Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Home , London Heliport, Mayor of London, North Acton, RAF Northolt

Ref: 191854OPDFUL

Address: Holiday Inn London West 4 Portal Way Acton Ealing W3 6RT

Proposal: Demolition of all existing buildings and structures on site and the mixed-use redevelopment of the site to provide two linked buildings of 45 and 55 storeys respectively, including up to 702 residential units (Use Class C3), a hotel (Use Class C1), flexible workspace (Use Class B1), restaurant (Use Class A3), flexible retail space (Use Classes A1/A3/A4), with a two level basement, access, car and cycle parking, refuse and service areas, hard and soft landscaping, public realm, all necessary enabling and mitigation works, and associated works.

This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement required by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.

Drawing numbers: Refer to relevant conditions (Annex 1)

Supporting Documents: Refer to relevant conditions

Type of Application: Full Application – Environmental Impact Assessment

Application Valid: 23.04.2019

Report by: Tiago Jorge

Recommendation:

Having taken into account all environmental information received by the Council in accordance with Regulation 26 of the EIA Regs 2017 (as amended) and giving full consideration to the environmental impacts of the proposed development, it is concluded that it is consistent with the aims and objectives of the development plan and, to the extent that might not be consistent with any particular policy, material considerations militate towards the grant of permission. As such, it is recommended that the Committee resolve to approve the proposed development subject to:

1) That the applicants and the other relevant persons having a requisite interest, be invited to complete the Section 106 Agreement in accordance with the detailed summary of the proposed terms of the planning obligations for this application in the ‘Legal Agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy’ section of this report, subject to:

a. such reasonable amendments as may be approved by the Chief Planner having due regard to any comments of the (Stage II referral to) Mayor of London and/or TfL and/or any other relevant comments on the Revised Section 106 Agreement; and,

b. the application being referred to the National Planning Casework Unit under paragraph 22 of the National Planning Guidance and paragraph 5(1) (c) (i) of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 and no notice of call-in being received from the Secretary of State (SoS);

Page 1 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

2) That upon completion of the Section 106 agreement the Chief Planner be instructed to APPROVE the application ref: 191854OPDFUL under delegated powers and grant planning permission subject to conditions substantially in the form contained in the subsequent recommendation (with such detailed amendments as the Borough Planner may consider to be reasonable and necessary in the course of negotiating the final Section 106 Agreement and having due regard to any comments of the Mayor and/or TfL and/or the Secretary of State and/or any other relevant comments on the Conditions).

PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING THE PLANNING APPLICATION

This planning application for Detailed Planning Permission for a mixed-use redevelopment of the site to provide two linked buildings of 45 and 55 storeys comprising 702 residential units (Use Class C3), a hotel (Use Class C1), flexible workspace (Use Class B1), restaurant (Use Class A3), flexible retail space (Use Classes A1/A3/A4), a two level basement, access, car and cycle parking, refuse and service areas, hard and soft landscaping, public realm, all necessary enabling and mitigation works, and associated works was submitted on 23rd April 2019 and supported by an Environmental Statement and other supporting documents. The Application has undergone consultation for a period well in excess of 6 weeks, including consultation in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017 (as amended) (“the EIA Regulations 2017”). Site notices notifying the planning application were erected within and in areas adjacent to the site.

Following discussions with the local planning authority, further information, to correct and clarify aspects of the application, was submitted in September/ October 2019 and the relevant procedural requirements (including further consultation) were carried out in accordance with regulation 25 of the EIA Regulations 2017.

A summary of the consultation process and responses is contained in the ‘Statutory Consultation’ section of this report, below.

The site is located within the ‘North Acton sub-area’ of the Old Oak Common Opportunity Area. The local planning authority for the Opportunity Area is the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC). Planning applications within the North Acton sub-area are however, delegated to the London Borough of Ealing for determination.

The Greater London Authority has been notified as the application is within the thresholds of potential strategic importance to London. The application has been referred under the following categories: (1A) new housing exceeding 150 units; (1B)(c) mixed uses exceeding 15,000sqm; (1C)(c) new buildings over 30 metres high and (3E)(b) includes the provision of more than 2,500 square metres of floorspace within use classes A1 to A5, B1 to B8 and C1, C2, D1 and D2.

The Mayor of London considered the proposal on 30th September 2019 and issued a letter of response containing the Mayor’s observations on the application. These comments are generally supportive of the application proposals and are reported in the consultation section of this report. The contents of this report have been considered by both the applicant and the Council and the Mayor’s comments have been properly addressed as far as is reasonably practicable through the provision of further information during the post-submission consultation process and/or the application of planning conditions and obligations.

The application has also been referred to the National Planning Casework Unit (Secretary of State) and confirmation has been received that the proposals have been reviewed. The SoS had no other comments regarding the proposed scheme. After the committee resolution, the National Planning Casework Unit will be referred to under paragraph 22 of the National Planning Guidance and paragraph 5(1), (c) (i) of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009.

Page 2 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Executive Summary

This report considers a full Planning Application for this 0.39-hectare site located in North Acton (East Acton Ward), within the ‘North Acton sub-area’ of the Old Oak Common Opportunity Area. The application site comprises a 225 room Holiday Inn hotel (Use Class C1) with ancillary meeting rooms, gym and a café.

The applicant is Gypsy Corner Portal Co. Ltd and the architect practice for the proposals is KPF (Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates) architects which was responsible for the main design and landscape proposals for the site. Gerald Eve were the consultants responsible for providing Town Planning and Viability expertise.

The proposal seeks permission for a residential led mixed-use scheme, comprising of the demolition of all existing buildings and structures and providing:

• two buildings connected by a sky bridge comprising 702 residential units (predominately starting at level 7): o South Tower with 55 Storeys and roof terrace comprising 414 new homes; o North Tower with 45 Storeys and roof terrace comprising 245 new homes o Sky Bridge at levels 26 and 34 comprising 36 new homes; and o Podium comprising 7 homes

• 35% affordable housing provision comprising of a commuted sum and 196 new affordable housing homes with 496 habitable rooms within the north tower (equating to 30.4% of the total proposed 1,629 hr) with the following tenure mix: o Intermediate (London Shared Ownership) – 260 hr (equating to 52.4%) o Genuinely AH (equating to 47.5%): • London Living Rent – 196 hr (equating to 39.5%) • London Affordable Rent – 40 (equating to 8%)

• The provision of a modern hotel comprising 159 rooms and conferencing facilities;

• The provision of 2,191 sqm (GIA) of employment floorspace (B1 flexible working / office space);

• The provision of 630 sqm (GIA) of flexible retail and food and beverage use on the ground floor;

• New restaurant and bar at 54th floor of South Tower;

• Private amenity space for residents of the Development – including landscaped terraces / winter gardens/ balconies to all apartments;

• An energy centre that incorporates heat pumps on an ambient loop which meets the London Plan hierarchy and targets for sustainability;

• Two level Basement providing servicing, car parking, cycle parking and plant and machinery;

• New accesses (vehicle and pedestrian); and,

• At-grade crossing over the A40.

Page 3 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

In terms of pedestrian access to/from the site from the west/south-west, over the A40, a pedestrian bridge over the A40; and an at grade pedestrian crossing over the A40 were considered and tested during the design process. Both of these options were considered in relation to safety, access and deliverability and the at-grade crossing option has been selected to be delivered with the scheme, with a £1,000,000 monetary contribution and space reserved for the footing for a DDA compliant bridge, when LBE decides to implement this option at a later date.

It is considered that this is a well-designed scheme which has benefited from a creative but also carefully measured design approach. The presence and prominence of the scheme needs to be acknowledged together with the harshness of the immediate surrounds, in particular in relation to its exposure to the southern aspect alongside the A40. In its own context, the scheme will act as a catalyst for change in the surrounding area whilst providing an acceptable balance of employment generating uses and animated street frontages, combined with a substantial amount of much needed housing and including a significant number of affordable homes.

The layout and massing of the scheme has been designed through an interactive EIA testing process that has been set out in specific response to the site’s context, topography and shape. The proposal would not prejudice the aspirations for the development of the wider area and it provides a development that is of an appropriate architectural and urban design quality, and it will offer ample opportunities for placemaking and improvement to the street scene, townscape and wider views beyond.

As such, the composition, sculptured form and layout of the development are supported and are considered to have appropriately taken into account the existing surroundings, which includes two storey residential property on the opposite side of the A40 just south of the site. The taller elements have been developed and geometrically configured to respond to all sensitive aspects to ensure that, on balance, both its visual impact and issues of privacy and overshadowing are acceptable.

The residential components are positioned at a sufficient distance away to protect the amenities of future occupiers as well as the existing amenity enjoyed by surrounding residents and would not be unduly overbearing. The new public realm is designed to provide healthy, animated and attractive landscaped areas for both the future employers and the residents of the development and focus on responding to, and connecting the development to the wider area to create a vibrant public space. A condition is proposed requiring the submission of an Estate management Framework to ensure that the public realm would be permanently maintained to a high standard and any potential conflict between users carefully managed.

In addition, parking for a maximum 43 vehicles with 21 for the residential units (all of which will be disabled bays), 14 standard car parking spaces for the hotel, 5 disabled bays for the hotel and 3 blue badge bays for the commercial uses. Cycle parking in accordance with draft London Plan policy and associated plant including an energy centre, soft and hard landscaping, infrastructure and highway work including a new internal service arrangement to serve and support the operational aspects of the residential and employment uses. The impact of the proposed development in terms of maintaining pedestrian and highway safety, limiting traffic generation and providing adequate parking is considered acceptable with suitable servicing proposed.

The development itself seeks to maximise the use of the land whilst providing high-quality bespoke employment facilities and residential accommodation, which include a significant contribution towards a new DDA compliant pedestrian bridge across the A40 and affordable housing.

A maximum of 702 units (comprising 1,629 habitable rooms) are proposed within this scheme and in this respect, the equivalent to 571 affordable habitable rooms will be provided as

Page 4 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

affordable housing. The affordable housing offer encompasses a combination of delivery on site of 496 habitable rooms (equating to 196 units and an overall on-site affordable housing provision of 30.4%) and a contribution in lieu of affordable housing on-site equivalent to an additional 75 intermediate habitable rooms (equating to a further 4.6% affordable housing provision). The on- site delivery comprises of 104 units (equating to 260hr or 58.7% of the AH provision) which would be shared ownership, 16 units (equating to 40hr or 20%) would be London Affordable Rent and 76 units (equating to 196hr or 34.3%) would be discount market rent (discounted to 80% of market rent). The financial viability and sustainability of the scheme has been reviewed by independent viability consultants appointed by the Local Planning Authority and is supported.

Letters of objection to the proposed development have been received from local residents and amenity groups. The objections raise a range of concerns, but issues cited by almost all objectors included concerns about the impacts of the construction activities; the height and density of the development; the effect of the dense residential development on social and other infrastructure (primarily health and education facilities); the impact of the low car parking ratio on exacerbating parking congestion in the surrounding residential streets; and conversely, the impact of additional vehicles on traffic congestion on the local highway network. A summary of the issues raised by objectors is set out within the report.

The recommendation includes details of the obligations to be incorporated into the s106 Legal Agreement and planning conditions. Additionally, the applicant would be liable to contribute to the Mayor’s Community Infrastructure Levy for the delivery of strategic transport infrastructure (Crossrail).

In relation to the layout and design of the proposed buildings the development would provide an excellent standard of living conditions to future occupiers and would not result in any adverse loss of privacy or amenity by neighbouring residential occupiers from overlooking.

Following extensive pre-application discussions, officers are supportive of this significant strategic residential-led scheme, the result of a thorough pre-application and design discussion, regarding the main planning considerations. This consideration has required the balancing of a number of complex and sometimes conflicting considerations, including the matters raised by the Greater London Authority, Historic England, the Ealing Clinical Commissioning Group and Sports England. A key planning consideration is to ensure the optimum re-use of this site for further employment provision, which is strategically located near to the Elizabeth Line (Crossrail) and London Underground (North Acton at Central Line).

There are material considerations which demonstrate that the proposal otherwise accords with many of the aims and objectives of the Development Plan, which indicate that planning permission ought to be granted. Weighing up all the material considerations, the proposed development is considered to be a sustainable development in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), the London Plan (March 2016), the Draft London Plan (Minor Amendments 2018) and the Council's Development Plan. The applicant has also addressed all concerns raised by the GLA and TfL.

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Act 2004 states that where regard is to be had to the Development Plan for the purpose of any determination of a planning application, the determination must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The scheme is considered by officers to be sustainable development and in accordance with the development plan policies set out below. To the extent there are any conflicts with particular development plan policies it is considered that material considerations outweigh these.

Page 5 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

FULL RECOMMENDATION

That planning permission is granted pursuant to this Application subject to the following

1. Any direction of the Mayor. Following the Council’s consideration of the Application, it will be referred to the Mayor of London in accordance with Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008;

2. The application being referred to the National Planning Casework Unit under paragraph 5(1) (c) (i) of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 and no notice of call-in being received from the Secretary of State;

3. The completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and that the Planning Committee delegate authority to the Chief Planner to finalise the details of the s106 Agreement, which shall contain the following obligations:

Non-Monetary Contribution

a) Affordable Housing i. Provision of dwellings with 496 affordable habitable rooms of which 40 habitable rooms to be provided as London Affordable Rent, 196 habitable rooms to be provided as London Living Rent and 260 habitable rooms to be provided as Shared Ownership Housing; ii. A commuted sum of £6,150,000.00 towards the provision of AH in the vicinity of the site (equivalent to 75 habitable rooms as Intermediate housing or 45.45 London Affordable Rent habitable rooms); iii. The affordable housing shall be ready for occupation prior to the occupation of no more than 35% of the private sale units; iv. The Registered Provider shall be required to comply with the Council’s Deed of Nomination Rights in respect of the affordable tenure units; v. Review Mechanisms, as required.

b) Energy i. Provision of Energy Centre ii. Connection of identified off-site buildings to the Energy Centre where feasible, viable and subject to entering into an appropriate contract

c) Distributed Ward Office (DWO) facility obligation. The provision of approximately 20 sqm of floorspace, provided communal welfare facilities are available or 50 sqm where they are not. Ideally with access to communal welfare facilities (showers, toilets, cooking facilities) and access to Wi-Fi and charging facilities with a minimum of 4 or 5 lockers;

d) Participation in an Apprentice and Placement Scheme. The Apprentice and Placement Scheme shall provide opportunities across the development, including the construction, design and post construction management of the development. Details of the Apprentice and Placement Scheme including 25 apprenticeship opportunities and the Developer to pay a 0.05% contribution of £525,000.00 to monitor the programme and to create pre-employment related initiatives to prepare local residents for opportunities at this site. Training initiatives for five apprenticeship will also be incorporated into the end-user phase.

e) The developer to devise and submit to the Council for approval and thereafter implement an Active Design Framework for the entire site in consultation with the Council’s Leisure department and Sport England.

f) Submission of a Parking Management Plan for approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Parking Management Plan should provide details of the criteria for the allocation

Page 6 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

of the proposed off-street parking spaces. This shall establish how the number of those eligible for parking spaces shall not exceed the number of off-street parking spaces and how off-street parking spaces shall be allocated on an equitable basis across the Private Sale, Private Rent, Intermediate Housing and Rented tenures. The Parking Management Plan shall also include details of the criteria and management for the allocation of the disabled parking spaces. The parking shall be provided in accordance with the Parking Management Plan.

g) Restriction of Parking Permits - all the units shall be precluded from obtaining a parking permit and visitor parking vouchers to park within the surrounding Controlled Parking Zones and future CPZ’s in the area;

h) The developer to submit to the Council for approval and thereafter commit to safeguard the necessary land to enable the delivery of ramped access to the bus stops, crossover points at the A40 and to implement an interim landscape scheme (in collaboration with any relevant adjoining land owners);

i) The developer to submit to the Council for approval and thereafter commit to safeguard the land to enable the delivery of the vehicular bridge over the A40 for a duration to be agreed between the applicant and the Council and to implement an interim landscape scheme (in collaboration with any relevant adjoining land owners);

j) The developer to develop a detailed scheme for a new foot and cycle bridge over the A40 in partnership with the Council and to submit a planning application to enable its delivery. The developer to work with the Local Authority and adjoining land owners to identify the timescales for the delivery of the pedestrian bridge and to secure any other necessary consents necessary to enable its delivery;

k) The developer to submit to the Council for approval and thereafter commit to safeguard the necessary land to enable the delivery of a pedestrian bridge over the A40. The Owner shall implement and maintain an interim landscape scheme on the said land until such time as it is required for the pedestrian bridge, or after the expiry of a number of years [to be agreed], whichever is the sooner referred to above.

l) The developer to enter into a S228, S278 and S38 agreement with the London Borough of Ealing and/ or Transport for London, as necessary to ensure the delivery of any necessary highways related works;

m) Submission of details for Highway Services technical approval of the design and construction of proposed works on the adopted highway, including any area to be dedicated as highway, ‘stopping ups’ and traffic management (temporary and/or permanent) and the appointment of contractor for the highway works;

n) The developer not to occupy the development until they have provided an Energy Centre in accordance with an Energy Strategy to supply all domestic and non-domestic units within the development with heating, hot water and where possible, cooling requirements;

o) Provision of funding for free car membership to eligible residents of the development for a minimum period of two years;

p) Submission and Implementation of the Travel Plan;

q) Submission of details of a scheme to enable residents of the proposed development to access and use of the hotel gymnasium;

Page 7 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Monetary Contributions

The following financial contributions have been secured, totalling £4,853,424.00:

Financial Contribution Sub-total Total

Education £525,000.00 Employment and training £525,000.00 Energy Monitoring £20,884.00 CCG £525,000.00 Air Quality £100,000.00 Monitoring £2,000.00 Parks and Leisure £600,000.00 Open Space £250,000.00 Trees £50,000.00 Active Ealing £250,000.00 Playspace £50,000.00 Transport and Highways £2,555,540.00 CPZ £30,000.00 Pedestrian and cycle related Improvements £100,000.00 North Acton Gyratory - Cycle Lane Safety Improvements £280,000.00 North Acton St Improvements £945,540.00 New Bridge £1,000,000.00 4PW Public Realm - specific works £200,000.00

Total £4,853,424.00

r) All contributions to be index linked;

s) Payment of the Council’s reasonable Legal and other professional costs in preparing and completing the agreement; and

t) Carbon Dioxide Offsetting contribution (carbon shortfall calculated at current rate of £60 per tonne of carbon for 30 years in the event that the CO2 emissions of the development, including both residential and non-residential, cannot be achieved onsite);

AND

4. That the grant of planning permission be subject to the following conditions:

CONDITIONS & INFORMATIVES:

Please refer to Annex 1 at the back of this report.

Site Description

The site address is at 4 Portal Way in North Acton, falls within the administrative boundary of the London Borough of Ealing (LBE) and within the North Acton sub-area of the Old Oak Common Opportunity Area, where the Mayor of London published the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) (November 2015).

Page 8 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The site comprises a 225 room Holiday Inn hotel (Use Class C1) with ancillary meeting rooms, gym and a café. The hotel building formed part of a wider masterplan for Portal Way which was granted outline planning permission in 2000. It covers a total area of 0.39 hectares (ha) and it is bounded by Portal Way (to the east) and Victoria Road (to the west), south of North Acton London Underground station. Immediately to the south of the site is Western Avenue (A40).

The western section of the site comprises an eight-storey building including basement, while the eastern section comprises a four-storey building with parking accommodation at ground floor level. Lower level surface car parking sits below the existing hotel block. The site also accommodates surface car parking spaces to the front of the hotel and there are 63 combined car parking spaces on site. Dedicated drop off and servicing facilitates are available at the front of the hotel, which is set into the site and accessed from the Portal Way mini roundabout.

The site has good transport links with the A40 located immediately south, a large collection of bus stops (Wales Farm Road North being the closest) which is immediately south of the Site. North Acton Underground and North Acton Mainline Station are both located within 1km of the Site. There are two Local Cycle Routes in proximity to the Site both of which are on-road routes. The site currently has a PTAL of 4, which will improve in the future with the provision of Elizabeth Line services at Acton Main Line station and Old Oak Common station, and HS2 serving Old Oak Common station.

The site is not located within a conservation area, the building is not listed, and there are no statutory or locally listed buildings in proximity to the site.

The Old Oak Common Opportunity Area is identified as having the potential to deliver 24,000 new homes and 55,000 new jobs. The site also sits within the wider site allocation Site OIS1 Park Royal Southern Gateway in LBE’s Development Sites Development Plan Document (DPD) which outlines the following allocation for the area:

“Mixed use development including residential and employment with ancillary retail and community uses, and provision of new public spaces including North Acton Station Square and soft landscaped public open space.”

The area surrounding the site contains predominantly mixed use buildings of various heights, including a number of tall buildings. The surrounding area contains a wide mix of land uses including residential, commercial and retail. The site is located in an area of significant change, therefore it is critical to understand the forthcoming context of the area.

Immediately to the south/southeast of the site is 2 Portal Way which has a resolution to grant, subject to the signing of a legal agreement, for two buildings of 25 and 35 storeys comprising 380 residential flats, 11 ground floor commercial kitchens and flexible office space. This is known as the ‘Culinary Quarter’ development. To the north, abutting the Algerian Embassy, is 6 Portal Way which currently has planning permission for four buildings, ranging in height from 2 storeys to 42 storeys, that will provide 578 residential flats and 3179sqm (GIA) of flexible uses. This permission has been implemented and the Applicant is currently seeking amendments through a Minor Material Amendment (S.73) within the consented height envelope. To the east is the Dixons Carphone site which has outline planning permission for a residential led mixed use development with a number of significant public open spaces and buildings of up to 32 storeys in height. Further to the east of the site and past the Dixons Carphone site is the Perfume Factory, Wales Farm Road which has resolution to grant for 3 buildings between 12 and 25 Storeys in height providing 380 residential flats and 1,403 sqm of flexible commercial space.

The site therefore sits within a cluster of existing and emerging tall buildings and is strategically located to act as a marker for the southern gateway and stitch the historic development that has occurred to the north of the site (up to North Acton Rail Station) together by providing permeability and a hub which will provide animation and activation at ground floor level.

Page 9 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The site is in proximity to both Heathrow Airport and Northolt Aerodrome and as a result the site sits within an area subject to ‘Aerodrome Safety’ in which specific height limits are applied to new developments according to international standards and recommended practices to ensure safe take-off and landing of planes at the adjacent airports.

The Proposed Development

Overview The formal description of the current proposal is:

“Demolition of all existing buildings and structures on site and the mixed-use redevelopment of the site to provide two linked buildings of 45 and 55 storeys respectively, including up to 702 residential units (Use Class C3), a hotel (Use Class C1), flexible workspace (Use Class B1), restaurant (Use Class A3), flexible retail space (Use Classes A1/A3/A4), with a two level basement, access, car and cycle parking, refuse and service areas, hard and soft landscaping, public realm, all necessary enabling and mitigation works, and associated works.

This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement required by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.”

The proposed development comprises:

• The provision of a modern hotel comprising 159 rooms and conferencing facilities;

• The provision of 2,191 sqm (GIA) of employment floorspace (B1 flexible working / office space);

• The provision of 630 sqm (GIA) of flexible retail and food and beverage use on the ground floor;

• New restaurant and bar at 54th floor of South Tower;

• Private amenity space for residents of the Development – including landscaped terraces / winter gardens/ balconies to all apartments;

• An energy centre that incorporates heat pumps on an ambient loop which meets the London Plan hierarchy and targets for sustainability;

Page 10 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

• Two level Basement providing servicing, car parking, cycle parking and plant and machinery;

• New accesses (vehicle and pedestrian); and

• At-grade crossing over the A40

The Proposed Development in Detail

Design The architectural treatment of the building has been conceived as a composition of slipped planes, which help to break down the scale of the facades and allow light and shadow to add interest to the building’s surfaces. The planes are expressed as textured metallic surfaces punctuated by windows and the separation between individual planes is reinforced by a simpler background glazed system that contrasts with the surfaces of the planes, which sit prominently in order to cast sharp shadows which in turn lend additional definition to the overall composition.

The principal façade design consists of simple planar elements, separated by vertical recesses. This device enables the building mass to be perceived as a group of slender elements on the skyline. The planar elements consist of pressed aluminium panels and framed windows, which are subtly recessed behind the metallic primary plane. The planes themselves are differentiated by means of their orientation and therefore the way in which they reflect light and the density of the pattern within the pressed aluminium panels, which form the solid surfaces of the building.

The proposal avoids a fully glazed approach to the elevations and instead proposes punctured solid planes and expressed corners to separate the articulation of each elevation with the composition of the whole.

The vertical recesses are occupied by balconies or winter gardens. The design balances the ratio of solid façade elements to glazed components creating the required internal daylighting levels within an energy efficient envelope.

The two towers have differing façade expressions as to avoid merging into one mass from certain viewpoints. The use of articulated corners and planes, created by a glazed and solid panels applied to both towers, ties the towers together as one development but allows differentiation between the two masses. The bridge is glazed and does not include pressed metal panels, thereby allowing the two towers to be read independently in some views as opposed to appearing conjoined.

Concept for staggered arrangement of planes to each tower

Page 11 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The solid panels within each of the slipped planes are applied with one of five different densities of same base geometric pattern. The pattern manifests in a pressed aluminium sheet which as a manufacturing technique resonates with the past heritage from Acton’s automotive industry.

To further emphasise a differentiation between the two towers, a subtle variation in the warm base tone colour to each tower emphasises the identity of the respective towers when read as one mass. The appearance of each plane will range in intensity as a result of the increased amount of shadow displaying in the denser-grained patterns. The density of the pattern decreases with height – the south tower has five densities whereas the north tower has three, meaning that the south tower will appear to face out more than the northern tower at the top.

All balustrades on balconies, whether projecting or recessed are glass topped with a metal handrail. Doors onto balconies are of a sliding type whereas winter gardens have an inward opening glazed doors and a fixed balustrade to the outside. Bedrooms have a similar arrangement. Apartment balustrades are set at a height of 1.3m above finished floor level to instil a sense of security at height. Other opening windows are bottom hinged and inward tilting. Façade vents are integrated into the upper window transoms as a thin slot detail.

The façade treatment of the ground floor is fully glazed in the retail and hotel lounge areas and more solid in the service areas.

The ground floor is set back on all elevations behind a colonnade of columns coming down from above.

The top of the south tower is crowned by a three storey glazed screen that grows out of the glazed corners and recessed between the façade planes below. It carries on the same rhythm of vertical mullions as the lower levels but is simplified to appear as a semi-transparent veil at the top of the tower. The screen visually encompasses both the roof terrace and the restaurant immediately below. A double-storey cantilever provides shelter from the window for the open- air roof terrace behind.

Hotel The proposals include the re-provision of a hotel on the site. The hotel and retail uses, coupled with the residential entrances form the base of the building up to and including level 6.

The hotel entrance and foyer are set across the central portion of the ground floor in a split-level arrangement. The hotel reception is located to the right of the main doors upon entry and the hotel lifts are placed immediately beyond that and before the split-level stairs, within the top-lit atrium space. Immediately above and spanning the full footprint of the Proposed Development at level 01 is an ancillary flexible working space, hotel conferencing and hotel ancillary support spaces such as training rooms, management offices and meeting rooms.

The hotel rooms are planned across levels two to five, providing 159 rooms, with a central atrium void that brings light down into the deep floor plate to illuminate rooms and circulation spaces. This atrium is top lit from a roof light at level 6 which forms an integral part of the landscaping of the outdoor garden and amenity space at that level.

Ten percent of the hotel keys will be accessible to wheelchair users.

The hotel is conceived as an anchor for the development and a key component of its function as a social and activity hub for the district. The hotel entrance is generously planned to allow unencumbered views through to the upper level lounge and bar area and down to the retail area below.

Page 12 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Flexible Commercial Uses The lower ground and ground levels of the buildings (i.e. the lower podium levels) are to be occupied by flexible retail, food and beverage and the hotel lobby.

Flexible retail and food and beverage uses are placed at the base of the Towers to provide activation and animation, drawing people to the site and providing a welcoming environment for those that are visiting the building as hotel guests, residents or members of the community and also passing by the building on their way to a final destination.

These spaces have been located primarily along the Western Avenue frontage at lower ground level, wrapping round the northern edge alongside the anticipated main pedestrian route.

An additional space is located further along the route on the north side of the building within the arcade. The rear of the largest unit (Unit 1) is allocated as a position for a kitchen, which would serve both the hotel bar and conference facility and the high-level restaurant on level 54 of the south tower.

Ground Floor Plan

Restaurant A publicly accessible sky restaurant which is associated with the hotel use is located within the south tower and level 54. This facility would be available to hotel users and visitors, and benefits from 360 views across London and activates the top of the building.

Page 13 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

It would include a patron’s bar and seating, as well as dining space, and would be internal to the building. There would be no external space associated with the restaurant. The restaurant will accommodate approximately 120 covers as well as bar patrons.

Residential

The residential element of the scheme would provide a total of 702 new homes, provided within two buildings which are linked by a bridge. A mix of studio, 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units are incorporated within each of the two blocks.

Below is a breakdown of all unit sizes across both towers: 3B5p 2B4p 2B3p 1B2p Studio Total Hab rooms South Tower 28 53 93 137 103 414 927 North Tower 3 68 69 105 0 245 633 Sky Bridge 0 0 0 18 18 36 54 Podium 0 2 0 4 1 7 15 Total 31 123 162 264 122 702 1629

The new homes are to be located within four principle zones within the development – the upper levels of the podium, north tower, south tower and sky bridge. Residential occupation starts at Level 7 continuing up to Level 42 in the North Tower and Level 53 in the South Tower and in the sky bridge at Levels 26-34. The North Tower, podium and sky bridge will accommodate both affordable and market homes with the South Tower accommodating market homes only.

Page 14 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Unit mix across towers:

Each floorplate offers a range of unit typologies stacked vertically up the two towers. This provides a selection of aspects, floor level locations, views and unit sizes for all tenure types.

The massing and orientation of the two towers enables the floor plan to incorporate generous living spaces, with apartment sizes meeting or exceeding the minimum gross internal floor areas set by the London Plan. Floor to ceiling height glazing is proposed for all apartments ensuring maximum daylight penetration to habitable rooms. All apartments benefit from openable windows in all rooms except bathrooms.

The apartments are designed with open plan living and dining rooms to create sociable living spaces. Kitchens are set to the back of the living/dining space and bathrooms positioned towards the back of the plan. Utility cupboards are positioned close to the entrance of the door and include the hot water cylinder and washing machine. Bedrooms are positioned so as to provide quiet spaces. The apartments would benefit from acoustic glazing and insulation reducing the potential for noise transfer between uses and from external sources.

Page 15 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Market housing: 2B3p Affordable housing: 2B3p

All residential units across the two towers have access to private balconies or winter gardens. Private amenity spaces have been positioned at the corners of the plan to take benefit of open aspects and view. At levels 7 and 8, residential units located on the podium benefit from large private terraces.

There will be a number of communal amenity spaces distributed around the buildings. There are residential amenity spaces at the base of the building, at the mid-level and at the top of the building. The amenity spaces take the form of either internal rooms or external landscaped garden terraces and would provide a good mix of spaces.

Accessible units are distributed throughout both towers. In respect of Wheelchair Accessible Units, 10% of the units would comply with Category M4 (3) of Part M with the remainder 90% complying with Category M4 (2) of Approved Document M, as required by the London Plan Housing SPG. 72 wheelchair accessible or adaptable dwellings, distributed throughout the two towers, would provide a range of aspects, floor level locations, views and unit sizes. 50 are located within the market residential units and 22 are located within the affordable residential units. Of the 72 units, 41 are 1-bed, 28 are 2-bed and 3 are 3-bed.

The mass of the building has been shifted to maximise dual aspect units and that no apartment aspect solely faces north. Both towers are oriented to maximise views over London.

The residential entrances and lobbies are located on either side of the hotel entrance and serve the respective towers.

Structural cores have been located so as to avoid overlooking and provide relief between the north and south towers. The two buildings are to be separated by a distance of at least 13m at their closes point.

Page 16 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Affordable Housing The affordable housing will be located in the north tower. Of the 702 new homes, 196 homes will be affordable. This will provide a total of 496 habitable rooms, equating to 30.4% affordable housing (see table below).

The affordable element will comprise a mix of three products: 1. London Living Rent; 2. London Affordable Rent; and 3. London Shared Ownership.

Habitable rooms by tenure: Tenure Habitable Rooms Percentage (%) Market Residential 1133 69.6% London Shared Ownership 260 16% London Living Rent 196 12% London Affordable Rent 40 2.4% Total 1629 100

Units by tenure: Unit Size Studio 1B2 2B3P 2B4P 3B5P Total P Number of Units 122 264 162 123 31 702 Market Residential 122 169 113 74 28 506 Shared Ownership 0 52 26 26 0 104 London Living Rent 0 33 21 21 1 76 Affordable Rent 0 10 2 2 2 16 Affordable (%) 17 38 23 18 4 28

Landscaping and Public Realm The scheme provides hard and soft landscaping at the base of the building with the aim of improving the pedestrian environment. Key spaces and activity on Level 00 and Level 01 are focused around the hotel entrances, along the eastern façade and in the north-west corner of the site, and the pedestrian route which runs around the northern edge of the building providing access between Gypsy Corner and Portal Way. Use of the spaces will be primarily passive, and the landscape strategy has been designed to reflect this. By focusing on the creation of a legible, attractive and high quality streetscape with multifunctional elements, it allows access throughout the ground plane to be maximised.

Page 17 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The following elements form the landscaping elements at ground level of the development: 1. Feature tree planting anchoring corners of the site 2. Living wall along northern boundary 3. A series of baffles (2m high perforated structures) provide artistic elements along the main walkway, improve the micro-climate around the building and aid way-finding 4. Cycle parking 5. Arrival space and drop off zone for coaches and disabled vehicles outside the hotel entrance 6. Hedge planting which creates division between pedestrian routes and vehicular access

The materials palette for hard landscaping intend to bring the landscape to life through crisp lines and edges which contracts with the adjacent paving, stainless steel furniture and timber topped seating across all terrace levels. Paving units will be concentrated along the pedestrian through route and level 00/01, and at the hotel entrances.

The proposed development will provide 4,078sqm of on- site amenity space including 1,068sqm of play space. The below concept diagram sets out its location.

The design for the sixth floor communal amenity space level has been focused around providing an adaptable space which is suitable for early years play and general amenity for other building users. The terrace is west facing and is overlooked by internal amenity spaces to the north and east, which open directly out onto the terrace.

Page 18 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

This amenity space will incorporate the following: 1. Sensory shrub planting to provide shelter and element of play and education 2. Play features: shapes of different surface treatments, colours and heights 3. Buffer planting to screen sky light 4. Podium style bench 5. Graded lawn

At the 35th floor a terrace is provided on top of the sky bridge. It has the following features: 1. Graded ornamental planting with feature tree provides shelter from wind 2. Podium style seating 3. Play features: shapes of different surface treatments, colours and heights

Page 19 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Internal communal spaces are provided at Level 43 and Level 44 with terraces available to all tenants. The perimeter of the outdoor terraces is protected by approximately 1.35m tall glazed balustrade to give a sense of security to users. The terraces benefit from a good south-westerly aspect and distant views across London. Both floors provide a variety of leisure uses. Level 43 offers calmer spaces such as a flexible library and reading space, a media room and quiet lounge space for residents to relax in. Level 44 provides for entertainment and social activities with a games room, a music room and lounge space.

The roof at level 55 of the south tower provides communal amenity in the form of an outdoor landscaped roof terrace with an associated internal amenity/ club room through which the outdoor amenity can be accessed. The room is generously proportioned and has views over London, with a long westward facing glazed façade. The roof can be accessed using the residential passenger lifts and stair within the central core and level thresholds provide easy access to the indoor and outdoor amenity spaces. The outdoor space is sheltered from the wind by the glazed façade which cantilevers past the roof level by approximately 7.7m. The space is divided into 3 key areas, which concentrate social activities within the southern half of the floor, and allow for a quieter, more contemplative, zone to the north.

Access, Parking, Servicing and Pedestrian Routes The development includes a new route for pedestrians and cyclists along the north edge of the site, linking Western Avenue with Portal Way. The route will also provide an area for visitor cycle parking.

Pedestrians and cyclists will access the site via Portal Way and the A40 Western Way to the south. Vehicle access will be via Portal Way only, with two points of access.

The proposals include a total of 43 car parking spaces over two basement levels, accessed via two car lifts on Portal Way. The lift to the north of the site will be the main point of access, with the south lift only used occasionally when the main lift is unavailable.

The basement car park will include the provision of wheelchair accessible parking spaces and active electric vehicle charging points (EVCP). The EVCP will be provided for 20% of car parking spaces with passive charging points for the remaining spaces.

A total of 1,179 long-stay cycle spaces will be provided within the basements for residential use and 57 short-stay cycle spaces will be provided for visitors of the residential, hotel and office uses. Cycle parking for the residential uses is distributed across the lower ground floor and basement and accessed by lifts from the residential lobbies of each tower. Of the 1,179 long- stay cycle spaces, 36 spaces would be for affordable rent tenants and 1,166 spaces for all other residential tenures.

The proposals include a total of four servicing bays: two on-street in a lay-by along the west edge of Portal Way; and two bays on-site within a service yard area. The lay-by along the west edge of Portal Way would also be used for coach parking, with capacity for two coaches.

The proposals include enhanced pedestrian and cycle crossing points on the A40 Western Way. The enhanced crossing points will improve access to the site for pedestrians and cyclists.

The 702 new homes would be accessed from street side entrances on both Portal Way (adjacent to the hotel entrance) and the walkway adjacent to the Algerian Consulate. Entrances have been designed to be clearly visible yet fully integrated into the façade design. Entrances will benefit from level threshold access, illumination and security arrangements.

Lifts Each tower contains a structural core containing passenger lifts and a firefighting lift. The lifts in the north tower are split into two independent groups, one consisting of two lifts that serve the

Page 20 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

social rented component on levels 7 – 9 and the residential amenity at level 6. A group of three lifts serve the remaining residential floors. One lift within this group serves as the firefighting lift and therefore serves all levels within the north tower.

The south tower contains four residential passenger lifts, one of which is the firefighting lift. All passenger lifts are sized to accommodate a wheelchair.

Energy and Sustainability Energy The servicing strategy uses reversible ASHPs (Air Source Heat Pumps) located on an intermediate plant floor, which can provide simultaneous heating and cooling. The ASHP will generate LTHW (45°C) and CHW (6°C), distributed through central risers. Boilers located on the same plant floor serve as back up to the ASHP, running when the external ambient temperature drops too low and effected the efficiency of the ASHP. These risers are then used to maintain the temperature of ambient loops at 15 - 25°C, when the ambient loop goes outside of this range it will be heated or cooled via plate heat exchangers connected to the LTHW and CHW loops.

Sustainability All new non-residential elements of the development are targeting as a minimum BREEAM Very Good rating with an aspiration for Excellent rating and all new residential development elements are targeting HQM ‘3 star’ rating. Measures include: • Maximising the opportunity for incorporation of water saving measures which include the use of water saving fixtures; • Using materials which have low embodied energy; • Re-using and recycling demolition waste where possible; • Reducing external heat rejection into the atmosphere and reducing the reliance on air conditioning; • Adding greening to the site including circa 20 trees and therefore providing a net gain; • Minimising sources of noise and dust enforced through the considerate contractor scheme (‘CCS’); • Measures to secure health and wellbeing for residents and users of the towers; and • Cycle spaces, onsite charging facilities including locker and showers to promote sustainable forms of transport.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA)

The Proposed Development falls within Category 10 (b) of Schedule 2 of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (as amended) as an urban development project where the area of the development exceeds 5 hectares and includes more than 150 dwellings, there is the potential for likely significant environmental effects. An Environmental Statement (ES) has been submitted with the detailed application which assesses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development.

The Environmental Statement (which together with the subsequent addendum forms the ES) was made available for public review at the Council Offices, Acton Library and on the Council’s website.

Prior to the formal submission of the application the applicant requested an EIA scoping opinion (in December 2018) to ascertain those environmental topics that should be included in the scope of the EIA. The LPA’s EIA scoping opinion issued in February 2019 (Reference 185774OPDCSCO) indicated that the environmental issues against which the effects of the proposed development needed to be assessed were: • Socio-Economics;

Page 21 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

• Transport and Access; • Air Quality; • Noise and Vibration; • Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing; • Wind Microclimate; • Archaeology • Water Resources, Flood Risk and Drainage • Ground Conditions; and • Townscape, Visual and Built Heritage.

The information provided accords with the EIA regulations 2017 in terms of what is required for inclusion within an ES. It also is based on and addresses all the issues identified by the LPA’s scoping opinion.

The EIA information provided was reviewed by the Council. In advance of submitting the application, the Applicant agreed those sites set out in the 'Other Considerations' above being those that should be included as part of any cumulative assessment. As agreed with the Council's consultants the ES considered the cumulative impacts of the development and all those developments listed in Scoping Opinion. Officers consider that the cumulative impacts of the proposed development have been robustly assessed. In accordance with its obligations under the EIA Regulations (including Regulation 26) officers have examined the environmental information submitted in support of the application (prepared by the Applicant’s EIA consultants) and consider that it accords with the requirements of the EIA Regulations 2017 in terms of what is required for inclusion within an ES and the robustness of the assessment. It also addresses all the issues identified by the LPA’s EIA Scoping Opinion. Officers, having examined the environmental information as required by Regulation 26 of the EIA Regulations 2017 (as amended) and conclude (per Regulation 29 of the EIA Regulations 2017 (as amended)) that, unless otherwise stated, the significant effects of the proposed development on the environment are those set out in the ES. The LPA shall comply with its other obligations (per Regulation 29 of the EIA Regulations) should planning permission be granted but include in this Report, those measures that the LPA considers are required in accordance with Regulation 29(b)(i)(bb)(cc)(dd), as suggested conditions/section 106 obligations, should planning permission be granted,

Plans and other documents defining the limits or specific proposals and principles of the scheme proposed in the application, as well as accompanying guidance on design and scale within the DAS and other application documents would, where appropriate, be secured by conditions attached to any grant of Planning Permission. This is to ensure that the development is built in accordance with the proposals assessed as part of the environmental information submitted with the application and for which the impacts have been considered.

In terms of the EIA Regulations 2017, officers consider that the environmental impacts of the proposed regeneration scheme have been fully considered by the applicant and by the LPA in the determination of this Application.

Relevant Planning History

There is no relevant planning history of note other than the adopted scoping opinion mentioned within the section above. The Holiday Inn hospitality operations are ongoing at the time of considering this application and there are approximately 82 jobs on site.

The site formed part of a wider masterplan for the Portal Way area which was granted outline planning permission on 04 October 2001 (LBE ref P/2000/0730). This outline permission allowed for a 200-bed hotel at the Site. Reserved matters were subsequently approved for a 7/8 storey hotel with 157 bedrooms and 72 parking spaces (LBE ref P/2002/0067 granted 10 April 2002).

Page 22 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

A further full planning application was approved in 2012 (Ref: PP/2012/3937) to extend the hotel and provide up to 225 keys.

The site formed part of a much larger island site and planning application (ref: P/2000/0730) in 2000 comprising the Gypsy Corner gyratory system:

“Phased development of site to include reorganisation of local road gyratory new access road and accesses, erection of car showroom and ancillary workshop (7,841 sq m), (B1) employment uses (16,605 sq m), mixed uses comprising (B1) employment uses (9,225 sq m) 200-bed hotel, retail (2,000 sq m), leisure (4,000 sq m) and residential (110 units) with total car parking provision of 282 spaces together with provision of new public streetscape including network of public cycle and pedestrian routes, lighting, signage, closed circuit television, street furniture, landscaping and associated open space.”

A further planning application (ref: P2002/1677) was granted in 2002 for:

“Reorganisation of gyratory (new access road and accesses), car showroom and ancillary workshop (not exceeding 7841 sq M); Phase 2 - B1 employment uses (not exceeding 16,605 sq M); Phase 3 - Mixed uses comprising B1 uses (not exceeding 9225 sq M); Hotel(s) (not exceeding 237 beds); retail uses (not exceeding 2000sq M); leisure uses (not exceeding 4,000 sq M) and residential use (not exceeding 398 dwellings). Total parking provision 422 spaces. Provision of new public streetscape including a network of public cycle and pedestrian routes, lighting, signage, CCTV, street furniture and landscaping and associated open space.”

A further planning application (ref: P/2002/1677) was granted in 2002 for:

“Reorganisation of gyratory (new access road and accesses), car showroom and ancillary workshop (not exceeding 7841 sq m); Phase 2 - B1 employment uses (not exceeding 16,605 sq m); Phase 3 - Mixed uses comprising B1 uses (not exceeding 9225 sq m); Hotel(s) (not exceeding 237 beds); retail uses (not exceeding 2000 sq m); leisure uses (not exceeding 4,000 sq m) and residential use (not exceeding 398 dwellings). Total parking provision 422 spaces. Provision of new public streetscape including a network of public cycle and pedestrian routes, lighting, signage, CCTV, street furniture and landscaping and associated open space”

In 2012 a full planning application (ref PP/2012/3937) was granted to extend the existing hotel:

“Extension to existing 150-bedroom hotel, with rooftop extension to the existing hotel and four storey rear extension, associated servicing and landscaping to provide an additional 75 bedrooms (225 in total)”

STATUTORY AND NON-STATUTORY CONSULTATION: This section of the report describes the consultation process carried out and summarises all the consultation responses received and how they were considered as part of the assessment.

Pre-application consultation by the Applicant Under Section 122 of the Localism Act 2011, applicants proposing to submit an application for planning permission are required to carry-out pre-application consultation with existing occupiers and residents in the vicinity of the site, where the proposed development is of a description specified in a development order. Although no such order has been published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (and therefore the pre-application consultation is not yet mandatory), the applicant has provided details of pre-application consultation within a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).

The applicant has submitted a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) that demonstrates extensive consultation and engagement with a wide range of interested groups and stakeholders including the London Borough of Ealing (LBE) and the Greater London Authority (GLA) officers.

Page 23 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Local stakeholders and community groups have been engaged with in a variety of different forms including a bespoke website, two public exhibitions, leaflet drops, letters (both personal and more standardised letter-drops), one to one briefing, site visit offered to engage the local residents, community and businesses.

The applicants have expressed that important feedback from consultation activities as well as the range of other comments over the consultation period have been incorporated in evolving the final design of the proposed development.

STATUTORY CONSULTATION

Consultation by the London Borough of Ealing

The Council has carried out extensive consultation on the ‘4 Portal Way’ application from the 13th May 2019. The Council notified all the statutory public bodies, stakeholders, local residents and amenity groups and all other interest groups on the application.

Site notices were displayed within and around the application boundary on 13th May 2019. The bespoke notices advised interested parties that a full set of application documents, including the Environmental Statement, were available in hard copy at the Council’s offices (Perceval House) and at the Acton Town Hall Library. The full set of information was also available on the Council’s website and the applicant also provided an overview of the proposed development on a bespoke website (https://www.4portalway.co.uk/).

Press Notices were first published in the Ealing Gazette on 13th May 2019. The first round of formal consultation ended on 3rd June 2019. In addition, the Council carried out a further round of consultation on 11th November 2019 for 21 days following the receipt of amended and additional information to clarify aspects of the application. The Council notified all the statutory consultees and the amended set of information was also published on the Council’s website in accordance with the Regulations. Formal consultation ended on 10th December 2019. Another round of consultation was initiated on the 27th January 2020, following amendments to the scheme, and this round of formal consultation concluded on the 10th February 2020.

49 site notices were displayed on lampposts within the application boundary and surrounding the site, including on Portal Way, Wales Farm Road, Wells House Road, Victoria Road, Chase Road, Park Royal Road, Western Avenue, Jenner Avenue, Seacole Close, Lister Close, Ferguson Drive, Cotton Avenue, Anderson Close, Friary Road, Emanuel Avenue, Friary Park Court, York Road, Horn Lane, Leamington Park, Noel Road, Cecil Road, Canada Crescent, Northfields Road, Court Way, Allan Way, Park View, Eastfields Road, the Crescent, the Fairway, Carlisle Avenue, Brunel Road, Long Drive and Cloister Road.

Including all statutory consultees, consultation letters were also sent to Ealing Civic Society, Acton Community Forum, Park Royal Partnership Ltd., Acton Alliance, Acton Green Residents Association, Acton Town Residents Association, East Acton Residents Association, Wesley Estate Residents Association, West Acton Residents Action Group, Action Acton, Old Oak Common Conservation Area, West London Business, and the ward councillors for Acton Central, Ealing Broadway, Hanger Hill and East Acton.

A total 148 representations were received from residents and community groups at the time of writing this report, including comments provided by West Acton Residents Association (WARA), Ealing Civic Society (ECS).

Amenity Groups The comments provided by these amenity groups are summarised below:

Page 24 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Ealing Civic Society: “Ealing Civic Society objects to this application. We consider the height, massing and scale of the proposed building to be totally out of scale and out of keeping with the surrounding area, particularly with the residential properties to the south and west of the site. Overall, the design is extremely aggressive and of a form usually associated with offices in a financial district rather than of an area largely comprising residential accommodation and would therefore be inappropriate in this location. We also have grave concerns about the planned mix of units in the development. At less than 30%, the proposed allocation of affordable accommodation is insufficient. In particular, the proposed affordable 2- and 3-bedroom units, of which there is a shortage across the borough, would be inadequate. Finally, it appears that the development would require a 'fire engineering strategy', presumably because it would not otherwise comply with UK Building Regulations for means of escape. This would need to be addressed.”

Planning Officer’s response to ECS: The scheme design evolved over an extensive series of workshops between the Applicant, GLA, TfL and Ealing Council Officers.

The height would be only out of character with the existing surrounding buildings, however, the site boundary is well set back from the nearest residential uses and character areas, and given the emerging context, it is deemed to be in keeping with the emerging development proposals in the vicinity. Given the high accessibility of the site, the density and massing of the scheme is also considered acceptable.

As there is no identified special architectural character in the immediate surrounding area it is considered that the design of the scheme can positively contribute towards an improvement to the street edge definition as well as the enhancement of both the existing and emerging urban context. The building appearance has evolved over the course of design-review workshops over the course of over a year, with several amendments being made in the process to achieve the most sculptural and aesthetically pleasing design whilst reducing its prominence on the skyline for the proposed development.

The scheme will deliver the required threshold in terms of affordable housing, however, to achieve this, a contribution has been agreed to fund further affordable housing off-site. This has been secured in the s106 Legal Agreement.

The London Fire Commissioner reviewed the scheme and commented that they had reviewed the fire strategy and were satisfied with the proposals with respect to fire risk and evacuation procedures.

Residents Consultations At the time of writing this report, a total of 174 public representations were received, including 172 comments, submitted on the Ealing Council public portal and one letter. 167 of these were comments in objection, a further 4 comments were in support and 2 comments were neutral. All representations were carefully read and considered by officers and were given appropriate weight in the determination of the application.

Notwithstanding this, for ease, a summary of the issues raised by neighbours, interest groups and members of the public are provided below, grouped on key themes of objection:

The Comments received in support of the proposals mentioned the following issues: • Proposal is in line with the overall objectives and principles of growth on a regional and local scale; • The development proposal is delivering affordable housing as well as increasing jobs and opportunities available in the area; • The proposal would likely attract more investment into the area which would result in additional amenities; • The design is modern looking and not the ‘usual boring square’;

Page 25 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

• The A40 crossing alongside other improvements to transport and local permeability and connectivity will be a large positive addition to the area; • Parking arrangements and the desire to promote sustainable transportation is supported; • Regeneration of this area will ensure it has a successful and green future and maintaining a prosperous future of West London in the London context.

Planning Officer’s response: The comments are noted.

Strain on public facilities and infrastructure: 104 individual responses referred to the impact of the proposed development causing a significant strain on local infrastructure and facilities, with a further 29 individual responses referring specifically to the lack of open space in the vicinity to accommodate the demand from the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: It is acknowledged that the proposed development would lead to a significant increase of the population of residents in the local area, which would inevitably lead to an increased demand for local services such as schools, hospitals and open space.

The relevant statutory and external stakeholders (including NHS, Education, Parks and Leisure departments) were consulted in relation to the proposed scheme, and comments were received quantifying the forecasted deficit for local social infrastructure provision, open space and other public facilities. It was suggested that appropriate obligations would effectively mitigate any adverse impacts of the development proposal. These comments were taken into account as part of the assessment, and the relevant contributions were negotiated and secured as part of s106. Obligations secured include significant monetary contributions to improvements of local healthcare and education facilities, contributions to improvements to local open space and sport facilities, provision of an onsite Distributed Ward Office (DWO)

As such it is considered that with the appropriate contributions secured, the adverse impacts of the population increase on straining local public infrastructure and open space would be mitigated. As well as that, given the significant socio-economic benefits of the proposed development scheme, it is considered that the development is acceptable on balance and will catalyse future development and enhancement of social facilities and infrastructure in the area.

Height: 85 individual responses referred to the inappropriate height of the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The architectural design proposes a ‘modern building of height’ solution. The building is designed to enable a Bridge-link typology, with a northern tower (set at 45 storeys with roof terrace, 197m) and a southern tower (55 storeys with roof terrace, 237m), combining to form a stimulating skyline element and provide a leading presence to mark Portal Way and a main entrance to the Southern Gateway and wider Old Oak area.

It is acknowledged that the height would be only out of character with the existing surrounding buildings, however, the site boundary is well set back from the nearest residential uses and character areas, and given the emerging context, it is deemed to be in keeping with the emerging development proposals in the vicinity around the North Acton Cluster.

Therefore, the proposed development is considered to be of an acceptable scale and massing which would positively integrate with the London skyline and character of the area and the visual amenity of the street scene.

Page 26 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Not in keeping with the area: 64 individual responses referred to the proposed development being out of keeping with the surrounding area and context.

Generally, the interplay between the windows, recessed and protruding elements, balconies and other surfaces in the development would provide a suitable level of articulation to minimise the perception of mass and scale. A condition has been included for further details on the indicative materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building to ensure good quality architecture.

As there is no identified special architectural character in the immediate surrounding area it is considered that the design of the scheme can positively contribute towards an improvement to the street edge definition as well as the enhancement of both the existing and emerging urban context. As such, given the sculptural architectural merit in the proposed development, it is considered that the building will positively contribute to the urban definition and character of the emerging local character.

Overdevelopment and unaffordable housing: 59 individual responses referred to the proposal representing overdevelopment for the context and a further 18 individual responses referred to the future ‘un-affordability’ of the accommodation within the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The site is located within an ‘Opportunity Area’. The OAPF indicates that the area has the potential for high-density mixed-use developments accommodating tall buildings in appropriate locations’ constituting a ‘new neighbourhood town centre [with] a high quality and coordinated public realm along Victoria Road and Portal Way’. The proposals for this site make a significant contribution towards an increase in the supply of new homes in London as well as an increase in job density, which would constitute significant socio-economic benefits to the area. These matters are discussed further in the relevant chapters of the report.

It is thus considered that the proposed development would make a positive contribution to tackling the housing crisis and provide much needed accommodation across London.

Loss of Light: 21 individual responses referred to the development causing a loss of light to the residential properties surrounding it.

Planning Officer’s response: The applicant has undertaken a daylight and sunlight assessment based on the full details of the building (height, massing and layout of the proposed and surrounding buildings). The results of the Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare Assessment are provided in the relevant section within this report.

In summary, it is noted that only a minor number of neighbouring residential properties, would experience minor to moderate adverse and moderate adverse losses of daylight as a result of the proposed development. This impact must have been weighed against the benefits of redeveloping the application site for a higher density mixed use development, which is considered to be desirable in terms of its contribution to meet the identified housing need, and the wider socio economic effects of optimising the use of the site. On balance, it is considered that the impact of the proposed development on the daylight and sunlight received by neighbours is acceptable, and that the retained levels of daylight and sunlight are typical of what may be achieved in urban conurbations.

Density: 20 individual responses referred to the inappropriate density of the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The need to optimise the use of residential land is a view strengthened by the draft London Plan Policy D6 which, considering the significant increase in housing need now recognised, has removed the Density Matrix. Policy D6 states that for growth

Page 27 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

to be accommodated in a responsible way, densities would have to be developed “above those of the surrounding area on most sites.”

The OAPF also indicates that the area has the potential for high-density mixed-use area accommodating tall buildings in appropriate locations’ constituting a ‘new neighbourhood town centre [with] a high quality and coordinated public realm along Victoria Road and Portal Way’.

Overall, the net developable residential site area of the site is 0.39ha. As such, whilst the application development proposes a provision of 702 dwellings, this equates to a density of circa 1,800 units per hectare or circa 4,177 habitable rooms per hectare.

London Plan Density Matrix in Table 3.2 provides guideline residential densities expected with consideration to respective PTAL levels. The site has a PTAL 4 in an urban location, which will improve in the future with the provision of Elizabeth Line services at Acton Main Line station and Old Oak Common station, and HS2 serving Old Oak Common station. On this basis, the Density Matrix would require developments in this location to constitute a density of 45-260 units per hectare; or 200-700 habitable rooms per hectare.

In this instance, although the proposed density expressively exceeds the range set out by the matrix the density proposed is considered appropriate in this location for several factors, including; the site is within the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area where there is a strategic aim to intensify residential density and the site is also in a location that is expected to see significant improvements to public transport accessibility that is set to further and consistently improve over the coming years. As such the development density is considered appropriate to the site. It is also noted that the Greater London Authority (GLA) support the density of the proposed development.

Appearance: 16 individual responses criticized the appearance of the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: As there is no identified special architectural character in the immediate surrounding area it is considered that the design of the scheme can positively contribute towards an improvement to the street edge definition as well as the enhancement of both the existing and emerging urban context. The building appearance has evolved over the course of a number of workshops over a period of over one year, with many key amendments made to the building appearance in the process to achieve the most sculptural and aesthetically pleasing design whilst reducing its prominence on the skyline for the proposed development. It is considered that the design evolution has created an aesthetic that will positively contribute to the character of the area.

Privacy: 12 individual responses commented on the infringement of privacy of the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The nearest residential property is located in excess of 60 metres distance from the development site and therefore there will be no impact on the privacy of existing residents.

Flight Path: 11 individual responses referred to the potential intrusion of the proposed development into the flight path of aircrafts taking off from and landing to Heathrow airport.

Planning Officer’s response: This was a key consideration in the assessment of this proposal and Heathrow, as well as RAF Northolt, London Heliport and the Ministry of Defence were all liaised with as part of the application analysis. It is noted that Heathrow airport is located

Page 28 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

approximately 14 km away from the site and therefore any aircrafts taking off or landing into Heathrow would likely reach a sufficient altitude to safely avoid the proposed development in their flight path. Following the submission of a verified Aviation Study by the applicant, Heathrow Airport et.al confirmed that the proposed development has been re-examined from an aerodrome safeguarding perspective and could conflict with safeguarding criteria unless any planning permission granted is subject to the recommended conditions. The suggested planning conditions form part of the recommendation. As such it is considered that the proposed development would not have an impact on any flight paths.

Family Housing: 8 individual responses referred to the lack of family sized accommodation within the proposed housing mix of proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The scheme provides a mix of different sized units and tenures that would be suitable for a range of future occupiers, including 154 (123 2 bed 4 persons units and 31 3 bed 5 persons) family sized units. This accounts for 22% of the overall units proposed. Out of these 154 units, 33.7% (52 units) are in Affordable Housing tenure. It is also noted that a large proportion of the two-bedroom units incorporate two double bedrooms and that the majority of the two-bedroom units would provide suitable occupation for young families.

Safety and Fire risk: 8 individual responses referred to the potential risk of fire and safety concerns associated with evacuation procedures due to the height of proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The London Fire Commission reviewed the scheme and commented that following review of the fire strategy, they were satisfied with the proposals with respect to fire risk and evacuation procedures. As such it is considered that the risk of fire is appropriately addressed within the development proposals.

Wind: 8 individual responses referred to the potential creation of unpleasant environments due to the increased chance of wind around the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: Potential effects of wind in the vicinity of the proposed development were considered as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment. Extensive wind tunnel testing has been undertaken to assess the effect of the Proposed Development on the local wind microclimate. Although, the introduction of the Proposed development, will result in a moderate to major adverse (significant) effect to the wind microclimate at seven receptors, the effects would be negligible (not significant) to pedestrian comfort at the remaining receptors and as such would provide appropriate conditions in the vicinity.

Therefore, subject to appropriate conditions, the proposals would meet the relevant considerations under Policies 7.6 and 7.7 of the London Plan by providing adequate mitigation that would reduce the wind speed within the site and not result in unmitigated adverse impacts on the surrounding environment outside the site. A ‘wind and microclimate’ condition is proposed to ensure that the above mitigation measures are adhered to through a binding planning condition.

Parking and Transport: 41 individual responses commented on the impact of the proposal on the local transport network and a further 10 referred to concerns regarding the low numbers of parking within the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The scheme was assessed by the GLA and TfL who initially raised concerns regarding the potential impacts of the proposal, however following clarification, it was agreed that a number of planning obligations and conditions would provide appropriate mitigation to accommodate the site into the surrounding network. These have been agreed to and included in the recommendation and would further enhance and develop connectivity and mitigate potential adverse impacts on the local transport, cycle and pedestrian network connectivity. These include conditions and obligations to secure level access to bus stop ‘Q’,

Page 29 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

contributions towards a new pedestrian crossing at grade as well as a new bridge over the A40, a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) to include details on deliveries and servicing, Travel plan, detailed Car and Cycle parking schemes as well as Parking, and Delivery Management Plans. The CLP would have to be developed in collaboration with TfL and HS2.

The proposed development will offer 43 parking spaces. This is equivalent to a ratio of 0.06 spaces per unit. This represents a reduction of 29 spaces from what was previously existing on site. This ratio is in line with the draft London Plan policies and objectives, however the GLA and TfL have suggested that these parking numbers could be further reduced, given the site’s high PTAL level. This was taken into consideration, however the amount initially proposed was considered to be appropriate.

Pollution, Demolition and Ecology: 24 individual responses referred to the effects of pollution on the local area resulting from the development, 6 individual responses referred to concerns regarding the demolition of the existing building on site as well as a further 12 comments referred to the potential adverse impacts of the demolition process on local ecology and biodiversity. As well as the impacts of the process on the local area, comments suggested that the existing hotel still has a long lifetime, so does not need to be re-developed.

Planning Officer’s response: The principle of the development is reliant on the delivery of a successful employment-led scheme to boost local socio-economic opportunities. The proposed development is an important part of Ealing’s progress toward a development-led strategy for intensified employment provision.

Throughout this report, there are sufficient material considerations to demonstrate that the proposal otherwise accords with many of the aims and objectives of the Development Plan and will facilitate the employment led optimisation of the site. Therefore, the principle of the demolition and re-development of the current building on site is sufficiently justified.

A planning condition to limit the adverse impacts arising from demolition and construction has been added to the recommendation. Safety and adverse impacts during demolition will be controlled by a Construction and Environmental Management Plan, in line with best practice for demolition and construction works.

The demolition works could contain some aspects of impulsive noise, but these will be controlled by application of the CEMP. As such, the general approach to the demolition and construction process has been designed to minimise the level and type of noise, the offsite impacts from dust and as such minimising the potential for adverse effects on the local wildlife and amenity of the neighbours.

Noise: 6 individual responses mentioned concerns regarding the noise nuisance, which will be caused both by the demolition and construction on site to neighbouring residents and uses.

The EIA identified that demolition and construction works have a potential for significant effects if not mitigated by the design and implementation practises of the Proposed Development. As such, a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been developed to provide adequate noise and vibration mitigation tools to reduce the potential impact to be not significant. Noise and vibration levels will be controlled in magnitude to be at or lower than the standard guidance of British Standard 5228. Therefore, living conditions will be in line with best practice for demolition and construction works near residential dwellings.

In terms of concerns to noise levels during the operational phase of the proposed development, the Council’s Pollution Technical team have reviewed the proposal and suggested a number of compliance and pre-occupation planning conditions which would ensure appropriate levels of noise are achieved throughout the premises. These are considered to effectively mitigate

Page 30 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

against any adverse impacts on excessive noise for the future users of the site and as such have been added to the recommendation.

Process: 5 individual responses referred to the lack of consultation and engagement with the local population in regard to the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The applicants have submitted a ‘Statement of Community Involvement’ which provided information and details of the extensive pre-application consultation carried out. This is summarised in the ‘Pre-Application Consultation’ section of the report. The level and quality of the consultation carried out was acceptable, and therefore in accordance with Section 122 of the Localism Act 2011.

Heritage: 4 individual responses referred to the potential harm to the local heritage due to the proposed development.

Planning Officer’s response: The site is not within a Conservation area, nor is there any identified special architectural character to the surrounding area. Historic England were consulted, reviewed the proposals and indicated that they do not have any objections to the proposed scheme, despite the obvious prominence of it due to the height.

External Consultations The following external consultees were contacted in relation to the application and provided a response. These are summarised below:

Historic England: Reviewed the proposal and noted that while the building height is vast, the immediate vicinity of it does not contain designated heritage assets. The proposed tower has the potential to be visible across extremely long distances and may be seen in the background of important views or affect the character of a wide range of assets beyond the usual assessment zones. Given the wide-ranging potential impacts of such a development, it was considered imperative to ensure any impacts are assessed carefully. In some of the visualisations initially submitted with the application, the wireline for the proposed development was deemed to be difficult to discern. It was therefore requested that specific views should be provided and clarified to the consultee to allow a full analysis of this proposal and its impact on both highly graded landscapes and domestically-scaled, characterful conservation areas.

Planning Officer’s response: The applicants were advised of the comments raised and were requested to prepare additional visualisations. Following the preparation of these, Historic England were issued a with the additional information. No concerns or objections were raised.

Greater London Authority (GLA): Reviewed the application as part of the ‘Stage 1 referral’ to the Mayor of London and advised that the principle to introduce residential development to this under-utilised site is supported. The proposed hotel will contribute positively to employment in the Opportunity Area in a highly-accessible location and is also supported. The quantum and affordability of the proposed affordable housing (30.4% by habitable rooms - split 52.4%/39.5%/8.1% London Shared Ownership/London Living Rent/ London Affordable Rent) does not meet the Fast Track Route and is not acceptable given the significantly increased density on this site. Grant funding must be investigated and further detail on the shared ownership income thresholds should be provided. An early and late stage review must be secured. The applicant should clarify the amount of play space.

The bulk, height and massing of this very tall building raised concerns in terms of its impacts on townscape and on Old Oak & Wormholt conservation area. The GLA advised that the applicant should make further design changes to mitigate these impacts; and seek to improve the public benefits of the proposal in order to outweigh harm to heritage assets. However, the proposal was deemed to cause less than substantial harm to the Old Oak & Wormholt Conservation Area

Page 31 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

in terms of heritage, which must be outweighed by public benefits, including maximising affordable housing.

Level access to the bus stop should be provided. The applicant has confirmed that the proposal would provide 10% of homes as wheelchair user dwellings. It was advised that the permission should secure M4(2) and M4(3) requirements by planning condition.

The Energy Hierarchy has broadly been followed; however, the applicant should consider the scope for additional measures aimed at achieving further carbon reductions, including connection to a district heating network and PV panels. The surface water drainage strategy does not give appropriate regard to the drainage hierarchy. The proposal would be Air Quality Neutral, which is supported.

In terms of transport, the applicant must prioritise the servicing needs before the proposed high- density development can be supported. Car parking should be reduced. The proposed bridge is acceptable over the A40 is subject to agreement of detailed design, infrastructure protection and maintenance arrangements, providing that a safe, fit-for-purpose at-grade pedestrian crossing is also provided; the applicant must also further discuss and implement improvements to the crossing at Leamington Park. Improvements to pedestrian and cycle facilities must be reviewed. Overall, the GLA expressed support for the proposals subject to the following details being reviewed and confirmed: • Quantum of Affordable housing to be secured in Legal Agreement. Further detail on shared ownership income thresholds should be provided. • An early stage review of the scheme’s affordability should also be secured. • Level access to bus stop and 10% M4(2) and M4(3) units to be secured by condition. • A suitable drainage strategy should be secured by condition. • Energy strategy and carbon offsetting to be secured in legal agreement and condition. • Car parking should be reduced and secured by condition. • Pedestrian bridge and crossings should be secured in s106. • Improvements to cycle and pedestrian infrastructure should be secured in s106.

Planning officer’s response: Following discussions with the applicant, the scheme’s appearance and external materials have been amended and redesigned to provide a more light and elegant appearance to the towers. Negotiations have been led in regard to ‘in lieu’ Affordable housing contributions and appropriate amounts are to be secured in the s106. All other relevant contributions, including affordable housing, transport improvements and an early stage review have been secured as part of the S106 Legal Agreement. Planning conditions and controls form part of the recommendation, as advised, ensuring development is in accordance with all relevant policy and in conformity with the London Plan and draft London Plan.

The Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS): had specified that the site lies within an area of low archaeological potential. Therefore, the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on heritage assets of archaeological interest. As such no further assessment or conditions were recommended.

Natural England: Considers that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected nature conservation sites or landscapes. As such the organisation raised no objection to this application.

Environmental Agency (EA): The specialists reviewed the proposed scheme and concluded that no objection or any additional requirements would be raised. Advice was provided regarding wheel washing facilities and the control of dust and other air pollutants in the context of the Air Quality Sensitive zone in the vicinity.

Planning Officer’s response: The advice communicated has been recorded as informatives within the recommendation.

Page 32 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Ealing Clinical Commissioning Group (NHS) have assessed the application and request that a financial contribution of £1,079,451 is secured in the legal agreement, based on the Healthy Urban Development Unit (HUDU) model.

Planning officer’s response: Following negotiations with the applicant, a payment was secured as part of the legal agreement. As well as that a planning condition is also being imposed to ensure the forthcoming scheme adheres to Sport England’s Active Design principles – whereby encouraging existing and new residents to become more active and healthier.

Heathrow Airport Ltd: Following an initial assessment, Heathrow reported that the proposed development causes an infringement of Heathrow’s Outer Horizontal Surface, which is a part of the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS). This surface sits at a height of 167.95m above means sea level (AMSL) and restricts the height of buildings, including roof structures such as aerials and flagpoles. The proposed height of the north tower is 197.25m AMSL and the south tower 237.34m AMSL. As such, the building would cause the following infringement of the Outer Horizontal Surface: North Tower – 29.30; South Tower – 69.39m. Following the submission of a verified Aviation Study by the applicant, Heathrow Airport confirmed that the proposed development has been re-examined from an aerodrome safeguarding perspective and could conflict with safeguarding criteria unless any planning permission granted is subject to the recommended conditions.

Planning Officer’s response: The applicants were notified of the original objection and undertook a proactive approach to providing additional information to satisfy comments made by Heathrow. The conditions stipulated form part of the recommendation.

Cadent Gas (National Grid): Had identified low to medium pressure gas pipes and associated equipment within the application site vicinity. The Applicant must ensure that proposed works do not infringe on Cadent’s legal rights and are a safe distance away from any gas apparatus. They have therefore suggested that an informative is attached, notifying the developers that they are required to contact Cadent and National Grid, once final locations of any works are verified and agree a construction methodology with both before carrying out any works on site.

Planning officer’s response: As advised, an informative forms part of the recommendation reminding the applicant of the requirement to contact Cadent and National Grid prior to carrying out any works on site.

Sports England: Have assessed the application in light of the NPPF and their own planning objectives and raised an objection. At present the proposal does not mitigate the harm that would be caused on the local sporting infrastructure by the increase in demand. As a result, the added strain on local sports facilities may ultimately detriment the quality of local facilities and the ability for the current and future population to participate in a range of sport. It has therefore been suggested that a financial contribution is secured as part of the S106 agreement which could mitigate against the potential adverse effects. The development should contribute toward the actions set out in the Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) to mitigate the impact on local outdoor sports provision. Sport England recommended that the applicant liaises with the Council to identify appropriate project(s). Advice was also given that the Active Design Framework should be applied and referenced throughout the development proposal to promote good design and more healthy lifestyles for future communities and users.

Planning officer’s response: Following discussions with the applicant, financial contributions towards enhancements and improvements of local sports facilities is being committed to as part of the s106 Agreement for this application.

Alongside these, a planning condition has been secured in the recommendation to ensure the forthcoming scheme adheres to Sport England’s Active Design principles. A sitewide Framework

Page 33 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

to set out a “Active Design” strategy has been secured, with the expectation that a more detailed strategy would be submitted once development timeline is confirmed. This would encourage existing and new residents to become more active through a well-designed and equipped public realm.

Whilst Sports England has welcomed the contribution and above initiatives, they have advised that this contribution remains insufficient to mitigate against the population increase. However, within the context of the wider benefits of this scheme clearly outweighing the adverse effects described by Sports England, it is considered that the financial contribution and conditions will be acceptable on balance.

The Secretary of State (Planning Casework Unit (PCU): Have acknowledged and reviewed the submitted application and have responded that they have comments regarding the proposed scheme.

Crossrail Ltd.: Advised that the site of this planning application is outside the limits of land subject to consultation under the Safeguarding Direction. Therefore, there were no further comments.

Health and Safety Executive (HSE): Reviewed the documents submitted with this application and advised that the application falls outside of the HSE consultation area and as such had no objection or any other comments.

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS / MOPAC): Have reviewed the planning application and believe that this development should be required to deliver the Distributed Ward Office (DWO) that MPS requires, as it is necessary, in order to mitigate policing requirements arising from the proposed development.

Planning officer’s response: Following negotiation with the applicant, the provision of a Distributed Ward Office within the development is being committed to as part of the S106 Agreement for this application.

Crime Prevention Design Officer (Metropolitan Police): Noted that serious consideration must be given to preventing vehicle crime and anti-social behaviour in the vicinity of the proposed development site. During pre-app discussions, the architects and client displayed an aspiration to achieve a full Secured by Design certification for the proposed development. The officer was confident that the development would achieve the certification, however recommended a planning condition to secure this.

Planning officer’s response: Planning conditions to secure compliance with Secured by Design principles in consultation with the Met Police are included in the recommendation.

Reviewed the proposal and advised that the application currently does not conform to adopted, draft London Plan and Mayor’s Transport Strategy policy objectives.

Transport for London (TfL): As set out in pre-application advice, TfL were willing to accept no provision of disabled car parking at the site, given public transport accessibility levels and contributions towards North Acton station Phase 2 improvements. This is on the proviso that no general car parking is provided for the hotel use, in compliance with draft London Plan policy. The current car parking provision (as well as motorcycle parking) is therefore not acceptable, and TfL would not support the application in its current form. However, the level of cycle parking provision and type is in accordance with the minimum requirements as per draft London Plan as well as the London Cycling Design Standards (LCDS). It was noted that the access into these stores is not currently compliant with the LCDS, as there are more than two doors which the cyclists must pass through to reach the storage/parking.

Page 34 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

TfL considered the proposed arrangement for deliveries and servicing to be insufficient in accommodating demand as they could compromise safety and would not be entirely in conformity with draft London Plan policy T7. These proposed arrangements were to be reviewed by the applicant, in order to allow for vehicles to load/unload in the designated areas and promote safety.

The applicant’s attention was drawn to the Healthy Streets’ and ‘Vision Zero’ advice from the Mayor and TfL and the scheme would need to demonstrate, specifically in relation to the frontages of the proposed development, how it complies with these set of principles.

Waste collection was considered inadequate and it was advised that arrangements should be made to accommodate this operation on-site. TfL were also concerned with the arrangements proposed for the coaches and taxis operating the site. They advised that these should be clarified or revised to comply with the draft London Plan policies and securing safety in these operations. The Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP) was advised to be updated, following consideration and secured by condition.

It was also noted that the current pedestrian crossings over A40 are insufficient to cope with the forecasted number of users, and as such alternative solutions to improve pedestrian and cycling connectivity would be required. It was advised that planning obligations must secure the delivery of upgraded pedestrian and cycling facilities across the A40. As such step-free access to bus stop Q and improved pedestrian and cycle connectivity across the A40 and between the site and Acton Mainline station and further must also be provided in order to ensure conformity with draft London Plan policies T2 and T5 and the MTS.

Planning officer’s response: The concerns of TfL have been communicated to the applicants and extensive discussions have occurred on ways to amend the scheme and resolve the issues raised accordingly. These included: the re-arrangement of layouts of the internal emergency doors, and a maximum of 2 doors would be required to reach the cycle stores; the re-allocation of two disabled spaces from the hotel to the commercial element.

The amount of parking for the hotel has been deemed necessary to accommodate the demand, given the fact that the numbers are already reducing from what was previously on site, this is considered acceptable. Residential car parking numbers shall be maintained, as well as the motorcycle parking which is considered necessary.

Crossing over the A40 at grade is proposed to be secured in the legal agreement and forms part of this recommendation. The applicants have developed a viable and feasible solution which connects the site to the footway on the western side of Horn Lane, which will provide access to Acton Mainline. While creating better connectivity, this would also address the concerns of safety and alleviate accidents around Gypsy Corner. Details of all these have been shared with the Council and are considered acceptable at this stage, however this shall also be re-visited at the detailed design stage. In addition, the applicant has agreed to a £1,000,000.00 monetary contribution towards the provision of a DDA compliant pedestrian bridge over the A40.

The scheme shall offer step free access to the bus stop identified via a lift to allow level access to the bus stop as well as the A40, this approach was chosen as construction of a DDA compliant ramp would be extensively space-consuming. This will also be a cycle connection into the at- grade crossing. Likewise, a contribution has been secured as part of the s106 to carry out works to provide ramped access between the A40 and Portal Way.

As such, the pedestrian and cycle links to be developed between Portal Way and A40 and level access to the bus stop have been identified as notable improvements to the current circulation situation and arrangements.

Page 35 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

There is local precedence for on-street servicing lay-bys. All servicing bays have been justified with detailed swept paths and it is considered that the proposed arrangements would sufficiently accommodate the demand arising from the proposed development. In terms of waste collection, the applicant had already agreed this process, as such no amendments were sought to the DSP, however the finalised document would be secured by condition.

As such, a number of planning obligations and conditions have been agreed to and included in the recommendation which would further enhance and develop connectivity and mitigate potential adverse impacts on the local transport, cycle and pedestrian network connectivity. These include conditions and obligations to secure level access to bus stop ‘Q’, contributions towards a new pedestrian crossing at grade as well as a new bridge over the A40, a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) to include details on deliveries and servicing, Travel plan, detailed Car and Cycle parking schemes as well as Parking, and Delivery Management Plans. The CLP would have to be developed in collaboration with TfL and HS2.

Highways England (HE): Reviewed the proposals and concluded that there should be a negligible impact on the Strategic Road Network (SRN) surrounding the site. As such, Highways England are satisfied there will be no material increase in queues or safety implications on the SRN and have no objection to this application.

High Speed 2 (HS2): Have advised that no part of the proposed development site is located within formal safeguarding limits. As such there are no objections to planning permission being granted for the application in safeguarding terms. However, given the proximity of the proposed development to HS2 interests in that location it is suggested to the applicant that ongoing engagement with HS2 Ltd is advisable as respective plans move towards the construction phase. It was noted that the Transport Assessment had already acknowledged the fact that the applicants are aware of the need to continue to engage closely with HS2 during the construction phases, especially as the two projects may commence simultaneously.

Planning officer’s response: An informative has been included in the recommendation which informs the applicants of the need to continuously engage with HS2.

Network Rail has no objection in principle to the above proposal but due to the proposal being next to Network Rail land and our infrastructure and to ensure that no part of the development adversely impacts the safety, operation and integrity of the operational railway we have included asset protection comments which the applicant is strongly recommended to action should the proposal be granted planning permission. The local authority should include these requirements as planning conditions if these matters have not been addressed in the supporting documentation submitted with this application.

Planning officer’s response: The matters advised are included within the recommendation either as informatives or conditions, as appropriate.

Fire Safety Regulation Service reviewed the documents submitted and advised that the Commissioner is satisfied with the proposals.

Ministry of Defence (MOD): The MOD identified that the two buildings will infringe the Outer Horizontal Obstacle Limitation Surface. The MOD therefore objected to the proposed development. There were no bird strike safeguarding concerns raised.

If the MOD suggested that a way to remove the objection would be to successfully mitigate any impacts. If the MOD is able to agree to any development at this site, then the MOD would request a condition for the submission of a construction management strategy (CMS) be applied to any consent.

Page 36 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Planning officer’s response: A planning condition to secure the submission of a CMS is included within the recommendation either as informatives or conditions.

Thames Water: Following initial investigations, Thames Water had identified an inability of the existing foul and surface water network infrastructure to accommodate the needs of this development proposal. Thames Water have contacted the developer to agree a position for foul and surface water networks but have been unable to do so in the time available and as such it was requested that specific conditions are added to any planning permission. They had also identified that the existing water infrastructure may not be able to cope with the development and have therefore suggested that a planning condition is introduced to ensure that the water network infrastructure has been investigated and there is evidence that the water network on the site can provide for the proposed capacity uplift in advance of occupation. As such Thames Water had no objection, subject to the recommended conditions, however they advised that approval should be sought from the Lead Local Flood Authority.

Planning officer’s response: Conditions to secure confirmation that existing surface and foul water networks as well as the water network infrastructure have been sufficiently upgraded have been included as pre-occupation conditions on the recommendation.

London Heliport: Following initial assessment, Heliport supported the NATS objection but also wished to register their own objection as an aviation stakeholder with an interest in any impact on use of low-level helicopter routes in the London area which could affect access of helicopter air traffic across London and to and from this facility.

Following an update to the scheme by the applicants, however, London Heliport withdrew their objection, subject to the addition of planning conditions to safeguard appropriately safe aircraft movements.

Planning officer's Response: Conditions suggested to secure a 'Radar Mitigation Scheme' have been included in the recommendation.

Environmental Health (Land Contamination): Following the review of contamination related documents, the officer advised that there is a low to moderate chance of contamination being present and as such recommended three site-specific planning conditions to secure remediation measures.

Planning officer’s response: Conditions to secure a site investigation, a remediation strategy and verification report form part of the recommendation.

Environmental Health (Noise): Reviewed the report by WSP, which confirms that extremely high traffic noise levels affect the proposed site. However, it concludes that, with appropriate mitigation measures, the site is suitable for residential use. Highest noise and vibration from the development site is predicted during the demolition period. There will also be high noise from plant, activities and traffic during the construction period. As such 14 planning conditions and five informatives have been recommended to mitigate the impacts of potential noise nuisance on the future occupiers of the site, and neighbouring properties.

Planning Officer’s response: The informatives and fourteen planning conditions were all considered appropriate in the context of the site and its context and as such form part of the recommendation.

National Air Traffic Services (NATS): Based on the preliminary technical findings, the proposed development was deemed to conflict with the safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) plc objected to the proposal.

Page 37 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Following the full technical and operational assessment of the proposal, the objection was withdrawn subject to planning conditions. NATS advised that due to its location and scale, the assessments required were those against the combined Primary and Secondary Surveillance Radars (PSR and SSR), located at Heathrow airport and the Air-Ground-Air installation near Greenford. Routes and operations in this area may be impacted by the proposal and accordingly engagement with helicopter operators, H Heliport and the Civil Aviation Authority is recommended.

A level of reduction in radar cover had been identified, however was deemed to be mitigated by the fact that NATS utilises several sensors covering the South East with the resultant radar cover being a composite of various sensors. As such, the reduction in cover in this direction, due to degraded low level cover from H10, has been deemed to be acceptable by Air Traffic Control.

The generation of false SSR targets however was deemed unacceptable to Air Traffic Control. As such it was advised that the SSR reflections can be prevented through adaptation of the building surfaces within the radar processing software. Accordingly, NATS would be supportive of planning conditions requiring a radar mitigation scheme to be agreed with the applicant. They have also advised that they would like to be consulted on the Construction methodology/Crane Plan to be aware of all locations, dates and heights of any proposed cranes on site.

Planning officer's Response: Conditions suggested to secure a 'Radar Mitigation Scheme' in consultation with NATS and to ensure NATS are consulted on the Construction methodology/Crane Plan have been included in the recommendation.

Internal Consultation

Education: Used the Wandsworth model for calculating expected child yield and concluded that there will be a shortfall of primary and secondary places in the area. Accordingly, a child yield of 29.33 Primary and 20.95 Secondary age range pupils was identified, which equates to a contribution of £718,809.17. The contribution is based on 90% of the basic need allocation multiplier for the primary and secondary sectors.

Furthermore, it was noted that this development must be seen in the context of all proposed developments in the area and as such there is a cumulative effect on the demand for places. Current projections, supported by updated predictions by the Greater London Authority (GLA), indicate a significant increase in the number of school age children in the coming years.

Planning officer’s response: Negotiations have been held with the developer and as a result a financial contribution to offset the impact on local school places from this development has been secured as part of the s106 obligations.

Strategic Planning (Policy): No objection. The scheme was reviewed and supported in strategic policy terms.

Regeneration (Employment, Apprenticeships and Training): The team reviewed the application and advised that the developer will be required to produce a Local Employment & Training Plan, which should be developed with the support of LB Ealing Employment & Skills Officer. The Plan should set out (as a minimum): the forecasting of jobs, apprenticeships and work experience opportunities (min 5 hotel related opportunities) and notification of these to LB Ealing, training provision and a demonstration of how this support the skills development and progression of local residents. A local labour target of 25% as a minimum will be required. These apply to both the construction phase of the scheme and operational-end user opportunities. As well as that a financial contribution of 0.05% of the building cost has been requested.

Page 38 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Planning officer’s response: The financial contribution of 0.05% build costs has been secured in the s106 agreement. A Local Employment & Training Plan has also been secured via the legal agreement.

Highways: Have reviewed the Framework CMP and noted that it will have to be developed further. One point raised for clarification was their proposed route for abnormal loads. The developer will be required to enter a section 38 agreement for highway adoption(s) and a section 278 for works on the existing highway.

Planning officer’s response: The applicant provided additional information in relation to the points raised by the highway officers. Routes for vehicles with abnormal loads will be prescribed within the detailed Construction Management Plan (CMP), which will be conditioned. The applicant will be required to enter a s278 and s38 agreement where applicable, as advised, if application is approved.

Transport: Reviewed the documents submitted and advised that while the scheme was supported overall, a reduction in parking would be required to make it acceptable in policy terms. Relocation of servicing from on street to the basement was also encouraged. The team advised that they would like to see amended plans prior to the application being presented at committee. The applicants supplied the information and as such Transport concluded that they would raise no objection to the proposed scheme, if sufficient mitigation is enabled by securing monetary obligations within the S106 agreement as well as planning conditions.

Planning officer’s response: Conditions to secure the Construction Management plan, Electric Vehicle Charging points, adequate Cycle parking, a Travel Plan and submission form part of the recommendation. Relevant obligations were secured as part of the s106 legal agreement to mitigate potential adverse impacts on the local transport network.

Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA): assessed the proposals in terms of potential flood risk and drainage. Concerns were raised in relation to rainwater harvesting and it was requested that the applicant provides firmer justification for not including a rainwater harvesting strategy. The site was deemed to have a low infiltration potential and therefore, a request for clarification was also made in relation to storage calculations, including permeable areas of the sub- catchments. Th applicants were advised to also provide proof that pumping is required for all sub-catchments including proposed ground levels after development and specific outfall levels or amend the drainage strategy to reduce the need of pumping where possible. The specialist advised that these clarifications would be necessary to make the application acceptable. No objection is raised, given that further information is supplied, and a number of planning conditions recommended are secured with the decision.

Planning officer’s response: Clarification was requested from the applicant and additional information was supplied in the form of an addendum to the drainage and flood risk strategies. As per advice given, several planning conditions to clarify and confirm drainage details at the detailed design stage have been added to the recommendation.

Sustainability (Energence): The Energy Strategy states that the non-residential space will be built to at least BREEAM Very Good standard with an aspiration to achieve “Excellent” standards in the final design. The “Clean” / “Green” technologies to be incorporated are: two Site Air Source Heat Pumps and ten Individual flat parasitic top up heat loads.

The overall site-wide CO2 emissions will be cut by at least 41.95% over Part L (2013). This makes the development compliant with the London Plan and Ealing Council’s requirements. This leaves a shortfall of 10,689 tonnes (over 30 years) which at £95/tonne will be met through an “offset” S106 payment of £1,015,455 to the Council. This will need to be secured in the S106 agreement for the scheme, alongside a clause on post construction energy equipment

Page 39 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

monitoring. Several planning conditions and informatives were also suggested to enforce compliance with London’s sustainability agendas and policies.

Planning officer’s response: All conditions and informatives suggested form a part of the recommendation. These will secure the scheme is compliant with sustainability principles promoted by the London Plan and Ealing’s Local Plan. Negotiations with the developers have resulted in contributions secured towards carbon ‘offsetting’ and post construction energy equipment monitoring in the s106 agreement.

Active Ealing (Leisure): Noted that the existing sports facility provision within the area is unlikely to accommodate the increased demand generated by the new residents of the proposed development without exacerbating existing and/or predicted future deficiencies.

As a result of the proposed future population increase of 1,144 new residents, the site and surroundings would have insufficient access to sports facilities that would ultimately be detrimental to their ability to participate in sport and would have negative implications for their health and wellbeing.

Therefore, a contribution to mitigate the harm on sport facility provision caused by the proposed population is deemed necessary to ensure the health and wellbeing of the future community without depriving the existing community.

The S106 contribution needed towards new indoor and outdoor sports facilities to the current value of £591,966, this will increase year on year in line with inflation so should be recalculated as the project timeline is confirmed.

The Council’s Ealing Sports Facility Strategy which includes the Playing Pitch Strategy highlights projects that need to be delivered to accommodate the increasing demand within the borough which contributions should be directed towards. In this respect, a list of potential projects can be identified when required based on those identified within the Council’s strategy as being required to accommodate the increasing population/demand. Specific projects which will benefit from the financial contribution made by the developer will be determined when the project timetables are secured.

Identified projects to be delivered in the Acton area include but are not limited to the following: • A new sand based artificial grass pitch suitable for hockey • Various projects at outdoor sports grounds to improve playing surfaces, floodlighting, access control and /or ancillary facilities for a variety of sports including football, cricket, tennis, etc. • Community accessible sports hall provision to be expanded either on existing school sites or at new build sites • More informal activity equipment in parks and open spaces e.g. outdoor gym equipment, distance marker routes and/or table tennis tables • A new gymnastics and trampolining facilities are required to cater for the whole borough this could be located in Acton

It was also requested that Active Design Principles are followed and incorporated where possible across the development.

Planning officer’ response: Active Design principles will be secured by planning conditions within the recommendation. Negotiations with the developers have resulted in a contribution being secured in the s106 agreement. This will contribute towards delivering new sports facilities and improving existing facilities primarily identified within the Ealing’s Sports Facility Strategy 2012- 21 action plan.

Page 40 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Parks and Leisure (Landscaping): Reviewed the proposed scheme and raise concern about this development proposal due to a shortage of private/communal amenity space, public open space and the scale of the development in relation to the existing urban grain.

The development is short of amenity provision by 7,281m2, there is also a limited amount of public open space consisting of hard and soft landscaping around the perimeter of the building which will fall considerably short of the requirements. The proposed play space provision consists of separate internal rooms for private and social tenants. These spaces would need to be dedicated play spaces with extensive permanent play equipment such as soft play areas, and it is also of concern that the spaces are separated for private and social tenants, which is unacceptable and goes against the mayor’s guidelines which states all play spaces should be accessible to all users with no segregation. Due to the lack of open and amenity/playspace provision, s106 payment would be required if the scheme gets approval. The site is also in an area of district and local park deficiency so access to local green space is extremely important.

As such planning conditions and s106 payments have been requested to mitigate the shortages and avoid adverse impacts on residents

Planning officer’s response: Financial contributions to mitigate against the lack of open space amenity space and playspace have been secured through negotiation in the S106 legal agreement. Planning conditions have been included within the recommendation.

Tree Services: Reviewed the proposal and raised no objection to the proposal.

Planning Policies: Please see informative section in Annex 1 for a full policy list.

PLANNING APPRAISAL

Reasoned Justification

The proposal is assessed against the policies contained in the adopted Development Plan, and in terms of its potential impact on the local and wider environment, on the amenities of the occupiers of surrounding development and all other material planning considerations.

Principle of the Scheme

North Acton has a long history as a focus for change and sustainable development within the Borough, initially as a defined Gateway to Park Royal in the initial and revised Park Royal OAPF and Ealing Local Plan, and subsequently as a new town centre in the emerging OPDC Local Plan. This plan is now in the latter stages of its examination and should be accorded substantial weight in decisions, the principal site specific considerations for this area are set out in Policy P7.

The vision that the plan sets out for North Acton is of a ‘high density mixed use area accommodating tall buildings in appropriate locations’ constituting a ‘new neighbourhood town centre [with] a high quality and coordinated public realm along Victoria Road and Portal Way’. This accords well with the mixed use nature of the proposal that incorporates both a hotel use, giving continuity to the existing use, and workspace alongside the main residential component. The mixed and vertically integrated nature of the scheme, and the uses that it proposes, accord well with the nature of North Acton as a significant transport hub and emerging new town centre within the broader Old Oak area and as gateway to both Park Royal and the early stages of the HS2 scheme as a whole.

The scheme also addresses the key requirement for improved pedestrian and cycle connectivity across the A40, which will constitute part of an ‘improved street network will provide a choice of

Page 41 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

greened routes to Old Oak, Park Royal and West Acton’ and deliver the substantial public realm improvements necessary to the new town centre.

As such, the proposed mixed use redevelopment of this site complies with Policy OIS1 of the Ealing Development Sites DPD; Policy 2.13, 3.3 and 4.2 of the London Plan and the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area Planning Framework and emerging policy within the OPDC draft Local Plan.

Hotel Use LP Policy 4.5 and draft LP Policy E10 seeks to ensure that visitor accommodation is in the appropriate location and sets out that it should be focused, where outside the CAZ, in town centres and opportunity and intensification areas. Ten percent of the hotel bedrooms should be wheelchair accessible under LP Policy 4.5. The supporting text to LP Policy 4.5 in paragraph 4.25 states that visitors play an important part in the city’s economy. As a result the policy sets an ambition target of 40,000 net additional hotel bedrooms by 2036. LP Policy 4.5 stipulates that hotels should be directed to the Central Activity Zone (CAZ) and Opportunity Areas. Part C for the Policy sets out that Development should not result in the loss of strategically important (categorized as 5,000 m² outside Central London) hotel capacity. DM DPD Policy 4.5 states that hotel development in Ealing is directed toward Acton, Ealing and Southall Town Centres and to locations with good public transport accessibility.

The existing land use at the site is C1 hotel use. The Proposed Development includes the re- provision of a hotel. The proposals will provide 159 high quality bedrooms. 10% of the bedrooms will be wheelchair accessible, which would be in line with LP Policy 4.5.

As part of the hotel offer, conferencing will be provided which will add vitality to the centre and help draw in new businesses locally and internationally, offering them a place to meet clients, hold conferences and conventions. In addition to conferencing and meeting rooms to which the local community and businesses would have access, the Development offers flexible workspace. This element of the proposal could provide a hub and an active use throughout the day.

The proposals re-provide an existing hotel and therefore comply with planning policy at all levels including the NPPF paragraph 80, LP Policy 4.5. Draft London Plan Policy E10 and DM DPD Policy 4.5.

Residential There is a clear policy requirement at a national, regional and local level to provide new housing. Policy 3.3 of the London Plan sets the annual target of achieving 42,000 net additional homes per year across London and seeks to improve housing choice, housing quality and affordability. Translated to the local level the adopted Core Strategy Policy 1.1a sets out a requirement for 14,000 new homes to be built in Ealing by 2026. The OAPF also indicates that the area has the potential for high density mixed use area accommodating tall buildings in appropriate locations’ constituting a ‘new neighbourhood town centre [with] a high quality and coordinated public realm along Victoria Road and Portal Way’.

The principle of residential uses in support of the optimisation of the site presents a material consideration in achieving the wider objectives of adopted and emerging policy to also deliver much needed housing. With the increasing housing targets for both the Opportunity Area as well as Ealing as a whole it is essential that residential uses are maximised on sites such as this. In this regard, it is considered that the redevelopment of the site for an employment led mixed use development with a significant enabling residential component is consistent with the wider aims and objectives of the Development Plan such that an employment led mixed use development with a residential component is therefore acceptable.

Commercial Uses

Page 42 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The provision of retail uses on the site is supported by Core Strategy Policy 1.2(c) which seeks to maintain and increase the supply of retail floor space including the delivery of up to 98,500sqm (gross) of comparison retail floor space and 29,900sqm (gross) of convenience retail floor space).

The provision of retail uses on the site to meet the day to day needs of future residents and workers on this and surrounding sites is accepted.

The applicant has submitted evidence, in the form of an Economic Statement (Volterra, April 2019), to support the proposals, which confirm the flexible commercial units are not intended to compete with existing commercial provision in the area, which should still remain the key retail destination in area. The proposed quantum of retail floorspace is considered appropriate and proportionate in alignment with the objectives of Policy 1.2(c) and the OAPF’s recognition of the need to deliver supporting commercial uses in this location, negating the requirement for a sequential assessment. The proposed retail provision also falls below the threshold identified within the NPPF for the completion of an impact test.

The proposed offer will provide a diverse range of local services and facilities to meet the future needs of the emerging population in this part of Acton and in addition to retail shops will also include the delivery of new cafes, restaurants and bars.

Together with the employment the commercial uses will provide activity along key frontages, animating the environment, encouraging social interaction and natural surveillance and helping to establish a sense of community and safety.

Economic Assessment and Employment The employment impacts once the scheme is operational can be estimated from the floorspace uses of the proposed development, less any jobs supported at the existing site. The site currently supports 82 FTEs, of which 57 are directly employed by the Holiday Inn and 25 are agency staff. Based on the proportion of part time workers in the hotel sector, this is equivalent to 115 jobs. It is estimated that the proposed development will support 265 FTEs, which equates to 330 jobs, accounting for the proportion of part time workers in each sector. This would represent a very momentous 230% increase in job density within the development site.

It is also important that the new developments benefit local residents and the scheme would assist in doing this through its wide range of employment opportunities, across a range of sectors, which could be taken up by local residents.

The Applicant is committed to maximising local jobs opportunities and has taken into account the employment and skills strategy for the borough, which states as one of four pivotal objectives to encourage contractors to prioritise resident’s employment and skills. The OPDC specifies a minimum of 15% end-use employment coming from the local area (defined as the London Boroughs of Brent, LBE or Hammersmith & Fulham). The Applicant would use reasonable endeavours to achieve this higher target. On this basis, 80 FTEs of the 265 FTEs supported by the proposed development – approximately 30% of the total jobs – would be expected to go to LBE residents. It is worth bearing in mind that this figure is relatively high in comparison to some other outer London boroughs, and as the area gets more accessible it may struggle to maintain this level of local jobs.

Conclusion The proposed development is an important part of Ealing’s progress toward a development-led strategy for intensified employment provision. However, the principle of the scheme depends entirely on the successful delivery of a one-off and highly-bespoke composite tall building, which would participant in the London skyline and be visible from large distances. As such, the legal agreement should ensure that; a) the employment component of the scheme (as well all other public benefits provided with the scheme), is delivered by imposing an appropriate restriction

Page 43 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

on the timing of occupation and that appropriate marketing of the commercial components to potential tenants/lessees is carried out in advance of its completion to maximise the chances of securing appropriate occupiers; b) provisions are included to regulate the management of the commercial strategy for the flexible-uses ancillary and supporting spaces - and, c) appropriate affordable housing strategies are secured as part of the s106 legal agreement.

In summary, whilst the proposal is for the introduction of a prominent building to the London skyline, there are sufficient material considerations to demonstrate that the proposal otherwise accords with many of the aims and objectives of the Development Plan and will facilitate the employment led optimisation of the site whilst delivering much need housing (including affordable housing) provision.

EIA Consideration of Alternatives Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations 2017 require that the main alternatives to any scheme that have been considered need to be outlined in the ES. The principal reasons for their choice should also be given, taking into account the environmental effects.

During the pre-submission evaluation process a number of options have been considered. The ES outlines the evaluation processes carried out by discussing the likely evolution of the Site without the proposals (baseline scenario) and design layout and specific site uses, under the following broad headings:

• Alternative Sites Alternative Sites were not considered as the Site is situated within the designated London Plan Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area and the growth and regeneration of the Site has been advocated by strategic and local planning policy for many years.

Both the adopted London Plan and the emerging new Draft London Plan express targets for strategic growth and development in response to the transformative public transport investment to be realised when the super transport hub (HS2 line and Crossrail 2 lines) merge at Old Oak Common. Furthermore, the LBE has allocated the Site in its Park Royal Southern Gateway December 2013 Development Sites Development Plan Document. This allocation confirms that the Southern Gateway is considered to be an appropriate place in principal for tall buildings by LBE and is a central component in its growth and regeneration. No further consideration is given to alternative sites.

• Do-Nothing The Site is located within the designated London Plan: Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area for which an Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) was adopted in 2015. The London Plan and the new draft London Plan express targets for strategic growth and development in response to significant public transport investment with the Old Oak Common station set to open in the future providing High Speed 2 and Crossrail 2 services.

The OAPF advocates high density development of mixed land use including tall buildings, new and reconnected public realm, open space and community facilities. Furthermore, the London Borough of Ealing (LBE) has allocated the Site in its Park Royal Southern Gateway (OISO Park Royal Southern gateway) in its adopted December 2013 Development Sites Development Plan Document (DPD).

The DPD Site allocation supports the mixed-use development of the Southern Gateway for uses including residential and employment with ancillary retail and community uses.

If the Site was not redeveloped it would remain in its current form, as the do-nothing scenario. A description of the do-nothing scenario, which is effectively the existing baseline conditions and future baseline conditions are set out within each topic chapter in this ES.

Page 44 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

• Alternative specific tower typologies, Alternative tower Heights and Alternative Pedestrian Accesses

The key concepts informing the final tower typologies were the careful location of the tall buildings alongside the A40 and to ensure the design evolution process considered a range of tower massing, including a single tower, two towers, a composite tower, two towers with a podium and two towers with a bridge link.

Several composite tower options were considered including variants to the massing and physical layout of the towers on the Site. Eventually the massing evolved into two tall connected elements, reflecting the final design option. Therefore, these have been subject to specific consideration

The initial tower massing studies included environmental considerations in relation to aviation, daylight and sunlight, wind and acoustics to optimise potential solutions for the massing and surroundings

The Two tower bridge link configuration was taken forward as the preferred option as it combines the positive elements of other tower typologies considered to perform best in regard to levels of daylight and sunlight within residential units, the amount of amenity space available to residents, increases the frontage and activates the public realm on the ground floor, provides a greater affordable housing provision and minimises operational noise on residents. Once the preferred tower typology was selected (Option 5 in the ES), the proposed layout, disposition of buildings and massing height of each of the two towers was studied in order to optimise views past, through and beyond 2 Portal Way for residential units. Studying the views has permitted greater visual permeability through the Site upon approach from the north and the west. Through this analysis the southern tower emerged as the taller element to become the defining marker for the immediate area. In this way, the scheme will serve as a “landmark” building and provide positive reference points and a sense of enclosure.

While analysis of the different options in terms of heights showed it was possible to have a tower up to a maximum of 246m AOD, it was determined that the maximum height of the tallest tower would be reduced to 236.5m AOD with consideration of the relationship to the cluster of tall buildings and inter-composition between the height of the two towers within the townscape views.

In terms of pedestrian access to/from the site from the west/south-west, over the A40, a pedestrian bridge over the A40; and an at grade pedestrian crossing over the A40 were considered and tested during the design process. The 2 options were considered in relation to safety, access and deliverability and the at-grade crossing option has been selected, with space reserved for the footing and lifts for a bridge, should LBE decide to pursue this option at a later date.

Urban Design Section 12 of the NPPF, London Plan policies 3.5, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6; Policies 3.5, 7.3, 7.4, and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD are relevant with regards to the design of new development. Policy 7.7 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD supplements the corresponding policy in the London Plan. This policy defines tall buildings as being substantially taller than their neighbours and / or which significantly change the skyline. Local variation Policy 7.7 states that tall buildings should only be located within the town centres of Acton, Ealing and Southall, the gateways to Park Royal, and identified development sites.

Design and Context The redevelopment of the Holiday Inn hotel represents an opportunity to significantly optimise and enhance the use of the site and, when seen collectively with other existing and emerging

Page 45 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

development in the locality, it is expected to positively contribute to the creation of an attractive and desirable destination for current and new visitors, new residents and employees.

The architectural design proposes a modern building of height solution whereby the building is designed to enable a Bridge-link typology, with a northern tower (set at 45 storeys with roof terrace, 197m) and a southern tower (55 storeys with roof terrace, 237m), combining to form a stimulating skyline and provide a leading presence to mark Portal Way and a main entrance to the Southern Gateway and wider Old Oak area.

The proposed scheme was developed from the architects considerate understanding of the site constraints and opportunities; and consequently, the proposed architectural rationale across the two tower building concept is considered to comprise high quality architecture that both responds to the wider and emerging character of the area, but also creates and adds to a quality collection of taller buildings.

The tall building strategy adopted, within its unique context, tests positively the optimal use of the site to support housing London’s growing population. The towers of the building are presented in rotation to each other so that the narrow edge of the south tower faces the broader flank of the north tower. This free-standing sculptural design arrangement exposes an acute angle with glancing views towards the City and assists in managing overlooking between the homes.

Generally, the interplay between the windows, recessed and protruding elements, balconies and other surfaces in the development would provide a suitable level of articulation to reduce the perception of mass and scale. A condition has been included for further details on the indicative materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building to ensure good quality architecture.

For these reasons the proposed development is considered to be of an acceptable scale, design and appearance that would positively integrate with the London skyline, character of the area and the visual amenity of the street scene.

In terms of policies, the Opportunity Planning Frameworks mentioned that ‘new development and urban characters are required to be established, incorporating contemporary architecture and building typologies to create liveable, inclusive neighbourhoods’. The proposed building is aligning with this to ensure a suitable amenity for existing and future residents whilst assisting with the defining and forming of a new character for the area.

Given the continuing demand for additional housing land in London, the only significant resource available lies within existing employment sites. Successful management of this resource to meet identified needs will require both careful conservation of overall supply and a focus on development to drive more efficient use of land.

The overall effect of the layout of the building, the scale of the development, the detailed architectural design of the buildings and site landscaping are considered to be capable of providing a successful and a distinctive development that would be expected to contribute positively to the townscape, in accordance with policies 7.1 and 7.4 of the London Plan.

Overall, it is considered that the proposed scheme has achieved a distinguished level of architectural merit and design qualities that would see a significant improvement to the visual townscape when compared to the appearance of the existing site. As such, on balance and whilst noting the significant prominence of the proposed scheme, there are no objections to the scale, height and massing of the current proposal, whilst observing that the current scheme is a natural progression of the Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) devised for the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area.

Massing and Scale

Page 46 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Currently within the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area, existing development is up to 44 storeys in height, contained with high quality buildings set within a legible street arrangement. The overall height and massing of the scheme now proposed would elevate the maximum height within the cluster of buildings to 55 storeys but then again within a comprehensible heights strategy that promotes an efficient use of land and responds to contextual sensitivities. This is considered to be acceptable and to broadly align with local variation Policy 7.7.

Given its height, the visual impact of the proposed building would be significant and, as such, the effect of the inclusion of taller buildings within the application site has been thoroughly tested as part of the applicant’s Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment (TVIA), which was submitted with the Environmental Statement accompanying this application. The baseline study concentrated on the Site and the wider area within the surrounding townscape. A very large distance from the Site boundary was identified as an appropriate distance within which to consider the wider townscape setting of the Site. Though the Site may yet be visible from beyond those distances included in the TVIA in some seasonal and weather conditions, it was considered to be too distant to allow any clear identification of the site features and its precise boundaries.

Key sensitive receptors, including views of the proposed development from within the surrounding Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings and other heritage assets were carried out to understand the magnitude and scale of visual effect resulting from the proposed development on the more sensitive receptors within the local area. The summary results of the applicant’s TVIA, and the assessment of the acceptability of the proposed development on sensitive heritage receptors, are addressed later in this report.

It is acknowledged that a representative proportion of local residents who responded to the planning consultation have raised objections to the introduction of a building of substantial height within the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area; consider that the development would adversely affect views and negatively detract from the character of the surrounding area. Additionally, a number of objectors consider that the provision of such building of height within the application site is contrary to the Local Plan policies. Likewise, due to the orientation of the development site to the west and location of the taller elements of the buildings in relation to 2 Portal Way, the public space itself would see an inevitable increase in overshadowing from the proposed towers.

However, the design approach, whilst allowing for a wide gap between the two towers, maximises the areas that would benefit from direct sunlight whilst also moderating the perception of bulk and massing of the building from a number of key viewpoints; albeit not all of the viewpoints, as aspired.

The perception of bulk and massing is further restrained through the use of a very selective palette of external materials; firstly, horizontally through the use of different - but combining, tonalities in between the two towers; and secondly, via a choice of grading and textural graining in each of the chosen tonalities as expressed vertically on the facades of the towers themselves. In essence, the architecture and materials of the building would work well to create a varied building form with good vertical and horizontal articulation emphasised by balconies, balustrades, windows, grading materials on the façade treatment, and recessed elements throughout.

Notwithstanding this, the approach to the height, scale and massing of the amended proposed development is considered to be acceptable. The architectural approach is well considered and the palette of materials is welcomed and in keeping with the emerging character and materiality of the area delivered to date. Given the prominent presence and nature of the scheme and length of build out, detailed conditions would need to be secured to ensure that the high-quality finishes and appearance suggested in the indicative images are reflected at build out stage.

Page 47 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Layout The two towers arrangement accomplishes visual permeability through the site upon approach from the north and the west. A green buffer zone has been designed between the pavement on Western Avenue and the recessed floor façade to improve both the pedestrian experience and to continue the concept of a green corridor along the A40. Due to the tapered shape of the site all vehicle, servicing and pedestrian entrances need to be located along the Portal Way frontage. Through a considered design process, the interaction between functions and massing within the building and the public realm would provide a safe environment. The pedestrian experience could have been made more friendly along the Portal Way frontage; however, the servicing requirements associated with the scale of the proposals and multiple uses are demanding and space hungry and provide for an adequate but still less than optimal urban edge alongside this frontage. However, the hotel lobby and entrances have been positioned centrally with residential entrances located on either side. The sheltered arcade is proposed coupled with a setback in the building façade. Together this approach creates a generous pavement.

In accordance with LP Policy 7.1 and DM DPD Policy 7.4, the objectives set out in the site allocation SIOI and CS Policy 3.4 the proposals have been designed so that the layout and proposed uses create a positive relationship to the street scene and the wider surrounding area. Active frontages at ground level are proposed along the site boundary helping link with surrounding development and provide a vibrant community.

Night time presence and Lighting Design Strategy The quality of the experience in the public realm after dark is of principal importance and equally as important as it is during the day. This would be particularly the case in the winter months and in areas where there is an evening economy.

With regard to exterior lighting, the scheme would be in harmony with the proposed landscape design principles whilst aiming to make a visual connection throughout each level of the building. The landscape, building facades and public realm characteristics would be emphasised to ensure that the site as a whole will be lit in a manner that it expresses a coherent identity.

After dark, the proposed lighting scheme on the ground level seeks to focus on lighting the facade to highlight the main routes around the building from Portal Way to Western Avenue. The proposed facade lighting would aid orientation and facilitate the extended use of the area after dark by creating a feeling of safety for future users.

The purpose of the landscape lighting design is to also highlight key zones within the structure of the building such as the terraces and bridge areas. To give a coherent feel, the use of selective lighting colour temperatures and the appropriate use of lighting intensity will be considered when integrating lighting into the landscape features and architectural elements. To that effect, each terrace paved area will be washed with light using LED linear grazers. Linear luminaires will also be integrated within the benches. Planting including trees and the green walls will be illuminated using uplights and careful consideration should be given to minimise light spill

The lighting strategy is to balance the quality and nature of the light provided together with the aim of utilizing energy efficient light sources. The light sources would be selected with good colour rendering properties for the main route that is heavily used by pedestrians with all external lighting elements designed to minimise light pollution, as well as being sensitive to the local environment. The main route that wraps around the building on the ground floor would be highly visible and stand out on site. Light would be used as a wayfinding tool to highlight the main path including; uplighting a green wall, grazing the facade with linear light while also using light to make a feature of the columns. Gobo Projection (stencil that is placed inside projector which produces a light projection of an image or text) may be used to convey a playful route along the path.

Page 48 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Overall, the lighting scheme would be expected to illuminate key zonal areas of the building, enhancing the architectural environment and creating visual interest for visitors and residents. The quality of light shall be achieved by using a limited colour temperature of circa 3,000K warm white light, together with a range of light intensities to give definition to the different areas of the structure. A condition is recommended to ensure the details of the lighting scheme are submitted to the Council for approval prior to the occupation of the building.

Townscape and Visual Effects The ES assessment has identified seven townscape character areas within a 750m radius from the Site boundary. In accordance with the ES TVIA the scheme delivers demonstrable improvements to the townscape, including local urban design benefits. These would range between Negligible (not significant) to Moderate / Major Beneficial (significant) eﬀects.

During, the demolition and construction phase the Proposed Development residual effects are Negligible (not significant) on ‘Acton Business Centre’ (Character Area 1) and ‘Residential South’ (Character Area 7). The demolition and construction residual effects are Minor Adverse (not significant) on ‘Residential West’ (Character Area 2). The likely effect is local level, over a short to medium term and consequently this likely effect is not significant.

Particular consideration has been given to impacts to visual amenity of receptors experienced in surrounding residential streets. As such, the effect led an interactive design progression that has embedded mitigation within the finalised design of the building. The effect arising from the impact to visual amenity from these local residential areas is Moderate Adverse (significant), which is direct, permanent, local and long-term. The effect is, however, moderated by the improved architectural quality of the building.

Across longer distances, including transient views from the Westway (A40), the scheme would be seen as part of the emerging skyline composition at North Acton. The height of the proposed building would reinforce the composition of the ‘likely future baseline’ and, in particular, the cumulative skyline. The proportions of the building would be apparent (and its profile, including sky gap) between the two towers, and would provide a sculptural presence that would be perceived as beneficial. It would therefore give rise to effects ranging between Negligible (not significant) to Moderate/Major Beneficial (significant) to all other visual receptors.

During the demolition and construction phase the likely effect is Minor Adverse (not significant) to the residential area (‘Residential West’) to the south-west of the site. This area, and the local residents within that area, is represented by view 9 in the HTVIA. The likely effect, in accordance with the ES is Minor Adverse (not significant), indirect, local and short-term.

Notwithstanding this, it is worth highlighting the construction works will have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of visitors at Acton Cemetery. The area, represented by views 6 and 34 in the HTVIA, will see a likely effect of Minor Adverse, indirect, local and short-term.

The remainder of the views (nos. 1-5, 7-8, 10-32 and 35-36) are taken over a considerable distance from the Site, or would be experienced while in transit, where the appearance of the Proposed Development at the demolition and construction phases will comprise the appearance of cranes on the skyline. The likely effects on these views is expected to be Negligible (not significant).

North Acton Cluster The OAPF sets the strategic vision for high density development of mixed land use including tall buildings, new and reconnected connected public realm and open space and community facilities. Policy 7.7 of LB Ealing’s adopted December 2013 Development Management Development Plan Document advises that tall buildings should be located at gateways to Park Royal, which includes the Southern Gateway Site OISI and the application site specifically.

Page 49 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The position of the site is of primary significance in the Park Royal Southern Gateway development framework. Located at the end of Portal Way and on the axis between North Acton Station and Acton Mainline Stations the site has the inherent presence to become a hub of activity and place making. As such, the mix of uses and access to and from the wider area is a key driver in the way the redevelopment of the site has been approached. The site is very visible from the A40 from each direction and, due to the gradient of the A40 and its gentle sweeping curve, the site presents itself as a local marker or gateway to Central London.

The proposed development is arranged as a dynamic composition of two towers connected at their base and with a sky bridge. The northern tower has 45 storeys (197.250m AOD) above ground and the southern tower 55 storeys (237.335m AOD) above ground (approx. 33m AOD). The hierarchy of heights helps to embed the scheme in the emerging consented cluster and the lower tower is able to sponsor the additional height of the taller element as the marker in the overall cluster and to add visual interest. This corresponds to the aspiration for creating an “interesting skyline” as outlined in the Site Allocation for the Southern Gateway in Ealing’s Development Plan. This arrangement is intended to create a picturesque and dynamic composition rather than a static one and can support further growth and development in the area. By differentiating the height and orientation of the two towers and placing the bridging element substantially below the level of the top of the lower tower, the overall massing is prevented from blending into one overpowering form.

Public Realm and Wider Connectivity The ground floor has been designed to maximise active frontage and transparency. The mixed- use nature of the development strives to create variety and interest in order to promote 24-hour animation and dialogue with its surrounding neighbourhoods. Activity also extends up the towers in the form of amenity spaces, garden terraces, play spaces and a sky restaurant on the 54th floor of the southern tower.

The site benefits from an existing crossing across the A40 Western Avenue and through a monetary contribution the application proposes enhancements to that crossing, recognising that the site sits at a gateway position along the pedestrian desire line between North Acton Underground and Acton main line stations. A number of further approaches were also considered and secured; including a contribution towards a DDA compliant pedestrian bridge to carry pedestrians and cyclists over the A40, as well as alternative locations for an at-grade crossing. In this particular respect, the design of the southern corner of the building safeguards the potential for a future bridge connection.

The proposed development would act as an anchor between North Acton Underground Station and Acton Main line, being almost equidistant between them while it negotiates the physical barrier presented by the A40 Western Avenue.

Density The Mayor’s Housing SPG and the London Plan highlight the critical role large sites play in meeting London’s housing need and reducing the gap between local and strategic housing need and supply. For the purposes of London Plan Policy 3.7, large sites are defined as those of more than 5ha in size or capable of accommodating more than 500 dwellings, with the current application site falling categorically within this second group. Given their strategic importance to meeting housing need, Policy 3.7 requires all large sites to be progressed through a plan-led process to encourage higher densities.

In this case, the application site is identified in the designated London Plan: Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area for which an Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) was adopted in 2015. The London Plan and the new draft London Plan express targets for strategic growth and development in response to significant public transport investment with the Old Oak Common station set to open in the future providing High Speed 2 and Crossrail 2 services

Page 50 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The Mayor’s Housing SPG states that the potential for increased densities should be positively explored and enabled on large sites and in opportunity areas. The London Plan highlights the scope for large sites to determine their own character in terms of residential densities. Indeed, the Mayor’s Housing SPG confirms that sites over two hectares typically have the potential to define their own setting in terms of the density ranges in Table 3.2 of the London Plan.

The need to optimise the use of residential land is a view strengthened by the draft London Plan Policy D6 which, in light of the significant increase in housing need now recognised, has removed the Density Matrix. Rather, Policy D6 states that in order for growth to be accommodated in a responsible way, densities would have to be developed “above those of the surrounding area on most sites.”

The current application proposes the redevelopment of the existing hotel site and its re-provision with a total of 702 new homes.

London Plan Policy 3.4 seeks to optimise the housing potential of sites, having regard to local context, design principles and public transport accessibility. Policy 1.2(h) of Ealing’s Development Strategy provides support for higher development densities in areas of good public transport accessibility. The policy identifies that whilst proper regard shall be made to relevant London Plan policies, the quality of the design, the location of the site and the need to provide a suitable housing mix would also be considered. Policy LV3.4 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD indicates that appropriate density ranges would normally be ‘Urban’ in Acton and other specified town centres, however local context and morphology would form the primary determinant of the acceptability of individual proposals.

Although it is acknowledged that the scheme seeks a very intensive use of the site, on balance the overall conclusion is that - contrary to the comments made by the Ealing Civic Society - it is not considered that the proposed development would constitute overdevelopment; in particular when due regard is given to factors highlighted in the above paragraphs.

Given these considerations the density proposed is accepted as it is considered to respond to the aspirations promoted by the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area designation and the emerging urban context. The proposed intensification on this important strategic site is considered acceptable and consistent with the aims to regenerate the wider area.

Size and Housing Standards Policy 3.5 of the London Plan and supporting Table 3.3 ‘Minimum space standards for new development’ seeks to ensure that new development is of the highest quality internally,

Page 51 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

externally and in relation to its context. Table 3.3 sets the minimum indoor living space requirements for new development based on the government’s nationally described space standards, adopted in 2016. Policy 3.5 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD requires that space standards set out in Table 3.3 are implemented in accordance with the Mayor’s London Housing Design Guide and the London Housing SPG. The table below provides details of the nationally described space standards and compares the minimum and maximum range of space standards proposed in relation to each unit type, by apartment building:

Bedrooms / Bedrooms / Bedrooms / Bedrooms / Occupation Occupation Occupation Occupation 1B1P 1B2P 2B4P 3B5P

Minimum space standards m² 39 50 70 86

4 Portal Way Minimum and maximum proposed space standards m² Compliance Yes Yes Yes Yes

The above information confirms that all of the new residential units would meet national and regional described space standards.

Table 3.3 of the London Plan also requires that the floor to ceiling height of new development is 2.5m for at least 75% of the gross internal area, although it is noted that the nationally described standard is 2.3m. The applicant’s section drawings of the various apartment buildings indicate that the floor to ceiling height would be an above standard 2.6m. The Design Guidelines document stipulates that all residential storeys are to have Typical storey height of between 3,000mm - 3,300 mm (3.2m) which enables a minimum 2500mm clear internal height, as measured from the top of finished floor level and the soffit of the finished ceiling. The relatively generous floor to ceiling height and large area of glazing to each dwelling are considered to go some way towards mitigating the impact associated with the single-aspect dwellings proposed with the development, of which 333 apartments (equating to 47% of the total 702 units) would be single-aspect. However, of the 702 units provided, many are still dual aspect whilst none is purely single aspect and north facing. Also, in accordance with the draft London Plan, only one of the 31 x 3 bed units would be single aspect. This single aspect, 7th floor, 3 bed unit is, however, attributed to the market tenure with its proposed floorspace area exceeding London Plan standards. This ensures that every unit receives a suitable quality of sunlight and daylight.

In consideration of the proportion of new dwellings that would be considerably larger than the minimum space standards; the relatively generous floor to ceiling heights and large proportion of glazing to each unit; the small proportion of the north-facing dwellings that would have two- bedrooms; and the proposed tenure of the largest number of dwellings with a north-facing orientation being within the rental sector; it is considered that on balance the standard of the proposed dwellings are acceptable.

Conditions are recommended to ensure that the number of dual aspect homes is maximised and to ensure a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.5 metres is provided throughout the scheme.

Accessibility Ten percent of all units within the development would be wheelchair accessible, whilst all units would be fully accessible and parking for wheelchair users is provided. The overall environment proposed by the development would be wheelchair accessible and the design has minimised topographical changes that cannot be negotiated by wheelchair or via a wheelchair accessible lift.

Page 52 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The applicant has committed to designing 10% of the residential units to Building Regulation M4(3) standards, with the remaining 90% designed to Building Regulation standard M4 (2) in accordance with London Plan Policy 3.8 and Policy D5 of the draft London Plan. A total of 72 units out of the 702 proposed would be provided as wheelchair adaptable. The M4(2) and M4(3) requirements are secured by condition together with a commitment to spread the wheelchair units proportionally across the tenures and storeys.

The proposal would therefore raise no concerns in terms of inclusive design guidelines and would be in compliance with policy 7.2 (An Inclusive Environment) under the London Plan (2016), which requires the provision of flexible and convenient living environments that take proper consideration of specific needs for older and disabled people.

Impact on Conservation Area / Heritage Assets Para. 189 of the NPPF states that in determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.

According to the NPPF Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise any conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal. And where a development proposal would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use (para. 196).

London Plan policy 7.8 states that development affecting heritage assets and their settings should conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to their form, scale, materials and architectural detail.

Ealing Development Strategy Policy 1.1 sets out the spatial vision for Ealing to 2026. At paragraph (h), the vision incorporates caring for the borough’s historic character and enhancing the significance of heritage assets in regeneration proposals. Paragraph (g) of Policy 1.2 states that this would be achieved by supporting the proactive conservation of heritage assets and enjoyment of their significance and promoting heritage-led regeneration. Policy 7C of Ealing’s Development Management DPD seeks to ensure that the development of heritage assets is based on an analysis of their significance, seeks to conserve the significance in question, protects and if appropriate restores historic fabric, and enhances or better reveals the significance of assets.

The Site contains no designated heritage assets and no landscape or nature conservation designations. As discussed above, there are a number of contrasting character areas adjacent to the Site containing different types and styles of buildings, but overall the site has a low / negligible townscape value, with the existing building being of no significant architectural merit. Due to the large, dense and urban context of Ealing, visibility of the existing building and Site is limited from surrounding streets. This is particularly prevalent from the north of the Site, where views of the existing buildings are limited by other intervening buildings.

As aforementioned, the site contains no listed buildings or conservation areas. The proposal is located 910 metres west of the Old Oak & Wormholt Conservation Area, and approximately 1.5 kilometres south west of the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area. The application proposals, directing consideration to the Environmental Statement Volume 2: Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment are unlikely to be visible from any nearby listed buildings and as such would cause no harm to their settings and significance.

Page 53 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

There would be views of the proposed building from Scrubs Lane Bridge looking across the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area. This area of the canal is largely surrounded by industrial uses and the emerging OPDC Local Plan Second Revised Draft identifies the area surrounding the canal as suitable for high density residential and commercial development alongside the enhancement of the canal. In this instance, the proposal would be located within the emerging skyline of high-density development around the canal area and any resulting harm to the setting and significance of the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area caused by the additional visible development is considered to be less than substantial.

The building would also be evident from the Old Oak & Wormholt Conservation Area in particular on views north west of the junction of Henchman Street and Erconwald Street. The building would appear over the top of the residential buildings within the conservation area and would cause harm to the setting of this conservation area. The presence of the building would be perceived more emphatically since no other developments would be afforded from this view. In addition, the proposal would be visible in the view along Erconwald Street south of Mellitus Street, where the proposal would appear behind houses, but the building as well as adjacent buildings of height would be largely obscured by trees. As such, it is considered that the proposal causes less than substantial harm to setting and significance of the Old Oak & Wormholt Conservation Area.

Historic England has assessed the application and due to the quality and limit of the visual information available, the extent of impact on nearby conservation areas was initially unclear. Ealing Council and Historic England requested that additional supporting information in the form of higher definition images and wireframe visualisations be provided to assist their analysis of the potential townscape and visual effects of the proposed development.

In response to Ealing Council and Historic England’s comments, the applicant prepared a wireline assessment of the proposed development, with the wireframe photomontages produced in accordance with the maximum storey height ranges provided for in the proposals. The supplementary figures were circulated to Historic England who raised no concerns to the impact of the proposals on identified Heritage Assets.

LBE has paid “special attention” to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation areas and given it great weight.

Paragraph 196 of the NPPF states that where proposals cause less than substantial harm to designated heritage assets, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. While the unorthodox approach to affordable housing within the site is just short of ideal, the proposal would still be considered to provide significant levels of much needed housing and affordable housing whilst ensuring a continued, sustainable and viable use for the existing hotel occupiers. In addition, the scheme is seeking to intensify job density whilst also diversifying the employment offer. The contributions towards public realm, secured as part of the s106 suite of obligations, are significant, and will deliver a very significant impact that can transform the perception of the area through better connections promoted across the A40, animated street frontages and improved active travelling. The proposals also meet the need to regenerate the wider site and provide an appropriate quantum and mix of residential and non-residential development in the site.

As such, the less than substantial harm identified (and being given special weight) is considered to be outweighed by the public benefits that the proposed development will bring, including the optimisation of an under-used site and provision of an appropriate quantum and mix of employment, residential and commercial development. The proposal would be considered to beneficially provide significant levels of much need employment, housing and affordable housing whilst ensuring a sustainable and viable use of the Site. Therefore, it is considered that the public benefits outweigh any ‘less than substantial harm’ to the Heritage Assets.

Page 54 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Overall, the methodology, reasoning and conclusions of the EIA assessments are considered robust and appropriate; and, having regard to the above aspects of the proposal would not result in any ‘substantial harm’. Applying paragraph 196 of the NPPF, the Council's statutory duty and affording special weight to the less than substantial harm identified, the proposal, by providing significant levels of housing and affordable housing whilst ensuring a sustainable and viable use of the Application Site is considered (having regard to the public benefits) to outweigh any ‘less than substantial harm’ to the Heritage Assets.

Therefore, it is considered that the public benefits largely outweigh any ‘less than substantial harm’ to the identified Heritage Assets.

Principle of Demolition within the setting of a Conservation Area & within the setting of Listed Buildings The layout, scale and form of the existing building do not contribute towards or enhance the character or appearance of the identified surrounding Conservation Areas and therefore, the demolition of the exiting building is not considered to harm the significance of these Conservation Areas. Likewise, the demolition of the identified existing building located within the Site and the re-planning of the Site is not considered to harm the significance of the grade II and locally listed buildings.

Archaeology Section 12 of the NPPF deals with conserving and enhancing the historic environment, in paragraphs 126 to 141. The NPPF places much emphasis on heritage “significance”, which it defines in Annex 2 as:

"The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting."

London Plan Policy 7.8 emphasises that the conservation of archaeological interest is a material consideration in the planning process. Paragraph 128 of the NPPF states that applicants should submit desk-based assessment, and where appropriate undertake field evaluation, to describe the significance of heritage assets and how they would be affected by proposed development.

The Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) has reviewed the applicant’s heritage assessment and advised that the site lies within an area of low archaeological potential. Therefore, the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on heritage assets of archaeological interest. As such no further assessment or conditions were recommended.

Impact on Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) Policy 7.17 of the London Plan states that Metropolitan Open Land is given the same level of protection as Green Belt, with inappropriate development refused, except in very special circumstances. This policy further states essential ancillary facilities for appropriate uses would only be acceptable where they maintain the openness of MOL. Policy 5.2 of Ealing’s Development (Core) Strategy and Policy 2.18 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD reiterates that only development ancillary to the open space that maintain visual openness would be permitted.

The development would be located on previously developed land. From a townscape and visual perspective, there would be a slight but acceptable impact upon Acton Park (Bromyard Avenue Area). As such, there would be some harm to the openness of the MOL. In this instance, while the very slight harm is considered, officers consider that, even after giving substantial weight to this harm and all other harm to the MOL, this harm is clearly outweighed by the benefit of re- providing a viable economic and employment use whilst providing additional housing, including affordable homes.

Page 55 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Housing The Government’s planning policy for housing is contained within the NPFF which requires LPAs to meet objectively assessed need and deliver housing which provides people with a choice about where they live and the type of accommodation available. The NPFF definition for affordable housing includes social rented, affordable rented and intermediate housing. Ealing’s Development Strategy states that the Council would seek at least 14,000 additional homes by 2026.

The delivery of a substantial contribution to the Borough’s housing target as part of this employment led scheme is a key planning consideration in support of the application and is an essential element in the Core Strategy’s objectives and strategy for meeting the Borough’s housing needs during the plan period. The scheme is to deliver 702 new units with a target of 35% (through a combination of on-site habitable rooms delivery and commuted sums in lieu of on-site affordable housing) as Affordable Housing.

In Summary, the scheme proposes alongside employment uses a further 702 new homes. These new homes would be distributed across the two towers in accordance with the proposed detailed floorplans and includes a number of affordable homes, predominately in the northern tower.

Unit Mix London Plan Policy 3.8 requires that new developments offer a range of housing choices, in terms of the mix of housing sizes and types, taking account of the housing requirements of different groups and the changing roles of different sectors in meeting these. In addition, the scheme also comprises non-residential uses and social amenities that include hotel, retail, and commercial facilities. In terms of uses and quantums, as aforementioned, the building is for an employment led scheme with 702 dwellings and 1,629 habitable rooms. The following indicative unit mix, is proposed:

Units by Tenure: Unit Size Studi 1B2P 2B3P 2B4P 3B5P Total o Number of Units 122 264 162 123 31 702 Market Residential 122 169 113 74 28 506 Shared Ownership 0 52 26 26 0 104 London Living Rent 0 33 21 21 1 76 London Affordable 0 10 2 2 2 16 Rent Affordable (%) 0 36 30.2 39.8 9.7 28

Habitable rooms by tenure: Tenure Habitable Rooms Percentage (%) Market Residential 1,133 69.6% London Shared Ownership 260 16% London Living Rent 196 12% London Affordable Rent 40 2.4% Total 1,629 100

Unit type Proportion Affordable housing contribution Studio 122 (17.38%) 0 One-bedroom 264 (37.6%) 95 Two-bedroom 285 (40.6%) 98

Page 56 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Three-bedroom 31 (4.4%) 28

As such, the scheme provides a mix of different sized units and tenures that would be suitable for a range of future occupiers, including 154 family sized units. It is further noted that a large proportion of the two-bedroom units incorporate two double bedrooms and that the majority of the two-bedroom units would provide suitable occupation for young families.

London Plan Policy 3.8 requires that 90% of new housing meets Part M4(2) of Part 1 of the Building Regulations, and, the balance of 10% of new housing meets Part M4(3) of the Building Regulations. The applicant’s Design and Access Statement confirms this apportioned wheelchair provision within each block. Planning conditions are included in the recommendation requiring compliance with Part M4(2) and M4(3) for all phases.

Affordable Housing Policy 1.2(a) of Ealing’s Development Strategy seeks 50% of all new housing on sites of 10 or more units to be affordable housing. London Plan Policies 3.11 and 3.12 and draft London Plan Policy H5 seek to maximise the delivery of affordable housing, with the Mayor setting a strategic target of 50%. LP Policy 3.11 sets out that to give impetus to a strong and diverse immediate housing sector, 60% of the affordable housing provision should be for social rent and 40% for intermediate rent or sale. Priority should be accorded to the provision of affordable family housing.

A maximum of 702 units (comprising 1,629 habitable rooms) are proposed within this scheme with affordable housing provision comprising of 196 units (496 habitable rooms). In addition, a monetary contribution in lieu of a further 75 intermediate affordable habitable rooms within the site is proposed bringing the overall housing offer to a total of 571 habitable rooms. The overall affordable housing offer would therefore equate to 35% of the total habitable rooms with the tenure mix comprising; 58.7% shared ownership, 7% London Affordable Rent, and 34.3% London Living Rent. Should the housing services so wish, the monetary contribution could alternatively secure 45.45 London Affordable Rent habitable rooms, which would equate to an overall 31.6 affordable housing provision. The details of the Affordable Housing are secured in the s106 legal agreement.

Viability London Plan Policy 3.12 relates to negotiations on affordable housing in mixed use schemes, and states that the maximum reasonable level should be sought having regard to issues such as current and future requirements for affordable housing at local and regional levels (having particular regard to the London Housing Strategy and the London Plan Annual Monitoring Report), adopted affordable housing targets, the need to encourage rather than restrain residential development, promoting mixed and balanced communities, the size and type of units needed in particular locations, and the specific circumstances of individual sites. The Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG seeks to increase the provision of affordable housing in London and introduced a threshold approach to viability, which is now incorporated within Policy H6 of the draft London Plan.

To comply with the policy requirements set out above, the applicant has submitted a viability appraisal (prepared by Gerald Eve) which examines the financial viability of the scheme overall and the ability of the scheme to deliver affordable housing along with other planning obligations required to mitigate the impact of the development. The applicant’s viability appraisal was independently reviewed by the consultants Barton Willmore with the outcome informing subsequent negotiations between the GLA, Council and the applicant in relation to the potential for on-site affordable housing provision.

Barton Willmore reviewed the proposed scheme and concluded that the proposed offer of Affordable Housing by the applicant does not currently meet the minimum level of developer’s profit to be considered viable (i.e. 17.5% profit on GDV).

Page 57 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Therefore, the applicant’s financial viability assessment has been meticulously analysed, and is considered to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the scheme is significantly in deficit without affordable housing provision. With grants the viability is likely to be significantly improved but there would be no surplus within the proposed scheme to support any further affordable housing. Barton Willmore concluded that their own appraisal of the scheme demonstrates a wide difference in outputs from Gerald Eve but it does not disagree with the overall final conclusion that the profit in the appraisals does not exceed the minimum required levels. Although in this regard, the GLA’s Stage I response confirms that the current appraisal remains under review, it is considered that the guidance contained within the Mayor’s Housing SPG makes clear that the current level of affordable housing offer is acceptable. Accordingly, given the deficit, it is proposed that any viability review secured as part of the s106 agreement should only anticipate additional affordable housing/contribution once the initial offer is viable.

As such, it is recommended that the s106 viability formulas reflect this principle.

Affordable Housing Review Mechanism It is a material planning consideration that the applicant’s affordable housing offer does not meet the Council’s requirement that 50% of all new housing on sites of 10 or more units should be affordable housing. In accordance with Policy 3.12 of the London Plan, the applicant’s financial viability appraisal provides robust evidence that the proposal would deliver the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing.

Overall, the proposed scheme meets the expectations of the London Plan, draft London Plan and Affordable Housing and Viability SPG, with affordable housing provided on an appropriate basis in terms of a combination of a commuted sum in lieu of on-site habitable rooms on-site affordable habitable rooms.

The details of the review mechanisms would be secured in the s106 legal agreement and the affordable housing secured in perpetuity subject to the standard carve outs.

Impact upon Amenity of Neighbouring Properties

Outlook and Privacy Policy 7A of Ealing’s Development Management DPD requires that new development must not erode the amenity of surrounding uses. Policy 7B of Ealing’s Development Management DPD states that new development must achieve a high standard of amenity for users and for adjacent uses.

The application site adjoins residential properties that are located in Horn Lane and Leamington Park and Cecil Road. Within the site itself, properties within the towers are proposed to be located adjacent to each other.

Policy 7B of Ealing’s Development Management DPD requires that new development achieves a high standard of amenity for users and for adjacent uses by ensuring, inter alia, good levels of privacy. Paragraph E7.B.3 of the supporting text to Policy 7B states that good levels of privacy are levels which are appropriate to the use type concerned. For example, residential accommodation should normally be expected not to suffer direct overlooking of internal spaces. External spaces within the curtilage of a building, including private gardens, would typically be subject to some overlooking and consequent limitations to privacy.

The site adjoins residential properties, in the form of two storey residential terraces - terraced houses at Horny Lane, to the south only and on the opposite side of the A40/ Western Avenue. The nearest of these properties is located some 60 metres away from the boundary of the site. There are also existing properties beyond Horn Lane with the nearest residence located some 150 metres further to the south of the site boundary and Cecil Road some 115m to the west of

Page 58 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

the site boundary. The proposals have been developed in response to these existing and approved schemes ensuring that adequate separation distance between the blocks are achieved to ensure there are no adverse residential amenity issues for future occupiers. Consequently, the proposed scheme would not reduce the privacy of neighbouring properties given the considerable separation distances achieved between the new development and neighbours; and therefore, the development is considered to be acceptable and to accord with the relevant objectives of policy 7B of Ealing’s Development Management DPD.

LB Ealing’s DM document contains policies that seek to safeguard the amenity of adjoining residential properties. In this instance, the Council would give consideration to the potential effects of development on visual privacy and safeguard the outlook from habitable room windows. It requires that new residential development not only provide good living conditions for the future occupiers, but expects that new development provides an attractive outlook and sense of privacy for those existing residents neighbouring the development.

The applicant has undertaken a daylight and sunlight assessment based on the full details of the building (height and layout of buildings). The results of the Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare Assessment are provided in its own section within this report.

The Environmental Statement (ES) also considers the impacts from the development on air quality, noise and vibration, and traffic, which have been addressed in other sections of this report. The ES concludes that the most significant effect on sensitive receptors (occupiers of the site and neighbouring the site) would be during the demolition and construction periods. An appropriately worded condition has been included in the recommendation requiring the submission of a Construction Logistics Plan, in the interests of reducing the associated impacts from demolition and construction activities on residential amenity.

In order to safeguard the privacy and amenity of occupiers, the applicants have demonstrated that they have considered the requirement to provide sufficient separation between new buildings and existing residential properties adjoining the proposed development. The application has been made with full details submitted for analysis and it is considered that good levels of separation are achieved to ensure that impacts from overlooking and loss of privacy are minimised.

Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare Chapter 13 of the Environmental Statement contains the applicant’s Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare Report (DSR), which assesses the impact of the proposed development on existing lighting levels to neighbouring residential properties. The technical analysis has been carried out in accordance with the BRE Guidance ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight – A Guide to Good Practice’ 2nd Edition, 2011’ (hereafter BRE guidelines) and British Standard 8206-2:2008 –‘Lighting for Buildings – Part 2: Code of Practice for Daylighting’. The BRE guidelines acknowledges that in order to secure an appropriate urban form that preserves and / or enhances the character and appearance of surrounding street scene, reductions in sunlight and daylight beyond the suggested minimums may be necessary. The guidance also advises that, "Another important issue is whether the existing building is itself a good neighbour, standing a reasonable distance from the boundary and taking no more than its fair share of light" (paragraph 2.2.3). For clarification, the BRE Guidelines stipulate that there should be no noticeable loss of daylight provided that:

i. The Vertical Sky Component (VSC) as measured at the centre point of a window is greater than 27%; or ii. The VSC is reduced to no less than 0.8 times its former value.

For sunlight, the Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH) test calculates the percentage of statistically probable hours of sunlight received by each window in both summer and winter months. For properties neighbouring a development, only the windows orientated within 90-

Page 59 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

degrees of due south and which overlook the site of the proposal are relevant for assessment. The guidelines suggest that windows should receive at least 25% total APSH with 5% of this total being enjoyed in the winter months.

The baseline model included in the Environmental Statement assessed the present conditions for each existing neighbouring property assessed as part of the applicant’s DSR. The level of effect was provided for the daylight and sunlight significant criteria; the magnitude vertical sky component test and daylight distribution test; the magnitude annual probable sunlight hours (APSH) test and APSH in winter test; and the magnitude percentage of amenity area that receive at least two hours of sunlight.

The construction of the Proposed Development would have a gradual effect upon the levels of daylight, sunlight and overshadowing as the massing of the Proposed Development increases over time. In this instance, the assessment of the effects of the completed Proposed Development provides a ‘worst case’ assessment of construction effects. Therefore, the study of the effects only needs to rely upon the operational effect assessment.

According to the applicant’s DSR there will be a reduction in daylight and sunlight availability but predominantly to some of the committed development (proposed or emerging neighbouring properties). Overall, of the 63 properties included for assessment (under the cumulative scenario) as part of the DSR, the likely effect to the daylight and sunlight amenity to 44 of those properties would be negligible. In addition, and in accordance with the ‘Minor Adverse Daylight Criteria, considering both VSC & NSL described under the “Significance Criteria Compared to the Existing Baseline” of the ES the 6 properties at 42, 44, 46, 48 and 64 & 66 Wales Farm Road, and at 1 Brett Vilas would experience an effect upon their daylight and sunlight amenity under the Cumulative Baseline Scenario, which is considered to be no greater than minor adverse. The remaining 13 properties (2 Portal Way; 6 Portal Way Block C; 6 Portal Way Block D; 6 Portal Way Block A; 6 Portal Way Block B; 50 Wales Farm Road, Lyra Court 121-210 Portal Way; Poulton Court Victoria Road; Trentham Court Victoria Road; Ebbett Court Victoria Road, Western Avenue/Horn Lane, Rehearsal House and 1 Portal Way) were subject to further assessment, as detailed below.

Daylight The degree of significance of the effect of the proposed development on the daylight to neighbouring residential properties in 6 Portal Way Blocks A and C, 50 Wales Farm Road, Lyra Court (121-210 Portal Way), Trentham Court (Victoria Road), Ebbett Court (Victoria Road), Western Avenue/ Horn Lane and Rehearsal Rooms would be no greater than minor adverse, according to the applicant’s DSR. Given the urban location and the clear intention to intensify residential accommodation in the area, the retained sunlight amenity is appropriate for this area. There are two site facing windows serving two rooms at 50 Wales Farm Road which will be fully BRE compliant in relation to the VSC changes experienced with the Proposed Development in place. The rooms will, however, experience NSL changes which are of moderate adverse significance. Whilst the NSL analysis results suggest that the occupants in these rooms will experience a noticeable change in their daylight amenity, when the ADF results are viewed, these show that, overall, there will be a potentially unnoticeable level of change with the ADF levels changing by no more than 0.12%. The overall effect of the development upon the property’s daylight amenity within the cumulative baseline scenario is, therefore, considered to be of no greater than minor adverse.

The degree of significance of the effect of the proposed development on the daylight to neighbouring residential properties at 1 Portal Way, 2 Portal Way, 6 Portal Way Blocks B and D and Poulton Court (Victoria Road) would be no greater than minor to moderate adverse, according to the applicant’s DSR. Construction of the Proposed Development would result in 11 rooms (25% of the 44 site facing windows studied) at Poulton Court experiencing a minor adverse effect to their daylight amenity based on the significance criteria. A further three rooms (7%) are each served by one window which experiences a moderate adverse change in VSC.

Page 60 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

These windows have low baseline VSC values in a range of 6.23%-7.51%. This means that the small (2.28% to 2.38%) actual VSC changes disproportionately present themselves in percentage of baseline terms to the effect that it numerically suggests that there may be a more material impact to the light within the room than there actually is. All 3 rooms are, however, fully BRE compliant in NSL terms and, in ADF terms, there will be a no greater than 0.26% change. The effect of the development upon these rooms is, therefore, considered to be of minor to moderate adverse as the occupants are unlikely to notice a material change in their daylight amenity.

The planning consent for 1 Portal Way is in outline and to consider the effect of the Proposed Development upon the daylight and sunlight amenity within this consented development, the amount of visible sky (VSC) which would be incident upon its façades in the cumulative baseline has been assessed and then compared to the amount of visible sky (VSC) which would be incident upon the façades of the development with the Proposed Development in place. The results show that the construction of the Proposed Development will cause a reduction in sky visibility to the facades of the most proximate blocks of this development which are in the region of 5-10% VSC. The levels to which these areas are reduced are, however, not inconsistent with those in similarly restricted locations in the baseline scenario but overall the effect of the Proposed Development upon this property’s daylight and sunlight amenity is considered to be potentially minor to moderate adverse dependent upon the ultimately intended usage of the rooms served by windows in the most proximate facades.

Sunlight According to the applicant’s DSR, the degree of significance of the effect of the proposed development on the sunlight amenity to neighbouring residential properties would be negligible Poulton Court, Trentham Court, Ebbett Court, Rehearsal Rooms; and it would be minor at 6 Portal Way Blocks A and B, 50 Wales Farm and Lyra Court. At Lyra Court there are four rooms, 3 (7% of the assessed total) which are BRE compliant in annual APSH terms. The other room will experience a minor adverse annual APSH change. Due to their low baseline levels of winter sun, the small (2%-3%) winter sunlight changes that all 4 rooms will experience present themselves, in percentage of baseline terms, as major adverse. However, each room retains a sense (1%) of winter sunlight and, by virtue of their usage (transient student accommodation) are unlikely to notice the small actual change. The overall effect of the development upon this property’s sunlight amenity within the cumulative baseline scenario is considered to be of no greater than minor adverse.

The degree of significance of the effect of the proposed development on the sunlight to neighbouring residential properties at 2 Portal Way and 6 Portal Way Block C would be no greater than minor to moderate adverse, according to the applicant’s DSR.

The degree of significance of the effect of the proposed development on the sunlight to neighbouring residential properties at 2 Portal Way and 6 Portal Way Block D would be no greater than moderate adverse, according to the applicant’s DSR. At 6 Portal Way Block D the effect upon the sunlight amenity within 4 rooms (6% of the assessed rooms) would be minor adverse. A further four rooms will experience minor adverse effects in their total annual sunlight amenity, but moderate to major adverse effects in their winter sunlight amenity. The alterations to the levels of winter APSH in these 4 rooms suggest that their occupants may notice a change in their sunlight amenity with the Proposed Development in place throughout the winter months. Nonetheless their retained absolute APSH levels are reasonable for an urban location at between 2%-4% during the winter months and 15%-24% throughout the year compared to the recommended 5% and 25% respectively. This leaves 1 kitchen, 1 living room, 16 bedrooms and 11 living/kitchen/dining rooms (45%), all of which experience moderate to major adverse effects in both their winter and total sunlight amenity. The changes to the levels of winter and total APSH in these 29 rooms suggest that their occupants may notice a change in their sunlight amenity with the Proposed Development in place throughout both winter and summer months, although the 16 bedrooms arguably have a lesser expectation of sunlight in respect of their usage. The

Page 61 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

retained absolute levels of winter and total APSH to the 13 other rooms in this category (which comprises 20% of the overall number of rooms included for assessment) are between 0%-3% during the winter months and 4%-16% throughout the year. In an urban area such as this it is unrealistic to expect adherence to the winter sunlight criteria for a combination of reasons. Firstly, in winter the sun is at a low altitude, being just 15° at midday on 21 December, so even fairly modest increases in massing can obstruct sunlight. Secondly, the sunlight model used in the sunlight methodology is fairly simplistic, summarising a whole year’s sunlight availability on just 100 probability dots scattered around the sky dome. This works satisfactorily for annual sunlight, but for winter sunlight the simplicity can give misleading results, because clipping one of those could make the difference between no loss and 100% loss of winter sunlight, for example. As such, the overall the effect of the Proposed Development upon this property’s sunlight amenity within the cumulative baseline scenario is considered to be moderate adverse.

Six rooms at Western Avenue/ Horn Lane (10.5% of the assessed rooms) will experience moderate to major adverse changes in both winter and annual APSH but will still retain a sense (1%) of winter sunlight and annual APSH levels of between 11% and 21% again the BRE recommended 25%. The effect of the Proposed Development upon these 6 rooms is, therefore, considered to be minor to moderate adverse.

In summary, it is noted that only a minor number of neighbouring residential properties, would experience minor to moderate adverse and moderate adverse losses of daylight as a result of the proposed development. This impact must be weighed against the benefits of redeveloping the application site for a higher density mixed use development, which is considered to be desirable in terms of its contribution to meet the identified housing need, and the wider effects of optimising the use of the site. On balance, it is considered that the impact of the proposed development on the daylight and sunlight received by neighbours is acceptable, and that the retained levels of daylight and sunlight are typical of what may be achieved in urban conurbations.

The full results of the VSC and APSH neighbouring receptors studies are given in Chapter 13 of the Environmental Statement. The extensive analysis shows that the for the majority of neighbouring buildings the Proposed Development would have no significant effect in terms of the supply of daylight and sunlight to any of the neighbouring receptors. Significant, i.e. moderate effects are limited to a few properties where further mitigation is not considered appropriate. In combination, however, the effects of the overwhelming majority of the Proposed Development has the potential for BRE Report compliant daylight and sunlight amenity.

Overshadowing The Proposed Development would cause a greater amount of shadow than that emanating from the current building on the Site but the additional shadow cast by the Proposed Development does not fall on the majority of the surrounding areas of amenity space for a sufficient length of time as to be noticeable to the users of those spaces. This is on the basis that the March 21st transient overshadowing drawings clearly show that the majority of surrounding spaces will either still be able to benefit from at least 2 hours of sunlight to more than 50% of the area, which is the BRE’s Sun on Ground assessment criteria to establish whether an area of amenity space will be adequately sunlit throughout the year, or, if the area has less than this amount of sunlight in the cumulative baseline scenario, the Proposed Development will not reduce the sunlit area by more than 20%. On this basis, the effect of the Proposed Development upon the majority of surrounding areas of amenity space is considered to be negligible.

The analysis indicated that the amenity space serving the 6 Portal Way scheme, which is currently under construction and the other cumulative schemes (1 Portal Way, 2 Portal Way and The Portal 1/ 2 and 3) may be more adversely affected as a result of the construction of the Proposed development. As such, the applicant carried out a detailed Sun on Ground analysis for these areas in order to quantify the effect more precisely. The 21st March sun on ground results show that, in the cumulative scenario, the construction of the Proposed Development

Page 62 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

would result in a noticeable increase in shadow upon two of the amenity areas within 6 Portal Way, one of the areas within 1 Portal Way and one of the areas within 2 Portal Way. The remaining areas will experience a negligible effect. The area known as the Central Piazza of 2 Portal Way (Portal Way 2) has, on the 21st March a level of sun on ground (18%) which is well below the BRE recommended 50%. This is predominantly due to one of the towers of this scheme being located directly to the south of this area. As a result, this area will only be able to receive short bursts of sunlight during the midmorning and mid-afternoon for the majority of the year. Construction of the Proposed Development to the west of this area results in a small actual (10%) reduction in the level of sunlight from which this area can benefit in the cumulative baseline situation during the mid-afternoons. As a percentage of the low baseline level of sunlight amenity upon this area, however, this small reduction suggests a materially noticeable change to the sunlight amenity of this area. The transient overshadowing plots show that the effect of the Proposed Development occurs between 3pm and 5pm.

During the summer months, when amenity spaces are mostly likely to be occupied due to the warmer weather and increased levels of sunshine, the sun on ground results significantly improve. The 21st June sun on ground results show that, in the cumulative scenario, the construction of the Proposed Development would not, with the exception of the Central Piazza within 2 Portal Way, reduce the area of any of the amenity spaces within the cumulative schemes which could benefit from at least 2 hours of sunlight by more than 12%. The majority of these spaces will, in fact see no change at all. In addition, more than half of every area (up to 100% in some cases) will still be able to benefit from at least 2 hours of sunlight during the summer months. The transient overshadowing plots for 21st June also clearly show that, as the sun is higher in the sky during the summer, the shadow cast by the Proposed Development will be much shorter, which means that, in the afternoons when the Proposed Development would cast shadow upon the cumulative schemes to the north of the Proposed building, the shadow, due to its short length predominantly only affects the car park of the Algerian Embassy. With the exception of the Central Piazza of 2 Portal Way, the overall effect of the Proposed Development in terms of the overshadowing of the amenity spaces serving 6 Portal Way and the cumulative schemes is considered to be no greater than minor adverse. Construction of the Proposed Development will result in a loss of sunlight upon the Central Piazza of 2 Portal Way for 3 hours in the mid-afternoon in the summer months. The effect upon this area is therefore considered to be moderate adverse.

The internal assessments of daylight, sunlight and overshadowing within the Proposed Development demonstrate that it would provide good levels of daylight and sunlight for the overwhelming majority of future occupants and that the amenity areas would also be compliant with expectations as an urban area.

As such, the Proposed Development will achieve levels of daylight and sunlight availability as expected for a scheme of this type and it is considered that the conclusions contained within the ES chapter are representative of the proposed scheme’s effects upon the amenity of the area.

Solar Glare The sensitive receptors considered for the solar glare assessment are drivers of vehicles on the surrounding road and rail network and the occupants of neighbouring buildings. The 21 identified viewpoints shown in Chapter 13 of the ES (Figure 13.3 with key location along Western Avenue, Portal Way, Jenner Avenue, Horn Lane, Wales Farm Road, Leamington Road and Cloister Road) have been selected as those where an approaching driver faces the Proposed Development and may need to make a decision; this being sensitive to an instance of distraction glare, and viewpoints at which occupants of neighbouring buildings may experience instances of glare, albeit not potentially hazardous. The Proposed Development would result in minor adverse (not significant) effects to solar glare at 18 viewpoints. The remaining 3 viewpoints will experience a minor to moderate adverse (significant) effect on solar glare from the Proposed Development.

Page 63 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Solar Reflectance Visualization (northbound along alleyway to the East of Horn lane)

Regardless of a small number of moderate adverse (significant) effects on daylight, sunlight and overshadowing, these are, on balance, considered to be transient and isolated and therefore no mitigation is required to make the development acceptable in planning terms.

Conclusion Overall, whilst transgressions to the BRE guidelines have been assessed given the location, the overall scale of the proposal, and the need to balance townscape development with daylight and sunlight impacts, it is considered on balance, to be acceptable. The resulting daylight levels to the neighbouring properties are acceptable in the urban context of the application site. The analysis shows that the neighbouring schemes would receive daylight and sunlight amenity consistent with and in excess of the expectations of this urban area. Overshadowing analysis of the surrounding amenity areas shows there would be little or no effect on the existing values. The effects of the Proposed Development on these areas, overall would be negligible.

Environmental Factors

Wind and Microclimate London Plan Policies 7.6 and 7.7 include objectives that require new development, and in particular tall buildings, do not adversely affect their surroundings in terms of wind turbulence and microclimate. Chapter 14 of the applicant's ES details the results of the modelled impact of the proposed development on the wind environment and microclimate.

Extensive wind tunnel testing has been undertaken to assess the effect of the Proposed Development on the local wind microclimate. With the introduction of the Proposed

Page 64 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

development, wind conditions in and around the Site are suitable in terms of pedestrian activities and cyclists for the general public.

Subsequently to the submission of the planning application in April 2019, WSP have been working with the Applicant undertaking further wind studies with the aim of developing and validating additional effective mitigation measures to alleviate and minimise residual negative wind conditions in and around the Site. The outcome of such studies has been reported in the ES Addendum submitted in October 2019. This ES Addendum confirms the results of the wind assessment following the wind analysis undertaken post submission of the planning application. This updates the analysis as reported in Volume 1, Chapter 14: Wind Microclimate of the April 2019 ES. In addition, replacements to Volume 3, Appendix 14.1 – Technical Report and Appendix 14.2 - Pedestrian Comfort and Pedestrian Distress of the April 2019 ES are provided in Appendix A and B, respectively.

With regards to pedestrian safety, there are no locations that have the potential to cause distress to pedestrians. Also, with the introduction of the Proposed development, wind conditions in and around the Site are suitable in terms of pedestrian activities. Wind conditions at balconies and terraces of the Proposed Development are considered suitable with regard to occupant comfort and safety. No further mitigation is therefore required.

Noise London Plan Policy 7.15 seeks to ensure that development proposals minimise the existing and potential adverse impacts of noise on, from, within or in the vicinity of development proposals. Ealing’s Development Management DPD Policy 7A seeks to protect amenity and seeks to ensure that emissions (including noise and vibration) are taken into account in the design of the development and are sufficiently mitigated. Ealing’s Supplementary Planning Guidance 10 (currently retained as interim guidance) sets out the Council’s requirements in relation to noise and vibration and provides guidance on sound attenuation and design.

Chapter 9 of the applicant’s Environmental Statement identifies the noise & vibration effects both on the proposed development and from the development on future occupiers and sensitive neighbours during construction. An operational Noise and Vibration assessment has also been carried out within this ES Chapter.

The Proposed Development would result in minor adverse to negligible (not significant) effects for the majority of the construction period. Demolition and construction works will include certain activities (such as piling) that are likely to increase noise levels and potentially cause vibration within and immediately adjacent to the Site. In particular, during the enabling works and piling there will be a moderate adverse (significant) effect on 302-328 Horn Lane and Portal West, 6 Portal Way. With respect to demolition and construction vibration, effects are considered minor adverse (not significant). The number of vehicles that currently use local roads is above the predicted number of construction vehicles likely during the busiest weeks of the construction programme, therefore construction traffic noise from the Proposed Development will have a minor adverse (not significant) effect on the nearest receptors. The implementation of noise and vibration control and management measures within the Construction Management Plan would help reduce noise and vibration disturbance.

A computer model of the Site and surrounding roads has been used to understand the anticipated noise levels resulting from the Proposed Development. Results show that traffic noise levels are expected to stay the same (or very slightly increase) and therefore a negligible (not significant) effect is expected at nearby receptors. It is considered with mechanical ventilation and suitable glazing, standard internal noise levels for apartments can be achieved, therefore the Proposed Development will result in a negligible (not significant) effect on internal noise levels. With respect to ground borne vibration and building services plant noise within the Proposed Development, effects are considered negligible (not significant).

Page 65 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The Council’s Pollution Technical Control Officer has considered the applicant’s Environmental Statement and noise & vibration assessment, and advised that the recommended noise mitigation measures would be capable of achieving suitable internal noise levels with closed windows. The Pollution Technical Control Officer has recommended a number of additional planning conditions are incorporated within the recommendation to further reduce the potential noise impact on sensitive receptors associated with deliveries and servicing; hours of operation, plant and equipment; and the potential for noise and disturbance from the use of outdoor seating areas associated with the proposed A3 / A4 / A5 use classes; and the mitigation of amplified sound within the commercial units, if this is proposed by the future operators. These conditions are included in the recommendation.

In summary, the proposals are considered to be capable of complying with the relevant policies and guidance relating to noise and vibration, subject to the imposition of appropriate mitigation measures secured through the recommended conditions.

Air Quality London Plan Policy 7.14 seeks to improve air quality, minimise increased exposure to existing poor air quality, promote sustainable design and construction to reduce emissions, and requires development to be at least ‘air quality neutral’. The Mayor’s ‘The control of dust and emissions during construction’ SPG and Sustainable Design and Construction SPG provide guidance on mitigating air quality impacts during construction and during the operation of the proposed development. Ealing’s Supplementary Planning Guidance 3 (retained as interim guidance) on air quality and pollution provides technical guidance on the process of air quality assessments and guidance on circumstances in which air quality conditions and Section 106 obligations would be sought. It is relevant that the entire Borough lies within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) declared by the Council, so it is particularly important to ensure that new development is at least air quality neutral.

The air quality assessment is included in Chapter Eight of the applicant’s Environmental Statement which includes the assessment of the Operational Impacts, the Effects During Construction Phase Assessment and the Cumulative Effects.

Construction Phase The air quality assessment relating to the construction phase utilises the IAQM Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition and Construction document and the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. The effects during the construction phase are predicted with regard to the potential for dust nuisance complaints and surface soiling events due to deposition, as opposed to the risk of exceeding any Air Quality indicators. An assessment of potential effects of dust from construction activities has been carried out for the demolition and construction stage of the Proposed Development. The assessment identified that there is a medium to high risk of dust soiling and increases in particulate matter concentrations.

Industry best practice and the implementation of suitable mitigation measures will reduce the effects of dust soiling and particulate matter; therefore, the Proposed Development will have negligible (not significant) effect on dust soiling and particulate matter increases.

Emissions from construction plant and machinery have also been assessed and will result in a negligible (not significant) effect on local air quality.

Operation An assessment of the effects of traffic emissions and the proposed energy centre during operation of the Proposed Development has been undertaken. The assessment found that effects on air quality at receptors are negligible (not significant). In addition, an Air Quality Neutral Assessment has been completed which shows the Proposed Development is compliant with building and transport emission targets and therefore is considered air quality neutral. The change in pollutant concentrations during operation and their effects on local air quality are

Page 66 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

considered negligible (not significant). However, measures such as electric vehicle charging facilities, car share schemes, cycle parking and the promotion of public transport will benefit local air quality.

The Proposed Development is therefore air quality neutral with regard to building and transport emissions.

Land Contamination London Plan Policy 5.21 supports the remediation of contaminated sites and requires appropriate measures to be taken to ensure that development on previously contaminated sites does not spread contamination. Ealing’s Development Management DPD Policy LV5.21 requires contaminated land to be treated in a manner appropriate for its proposed use, and evidence of the appropriateness of the measures to be taken must be submitted to the Council.

An assessment of ground conditions and contamination is provided within Chapter 11 the accompanying ES ‘Ground Conditions’ which assesses the likely significant impacts of the demolition and construction, and operation, of the proposed development on the ground and groundwater conditions. The chapter addresses the need for mitigation measures and identifies the benefits and residual effects of the proposed development.

Demolition and Construction The assessment on ground condition assessed the effects of direct contact with solid contaminants, inhalation of asbestos fibres and inhalation of ground gas for future site users, adjacent site users and future buildings and services. No significant effects were identified during the demolition and construction stage, however adaptive mitigation is proposed where appropriate and will be set out within the Construction Management Plan. The Proposed Development will therefore result in a negligible (not significant) effect on receptors following the implementation of mitigation measures.

Operation The assessment during the operational phase assessed the effects of contact with contaminated soils and dust, ground gas and vapour for future site users, adjacent residents, buildings and water supply pipes. No significant effects were identified and the Proposed Development would result in a negligible (not significant) effect (for adjacent residents) and a minor positive (not significant) effect (for future site users, buildings and services)

The Council’s Pollution Technical Control Officer reviewed the information submitted as part of this application, including the information submitted as part of the ES and requested that suitable mitigation is secured by condition, including the approval of a verification report that demonstrates the remedial measures outlined in Chapter 11 have been completed effectively prior to the occupation of any residential buildings. A suitable condition has been included that address the Pollution Technical Control Officer’s comments.

Landscaping, open space, and play space provision The landscape proposals aim primarily to create a permeable and fully accessible public realm responding to the conditions within the existing site and developing a series of new landscape spaces, whilst ensuring a hierarchy of routes and spaces is created through the Site, mainly from north to south. The primary landscape objectives are therefore to create a network and hierarchy of new public open spaces; improve the site’s permeability and connection to the surrounding network of streets including the A40` side; promote all open spaces to be universally accessible to encourage a feeling of inclusiveness, safety and security; define and reinforce activities and functions; create and inform physical and visual connections to aid way-finding, legibility and connectivity of the development; reinforce the character of the development; and, draw natural elements into the site to provide amenity and recreational spaces as well as enhancing the limited biodiversity and ecology of the local area.

Page 67 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

London Plan Policy 7.5 promotes the provision of public spaces within the public realm which are secure, accessible, inclusive, connected, and incorporating the highest quality design and landscaping. London Plan Policy 2.18 promotes a network of multi-functional green spaces across London. In relation to play space, Policy 3.6 of the London Plan seeks provision of play and informal recreation facilities in all housing developments, and the Mayor also has Supplementary Planning Guidance on the design of facilities for Play and Informal Recreation.

At the local level these policies are supported by Ealing’s Development Management Policy 2.18 which promotes a network of green spaces, Policy 7B which requires new development to have a positive visual impact and Policy 7D which requires developments to make appropriate contributions towards open space provision. This is further supported by Table 7D.1 which indicates that proposals for more than 150 residential units would need to provide public open space and allotments either on-site or as a financial contribution, together with on-site private and communal garden space, outdoor active recreation space and a contribution towards children’s play space (onsite provision of that latter may also be desirable). Table 7D.2 sets out space provision requirements for each ‘type’ of open space, although items on this list should not be applied in isolation, as some open spaces can be multifunctional.

Open Space and Leisure The development of the public open space is based on providing an adaptable and layered landscape approach, which facilitates the continuity of the architectural language into the landscape, and easing connections around and within the site. The landscaping proposals focus on improvements to the ground floor level of the development to vastly improve the public realm and provide a welcoming environment.

Proposals include tree planting anchoring corners of the site, a living wall along the northern boundary of the site, hedge planting to differentiate vehicular and pedestrian routes and artistic elements along the main walkway within the site, and provision of 2,039 sqm external amenity space. This would provide connection within the site and improve legibility while providing space for informal recreation.

A total of 4,924sqm of open space, including 1,068sqm of play space is therefore proposed across the building, equating to 3.94sqm of open space per person. The below tables set out the full amenity provision and its location:

Level External Internal Total amenity amenity space amenity space space (m2) (m2) (m2)

Level 55 463 156 619

Level 35-44 172 828 1000

Level 6 198 0 198

Level 00/01 2,039 0 2,039

Total 2,865 982 3,856

As such, the current proposals would not realise the borough wide target of 19.5sq.m of public open space per person resulting in a shortfall of some 20,000sqm in open space provision.

Similarly, Sport England considers that new developments should contribute towards meeting the generated demand through the provision of on-site facilities and/or providing additional capacity off-site. The Council’s Sports Development Manager also identified a number of

Page 68 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

projects as being required to accommodate the increasing population/demand. As a result, without mitigation, the proposed future population of the site, and surrounding the site, would have insufficient access to sports and leisure facilities that would ultimately be detrimental to their ability to participate in sport and would have negative implications for their health and wellbeing.

The Council’s Parks Service, Active Ealing officers and Sports England have requested a contribution to offset the low provision of leisure facilities and public open space in this development and a financial contribution of circa £600,000.00 (£250,000.00 towards provision of open space, £250,000.00 towards the provision of leisure and sports facilities, £50,000.00 towards the provision of playscape and £50,000.00 towards the provision of trees) has been secured in the s106 obligations to that effect. Although there are potential financial contributions towards sport and an equal number of very valid non-monetary measures being proposed, the development would not fully mitigate the impact of the additional residents on the current and future open spaces and sporting infrastructure, which could ultimately be detrimental to health of the future community. However, it is considered that the measures proposed (including potential access to the hotel gym by future residential occupiers) would contribute towards the provision of local sports infrastructure and if appropriately secured as recommended, these measures in combination could make a quantitative and qualitative contribution towards the Government and Sport England wider strategy of making people more active and decreasing inactivity.

Likewise, notwithstanding this shortfall in the provision of public open space, it is worth noting that the open spaces are proposed to be distributed throughout the development to maximise residents’ opportunities. There are 6 levels at which public open space is provided: ground floor, sixth floor, 35th floor, 43rd floor, 44th floor and 55th floor. Further, the site is within close proximity (less than 1km) to thirteen public open spaces, i.e. 200m from Seacole Close Playground, 400m from Friary Place Green and 500m from North Acton Playing Field, which vary from passive green spaces to sports pitches and climbing play and outdoor gym equipment. Future residents would have a variety of choice in regard to amenity space and activities, both on site and nearby public parks with open spaces and a range of facilities.

Officers consider that the range and quality of materials proposed for the public realm is well considered and would help create an attractive and distinctive new area and that the proposed internal and external amenity spaces would provide new facilities for local people. The hard landscaping utilises materials that complement the contemporary architectural design of the development and would provide a welcoming and attractive public realm. The distribution of amenity space with varying facilities throughout the towers would help provide distinctive and attractive spaces which facilitate interaction, recreation and children’s play and would meet the needs of future residents.

Further details of the palette of planting are required to ensure that the landscaping strategy would provide colourful year round planting with a range of species that would attract wildlife.

As such, it is considered that the variety of public amenity spaces within the development would be appropriate to the quantum of residential units proposed.

Private Amenity Space The proposals also incorporate private amenity space in the form of private balconies or winter gardens with direct access from individual flats. All of the units would also have access to communal amenity spaces in the form of landscaped terraces, internal communal spaces and a roof terrace, which would be allocated for the use of residents.

Officers consider that the landscape proposals for private amenity provision to be well thought out and use good quality materials and planting, and that the internal communal spaces at levels 43 and 44, and dedicated children’s play space would provide a pleasant amenity space for

Page 69 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

residents while the external and roadside planting would be attractive and create attractive links through to Gypsy Corner and Western Avenue.

Conditions are recommended which require further details be provided of the children’s play areas including safety surfacing and equipment; Hard and Soft Landscaping Scheme; Boundary Treatment; Landscape Management Plan for a minimum period of 5 years from the implementation of final planting; details of the living green wall and maintenance; together with a maintenance schedule and details of sustainable urban drainage systems to be implemented on site.

Play space Play space provision on site is required to meet the Mayor of London’s Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation, 2012. These standards, which are also referenced within L.B. Ealing’s Development Management Plan table 7D.2, require a minimum 1,992sqm of children’s play areas be incorporated into the development to satisfy the 10sqm GLA benchmark per child. The child yield of the development, based on the Mayor’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG, has been calculated below:

Age Group Child Play area Play area Shortfall (years) Yield requirements provided (sqm) (sqm) (sqm) 0-5 172.5 1,725 1,068 -657 12+ 26.7 267 0 -267 TOTAL 199.2 1,992 796 -924

Across the whole floorspace area, the proposals would provide 1,068sqm space for door-step (Under 11s) play distributed across the building, as follows:-

Level External play Internal play Total Play space (m2) space (m2) space(m2)

Level 55 0 0 0

Level 35-44 150 457 607

Level 6 223 238 461

Level 00/01 0 0 0

Total 373 695 1,068

While there is a significant shortfall in provision, as proposed the active areas would be balanced with passive, quiet spaces that children require for play and social development. For all the other age groups the proposals would not meet its delivery provision of 267sqm of equipped play space; including play space provided as informal play space incorporating multifunctional, imaginative, versatile elements, in which children and young people of all ages can play and interact. The play space proposed by the scheme is therefore not compliant with policy requirements. Consequently, the Council’s Parks Service has advised that the provision of improved and additional children’s play facilities for children’s play space caused by the increased number of units should be provided. A financial contribution of £50,000.00 has been secured in the s106 obligations for such purpose.

Trees The detailed proposals include 20 additional trees (including feature trees) to be planted across the site, with numbers and suggested species set out in detail in the Landscape DAS. The development of the planting strategy has been undertaken with a view to provide a range of

Page 70 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

plant types to satisfy design of softscape within the public and private realms of the project, to reinforce the character of various areas, contribute to the built environment and to improve biodiversity and sustainability of the built project. Tree planting includes a range of species and sizes to suit various locations and the constraints of a predominantly confined planting environment.

The Council’s Tree Officer has no objection to the proposals and as such, the tree planting proposals for the development are considered to provide the basis of an attractive environment that would be acceptable in relation to the quantum of proposed residential and non-residential uses within the site. As aforementioned, a financial contribution towards tree planting has been secured as part of the s106.

Nature Conservation and biodiversity

The NPPF states that the planning system should minimise the impacts of development on biodiversity, and provide net gains in biodiversity where possible (paragraph 109). Local Authorities should also promote the preservation, restoration and re-creation of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species and encourage opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments (paragraphs 117 and 118). London Plan Policy 7.19 supports these objects and seeks to protect designated sites and protected/priority species and habitats, and seeks positive contributions towards biodiversity from development proposals. London Plan Policy 2.18 also supports networks of green infrastructure (and this is re-iterated in Ealing’s Development Management Policy 2.18), and London Plan Policy 7.21 relates to the protection of trees and woodlands and encourages additional tree planting in development proposals.

At the local level Ealing’s Development Strategy Policies 5.3 and 5.4 relate to the protection of green corridors and protection of the natural environment, biodiversity and geodiversity.

A Phase 1 habitat survey has been undertaken by WSP, the full details of which are contained in the Preliminary Ecology Appraisal, which is contained within the Environment Statement Volume 3. The assessment concludes that the site has low conservation value and negligible suitability for protected species, given the dense urban setting of the site, and it being dominated by buildings and hardstanding.

There is potential for common species of breeding bird to be present in the roof of the existing hotel building. Mitigation recommendations are consequently suggested in this respect, as well as potential enhancements for inclusion within the development. An Ecological Enhancement Plan would form part of the Landscaping conditions to be prepared for the Site.

The member’s attention is drawn to the fact that owing to the site’s proximity to operational airports, a Bird Hazard Management Plan will be required setting out the measures that would have to be taken to minimise the attractiveness of the development to birds that could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Heathrow Airport and RAF Northolt. The recommendations of the Bird Hazard Management Plan would need to directly contribute to the design development of the proposal’s landscaping. Overall, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in a significant increase in bird hazard risks to aircrafts, provided that appropriate condition are secured as part of the consent. The assessment should also ensure that bird activity is monitored and subject to any notable increase, an appropriate level of mitigation including physical deterrents, anti-perching devices and exclusion products, should be implemented.

Overall, the proposed development, subject to the incorporation of the recommended ecological and habitat enhancements, will deliver an overall net gain on the existing level of ecological biodiversity. Consequently, the development complies with relevant nature conservation

Page 71 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

legislation, the UK Biodiversity Framework and relevant planning policy (NPPF and London Plan).

In summary it is considered that the proposed development would not have any significant adverse impacts on nature conservation and biodiversity, any minor adverse impacts would be appropriately mitigated, and the proposed enhancements noted above would improve opportunities for ecology and biodiversity at the site in comparison to the existing situation.

Subject to a number of conditions of consent, the landscaping proposals for the development are considered to provide the basis of an attractive environment that would be acceptable in relation to the quantum of proposed residential and non-residential uses within the site.

Health and Education Infrastructure

London Plan Policy 3.16 and Ealing’s Development Strategy Policy 6.2 recognises the need for additional and enhanced social infrastructure provision in order to meet the needs of a growing population. It is particularly apparent that social infrastructure provision is required in areas with major new development or where regeneration is taking place. Social infrastructure covers a wide range of facilities, including health provision, nurseries, schools, play, recreation and sport facilities.

Health The provision of health and social care facilities to support a growing and changing population is advocated by London Plan Policy 3.17. This policy encourages Boroughs to ensure their public health team work with the local NHS, social care services and community organisations to regularly assess the need for health and social care facilities at the local and sub-regional level, and to secure sites and buildings for, or to contribute to, future provision. Following discussions with the CCG the provision of a contributions towards health infrastructure in the area would be required in lieu of additional health facilities. A contribution of £525,000.00 towards the improvement of health provision in the area is secured as part of the s106.

Education London Plan Policy 3.18 states that the Mayor would support the provision of childcare, primary and secondary school, and further and higher education facilities adequate to meet the demands of a growing and changing population to enable greater choice. The policy also advises that proposals for new schools, including free schools should be given positive consideration and should only be refused where there are demonstrable negative local impacts that substantially outweigh the desirability of establishing a new school and which cannot be addressed through the appropriate use of planning conditions.

The 702 dwellings proposed (with their indicative mix and tenure) would generate a total of circa 29.33 primary aged pupils and circa 20.95 secondary aged pupils. Chapter 6 of the ES assesses the capacity of state-run primary and state-run secondary schools within the School Planning Area around the development site and their scope to accommodate the resulting uplift.

Accordingly, there would be no surplus places in primary school provision that is sufficient to accommodate the primary school pupils that the development in its entirety would generate. A financial contribution to offset the impact on primary school places provision from this development of £306,000.00 has therefore been secured in the s106 obligations.

LB Ealing’s pupil projections data for secondary schools (which extends to 2023/24) also confirms a requirement for additional secondary school places. This therefore represents a deficit in the future years, in which the secondary aged pupils generated from the wider development could not be accommodated. As such, mitigation for secondary aged pupils would be required. A financial contribution to offset the impact on secondary school places provision from this development of £219,000.00 has been secured in the s106 obligations.

Page 72 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

In summary, it is considered that the proposed combined £525,000.00 mitigation for the additional school places within the Borough required as a result of the proposed development, would be in accordance with the objectives of policy 6.2 of Ealing’s Development Strategy, policy 3.18 of the London Plan, and paragraph 72 of the NPPF.

Transport Highways and Road Network Implications

Pedestrian and cycle access will be provided to the site from both Portal Way and also from the A40 Western Avenue. To ensure the safety of pedestrians in the vicinity of the site, public realm improvements are being put forward by a number of the schemes in the area to improve Portal Way and make it a more pedestrian friendly environment. In addition, a link along the northern side of the Site is provided to link Portal Way with the A40 and will be solely used by pedestrians and cyclists.

Further to this a controlled crossing option has been investigated alongside TfL at the junction of the A40 / Horn Lane / Victoria Road as well as wider linkages down towards Acton Main Line station and a potential crossing of Leamington Park being explored in due course.

Overall the pedestrian movement within and around the Site will be of high quality with the provision of an attractive open space, well maintained and legible pathways and lighting, providing natural surveillance.

Two lifts will be provided to the basements, one in the North and one in the South of the site. The Northern lift will be the main point of access, with the Southern used only for emergencies. Waiting areas will be provided within the basement for vehicles exiting the lift, and on street waiting area will also be provided for vehicles entering the site. The lifts are sized such that they are able to accommodate a DDA vehicle.

The car park at the proposed development will be situated across two basement levels, accessed via a single car lift from the northern end of the site. During emergencies or maintenance periods a further lift is provided at the southern end of the development which is accessed via the servicing area. A total of 43 car parking spaces will be provided of which 21 are for the residential units (all of which will be disabled bays), 14 standard car parking spaces for the hotel, 5 disabled bays for the hotel and 3 blue badge bays for the commercial uses.

Cycle parking has been provided in line with Draft London Plan parking standards and will be designed in accordance with London Cycle Design Standards. Therefore, a percentage of cycle parking will be Sheffield stands as well as the cycle parking areas being able to accommodate other bicycle types such as trikes.

There will be a total of four servicing bays associated with the site at ground level. Two of these will be situated on-street along Portal Way, and these bays will double up as coach drop-off bays. To the south of these bays will be the refuse collection area where the refuse vehicle can stop adjacent to Portal Way within the recommended trolleying distance of the bin storage area. A further two bays are provided in the servicing area at the southern end of the Site which are able to accommodate a 10-metre rigid vehicle and a transit van, (it should be noted that the Transit space is also used as the bin storage area). Both of these bays will need to be reversed into from Portal Way given the constraints of the site.

As a secondary option it will be possible for smaller deliveries to take place on-street from within areas of single yellow line without causing an obstruction to other road users. This will be particularly useful for a wider site coverage of the residential units where a driver does not wish to drive down to the basement servicing area before having to walk all the way back across the site to make the delivery.

Page 73 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

A lay-by is proposed along Portal Way which can accommodate two coaches, and is located directly outside the hotel foyer. Although two coaches can be accommodated on-site at the same time, this will be by no means a regular occurrence and indeed at other times the lay-by will be used for other deliveries such as food or linen to the hotel or groceries / furniture to the residential units. The lay-by can be accessed by vehicles making a U-turn at the roundabout at the far west of the site therefore resulting in no turning to be undertaken within the site but at the same time no reversing. Once a coach has completed dropping hotel residents off rather than park on the site it could proceed to a coach park in the local area. Coach parking facilities at Wembley Stadium (within Green Car Park) and Shepherd’s Bush depot on Wells Road are the ones in closest proximity to the Site. This will significantly decrease the dwell time of coaches and reduce the amount of space required on-site.

Work undertaken by the applicant has set out how the public realm will work alongside some visual representations. It should firstly be noted that due to the site constraints vehicle access is only possible from Portal Way due to the proximity of the A40, Victoria Road and the Algerian Consulate.

During the initial design stages servicing within the confines of the Site was investigated, including a route around the Site. However, this would have taken up too much developable land and resulted in having to cross the Portal Way footway twice. At the same time a servicing lift was also investigated, but the time involved to get such large vehicles to and from the basement level would have left vehicles potentially queuing on Portal Way. Meanwhile, both taxis and coaches need to drop off at ground level, hence why a lay-by was subsequently pursued. Coach movements are however minimal and as set out within the Transport Assessment, will park in dedicated off-site coach parks.

Looking at actual vehicular movements along Portal Way even during the peak hour the development generates a vehicle along the route every 2 minutes across all land uses. Portal Way can therefore be considered to be lightly trafficked. It should also be noted that around 90% of the predicted servicing trips will be undertaken using LGVs and this type of vehicle can be accommodated within the car lift, therefore not having to stop on the frontage along Portal Way.

Finally, there is also precedence in the local area of other developments being permitted servicing via a lay-by with 2, Portal Way putting one forward on the far side of Portal Way.

A brief appraisal of the Development proposals has been undertaken in respect of the following policy documents: • National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019); • National Planning Practice Guidance (2018); • Mayors Transport Strategy (2018); • New London Plan (2018); • London Plan (2016); • LB Ealing Local Plan: Core Strategy (2012); • LB Ealing Local Plan Development Management DPD (2013); • LB Ealing Sustainable Transport for New Development (2012); and • OPDC Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation Draft Local Plan Second Revision with Minor Modifications (June 2018).

The location, design, scale and land uses for the Development proposals fully accord with current national, strategic and local planning policy guidance. In addition, the proposals will positively contribute to the achievement of the aspirations of sustainable Development within the London Borough of Ealing.

Public transport accessibility of the Site has been assessed using the PTAL methodology. This highlights that at present a 'Good' level of accessibility is achieved.

Page 74 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The Site benefits from excellent pedestrian accessibility from the surrounding area with footways and pedestrian connections surrounding the Site.

The majority of streets near the Site and suitable and recommended for cyclists with Portal Way and the A4000 Victoria Road forming part of the ‘Quietway’ cycle network that provides signposted routes on quieter back streets for cyclists traveling at a more relaxed pace. An off- road route runs alongside Western Avenue from Hillingdon in the west to White City towards central London. The nearest cycle hire stations are located at White City.

London Bus services are easily accessed with stops located on Western Avenue and Gypsy Corner, which provide access to a good range of destinations.

North Acton Station is the closest underground station which is around 350 metres walk from the Site and is served by the Central Line.

Acton Main Line station is the nearest National Rail station and is located 700 metres south of the development and serviced by TfL Rail. Further to this the Old Oak Common national rail station is due to open in 2026 which is around 1KM from the site and will be served by HS2. Finally, the proposed Crossrail route will run through Action Main Line station which will provide good links to central London, Reading and Heathrow Airport.

Provisions for access to the Development by mobility impaired persons have been included. In addition, the public transport infrastructure within the surrounding area also includes excellent provisions for the mobility impaired.

An assessment of travel demand, split by mode, has been undertaken for the proposed Development, which has demonstrated that the level of trips associated with the Development can be accommodated on the various modes of transport.

Car parking provisions for the residential element of the Site is in line with the emerging London Plan standards in that 3% of the total number of units are provided with a parking space and each of these spaces is DDA compliant. At the same time the car parking for the commercial element is in line with the emerging London Plan. With regard to the level of hotel car parking this has been reduced when compared to the current provision on Site beyond the level of what would be associated with a pro-rata reduction in the number of hotel rooms. Despite this a level of car parking for the hotel is required and this has been justified within the transport report.

Cycle parking for the proposed Development will be provided at a level suitable to cater for the demands of the Development and in accordance with the aims of the policies set out by the London Borough of Ealing and TfL. These spaces are provided in secure basement areas. Visitor cycle spaces will be provided at ground level within the landscaping areas to encourage the use of bicycles for visitors to the Development.

In summary, the proposed Development benefits from very good levels of public transport accessibility, pedestrian provision and cyclist provision. The close proximity of the proposed residential Development to large-scale employment and retail areas will help reduce the overall need to travel and encourage the use of sustainable modes for trips. In addition, the generated trips by each of the different modes of transport can be accommodated on the surrounding transport infrastructure. Finally, the proposed Development fully meets the transport aspirations of the London Borough of Ealing and current Governmental guidance in respect of sustainable Development and will, through its design, encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport. A suite of conditions and obligations in connection with, inter alia, transport, mitigation, cycle provision and EVCP have been secured as part of the recommendation and s106 legal agreement.

Page 75 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Designing Out Crime (Secured by Design)

London Plan Policy 7.3 (Designing out Crime) requires all forms of development to provide safe, secure and appropriately accessible environments that aim to reduce criminal behaviour. Routes of access and communal spaces should be legible and well maintained and there should be a clear distinction between private, semi-public and public spaces, with natural surveillance of public spaces and their access.

The proposed development would have a clear and legible access along the perimeter of the proposed building with no obvious public areas which are shielded from public viewing. The proposed development would therefore aim to provide a safe and secured environment for future occupiers of the site.

As part of the preparation of the development, discussions were held with the Designing Out Crime Officer for the Metropolitan Police. The scheme was well received and noted as being a substantial improvement from the built environment as existing, but that consideration must be given to preventing vehicle crime and anti-social behaviour in the vicinity of the proposed development site. A planning condition is recommended by the Designing Out Crime Officer to ensure the development achieves Secured by Design accreditation.

Whilst there are no concerns with reference to accessibility and legibility, a planning condition has also been recommended requiring details of external lighting for approval.

Energy and Sustainability

The provision of sustainable development is a key principle of the NPPF, which requires the planning process to support the transition to a low carbon future. Policies 5.2 and 5.3 of the London Plan require submission of energy and sustainability strategies showing how the heating and cooling requirements of the development have been selected in accordance with the Mayor’s energy hierarchy.

In particular, Policy 5.2 requires that new major developments meet zero-carbon standards with at least a 35% CO2 reduction beyond Building Regulations Part L 2013 (or any later version) being achieved onsite. Any shortfall will be met through a S106 carbon offset contribution. Policy 5.2 is to be replaced by policy S12 in the new London Plan (2019 draft) which adds a fourth layer to the energy hierarchy which requires development to monitor, verify and report on energy performance in operation. This policy was already reflected in Ealing Council’s 2013 DPD policy E5.2.3 which requires the post-construction monitoring of renewable/low-carbon energy equipment.

Revised London Plan policy SI3 (Energy Infrastructure) recognises that combined heat and power (CHP) may have negative effects on London’s air quality. The policy also recognises that because the carbon intensity of grid electricity is steadily dropping due to the increasing use of marine wind turbines, electric air-source-heat-pumps are a better carbon reduction option than gas fired CHP.

In addition, London Plan policy 5.7 (5.42) states that there is a presumption that all major development proposals will seek to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by at least 20% through the use of on-site renewable energy generation wherever feasible. Section 11.2 of the GLA (2018) Energy Assessment Guidance expects all major development proposals to maximise on- site renewable energy generation regardless of whether a 35% target has already been met.

In April 2019 Ealing Council passed a motion declaring a ‘Climate Emergency’ with a commitment to draw up and implement policies that will achieve a target of net zero emissions by 2030. Over time, the UK electrical grid has increasingly been supplied via renewable sources moving away from fossil fuels. This decarbonisation will continue; suggesting a push towards

Page 76 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

an increasingly electric future rather than the gas fuelled MEP solutions that are applied today. This will in turn improve the air quality of the London area.

There have been extensive discussions between the Applicant, GLA officers, and Ealing officers over the energy strategy proposed for this scheme. The GLA expressed reservations to the current strategy, and after careful reappraisal, Ealing Council officers agree that a revised strategy should be explored.

An ambient (low temperature) air source heat pump heating/hot water distribution loop has been proposed, with mini-heat pumps in each flat to boost the water up to the correct temperature. This will be supported by back-up gas boilers. Following consultation with GLA energy officers, it is felt that this is not the best, or most secure, carbon reduction solution. The parasitic electrical demand of the mini heat pumps is likely to make the ambient loop less carbon efficient than a conventional high temperature heat pump system.

One of the theoretical advantages of an ambient temperature loop is that water circulating around a building at 20o is less likely to contribute to overheating problems, than water circulating at 60o. However, the heating/hot water demand will be much less in the summer when overheating might be an issue. It is also possible to insulate the pipework to minimise heat loss. The ambient loop system is an unusual approach and may prove to be a technically viable in certain development profiles, but until there has been further monitoring and evaluation of such systems, it is felt that it would be premature for Ealing to encourage these types of solutions for such a prominent scheme. Should the system fail to deliver the significant CO2 reductions anticipated, then it would seriously undermine Ealing’s Climate Emergency declaration aims and objectives. It is therefore officers view that this scheme should adopt a more tried and trusted solution. The current energy strategy also says that a “water source heat pump” will be used to provide hot water for the hotel, but there is no technical explanation of this system, so it is impossible to assess its suitability.

In addition to the issues of heating/hot water, the applicant has not fully explored the potential for PV deployment. GLA, and Ealing, policy is clear that even if the minimum CO2 reduction targets have been met, the maximum amount of PV feasible should also be incorporated into the development. Although some of the limited roof space may be given over to services infrastructure and amenity space, that is not incompatible with the deployment of PV, which can be mounted on frames above the services infrastructure, to provide protection from the rain and make the amenity space more realistically usable.

Although this has to be balanced against the impact on the appearance of the building, it is also possible to use PV effectively as a cladding on high buildings. PV cladding facing anywhere from SE to SW will still generate up to 700 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity per kW of PV. Conventionally deployed PV (at an angle of 30o) will generate about 950 kWh.

As such, conditions are recommended requiring the Applicant to submit a revised energy strategy that incorporates: a) a high temperature air source heat pump(s) network, b) the deployment of sufficient PV, where feasible and practical.

Irrespective of the approach that is finally adopted, the energy equipment used, and the overall heating/hot water demand of the development, must be rigorously monitored in the way required by the Council (DPD policy E5.2.3) and the GLA (emerging policy S12). This is to ensure that the relevant energy policies have been complied with, and to acquire an empirical evidence base on the performance of the energy systems for future reference. The preliminary BREEAM assessment is to achieve “Very Good” standard with a score of 63+%.

The current energy strategy assumes overall site-wide CO2 emissions will be cut by at least 41.95% over Part L (2013). This leaves a shortfall of 10,689 tonnes (over 30 years) which at

Page 77 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

£60/tonne will be met through an “offset” s106 payment of £641,340 to the Council. However, these figures will need to be revised as a result of the required changes to the energy strategy. This sum may be subject to minor adjustment and will be secured in the Legal Agreement.

Compliance with London Plan policy 5.9 which relates to Overheating and Cooling has been demonstrated through the submission of the Dynamic Overheating Assessment. The results showed that all habitable spaces tested pass the comfort criteria and therefore do not face risk of overheating for the current design summer year weather file. On this basis, the Council are satisfied that such measures have been fully explored and a compliance condition is recommended to ensure the scheme is carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures identified in this document.

Any carbon shortfall would be addressed through a carbon offsetting contribution which would be paid towards the Council’s Carbon Offsetting Fund.

Other planning considerations

Estate Management The parameters and principles to be achieved through an Estate Management Framework (EMF) is to be approved by the Council prior to the occupation of the development in accordance with the proposed planning conditions.

An EMF would provide for the adoption by the Council of all or some of the new or improved areas of public realm or it may (in some, but probably not all, cases) be managed, repaired, maintained and renewed by the Developers or an Estate Management Body, which they establish in accordance with the detailed arrangements to be approved in the EMF. The proposed condition would contain requirements to provide for such of the following issues as may be relevant in the light of the Council’s approval of the EMF:

a. Public rights to use those areas of public realm which are not to be directly owned or adopted by the Council as public highways or public open space, including 24/7 access to some of the key Public Realm; b. Implementation of the approved arrangements to secure safe and high quality Public Realm, including management, maintenance, repair and renewal in accordance with the approved arrangements contained in the EMF; c. Secure long-term funding of the Estate Management Bodies set up in accordance with the approved EMF; d. Provisions for the adoption of such public realm areas as may be required to be publicly adopted in the EMF.

Aviation Impact Assessment

Heathrow Airport expressed concerns to the development as it penetrated the Outer Horizontal Surface (safeguard). Through consultation with the airport it was confirmed that the Outer Horizontal surface was a mechanism to establish a more formal assessment of the scheme. Heathrow subsequently accepted a report from a licensed Instrument Flight Procedure design company that confirmed that the development would not have measurable impacts on the safe and continuous operations of the current runway and the proposed 3rd runway at the airport.

Heathrow have subsequently submitted a full representation requiring the following conditions be secured: • Obstruction Lighting Plan – A plan showing details of the obstruction lighting scheme to aid the visual identification of the development. An indicative plan was included in the aviation assessment and it is expected that a detailed plan will discharge this condition.

Page 78 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

• Construction Methodology Plan – A plan showing the location, height and reach of the cranes used to construct the building as well as the dates at which the cranes will reach specific heights and duration of the cranes being at height. This information is used by the airport to assess the potential impact on operations and to ensure that the crane operator follows the correct guidance for obstruction lighting. A plan is being developed with the client and relevant contractor that will discharge this condition.

• Radar Mitigation - This condition has been requested by Heathrow on behalf of the National Air Traffic Services who operate the Heathrow 10cm Radar. The condition requires that the proposed developer enters into an agreement to have suitable mitigation put in place separately with NATS. The developer in this case is working separately with NATS to secure suitable means of mitigation.

With respect to RAF Northolt an initial concern was expressed due to the penetration of the Outer Horizontal Surface. In this case the rules under the Military Aviation Authority depart slightly from their civilian origins in that the Outer Horizontal Surface is a safeguarded surface. To address the operational issues an Instrument Flight Procedure Design consultant was engaged to assess operations at RAF Northolt with respect to the proposed development. The consultant confirmed that there would be no impact on the safe and continuous operation of aircraft at RAF Northolt. At the time of writing of this brief the MoD (Ministry of Defence) was reviewing the various aviation assessments and were aware that Heathrow had confirmed they had no concerns with the proposed scheme. Should a representation be received prior to issue of the decision notice expressing a position that could materially impact or influence this recommendation then the application will be reverted to committee for further consideration. However, it is worth drawing attention to the fact that the orientation of the runway of RAF Northolt is such that there is less likelihood of an operation issue than at Heathrow, where concerns have been capable of resolution by appropriate conditions. The following conditions are recommended to ensure there are no impacts on the operations at RAF Northolt:

• Obstruction Lighting Plan – A plan showing details of the obstruction lighting scheme to aid the visual identification of the development. An indicative plan was included in the aviation assessment and it is expected that a detailed plan will discharge this condition.

It should be noted that The London Heliport is not a statutory consultee due to the significant distance from the proposed development to the Heliport. Notwithstanding, concerns were initially expressed by the Heliport operator with specific reference to the various designated helicopter routes that provide access to London. In this case the Heliport operator was seeking to determine if the development could impact the safe operation of helicopters. At present the Civil Aviation Authority allows helicopters operating along these specified routes to operate with a minimum horizontal separation of 500m. As the development is more than 1km away from any helicopter flight path there should therefore be no conflict. The London Heliport has since confirmed that it no longer objects to the scheme.

The National Air Traffic Services (NATS) are the provider of local air traffic control services to many airports in the UK including London Heathrow. Additionally, they manage traffic across the UK and facilitate transatlantic flights as they pass over the country. In the case of the proposed development the aviation assessment contained a chapter that confirmed that the development would not impact the operation of navigational and communication aids at the airport. There was however the potential that the development could impact the operation of the Heathrow

Page 79 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

10cm Radar. Through consultation with NATS it was determined that the development could cause ‘reflections’ whereby the radar ‘sees’ the development and could misinterpret those reflections as aircraft in a location where they are not expected. Based on the large number of tall buildings in the greater London area, NATS have developed a robust methodology to filter out such reflections by applying a software upgrade. The Radar Mitigation will be an agreement between the developer and NATS whereby the developer agrees to pay for the additional costs of applying the software upgrade. In addition, the following conditions are relevant to NATS:

• Radar Mitigation – An agreement between the developer and NATS whereby the developer agrees to pay the cost of a software upgrade. To close out the condition a construction methodology plan is required to inform NATS of the timings of the crane lifts, the location of the buildings and cranes so all elements can be accounted for.

• Construction Methodology Plan – A plan showing the location, height and reach of the cranes used to construct the building as well as the dates at which the cranes will reach specific heights and duration of the cranes being at height. This information is used by NATS to help programme the right time to apply the software upgrade. A plan is being developed with the client and relevant contractor that will discharge this condition.

Flood Risk and Water Supply Infrastructure Policy 1.2(m) of Ealing’s Development Strategy, Policies 5.12 and 5.13 of the London Plan and draft London Plan Policy SI12 require that new development incorporates sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) in order to achieve greenfield run-off rates and ensure that surface water run-off is managed as close to its source as possible.

The Site is located within Flood Zone 1 and the nearest watercourse is the Paddington Branch of the Grand Union canal, which is 1.5km north-west of the Site. A Flood Risk Assessment is not required as the Site is below 1 hectare in size and within Flood Zone 1, however the Applicant had chosen, under Chapter 12 of the ES, to submit a Flood Risk Assessment as part of the application. This assessment provides an evaluation of the potential flood risk, which overall is concluded to range between ‘low’ and ‘very low’ across the Site.

An Outline Surface Water Drainage Strategy has been produced for the Proposed Development to demonstrate ways in which flooding would be reduced and managed. In addition, ground will be gently sloped away from the entrances of the proposed building to minimise the flood risk to occupants.

During construction, the Proposed Development would discharge any surface water and foul water into the Thames Water Sewage Network. The volume of run off into the sewage network would depend on the task being carried out, however it is considered that demolition and construction of the Proposed Development would result in a negligible (not significant) effect on the drainage network. As per comments raised by Thames Water, planning conditions secure that prior to occupation, confirmation of existing surface and foul water networks are adapted to the appropriate capacity shall be provided to the Council. The applicants should continue to engage with Thames Water throughout the forthcoming development process.

During the operational period, the Proposed Development would continue to release waste water into the public sewer network and will therefore increase the volume of surface water runoff. The proposed Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) would reduce the rate of surface water runoff. However, the GLA have advised that they would like to see more regard to the drainage hierarchy. It was particularly noted that the Proposed Development does not make use of water harvesting and reuse systems.

As such a planning condition has been recommended to secure the confirmation of a Sustainable Drainage System on site, which incorporates the extensive water harvesting and reuse system and any other measures from the top of the drainage hierarchy.

Page 80 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The Proposed Development is likely to utilise the existing water supply which will result in a large increase in water demand. Upgrade and remedial works to the public water supply network would therefore likely be required to accommodate the Proposed Development’s water demand. This will need to be agreed in consultation with Thames Water. A planning condition to this effect secures that these upgrades are agreed and completed prior to occupation. As such it is considered that there will be no significant negative effects on drinking water demand and supply, subject to the recommended conditions.

Overall, subject to the planning conditions and timely and meaningful engagement by the Applicants throughout the development process with Thames Water and the GLA where relevant, the Proposed Development is considered to have no detrimental impacts on the local water networks and flood risk in the local context.

LEGAL AGREEMENTS AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY

The NPPF and Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (CIL) require planning obligations to be:

(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development

The NPPF stresses the importance for local planning authorities to meet the infrastructure requirements needed to deliver future developments. Planning obligations are a critical way of ensuring that the objectives of the NPPF are met and future growth is stimulated.

In accordance with policies 8.2 and 8.3 of the London Plan and Policies 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 of Ealing’s adopted development Strategy, appropriate mitigation measures and financial contributions are being sought through legal agreement as detailed in the recommendation section of this report. It is considered that the measures and contributions are necessary to mitigate impacts of the development, particularly on local infrastructure such as health services, education, parks and leisure, roads and public transport.

Proposed contributions and other obligations to be secured through the Section 106 Agreement are set out below:

Non-Monetary Contribution

a) Affordable Housing vi. Provision of dwellings with 496 affordable habitable rooms of which 40 habitable rooms to be provided as London Affordable Rent, 196 habitable rooms to be provided as London Living Rent and 260 habitable rooms to be provided as Shared Ownership Housing; vii. A commuted sum of £6,150,000.00 towards the provision of AH in the vicinity of the site (equivalent to 75 habitable rooms as Intermediate housing or 45.45 London Affordable Rent habitable rooms); viii. The affordable housing shall be ready for occupation prior to the occupation of no more than 35% of the private sale units; ix. The Registered Provider shall be required to comply with the Council’s Deed of Nomination Rights in respect of the affordable tenure units; x. Review Mechanisms, as required.

b) Energy iii. Provision of Energy Centre

Page 81 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

iv. Connection of identified off-site buildings to the Energy Centre where feasible, viable and subject to entering into an appropriate contract

f) Submission of a Parking Management Plan for approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Parking Management Plan should provide details of the criteria for the allocation of the proposed off-street parking spaces. This shall establish how the number of those eligible for parking spaces shall not exceed the number of off-street parking spaces and how off-street parking spaces shall be allocated on an equitable basis across the Private Sale, Private Rent, Intermediate Housing and Rented tenures. The Parking Management Plan shall also include details of the criteria and management for the allocation of the disabled parking spaces. The parking shall be provided in accordance with the Parking Management Plan.

Page 82 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

o) Provision of funding for free car membership to eligible residents of the development for a minimum period of two years;

p) Submission and Implementation of the Travel Plan;

q) Submission of details of a scheme to enable residents of the proposed development to access and use of the hotel gymnasium;

Monetary Contributions

The following financial contributions have been secured, totalling £4,853,424.00:

Financial Contribution Sub-total Total

Total £4,853,424.00

r) All contributions to be index linked;

s) Payment of the Council’s reasonable Legal and other professional costs in preparing and completing the agreement; and

Page 83 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The applicant has reviewed the Heads of Terms set out under the recommendation and has agreed to enter into a s106 Agreement.

Community Infrastructure Levy The Mayor’s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was adopted on 01/04/2019. This has introduced a charging system within Ealing of £60 per sqm of gross internal area (GIA) of net additional floorspace created. The CIL Regulations 2010 (as amended) state that affordable housing would be exempt from the charge but this is subject to the criteria set out in Regulation 51 of the regulations.

The total liable sum (before indexation) for the scheme is calculated as £4,938,960.00 based on 82,316sqm of chargeable development (inclusive of 75,762sqm of C3 floorspace plus 15,201sqm of non-residential floorspace minus 8,647sqm of demolished floorspace) Indexation using the BCIS All In TPI index figure as relevant at the time of the permission will be added to the sum if required. A discount for social housing relief may be applicable if the applicant can demonstrate that the development meets the criteria set out in Regulation 51 of the CIL Regulations 2010 (as amended), which could potentially see this sum reduce to £3,639,900.00 (plus indexation). The liable sum for each phase of development shall be calculated at the time planning permission first permits development of the relevant phase and in line with the amount of floorspace and affordable housing proposed for that phase.

It is worth drawing attention to the fact that these figures may be amended in accordance with the actual publication TPI index figures at the date of issuing the decision notice. Based on a permission granted in early 2020, there will be no indexation. Ealing’s Draft (CIL) Charging Schedule was consulted on between 27/03/2015 – 08/05/2015. It is anticipated that Ealing’s CIL would be adopted later in 2020.

Fire Safety: The technical aspects of the materials to be used in any development, in relation to fire safety, are considered under the Building Act (1984) and specifically the Building Regulations (2010). These require minimum standards for any development, although the standards would vary between residential and commercial uses and in relation to new build and change of use/conversions. The Regulations cover a range of areas including structure and fire safety. Any person or organisation carrying out development can appoint either the Council’s Building Control Service or a Private Approved Inspector to act as the Building Control Body (BCB), to ensure the requirements of the Building Regulations are met. The BCB carry out an examination of drawings for the proposed works and make site inspections during the course of the work to ensure the works are carried out correctly. On completion of work the BCB would issue a Completion Certificate to confirm that the works comply with the requirement of the Building Regulations.

Moreover, in accordance with policy D11 of the draft London Plan (2017) in the interests of fire safety and to ensure the safety of all building users, development proposals must achieve the highest standards of fire safety. A condition is recommended requiring that prior to or concurrent with the submission of the first Reserved Matters Application for any Phase or Sub-Phase of the Development a Fire Statement for the relevant Phase or Sub-Phase shall be submitted to the Council for approval.

The scheme is a mixed-used building including different uses such as residential, hotel, office, retail and car park. The design of the different parts will follow the recommendations

Page 84 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

of different guidance documents; however, the majority of the building will be designed under the umbrella of BS 9999 and BS 9991.

The building will have fire detection and alarm system with voice alarm and fitted with a sprinkler system throughout. This level of the fire safety systems can guarantee early fire detection and alert. The sprinkler system will provide fire control in accordance with the relevant standards.

The building will be served by multiple stairs. Including 3 stairs serving the hotel bedroom floors and two single stairs serving the residential floors. Two of them are fire-fighting stairs to ensure that the fire brigade has protected access to the floors. Enhancing the level of safety, the fire fighting shafts and lift shafts are proposed to have pressurisation smoke control system besides the smoke control system that is proposed in the residential common corridors.

Conclusion: Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that where regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination of a planning application, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. On balance, there are material considerations which demonstrate that the application is considered to accord with many of the policies and objectives of the Development Plan and other material considerations (including the NPPF) indicate that planning permission ought to be granted. In particular, it is considered that the proposal for an employment led mixed use scheme is of a suitable layout and design which responds well to the surrounding urban context and would cause little harm to the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers.

The development would provide good quality residential accommodation for future occupiers with sufficient access to both private and communal amenity spaces and provides for the efficient use of land in an urban area. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposal would not be of detriment to the surrounding road network and public transport system offering sufficient storage for cycles and refuse and recycling.

On balance, the proposals are considered to be acceptable and it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to any direction of the Mayor and Secretary of State (in this case, the MHCLG).

The summary conclusions of the assessment of the application represent the main reasons for the recommendation to grant permission, subject to further statutory consultation with the Mayor of London and MHCLG.

Local Finance Considerations Pursuant to section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) the Council is required to take into account any local finance considerations, as far as material to the application. These comprise a grant or other financial assistance that has been, or would be or could be, provided to the Council, or any sum that has been received, or would be or could be, in payment of CIL. The Mayoral CIL, collected by the Council on the Mayor’s behalf, is such a consideration. The weight to be afforded to the receipt of CIL in the context of the decision whether to grant planning permission is a matter for members.

Human Rights Act: In making your decision, you should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as the London Borough of Ealing to act in a manner, which is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Page 85 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

You are referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property). It is not considered that the recommendation for approval of the grant of permission in this case interferes with local residents’ right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest and the recommendation for approval is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

The Council has had due regard to any potential adverse equality impacts of the proposed development, and to the extent that there are adverse impacts, which there may not be, the report should set out any mitigation proposals that would safeguard and promote the objectives protected by s149 Equality Act as far as reasonably possible if the proposal will bring about significant change.

Page 86 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

ANNEX 1 4 Portal Way Planning Conditions and Informatives

COMPLIANCE 1 Time Limit The development permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and the timescale of the development to allow for the progressive implementation of the Development and the regeneration of the area in accordance with relevant planning policies within a realistic and reasonable timetable.

2 Approved Drawings The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents insofar as they will be amended subject to the approved plans and documents necessary to support the reserved matters application(s) required by the various conditions of this permission:

PA-000 Cover Sheet Rev 01 PA-001 Schedule of Drawings Rev 01 PA-003 Section Cut and Elevation Marker Key Plan Rev 01 PA-007 Existing Site Location Plan Rev 00 PA-008 Site Location Plan Rev 00 PA-009 Land Ownership Plan Rev 00 PA-011 Existing Roof Plan, Existing Context Rev 00 PA-012 Proposed Roof Plan, Consented Context Rev 01 PA-021 Existing Building Ground Floor Plan Rev 00 PA-022 Existing Building Typical Floor Plan Rev 00 PA-023 Existing Building Elevations Rev 00 PA-041 Proposed Roof Demolition Plan Rev 00 PA-050 Proposed Ground Floor, Consented Context Rev 01 PA-097 Proposed Basement 2 Floor Plan Rev 00 PA-098 Proposed Basement 1 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-099 Proposed Lower Ground Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-100 Proposed Ground Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-101 Proposed Level 01-02 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-103 Proposed Level 03-06 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-107 Proposed Level 07-08 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-109 Proposed Level 09-15 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-116 Proposed Level 16-25 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-126 Proposed Level 26-35 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-136 Proposed Level 36-43 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-144 Proposed Level 44-45 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-146 Proposed Level 46-54 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-155 Proposed Level 55-56 Floor Plan Rev 00 PA-157 Proposed Level 57 Floor Plan Rev 01 PA-180 Proposed Level Roof Plan Rev 01

Page 87 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

PA-200 Proposed Elevation South and East - Consented Context Rev 01 PA-202 Proposed Elevation North and West - Consented Context Rev 01 PA-220 Proposed Elevation A Rev 01 PA-221 Proposed Elevation B Rev 01 PA-222 Proposed Elevation C Rev 01 PA-223 Proposed Elevation D Rev 01 PA-224 Proposed Elevation E Rev 01 PA-225 Proposed Elevation F Rev 01 PA-226 Proposed Elevation G Rev 01 PA-227 Proposed Elevation H Rev 01 PA-230 Proposed Elevation A and B Lower Floors Rev 01 PA-231 Proposed Elevation C and E Lower Floors Rev 01 PA-240 Proposed Elevation Amenity Level 06 and 35 Rev 01 PA-241 Proposed Elevation Amenity Level 55 Rev 00 PA-250 Proposed Section AA Rev 00 PA-251 Proposed Section BB Rev 00 PA-300 Wall Type Key Contents Rev 01 PA-301 Typical Residential Wall Type 02B Rev 01 PA-302 Typical Residential Wall Type 02C and 02D Rev 01 PA-303 Typical Residential Wall Type 02E and 03 Rev 01 PA-304 Typical Hotel Wall Type 01A and 01B Rev 00 PA-305 Typical Hotel Wall Type 04 Rev 01 PA-310 Typical Winter Garden Rev 01 PA-311 Typical Protruding Balcony Rev 01 PA-312 Typical Recessed Balcony Rev 01

Accommodation Schedule (prepared by KPF, dated 20.03.2019); Plans and drawings (see enclosed drawing schedule) (KPF); Environmental Statement Vol. 1: Main Text, Ref.: 70046384 (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Environmental Statement Vol. 2: Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment (prepared by Montagu Evans, dated April 2019); Environmental Statement Vol. 3: Technical Appendices Ref.: 70046384 (prepared by WSP; dated April 2019); Environmental Statement Vol. 4: Non-Technical Summary Ref.: 70046384 (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Transport Assessment (incorporating Draft Delivery and Servicing Plan, Draft Travel Plan, Healthy Streets Assessment and Draft Construction Logistics Plan) (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Design and Access Statement (prepared by KPF, dated April 2019); Daylight and Sunlight Amenity within the Proposed Development (prepared by Point 2 Surveyors, dated April 2019); Sustainable Design and Construction Statement (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Energy Statement (prepared by WSP, dated 2019); Economic Statement (prepared by Volterra, dated April 2019); Aviation Report (prepared by Swanson Aviation, dated April 2019); BEAC-WSP-XX-XX-RP-LI-0001-REVP03 (External Lighting Scheme) (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Framework Construction Management Plan (prepared by Multiplex, dated April 2019); KWEW/LDA/ U0008358 (Town Planning Statement) (prepared by Gerald Eve, dated April 2019); Affordable Housing Statement (prepared by Gerald Eve, dated April 2019); Financial Viability Assessment (prepared by Gerald Eve, dated April 2019); BEAC- WSP-XX-XX-RP-WM-003 REV P04 (Waste Management Strategy) (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Foul Sewage and Utilities Statement (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Fire Strategy (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Framework Estate Management Plan (prepared by WSP, dated April 2019); Statement of Community Involvement (prepared by Four Communications, dated April 2019); Illustrative Options for Future A40 Bridge Crossing (Indicative only) (prepared by KPF, dated April 2019). Letter: Response to TfL (prepared by WSP, dated 28/11/2019); IFP (Aerodrome Safeguarding report) (prepared by CYRRUS, dated 7/11/2019); Environmental Statement Addendum (prepared by WSP, dated October 2019); Environmental Statement Non-

Page 88 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Technical Summary Addendum (prepared by WSP, dated October 2019); Design and Access Statement Addendum (prepared by KPF, dated January 2020).

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3 Cycle Parking A minimum of 1,179 long-stay cycle spaces shall be installed prior to the first residential occupation of the development hereby permitted and permanently retained as such thereafter. A minimum of 5% of these cycle parking spaces shall facilitate larger or adapted cycles for disabled users.

A minimum of 57 short-stay cycle spaces (for visitors of the residential, hotel and office uses) shall be installed prior to the first occupation of the development and permanently retained as such thereafter. A minimum of 5% of these cycle parking spaces shall facilitate larger or adapted cycles for disabled users.

Reason: To ensure adequate cycle and scooter parking is provided to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport in accordance with Policy 6.9 of The London Plan, Policy T5 of the Draft London Plan and Ealing’s Supplementary Planning Document ‘Sustainable Transport for New Development’.

4 Permanent Obstacle Lighting Scheme Red obstacle lights should be placed on both the proposed towers at 4 Portal Way. Flashing red (20 and 60 flashes per minute) Medium Intensity Type B lighting of 2000 candela will need to be installed at the roof level of both buildings ensuring visibility from all directions. Additional intermediate lighting consisting of steady red medium intensity Type C lighting of 2000 candela will need to be installed down the sides of each building ensuring that the spacing doesn’t exceed 52m. Periods of illumination of obstacle lights, obstacle light locations and obstacle light photometric performance must all be in accordance with EASA regulation CS-ADR -DSN Chapter Q ‘visual aids for denoting obstacles’.

To ensure the developer interprets the regulations correctly we will require the developer to submit their obstacle lighting plan to Heathrow safeguarding prior to discharge.

Reason: Permanent illuminated obstacle lights are required on the development to avoid endangering the safe movement of aircraft flying within London Terminal Manoeuvring Area (LTMA).

5 Flexible Commercial Units The use of the flexible commercial units shall be permitted between the hours of 07.00 hours to 00.00 hours Sunday to Wednesday and Bank Holidays, and 07.00 hours to 01.00 hours on Thursday to Saturday.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise from activities or people at or leaving the site, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

6 Hours of use of commercial external areas The commercial external areas shall not be used other than between the hours of 08.00 hours to 20.00 hours Sunday to Wednesday and Bank Holidays, and 08.00 hours to 22.00 hours on Thursday to Saturday.

Page 89 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise from activities or people at or leaving the site, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

7 Floodlights, Security lights and Decorative External Lighting External artificial lighting at the development shall not exceed lux levels of vertical illumination at residential facades that are recommended by the Institution of Lighting Professionals in the ‘Guidance Notes for The Reduction of Light Pollution 2011’. Lighting should be minimized, and glare and sky glow should be prevented by correctly using, locating, aiming and shielding luminaires, in accordance with the Guidance Notes.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of surrounding premises is not adversely affected by lighting, in accordance with Policies 7.13 of the London Plan, D2 and D10 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013).

8 Accessibility - Wheelchair User Dwellings 1 Ten percent of the approved residential dwellings shall be designed and constructed to meet Approved Document M (Volume 1: Dwellings), Part M4(3) (Wheelchair user dwellings) of Building Regulations 2015, or other such relevant technical standards in use at the time of the construction of the development.

Reason: To ensure the provision of wheelchair housing in a timely fashion that would address the current unmet housing need; produce a sustainable mix of accommodation; and provide an appropriate choice and housing opportunity for wheelchair users and their families, in accordance with the objectives of policies: 3.5, 3.8 and 3.9 of the London Plan; and policy 1.1(h) of Ealing's Development (or Core) Strategy 2012.

9 Accessibility - Wheelchair User Dwellings 2 90% of all future new residential units shall be constructed to Building Regulations 2015 Part M4(2), or other such relevant technical standards in use at the time of the construction of the development.

Reason: To ensure that adequate access is provided to all floors of the development for all occupiers and visitors including those with disabilities, in accordance with policies 3.5, 3.8, and 7.2 of the London Plan; policy 1.1(h) of the Ealing Development Strategy 2026 (2012); policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013); and interim Ealing SPG ‘Accessible Ealing’ (2012).

10 Overheating and Cooling The development shall incorporate the overheating and cooling measures in line with CIBSE TM49 & TM52 guidance and detailed in the final approved Dynamic Overheating Assessment that meets the GLA guidance on fully exploiting passive measures before considering active cooling such as reducing glazed areas and g- values, and external and internal shading. The overheating analysis should include enhanced passive measures where feasible, and the results should show the margin of compliance/failure for DSY1, DSY2 and DSY3.

Reason: To ensure that the risk of overheating has been sufficiently addressed in accordance with policy 5.9 of the London Plan; Ealing’s Development (Core) Strategy, and Development Management DPD.

Page 90 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

11 Car Parking Restrictions The maximum amount of car parking to be accommodated within the development shall not exceed 21 blue badge bays for the residential units; 14 standard and 5 blue badge parking spaces for the hotel and 3 blue badge bays for the commercial units. Any change from the approved maximum parking provision shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of superstructure works on the relevant phase of development. For clarity, parking provision shall not be increased from the maximum levels set out or approved as above.

Reason: To ensure that the parking strategy within the Development is implemented in accordance with the principles described in the Transport Assessment by sustainable transport methods in the interests of avoiding unnecessary traffic and congestion. Ensure compliance with London Plan and Draft London Plan. 12 Passenger Lifts Passenger lifts located within the communal cores serving the approved Blocks shall be installed and operational prior to the first occupation of the relevant part of the Block to which the lift serves.

Reason: To ensure that adequate access is provided to all floors of the development for all occupiers and visitors including those with disabilities, in accordance with policies 3.5, 3.8, and 7.2 of the London Plan; policy 1.1(h) of the adopted Ealing Development Strategy (2012), policy 7B of the adopted Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and interim Ealing SPG ‘Accessible Ealing’ (2012).

Page 91 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

PRE-COMMENCEMENT 13 Construction Environmental Management Plan (Demolition, Construction, Logistics & Environmental Management Plan) Prior to the commencement of development, a site Construction Environmental Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA in consultation with HS2 and TFL. The submission shall include the following: a) The number of on-site construction workers and details of their transport options and parking facilities. b) Anticipated route, anticipated number, frequency and size of construction vehicles entering / exiting the site per day. Highlighting and including details of any vehicles with abnormal loads. c) Delivery times and booking system (which is to be staggered to avoid morning and afternoon school-run peak periods). d) Route and location of site access for construction traffic and associated signage with swept path analysis provided. e) Management of consolidated or re-timed trips. f) Construction hours including limiting hours of noise nuisance g) Keeping nearby accesses free from obstruction and segregating construction and general traffic h) No burning of waste on site i) Construction of staff accommodation j) Any temporary road measures k) Proposed on-site construction worker parking l) Anticipated route, number, frequency and size of construction vehicles entering/exiting the site m) Wheel washing provisions n) Construction vehicle manoeuvring and turning, including sweep path diagrams to demonstrate how vehicles will access the site and be able to turn into and emerge from the site in forward gear. o) Details of any temporary vehicular access p) Details of the noise / vibration and dust mitigation measures to accord with the Mayor's "Best Practice Guidance: The control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition (2006)" and BS 5228-1:2009 - Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites - Part 1: Noise. q) Details of site security, temporary lighting and the erection of maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing where appropriate. r) Secure off-street loading and drop-off facilities. s) Vehicle manoeuvring and turning, including swept path diagrams to demonstrate how construction vehicles will access the site and be able to turn into and emerge from the site in forward gear and including details of any temporary vehicle access points. t) Details as to the locations for storage of building materials and construction debris and contractors’ offices. u) Procedures for on-site contractors to deal with complaints from members of the public. v) Measures to consult cyclists, disabled people and the local schools with regard to delivery times and necessary diversions. w) Details of all pedestrian and cyclist diversions. x) A commitment to be part of the Considerate Constructors Scheme. y) Confirmation of use of TfL's Freight Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS) or similar.

Page 92 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

z) Details of any cranes and other tall construction equipment (including crane locations and operating heights and details of obstacle lighting). aa) The submission of evidence of the condition of the highway prior to construction and a commitment to make good any damages caused during construction. bb) Details of parking restrictions which may need to be implemented during construction work.

Prior to the commencement of any site work, all sensitive properties surrounding the site shall be notified in writing of the nature and duration of the works to be undertaken, and the name and address of a responsible person to whom enquiries / complaints should be directed.

The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the details so approved. Any areas to be used for the storage of building materials or other site activities outside of the relevant phase of the development shall be returned to the original condition immediately following the practical completion of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of local residents and adjoining occupiers and to ensure adequate highway and site safety during the course of the works and in order to avoid congestion from construction traffic from the development site as well as the HS2 development at the Gypsy corner junction, in accordance with policies 1.1 (e) (f) (j), 1.2, 2.1 & 2.8 of the Ealing Development (Core) Strategy 2012, policy 6.3, 6.14, & 7.13 - 7.14 of the London Plan (2016), T4 of the draft London Plan and policy 7A of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan, Greater London Authority 'The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition Supplementary Planning Guidance (20014), BS 5228-1 :2009+A1 :2014 - Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites: Noise.

14 Air Quality Management Plan Prior to the commencement of this development, (including demolition and site clearance) an Air Quality and Dust Management Plan (AQDMP) that includes an Air Quality (Dust) Risk Assessment shall be produced in accordance with current guidance The Control of Dust and Emissions during Construction and Demolition, SPG, GLA, July 2014, for the existing site and the proposed development. A scheme for air pollution mitigation measures based on the findings of the report shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any works on the site.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities for future occupiers of the development in accordance with policies 3.5 and 7.15 of the London Plan, policies 1.1 (j) & 1 .2(f) of the Ealing Development (or Core) Strategy (2012) and with policy 7.3 of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document (2013).

15 Site Waste Management Plan Prior to the commencement of development (except demolition, site clearance and preparation work), a Site Waste Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Site Waste Management Plan shall demonstrate how the procurement of materials for the development during construction would promote sustainability, including by use of low impact, sustainably sourced, reused and recycled materials, including reuse of demolition waste, use of local suppliers and by reference to the BRE's Green Guide Specification.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved.

Page 93 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Reason: To ensure sustainable procurement of materials which minimises the negative environmental impacts of construction in accordance with policies 5.3 and 5.18 of the adopted London Plan, policies 1.1 (k) and 1.2 (f) of the adopted Ealing Development Strategy (2012) and interim guidance in Ealing's SPG4 'Storing waste for recycling and disposal.

16 Design Out Crime All buildings, cores and units hereby approved must comply with 'Secured by Design' standards. Prior to the commencement of any above ground works within each Phase or Sub-Phase, the applicant must provide evidence of compliance with the standards of 'Secured by Design Accreditation' to the Local Planning Authority for written approval in consultation with the Metropolitan Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor.

Reason: To ensure that opportunities to commit crime are reduced, particularly in relation to the approved apartment buildings that contain shared core entrances that serve more than eight dwellings; and in order that the new buildings incorporate appropriately designed security features, in accordance with policies 7.3 and 7.13 of the London Plan and Policy 7.3 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD.

17 Submission of a Construction Management Strategy (NATS, Heathrow and MOD combined) Development shall not commence until a construction management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with NATS, covering the application site and any adjoining land which will be used during the construction period. Such a strategy shall include the following matters:

- Details of cranes and other tall construction equipment (including the details of dates, heights and locations of cranes proposed and obstacle lighting) – Such schemes shall comply with Advice Note 4 ‘Cranes and Other Construction Issues’ (available at www.aoa.org.uk/policy-campaigns/operations-safety).

The approved strategy (or any variation approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority) shall be implemented for the duration of the construction period.

Reason: To ensure the development does not endanger the safe movement of aircraft flying within London Terminal Manoeuvring Area (LTMA).

18 NATS Radar Mitigation: No Development can take place until:

- A Radar Mitigation Scheme has been agreed and implemented to ensure that the proposed development will have no impact on the Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR). The SSR reflections can be prevented through adaptation of the building surfaces within the radar processing software.

Reason: To ensure the development does not endanger the safe movement of aircraft or the operation of nearby airports through interference with communication, navigational aids and surveillance equipment.

19 Separation of noise sensitive rooms in neighbouring flats Prior to commencement of the relevant part of the development, details shall be submitted to the Council for approval in writing, of an enhanced sound insulation values of at least 5dB above the Building Regulations value, for the floor/ceiling/wall structures separating different types of rooms/ uses in adjoining dwellings, e.g.

Page 94 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

kitchen/living/dining/bathroom above/below/adjoining a bedroom of separate dwelling. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site is not adversely affected by noise, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

20 Separation of communal/commercial/plant and noise sensitive premises Prior to commencement of the relevant part of the development, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, of the sound insulation of the floor/ceiling/walls separating plant rooms, gym, lifts, social spaces and other commercial and communal facilities/areas from dwellings. Details of mitigation measures shall demonstrate that the sound insulation value is sufficiently enhanced above the Building Regulations value for residential use in order not to exceed an acoustic standard of NR 25 Leq 5 mins (octaves) or NR 20 Leq 5 mins (1/3 octaves) inside a bedroom and NR 30 Leq 5 mins (octaves) or NR 25 Leq 5 mins (1/3 octaves) inside a living room when noise is generated by the communal/commercial/plant use. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: In the interests of the living conditions of the occupiers of the residential premises, in accordance with Interim Supplementary Planning Guidance 10, policies 1.1(j) of the Ealing Core Strategy (2012), policy 7A of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), policies 7.14 & 7.15 of the London Plan, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

21 Gym vibration noise isolation Prior to commencement of the relevant part of the development, details shall be submitted to the Council for approval in writing, of proprietary anti-vibration mounts and/or other mitigation measures for the isolation of walls/floors/ceilings, exercise equipment and loudspeakers. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected by airborne or structure borne noise or vibration, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

22 Extraction and Odour Control system for non-domestic kitchens/ dry cleaners Prior to commencement of the relevant part of the development, details shall be submitted to the Council for approval in writing, of the installation, operation, and maintenance of the odour abatement equipment and extract system, including the height of the extract duct and vertical discharge outlet without cowl at least 1m above the eaves of the main building . Approved details shall be implemented prior to the commencement of the use and thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected by cooking odour, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

23 Demolition Method Statement and Construction Management Plan

Page 95 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a demolition method statement and a construction management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. Details shall include control measures for dust (in accordance with Dust: Best Practicable Means (BPM) should be used in controlling dust emissions, in accordance with the Supplementary Planning Guidance by the GLA (2014) for The Control of Dust and Emissions during Construction and Demolition), noise and vibration (in accordance with Noise and Vibration from demolition, construction, piling, concrete crushing, drilling, excavating, etc.:Best Practicable Means (BPM) should be used during construction and demolition works, including low vibration methods and silenced equipment and machinery, control and monitoring measures of noise and vibration, delivery locations and all associated activities audible beyond the site boundary, in accordance with the Approved Codes of Practice of BS 5228-1 and -2:2009+A1:2014 Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites), dark and smoke (No waste materials should be burnt on site of the development), lighting, delivery locations, restriction of hours of work and all associated activities audible beyond the site boundary to 0800-1800hrs Mondays to Fridays and 0800 -1300 hrs on Saturdays, advance notification to neighbours and other interested parties of proposed works and public display of contact details including accessible phone contact to persons responsible for the site works for the duration of the works.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise, vibration, dust, lighting or other emissions from the site, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

24 Sustainable Urban Drainage (Development) Prior to the commencement of development on each Phase or Sub-Phase, a surface water drainage scheme based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Environment Agency. The drainage strategy should demonstrate the surface water run-off generated up to and including the 1 in 100 year plus climate change storm will not exceed 5 litres per second as shown in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall include attenuation through permeable paving and attenuation tanks. The development shall thereafter be provided in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To minimise the risk of flooding, to improve and protect water quality, improve habitat and amenity and in the interests of the drainage network in accordance with policies 5.12, 5.13 and 5.14 of the London Plan, policy 1.2(m) of Ealing's Development (or Core) Strategy 2012; and policy LV5.12 of Ealing's Development Management DPD (2013).

25 Energy and CO2 a) Prior to commencement of construction the applicant shall submit an energy strategy for approval demonstrating how the CO2 emissions of the proposed development will be reduced by at least 35% over Part L (2013) and in line with the Mayor’s and Ealing Council’s policies. The energy strategy shall incorporate energy generation infrastructure agreed by the Council and the GLA prior to submission.

Page 96 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

b) Prior to commencement of construction the applicant shall submit an energy strategy addendum detailing how the maximum amount of photovoltaic panels will be incorporated into the development in line with GLA and Ealing Council guidance. The addendum shall include layout drawings and technical specifications of the PV. c) Prior to commencement of construction the permitted development shall incorporate and maintain, and in the case of energy generation equipment confirm as operational, the approved measures to achieve the overall on-site reduction in regulated CO2 emissions identified in the final approved Energy Strategy including: i. Lean passive design measures to achieve an annual reduction of at least 10% in regulated carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions over BR Part L 2013 for the domestic element, and at least 15% for the hotel, or alternative percentage reductions agreed by the Council and the GLA prior to permission. ii. Green renewable energy equipment including the incorporation of air-to- water communal Air Source Heat Pump(s) and PV panels to achieve an annual reduction of at least 37.94% (or an alternative agreed percentage cut) in regulated carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions over the Be Lean/Clean stage of the Energy Hierarchy, or alternative reduction targets agreed by the Council prior to permission. d) Prior to commencement of construction details of the specifications, design and layout of the proposed energy equipment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Equipment details shall include exact heat pump(s) thermal kilowatt output, site distribution networks, heat output pipe diameter(s), monthly energy demand profile, and the number of PV arrays, the kWp capacity of each array, and the orientation, pitch and mounting of the panels. The development shall be implemented only in accordance with the approved details. e) All boilers to serve the energy requirements of the development should be specified with NOx emissions (g/m²) that are compliant with the ultra-low NOx (g/m²) benchmarks as set out at Appendix 5 of the Mayor’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPG. f) Within three months of the occupation/first use of the development the relevant Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) and detailed SAP Worksheets showing clearly the TER and DER, and/or the Display Energy Certificates (DEC's), accompanying Advisory Reports and detailed BRUKL modelling output reports showing clearly the TER and BER from the ‘as built stage’ following completion of the development, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Authority in order to confirm compliance with the energy efficiency measures detailed in the approved Energy Strategy. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of addressing climate change and to secure environmentally sustainable development in accordance with policies, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.6, 5.7 and 5.9 of the London Plan, guidance note 11 of the GLA Energy Assessment Guidance

Page 97 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

2018, policies LV5.2 and 7A of Ealing’s Development Management DPD 2013, and policies 1.1(k) and 1.2(f) of Ealing’s Development (Core) Strategy 2012.

26 Energy Centre: Site distribution network and District Heating Prior to commencement of the approved development the following details should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval: a) An explanation of the technologies used to meet the heating and hot water demands of both the residential units and the hotel; b) Evidence of investigation of ways to connect to any available District Heat Network and briefings of discussions with neighbouring developers. If a suitable heat network is available a timetable for connection to the network shall be submitted to the Council for approval; c) Details of the layout of the energy plant room and equipment and the method of how the facility shall be designed to connect to, or allow for future connection to, an offsite district heating network, if an on-site energy centre is provided; d) Technical details and schematics of the sitewide heat distribution network shall be submitted to the Council including the monthly energy demand profile, thermal kW outputs, heat output pipe diameters; e) All boilers to serve the energy requirements of the development should be specified with NOx emissions (g/m²) that are compliant with the ultra-low NOx (g/m²) benchmarks as set out at Appendix 5 of the Mayor’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPG. f) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To secure the measures set out within the approved Energy Strategy Statement and to ensure that the development energy plant room is designed in a manner which allows for the connection to an existing or potential future offsite district heat network. To ensure that the development contributes to reducing the use of fossil fuel or other primary energy generation capacity, and to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases in accordance with policies 5.3, 5.5 and 5.6 of the London Plan, policies 1.1(k) and 1.2(f) of Ealing’s adopted Development (or Core) Strategy 2012, policy LV5.2 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD, and the Mayor’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPG.

27 Sustainable Design and Construction Prior to the commencement of the development Sustainable Design and Construction strategies which includes full details of the measures that are to be incorporated into the development to achieve the requirements of the local and regional planning policies shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in line with the Mayor’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPG. The development shall be constructed in line with the approved energy and sustainability measures.

Reason: In the interest of addressing climate change and to secure sustainable development in accordance with policies 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.6, 5.7 and 5.9 of the London Plan, policies LV5.2 and 7A of Ealing’s Development Management DPD 2013, and policies 1.1(k) and 1.2(f) of Ealing’s Development (Core) Strategy 2012 and Mayor’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPG.

28 Biodiversity roofs Prior to the commencement of any above ground work, full details of biodiversity roofs which shall be compliant with GRO Green Roof Code 2014 shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the implementation of the relevant part of the development hereby approved. Submitted information should include a report from a suitably qualified ecologist specifying how the biodiversity roof has been developed for biodiversity with details of landscape

Page 98 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

features and a roof cross-section. Details of the green or brown roof construction and specification should be included, together with a maintenance schedule for these.

Where a green roof is proposed, this should be comprised of, but not necessarily limited to: a) Be biodiversity based with extensive substrate base (depth 80-150mm). b) Have sufficient depth of soil or growing medium for the relevant planting, including the e-use of any demolition material where feasible. c) Be planted / seeded with a green mix of species within the first planting season following the practical completion of the building works. The seed mix shall be focused on wildflower planting and shall contain no more than 25% sedum. d) Have relevant efficient and effective drainage and irrigation to sustain the vegetation.

The biodiversity roofs shall not be used as an amenity or sitting out area and shall be only accessed in the case of essential maintenance or repair.

Reason: In the interests of supporting and enhancing local biodiversity on site in accordance with policies 3.5, 6.9, 6.10, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5, 7.19, 7.27 and 7.28 of the London Plan; policies 1.1(e), (f), (g), (h), 1.2 (d), 2.9 (b) and 5.5(b) of Ealing’s Development Strategy 2026 DPD (2012); and policies LV 2.18 and LV 7.3 of Ealing’s Development Management DPD.

29 Materials Notwithstanding the approved plans and documents, details and samples of all facing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the relevant works.

Where relevant, the samples and details shall include: a) brickwork (including brick panels and mortar courses); b) cladding materials, including roof finishes; c) all window treatments (including sections, reveals and kitchen windows within an area opening into a shared access deck shall be non-opening and fire rated for at least 30 minutes under the Building Regulations); d) building entrance details and material samples; e) balcony structures and balustrading treatment (including sections); f) privacy screen treatment; g) residential and bin store entrance doors / ventilation louvres; h) shopfront design in relation to the A1 / D1 use class premises; i) Entrance gates to on-site car parking areas; j) Energy centre, substation, refuse and bicycle store entrance doors and ventilation louvres; k) Boundary treatment walls, fencing, gates and footings; l) any other materials to be used.

The details so approved shall be installed/erected/operational prior to first occupation of the relevant part of the development.

Reason: In the interest of securing sustainable development and to ensure that the resulting appearance of the development is of a high standard in accordance with policies: 3.5, 7.1, 7.4 and 7.6 of the London Plan; 1.1(h), 1.1(k), 1.2(f), 1.2(h) and 2.10 of Ealing's Development (or Core) Strategy 2026 (2012); and policies LV3.5, LV7.4 and 7B of Ealing's Development Management DPD (2013).

Page 99 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

UPON COMMENCEMENT: 30 Active Design An Active Design Framework for the whole development, demonstrating how the scheme intends to incorporate the principles and strategies set out in the 'Active Design' 'Planning for health and wellbeing through sport and physical activity' (October 2015), which shall be prepared and reviewed in consultation with Sports England and submitted to the LPA for approval and approved every three years or such longer intervals as may be approved by the Council within 1 month of commencement.

Prior to commencement of any work on any Phase or Sub-Phase, an 'Active Design' statement demonstrating how each phase incorporates the principles and strategies set out in the 'Active Design' Planning for Health and Wellbeing through Sport and Physical Activity (October 2015) and ‘Active Design Framework for 4 Portal Way’ must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA.

Reason: To promote health and wellbeing; in order to ensure there is sufficient supply of good quality sports and recreation facilities and to ensure that more active travel becomes part of every journey; in accordance with policy 3.19 of the London Plan and policy S5 of the Draft London Pan.

31 H10 Radar Mitigation No works above ground can take place until:

- Mitigation has been agreed by the LPA in consultation with Heathrow and put in place to ensure that the proposed development will have no impact on the H10 Radar at Heathrow Airport.

Reason: To ensure the development does not endanger the safe movement of aircraft or the operation of Heathrow Airport through interference with communication, navigational aids and surveillance equipment.

32 Site Investigation Prior to the commencement of any works on site (other than demolition and site clearance) and based on the conceptual site model contained within WSP report Project No: 70046384 Ref No.: 70046384-11135(2) submitted as Appendix 11.1 of the Environment Statement) a site investigation shall investigate the site and any previously inaccessible ground. The site conceptual model shall be amended based on the findings of the intrusive site investigation and the risks to identified receptors up dated. This assessment must be undertaken by a competent person, and shall assess any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The findings of the site investigation and proposed remedial options shall be submitted to the Local planning authority for approval in writing prior to any remedial works commencing and any development works commencing.

Reason: To ensure the land contamination issues are addressed in accordance with policy1.1 (j) of the adopted Local Development Framework (Core Strategy 2012), policy 5.21 of the London Plan and Ealing Local Variation to London Plan Policy 5.21 of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013.

33 Remediation Scheme: If necessary, a detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use shall be submitted to and subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The approved

Page 100 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development, (excluding site clearance and demolition) other than that required to carry out remediation works.

34 Verification Report Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report submitted shall be in accordance with current guidance / best practice and shall be approved in writing prior to commencement of any above-ground works.

35 External Lighting Upon commencement of the development or prior to the installation of any external lighting, details to demonstrate that the proposed external lighting scheme will comply with the ‘Guidance Notes for The Reduction of Light Pollution 2011’ shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. External artificial lighting at the development shall not exceed lux levels of vertical illumination at neighbouring premises that are recommended by the Institution of Lighting Professionals in the ‘Guidance Notes for The Reduction of Light Pollution 2011’. Lighting should be minimised, and glare and sky glow should be prevented by correctly using, locating, aiming and shielding luminaires, in accordance with the Guidance Notes.

Reason: In the interests of the living conditions of occupiers of nearby properties and future occupiers of the site, in accordance with policies policy 1.1 (j) of the Ealing Core Strategy (2012), policy 7A of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document (2013) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2012).

36 Non-Residential BREEAM energy/CO2 accreditation a) The non-residential element of the development shall be registered with Building Research Establishment (BRE), achieve BREEAM Rating Very Good and make reasonable endeavours to achieve Excellent (based on the latest BREEAM NC Technical guidance). b) Within 3 months of commencement of each non-residential element of the development, Interim BREEAM NC Assessment and related Certification verified by the BRE shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval. c) Within 3 months from the date of first occupation of each non-residential element of the development, BREEAM 'Post Construction Stage' Assessment and related Certification verified by the BRE should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval confirming the BREEAM standard and measures have been implemented. d) Following any approval of a 'Post Construction Stage' assessment and certificate of the development, the approved measures and technologies to achieve the BREEAM Very Good or higher standard shall be retained in working order in perpetuity.

Page 101 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Reason: In the interest of addressing climate change and to secure sustainable development in accordance with policies 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.6, 5.7 and 5.9 of the London Plan 2015, policies LV5.2 and 7A of the Ealing Development Management DPD 2013, and Policies 1.1(k) and 1.2(f) of the Ealing Development (Core) Strategy 2012.

37 Open Spaces Design Upon commencement of superstructure works, details of the construction of any of the Open Spaces, Hard and Soft Landscaping included within the development plot must be submitted for approval by the LPA. These must include:

a) A statement demonstrating general conformity with relevant parameters and principles described in the Design and Access Statement and where relevant the Addendum Design and Access Statement

b) The layout, design and purpose of the space; c) The location of internal pedestrian and/or cycle routes, where relevant; d) Details of bird and bat boxes or any other artificial habitats to be installed; e) Enclosures and boundary treatments including types, dimensions and finishes of walls, fences, screen walls, barriers, bollards, rails, retaining walls and hedges; f) Play areas including details and specifications of equipment including safety surfacing; g) Details of all hard and soft landscaping to be implemented. h) A statement detailing how the landscaping proposals contribute to the mitigation measures for nesting birds and ecological enhancements detailed within the Environmental Statement. i) All security and external lighting to be installed.

Reason: To ensure high standards of design and implementation of landscaping and the public realm in accordance with the mitigation measures proposed and described in the Environmental Statement, in order to ensure that the site landscaping is provided in a timely fashion; and in order to provide a good level of privacy for future occupants, in accordance with policies LV2.18, LV7.3, LV7.4, 7B and 7D of Ealing’s Development Management DPD (2013); policies 2.18, 7.4, 7.13, 7.19 and 7.21 of the London Plan; policies 1.1(h) and (i), 2.10, 5.3, 5.4 and 6.3 of Ealing’s Development (or Core) Strategy (2012).

PRE-OCCUPATION: 38 Delivery and Servicing plan A delivery and servicing plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to first occupation of any part of the development hereby approved. The plan shall cover the following: - Vehicle tracking and movements - Swept paths drawings for a refuse lorry vehicle, 10-metre rigid vehicle and also a fire appliance vehicle including silent reversing methods, quiet loading/unloading measures, etc.; - Deliveries and collections; including hours of use, times and frequency of activities, how deliveries will be scheduled to avoid several Lorries arriving at the site simultaneously; - Servicing trips (including maintenance); and measures to reduce the number of freight trips to the site (freight consolidation); - Cleaning and waste removal; including arrangements for refuse collection; - Monitoring and review of operations. - A detailed coach and taxi servicing management strategy

Page 102 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

The delivery and servicing plan shall be implemented on first occupation of any part of the development hereby approved and the site shall be managed in accordance with the approved plan for the life of the development, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development can be adequately serviced in the interests of pedestrian and highway safety and the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected, in accordance with policies 6.11 and 6.13 of the London Plan and Local Variation policy 6.13 of the Development Management DPD 2013.

39 Wastewater No properties shall be occupied until confirmation has been provided that either: o All wastewater network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows from the development have been completed; or o A housing and infrastructure phasing plan have been agreed with Thames Water to allow additional properties to be occupied. Where a housing and infrastructure phasing plan is agreed no occupation shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed housing and infrastructure phasing plan.

Reason: The development may lead to sewage flooding and network reinforcement works are anticipated to be necessary to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to accommodate additional flows anticipated from the new development.

40 Surface Water: No properties shall be occupied until confirmation has been provided that either: o All surface water network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows from the development have been completed; or o A housing and infrastructure phasing plan have been agreed with Thames Water to allow additional properties to be occupied. Where a housing and infrastructure phasing plan is agreed no occupation shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed housing and infrastructure phasing plan.

Reason: The development may lead to flooding and network reinforcement works are anticipated to be necessary to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to accommodate additional flows anticipated from the new development. Any necessary reinforcement works will be necessary to avoid sewer flooding and/or potential pollution incidents.” The developer can request information to support the discharge of this condition by visiting the Thames Water website at thameswater.co.uk/preplanning.

41 Water Network No properties shall be occupied until confirmation has been provided that either: - All water network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows from the development have been completed; or - A housing and infrastructure phasing plan have been agreed with Thames Water to allow additional properties to be occupied. Where a housing and infrastructure phasing plan is agreed no occupation shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed housing and infrastructure phasing plan.

Reason: The development may lead to no / low water pressure and network reinforcement works are anticipated to be necessary to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to accommodate additional demand anticipated from the new development” The developer can request information to support the discharge of this condition by visiting the Thames Water website at thameswater.co.uk/preplanning.

Page 103 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

42 Transport and/or commercial/industrial/cultural noise sources Prior to occupation of the development, the cumulative noise level of external noise sources (as assessed according to requirements of the Council’s interim SPG10) shall inform the assessment and provision of sound insulation of the building envelope. Details shall be submitted, including glazing specifications for windows and winter gardens (sound insulation including frames, seals and ventilators tested and approved in accordance with BS EN ISO 10140-2:2010) and of acoustically attenuated ventilation and cooling as necessary (with air intake from the cleanest aspect of the building), to achieve internal room- and (if provided) external amenity noise standards of BS8233:2014 and SPG10. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: In the interests of the living conditions of future occupiers of the site, in accordance with policies policy 1.1(j) of the Ealing Core Strategy (2012), policy 7A of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document (2013), and policies 7.14 of the London Plan, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

43 Ground and airborne building vibration Building vibration levels generated by transport sources shall not exceed the criteria of BS 6472:2008 and SPG10. No part of the development shall be occupied until mitigation measures, as necessary, have been implemented. Approved details shall thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected by ground- or airborne vibration, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

44 External noise from machinery, extract/ ventilation ducting, mechanical gates, etc. Prior to the first use of the development, details shall be submitted to the Council for approval in writing, of the external sound level emitted from plant/ machinery/ equipment and mitigation measures as appropriate, as measured at/ calculated to the nearest and/or most affected noise sensitive premises. The measures shall ensure that the external sound level LAeq emitted from plant, machinery/ equipment will be lower than the lowest existing background sound level LA90 by at least 5 dBA at the most noise sensitive receiver location. The assessment shall be made in accordance with BS4142:2014, with all machinery operating together at maximum capacity. Details of any noise mitigation measures shall be submitted for approval. A post installation sound assessment shall be carried out where required to confirm compliance with the noise criteria and additional steps to mitigate noise shall be taken, as necessary. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise from mechanical installations/ equipment, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

45 Anti - vibration mounts and silencing of machinery etc. Prior to the first use of any machinery, plant or equipment/ extraction/ ventilation system and ducting at the development shall be mounted with proprietary anti-

Page 104 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

vibration isolators and fan motors shall be vibration isolated from the casing and adequately silenced and maintained as such.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site and surrounding premises is not adversely affected by vibration, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

46 Commercial uses: external doors and windows to remain shut Commercial uses including the gym, hotel and restaurant kitchens, etc. shall not commence until external doors to the premises have been fitted with self-closing devices, which shall be maintained in an operational condition and at no time shall any external door nor windows be fixed in an open position during the emission of noise, odour etc. Alternative, acoustically attenuated, ventilation shall be provided.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise /odour /smoke /fumes, in accordance with Policies 7.15 of the London Plan, D13 of the draft London Plan, Ealing Local Variation to Policy 7A of Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Ealing SPG 10: 'Noise and Vibration'.

47 Sustainable Urban Drainage Scheme (Evidence) The development shall not be occupied until evidence (photographs and installation contracts) is submitted and confirmed in writing by the LPA in consultation with the GLA to demonstrate that the sustainable drainage scheme, which incorporates the extensive water harvesting and reuse system and any other measures from the top of the drainage hierarchy for the site has been completed in accordance with the submitted details. The sustainable drainage scheme shall be managed and maintained thereafter in accordance with the agreed management and maintenance plan for all of the proposed drainage components.

Reason: To comply with the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems, the National Planning Policy Framework (Paragraph 103), the London Plan (Policies 5.12 and 5.13) along with associated guidance to these policies.

48 Post construction energy equipment monitoring In order to implement Ealing Council DPD policy 5.2.3 (post-construction energy monitoring), and the (emerging) London Plan policy S12 with the “Be Seen” stage of the revised energy hierarchy, the developer shall: a) Enter into a legal agreement with the Council to secure a S106 financial contribution for the post-construction monitoring of the renewable/low carbon technologies to be incorporated into the development and/or the energy use of the development as per energy and CO2 Condition(s). b) Upon final construction of the development, or relevant phases of the development, and prior to occupation, suitable devices for monitoring any renewable/low-carbon energy equipment, and/or the heat and electrical demand of the development, shall be installed. The monitored data shall be automatically submitted to the Council at daily intervals for a period of four years from occupation and full operation of the energy equipment. The installation of the monitoring devices and the submission and format of the data shall be carried out in accordance with the Council's approved specifications as indicated in the Automated Energy Monitoring Platform (AEMP) information document. c) The developer must contact the Council’s chosen AEMP supplier (Energence Ltd) on commencement of construction to facilitate the monitoring process.

Page 105 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

d) Upon final completion of the development and prior to occupation, the developer must submit to the Council proof of a contractual arrangement with a certified contractor that provides for the ongoing, commissioning, maintenance, and repair of the renewable/low-carbon energy equipment for a period of three years from the point that the building is occupied and the equipment fully operational.

Reason: To monitor the effectiveness and continued operation of the renewable/low carbon energy equipment in order to confirm compliance with energy policies and establish an in-situ evidence base on the performance of such equipment in accordance with the relevant policies in the (current and draft) London Plan; currently London Plan policy 5.2, draft London Plan policy S12 (“Be Seen” stage of the energy hierarchy), Ealing's Development (Core) Strategy 2026 (3rd April 2012) and Development Management DPD policy 5.2, E5.2.3, and Policy 2.5.36 (Best Practice) of the Mayor’s Sustainable Design & Construction SPG.

49 Landscaping Maintenance Prior to the occupation of any residential units within the development, the applicant must submit details of a Landscape Management Plan covering a minimum period of 5 years from the implementation of final planting for approval by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the proper maintenance of the site and to ensure that the quality of the public realm and the setting of the site is appropriately safeguarded and that that access is maintained for disabled people and people with pushchairs, in accordance with policies 3.1, 3.16, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5, 7.8, 7.21, 7.24, 7.27, 7.28 of the London Plan, policies 1.1(e), (g) (h),1.2 (d) (f), and 2.10 of Ealing’s adopted Development (Core) Strategy (2012), Table 7D.2 of Ealing’s adopted Development Management DPD.

50 Electrical Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP) Prior to the occupation of any residential units or the first use of any non-residential use within the development hereby permitted, at least 20% of car parking (9 spaces) shall be fitted with active vehicle charging facilities, while passive electric vehicle charging facilities shall be provided on the remaining 80% (34 spaces) of car parking spaces. The electric or Ultra-Low Emission car charging facilities shall be retained as such thereafter for the lifetime of the development hereby permitted, unless being upgraded to active charging facilities.

Reason: To ensure appropriate provision of suitable infrastructure for electric or Ultra- Low Emission vehicles in accordance with Draft London Plan Policy T6.1.

51 Estate Maintenance and Management Framework Prior to the first occupation of a Phase (or Block therein) within the development hereby approved, a Maintenance and Management Framework for that Phase (or Block therein) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy should include details of the following:

a) Security - to include design, location and details of CCTV and associated equipment, security lighting, design, well-lit safe routes b) Disabled access c) Maintenance and cleaning of all external areas of the estate

The relevant Phase (or Block or part therein) shall not be managed otherwise than in accordance with the approved strategy for the life of the development or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 106 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

Reason: In the interests of the proper maintenance, safety and security of the site and to ensure that the quality of the public realm and the setting of the listed buildings is appropriately safeguarded and that that access is maintained for disabled people and people with pushchairs, in accordance with policies 3.1, 3.8, 3.16, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5 and 7.8 of the adopted London Plan, policies 1.1(e), (g) and (h),1.2 (d) and (f), and 2.10 of the adopted Ealing Development (and Core) Strategy (2012), policies 6.13 and 7.3 of the adopted Ealing Development Management DPD (2013).

Page 107 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

INFORMATIVES: 1) There are water mains crossing or close to your development. Thames Water do NOT permit the building over or construction within 3m of water mains. If you're planning significant works near our mains (within 3m) we’ll need to check that your development doesn’t reduce capacity, limit repair or maintenance activities during and after construction, or inhibit the services we provide in any other way. The applicant is advised to read our guide working near or diverting our pipes. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your- development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes

2) The proposed development is located within 15m of our underground water assets and as such we would like the following informative attached to any approval granted. The proposed development is located within 15m of Thames Waters underground assets, as such the development could cause the assets to fail if appropriate measures are not taken. Please read our guide ‘working near our assets’ to ensure your workings are in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you’re considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your- development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes.

3) Permitted hours for building work: Construction and demolition works and associated activities at the development including deliveries, collections and staff arrivals audible beyond the site boundary should not occur outside the hours of 0800 - 1800hrs Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300hrs on Saturdays nor at any other times, including Sundays and Public/Bank Holidays.

4) Notification to neighbours of demolition/ building works: All occupiers surrounding the site should be notified in writing at least 21 days prior to the commencement of any site works, of the nature and duration of works to be undertaken and subsequently be regularly updated. The name and contact details of persons responsible for the site works should be signposted at the site entrance or hoarding in case of emergency and for enquiries or complaints. Any complaints should be properly addressed as quickly as possible.

5) Given the proximity of the proposed development to HS2 interests in that location, the Applicant is advised that ongoing engagement with HS2 Ltd is strongly advisable especially as respective plans move towards the construction phase.

6) Energy and CO2: The provision of sustainable development is a key principle of the National Planning Policy Framework which requires the planning process to support the transition to a low carbon future. Policies 5.2 and 5.3 of the London Plan require submission of energy and sustainability strategies showing how the heating and cooling requirements of the development have been selected in accordance with the Mayor’s energy hierarchy.

7) Policy 5.2 that requires new major development to meet zero-carbon standards with at least a 35% CO2 reduction beyond Building Regulations Part L 2013 (or any

Page 108 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

later version) being achieved onsite. Any shortfall will be met through a S106 carbon offset contribution.

8) London Plan policy 5.7 (5.42) states that there is a presumption that all major development proposals will seek to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by at least 20% using on-site renewable energy generation wherever feasible. Section 11.2 of the GLA (2018) Energy Assessment Guidance expects all major development proposals to maximise on-site renewable energy generation regardless of whether a 35% target has already been met.

9) Any development in London, especially in an Air Quality Sensitive zone must be considered in line with the wider (as well as local) strategy contained within the London Plan and London Environment Strategy- both in terms of decision making over the application in principle and in the execution of the development as applied for. Any demolition and construction must be undertaken in line with the London Planning guidance and any associated Supplementary Planning Guidance(SPG)'s, such as the 'Control of dust and emissions' SPG- paying attention to Non Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM)'s and the enforcement and discharging of planning conditions.

10) Wheel-washing activities (during demolition and construction) at the development site should be given the highest priority so that the development site has real mitigating abatement technology to reduce the suspension, and re-suspension of air borne dust that will be created by the demolition and construction. The A40 (Western Avenue) has a 'canyon' effect on pollutants including Particulate Matter, exacerbated furthermore by tall buildings, whereby the dust keeps getting re- suspended increasing the risk of health impacts in the local area.

11) Due to the location of the development and the layout of the roads, it is likely that that the nearby Horn Lane will see a significant increase in traffic as a result of disruption and congestion at the nearby development site, and HGV movements as a direct result of the location of the development. This road should be 'avoided' in any planning consent issued by the Borough. If the site wheel-washing techniques are not fit for purpose or properly regulated there is a very real likelihood that all traffic will contribute to the spread of the dirt and mud and dust generated from the development site, and spread this along the one way system and Horn Lane. This will increase re- suspension and increase the risks of pollution on Human Health. The nearby Horn Lane Air Quality Monitor (which has only until very recently, exceeded AQS since 2005), will experience effects from an increase in traffic in the area, and will result in further emissions (brake and tyre wear and emissions of idling engines NOx). Care should be taken to issue night permits where applicable and minimise rush hour permits of work.

12) Before carrying out any work the Applicant must: - Carefully read the requirements including the guidance documents and maps showing the location of apparatus, provided by Cadent Gas. - Contact the landowner and ensure any proposed works in private land do not infringe Cadent and/or National Grid's legal rights (i.e. easements or wayleaves). If the works are in the road or footpath the relevant local authority should be contacted.

Page 109 of 110

Planning Committee 19/02/2020 Schedule Item 02

- Ensure that all persons, including direct labour and contractors, working for you on or near Cadent and/or National Grid's apparatus follow the requirements of the HSE Guidance Notes HSG47 - Avoid danger from Underground Services' and GS6 - Avoidance of danger from overhead electric power lines'. This guidance can be downloaded free of charge at http://www.hse.gov.uk - Verify and establish the actual position of mains, pipes, cables, services and other apparatus on site before any activities are undertaken.

13) A photographic survey detailing the condition of the footways and carriageways in the immediate vicinity of the site should be submitted to the Council’s Highways Department prior to the start of the development. Upon practical completion of the proposed development the survey should be repeated and reported to the Council’s Highways Department.

14) Construction and demolition works and associated activities at the development including deliveries, collections and staff arrivals audible beyond the boundary of the site should not be carried out other than between the hours of 0800 - 1800hrs Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300hrs on Saturdays and at no other times, including Sundays and Public/Bank Holidays, unless otherwise agreed with the Environmental Health Officer.

Page 110 of 110