Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Market Analysis July 2019

Home , Doncaster Racecourse

Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-16 Flashing to polycarbonate roofing working loose

7-17 Minor cracks in render to service tower

51 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-18 Damp damage to ceiling in Esher Hall bar

7-19 Damp damage to wall in Esher Hall

52 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-20 Water damage to ceiling by side door to Esher Hall

7-21 Water damage to ceiling in switch room lobby

53 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-22 Water damage to ceiling over reception ramp

7-23 Water damage to high level ceiling over ramp

54 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-24 Cracks between escalator and wall below

7-25 Damp damage to ceiling in Sports Bar

55 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-26 Infills between precast concrete units partly spalled

7-27 Duct cover working loose in Totepool kiosk

56 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-28 Damp damage to ceiling in Chasers Bar

7-29 Damp damage to ceiling in staff room

57 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-30 Cracks in ceiling in corridor

7-31 Damp damage to ceiling in Royal Box

58 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-32 Damp damage to ceiling in press box

7-33 Crack in steps to terrace from Brasserie

59 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-34 Gap between concrete steppings and asphalt

7-35 Concrete spalling on front terrace

60 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-36 Concrete spalling on front terrace

7-37 Concrete spalling on front terrace

61 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-38 Concrete spalling on front terrace

7-39 Concrete spalling on front terrace

62 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-40 Concrete spalling on front terrace

7-41 Concrete spalling at entrance to Owner & Trainers seating

63 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-42 Concrete spalling on Esher Hall 3 wall

7-43 Minor areas of concrete spalled on wall to Surrey Hall 5

64 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-44 Concrete spalling on wall to disabled viewing

7-45 Top surface of paving slabs spalling

65 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-46 Concrete spalling on vomitory wall

7-47 Section of concrete step spalled

66 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-48 Concrete spalling on side wall to steps

7-49 Plant growth on steps

67 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-50 Concrete repair failing

7-51 Render spalled on side wall to stand

68 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-52 Leaching through concrete terrace

7-53 Surface rust to barriers

69 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-54 Cracks in concrete wall to ramp

7-55 Surface rust to barrier where finishes have failed

70 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

7-56 Crack in end wall of terrace adjacent ramp

7-57 Cracks in render to end wall of stand

71 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-01 Minor area of render spalled new bin store

8-02 Paint peeling from steel around feature windows

72 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-03 Surface rust to balcony support steelwork

8-04 Moss growth in joints between steel members

73 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-05 Water damage to ceiling in gent’s toilet

# 8-06 Plant growth on private box balcony

74 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-07 Surface rust to balcony support steelwork

8-08 Water damage to wall in corridor to kitchen

75 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-09 Water damage to ceiling in kitchen

8-10 Minor surface rust to roof canopy support steelwork

76 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-11 Water damage to wall in corridor to kitchen

8-12 Plant growth on roof

77 Sandown Park Racecourse 11/ Photographs October 2018

8-13 Minor surface rust to plant enclosure support steelwork

Capita Real Estate and Infrastructure Ltd 65 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7NQ Tel 020 7709 4500 www.capita.com

Appendix 08

INDICATIVE PROGRAMME

INDICATIVE PHASING

RAPLEYS LLP 1

Appendix 09

MARKET ANALYSIS BY SAVILLS DATED JULY 2019 AND

LETTER FROM HILTON DATED 3 JUNE 2019

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Market Analysis July 2019

Esher Hotel Market

Existing: 5 hotels (57 bedrooms), comprising 3-star hotels (60%), Budget hotels (20%) and 4-star hotels (20%). It should be noted that all of the existing hotel stock comprises pubs with bedrooms rather than traditional hotels, save Sandown Park Lodge which is the existing budget hotel at Sandown Park Racecourse.

Pipeline: 1 extension (4 bedrooms) at The Bear. There is no other hotel in the planning pipeline.

We provide an overview of the hotels in the Esher hotel market below.

Marker Hotel Bedrooms Grading Description 1 The Bear 7 3-star 16th coaching inn located in Esher town centre. Offers a restaurant, pub and 9 car spaces. Operated by Young & Co’s Brewery Plc. The hotel is in the planning stages for a further 4 bedroom extension. 3 Albert Arms 6 3-star Located in Esher town centre. Offers a restaurant, pub Beautiful Bedrooms and one meeting room. Operated by Fuller Smith & by Fuller’s Turner Plc. 4 Sandown Park 21 Budget Located at the south end of Sandown Park Racecourse. Lodge Offers a restaurant and 150 car spaces. 5 Swan Inn 6 3-star Located closer to Claygate. Offers a restaurant, terrace and 12 car spaces. Operated independently. 7 The Foley 17 4-star Located closer to Claygate. 1780s village pub offering a restaurant, one meeting room and 10 car spaces. Operated by Young & Co’s Brewery Plc.

The existing Esher hotel market is evidently small and we understand that there is capacity for an upper midscale hotel to service the racecourse, local community and transient business from London and the Home Counties. There appears to be untapped corporate and leisure demand that a hotel on the racecourse would be well-positioned to service. Such demand is in addition to potential demand resultant of the 350 conference, banqueting and events held at the Racecourse over the year, as well as the 24 race days per annum.

Hilton have expressed a serious interest in the potential hotel at Sandown Park Racecourse. They comment that “Sports venues are a source of local and international pride…in recent years Hilton has developed more hotels at UK stadiums and sporting venues than any other hospitality company and we believe that a hotel and its associated components help create jobs and provide a focus for community needs”. Hilton already have two hotels in the local hotel market, namely Hilton Cobham and DoubleTree by Hilton London Kingston Upon Thames, permitting them good insight into the potential performance and success of a hotel at Sandown Park Racecourse.

Local Hotel Market (5 miles from Sandown Park Racecourse)

In order to understand the relative small size of the Esher hotel market, we provide below a precis of the hotel market within 5 miles of Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher. This is also illustrated on the below map.

Existing: 59 hotels (3,540 bedrooms), dominated by 3-star hotels (32%), Budget hotels (29%) and 4-star hotels (25%). 49% of stock is branded, with Premier Inn being the most prevalent. We provide a summary of the existing brands in the area below.

Brand No of Hotels No of Bedrooms Premier Inn 9 (15%) 699 (20%) Travelodge 7 (12%) 646 (18%) Young & Co’s Brewery Plc 3 (5%) 62 (2%) Fuller Smith & Turner Plc 3 (5%) 53 (1%) Holiday Inn 2 (3%) 306 (9%) Hilton 1 (2%) 158 (4%) DoubleTree by Hilton 1 (2%) 146 (4%) Best Western 1 (2%) 76 (2%)

savills.co.uk 2

HandPicked 1 (2%) 57 (2%) Innkeeper’s Lodge 1 (2%) 19 (1%) Hall & Woodhouse 1 (2%) 14 (1%)

Pipeline: 14 hotels and extensions (384 bedrooms). There are 5 branded hotels (146 bedrooms) in the planning pipeline, including Ibis Worcester Park, a 132 bedroom budget hotel due to be delivered in June 2021 and Druids Head, a 5 bedroom pub with bedrooms from Greene King.

UK Regional Hotel Market

The continuing rise in staycation numbers, recovery in corporate travel and the weak Sterling have boosted operational performance in the UK’s hotel market over recent years. Between 2013-2018, the UK regions saw 6.2% average annual growth in RevPAR according to STR.

We have reviewed key performance metrics of a sample of hotels within a 5 mile radius of the Property. Occupancy falls within the range of 75-82%, accompanied by ADR levels of £86-91. Due to the confidential nature of this information, which has been informed from other Savills projects, we are unable to disclose further detail. We do note however that this indication is in line with the occupancy levels being achieved by the wider UK regional market, and above the average daily room rates (ADR) of the wider UK regional market, reflective of the affluent local area and proximity to the Capital. The graph below illustrates the key performance indicators of the UK regional market over the last four years.

80 100% 70 90% 80% 60 70% 50 60% 40 50%

30 40% OCC (%) 30%

ADR / REVPAR ADR REVPAR / (£) 20 20% 10 10% 0 0% 2015 YE 2016 YE 2017 YE 2018 YE YTD May YTD May 2018 2019

ADR RevPAR Occ

Source: STR

PWC recognise a continued resilience in the UK regional hotel market in their forecasts for 2019 and 2020. In the provinces, PWC anticipate ADR to increase by 0.5% and 0.8% respectively year-on-year, converting to a rise on RevPAR levels of 0.4% and 0.8% respectively year-on-year. Occupancy is anticipated to remain stable at 76%, with the regions absorbing a net growth of 3.3% in 2019.

Conclusion

The Esher hotel market is small compared to other regional UK hotel markets, as well as the wider local market. The existing Esher hotel market is dominated by pubs with bedrooms, and there are no new hotels in the pipeline. We consider that there is untapped corporate and leisure demand for a hotel in Esher. The key performance indicators of hotels in the local area, alongside Hilton’s desire to brand or operate the proposed hotel, add weight to anticipated good demand for a hotel at Sandown Park Racecourse.

savills.co.uk 3

Maple Court Reeds Crescent Watford Hertfordshire WD24 4QQ United Kingdom

3 June 2019

William Gittus Group Property Director The Jockey Club 75 High Holborn London WC1V 6LS

Dear William

Proposed Hilton Garden Inn, Sandown Park Racecourse (Proposed Hotel)

Further to our meeting where we discussed the hotel development opportunity at Sandown Park Racecourse, I see that you have now applied for planning permission. This is a great site for a hotel and one which I believe would work particularly well as a Hilton Garden Inn of up to 150 keys. I therefore wanted to formally confirm Hilton’s interest in further discussions with you regarding the possibility of the parties entering into either a Franchise or Management Agreement in respect of the Proposed Hotel.

You will know that the Hilton brand enjoys the highest unprompted awareness of any brand hotel in both the business and leisure sectors (BDRC surveys), not only in the UK but also on every continent. In addition to benefiting from the Hilton name, the Hilton Garden Inn brand shares the same global sales, reservations, technology, loyalty and performance support programme as the Hilton core brand.

We have a proven track record of hotels at sporting venues and have just recently opened Hilton Garden Inn at Doncaster Racecourse and are under construction with Hampton by Hilton at Hamilton Park Racecourse and I would welcome the opportunity to show you the hotel at Doncaster.

Sports venues are a source of local and international pride. Often built, not just for sporting reasons, but also for reasons of destination marketing and support for the wider community. Now more than ever they are part of the entertainment industry – fans come not just to spectate but also to participate and have a great “day” out. Commercial reality also dictates that sporting venues create more income outside of sports events and generate much needed income independent of sport. In this regard, hotels have a major role to play in both enhancing the fan experience and strengthening profitability of the venue. In recent years Hilton has developed more hotels at UK stadiums and sporting venues than any other hospitality company and we believe that the hotel and its associated components help create jobs and provide a focus for community needs. The hotel becomes an

Hilton Worldwide Limited, 4 Cadogan Square, Cadogan Street, Glasgow, G2 7PH Registered in Scotland Company No: SC022163

anchor of the venue and turns it into a 365 day, 24 hour operation so that the venue is active outside of sporting days. It is all about creating a mixed use entertainment and sports driven destination that delivers for the local community.

Please note that any interest is strictly subject to contract and approval of the parties’ respective boards of directors and should we reach agreement, this would be on the basis of either our standard Franchise or Management Agreement.

This letter is not intended to be, and it is not, legally binding on either you or us. This letter and any negotiations prior or subsequent to this letter cannot be construed within the meaning of English law as an offer, promise representation or intention to conclude or enter into a binding agreement whether written or otherwise and should be considered only as a basis for further discussions.

Accordingly, and without limitation, neither party will be liable to the other, as a result of a failure by either party to reach a binding written agreement in respect of the Proposed Hotel. Consequently, either of us may cease discussions at any time. Under no circumstances shall the cessation of negotiations be construed as a breach of contract, good faith or pre-contractual obligations, and therefore, shall not give rise to any compensation or other liability whatsoever. Nothing in this letter shall prohibit either party from considering, negotiating or entering into one or more contracts with any third party in relation to the development, management, franchise or operation of hotels in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.

Additionally, efforts by either party to complete due diligence or negotiate or prepare any documents shall not be considered as evidence of intent by either party to be bound by the terms of this letter.

I look forward to discussing the project further with you and would welcome the opportunity to work with you on this exciting hotel development opportunity.

Yours sincerely

Sarah Green Development Director, UK & Ireland

Appendix 10

ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENTS

Site Boundary

01 Key Benefit Number Location

06 07

The Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd 10

05 client The Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd

project title 01. Removal of barbed wire fencing atop closeboard 05. The removal of the existing Leylandii tree cover would 10. Setting back the proposed development from 14. Ecological enhancements would include the fencing along More Lane, to be replaced with plain wire, further improve the approach to the centre of Esher; Portsmouth Road, supported by new tree planting, would implementation of additional bat and bird boxes around the Sandown Park, Esher would serve to soften local views, improving the character 06. Removal of existing built form and external assist in enhancing the well-treed character of the Sandown park Racecourse site; of the immediate context and enhancing the approach to paraphernalia, albeit at a relatively small scale, would approach to the centre of Esher; Esher on More Lane; result in the simplification of local views; 15. The establishment of additional native woody hedgerows, drawing title 11. The retention of the llocally listed tollhouse (original where possible, would provide a further contribution to wider Sandown Park: Environmental Enhancement 02. Existing close board fencing to be replaced with new 07. New landscape features would assist in maintaining the building), would serve to further maintain the approach to green infrastructure; and fencing, continuing the existing character of Portsmouth character of Lower Green Road, with views of built form the centre of Esher; Diagram Road, framing the existing Gates. filtered by native landscape features; 12. Controlled access through the Grade II Listed Gates date 10 JULY 2019 drawn by CR 03. Improvement of the conservation area through removal 08. Setting back the proposed development from Station would increase the protection to the Gates, and enhance drawing number edp5237_d013c checked BC of unsightly metal gates for the access; Road would maintain the green, well-treed, characteristics the local character of Portsmouth Road; scale Not to scale QA GY of the eastern edge of the Racecourse; 04. Improvements to the close board fencing would 13. An ecological management plan for the wider site, improve the experience of the Travellers Rest and the 09. The introduction of an active site frontage, with would manage the park in a manner more tailored to approach to the centre of Esher along Portsmouth Road; removal of existing security gates and softening of local maximising biodiversity value and contributing to wider views through the planting of new landscape features, green infrastructure; would serve to enhance local character;

Registered office: 01285 740427 - www.edp-uk.co.uk - [email protected] © The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd. © Bing Maps. Microsoft product screen shot(s) reprinted with permission from Microsoft Corporation

Appendix 11

ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENTS

17 May 2019

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher

Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

Report Number: 11932_R04_NJ_HM

Author: Nathan Jenkinson ACIEEM

Checked: Aaron Grainger MCIEEM

Birmingham ・ Cotswolds ・ Exeter ・ London ・ Manchester Contents

Section 1: Introduction ...... 1 Section 2: LEMP Objectives and Constraints ...... 2 Section 3: Enhancement Features and Management Prescriptions (Heads of Terms) ...... 3 Section 4: Mechanism for Implemenation of LEMP ...... 4 References

This report, all plans, illustrations and other associated material remains the property of Tyler Grange LLP until paid for in full. Copyright and intellectual property rights remain with Tyler Grange LLP.

The contents of this report are valid at the time of writing. Tyler Grange shall not be liable for any use of this report other than for the purposes for which it was produced. Owing to the dynamic nature of ecological, landscape, and arboricultural resources, if more than twelve months have elapsed since the date of this report, further advice must be taken before you rely on the contents of this report. Notwithstanding any provision of the Tyler Grange LLP Terms & Conditions, Tyler Grange LLP shall not be liable for any losses (howsoever incurred) arising as a result of reliance by the client or any third party on this report more than 12 months after the date of this report.

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

11932_R04_17 May 2019_NJ_HM

Section 1: Introduction

Scope of Report

1.1. This report describes the ‘heads of terms’ of a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP). The LEMP is to be implemented for the wider Sandown Park site (hereinafter referred to as the ‘masterplan site’) and is not limited to the development sites only.

1.2. It is intended that the implementation of the LEMP would maximise the biodiversity potential of retained and newly created resources, and deliver overall ecological enhancement of the masterplan site, in accordance with planning policy and guidance.

1.3. It is envisaged that the detailed prescriptions of a full LEMP would build upon the heads of terms set out in this report.

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

11932_R04_17 May 2019_NJ_HM Page 1

Section 2: LEMP Objectives and Constraints

Objectives

2.1. The objectives of the LEMP are:

• To maximise the ecological importance of retained habitats;

• To ensure that newly created habitats are maintained in order that they establish successfully and provide biodiversity benefits in the long term;

• To maintain connectivity in terms of wildlife corridors through the masterplan site, to promote wildlife dispersal and colonisation, and to avoid isolation and fragmentation effects for mobile species;

• To improve the conservation status of identified valuable and/or priority species;

• To increase the amenity and interpretative value of the masterplan site by maintaining accessible natural greenspace for users, whilst ensuring that potential disturbance effects to important ecological features are minimised; and

• To monitor the efficacy of the LEMP by undertaking biological recording of habitats and species.

2.2. Heads of terms enhancement features and management prescriptions to deliver these objectives are outlined in Section 3.

Management Constraints

Legislative Considerations

2.3. Management cannot be undertaken that would result in offences under protective legislation. As such, management would ensure conformity with the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981 (as amended), the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. Specific reference to this is made where appropriate.

2.4. The LEMP would be required, in part, to ensure management and monitoring of habitats is in conformity with the conditions of the Natural England development licences that may be required for bats and great crested newt (to be confirmed by further surveys).

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

11932_R04_17 May 2019_NJ_HM Page 2

Section 3: Enhancement Features and Management Prescriptions (Heads of Terms)

3.1. At this stage, details of site enhancement feature locations and quantum are not available. However, it is envisaged that the LEMP will include recommendations for the instatement and management of the following:

• Installation of bat and bird boxes, and insect hotels;

• Nectar rich planting to increase the invertebrate food resource at the site, for species such as birds and bats;

• Establishment of wildflower grassland;

• Establishment of hedgerows/new native woody boundary features;

• Replacement and additional native tree planting;

• Enhancement of on-site ponds, for example through the planting of emergent and marginal vegetation; and

• Establishment of refugia/deadwood piles nearby to ponds for amphibians such as smooth newt (detected as present during newt surveys).

3.2. The above recommendations are in line with those made in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment report (Report Ref: 11932/R01g), prepared for the hybrid planning application sites.

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

11932_R04_17 May 2019_NJ_HM Page 3

Section 4: Mechanism for Implementation of LEMP

4.1. The full LEMP, together with its implementation, would be secured by planning controls.

4.2. It is envisaged that it would be implemented in perpetuity by the existing Sandown Park grounds team, with initial guidance and ongoing assistance from licensed ecologists, as required.

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

11932_R04_17 May 2019_NJ_HM Page 4

References

Bat Conservation Trust and Institution of Lighting Engineers (2009) Bats and Lighting in the UK: Bats and the Built Environment Series

BS 42020:2013. Biodiversity. Code of practice for planning and development

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Masterplan Site) – Heads of Terms

11932_R04_17 May 2019_NJ_HM

Appendix 12

TRANSPORT COMMENTARY AND ENHANCEMENT DIAGRAM

transport planning practice

Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher Applicant response to Save Esher Green Belt Group of Residents

Introduction

1. This note has been prepared to respond to the Highways Review comments raised by Save Esher Green Belt Group of Residents in Appendix 5 of their letter dated the 1st April 2019. The Summary and Conclusions in Section 7 have been used as a basis for the response. The residents comments are set out in italics below together with TPP’s response. Response

In summary, the TA submitted in support of the development proposal lacks sufficient detail in a number of areas including: A review of the existing pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure in the vicinity of the site, and how this will be improved so that the development proposal appropriately takes up the opportunity for sustainable travel. 2. The scope of the Transport Assessment has been agreed with Surrey County Council (SCC). This involved a number of meetings and discussions responding to their comments. 3. A review of the pedestrian and cycle network was undertaken following pre-application advice from SCC. The approach has been to identify areas where pedestrian and cycle improvements could be made to the existing transport network and within the development sites. The pedestrian and cycle network improvements along with other transport improvements currently being discussed with SCC to mitigate the impact of the development are shown on Figure 1. 4. Portsmouth Road already has intermittent advisory cycle lanes which help to prevent cars passing too close to cyclists. The development proposals will also provide secure and covered cycle parking for future residents, hotel visitors and staff and Jockey Club staff and visitors. In addition, improvements to the cycle parking provision at Esher Station will be investigated. 5. Improvements to the pedestrian network currently being discussed with SCC include:  Extending the footway on More Lane to the south of the centre of course entrance, up to the access and linking it to the bus stop to the north of the access.  A contribution to widening Lower Green Road to provide sufficient width for vehicles to park on-street whilst maintaining two-way flow. This will prevent vehicles parking on the footway which provides a safer walking route for

30918/D/018a 1 July 2019

Transport Planning Practice

pedestrians on Lower Green Road and in particular those walking to Esher Station.  Improving the pedestrian route between Lower Green Road and Esher Station. This could include lighting and better drainage.  Provision of a pedestrian crossing facility and traffic calming on Station Road at the access to Esher Station to improve conditions for pedestrians.  Improvements to the footway on Station Road which could include resurfacing, pedestrian signing and tactile paving. These improvements will provide better access on foot to Esher Station and the town centre.  Improvements to the footway on Portsmouth Road which could include resurfacing, pedestrian signing, tactile paving and jetting of existing drainage gullies which appear to be blocked and cause localised flooding. These improvements will provide better access on foot to Esher Station and the town centre.  Right-turn lane on Portsmouth Road for Site 5. This will include informal pedestrian crossing facilities with refuges. Analysis of existing highway conditions on the local highway network, which include junctions that are subject to peak hour congestion and delay. 6. A review of the existing highway conditions was undertaken. Automatic Traffic Counter (ATC) surveys were also undertaken for a period of seven days on all the roads surrounding the Racecourse. A number of site visits have also been undertaken at peak and off peak times and on race days. 7. It is appreciated that local junctions are operating at or over capacity in the highway peaks. This is an existing issue and the development proposals will not have a significant impact on these junctions. However a package of mitigation measures is being discussed with SCC. Figure 1 shows some of the potential transport mitigation measures. The new site access junctions have been modelled to ensure these will not impact on the existing Highway network. Analysis of the accident record in the vicinity of the site, which includes a number of areas where there are clusters of accidents including involving vulnerable road users. 8. A review of the accident data was undertaken and is summarised within the ES Chapter for Transport. A full and detailed assessment of the traffic impact of the development proposal on the local highway network. This current assessment is not fit for purpose and, at best, pays lip service to this matter. This should include capacity testing and consider traffic impacts on race-days. 9. The development proposals will have a minimal impact on the local Highway network. The proposals are to refurbish the Racecourse not increase the number of trips to and from the site on race days. Therefore, traffic associated with the Racecourse will not increase. It should be noted that race days and events usually take place outside of the Highway network’s busiest times.

. 30918/D/018a 2 July 2019

Transport Planning Practice

10. In addition to the measures on Figure 1, which are currently being discussed with SCC, the Racecourse Travel Plan will include measures to promote sustainable travel which will help to mitigate the traffic impacts associated with the Racecourse. Highways mitigation needs to be identified and delivered by the proposal. Given the existing issues and the scale of development, it is highly likely that significant highway works will need to be delivered as part of the proposal to make the scheme acceptable in transport terms. 11. The Highway improvements currently being discussed with SCC Highways are set out on Figure 1. The improvements have been identified to improve infrastructure that will lead to sustainable transport use. In addition to the pedestrian and cycle improvements set out under paragraphs 2 and 4, the following transport improvements are being considered:  Bus stop improvements on More Lane, Lower Green Road and Portsmouth Road. This could include Real Time Passenger Information Systems, access for all compatible kerbs and bus shelters with lighting and power.  Improving the safety on the bend of More Lane / Lower Green Road by cutting back vegetation and improving forward stopping sight distance visibility. Measures to prevent parking on the bend could be implemented.  Relocating the access for Site 3 further from the bend on Lower Green Road and the junction of More Lane. This allows the junction to be located on a straight section of road and provides improved visibility with further clearance from interaction with the vehicles joining from the More Lane junction.  Improving HGV signing at the Esher Gyratory to warn drivers of bridge height constraints associated with the railway line. This will prevent HGVs having to reverse along or turn around on More Lane and Lower Green Road which is understood to cause significant disruption.  Traffic calming on Station Road at the entrance to Esher Station.  Right-turn lane on Portsmouth Road for access into Site 5 to prevent blocking by right turning vehicles on Portsmouth Road. This includes the provision of informal pedestrian crossings with central refuges on Portsmouth Road.  Provision of a Residential Travel Plan which will contain bespoke measures to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes whilst discouraging single occupancy private car use. The Travel Plan will also provide information on the health benefits of walking and cycling.  Provision of a Hotel Travel Plan which will contain bespoke measures to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes whilst discouraging single occupancy private car use. The Travel Plan will also provide information on the health benefits of walking and cycling.  Provision of a Racecourse Travel Plan which will contain bespoke measures to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes whilst discouraging single occupancy private car use. The Travel Plan will also provide information on the health benefits of walking and cycling. 

. 30918/D/018a 3 July 2019

Transport Planning Practice

 Provision of a Car Park Management Plan to ensure the Residential sites maintain a sufficient level of parking for the demand .  Provision of an Event Management Plan to ensure race days and events at the Racecourse are managed to minimise their effects on the local transport network and provide sufficient parking, and that visitors and staff arrive and depart the site in a safe and efficient manner. Parking matters need further analysis. If the parking at Esher C of E High School cannot be guaranteed then there is likely to be overspill on to local streets, potentially to the detriment of highway safety. 12. The parking provision on the Racecourse is sufficient for all but a one or two large race days a year. The development proposals are to improve and rationalise the existing onsite parking provision so that it is available all-year round and its capacity is not reduced due to inclement weather. The Racecourse have an arrangement with Esher C of E School for overspill parking when this is required. In addition, the provision of an Event Management Plan will ensure car parking for the Raccourse is appropriately managed. SCC are a competent highway authority and it is expected that these points will be picked up by them in their consultation response. As it stand, there is currently insufficient evidence to satisfactorily demonstrate that the development proposal meet the key transport tests set out in paragraphs 108 and 109 of the NPP, in particular: 13. The scope of the Transport Assessment has been agreed with SCC. This involved a number of meetings and discussions responding to their comments. The mitigation required for the proposed development is currently being discussed with SCC. Appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes have not been taken up. 14. TPP’s responses to the comments above demonstrate that measures to encourage sustainable transport are being put forward. The significant impacts from the development on the local highway network have not been mitigated to an acceptable degree; and 15. It is acknowledged that local Highway junctions are operating at or above capacity. This is an existing issue and the development proposals will not have a significant impact on these junctions. However, a package of mitigation and improvement measures are currently being agreed with SCC to mitigate the impact of the development. It has not been demonstrated that there would not be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, nor that the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be less than severe. 16. The ES Transport Chapter demonstrates that the development proposals’ impact on the local transport network would be less than severe.

. 30918/D/018a 4 July 2019

Investigate opportunities to widen road Investigete options to improve to provide residential parking and existing station route from improve conditions for pedestrians Lower Green Road Provision of pedestrian crossing facility and traffic calming DOUGLAS ROAD

LOWER GREEN ROAD DOUGLAS ROAD ESHER STATION Bus stop improvements DOUGLAS ROAD

STATION ROAD

MORE LANE LOWER GREEN ROAD Improve cycle parking at station LOWER GREEN ROAD

Relocate and improve access

7.3m

Relocate access, improve visibility 7.3m Improve on-street pedestrian route and provide pedestrian access

Improve safety on bend New access with right-turn lane and pedestrian crossing facilities Improve on-street pedestrian route Improve centre of course car parking

MORE LANE

PORTSMOUTH ROAD

Improve car parking and landscaping Bus stop improvements

LITTLEWORTH COMMON ROAD

NEW ROAD Pedestrian footway Improve existing access

extended to bus stop 7.29m VINCENT CLOSE New pedestrian Improve entrance and existing public park New bridge height access restriction signage Bus stop improvements

6m BASED ON ORDNANCE SURVEY MAPPING AND REPRODUCED BY TRANSPORT PLANNING ESHER PLACE AVENUE PRACTICE WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HMSO © CROWN COPYRIGHT PORTSMOUTH ROAD

4 43 The Wheatsheaf(PH) on Based on drawing nmber, Rectory the Green 11071FE_101_A_Masterplan. TPP - REF In_30 5 1 40 7 6 41 SANDOWN ROAD 38 36 37.4m 4

7 2 1 34 TELLISFORD 16 to 23 1 Key 2 ESHER 9 3 GREEN 28 WARREN ESHER GREEN El CLOSE Sub Sta 2

El Sub Sta 1

26 30.8m 12

Cinema 1 to 15 - Transport improvements brought forward 3 24 Esher Green 22 16 20 18 18 20 16 24 with development proposals Venson House 24a 13

15 34.4m 26 El Sub Sta ESHER LB 17 GREEN Bank 28 War Memorial TCBs King George's 32 19 to 21 Hall 35.5m 15 19 Elmbridge Posts 23 Instituteof Adult 32.3m PO BM 33.88m 35.1m Lych Gate EducationDay Centre 25 - Transport improvements to be agreed with LB 27 Bus stop improvements 33 ESHER Clinic 37 31 0m 500m 34 35 39 26 El Sub Sta Citizens Advice SSC Highways 24 Bureau Regency House 47 18 49 Christ Church 13 T:\30000_Projects\30918 Sandown Park Racecourse, Esher\ACAD\038_A.dwg Sorting Office 16 1:5000 @ A3 Potential transport improvements

70 Cowcross Street London, EC1M 6EL t: 020 7608 0008 Figure 1 transport planning practice w: www.tppweb.co.uk

Appendix 13

FEASIBILITY PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE POLICY

COMPLIANT REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Da t e : 24 Church St. West, St. Church 24 Woking,Surrey, 6HT GU21 350 494 01483 [email protected] www.prc-group.com Architecture Planning Master Planning UrbanDesign Interiors Landscape Offices Woking London Keynes Milton Warsaw therein remains therein nd specification orbills specification nd Rev: Drawn /Chkd : Date : Date the scale bar. scale the ions to be checked onsite. checked be to ions 07.05.2019 P r e l i m i n a ry m na i Pi l re l v a ppr o A Checked by : by Checked MC Drawing _ : No Stage FE_201 @ A1 : @A1 vested in the PRC Group PRC the in vested The copyright of the drawings and designs contained designs and drawings the of copyright The C R e Rv i is sn o : Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd ClubJockey Racecourses Scale 07/05/2019 11:52:56 Preliminary Issue Preliminary C l e i t n : e P c rt j : o Park Sandown Dr a i w g n li et T : Residential led mixed use development 2500 1: 11071 : IssueStatus n o i t ruc nso t C n o i t a rm o Inf Tde e r n Figured dimensions only are to be used. All dimens All used. tobe are only dimensions Figured a drawings between and drawings between Differences Group. PRC tothe reported be to quantites of using scaled be can drawings purposes, ForPlanning

Job No : JobNo

n n i i

a a

r r

D D Marquis of Granby (PH) 15.4m

Service Centre AA Patrol

y y

r r

t t

n n

a a

G G

l l

a a

n n

g g

i i

S S 13.6m

n i Thames Ditton and Esher Thames Club Golf

a r

D North 13.8m

Yew Tree Yew Cottages

1 1

8 8

4 4 Car Park Car

15.9m

5 Common Littleworth Common

y y

r r

t t

n n

a a

G G

l l

a a

BM 13.84m BM

n n

g g

i i

Littleworth Common Littleworth

S S

Golf Course Course Golf

D D

A A

O O

R R

H H

T T

Ditton Common Ditton

O O

M M

S S

T T

Littleworth Common Littleworth

R R

e e O

) O )

P P h h

t t

m m

u u

y y

( (

R R

h h

t t

e e

a a

h h

P P

T T

n n

i i

a a

r r

D D Golf Course Course Golf Ditton Common Ditton 14.2m 18.1m BM 17.61m BM Path (um)

17.7m

D D

A A

O O

R R

1 1 2

H H 4

T T

R R

O O W W E E L L T T I I T T L L 16.6m 18.4m )

(

1 9 9 h 1

t 2 a

3 3

1 2

5 1 5 1 Works (um) Path S TE NA

) )

m m

u u

( (

h h

t D D

a a

P A

18.2m 5 A

E E

M M

E E

L L

T T

I I

L L

14.4m

5 5

Foot Bridge

1 1

0 0

N 1 1 1 A 1

Mile Stone

m m 20.0m

1 1

8 8

. .

4 4

) )

1 1

m m

u u

( (

M M

h h

t t

B B a a

P P TCB ROAD TATION

S 19.2m

1 1

2 5 5

1 a

Drain d a 9 a 9 tion Ro LITTLEWORTH Sta 8 Esher Station Esher

) ) D

m m u ( ( u A

h h

a t a t A P P TION RO STA O R

M 21.0m D D

O A A

O O

R H

1 1 T

N R

E LB O

E E

R R

E 1

G G 55

N N

e e

s s r r

u T

o o

C C O O

I e

e TCBs

c c

a a

R R n

n L T T i i

a a

S S

r r

E E

D D

n n

i i

a a W W

r r

D D Garage 1 Churston House Churston

5 1 4 Drain 4 1

PLACE

E E

S S

15.0m

O O 6

6 1 L L

11.0m

C C

S S

N N

A A

ER E

EMB s H L L 1 1 e 1 1 T

m R R R

NE 4 SITE ha e in O O LA O T us ra W

o D LE

1 H T 1

5 IT 5 5 L 5

19.5m

1 1

6 6

3 3

1 1 3

3 TE GA N n W ala

DO th

1 N La 1

E E

23.3m

s ld w

w ie e

e nf

M le

G s s

e e

s s

5 5 m m a a e e

a a

y g

h h

a r a

t t

T T e

t s t

Ro o LB C

6 6

a a

s s

t t

n n

a a

1 r

G G

6 6

18.9m

1 1 B B 4 4

n n

i i Bracken Lea

a a r r

D D House Littleworth 2 2

e e

s s

r r

9 9

u u

E E

Sandown Park Sandown T

o o D D

A A

2 2

C 7

G G

1 1

O O

R R e e

N 9

c c H

WN W

T T a a

O O

U U

R R 5 D D

1 O 1

N N

8 8

M M

1 1

A A

S S

T T

R R

D D

O n A A i P

P ra

7 D 7

O O

R R

s s

N N

e e

E E

g g 1

a 0 t t

E E

t AD

o O

2 2

R R

E R E

S S

O O

1 1

C L L C

C N C

U U A A

E E

e 1 1 N N e O

I I

T T l

G G R M R

A A t

M M t

M r

r O

y C R

R H

M M T

Ditton Lea R E E O

LEW

W ITT

L 18.0m

O O

L L e e

g g

a a n n

t t

o o

o ow

C C

d d

4 4

n n

a a

S S Tennis Court 17.7m

7 2 2 16.1m Golf Course Course Golf

1 5 2 ge ta ot

t C ge

on d 3 Lo 3 um t rt a on be es e m Al g BeB u tta ea Co B El Sub Sta Grants Cottages Grants

17.4m 3333

E E

S S

O O

L L

1 1

C C

Rosemary House Rosemary D

O O

BM 17.23m BM 3

O O

s W W

g T T

BM 25.20m

S S

e e E l E

s s r

r r

u W

Subway u k k 1

o F r

C C

a a

P P

e e

c w

n n

a T w w R R

o o

d d

n 27 43

a a

S S

N N E E

R R

W W A A O O D D

2 2 24.5m

8 1

1 1 5 7 2 17.7m

39 Cheltonian Place Cheltonian

24.9m

R R E E R R E E H H H H S S S S E E E E R R E E H H S S E SE E

WESTW LO

OOD C 23.7m

2 2

e 3

e e

s 5

s s

u u

2 r o o

1 u

H H

o o

1 1

2 2

n n

C C

Signal Gantry D

e e

A A

e e

O O

c 1

W 2

a a

R R

H H

6 2 2 6

T T 8 8

2 25.3m U U

O ROAD

M EW 6

6 N S El Sub Stas S

T T

R R

0 0

O O 3 3

P P The Toll House Toll The The Toll House Toll The

22.8m AD RO NEW 1515 19

25.2m 9 9

1 1 (Hatton Hill Day Nursery) Day Hill (Hatton (Hatton Hill Day Nursery) Day Hill (Hatton

2 2

2 17 2 10.3m BM 24.44m BM iles e T 1 Blu 1 2 9 3 Posts 0 od Posts ewo l Pine

g m Trees

Tan .90 7 2 7 2

2 2 4

4 m m 2

BM 2 0 0

0 0

5 5 3 3

. .

5 5

The Barn The

2 2

M M

1 1

6 6

B B 22.3m

Little Orchard

1 1

4 4

5 5

18.9m

2 2

7 7 2

2 5a

1 1

3 0

1 1 6 6 4 4 2

2 Pond 3 3 Green Willow

D 25.1m OA PC PC R NEW

1 1

3 3

e e

s Pond 2 2 r r

u u

o o

C C

e e

c c

a a

R R 6 n n

i 1 to a a

r 1 D D 21.2m

10.5m

6 6

1 3

Furlongs 4 4

4 4 LB Tennis Court

Tank 4 4

4 8

E E T T A A G G

K K

C C I I

R R

A A

C C

19.9m 2 1 1

4 4

2 2 D D

A 7

O 21 R R

H H 2 2

T T 4 4

U U

O O 25.2m

M M

S 1

T T

R R

5 5

O O

P P

6 6

6 1

5 5 11.7m m ) 43

25.

Reservoir BM

K K

R R

7 2 2

2 2 A A

Cedar House

P P E E

R R

M M

A A

0 4 4

M M H H 1 1

N N W W

R R

O O

L L U U

3 L L

I B B

5 5

H H

WI W

n n

i i

S S

m m

E E

2 2

a a

3 3

A A

7 7

1 1

r r

C C

S S

A A

1 1

. . D D

L L

D A D

P P 1 1

Garden Cottage

N N

2 2

1 s

N e Villla

Selbourn A A

O O

( Tennis Whitelands

Court

21.0m

L L

T T M

M ND

1 1

R R 25.1m

D B B D E

5 5 D E

O E B B

O 1 O

W M Linden

O O

E AD P P

W W O

d N

E E

4 4 W

a 2 O H H t Coverack

Lodge D

S 5 T T b N u Hunters 1 A

El S S

a 28

3 o

3 El Sub Sta

5 5

m m

e e

8 8

1 1

9 9

s s

0 R 0

r r

8 8

. .

u u h

1 t

2 o

9 o r

1 1

C C

Hazel Cottage

M M w

e s

B t c c

7 a a a e

11.4m h h s

R 10.9m R C u

t H

1 1 1

1 6 6

4 Lyndale 4 Golf Course Golf

u D

A D

O AD

8 R A D D O

8 O

1 1 A A

o R R

O O

R R W

W W O

O O shton 6 R R A Tennis

8 Court

Meads B BR L B m L

IL L

L L

LB I

H I

H H

4 Y s N 8 N

A 15 to 20 Brock House

5 5

2 2

W E

22.8m 5 5

E 1

8 8

E V E

t R R

O 5

t t

R R

G e Bemerton

u E E s s

G G r TCB r o o

w w

u r u C C

o o

r H H

o o

b b

l l

C C

l l

i i

S S

H H e e

c E E

R R

a o

a Clare House

E E R R

W 4 W

Pond

1 1

o 6 o

t O t O

2 2 P

L 1 L

e e

s s

r r 9

Meadowbrook Farm Meadowbrook u

u Royston

o o

C C

1 1

2 2

5 5

e e

c c

1 1 a a

2 2

1 1 Court Hillbrow

R R

4 4

1 1

o o

t t

1 1

1 1 1 1 7

7 Chalfont

25.9m

n n

i i

a a r

r Hillmorton

D D

4 4

8 8

6 6 25.4m

White Tennis Court

The Gate House

1 1 Heather Bowling Green Bowling w ro rb ai Courtfield F

BM 26.86m

6 6 Fair View

Haslemere Fair Fair Oak

Signal Gantry

9 9

6 e Golf Course Golf 8

8 s 7 7 u o 7 6 H 26.4m

Sandown Park Sandown w 79 ro 11.6m

7 Park Sandown b 7 ill H

75 1

73 1

e e

s s

r r

u u

D D

o o A 27.7m A

O O

C C

n n

i i

E R

IV 3 3

e e

DR a

r K r

2 c O 2 T

RO T 1 1

a a

D B D U

RAN U

O O R C R

TCB e

M M s s

u u S S

T T o o

H H R R

O O s s

P P 7 7

w w 8 8

e e

8 r 8

2 2 d

8 d 8

n n

A A

Sub Sta t t

S S Pond

6 6 4 4

6 6 El 0 0 Sta Sub MP.75 Civic Centre Civic

1 3

6 2 8 o

8 to

5 5 9

9 6

Terraces 1 1

1 1

1 to 28

1 1

t t

o o

1 1

5 5

11.6m

n n

i i

e e

c c a a

r r

a a

2 r

r 2 r

2 D

0 e Wootton

T T

8 8

0 0

1 1

D D

A A

MIXED USE USE MIXED

O O

Golf Range Golf

R R

2 2

t 9 t 9

o o

4 3 3

S S 4

A A

L L

G G

Golf Range Golf

U U

5 5

O O

0 0

1 1

D D Grandstand

12 Hall George's King

2 Clinic

4 3

8 8

1 1

1 30.8m

E E N N U U E E V V R R

A A 34.0m I I L L A A B B Parade Ring Parade 1 10

02 0

s s LED RESIDENTIAL

e Bureau

c c

2 2

2 5 2 5 a a

r r

r r 2 3 3 2

e e

T T

Citizens Advice Citizens

3 3 5

13 5

1 1 1

1 Stone

PC PC 1 1 1 Totalisators 5

DEVELOPMENT SITE DEVELOPMENT 7

8 8

2 2

7 9 7

9 1 1 6 3 3 6

1 1 3 0 3

0 s

ace 1 2

ra 2

r 9 Lodge 1 Te 1 to The

Playground 21

P Library O

R R E E H H S S E E R R E E H H S S E 2 E

5 5

5 ATH

9 P s s

t H s

s RC n

n U o

i o

i CH

6 6 2 LD

P 7 O

a a 1 1 r

r 2

0 3

D D 1

3 3

1 1 6

6 3 3

3 3

1 1 8

8 3 1 1 5 Library 37 E S LO

Grandstand C 3

1 N 9

11.7m E 0

2 R 2 R A

W 32.3m th Winning Post 4 a

2 h P

6 6 rc

2 a 2 hu 4 24 C

TCBs d

Ol 8 8

2 2

5 5

a a

t 8 t 8

S S

b b

u u

S 4

7 2 2

l E 3 3 E

6 E Cinema U

n n

i i

a a

r r

Bank V

D D

Bank A 3 3

St George's Church George's St R

7 7

BM 33.88m BM A

o o t

P t

1 1 R Golf Range Golf 67a E ESHER H REMAINING RACECOURSE RACECOURSE REMAINING

Post

7 7

5 39.87m BM

House

n 1 i i

a a

a Westgate

4 4 r

r e

3 Golf Course Golf 3

D D s u o H

Golf Range Golf

n 53 Bank o o

El Sub Sta

5 5 5

s 5

7 7

n 6

e 6 se V

ou 57 R H 5 Posts UTILIZED FOR AMENITY PUBLIC FOR UTILIZED b

lu 59

C ouse n

n H

i i

wick a

a ar r

r W D

D 65

n n i

i North

a a

r r ge

n Lod

D D d klan

The Bear Hotel Bear The Buc

Eclipse Pavilion Eclipse

5 5 e e Club

Club s

6 Hou

6 6

4 6 4 pe 1

Slo

Ski 71 e

8 NE

r 1 LA 8

8 T 4 4 39.2m N EMO LAREMR N C

34.4m E E El

11.6m

2 R 0 0

5 Lower Green Lower G 5 G Park Sandown 0

2 Sub Sta

T T

E E

p e p e

S o l S l o 1 PO

i k k i

S S

E E

e e 5

R R

s s

R 2 T T

r r

5 5

S S

12 u

H The Warren The H

o 2 H

Posts

2 G

S I C C

H H

El Sub Sta

t t

f i i f

i E

T T

k k 4 4 S S e e

5 5

E E

c c Office Sorting

E E

a a

9 6

D D

5 5

R R

R R R R

T T

O O

S S

1 e e

n H n S

S t t

I I

e o o L L

u G u

i I i

0 t 0 t

t t

i i

6 6 E E

H 7 t t

a a T

T 7

s s

c c

n n

e 4 e

u u I

AY I

r 2 r

WAW

t d t AN d

R BM 11.93m

R e

A n k

E E

e e

t t

a Mon l

d d

i i

C B

r r

Bank

y b y b

a a

w A A

e a

l 9

e e

s s f f

D D

p 7 o o

l l r r

S o

E E

i i

k k

u u 1 1 S S

o o

) )

C C

m m

e e

u u

( (

c 7

h PH

o a

a 9 t t

a a

R 36.2m

t t 2 i f i f P P

L L

k k

S S

1 1 n D Fn 1 1 i

a Ski Centre

El Sub Sta

2 2 6 6 L D 6

6 House

0 0 2 Trough

4 4 Regency 1 1

1 1

3 3

5 5

3 4 7

1 T 7 6 6 6 EE 1 TR S LB 18

Esher Esher Green

1 1

3 3 2 2 7 6 H 7 2 RC HU

4 C

1 1 7 7

8 8 8 7 2 7

36.5m D

D 1

The Warren The

A to

1 2

8 8

O O 2

37.8m

(PH) R

R Green the on Wheatsheaf The

e e

s PH u u

o o

H H

e e

t t

e e l l

SL f n SL n

Gardens y a Allotment a

34 W

N N

4 4

8 8

E E

E N Pitch and Putt Golf Course Golf Putt and Pitch

R E

e e 6 6

E 8

G G s s

r R

8 8

u u

8 G 8

o o

0 0

C C

9 9 R R

E E e

e 36 E

c H

W S

a E WarMemorial 35.5m

O 38

R R L L 40

h 1

3 3

5 c 5 r r 1 1

u House Bewley h h

C 4

n n

i i

a a

r r

D D

6 Green Esher

8 8

4 4 9 9

1 1 3

Sandown Park Sandown

E E

C C

Lych Gate 8 A

Pitch and Putt Golf Course Golf Putt and Pitch L

P P

R R

E E

46 H 4

e e

T T d d

l l

g g

A A

37.4m r O O

o o

Sandown Park Sandown E

e e F F

H H

h h

n n

i i T T

Golf Course Golf

a a

r r 11.9m

FB D D 54 ta b S l Su NE E E LA 20 MOR

Terrace 2 2 2 5

AD 5

37.3m RO 38.0m a

a K 6

6 R 4

4 PA

1 1

3 3

Car Park Car

4 4

0 0

3 4 3 4

1 1

5 Christ Church

5 E BM 12.43m BM 1

1 AN E L

ESHER ESHER R

1 1 4

D D 4

1 Winning Post

3 3 1 1 a a 5

A A 5

BM 39.32m BM t

o O

O 1

R R

Allotment Gardens Allotment

S S

A A 8

L L

G G

n n

b b

U U i i

0 0

5 5

1 1

a a

O O

3 3 r r

D D D D

9 Winning Post

4 4 7 7

Charlotte Mews Charlotte

33.6m 8

a a 5

5 14 1 3

3 1 2 1

2 7

9m 7

4 1

BM 35.

4 4

9 1 5 5 1 4

5 1

7 7 4 3

1 6

3 3

1 1

e e

r r

E E

Rectory

a a V 35.1m V

u u

O FB O

3 3

q q

3 3 R R

S S

G G

k k

r r Y

5 Y

5 MP15

a 4 a

6 E 1 1 LB

S S P P

L L

O O

W W 31

8 1 8 5

FB E NU

A e

1 1 s E s

5 C

LA o l

P l 19

R 7 C

E C

4 4 H

27a 2 S

s s 9 9

10 E '

n n

e e

1 1

e e 1 1 7

El Sub Sta 1

3 3

6 t 6

12.0m u o

2 2

6 6 Q Q

1 1

0 D

5 OA

E Y R

n n

i 7 E N NE

a LS

Dr Dr

A O

6 W

L L 1

1 1

9 9

2 2

4 4

S S

A A

2 2

2 M

A AM

L L 1

Starting Posts 1 1 4 4

m m

0 0

SITE 3 SITE 1

. .

7 7

2 e 2

ace Cours M

R M

B B

3 3

2 2 2 3 3 LB

3 4 5

t o VE

2 A

R L E L

5 6 OW L 1 T L 15

1 HI

E HI

6 E

4 4

S L S

7 EF A

YN A M

WA 1 M

M M A

NENE A 4

4 RERE LA L

MO L

3 3

Tennis Court

o o

House t t

Wolsey

33.0m

0 0

2 2

5 1 5 4 4 1 4 1 1 1

7 1

7 14

2 0 3 0 7

1 61 5 7

3 1 2 1 n

5 n i

43 1 155 i

1 a

r r

9 1 D 14 D

2 7 2 1 15 21 2 1

3 ne

3 3 1

a 1

L t

D D r

A A O

R R

3 3 u M M R R A A 1 F

F o E 1 1 e S 1

r s C LO

ni N C

o n E O T

Te S AT

O O L

M L C C

7 9

1 1

T T

N N

E E

12.1m E C

5 C

3 3

N 6 N

I I

7 U

7 V

3 3 5 5 N

1 N

0 0

58 E

1 1

V V

3 3 A A

3 3

62 7 3 LB 3 9 9

7 7

4 4 2 2

3 3

8 4 4 8

E E

24.3m 1 1

77 C C

4 4 2 2

12.1m A A

1 1

L L

P P

Lower Green D

LANE OA

2 MORE R

6 6 2 2 E N R E

A E V

L 2 E I

BM 17.47m BM U

4 4 L 1 1 1

7 7 H

34.5m N C

ORE S 1

5 M 5

2 2 7 E 7

E a 1 1

o o

t t A

7 R

E 4 4 5 5

36.5m W E

VE V

I I

T 5 in R

Dra 30.6m

DR D

6 6

EN E E

E E

T R R

4 a 4 9

2 9

G G 4

1 1 6 6 1 L 3

3 35.00m BM

R F

E E

ER E E

S N H

2 to 4 12.61m BM O O Y

6 S BM 30.68m BM

L L

ESH E A

C C

F F

I 1

R R n n

i i

a a

R R

1 r

D D

E E

H H

11.9m

S S

6 6 TCB

o o

D D

t t n n

i i

School High E of C Esher Surgery

A A 1 1

a a

m m e r

rrac r O

Te O 2

2 ns D r D

Bu El Sub Sta

R R

9 9

. .

L L

1 1

L L

1 1

I I

10 M M

M 22

0 0

B B 2 2

38 4

3 n

i 11.7m i

2 2

a a

d d

r r

1 1

n n

D D o o

n n

i i

P P

a a

D r 1 1 2

OA 2

LOWER GREEN LOWER D

R D 3

FARM 3

a a

3 3

a 1 1

2 2

9 9 1

2 8

5 1

5 5 9

11.6m a

5 5

b b n n

i i

7 7

a ESHER

r r

D D

E E

S S

O O

L L C C

N N

O O

N N

R R

E E

B B A A ' ' D D

1 1 1 1

2 2

1 E 1 7 7 1

S t S

o 1 6

0 O

L L

2 C

N N

O O

N N 1 1 a 7 7 a

U R

E E

B B

A A

' '

NUE N D 1 1 9

9 E

3 3

3 V

1 1

2 2

9 Pond A

1 3 3 1

3 3

2 E 2

CEC

1 A

1 5

r t t r

u u

o o

C C

m m r r

a a

F P F P d d l l O O

n n E

i 2 i

6 6

a a

r r HHE

D D 2 S El Sub Sta

2 E 32.3m

5 5

3 3 3 3 1 E

Oak House LOS

n n i

i C

1 G a

a N r

r I 5

5 T D D N HU 250m

9 6 9 29.0m

Games Courts Games

3 3

5 5 4 Signal Gantry Games Court Games

12.1m

2 2

Open Air Open Theatre

3 3

5 5

1 1

n n i i

a a

r r 1

D D

n n

i i

4 4 a a 0 0 o i

a 5 D r D

D 33.9m

a a

0 0

1 1

Lodge

Nicholas

0 0

1 1

7 8 8 8 8

1 1 0 0

28.1m

1 5 1 9 9 6 6 27.4m

Recreation Ground Recreation

1 1

3 3 E

6 E

2 N

Esher Place Esher N

A 3 A

BM 26.53m L L

S S

A A

M M

A A

L L

3 AY Pool Swimming

JOSEPH LOCKE W

6 6

1 1

n n

i i

L L

a L a

I I

r r

1 1 School High E of C Esher

0 H

D 3 D 7

S S

A A

5a M M M

Playground A

L L

D D

A A

O O

33.05m

R R

L L

L L I

I 5

M M

0 0

2 8 2

7 7 2 23.1m

12.9m

2 2

6 6

LB 34.8m

8 8

1 1

in 1 a 2 Dr LOWER GREEN LOWER GREEN Highdrive

ESHER

n n

i i 9 9 23.79m BM

a a

r r

D D

7 Lammas Lodge

n n

i i

a a

r r

1 1

Millmead

D D

2 E

4 Monument

U 26.1m

MP 15.25 8 N

E 1

1 1

6 6 V

A o

o t t

R 1

1 in in E Harvest Court Harvest a Dr Dra

2 2 T

E 39.8m

1 E

k L

r r

a a

E 1 P

1 1

Court

Tennis 5 5

s s

Y s s

e e A

n n

i W

s s

u u

B B

1 1 0 0

e e

l l

ESHER o o

9 M 9 M

BM 41.14m BM

n n

i n i

i S 50

a a

a N

r E

D D

D D R

5 R

A A

G G 4

E 2

E E

S S

H H

O O

T T L L

6 C

4 El Sub Sta

R R

E E

T T

S S

E E

H H

C C

1 1 N N

I 3 W W

1 1

99 ESHER

7 7 1 1

3 K 1 1 K L A W S

A 2 2 A 6 H 2 L

P 4 3

E E

S S

O O L L

23.9m C

R Foot Bridge R

E E

T T

S S

E E

H H

C C

N N I I 1:2500 Scale 0 W Mast W

5 1 5 1 8 31.5m

E E

S S

O O

L 6

C 1

S S

M M

A A H H L L

E E

P P

D1 3

4 4 1 1

2 2

3 3

2 1 1 2

BM 23.64m BM 4 1 1 1

Swimming Pool Swimming

n i n i

r D a D a r SE LO C 'S E K A R D

Appendix 14

PLAN ILLUSTRATING ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT

OPTIONS 1-3

the scale bar. scale the h ions to be checked onsite. checked be to ions t r

N 12.04.2019 Boundary adjusted Boundary ry m na i Pi l re l v a ppr o A Checked by : by Checked MC Drawing _ : No Stage PL_203_1 bikes Bins / @ A1 : @A1 vested in the PRC Group PRC the in vested The copyright of the drawings and designs contained designs and drawings the of copyright The P1 discussionfor Issued MC 120419 C 1 : 500 : 1 R e Rv i is sn o : Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd ClubJockey Racecourses Scale 12/04/2019 14:52:43 Preliminary Issue Preliminary C l e i t n : e P c rt j : o Park Sandown Dr a i w g n li et T : Site 3 - Indicative Layout Option 1 11071 : IssueStatus n o i t ruc nso t C n o i t a rm o Inf Tde e r n Accommodationschedule: 27 x 1B2P 59 x 2B4P Total 86 flats 119 x CPS Figured dimensions only are to be used. All dimens All used. tobe are only dimensions Figured a drawings between and drawings between Differences Group. PRC tothe reported be to quantites of using scaled be can drawings purposes, ForPlanning Job No : JobNo Type B Type 1x1B2P Entrance 11x2B4P 3 3 storeys bikes Bins /

in ra D Turning Communal gardens Type C Type 1x1B2P Entrance

11x2B4P

3 3 storeys

D D

A A

O O

R R bikes

Bins /

N N

or drainmoved

E E

New drain culvert

E E

R R

G G

R R

E E

W W

O O

L L Type B Type 7x2B4P 1x1B2P Entrance 2 2 storeys Boundary racecourse to improvements bikes Bins / under T87 Existing drain Access road Access Type B Type 7x2B4P 1x1B2P Entrance

2 2 storeys

n n

i i

a a

r r

D D bikes Bins /

Racecourse service road service Racecourse New drain New culvert 1800 or drain moved TBA Drain Type B Type 7x2B4P 1x1B2P Entrance 2 2 storeys

egress culvert racecourse to access Emergency New New access/ New drain Entrance culvert Type B Type 7x2B4P 1x1B2P New New drain 2 2 storeys Villas Communal gardens Existing drain

bikes Bins /

o l

i t s i x

e c

Culvert a

extended

n Type A Type e 3x2B4P 7x1B2P Entrance

2 2 storeys

o B bikes Bins / Type A Type 3x2B4P 7x1B2P Entrance 2 2 storeys Existing landscapingretained bikes Bins / drain

Existing

Type Type A d

3x2B4P 7x1B2P Entrance

2 2 storeys a

Turning r

a R bikes Bins / NE MORE LA Communal gardens 50 m

MO RE LANE

Drain 25

n i

D Scale 1:500 Scale 0 Da t e : 24 Church St. West, St. Church 24 Woking,Surrey, 6HT GU21 350 494 01483 [email protected] www.prc-group.com Architecture Planning Master Planning UrbanDesign Interiors Landscape Offices Woking London Keynes Milton Warsaw therein remains therein P1 nd specification orbills specification nd Rev: Drawn /Chkd : Date : Date the scale bar. scale the ions to be checked onsite. checked be to ions 12.04.2019 P r e l i m i n a ry m na i Pi l re l v a ppr o A Checked by : by Checked MC Drawing _ : No Stage PL_303_1 @ A1 : @A1 vested in the PRC Group PRC the in vested The copyright of the drawings and designs contained designs and drawings the of copyright The P1 discussionfor Issued MC 120419 C R e Rv i is sn o : Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd ClubJockey Racecourses Scale 12/04/2019 15:10:05 Preliminary Issue Preliminary C l e i t n : e P c rt j : o Park Sandown Dr a i w g n li et T : Site 3 - Indicative Section Option 1 Asindicated 11071 : IssueStatus n o i t ruc nso t C n o i t a rm o Inf Tde e r n Figured dimensions only are to be used. All dimens All used. tobe are only dimensions Figured a drawings between and drawings between Differences Group. PRC tothe reported be to quantites of using scaled be can drawings purposes, ForPlanning Job No : JobNo

in ra

D D

A A

O O

R R

N N

E E

R R

G G

R R

E E

W W

O O

L L

n n

i i

r ra

D D Drain Proposed ground ground Proposed floorlevel 13.7m @

NE MORE LA

MO RE LANE SiteBoundary

Drain B

n i

D 53.6 m (Type B) (Type MoreLane Proposed 2 2 Proposed storey building storey Existing Trees SiteBoundary Existing ground level Existingground Existingtrees Proposed Proposed Bins/Bikes 49 m Existing ground level Existingground SiteBoundary Proposed 2 storey storey 2 Proposed A) building(Type Lower GreenLower Road 1 : 200 1 : 200 1 : Section A -through Lower Green Lower road -through Section A Section-B More Lane through Proposed ground ground Proposed floorlevel 13.7m @ Proposed Proposed Bins/Bikes 20 m 20 10 Scale 1:200 Scale 0 P1 Rev : Rev Date : 12.04.2019 Information 1 500 : Stage _ Drawing No : Drawing _ Stage Scale @ A3 @ : Scale PL_204_1 Preliminary Tender Accommodationschedule: x2 Studio 32 x 2B4P 20 x 3B5P Total 54 flats 88 x CPS Job No: Job Checked by : Checked Construction Approval MC 11071 North /egress N ROAD Main access STATIO

s access ement Future rov provision ary imp Bound Landscape Entrance 3 3 Storeys Indicative Layout Option 1 Layout Option Indicative

area -

Bins/Bikes t

n e

C n t l : i e Racecourses Ltd Club Jockey t e : c j P o r Park Sandown D i t T l i e n g a w : r Site 4

D : a t e

o B

4 4 Storeys

s 36Car Crescent spaces r

o area c

e /Drawn Chked: c

a Bins/Bikes r

MC 120419

o Group PRC then

t quantites of s reportedtothe to be

e Entrance

o B ings andings between drawingsand specification billor s andings containeddesigns thereinvested remainsi nt me ve ro

Ramp to to Ramp p Basement im ry da un Bo 3 3 Storeys Racecourse aledscaleusingthebar.the copyright The draw of ionsbebetweencheckedonsite. to draw Differences 50 m parking 52spaces basement Entrance to Figured dimensionsFigured only beAllused. dimenstoare PlanningGroup. For PRC purposes,drawingsbecan sc P1 for discussion Issued C R e v i n : ss R e i o 25 24 Church St. West St. 24Church Surrey, Woking, 6HTGU21 01483350494 [email protected] www.prc-group.com P l a n nng alni P I n t e r i o r s ir o r e tn I L a n d s c a p e p a c as dn L U r b a n D e s i g n g i s e D na b r U M a s t e r P l a n nng a lni P r e t s Ma A r r c A h it ec u t e r Oi f f c e s Woking London MiltonKeynes Warsaw Scale 1:500 Scale 0 Da t e : 24 Church St. West, St. Church 24 Woking,Surrey, 6HT GU21 350 494 01483 [email protected] www.prc-group.com Architecture Planning Master Planning UrbanDesign Interiors Landscape Offices Woking London Keynes Milton Warsaw therein remains therein P1 nd specification orbills specification nd Rev: Drawn /Chkd : Date : Date the scale bar. scale the ions to be checked onsite. checked be to ions 12.04.2019 P r e l i m i n a ry m na i Pi l re l v a ppr o A Checked by : by Checked MC Drawing _ : No Stage PL_304_1 @ A1 : @A1 vested in the PRC Group PRC the in vested The copyright of the drawings and designs contained designs and drawings the of copyright The P1 discussionfor Issued MC 120419 C R e Rv i is sn o : Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd ClubJockey Racecourses Scale 12/04/2019 15:10:10 Preliminary Issue Preliminary C l e i t n : e P c rt j : o Park Sandown Dr a i w g n li et T : Site 4 - Indicative Section Option 1 Asindicated 11071 : IssueStatus n o i t ruc nso t C n o i t a rm o Inf Tde e r n Figured dimensions only are to be used. All dimens All used. tobe are only dimensions Figured a drawings between and drawings between Differences Group. PRC tothe reported be to quantites of using scaled be can drawings purposes, ForPlanning Job No : JobNo road

Mile Stone

m m

1 1

8 8

. .

4 4

Portsmouth Portsmouth 1

North

M M

B B TCB N ROAD

STATIO

n n

i i

a a r r

D D Churston House Churston A

Churston House Churston

E E

s s

w w

e e

M M

s s

e e

m m

a a

h h

T T SiteBoundary 48.7 m Site 4 Site 4 (4Storey) Basement parking Basement SiteBoundary 20 m 20 10 Racecourse Proposed ground ground Proposed lvl 13.3mfloor @ Existing Ground Level Existing Ground 1 : 200 1 : Scale 1:200 Scale 0 A - A Site4 - House Churston sectionthrough Existing Racecourse racecourse car park Nursery gardens

Bo unda ry im prov eme nts N to ra o ceco r urse th Bins / bikes Proposed relocated nursery Bins / bikes Turning Bins / head bikes

Existing access for Entrance 66 Car spaces nursery development Existing trees retained from main gate Entrance Entrance

Nursery parking Block A

Block B Block C

Improvements to landscaping along Portsmouth Road Existing trees retained Existing trees retained Existing trees retained Existing tollhouse retained

Boundary improvements New access Accommodation schedule: PORTSMOUTH ROAD for residential development 27 x 1B2P 18 x 2B4P 6 x 3B5P Total 51 flats Scale 1:500 Villas

0 25 50 m 66 x CPS

R e v i s i o n s : Drawn / Chked: D a t e : C l i e n t : O f f i c e s A r c h i t e c t u r e 24 Church St. West Checked by : Scale @ A3 : Date : Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd Woking P l a n n i n g Woking, Surrey, P1 Issued for discussion MC 120419 MC 1 : 500 12.04.2019 London M a s t e r P l a n n i n g GU21 6HT P r o j e c t : Job No: Stage _ Drawing No : Rev : Milton Keynes U r b a n D e s i g n Warsaw I n t e r i o r s 01483 494 350 Sandown Park 11071 PL_205_1 P1 L a n d s c a p e D r a w i n g T i t l e : Construction Preliminary Information [email protected] Approval Tender www.prc-group.com Figured dimensions only are to be used. All dimensions to be checked onsite. Differences between drawings and between drawings and specification or bill s of quantites to be reported to the Site 5- Indicative Layout Option 1 C PRC Group. For Planning purposes, drawings can be sc aled using the scale bar. The copyright of the draw ings and designs contained therein remains vested i n the PRC Group Da t e : 24 Church St. West, St. Church 24 Woking,Surrey, 6HT GU21 350 494 01483 [email protected] www.prc-group.com Architecture Planning Master Planning UrbanDesign Interiors Landscape Offices Woking London Keynes Milton Warsaw therein remains therein P1 nd specification orbills specification nd Rev: Drawn /Chkd : Date : Date the scale bar. scale the ions to be checked onsite. checked be to ions 12.04.2019 P r e l i m i n a ry m na i Pi l re l v a ppr o A Checked by : by Checked MC Drawing _ : No Stage PL_305_1 @ A1 : @A1 vested in the PRC Group PRC the in vested The copyright of the drawings and designs contained designs and drawings the of copyright The P1 discussionfor Issued MC 120419 C R e Rv i is sn o : Jockey Club Racecourses Ltd ClubJockey Racecourses Scale 12/04/2019 15:10:14 Preliminary Issue Preliminary C l e i t n : e P c rt j : o Park Sandown Dr a i w g n li et T : Site 5 - Indicative Section Option 1 Asindicated 11071 : IssueStatus n o i t ruc nso t C n o i t a rm o Inf Tde e r n Figured dimensions only are to be used. All dimens All used. tobe are only dimensions Figured a drawings between and drawings between Differences Group. PRC tothe reported be to quantites of using scaled be can drawings purposes, ForPlanning Job No : JobNo

ce la P an ni lto he C 3m .2 7 1

D D

R R

A A

W W

R R

E E

H H

S S

E E

m .7 17 A PORTSMOUTH ROAD PORTSMOUTH

m .9 18 pathway

Pedestrian h rt o N PortsmouthRoad Site Site Boundary building Retained existing Site 5 Site (4Storey) level @18m lvl @18m level Proposed Site ground Proposed Site Proposed Proposed park Car Proposed Bins/Bikes Site Site Boundary Racecourse Racecourse 1 : 200 1 : Section A - Section A Road Portsmouth through 20 m 20 10 Scale 1:200 Scale 0

Appendix 15

TABLE ANALYSING THE FOUR ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT

OPTIONS 1-3

Sandown Park - Alternative Development Options Appraisal

Implications in Site 3 Variation (all blocks 2 storeys apart from the two furthest Site 4 Variation (removal of 5th & 6th storeys, see plans Site 5 Variation (removal of block D, see plans 111071PL/205/P1 comparison to application east which are retained at 3 storeys, see plans 111071PL/203/P1 111071PL/204/P1 and /304/P1) and /305/P1) proposals and /303/P1)

Green Belt Openness – There would be a reduction in the massing of built form The reduction in height of the proposed development would The introduction of the revised development within Site 5, despite Spatial/ Visual1 throughout the site in comparison to the application proposal. continue to bring development at the southern boundary of the the reduction in built massing within the site, would continue to However, development would continue to increase the visual Racecourse closer to its northern boundary. However, the role of marginally reduce the length of Portsmouth Road from where

association between the northern and southern edges of the mature landscape features on the northern boundary would views to the northern edge of the Racecourse can be appreciated. Racecourse, essentially the land deemed to form the ‘essential continue to limit the association between the site and the However, the variation would not be perceived to ‘reduce the gap’. Despite the reduction in built form height, the increased Racecourse. Despite the reduction in built massing within the site, perceived or actual distance’ between settlements and in intervisibility with the nearest ‘settlement edge’, namely the there would remain an absolute loss of openness within the site, comparison to the application scheme would reduce the location perceived northern built context of Esher being formed by the although the sense of openness within the Racecourse is unlikely from which this separation could be experienced, albeit this is Grandstand, would continue to result in a degree of a reduction in to be adversely affected. from a short section of a busy and urbanised vehicular corridor. the sense of openness within the Racecourse. However, with the The reduced height of built form within the site, as above, would The variation would reduce the built mass within the site in retention of a gap of approximately 480m, the Racecourse’s remain an identifiable but minor element of local views. The site is comparison to the application proposal. However, given that the function in providing an ‘essential gap between settlements’ well-related to the existing context and does not contribute to the site is well-related to the existing built context without providing a would remain. perceived separation between settlements – this would not contribution to the perceived separation between settlements, The landscape strategy for the proposed development would change as a result of the variation. Overall, the revised proposals neither the application proposal nor the variation would harm the provide a new defensible boundary to the northern edge of the would still not harm the openness of the Green Belt and the openness of the Green Belt. Overall, the both options are Racecourse, with the reduction in built form height assisting in function of the Racecourse as an ‘essential gap between considered appropriate in spatial/visual terms. assimilating proposed built form into the perceived well-treed settlements’. context. Overall, and in the context of the aforegoing commentary, the The proposed development would continue to impact on proposals would be appropriate in spatial/visual terms, but still be openness, such that it would be considered inappropriate in inappropriate development within the Green Belt as the site is not spatial/visual terms. previously developed.

Transport A review of the trip generation, using the trip rates agreed with A review of the trip generation , using the trip rates agreed with A review of the trip generation, using the trip rates agreed with SCC relative to the development proposals, but based on the SCC relative to the development proposals, but based on the SCC relative to the development proposals, but based on the reduced number of units, has been undertaken to compare it to reduced number of units, has been undertaken to compare it to reduced number of units, has been undertaken to compare it to the proposed planning application trip generation. It the proposed planning application trip generation. It the proposed planning application trip generation. It demonstrates that the predicted vehicle trip generation will demonstrates that the predicted vehicle trip generation will demonstrates that the predicted vehicle trip generation will reduce by 4 trips on both Lower Green Road and More Lane in the reduce by 6 trips on Station Road in the AM peak hour and 5 trips reduce by 10 trips on Portsmouth Road in the AM peak hour and 7 AM and PM peak hours. This reduction in trips on the local roads in the PM peak hour. This reduction in vehicle trips on the local trips in the PM peak hour. This reduction in vehicle trips on the would be indiscernible when compared to the planning roads would be indiscernible when compared to the planning local roads would be indiscernible when compared to the planning application proposals. application proposals. application proposals.

Viability2 The changes would result in a residual land value for sites 1-5 of The changes would result in a residual land value for sites 1-5 of The changes would result in a residual land value for sites 1-5 of circa £31m, against a revised benchmark land value of £35.79m, circa £33.5m, against a revised benchmark land value of £35.79m, circa £34.5m, against a revised benchmark land value of £35.79m, rendering the scheme unviable. rendering the scheme unviable. rendering the scheme unviable.

Summary Comments Alterations to the proposal would have limited impact in terms Alterations to the proposal would have limited impact in terms Alterations to the proposal would have limited impact in terms of landscape, Green Belt and transport considerations. However, of landscape, Green Belt and transport considerations. However, of landscape, Green Belt and transport considerations. However, any proposal resulting from this variation would be unviable. any proposal resulting from this variation would be unviable. any proposal resulting from this variation would be unviable. Notes:

1. Green Belt analysis should be reviewed in the context of Table 1 in the Green Belt Statement by Rapleys, dated 22 February 2019, submitted with the planning application 2. In reviewing viability, it has been assumed that: • Site 2 will remain 100% affordable housing • Average flat areas as the submission • The same construction build rate and timescales as the submission • S106 contributions are adopted at the same rate per unit as submitted, and CIL payment reductions have been carried out on a rounded basis

Appendix 16

EXAMPLES OF LOCAL EMPLOYMENT OBLIGATIONS

EXAMPLES OF LOCAL EMPLOYMENT OBLIGATIONS 12 July 2019

Examples of planning applications which included obligations requiring the applicant/developer to work with the local authority in order to ensure that local employment is maximised as a result of development:

Site: 98 York Road, London SW11 3RD Application Reference: 2015/5308 Local Authority: London Borough of Wandsworth

Site: BAE Systems, Elettra Avenue, Waterlooville, PO7 7XS Application reference: APP/13/00893 Local Authority: Havant Borough Council

Site: Buildings 4 and 5, Hyde Park Hayes, Millington Road, Hayes Application Reference: 40652/APP/2013/1981 and 45753/APP/2013/1980 Local Authority: London Borough of Hillingdon

Site: Buslingthorpe Mills, Education Road, Leeds LS7 2AP Application Reference: 16/02759/FU Local Authority: Leeds City Council

Site: Centre Point, 101-103 New Oxford Street and 5-24 St Giles High Street, London WC1A 1DD Application Reference: 2013/1957/P Local Authority: London Borough of Camden

RAPLEYS LLP 1