planning report PDU/2764/01 17 October 2011 Shepherd’s Bush Market, Uxbridge Road

in the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham planning application no. 2011/02930/OUT

Strategic planning application stage 1 referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008

The proposal Outline application for phased redevelopment of Shepherd’s Bush Market and adjoining land to provide for the refurbishment and enhancement of the market, provision of up to 212 residential units, retail/market, food and beverage spaces, landscaping, car and cycle parking.

The applicant The applicant is Orion Shepherds Bush Limited and the architect is Robin Partington Architects.

Strategic issues This outline proposal for the regeneration of the Shepherds Bush Market and adjoining land provides for a reasonable mix of uses and acceptable level of family homes at an acceptable density. Further information should be provided regarding the location of play space.

The main concerns are ensuring that the market operations are not interrupted during construction, and that the longer-term management of the market does not dilute the unique character and nature of the market. The lack of affordable housing provision, arrangements for the hostel/day centre and the level of car parking must be addressed. Further concerns are design and transport related, and the applicant is asked to confirm the impact of noise from the Hammersmith and City line on the proposed residential units.

Other issues, including access and sustainable development are generally in compliance with the London Plan, although additional information has been requested on these two areas.

Recommendation

That Hammersmith & Fulham Council be advised that while the application is generally acceptable in strategic planning terms, the application does not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 100 of this report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 102 of this report could address these deficiencies.

page 1 Context

1 On 20 September 2011 the Mayor of London received documents from Hammersmith & Fulham Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 31 October 2011 to provide the Council with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under Category 1A and 1B of the Schedule to the Order 2008:

 Category 1A. Development which comprises or includes the provision of more than 150 houses, flats, or houses and flats.

 Category 1B: Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres.

3 Once Hammersmith & Fulham Council has resolved to determine the application, it is required to refer it back to the Mayor for his decision as to whether to direct refusal; take it over for his own determination; or allow the Council to determine it itself.

4 The environmental information for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 has been taken into account in the consideration of this case.

5 The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Site description

6 The 1.93 hectare site is located in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, within the White City Opportunity Area and Shepherd’s Bush town centre which is identified as a metropolitan centre in the London Plan.

7 The site is bounded to the north by Uxbridge Road and to the south by Goldhawk Road, both of which form part of the Strategic Road Network (SRN). The site is bounded to the west by the Hammersmith & City London Underground line viaduct and the New Shepherd’s Bush Market, and to the east by the rear gardens of 2-storey homes on Pennard Road. Pennard Road is part of the borough’s local highway network.

8 The site is occupied by a number of different buildings with a variety of uses. TfL owns and manages the Shepherds Bush Market, which runs north-south through the site along the east side of the LUL viaduct. The market comprises approximately 140 trading businesses as stalls, arches and small retail units. Directly west of railway viaduct and south of Uxbridge Road is the New Shepherds Bush Market, which is not part of this planning application.

9 The site includes a 2-storey terrace of shops along Goldhawk Road; these are proposed to be demolished as part of the planning application. The land directly behind the shops is occupied by two residential buildings owned by the Peabody Trust providing supported accommodation, and a homeless persons day centre owned by Broadway. To the north of these and at the centre of the site is land that was purchased by the Council and previously occupied by the Spring Grove Laundry, which has been demolished. The Council also owns other small parts of the site.

page 2 Figure 1: Existing site (source: Robin Partington Architects)

10 Existing vehicle access to the former laundry site is via Pennard Road through an arch in the housing terrace. The market has entrances for servicing from Lime Grove, Goldhawk Road and Uxbridge Road. Market Lane runs down the middle of the site between the entrances to the market from Goldhawk and Uxbridge Roads.

11 The site is not in a Conservation Area, although the Coningham and Lime Grove Conservation Area is immediately to the west of the site and the Shepherds Bush Conservation is immediately to the east. Two Buildings of Merit (locally listed buildings) adjoin the site: the former Shepherds Bush Library to the northeast of the site on Uxbridge Road, and Pennard Mansions to the east of the Goldhawk Road frontage.

12 The site has an excellent public transport accessibility (PTAL) score of 6, on a scale of 1-6, where 6 is the highest. The nearest London Underground services can be accessed from either Shepherd’s Bush Market or Goldhawk Road stations, which are located immediately to the north and south of the site respectively and provide access to both the Hammersmith & City and Circle lines. London Overground and Central line services are also located within an acceptable walking distance, being located approximately 600 metres to the east of the site at Shepherd’s Bush station. The site is also served by numerous bus routes, with the nearest stops located outside the site, on both Uxbridge and Goldhawk Roads.

Details of the proposal

13 The proposal is a mixed-use development on the site of the existing Shepherds Bush Market, former Spring Grove Laundry, Broadway Centre, Peabody sheltered housing and shops along Goldhawk Road. The proposal is an outline application with ‘parameter plans’ which define the scale, layout and access of new buildings. A design code has been submitted along with illustrative material to demonstrate how the design code and parameters plans might be interpreted.

14 The proposal features a new mixed-use building on the southern half of the site, a residential mews with live-work units between the houses on Pennard Road and the main development, and improvements to the existing market. The mixed-use building will replace the existing terrace of shops along Goldhawk Road, providing retail and restaurant uses at its base, with 4 blocks of residential above providing 194 flats in a mix of 1, 2 and 3-bed units. The retail base is approximately 5m (1-2 storeys) in height, with the residential above it adding between another 10-25m (3-8 storeys,) with the upper floors setting back from the eastern boundary. The total height will be the equivalent of approximately 5-10 storeys of development

page 3 Figure 2: Proposal as seen form the North East and South West (source: Robin Partington Architects)

15 13 mews houses and 5 live/work units will be delivered to the rear of the homes on Pennard Road, rising to approximately 2-3 storeys.

16 This development will be complemented by physical improvements to the market itself. Market Lane will be widened to improve pedestrian and (limited) vehicular circulation. The increased space will allow the introduction of free-standing market stalls, new landscaping, drainage, seating, and canopy structures.

17 The proposal features 83 underground car parking spaces, up to 457 cycle spaces, and a servicing yard for the market contained within the new building.

18 Public realm improvements are also proposed, including the creation of a ‘shared surface’ for vehicles throughout the market, and three small public spaces. One space will be focused around the Bush Theatre, one at the centre of the site and one partially within the new retail area which will be partially covered. All the spaces are designed to be flexible and could feature cafe seating, temporary market stalls, performance spaces and other temporary uses. Twelve new trees are proposed as well as other landscaped features including seating.

19 The applicant is in the process of acquiring an interest in the market from TfL, however the applicant will only enter into an agreement with TfL if planning permission for this scheme is granted.

page 4 Case history

20 A pre-planning application meeting was held with the applicant on 15 March 2011. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

21 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 Retail/town centre uses London Plan; PPG13, PPS4  Regeneration London Plan; the Mayor’s Economic Development Strategy  Equal opportunities London Plan; Planning for Equality and Diversity in Meeting the spatial needs of London’s diverse communities SPG; Diversity and Equality in Planning: A good practice guide (ODPM)  Housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG; Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG, Housing Strategy; Interim Housing SPG; Housing SPG EiP draft  Affordable housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG, Housing Strategy; Interim Housing SPG; Housing SPG EiP draft  Density London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG; Interim Housing SPG; Housing SPG EiP draft  Urban design London Plan; PPS1  Sustainable development London Plan; PPS1, PPS1 supplement; PPS3; PPG13; PPS22; draft PPS Planning for a Low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate; the Mayor’s Energy Strategy; Mayor’s draft Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies; Mayor’s draft Water Strategy; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG  Ambient noise London Plan; the Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy; PPG24  Transport London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; PPG13;  Parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; PPG13

22 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the saved policies of the 2003 Hammersmith & Fulham Unitary Development Plan and the 2011 London Plan.

23 The following are also relevant material considerations:  The Hammersmith & Fulham Core Strategy which is scheduled to be adopted in mid- October 2011. The planning inspector found the Core Strategy sound in July 2011.  The Hammersmith & Fulham Shepherds Bush Market Area Planning Brief, which was adopted in October 2010 as a supplementary planning document (SPD). The brief is currently under judicial review on six grounds. The grounds are: failures in respect of consultation procedure; the content of the document not being in compliance with requirements for an SPD; that the SPD amounts to an Area Action Plan (AAP) and therefore should have been subject to the consultation requirements for an AAP; that a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) should have been undertaken; that the Council has failed to comply with the Race Relations Act 1976; and the appearance of fairness. The Council is contesting the claim in full, however a court date has not yet been set.  The draft White City Opportunity Area Planning Framework, which underwent consultation in April-May 2011.

page 5 Land Use Principles, Retail/Town Centre Uses and Regeneration

24 The London Plan identifies Shepherd’s Bush as a ‘Metropolitan Centre’. Policy 2.15 of the London Plan seeks to sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of such centres, through intensification of uses, including housing. The Council’s planning brief sets out preferred uses for the site to include an element of cafes and restaurants, along with residential and significant public leisure, arts, entertainment or cultural use. The comprehensive development of this site, with a provision of a mix of uses, including residential, restaurants and retail space, would therefore be in accordance with both London Plan and Council policy.

Market development and regeneration

25 London Plan policy 4.8 Supporting a successful and diverse retail sector seeks to support the range of local markets, including street and farmers’ markets, and prevent the loss of retail and related facilities that provide essential convenience and specialist shopping. Policy 4.9 Small Shops sets out that the Mayor will consider mechanisms to provide or support affordable shop units suitable for small or independent retailers. The Council’s planning brief also expects that any scheme should deliver a mix of mostly small units and a strategy of encouraging independent and specialist shops, “to accommodate the trading area of the existing market stalls and units currently operating in the market within the regeneration proposals and maintain its traditional role in the community while enhancing its offer with a more diverse mix.” The White City OAPF identifies the Market as one of three anchors in the town centre which provides important variety within the town centre, and encourages enhancement of the market to sustain its traditional role in the community and appropriate balance to the offer in the Town Centre.

26 The applicant suggests that the market has seen a decline in recent years, providing as evidence the reduction in the number of stalls and limited variety of products and stall types, as well as documenting problems with the physical environment. This proposal specifies many physical improvements to address the condition and appearance of the market, an increase in floorspace for retail, market stalls and food and drink establishments, as well as improvements to the drainage and servicing infrastructure. These improvements are welcomed.

27 The proposal also seeks to address the perceived lack of active management of the market from the current owners/operators. To this end the applicant intends to bring in a specialist market management company to operate the market going forward, and submitted a ‘Management Strategy Plan’ that sets out a general aspiration for the future operator. Crucially, however, this company has not yet been appointed.

28 Whilst the applicant has set out that they are ‘determined that the regeneration for the market will not fundamentally change the nature and unique character of the market’ and that they are ‘committed to ensuring that the market remains a location for local and or independent businesses,’ the proposal does not set out how this will be ensured. Instead, the applicant suggests that ‘the appointed management company will be required to ensure that the markets[sic] letting policy meets this requirement.’ A much more specific plan and assurance of how this will be achieved and secured must be agreed to via section 106 or planning condition, to ensure that the unique nature and character of the market is protected.

29 The applicant has also submitted a ‘Market Charter’ that sets out that rents will not be increased for 3 years from the start of construction work, and subsequent to that rents will not rise more than 3.5-5.0% per annum, in line with the RPI. Officers are unable to assess whether the proposal will be satisfactory to market lessees and shopowners being affected by the development. More information should be provided prior to the application being referred back to the Mayor with details on terms and conditions, rent levels and arrangements which will ensure that the

page 6 traders will be able to continue operating under the new management structure. This should be secured via a section 106 agreement, and the Council should also ensure via the section 106 agreement that the appropriate mechanisms will be in place to control the size, mix and type of units to ensure that the unique character and nature of Shepherds Bush Market, with its local independent traders, is retained.

Market operation during development

30 The Market Charter submitted by the applicant makes a commitment to keeping the market open and working throughout the investment and development period, and carrying out the development in phases to maintain continuous operation of the market. The management strategy plan also sets out that existing traders and shopowners who are affected by the development will be temporarily relocated to existing empty stalls or premises. An illustrative phasing plan has been submitted to demonstrate how this might be achieved, although it is difficult to assess from the submitted information what will remain operational and what will be rendered unusable at various times, which entrances to the market will remain open, and whether sufficient space exists to provide existing traders and shopowners with suitable alternative premises to ensure continuous operation of the market and businesses throughout the development period. The applicant should provide more detailed and concrete phasing plans which address these issues and which demonstrate that all trading will be able to operate continuously. All of these provisions should be secured via the section 106 agreement. Equalities

31 From 5 April 2011 a new public sector equality duty, as set out in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (the Act) came into force. This replaces duties under the Race Relations Act as well as other domestic discrimination legislation. The Act includes a new single public sector equality duty (the Duty) which brings together the previous race, disability and gender duties and extends coverage to include age, sexual orientation, religion or belief, pregnancy and maternity and gender reassignment. These are the grounds upon which discrimination is unlawful and are referred to as ‘protected characteristics.’ The Duty requires listed public bodies to consider the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations in all their functions.

32 Policy 3.1 of the London Plan, Ensuring equal life chances for all, sets out that proposals should protect and enhance facilities and services that meet the needs of particular groups and communities.

33 The application includes an equality statement which considers impact on priority groups relating to age, disability, faith, gender, race, sexual orientation and socio-economic deprivation. In all areas of potential impact, the assessment concludes that the impact of the development will be positive. The commitment of the applicant to retain all the businesses within the market, retain the diverse nature and appeal of the market, and ensure that the traders remain trading through- out are identified as key mitigating actions. The applicant also sets out that it will continue to monitor potential impacts throughout the construction programme and once again once the development is fully operational. The Council should satisfy itself that the appropriate conditions or legal mechanisms can be implemented to ensure this commitment is met.

34 Policy 3.16 Protection and enhancement of social infrastructure and 3.17 Health and Social Care facilities resist proposals that result in a loss of health and social infrastructure in areas of defined need without realistic proposals for re-provision. It also sets out that existing facilities that meet the needs of particular groups should be protected.

page 7 35 The indicative programme suggests that the Broadway and Peabody facilities will be demolished in the 3rd quarter of 2012. The applicant has indicated that a significant contribution toward the relocation of the Broadway hostel/day centre facility will be delivered as part of the s106 planning obligation. No further details of this contribution have been provided. More detail on the nature of this contribution and the relocation of the facility should be provided before the application is referred back to the Mayor at stage II. Housing and affordable housing

36 Of the 212 units proposed, 194 will be apartments in the building above the market. The remainder will be in the mews behind Pennard Road, of which 5 units will be 1-bedroom live-work spaces, and 13 will be mews houses of either 2 or 3 bedrooms.

37 The proposed housing mix is as follows:

One bedroom Two bedroom Three Total bedroom

Private for sale 81 (38%) 84 (40%) 47 (22%) 212

38 The White City OAPF sets out an aspiration that at least 20% of all private market housing is family sized. This proposal exceeds this requirement.

Children’s play space

39 Policy 3.6 of the London Plan sets out that “development proposals that include housing should make provision for play and informal recreation, based on the expected child population generated by the scheme and an assessment of future needs.” Using the methodology within the Mayor’s supplementary planning guidance ‘Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation’ it is anticipated that there will be approximately 41 children within the development. The guidance sets a benchmark of 10 sq.m. of useable child playspace to be provided per child, with under-5 child playspace provided on-site. As such the development should make provision for 240 sq.m. of playspace.

40 This development assumes that 220 sq.m. of playspace can be provided on the roof of the podium deck. This has been noted in the design code, although a plan should be submitted to illustrate how 220 sq.m. can be accommodated on the roof terrace. The applicant should also address how children living in the mews housing will access local playspace.

Affordable housing

41 This proposal does not include any affordable housing. London Plan Policy 3A.10 requires borough councils to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on individual private residential and mix-use schemes. In doing so, each council should have regard to its own overall target for the amount of affordable housing provision. Policy 3A.9 states that such targets should be based on an assessment of regional and local housing need and a realistic assessment of supply, and should take account of the London Plan strategic target that 35% of housing should be social and 15% intermediate provision, and of the promotion of mixed and balanced communities. In addition, Policy 3A.10 encourages councils to have regard to the need to encourage rather than restrain residential development, and to the individual circumstances of the site. Targets should be applied flexibly, taking account of individual site costs, the availability of public subsidy and other scheme requirements.

page 8 42 Where borough councils have not yet set overall targets as required by Policy 3A.9, they should have regard to the overall London Plan targets. It may be appropriate to consider emerging policies, but the weight that can be attached to these will depend on the extent to which they have been consulted on or tested by public examination. Hammersmith & Fulham Council has set an overall borough target of 40% affordable housing in its Core Strategy, as well as a target of 40% affordable housing in the White City Opportunity Area.

43 Policy 3A.10 is supported by paragraph 3.52, which urges borough councils to take account of economic viability when estimating the appropriate amount of affordable provision. The ‘Three Dragons’ development control toolkit is recommended for this purpose. The results of a toolkit appraisal might need to be independently verified to demonstrate that the proposal represents the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing.

44 The applicant has noted that the approach to affordable housing is a function of the overall scheme viability, as well as in response to the Council’s priority for achieving market regeneration set out in its planning brief. The applicant proposes to direct any section 106 contributions towards the works needed to refurbish the market, which the Management Strategy Plan notes will not exceed £5million.

45 A detailed viability assessment was submitted too late for officers to review or have an independent assessment undertaken in time for this report. The Council has commissioned an independent verification of the viability assessment. Officers will review the results of the independent assessment to ensure that the proposed approach is justified.

Density

46 Policy 3.4 of the revised London Plan seeks to ensure that new developments optimise the potential of sites, and applies a residential density matrix to achieve a sustainable level of provision. In central areas with excellent public transport such as the application site, the expected density range would be between 140 and 405 dwellings per hectare. Development with a higher proportion of family housing would be expected to rate in the lower end of this range.

47 Using the ‘Greenwich’ calculation method, the proposed density of the scheme would be 165 dwellings per hectare. Given the site’s location and characteristics, the Mayor would normally expect the proposal to aim for a higher density. However there are contextual constraints on the site (which are described within the design and access statement and the design commentary below), which restrict the potential of the site to deliver a greater density of residential development. Design

48 Good design is central to all objectives of the London Plan (2011) and is specifically promoted by the policies contained within chapter seven which address both general design principles and specific design issues. London Plan Policy 7.1 sets out a series of overarching design principles for development in London. Other design polices in this chapter and elsewhere in the London Plan include specific design requirements relating to maximising the potential of sites, the quality of new housing provision, tall and large-scale buildings, built heritage and World Heritage Sites, views, the public realm and the Blue Ribbon Network. New development is also required to have regard to its context, and make a positive contribution to local character within its neighbourhood (policy 7.4).

Local context

page 9 49 As noted above, the site is not in a Conservation Area, although it is located between two Conservation Areas to the east and west. There are no listed buildings on the site or in the immediate vicinity, however there are several buildings of merit (locally listed buildings) nearby. To the east of the site’s northern boundary on the Uxbridge Road is the former Shepherd’s Bush Library, a Victorian library building that has been refurbished and occupied by the Bush Theatre company. To the east of the site’s southern boundary on Goldhawk Road is the locally listed Pennard Mansions, a 5-storey Victorian mansion block with shops at the ground level. Bounding the site to the east from north to south are the rear gardens to the Victorian 2-storey terrace along Pennard Road, which are within the Shepherds Bush Conservation Area. The railway arches of the Hammersmith and City Line viaduct form the western boundary to the site, and immediately beyond the arches is a contemporary development of 3-4 storey flats, as well as a 2-3 storey Victorian terrace which is within the Coningham and Lime Grove Conservation Area.

Site layout and design approach

50 The parameters plan submitted seeks to secure and confirm the general site layout, points of access and maximum extent of building envelopes and building lines. The general design principles of the application are supported, and the layout of the proposal is generally acceptable. The widened Market Lane will provide improved access and circulation spaces, whilst the additional public spaces will provide welcome amenity and opportunities for seating, informal and temporary uses. The improved servicing arrangements in the basement to the new building are welcomed. The layout of the basement car park is generally good and would allow easy access to residential cores. The parameters plans provide for two residential entrances off Market Lane, and one off Goldhawk Road; flats in blocks A and B would have a communal entrance from Market Lane as well as Goldhawk Road, whilst blocks C and D would share a separate entrance along Market Lane.

51 The design code sets out that the access to Pennard Mews will be secured by gates at both the Pennard Road and Market Lane entrances, although this is not reflected in the parameters plans. It is unclear whether the Council has sought that this road be publicly accessible; confirmation should be provided that the proposed arrangement is welcomed by the Council.

Height, mass and bulk

52 As noted above, the site capacity is probably greater than the proposed density but there are contextual influences that prevent the site from realising its full potential capacity, most notably, the scale of the terraced housing on Pennard Road, as well as the nearby locally listed buildings. These all create a context which has influenced the massing of the proposal, with the main building broken down into four blocks which themselves have progressive set-backs creating a terraced effect towards the east. This terracing has been incorporated to allow sunlight and daylight into the podium amenity areas, as well as to reduce the imposition of bulk on the lower- scale residential areas.

53 The proposed massing ensures the taller elements of the proposal are shielded from most views and shifts most of the bulk away from the lower scale areas to the east of the site, however, there are several areas where the massing could be reviewed to ensure it is appropriately responsive to the sensitive local context. The fifth floor setback along the Goldhawk Road frontage of Block A would benefit from being pulled back to the same degree as the 6th floor setback, to ensure the mass along Goldhawk Road is not seen as overbearing in the context of the 4-storey terrace opposite.

54 The townscape assessment notes that adverse effects would be caused on Pennard Road by the proposals. Further efforts to step back and refine the massing of the uppermost levels of

page 10 blocks B, C and D should be investigated to ensure the adverse impacts to the properties and views in the Conservation Area on Pennard Road are avoided.

Internal layouts

55 As this is an outline application, the applicant has submitted illustrative floorplans to demonstrate indicative flat layouts, although these will not form part of the formal permission.

56 The illustrative flat plans demonstrate how a scheme could deliver flats that either meet or exceed the minimum space standards set out in the London Plan, with relatively generous 2 and 3- bed units in particular, although it is disappointing that only half of the units could benefit from private amenity space.

57 The applicant has proposed communal amenity space on the podium of the retail spaces, and the illustrative materials and design code suggest that children’s play space will be accommodated on these podium spaces. As noted above, confirmation that the appropriate amount of play space can be provided in these spaces is required, and that the play space can be accommodated on parts of the podium that will not suffer from overshadowing at key times of day. Furthermore, the illustrative material suggests that the shared podium amenity spaces will be accessible from the communal entrances, although this is not clear on the detailed plans; the applicant should provide further detail to illustrate how residents will access the communal amenity spaces.

58 The proposals suggest that this illustrative scheme delivers ‘primarily’ dual aspect dwellings, with no north-facing single aspect dwellings. This appears to have been achieved in the illustrative plans through extensive use of splayed or angled windows to bedrooms on many elevations, which are also necessary to address privacy and overlooking concerns as the blocks are quite closely spaced.

59 The provision of dual-aspect dwellings is welcomed, however whilst an angled/splayed window is likely to provide sufficient daylight for a bedroom, in some cases where splayed/angled windows are used for the living spaces there is a concern over low levels of natural light to the flat. The applicant should confirm how many single aspect - and in particular north-facing – dwellings are likely to be delivered, and also how many units will have a splayed window to the main living space. Some of the illustrative material also suggests that some bedrooms might not have any windows at all, which would not be acceptable. The applicant should also confirm that all habitable rooms have windows.

60 The submitted design code outlines basic principles of the design of the elevations, fenestration patterns, openings, materials, and landscaping features. The predominant materials are proposed to be brick or silver/bronze coloured aluminium, supplemented by other materials such as steel, glass and render. The design code and illustrative scheme demonstrate how these materials and details could potentially result in a contemporary and polite interpretation of the traditional styles of surrounding buildings. The Council should satisfy itself that sufficient detail and commitment to a high standard of materials and detailing can be secured via the design code and further conditions. For example, given the large areas of brick proposed, the Council should ensure that in approving materials conditions, the brick type and detailing is of the highest quality.

Access

page 11 61 London Plan policy 3.8 aims to ensure that proposals achieve the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion (not just the minimum). Inclusive design principles – if embedded into the development and design process from the outset – help to ensure that all of us, including older people, disabled and deaf people, children and young people, can use the places and spaces proposed comfortably, safely and with dignity.

62 The Design and Access statement establishes that step free access will be provided to the proposed residential accommodation, and that internal layouts of the flats will be designed to Lifetime Homes standards. Disabled parking is shown to be provided the basement parking area, with spaces close to lift cores. Illustrative flat layouts have been submitted to illustrate the future approach to flat layouts, and the statement commits that 10% of new housing would be designed to be wheelchair accessible, or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users. As the details of the internal layouts are reserved matters, this will be a matter that the Council must confirm at a later stage. All of these features should be secured via planning condition. Sustainable Development

63 The London Plan climate change policies set out in Chapter 5 collectively require developments to make the fullest contribution to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change, and to minimise carbon dioxide emissions. London Plan Policy 5.2 Minimising carbon dioxide emissions sets out an energy hierarchy for assessing applications, London Plan Policy 5.3 Sustainable design and construction ensures future developments meet the highest standards of sustainable design and construction, and London Plan Policies 5.9-5.15 promote and support effective adaptation to climate change. Further detailed policies on climate change mitigation and adaptation are found throughout Chapter 5 and supplementary guidance is also given in the London Plan Sustainable Design and Construction SPG.

64 The proposal is designed to achieve BREEAM Very Good and a Code for Sustainable Homes rating of 4.

Climate change mitigation

65 The applicant has broadly followed the energy hierarchy. Sufficient information has been provided to understand the proposals as a whole and whilst the proposals are broadly acceptable, further information is required before the carbon savings can be verified.

Energy efficiency standards

66 Based on the information provided, the proposed development will meet 2010 Building Regulations compliance through energy efficiency alone. A range of passive design features and demand reduction measures are proposed to reduce the carbon emissions of the proposed development. Both air permeability and heat loss parameters will be improved beyond the minimum backstop values required by building regulations. Other features include energy efficient lighting and mechanical ventilation with heat recovery. The demand for cooling will be minimised through the use of high performance glazing, balconies and solar shading to minimise solar gain.

District heating

67 While there are no existing district heating networks within the vicinity of the proposed development there are plans for an area-wide district heating network serving the White City Opportunity Area. This area network is unlikely to be in place prior to construction of the proposed development. The applicant has, however, provided a commitment to ensuring that the

page 12 development is designed to allow future connection to the proposed area district energy network when it becomes available.

68 The applicant is proposing to install a site heat network with all residential and non- domestic building uses connected to the site heat network. A drawing showing the route of the heat network linking all buildings on the site should be provided. The site heat network should be secured by condition.

69 The site heat network will be supplied from a single energy centre. Further information on the floor area and location of the energy centre should be provided. The single energy centre should be secured by condition.

Combined Heat and Power

70 The applicant is proposing to install a 100 kWe gas fired CHP unit as the lead heat source for the site heat network. Heat profiles have been provided to illustrate the sizing. A reduction in regulated CO2 emissions of 133 tonnes per annum (28%) will be achieved through this second part of the energy hierarchy.

Renewable energy technologies

71 The applicant has investigated the feasibility of a range of renewable energy technologies and is proposing to install 200m2 of PV at roof level. A roof drawing showing the roof area available for the installation of photovoltaic panels has been provided. A reduction in regulated CO2 emissions of 9 tonnes per annum (3%) will be achieved through this third element of the energy hierarchy.

Summary

72 The estimated regulated carbon emissions of the development are 302 tonnes of CO2 per year after the cumulative effect of energy efficiency measures, CHP and renewable energy has been taken into account. This equates to a reduction of 142 tonnes of CO2 per year in regulated emissions compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development, equivalent to an overall saving of 32%.

73 The carbon dioxide savings exceed the targets set within Policy 5.2 of the London Plan and therefore the proposals comply with London Plan policies relating to climate change mitigation. Further information relating to the heat network and energy centre should be provided before the carbon savings can be verified, and the Council should ensure appropriate conditions are attached to any permission.

Climate Change Adaptation

74 London Plan policy 5.10 Urban greening and 5.11 Green Roofs and Development Site Environs set out that development proposals should integrate green infrastructure, including tree planting and green roofs.

75 Green roofs or landscaped roof surfaces are proposed on most roof surfaces, except for the uppermost levels of the four residential blocks, which will be occupied by photovoltaic panels. Furthermore, 12 new trees are proposed in the design code and the design and access statement, along with ‘feature’ landscaping. These elements, which will increase the biodiversity on site whilst also contributing to a high quality environment are welcomed and should be secured via planning condition.

page 13 76 London Plan policy 5.13 Sustainable Drainage seeks to ensure that sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) are used where practicable, and that developments should aim to achieve greenfield run-off rates by managing surface water run-off as close to its source as possible through attenuation and storm water management. The draft White City OAPF reiterates these policy objectives, and seeks to ensure that all new development in the Opportunity Area achieve these aspirations particularly in the context of the pressures on the Counters Creek sewer.

77 Given the operational needs of the Market, the proposal is primarily hard-landscaped, however the proposed green roofs will reduce the amount of impermeable surfaces on the site. The sustainability statement also suggests that permeable paving and underground storage attenuation tanks will also contribute to the SUDS measures, resulting in a reduction of 50% of surface water runoff. Whilst these measures meet the minimum standards set out in the London Plan, it is unclear whether the proposal can meet the London Plan and OAPF aspiration of 100% attenuation. The applicant should demonstrate whether this is achievable. Noise

78 London Plan policy 7.15 requires that noise sensitive development should be separated from major sources of noise wherever practicable. The advice contained in Planning Policy Guidance note 24 (PPG24): Planning and noise is also relevant. The Mayor will also support new technologies and improved practices to reduce noise at source, especially in road, rail and air transport. In addition standard 5.2.1 of the Mayor’s Housing SPG (EiP draft) states that developments should avoid single aspect dwellings that are north-facing, exposed to NEC C or D or contain three or more bedrooms.

79 The main potential strategic noise concerns with this proposal arise from the noise exposure of the residential elements due to the proximity to the tube line. Potential adverse impacts of vibration disturbance from the railway will also need be considered. It is unclear whether the facade of the proposed development has provided sufficient attenuation to ensure that the guideline internal noise levels conditions are met. The Council should satisfy itself that these issues have been addressed to its satisfaction in the proposals. Transport

80 As noted above, Transport for London owns part of the site and currently operates and manages the existing market. In light of this interest, the comments that follow have been reviewed and approved by the GLA transport team.

Car parking

81 83 car parking spaces are being proposed for the residential aspect of the development, equating to an overall ratio of 0.4 spaces per unit. While this level of provision is in accordance with London Plan standards, it is at the higher end of what is being sought as part of the White City Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF). Given the site’s excellent PTAL and the already congested nature of the surrounding highway network, it is strongly recommended that this level of car parking is reduced to avoid negative impact on the capacity of the strategic highway network. It is noted that occupiers of the proposed development will be ineligible for an on-street residents parking permit, and this should be secured through the s106 agreement.

82 9 disabled car parking spaces are being proposed on-site, representing 10% of the total spaces to be provided, in addition to two car club spaces. This level of provision is supported. 20% of car parking spaces are proposed to be fitted with Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP’s) in accordance with London Plan standards, with an additional 20% having passive provision, which

page 14 again is supported. The EVCP spaces should be illustrated on a plan, which also identifies the details of the proposed infrastructure.

83 Car parking is proposed to be located in the basement of the residential units. Given that this location is within 25 metres of the Hammersmith & City line viaduct, London Underground (LU) will need to be consulted in advance of any works being undertaken, in order to ensure there will be no negative impacts on the integrity of the structure. This should be secured by condition.

Impact on Highway and Public Transport Network

84 The trip generation and modal split estimates for the proposed development have been based on TRAVL data for the residential units, and surveys carried out of the existing site for the other land uses, which is considered acceptable, however a reduction in car parking spaces is recommended to avoid impact on the strategic highway network. It is accepted that the proposed development would be unlikely to negatively impact on the public transport network within the vicinity of the site.

Cycling and Walking

85 Up to 457 cycle parking spaces are being proposed for the residential units. This is in accordance with the cycle parking standards set out in London Plan Policy 6.9, and is therefore supported. Additional cycle parking is being proposed at street level for both the traders and visitors to the site, with showers and locker facilities being provided for those working at the market, which is also supported.

86 The Barclays Cycle Superhighway (CSH) Route 9 will run along the A312 Hammersmith Road, located approximately a 3 minute cycle from the site. In addition, although it is not yet fixed, CSH route 10 is also expected to run nearby. Initial design work has commenced and development must promote and facilitate it’s completion in accordance with policy 6.9 of the London Plan. Consideration should therefore be given towards what improvements may be required to provide a safe and convenient cycle link from the proposed development to these routes, both of which would help facilitate cycling to and from the site in the future. Further discussion with regards to this would be welcomed.

87 As requested at the pre-application stage, an audit of the local pedestrian environment has been undertaken, including a condition survey of bus stops located within the vicinity of the site. This has identified a number of areas in need of improvement, and given the likely increase in pedestrian activity in the area as a result of this development, it is recommended that the local highway authority seeks a contribution towards implementing some of the measures identified, in particular those which would improve pedestrian accessibility in the area, by ensuring that the appropriate dropped kerbs and tactile paving are in place, alongside safe pedestrian crossing points, in accordance with policy 6.10 of the London Plan.

88 The provision of Legible London signage has also been identified as a way of improving pedestrian wayfinding in the area. This should also be secured through the s106 agreement, as a way of improving and facilitating walking in the area. The applicant should actively approach TfL and the council in order to develop an appropriate strategy for the area including calculating the amount of contribution and detailed drafting of any s106 obligations.

89 A number of improvements to local bus stops have also been identified, and it is therefore requested that a contribution towards these is secured through the s106 agreement, in order to encourage the increased use of public transport to and from the site, in accordance with policy 6.1 of the London Plan. As a guide, a new bus shelter including associated highway works would cost approximately £12,000, while the provision of bus countdown costs approximately £10,000, and

page 15 further discussions in relation to this, including the precise requirements of the site would therefore be welcomed.

90 As part of the White City OAPF, a development infrastructure funding strategy (DIFS) is currently being undertaken, with the purpose of establishing an appropriate development tariff for the area. Once this has been established, it is understood that in the future, contributions will be sought towards providing step-free access at White City LU station, which will make both Tube lines serving the Shepherd’s Bush area fully accessible. While this work is still at an early stage, the borough is strongly encouraged to seek a contribution from this development towards the implementation of this, which will be pooled with contributions from other developments in the OA as they come forward.

Travel Plan

91 A travel plan has been prepared in support of this development which outlines a good range of site-wide objectives, targets and measures. It is therefore recommended that this document is secured, managed, monitored and enforced through the s106 agreement. Including, securing an amount of money per residential unit in the s106 agreement. A detailed travel plan for each use will be required moving forward.

Traffic Management Act

92 Should this application be granted planning permission, the developer and their representatives are reminded that this does not discharge the requirements under the Traffic Management Act 2004. Formal notifications and approval may be needed for both the permanent highway scheme and any temporary highway works required during the construction phase of the development.

Alternative Olympic Route Network

93 Goldhawk Road and Shepherds Bush Green will form part of the Alternative Olympic Route Network (AORN) during the period of the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. While this is not intended to be the main route for the Games family vehicles travelling to the different venues, it may however still be frequently used as a back-up. As such, there may be restrictions on what on highway works can be undertaken during this period, and the applicant should therefore consult with TfL prior to any works taking place on site which may impact on the AORN.

Servicing and Construction

94 It is recommended that a construction logistics plan (CLP), which seeks to minimise the impact of the development on the highway network during the course of construction, be secured for the site by condition, in accordance with Policy 6.14 of the London Plan. A draft delivery and servicing plan (DSP), which seeks to rationalise servicing vehicle movements once the site is operational, has already been produced for the site, and it is recommended that the implementation of this is secured by condition.

95 The London Underground infrastructure protection team will also need to be consulted in advance of any changes being made to the railway viaduct, no matter how minor, in order to ensure that the changes are unlikely to impact on the safety of the structure, either in the short or the long term. As such a detailed construction method statement will need to be produced in consultation with LU in advance of any works commencing on site. It is recommended that this is also secured by condition and the developer should seek advice from TfL as to the necessary wording of this condition.

page 16 Summary

96 Further discussions are recommended with regards to the proposed level of car parking on site in order to avoid negative impacts on the capacity of the strategic highway network; along with suggested improvements to local bus stops and the pedestrian and cycling environment that ensure compliance with London Plan policies 6.1, 6.9, 6.10, 6.13 and 6.14; and some use of planning conditions. Local planning authority’s position

97 The local authority is part owner of the site. Council planning officers have engaged in pre-application discussions with the development team. Officers are positive about the application, but share the Mayor’s concerns on several issues, including the details relating to the continued operation of the market and the viability assessment. Legal considerations

98 Under the arrangements set out in Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor is required to provide the local planning authority with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. Unless notified otherwise by the Mayor, the Council must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order if it subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the application, in order that the Mayor may decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, or direct the Council under Article 6 of the Order to refuse the application, or issue a direction under Article 7 of the Order that he is to act as the local planning authority for the purpose of determining the application. There is no obligation at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions regarding a possible direction, and no such decision should be inferred from the Mayor’s statement and comments. Financial considerations

99 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

100 London Plan policies on retail/town centre uses, equal opportunities, housing, affordable housing, density, urban design, access, sustainable development, ambient noise, transport and parking are relevant to this application. The application complies with some of these policies but not with others, for the following reasons:  Retail/Town Centre Uses: The mix of uses and efforts to strengthen the market are welcomed, however mechanisms to secure continuous operation during development and preserve the market’s unique character must be clarified and secured via legal agreement.  Equalities: An equality statement and assessment has been submitted. The Council should ensure that the mitigation measures proposed to address identified impacts will be secured in the appropriate manner. Confirmation of arrangements for the relocation of the hostel should be provided.  Housing: The amount and mix of housing is appropriate, and there is a satisfactory amount of family housing for the proposed tenure, although the location of children’s play space must be confirmed.

page 17  Affordable Housing: There is no justification for the lack of affordable housing. A viability assessment must be independently verified to ensure the proposal represents the maximum achievable affordable housing.

 Density: The density proposed is appropriate to the local context and physical site constraints.

 Urban Design: Although the layout is generally acceptable, the applicant should reconsider the massing along the Goldhawk Road frontage and of the blocks visible from Pennard Road. The reliance on angled windows to living areas needs further exploration, and the limited provision of private amenity space for larger units is disappointing.

 Access: The proposals commit to delivering all homes to Lifetime homes standard and 10% as wheelchair accessible. The Council should secure all details via planning condition or at reserved matters stages.

 Sustainable Development: The proposals comply with London Plan policies relating to climate change mitigation, although further information relating to the heat network and energy centre should be provided before the carbon savings can be verified. The applicant should improve the anticipated reductions in surface water run-off rates.

 Ambient Noise: Confirmation is required to ensure ambient noise from the railways is properly addressed in the design of the residential properties.

 Transport and Parking: Further discussions are recommended with regards to the proposed level of car parking on site in order to avoid negative impacts on the capacity of the strategic highway network; along with suggested improvements to local bus stops and the pedestrian and cycling environment. 101 Whilst the application is broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, on balance, the application does not comply with the London Plan. 102 The following changes might, however, remedy the above-mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan:  Retail/Town Centre Uses: Commitments to secure the continuous operation of the market during construction and to preserve the unique character of the market following redevelopment.  Equalities: Confirmation of arrangements for the relocation of the hostel.  Housing: Confirmation of location and quality of children’s play space.

 Affordable Housing: Verification of the viability assessment to demonstrate that the proposal represents the maximum achievable affordable housing.

 Urban Design: Reconsideration of the massing along the Goldhawk Road frontage and of the blocks visible from Pennard Road.

 Sustainable Development: Provision of further information relating to the heat network and energy centre and reduction of surface water run-off rates.

 Ambient Noise: Further information demonstrating that ambient noise from the railways has been mitigated.

page 18  Transport and Parking: review of the levels of car parking on site, suggested improvements to local bus stops and the pedestrian and cycling environment, and commitment to secure various elements via section 106 and planning condition.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager - Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Alexandra Reitman, Case Officer 020 7983 4804 email [email protected]

page 19