planning report PDU/1659 and 1659b 22 February 2012 Number One , Site A & B (over station development) in the City of Westminster planning application no. 11/10043/FULL and 11/10045/FULL

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

The proposal Redevelopment of two sites comprising demolition of existing buildings and construction of over site development containing two buildings of up to nine storeys to contain retail, theatre and office floor space, with associated public realm, landscaping, servicing and access arrangements.

The applicant The applicant is Derwent Valley Central Ltd and Crossrail Ltd, and the architect is Allford Hall Monaghan Morris Architects.

Strategic issues The proposed mix of uses including office floor space and the provision of off-site residential development is supported in the context of the linked applications. The design principles of the scheme are acceptable and consideration has been given to ensure the buildings are fully accessible. The application broadly complies with London Plan climate change policies but further information is required to verify carbon savings. The application is acceptable in transport terms subject to further information and a Crossrail contribution being secured.

Recommendation

That Westminster City Council be advised that the application does not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 75 of this report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 77 of this report could address these deficiencies.

Context

1 On 12 January 2012 the Mayor of London received documents from Westminster City Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 22 February to provide the Council with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his

page 1 2 The application for Site A is referable under Category 1B of the Schedule to the Order 2008 (with Site B being a linked application):

“Development (other than development which only comprises the provision of houses, flats, or houses and flats) which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings— (b)in (other than the City of London) and with a total floorspace of more than 20,000 square metres”

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

4 The environmental information for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 has been taken into account in the consideration of this case. The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Site description

5 The application sites are located at the junction of Oxford Street, , Road and New Oxford Street. The proposal comprises two sites: site A is bounded to the north by Oxford Street, to the east by Charing Cross Road, to the south by Sutton Row and to the west by Falconberg Mews and development on Oxford Street. Site B sits to the south of Site A and is bounded to the north by Sutton Row, to the east by Charing Cross Road, to the south by Goslett Yard and to the west by the rear of St Patrick’s Church and development which fronts Square.

6 Prior to demolition, the sites contained a mix of business uses, including retail, offices along with the Astoria, a live music venue and nightclub.

7 Oxford Street and Charing Cross Road both form part of the Strategic Road Network (SRN), with the nearest part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) being the A501 Euston Road, 1km to the north of the site.

Figure 1: site location plan for Blocks A and B (this application) and C and D (linked application) (source: submitted Design and Access Statement)

page 2 Details of the proposal

8 Planning permission and conservation area consent are being sought at two sites. On site A, a nine storey building to contain approximately 3,900 sq.m. of retail floor space, with 24,225 sq.m. offices above is proposed. On site B, a nine storey building to contain a theatre (3,800 sq.m.) and 4,185 sq.m. of offices above is proposed.

9 The application has arisen following the need to demolish the existing buildings on the site to facilitate Crossrail works. Under the Crossrail Bill, planning permission is required for development taking place over works sites or stations (referred to as Over Site Development). This proposal is being brought forward by Derwent London in a collaborative agreement with Crossrail Ltd. The site triggers a policy requirement for housing, which is proposed to be provided on the Tottenham Court Road Western Ticket Hall OSD site (ref PDU/2723 – also on the agenda) being brought forward by Crossrail Ltd. Both applications are being brought forward together and will be appropriately linked through subsequent legal agreements. Case history

10 Pre-application discussions regarding the proposals for this and the Tottenham Court Road Western Ticket Hall OSD have taken place with GLA officers dating back to 2007. To date, it has been advised that the principle of the development is acceptable and in line with strategic planning policy however, further discussions were requested regarding the off-site housing strategy, including the delivery of affordable housing, design, specifically the proposed design of the building on site A, inclusive design, climate change and transport. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

11 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 Land use principles London Plan  Retail/town centre uses London Plan; PPG13, PPS4  Housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG; Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG, Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy; Interim Housing SPG; draft Housing SPG; Affordable Rent draft SPG; draft Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan  Urban design London Plan; PPS1  Inclusive design - access London Plan; PPS1; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM)  Sustainable development London Plan; PPS1, PPS1 supplement; PPS3; PPG13; PPS22; draft PPS Planning for a Low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG  Transport - parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; PPG13; draft Early Minor Alteration to the London  Crossrail London Plan; draft Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy; Crossrail SPG

12 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, The development plan in force for the area is the 2007 Westminster Unitary Development Plan, the 2011 Westminster Core Strategy (adopted 26 January 2011) and the London Plan 2011.

page 3 Principle of development

13 The application sites fall within the Central Activities Zone (CAZ), as identified in the London Plan. London Plan Policy 4.2 A c) and d) Offices states that boroughs should “encourage the renewal and modernisation of the existing office stock in viable locations to improve its quality and flexibility ”and “seek increases in current stock where there is authoritative, strategic and local evidence of sustained demand for office based activities“. Policy 2.10 Central Activities Zone – strategic priorities also seeks to, “in appropriate parts of the CAZ… ensure that development of office provision is not strategically constrained and that provision is made for a range of occupiers especially the strategically important financial and business services”.

14 The schemes propose the following floor space:

15 The proposal includes an uplift of approximately 14,000 sq.m. in office floorspace. The increase in office floorspace in this CAZ location is supported and in accordance with strategic planning policies.

16 In addition to London Plan policy requirements in relation to office floorspace, London Plan policy 2.11 promotes mixed-use development, and states that “Within the Central Activities Zone… wherever increases in office floorspace are proposed they should provide for a mix of uses, including housing”.

17 The applicant has argued that due to the constraints placed on site A by Crossrail and London Underground operational requirements, it is not possible to provide on-site housing on that site. Given the Council's requirements for a theatre on site B, and the potential amenity conflict between an entertainment use and residential accommodation, the applicant has also argued that it is not possible to provide the required housing element on site B.

18 Consequently, the applicant has developed land use strategy with another Crossrail works site – the Tottenham Court Road Crossrail station’s western ticket hall on Oxford Street, that it is

page 4 19 Whilst the principle of the land use strategy ensures the delivery of strategic planning objectives across the four sites, in order to be acceptable the approach would need to be adequately secured through any future legal agreement for all sites. Both applications have been submitted together, which allows both the Mayor and the Council to consider both schemes simultaneously. Further discussions regarding the legal agreement will be required with the applicants for both sites, and the Council, before the application is reported back at Stage 2.

Theatre use

20 Prior to demolition, the Astoria music venue was located on the site. The Astoria had a history of use as a cinema, theatre and, prior to its closure, a live music venue with a capacity of 2,000. London Plan policy 4.6 provide strategic support and protection for arts, culture and entertainment provision.

21 The proposal includes a 350-seat theatre. Whilst this is not replacement provision of a live music venue, securing a theatre as part of the redevelopment will ensure the sites continued use for culture and entertainment use and in this respect the proposal accords with strategic policy. It would be expected that the section 106 agreement includes obligations that secure the theatre for use to a certain standard. The cost of the theatre provision also needs to be considered in the context of overall scheme viability in the context of the linked planning application, where this impacts upon the delivery of financial obligations and affordable housing in particular.

Retail uses and public realm

22 Policy 2.10 also seeks to support and improve the retail offer of the CAZ for residents, workers, and visitors whilst policy 2.11 states that within the CAZ the Mayor will and boroughs should “…identify, enhance and expand retail capacity to meet strategic and local need, and to focus this on the Central Area Frontages…”. Policy 2.11(h) seeks to secure completion of essential new transport schemes necessary to support the roles of CAZ, including Crossrail. Policy 2.13 is also of relevance, noting the site is within the Tottenham Court Road Opportunity Area, which seeks integrated renewal and enhancement of the public realm and provide better connection between , Oxford Street and .

23 The proposal seeks to provide high-quality retail units on the Oxford Street frontage, improving the current retail offer. Improvements to the public realm are also proposed and would assist in improving the linkages and connections around Tottenham Court Road as part of the Crossrail works, in line with strategic policy and would deliver a considerable uplift in the wider retail offer at the eastern end of Oxford Street when compared with other redevelopment schemes in the locality. Housing

24 As discussed above, this site is being brought forward for housing to address policy requirements regarding office redevelopment in the CAZ that arise from the Number One Oxford

page 5 25 At local level UDP policy H4 seeks affordable housing contributions on sites over 0.3 hectares or on sites with 10 or more dwellings. Policy CS16 of the adopted Core Strategy also sets out that within the CAZ a maximum of 30% affordable housing will be sought.

26 As noted above, this particular scheme does not include any housing, but is linked to the site at Tottenham Court Road Western Ticket Hall. Comments in relation to housing are included in that report (ref PDU/2723). Urban design

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

Use and layout

28 The location of a mixed-use development in this location, which includes a small theatre, would ensure that Charing Cross Road retains its vibrancy both in daytime and the evening. The route’s importance as a link between the busy hubs of Cambridge Circus and St Giles’ Circus is sustained through such uses and activity, and therefore the uses are welcomed in principle.

29 The creation of the new public space on Sutton Row will enable opportunities, in partnership with the buildings’ design, for qualities of character and place-building. The location of both the office and main theatre entrances facing into this space is supported. The opening of views from Charing Cross Road towards of the listed Church building are welcomed, and as suggested at the pre-application stage, Building B’s office entrance pavilion would be small in scale and unambiguous. The entrances to the theatre and uses in Building A would also be clear, and contribute to the activity of Charing Cross Road and the pedestrianised space.

30 The constraints of designing the buildings and uses around the requirements of the station development are understood, as are the constraints of the small site in terms of the theatre’s design. Small theatres are less common in the West End and while it is appreciated that the internal layout has emerged with the assistance of an operating partner, the flexibility of the theatre in terms of its seating layout is welcomed. The absence of scenery lifts may limit this flexibility, but in summary, the level of infrastructure provided would appear appropriate to support a theatre of this size.

31 Likewise, the design of the proposed retail units on site A offers flexibility regarding their size, and the use of two-storey display facades acts as an anchor for both the use and the built form. The retail frontages are orientated to face the busiest site edges, with the officer entrances contributing to a mixed-use, 24-hour pedestrianised zone. This layout is supported.

Massing and scale

32 The massing is generally well-considered and appropriate to the site. The view of the theatre from the various station exit points and the important intersection at St Giles’ Circus is

page 6

Figure 2: View of building A (right) and building B (centre of view) incorporating the theatre, from the underground exit at the base of Centrepoint (Source: submitted Environmental Statement part II).

33 The heights of the buildings is appropriate, and this acceptability is assisted by cutaway features that reduce the massing of both buildings and would provide interest on the Charing Cross Road elevations. The recognition of the prevailing parapet level on Oxford Street and its continuation into the new building is welcomed. However, the taller element of Building A would be visible against the more traditional forms of the building roofs when viewed along Oxford Street, and this is the one element of the proposal that could be considered incongruous. However such juxtapositions are already common in Oxford Street and the constrast is not particularly detrimental in this case.

Figure 3: View of building A from Oxford Street, looking east (Source: applicant’s Environmental Statement part II).

34 The new buildings would have limited visibility when viewed against listed buildings and the conservation area in Soho Square. In this instance, the height of the buildings enables their rooflines to be seen, but the restrained scale, and the materiality of the buildings, ensures that they would be read as part of the prevailing townscape, rather than as features that would draw attention away from the immediate foreground setting.

page 7 35 The double height of the retail/ground floor treatment around the site A building would offer a suitable scale to the adjacent pedestrian environment and also help to announce the corner station entrance. As such, the scale assists in providing acceptable interfaces between the streets and the buildings, which is welcomed.

Materials and public realm

36 The building on site B is clearly the headline of the scheme but has a separate identity from the building on site A, which also has a role in announcing the corner and the station, and occupies the more important location. This building requires a treatment that can respond positively to the buildings on the other corners of St Giles’ Circus, be instantly recognisable as a station and as a building in its own right, and be read independently from the theatre building, assisting in maintaining the grain of the area. It must also respect the setting of the adjacent listed buildings, including Centrepoint. As such, the proposed site A building is considered to have an appearance that supports all of these roles, striking a balance to ensure that it does not overshadow the more ‘showy’ buildings of Centrepoint and site B, whilst providing a statement for the corner. As initially presented at the pre-application stage, the elevations were less intricate than now, although officers consider that the addition of colour and the use of a high-quality, durable and simple materials palette would be sufficient. The cutaways in the massing also contribute to ensure that the facades do not appear unnecessarily repetitive.

37 The proposed facade treatment of the theatre building is interesting. The architect’s desire to provide a building that is both functional for the daytime office uses and illuminated as a point of attraction in the evening is an approach that is welcomed, and the use of a material which can be attractively lit is supported. The colonnade on the southern edge of building provides a contrast to the rest of the building and identifies the office entrance, but in order to best support the vitality that the pedestrianised street would offer, the glazed retail frontage on site A should be extended beneath the colonnade towards the office entrance. This would also improve the visibility of the retail element from the southern approach on Charing Cross Road.

38 The proposal incorporates some non-active frontages, which are necessary both as a result of the constraints set by the Crossrail development, and the need to incorporate servicing areas. The execution of the dynamic display proposed on the Charing Cross Road frontage must be appropriate within the context of the building (rather than be used for third-party advertising), and along with the illumination of the building, should be subject to a management plan.

39 This will be an area of significant pedestrian activity, and therefore the simple proposals for the public realm are welcomed. The restriction of service vehicle activity in this space is supported, and in line with aspiration of the Council to provide an urban ‘oasis’, or city pocket park. The design would provide opportunities for a good level of seating and the incorporation of tree planter boxes in a formal layout would assist in defining the character of the space. Access and inclusive design

40 London Plan policy 7.2 seeks to ensure that proposals achieve the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion (not just the minimum), and this and all developments should seek to better minimum access requirements. Design and access statements should explain the design thinking behind the application and demonstrate how the principles of inclusive design, including the specific access needs of people with disabilities, have been integrated into the proposed development and how inclusion will be maintained and managed.

41 The applicant has submitted an access statement to show how the scheme would meet relevant Building Regulations, DDA, BS and good practice guidance. This includes detailed plans to show accessible routes into and through the building. The main access to the buildings is from

page 8 42 In working up detailed plans at Building Regulations stage, on going discussions with the Council’s access officer would be appropriate, and suitable conditions imposed on any planning permission to secure this. Sustainable development

43 The London Plan climate change policies as set out in chapter 5 collectively require developments to make the fullest contribution to tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions, adopting sustainable design and construction measures, prioritising decentralised energy supply, and incorporating renewable energy. The policies set out ways in which developers must address mitigation of, and adaptation to, the effects of climate change.

Energy – climate change mitigation

44 Policy 5.1 and 5.2 of the London Plan seek to achieve an overall reduction in London’s carbon dioxide emissions through a range of measures including using less energy, supplying energy efficiently and using renewable energy, improving on Building Regulations targets by 25% in the period 2010-2013.

Energy efficiency standards

45 A range of passive design features and demand reduction measures are proposed to reduce the carbon emissions of the proposed development. Both air permeability and heat loss parameters will be improved beyond the minimum backstop values required by building regulations. Other features include energy efficient lighting and the use of solar shading. The demand for cooling will be minimised through the use of high performance glazing and via the use of natural ventilation.

46 The development is estimated to achieve a reduction of 38 tonnes per annum (6%) in regulated carbon dioxide emissions compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development.

District heating

47 The applicant has carried out an investigation and there are no existing or planned district heating networks within the vicinity of the proposed development. The applicant has however, provided a commitment to ensuring that the development is designed to allow future connection to a district heating network should one become available.

48 The applicant is proposing to install a site heat network linking both site A and B. A drawing showing the route of the heat network linking all buildings on the site should be provided.

49 The number of energy centres serving the site is unclear. The applicant should commit to a single energy centre serving the whole site. Further information on the number, size (sq.m.) and location of the energy centre should be provided.

page 9 Combined Heat and Power

50 The applicant has investigated the feasibility of CHP. However, due the type of development and the intermittent nature of the heat load, CHP is not proposed. This is accepted in this instance.

Renewable energy technologies

51 The applicant has investigated the feasibility of a range of renewable energy technologies and is proposing to install 250 sq.m. of roof mounted photovoltaic array (PV). A roof drawing showing potential PV locations have been provided.

52 A reduction in regulated carbon dioxide emissions of 11 tonnes per annum (2%) will be achieved through this third element of the energy hierarchy.

53 In summary, the estimated regulated carbon emissions of the development are 623 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year after the cumulative effect of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy has been taken into account.

54 This equates to a reduction of 50 tonnes of CO2 per year in regulated emissions compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development, equivalent to an overall saving of 7%.

55 The on-site carbon dioxide savings fall short of the targets within policy 5.2 of the London Plan. While it is accepted that there is little further potential for carbon dioxide reductions onsite, in liaison with the borough, the developer should ensure the short fall in carbon dioxide reductions is met off-site.

Climate change adaptation

56 Policies 5.10 to 5.15 of the London Plan set out policies that seek to minimise overheating and contribute to heat island effects; minimise solar gain in summer; contribute to flood risk reduction, including applying sustainable drainage; minimising water use; and protect and enhance green infrastructure. Specific policies cover overheating, living roofs and walls and water and require the inclusion of sustainability measures within developments. Further guidance on this policy is given in the London Plan Sustainable Design and Construction SPG.

57 The applicant has submitted a sustainability statement, which includes relevant BRE pre- assessments. The applicant states that it is intended to achieve BREEAM ‘Excellent’ rating for the office areas; BREEAM ‘Very Good’ rating for the retail areas; and BREEAM ‘Very Good’ rating for the theatre areas. The applicant’s statement sets out a number of techniques proposed to reduce energy consumption and cut carbon emission, using low energy lighting, energy efficient appliances, high levels of insulation, and through passive solar design. Low water use sanitary- ware and fittings will be specified in order to meet target water consumption levels. Brown or green roofs will be incorporated, providing opportunities for nesting birds and plant biodiversity, and also reducing the urban heat island effect, as required by policy 2.10 of the London Plan. These commitments are welcomed, and should be secured by the Council as part of any planning permission that is granted. Transport

58 The site is located above Tottenham Court Road Underground Station, served by the Central and Northern lines. Victoria line services from Oxford Circus Station and line services from Station are also available within walking distance. There are also 18

page 10 59 The site is intended to be car free and given the site’s highly accessible location, this is supported. However, there is a concern that insufficient consideration has been given to parking provision for Blue Badge holders. The transport assessment identifies the nearest on street facilities, but these are several hundred metres from the site and their availability cannot be guaranteed. As such, further consideration must be given to Blue Badge parking before the application can be considered to be compliant with London Plan Policy 6.13 Parking.

60 Although the general approach taken to trip generation is acceptable, some further information on how the trip rates and modal split have been arrived at is required to ensure that the number of trips arising from the development has been correctly forecast. Likewise, some further information and assessment is required to confirm that the development will not result in any unacceptable impact on local transport networks.

61 The proposed theatre is likely to generate a number of coach trips, and the TA identifies the existing coach bay on St Giles High Street which could be used for this purpose. However, this bay has been removed during Crossrail works and may not be re-provided depending on the final layout of St Giles High Street as part of the public realm proposals for the area. As such, further consideration should be given as to how coach parties would access the proposed development and a satisfactory arrangement should be found to comply with London plan policy 6.8 Coaches.

62 Likewise, the development is likely to generate a significant number of trips by taxi and private hire vehicle, whilst the proposed closure of Sutton Row to vehicles would remove an established link for taxis between Soho Square and Charing Cross Road. As such, and given that the development does not propose any dedicated taxi rank to serve the development, this is likely to cause localised congestion issues with taxis picking up and dropping off from the busy Charing Cross Road frontage. The developer is therefore requested to discuss this issue further with the Public Carriage Office to find a suitable location for a dedicated taxi rank and to agree on whether any mitigation for the closure of Sutton Row is necessary, in line with London Plan policy 6.12 Road Network Capacity.

63 The proposals associated with this development and the wider works identified as part of Camden’s Urban Realm project would have a beneficial effect for pedestrians and cyclists, including the part pedestrianisation of Sutton Row, the setting back of building lines to allow for wider footways around the site and the provision of cycle parking, showers and lockers in accordance with the standards set out within the London Plan. The development would also provide a new Legible London totem within the pedestrian plaza. This is supported and should be secured as part of the Section 106 agreement for the development.

64 Off street servicing facilities would be provided for both parts of the development, although vehicles that can access these would be restricted in size. However, set deliveries to the proposed theatre would typically use larger vehicles and as such several options have been put forward in the TA to allow loading at certain times from Charing Cross Road dependent on its final configuration once Crossrail works are complete. The size of vehicles used to service Site A should be controlled via an appropriate planning condition and given the current uncertainty around servicing for Site B a condition should be secured on any consent requiring approval of a detailed Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP), to include information on set deliveries for the theatre prior to occupation. Site B should then be serviced only in accordance with the provisions of this DSP.

page 11 65 The submitted travel plan is considered to be well written and of a good standard, and as such has passed its assessment. The Travel Plan should therefore be secured, managed, monitored and enforced through the s106 agreement for the site.

66 It is understood that construction of the development would start following completion of the London Underground and Crossrail works, currently scheduled for 2017. A draft Construction Management Plan (CMP) has been provided as an appendix to the TA, which is welcomed. However, whilst it is accepted that the CMP cannot contain too much detail at this stage, it should nevertheless contain provisions for reducing the amount of construction traffic associated with the site, in accordance with the principles of constructions logistics plans (CLPs).

Crossrail

67 London Plan Policy 6.5 and the associated Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) ‘Use of planning obligations in the funding of Crossrail’ (July 2010) set out the mechanism for contributions towards Crossrail. The SPG states that contributions should be sought in respect of proposals for uplifts in floorspace for office (B1), retail and hotel uses in central London, where there is a cumulative uplift in such floorspace of more than 500sqm. The Crossrail contribution requirement for Site A and Site B based on the figures provided are as follows:

Site A Land Use Existing Proposed Net change Crossrail Crossrail charge (sqm) (sqm) (sqm) charge per sqm (£) (£) B1 Office 7,577 24,225 +16,648 137 +2,280,776 Retail 1,780 3,869 +2,089 88 +183,832 Total Crossrail charge payable on commencement to TfL +2,464,608

Site B Land Use Existing Proposed Net change Crossrail Crossrail charge (sqm) (sqm) (sqm) charge per sqm (£) (£) B1 Office 6,002 4,185 -1,817 137 -248,929 Retail 1,990 0 -1,990 88 -175,120 Total Crossrail charge payable on commencement to TfL -424,049

Net contribution for Sites A and B combined Land Use Existing Proposed Net change Crossrail Crossrail charge (sqm) (sqm) (sqm) charge per sqm (£) (£) B1 Office 13,579 28,410 +14,831 137 +2,031,847 Retail 3,770 3,869 +99 88 +8,712 Total Crossrail charge payable on commencement to TfL +2,040,559

68 Further discussion regarding the required contributions towards Crossrail are necessary before the application is reported back to the Mayor at Stage 2 and in connection with the CIL payment required below. Payment of CIL would be considered as a credit towards any section 106 Crossrail payment. Community Infrastructure Levy

69 In accordance with London Plan policy 8.3, the Mayor of London proposes to introduce a London-wide Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) that will be paid by most new development in Greater London. Following consultation on both a Preliminary Draft, and then a Draft Charging Schedule, the Mayor has formally submitted the charging schedule and supporting evidence to the examiner in advance of an examination in public. Subject to the legal process, the Mayor intends to

page 12  Cases where a planning application was submitted before 1 April 2012, but not approved by then.  Cases where a borough makes a resolution to grant planning permission before 1 April 2012 but does not formally issue the decision notice until after that date (to allow a section 106 agreement to be signed or referral to the Secretary of State or the Mayor, for example),.

70 The Mayor is proposing to arrange boroughs into three charging bands with rates of £50 / £35 / £20 per square metre of net increase in floor space respectively. The proposed development is within the City of Westminster where the proposed Mayoral CIL charge is £50 per square metre. More details are available via the GLA website: http://www.london.gov.uk/publication/mayoral- community-infrastructure-levy.

71 Within London both the Mayor and boroughs are able to introduce CIL charges and therefore two distinct CIL charges may be applied to development in future. At the present time, borough CIL charges for Redbridge and Wandsworth are the most advanced. The Mayor’s CIL will contribute towards the funding of Crossrail. Local planning authority’s position

72 Westminster City Council is presently considering the applications and is intending to report them to its Planning Committee in April 2012. It is understood that negotiation is currently taking place in relation to the four schemes, with particular reference to affordable housing. Legal considerations

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

74 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

75 London Plan policies on CAZ, offices, leisure, housing, design, inclusive design, sustainable design and construction, energy and transport, are relevant to this application. The application complies with some of these policies but not with others:

 Principle of use: The land use strategy proposed across the four sites together meet the strategic objectives for mixed use development, including offices and housing in the CAZ.

page 13  Urban design: The proposal demonstrates a suitably high standard of architecture and quality of public realm and the scale and form of development is acceptable.

 Inclusive design: The proposal involves a number of inclusive design measures to make the buildings and public realm accessible, in accordance with policy 7.2.

 Climate change mitigation and adaptation: The applicant has broadly followed the energy hierarchy. Sufficient information has been provided to understand the proposals as a whole. The proposals are broadly acceptable however, further technical information is required before the carbon savings can be verified. The commitments to sustainable design and construction measures are welcomed, and should be secured by condition.

 Transport: The proposed development will have a minimal impact on the capacity of the surrounding highway network however, in order to fully comply with the London Plan further information and mitigation measures are required.

76 Whilst the application is broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, on balance, the application does not fully comply with the London Plan. 77 The following changes might, however, remedy the above-mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming fully compliant with the London Plan:

 Land use principles: Further discussion is required in relation to affordable housing and planning obligations that link this and Sites C and D at the Western Ticket Hall.

 Climate change mitigation: Further details on the site heat network, energy centre and meeting the carbon dioxide emission reduction off-site.

 Transport: Further information in relation trip generation and public transport impact is required, in addition to details of blue badge parking, taxi and coach provision for the site. Servicing of the site should be subject to appropriate planning conditions, along with the requirements for a delivery and servicing plan, construction management plan and travel plan, to be secured. A contribution of £2,040,559 towards Crossrail is also required.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager - Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Samantha Wells, Case Officer 020 7983 4266 email [email protected]

page 14