, details of secure cycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times. Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory cycle storage facilities and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy DM8 (Sustainable Transport for New Developments) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012

12 Refuse management Refuse storage facilities and recycling facilities shall be provided prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such facilities to be permanently retained at the site. The developer and/or their successors in title shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that all refuse and recyclable materials associated with the development shall either be stored within this dedicated store/area as shown on the approved plans, or internally within the building(s) that form part of the application site, and that no refuse or recycling material shall be stored or placed for collection on the public highway or pavement, except on the day of collection. Reason: To ensure the provision of refuse facilities to the satisfaction of the Council in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

A102

Page A103

13 Noise Before any piling takes place a piling method statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method. Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy

14 Energy and Sustainability Prior above ground works of the development hereby approved, details as to how the approved development has been designed to connect to a future District Heating Network in the surrounding area and provision for the development’s connection shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter permanently retained. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.][EP1]

15 Sustainability and Energy Prior to occupancy of 50% of the units of the development hereby approved, an assessment carried out by a suitably qualified professional, of the carbon reduction measures implemented within the Development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (March 2016) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

A103

Page A104

16 Biodiversity (Pre commencement) The development to which this permission relates shall not be commenced (with the exception of demolition) until a scheme to enhance the nature conservation interest of the site has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The submitted scheme shall incorporate the recommendations made within Section 4.2 of the approved Ecological Appraisal prepared by Aspect Ecology dated August 2020. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To safeguard the biodiversity and nature conservation value of the site, in accordance with policy 7.19 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS3 and DM6 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

17 Permitted Development Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order (England) 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no telecommunications equipment shall be installed on the roof of the development hereby approved without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

18 Car Parking The car parking shown on the approved plans shall be provided with a hard-bound, adequately-drained, dust-free surface prior to beneficial occupation of the development to which this permission relates and shall be permanently retained and kept free from obstruction thereafter. It shall not be used for any purposes other than the parking of vehicles for the occupiers of and visitors to the development. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in

A104

Page A105

accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

19 Construction Management Plan No development shall take place (including any works of demolition) until a construction management plan or construction method statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved plan/statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The statement shall provide for:

i) How the proposed development will be built; ii) Hours of working (which shall be limited to 08.00 to 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 to 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays); iii) The procedure for loading/unloading materials; iv) The route to and away from site for muck away and vehicles with materials; v) The protocol for managing deliveries to one vehicle at a time on sites with restricted access or space; vi) The protocol for managing vehicles that need to wait for access to the site; vii) Whether any reversing manoeuvres are required onto or off the public highway into the site and whether a banksman will be provided; viii) Temporary site access; ix) Signing system for works traffic; x) Whether site access warning signs will be required in adjacent roads; xi) Whether it is anticipated that statutory undertaker connections will be required into the site; xii) The storage of plant, materials and operatives vehicles; xiii) The potential for impacts from dust and emissions during the demolition and/or construction phase upon local air quality and surrounding residents; xiv) Measures for the laying of dust, suppression of noise and abatement of other nuisance arising from development works; xv) The location of all ancillary site buildings; xvi) The means of enclosure of the site, its erection and maintenance; xvii) Wheel washing equipment; xviii) The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; xix) Meeting the requirements of the Low Emission Zone for Non-Road Mobile Machinery (where relevant plant or vehicles are being used); and

A105

Page A106

xx) The method of recycling and disposing of waste resulting from the demolition and/or construction phases Deliveries/collections to and from the site shall use a route that is agreed with the highway authority and the agreed route shall be signed accordingly. Reason: These details are required prior to commencement of development because the relevant works would take place at the beginning of the construction phase in order to safeguard the amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

20 Electric Vehicle Charging Points Prior to the beneficial occupation of the development hereby approved, 5 car parking spaces shall be provided with active provision for electric vehicle charging points and 22 further spaces shall be provided with passive charging points. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

21 Travel Plan Prior to beneficial occupation of the development to which this permission relates, a detailed travel plan comprising immediate, continuing and long-term measures to promote and encourage alternatives to single-occupancy car use shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved plan shall then be implemented and monitored to the satisfaction of the local planning authority, having regard to the targets contained within it. Reason: To ensure that appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport are taken up, in accordance with policy 6.3 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS6 and DM8 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

A106

Page A107

22 Car Park Management Plan The development hereby approved shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved ‘Cumberland House Car Parking Management Plan - August 2020’. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking in the interests of the safety and operation of the highway network, in accordance with policy 6.13 of the London Plan 2016 and policies CS7 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

23 Archaeology No demolition or development shall take place until a stage 1 written scheme of investigation (WSI) has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. For land that is included within the WSI, no demolition or development shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed WSI, and the programme and methodology of site evaluation and the nomination of a competent person(s) or organisation to undertake the agreed works. If heritage assets of archaeological interest are identified by stage 1 then for those parts of the site which have archaeological interest a stage 2 WSI shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. For land that is included within the stage 2 WSI, no demolition/development shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed stage 2 WSI which shall include: A. The statement of significance and research objectives, the programme and methodology of site investigation and recording and the nomination of a competent person(s) or organisation to undertake the agreed works B. Where appropriate, details of a programme for delivering related positive public benefits. C. The programme for post-investigation assessment and subsequent analysis, publication & dissemination and deposition of

A107

Page A108

resulting material. this part of the condition shall not be discharged until these elements have been fulfilled in accordance with the programme set out in the stage 2 WSI. Reason: This pre-commencement condition is necessary to safeguard the archaeological interest on this site. Approval of the WSI before works begin on site provides clarity on what investigations are required, and their timing in relation to the development programme, in accordance with the NPPF (2019).

24 Air Quality - Control of Dust Prior to the commencement of the development the applicant must submit details of how dust and emissions during construction and demolition are to be controlled. These measures must include the recommendations within table 21 of the submitted Air Quality Assessment. The applicant shall have regard to the GLA SPG on the Control of Dust and Emissions During Construction and Demolition. Such details shall normally include:

● A dust management plan including all recommended measures in Appendix A6 of the Air Quality Assessment

● Site monitoring ● Compliance with the requirements for non-road mobile machinery.

See http://nrmm.london/. Note: parts of the borough require the higher standards for opportunity areas. Details are available on the Non Mobile Machinery website.

Reason: To protect local air quality and comply with Policy 7.14 of the London Plan and the GLA SPG Control of Dust and Emissions During Construction.

A108

Informatives: 1. In dealing with the application the Council has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive way. We have made available detailed advice in the form or our statutory policies in the Core Strategy, Supplementary Planning Documents, Planning Briefs and other informal written guidance, as well as offering a full pre-application advice service, in order to ensure that the applicant has been given every opportunity to submit an application which is likely to be considered favorably. 2 Your attention is drawn to the need to comply with the relevant provisions of the Building Regulations, the Building Acts and other related legislation. These cover such works as - the demolition of existing buildings, the erection of a new building or structure, the extension or alteration to a building, change of use of buildings, installation of services, underpinning works, and fire safety/means of escape works. Notice of intention to demolish existing buildings must be given to the Council's Building Control Service at least 6 weeks before work starts. A completed application form together with detailed plans must be submitted for approval before any building work is commenced. 3 The Party Wall Act 1996 requires a building owner to notify, and obtain formal agreement from, any adjoining owner, where the building owner proposes to:

iv.carry out work to an existing party wall; v.build on the boundary with a neighbouring property; vi.in some circumstances, carry out groundworks within 6 metres of an adjoining

building.

Page A109

25 Air Quality Prior to the commencement of above ground works (excluding demolition), a Damage Cost Assessment using the most up to date damage cost toolkit from Defra and the most recent version of the EFT must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To comply with Policy 7.14 of the London Plan and the GLA Sustainable Design and Construction Practice SPG

A109

Notification and agreements under this Act are the responsibility of the building owner and are quite separate from Building Regulations, or Planning Controls. The Building Control Service will assume that an applicant has obtained any necessary agreements with the adjoining owner, and nothing said or implied by the Council should be taken as removing the necessity for the building owner to comply fully with the Party Wall Act. Further information and advice is to be found in "The Party Walls etc. Act 1996 - Explanatory Booklet". 4 Your attention is drawn to the fact that planning permission does not override property rights, and that if your proposal involves construction on or near the site boundary then you should take appropriate steps to ensure that you have correctly identified the position of the boundary, that you do not build over it, and that any works which affect a neighbours property in any way have the benefit of the appropriate agreement from the landowner. Failure to undertake the above steps may leave you liable to legal action by neighbouring landowners. If you require further information or advice, you should consult a solicitor. 5 The building/extension that you propose may affect a right of light enjoyed by the neighbouring property. This is a private right which can be acquired by prescriptive uses over 20 years; as such it is not affected in any way by the grant of planning permission. 6 When undertaking demolition and/or noisy building work, please be considerate to your neighbours and do not undertake work before 8am or after 6pm Monday to Friday, before 8am or after 1pm on a Saturday or at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays. 7 You are advised that the Council does have formal powers to control noise and nuisance under The Control of Pollution Act 1974, the Clean Air Acts and other relevant legislation, and that any works undertaken which impact unreasonably upon the surrounding area may be subject to action by the Council's Environmental Health Department. 8 Please note that this planning application has been assessed against current planning legislation only. The applicant (or any subsequent owner or developer) is therefore reminded that the onus of responsibility to ensure the proposed cladding installation meets current fire safety regulations lies fully with them and that they are legally obliged to apply for the relevant Building Regulations. 9.The proposed development is located within 15m of Thames Water's underground assets, as such the development could cause the assets to fail if appropriate measures are not taken. Please read our guide ‘working near our

Page A110

A110

assets’ to ensure your workings are in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you’re considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your-development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes. 11.the Council will require the applicant to undertake a road and footway condition survey before construction begins. This will take the form of a joint inspection with a member of the Highways Operation Team and will involve a photographic record and visual observation of the roads, verges and margins. The team would secure some deposit to ensure that repairing cost is covered should any damage result from the construction associated with this site. 12.A license from the Highways Operation will be required to erect off site direction signs. This same team will issue the hoarding license (if necessary) and seek appropriate deposits. 13. During construction, spoil could be carried from the site onto the public highway. The access into the site should be paved to minimise the carryover of spoil onto adjacent roads. We would also require the applicant to sweep and wash down the adjacent roads to ensure that the public highway is kept clear of debris. This is to ensure a satisfactory road surface for road safety reasons at all times. 14.The applicant should be advised to consider if a parking suspension might be needed to allow access for big delivery construction vehicles involved. To apply for parking suspension (if needed), the applicant should contact the Environment Contact Centre on 020 8547 5002. 15.Any parking that cannot be contained within the site must park considerately and safely, so as not to obstruct sightlines at junctions or site accesses. The applicant should be aware that any such parking will cause unnecessary concern and agitation within the local community; Should make full use of the site accesses to maximise the availability of off street parking 16.Reasonable efforts have been made to check that the plans submitted for the purposes of this planning application are consistent from one to the next, and that the development hereby approved can be implemented in accordance with all of the plans submitted. Should it transpire that this is not possible and that your plans are flawed, please be clear that it may be impossible to implement this permission, and that any development undertaken which relies on this permission may be unauthorised and subject to enforcement action if expedient.

Page A111

A111

17. The piling method statement should detail the type of piling to be undertaken, why this method has been selected, measures to be taken to minimise noise and vibration and a plan showing where the piles are to be installed. There are a number of different piling methods suitable for different circumstances. Guidance is contained in BS5228 Noise control on Construction and Open sites - Part 4: Code of Practice for noise and vibration control applicable to piling operations. The contractor is required to take the best practicable means to minimise noise and vibration and the Council positively encourages the use of hydraulic, auger and diaphragm wall piling methods. Where complaints of noise and vibration are received it is expected that the contractor will undertake noise and vibration monitoring, with data reported back to the Environmental Health Service. 18. Written schemes of investigation will need to be prepared and implemented by a suitably qualified professionally accredited archaeological practice in accordance with Historic England’s Guidelines for Archaeological Projects in Greater London. This condition is exempt from deemed discharge under schedule 6 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

Page A112

A112