DOCSLIB.ORG

PDU Case Report XXXX/YY Date

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PDU Case Report XXXX/YY Date planning report PDU/2857/02 2 October 2012 Land at Colonial Drive, Bollo Lane, Chiswick Park in the London Borough of Ealing planning application no. P/2012/0338 Strategic planning application stage II referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 The proposal Demolition of the existing warehouses and the erection of a mixed-use development of up to eight storeys comprising 124 residential units (33 x affordable and 91 market units), 589sq.m of office space (Use Class B1) and a 478 sq.m. childcare facility (Use Class D1). The provision of 12 disabled car parking spaces and four integral cycle stores. Provision of footpath on North boundary to link Bollo Lane to Chiswick Business Park, associated public realm, landscaping and toddler play space. The applicant The applicant is Blackstone Ltd. and the architect is BFLS. Strategic issues The Mayor previously raised issues relating to housing, children’s playspace, design, inclusive design, climate change, biodiversity, noise air quality and transport. These matters have now been satisfactorily resolved and the proposed application is acceptable in strategic planning policy terms. The Council’s decision In this instance Ealing Council has resolved to grant permission, subject to the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under Section 106. Recommendation That Ealing Council be advised that the Mayor is content for it to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and does not therefore wish to direct refusal or direct that he is to be the local planning authority. Context 1 On 9 February 2012 the Mayor of London received documents from Ealing Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. This was referred to the Mayor under Category 1B of the Schedule to the Order 2008: “Development… which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres.” 2 On 13 March 2012 the Mayor considered planning report PDU/2857&2857a/01, and subsequently advised Ealing Council that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 105 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 106 of that report could address these deficiencies. 3 A copy of the above-mentioned report is attached. The essentials of the case with regard to the proposal, the site, case history, strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance are as set out therein, unless otherwise stated in this report. Since then, the application has been revised in response to the Mayor’s concerns (see below). On 16 May 2012 Ealing Council decided that it was minded to grant planning permission and on 25 September 2012 it advised the Mayor of this decision. Under the provisions of Article 5 of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor may allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, direct Ealing Council under Article 6 to refuse the application or issue a direction to Ealing Council under Article 7 that he is to act as the Local Planning Authority for the purposes of determining the application and any connected application. The Mayor has until 9 October 2012 to notify the Council of his decision and to issue any direction. 4 It should be noted that Ealing Council formally adopted its Core Strategy in April 2012. 5 The decision on this case, and the reasons will be made available on the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk. Update 6 A the consultation stage the Council was advised that the application complies with some London Plan polices but not with others, for the following reasons: Principle of development: The site is specifically identified as being suitable for a mixed- use redevelopment in both Ealing’s Employment Land Review and its draft Development site DPD and the site is being released from its current employment designation in a managed and planned way. Therefore, the loss of borough employment land is accepted and the principle of an alternative mix of uses on the site is acceptable. The principle of the application for the proposed Bridge has been established by the extant permission and it is therefore acceptable. Mix of uses: The proposed mix of office, creche and residential units is acceptable in principle on this site. Affordable housing: Further information and discussion is required to determine whether the application complies with London Plan affordable housing policy. Density: The density complies with London Plan Policy 3.4. Children’s Playspace: The application complies with London Plan Policy 3.6, subject to further details of the proposed contribution. The contribution should be secured through the section 106 agreement. Urban design: The application does not comply with London Plan design policy. Inclusive design: Further information is required to comply with London Plan Policy 7.2. Climate change: The carbon dioxide savings exceed the targets set within Policy 5.2 of the London Plan and the application complies with this Policy. Biodiversity: The application does not comply with London Plan Policy 7.19. Noise: Further information is required to determine whether the application complies with London Plan Policy 7.15. Air quality: Further discussion and information may be required to determine whether the application complies with London Plan air quality policy. Transport: Further information is required to ensure the applicant complies with London Plan transport policy. 7 It was also advised that the following changes might, however, remedy the above- mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan: Affordable housing: The Council should send a copy of the independent assessment of the applicant’s viability appraisal to officers when it has been received. Further discussion will be required with the Council and applicant at that stage. Children’s Playspace: Further details of the proposed financial contribution are required. The contribution should be secured through the section 106 agreement. Urban design: The applicant is required to address the concerns raised regarding the internal layout of some of the units and the way in which the ground floor of the development addresses the public realm. Inclusive design: The applicant should include typical flat layouts that demonstrate that the Lifetime Homes criteria have been addressed. It should also indicate on the plans where the wheelchair accessible flats are located. The applicant should demonstrate the adaptability of homes proposed. The Council should secure the appropriate management and maintenance of the external lift associated with the Bridge through the section 106 agreement, including a clause which will ensures repairs are made as soon as is practicable possible. Climate change: The proposed energy strategy should be secured via condition. Furthermore, the applicant should provide roof drawings showing potential location for PV, a drawing showing the route of the heat network linking all buildings on the site should be provided and confirm the location and floor area of the energy centre for the development. Biodiversity: Further discussions are required between officers, the applicant the Council and the London Wildlife Trust to determine the best approach to avoid adverse impact on the reserve and to sufficiently mitigate any impacts. Noise: The measured noise levels should be reviewed and clarified, especially noise from railway lines to the north boundary of the site and vibration from trains should be assessed in greater detail, preferably based on site measurements. Furthermore, balconies should be treated as private amenity spaces and that appropriate noise levels within such spaces should be maintained. The council should impose suitable conditions are to ensure reasonable or good internal acoustic conditions for residents and to ensure a reasonable or good standard of protection for the local environment due to noise arising from the development itself. Air quality: Further discussion and information may be required to determine whether the application complies with London Plan air quality policy. Transport: The applicant is required to address the lack of assessment of the pedestrian and cycle network surrounding the site and provide an updated Travel Plan and a Construction Logistics Plan. The level of parking, the Travel Plan and the Construction Logistics Plan should be secured by condition or within the Section 106 agreement. Affordable housing 8 At the consultation stage the applicant proposed 33 affordable units, 27% of the total number of units (and by habitable room) with a 70:30 intermediate to social rented split (59:41 split by habitable room). The Council was required to send a copy of the independent assessment of the applicant’s viability appraisal to the GLA to inform further discussion with the Council and applicant regarding the affordable housing offer. 9 The independent assessment of the viability appraisal indicated that the affordable housing offer put forward by the applicant was not the maximum reasonable amount that could be sought without impacting the viability of the scheme. Ealing Council subsequently secured an off-site cash-in-lieu payment of £1.2 million for the provision of eight/ten family homes to be built by the Council through the Local Authority New build Programme. 10 Paragraph 3.74 of the London Plan states that affordable housing provision is normally required on-site and only in exceptionally circumstances should it be provided off-site or through a cash in lieu contribution ring fenced, and if appropriate ‘pooled’, to secure efficient delivery of new affordable housing on identified sites elsewhere. The revised early minor alterations to the London Plan (consultation draft June 2012) strengthens the policy position regarding off site provision for affordable housing further.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Direct and Indirect Contribution Made by the Wildlife Trusts to the Health and Wellbeing of Local People
    An independent assessment for The Wildlife Trusts: by the University of Essex The direct and indirect contribution made by The Wildlife Trusts to the health and wellbeing of local people Protecting Wildlife for the Future Dr Carly Wood, Dr Mike Rogerson*, Dr Rachel Bragg, Dr Jo Barton and Professor Jules Pretty School of Biological Sciences, University of Essex Acknowledgments The authors are very grateful for the help and support given by The Wildlife Trusts staff, notably Nigel Doar, Cally Keetley and William George. All photos are courtesy of various Wildlife Trusts and are credited accordingly. Front Cover Photo credits: © Matthew Roberts Back Cover Photo credits: Small Copper Butterfly © Bob Coyle. * Correspondence contact: Mike Rogerson, Research Officer, School of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ. [email protected] The direct and indirect contribution made by individual Wildlife Trusts on the health and wellbeing of local people Report for The Wildlife Trusts Carly Wood, Mike Rogerson*, Rachel Bragg, Jo Barton, Jules Pretty Contents Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 8 1.1 Background to research 8 1.2 The role of the Wildlife Trusts in promoting health and wellbeing 8 1.3 The role of the Green Exercise Research Team 9 1.4 The impact of nature on health and wellbeing 10 1.5 Nature-based activities for the general public and Green Care interventions for vulnerable people 11 1.6 Aim and objectives of this research 14 1.7 Content and structure of this report 15 2. Methodology 16 2.1 Survey of current nature-based activities run by individual Wildlife Trusts and Wildlife Trusts’ perceptions of evaluating health and wellbeing.
    [Show full text]
  • Spaces Wild, London Wildlife Trust
    SPACES WILD championing the values of London’s wildlife sites Protecting London’s wildlife for the future Foreword London is a remarkably green city supporting a wide diversity of habitats and species. Almost half of its area is blue and green space, and almost a fifth – covering over 1,500 different sites - is of sufficient value to biodiversity to be identified worthy of protection. These wildlife sites consist of much more than nature reserves, ranging from wetlands to chalk downs that are often valued by the local community for uses other than habitat. They have been established for almost 30 years, and as a network they provide the foundations for the conservation and enhancement of London’s wildlife, and the opportunity for people to experience the diversity of the city’s nature close to hand. They are a fantastic asset, but awareness of wildlife sites – the Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) – is low amongst the public (compared to, say, the Green Belt). There is understandable confusion between statutory wildlife sites and those identified through London’s planning process. In addition the reasons why SINCs have been identified SINCs cover 19.3% of the are often difficult to find out. With London set to grow to 10 million people by 2030 the pressures on our wildlife Greater London area sites will become profound. I have heard of local authorities being forced to choose between saving a local park and building a school. Accommodating our growth without causing a decline in the quality of our natural assets will be challenging; we have a target to build an estimated 42,000 homes a year in the capital merely to keep up with demand.
    [Show full text]
  • BST236 the Penrose 230X320mm AW.Indd 1 09/08/2017 09:23 6,440 SQ
    BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 1 09/08/2017 09:23 6,440 SQ. FT OF PRIME, SELF-CONTAINED OFFICE SPACE, ON THE EDGE OF GUNNERSBURY TRIANGLE AND ADJACENT TO CHISWICK PARK STATION WITH A WEALTH OF TRANSPORT CONNECTIONS. 1 BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 2-1 09/08/2017 09:23 2 3 BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 2-3 09/08/2017 09:23 4 5 BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 4-5 09/08/2017 09:23 6 A view across the brightly lit office. 7 BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 6-7 09/08/2017 09:23 8 A view of the main office space. A view of the floor to ceiling windows running along the south wall. 6,440 sq. ft of office space revelling in natural light provided by floor to ceiling windows spanning the entire south wall. 9 BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 8-9 09/08/2017 09:23 THE DETAILS / BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 10-11 09/08/2017 09:23 12 THE PLANS / FLOORPLAN INDICATIVE ( APPROXIMATE NIA ) LAYOUT 6,440 sq. ft — 598.3 sq. m IPMS3 Open work stations: 58 AVAILABLE ON REQUEST Reception work stations: 2 TOTAL: 60 Reception area: 4 Break-out space: 33 Meeting room (8 person): 1 NORTH NORTH 13 BST236_The Penrose_230x320mm_AW.indd 12-13 09/08/2017 09:23 14 SPECIFICATION / 1.1 Key Dimensions Overall Service Zone 125mm Overall finished floor-to-soffit height 2,850mm & 3,000mm 1.2 1.4 Floors & Ceilings Population Density 150mm raised floor 1:8m2 (at 80% provision) Exposed concrete soffits, treated with concrete paint 1.5 High efficiency LED lighting WC & Shower Provision 5 x WCs 1 x shower 1.3 Lockers and changing facilities Heating & Cooling Fresh air ventilation and 1.6 perimeter heating Car Parking 1 dedicated car parking space 1.7 Sustainability EPC Rating: A Note: All figures are based on extent of current survey information.
    [Show full text]
  • Report and Financial Statements for the Year Ended 31St March 2020
    Company no 1600379 Charity no 283895 LONDON WILDLIFE TRUST (A Company Limited by Guarantee) Report and Financial Statements For the year ended 31st March 2020 CONTENTS Pages Trustees’ Report 2-9 Reference and Administrative Details 10 Independent Auditor's Report 11-13 Consolidated Statement of Financial Activities 14 Consolidated and Charity Balance sheets 15 Consolidated Cash Flow Statement 16 Notes to the accounts 17-32 1 London Wildlife Trust Trustees’ report For the year ended 31st March 2020 The Board of Trustees of London Wildlife Trust present their report together with the audited accounts for the year ended 31 March 2020. The Board have adopted the provisions of the Charities SORP (FRS 102) – Accounting and Reporting by Charities: Statement of Recommended practice applicable to charities preparing their accounts in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland (effective 1 January 2015) in preparing the annual report and financial statements of the charity. The accounts have been prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006. Our objectives London Wildlife Trust Limited is required by charity and company law to act within the objects of its Articles of Association, which are as follows: 1. To promote the conservation, creation, maintenance and study for the benefit of the public of places and objects of biological, geological, archaeological or other scientific interest or of natural beauty in Greater London and elsewhere and to promote biodiversity throughout Greater London. 2. To promote the education of the public and in particular young people in the principles and practice of conservation of flora and fauna, the principles of sustainability and the appreciation of natural beauty particularly in urban areas.
    [Show full text]
  • London National Park City Week 2018
    London National Park City Week 2018 Saturday 21 July – Sunday 29 July www.london.gov.uk/national-park-city-week Share your experiences using #NationalParkCity SATURDAY JULY 21 All day events InspiralLondon DayNight Trail Relay, 12 am – 12am Theme: Arts in Parks Meet at Kings Cross Square - Spindle Sculpture by Henry Moore - Start of InspiralLondon Metropolitan Trail, N1C 4DE (at midnight or join us along the route) Come and experience London as a National Park City day and night at this relay walk of InspiralLondon Metropolitan Trail. Join a team of artists and inspirallers as they walk non-stop for 48 hours to cover the first six parts of this 36- section walk. There are designated points where you can pick up the trail, with walks from one mile to eight miles plus. Visit InspiralLondon to find out more. The Crofton Park Railway Garden Sensory-Learning Themed Garden, 10am- 5:30pm Theme: Look & learn Crofton Park Railway Garden, Marnock Road, SE4 1AZ The railway garden opens its doors to showcase its plans for creating a 'sensory-learning' themed garden. Drop in at any time on the day to explore the garden, the landscaping plans, the various stalls or join one of the workshops. Free event, just turn up. Find out more on Crofton Park Railway Garden Brockley Tree Peaks Trail, 10am - 5:30pm Theme: Day walk & talk Crofton Park Railway Garden, Marnock Road, London, SE4 1AZ Collect your map and discount voucher before heading off to explore the wider Brockley area along a five-mile circular walk. The route will take you through the valley of the River Ravensbourne at Ladywell Fields and to the peaks of Blythe Hill Fields, Hilly Fields, One Tree Hill for the best views across London! You’ll find loads of great places to enjoy food and drink along the way and independent shops to explore (with some offering ten per cent for visitors on the day with your voucher).
    [Show full text]
  • The Woodlander
    Autumn at Sydenham Hill Wood (DG) In this issue: Open Day blockbuster Volunteers clean up mess Wildlife sightings The Crystal Palace High Level railway And winter bird walk Contact: [email protected] 0207 252 9186 Twitter Facebook Protecting London’s wildlife for the future Registered Charity Number: 283895 Follow London Wildlife Trust on Twitter and Facebook Sydenham Hill Wood News Volunteers clean up after double arson attack After suffering a double arson attack on our fencing storage at Sydenham Hill Wood in August, it was left to volunteers from the local community to clean up the debris and piles of charcoal. It is not unusual to have to deal with minor incidents of vandalism and attempts to damage fencing, sometimes with fire, but this was nd different. The first arson attack took place on Saturday 2 August and the second on the following Monday. The fire brigade was called in to put out both fires. Thank you to the London Fire Service for all their work in doing so. One of the main concerns, apart from damage to property and equipment was the protection of bats which use the tunnel to roost and hibernate. We know that bats swarm in the tunnel in summer but they are unlikely to have been harmed as the tunnel has another point of exit for bats on the southern, Lewisham end. In September Southwark Council covered the damaged façade with steel sheeting to stop anyone gaining unlawful access to the tunnel in future. The tunnel was built in the 1860s as part of the Crystal Palace High Level railway but closed in 1954.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating a Nature Recovery Network to Bring Back Wildlife to Every Neighbourhood
    Towards A Wilder Britain Creating a Nature Recovery Network to bring back wildlife to every neighbourhood A report for the Westminster Government by The Wildlife Trusts Nature Recovery Network We all The common lizard used to live up to its name. It could need nature do again It’s time to give it the space it needs to be part of all our lives Contents t a time when Britain stands 4 Britain in 2040 on the brink of its biggest It could be healthier, happier and greener – if we take A ever shake-up of the right decisions now environmental rules, The Wildlife Trusts are calling for a wilder, better 6 Britain in 2018 Britain. A lack of joined-up thinking has produced a raft of Most people agree that wildlife social and environmental problems and wild places are valuable for their own sake. We now know from 8 The solution: a Nature Recovery Network research across the globe that a Local networks of places that are good for wildlife, joined healthy, wildlife-rich natural world is together into a national Nature Recovery Network essential for our wellbeing and prosperity. 12 How the network can become reality But wildlife has been getting less A combination of strong new laws, nature maps and a and less common, on land and at change in our national culture to value nature once more sea, for decades. Wild places are The Wildlife Trusts more scarce, smaller and more 14 Pioneer project: the Aire Valley, Yorkshire Tel: 01636 670000 isolated. There is less nature and How a Nature Recovery Network would strengthen the local economy Email: [email protected] Website: wildlifetrusts.org greenery in the places where we @WildlifeTrusts live and work.
    [Show full text]
  • LBR 2007 Front Matter V5.1
    1 London Bird Report No.72 for the year 2007 Accounts of birds recorded within a 20-mile radius of St Paul's Cathedral A London Natural History Society Publication Published April 2011 2 LONDON BIRD REPORT NO. 72 FOR 2007 3 London Bird Report for 2007 produced by the LBR Editorial Board Contents Introduction and Acknowledgements – Pete Lambert 5 Rarities Committee, Recorders and LBR Editors 7 Recording Arrangements 8 Map of the Area and Gazetteer of Sites 9 Review of the Year 2007 – Pete Lambert 16 Contributors to the Systematic List 22 Birds of the London Area 2007 30 Swans to Shelduck – Des McKenzie Dabbling Ducks – David Callahan Diving Ducks – Roy Beddard Gamebirds – Richard Arnold and Rebecca Harmsworth Divers to Shag – Ian Woodward Herons – Gareth Richards Raptors – Andrew Moon Rails – Richard Arnold and Rebecca Harmsworth Waders – Roy Woodward and Tim Harris Skuas to Gulls – Andrew Gardener Terns to Cuckoo – Surender Sharma Owls to Woodpeckers – Mark Pearson Larks to Waxwing – Sean Huggins Wren to Thrushes – Martin Shepherd Warblers – Alan Lewis Crests to Treecreeper – Jonathan Lethbridge Penduline Tit to Sparrows – Jan Hewlett Finches – Angela Linnell Buntings – Bob Watts Appendix I & II: Escapes & Hybrids – Martin Grounds Appendix III: Non-proven and Non-submitted Records First and Last Dates of Regular Migrants, 2007 170 Ringing Report for 2007 – Roger Taylor 171 Breeding Bird Survey in London, 2007 – Ian Woodward 181 Cannon Hill Common Update – Ron Kettle 183 The establishment of breeding Common Buzzards – Peter Oliver 199
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript Mathew Frith London Wildlife Trust Thank
    Planning Committee THE GREEN BELT OF THE FUTURE SEMINAR Mathew Frith London Wildlife Trust Thank you, Barbara [Young]. I am not either a landscape architect or a planner. I want you to imagine the song of a skylark in this room. It would be interesting to know how many have actually heard a skylark in the last six months or so, but therein lies an issue. I would say they are an iconic species of our green belt. This is Hutchinson’s Bank [local nature reserve and Site of Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation] in south Croydon, in New Addington, it is a site that we have been managing for 30 years. I am going to upset our chair by now saying that we have actually spent a huge amount of time over those 30 years removing a lot of trees, damaging the critically-important chalk grassland, one of the most globally-threatened habitats that we have in this country. However, the issue here is that the community that live in New Addington, on the left there, are surrounded by green belt but I reckon that very few actually can access it because most of it is closed to them. It is agricultural land, it is horsiculture, it is a landfill and we are the one site that is closest to them that we maintain as open land. It is one of a number of sites that contain a huge range of biodiversity that is characteristic of the green belt, but, as we have heard already today, the architects of the green belt did not foresee the impacts of industrial agriculture, they did not see the future impacts of social change and this biodiversity, as we now know, in many ways is under threat.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunnersbury Park
    GUNNERSBURY PARK Conservation Area Appraisal Consultation Draft May 2018 GUNNERSBURY PARK l 2 Foreword I am pleased to present the draft Gunnersbury Park Conservation Area Appraisal. Gunnersbury Park is an important part of Brentford and Chiswick and a valuable part of the heritage of the borough. This draft appraisal builds on the original conservation statements for Hounslow’s conservation areas and has been reviewed as part of a comprehensive review of Hounslow’s conservation area statements. The purpose of the appraisal is to provide an overview of historic developments and key components that contribute to the special interest. This appraisal will also identify positive and negative contributors as well as opportunities for improvement in order to inform a comprehensive understanding of the conservation area. The regeneration of the Great West Corridor and Brentford East offers the opportunity to improve the conservation area and its surroundings through high quality new development and improved public UHDOP:HKRSHWKLVGRFXPHQWZLOOSOD\DVLJQL¿FDQWUROHLQWKHIXWXUHPDQDJHPHQWRI*XQQHUVEXU\3DUN Conservation Area and will be a guide for developers, residents and planners. We look forward to hearing your views on the draft appraisal and will amend this where appropriate, following consultation. Steve Curran Councillor Steve Curran Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Corporate Strategy, Planning and Regeneration GUNNERSBURY PARK l 3 Executive Summary Presented here is the consultation draft version of the Gunnersbury Park Conservation Area Appraisal. The purpose of a conservation area appraisal is to provide an overview of the historic development of the area and to describe the key components that contribute to the special interest of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • The London Plan Habitat Targets a Review of Progress and Forward Recommendations March 2017
    The London Plan Habitat Targets a review of progress and forward recommendations March 2017 New reedbeds at Woodberry Wetlands, Manor House © Don Lewis Report authors Michael Waller Grad CIEEM (LWT) Mathew Frith MCIEEM (LWT) Chloe Smith (GiGL) Andy Foy (GiGL) This page is deliberately left blank London Plan habitat targets review March 2017 Contents 1. Executive summary .................................................................................................................. 4 2. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 7 3. Biodiversity action planning context ......................................................................................... 8 3.1 London Plan target origins ................................................................................................ 8 3.2 Policy context ................................................................................................................... 8 4. Review methodology .............................................................................................................. 12 4.1 Overview of data sources ............................................................................................... 12 4.1.1 Data source strengths and weaknesses .................................................................. 12 4.2 Collating available datasets to estimate the current habitat extents ................................ 13 5. Review of habitat targets.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Gunnersbury Park Conservation Area
    GUNNERSBURY PARK AND SURROUNDING AREA Boundary: See Map 7 Date of Designation: 20 November 1990 Date of alteration or extension: None Additional protection to the area: Listed status of Mansions, and Park buildings and features; the grounds are Gardens are Grade Il* on the English Heritage Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest. The Park as a whole is administered by a joint management committee, which includes funding and representation from London Borough of Ealing as well as of Hounslow. Many of the buildings are included on the English Heritage Buildings at Risk Register. The Park is a Nature Conservation Area. The Gunnersbury Park Garden Estate housing area (“Gunnersbury Triangle”) has Article 4(2) status, directed 24 July 2001. Special Architectural and/or Historic Interest The boundary of the conservation area was drawn to focus upon two areas; firstly, the Gunnersbury Park/Kensington Cemetery area of open land based on the Mansions and earlier great house, and, secondly, the Gunnersbury Park residential estate which lies opposite and to the east. The mansion, small mansion, garden buildings, outbuildings and park have been highlighted by statutory listing. The Park is also on the Register of Parks and Gardens by English Heritage. Gunnersbury Park Garden Estate (often known as Gunnersbury Triangle Estate, but not the nature reserve of the same name near Chiswick Park station) was considered to be a complete and relatively unspoilt example of a 1920’s garden suburb estate. The shopping parade was included because it formed part of the Gunnersbury Estate. Lionel Road and Popes Lane were included because they back onto the park and any alterations or extensions would impact on the park and its skyline.
    [Show full text]