St Helier Hospital, Carshalton London Borough of Sutton Planning Application No
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
planning report 2571/02 19 March 2010 St Helier Hospital, Carshalton London Borough of Sutton Planning application no. C2009/62093/OUT 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 Outline application for demolition of Ferguson House & adjoining nursery building, to determine access, layout and scale, for the erection of a new building comprising 24,600 sq.m. gross floor space to provide replacement hospital wards, out-patient accommodation and a local care centre. Erection of a separate multi-deck car park for 560 cars and an additional 267 surface car parking spaces (total 827 spaces), the formation of internal roads and pedestrian routes and associated landscaping. The applicant The applicant is the Epson and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust and the architect is Pirie Russell Associates. Strategic issues Issues raised previously relating to design, access and inclusion, transport and energy have been addressed through provision of further information and, where appropriate, the use of planning conditions and/or the section 106 agreement. Recommendation That Sutton 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 30 December 2009 the Mayor of London received documents from Sutton 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 Categories 1B, 1C and 3F of the Schedule to the Order 2008, as follows: • “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— (c) outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres” page 1 • “Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building of one or more of the following descriptions— (c) the building is more than 30 metres high and is outside the City of London”. • “Development for a use, other than residential use, which includes the provision of more than 200 car parking spaces in connection with that use”. 2 On 2 February the Mayor considered planning report PDU/257a1/01, and subsequently advised Sutton Council that the application did not fully comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 58 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 59 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. On 10 March 2010 Sutton Council decided that it was minded to grant planning permission for the application, and on 15 March 2010 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 Sutton Council under Article 6 to refuse the application or issue a direction to Sutton 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 28 March 2010 to notify the Council of his decision and to issue any direction. 4 The decision on this case, and the reasons will be made available on the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk. Update 5 At the consultation stage Sutton Council was advised that the application did not fully comply with the London Plan; but that the following possible remedies could address these deficiencies: • Urban design: further information should be provided in relation to the proposed car park design, the siting of the proposals and the proposed ‘phase 2’ development. • Access and inclusion: further information should be provided on how the proposals will meet the highest standards of inclusion and the applicant should ensure ongoing use of a specialist access consultant for the detailed design stage. A planning condition should secure this. • Climate change mitigation and adaptation: further information is required in relation to the proposed energy centre, the use of biofuel CHP and an alternative energy strategy should also be developed. Further information is also required on the sustainability elements. The energy strategy will need to be secured through the section 106 agreement and/or appropriate planning conditions. • Transport: further information is required in relation to transport assessment, bus trip analysis, the highways modelling, the low level of cycle parking, servicing and construction management and the need to agree and appropriate level transport mitigation where deemed necessary. 6 Due to the outline nature of the proposals and the urgent timescales to secure NHS funding, the application has not been significantly revised since the consultation stage. However, further clarification has been provided and planning conditions have been applied where appropriate to address concerns. Paragraphs 7 to 18 below set out how the issues have been addressed. page 2 Urban design 7 The applicant has confirmed that the siting of the multi-storey car park has been dictated by a number of physical constraints on the site, including power lines and the need to ensure adequate spacing between buildings. Further information has also been provided in relation to the proposed use of gabion blocks at the ground floor level of the multi-storey car park, which will be set back from the pedestrian pathway by a 5-10 metre strip of landscaping. The landscaping strategy and proposed use materials have been secured by planning condition. The applicant has also provided confirmation that there is no proposed future development on the site. 8 As such, the urban design issues have been suitably resolved. Access and inclusion 9 The applicant has clarified the procedures it intends to use to ensure that the final development meets the highest levels of accessibility and inclusion, including the use of an Access, Equality and Diversity Committee, with representatives from LINks (Local Involvement Networks). In addition, a planning condition has been attached to the draft planning permission to ensure that access and inclusion issues are appropriately addressed as the detailed design of the proposal progresses: “Prior to the commencement of development an Access Strategy, carried out by a suitably qualified access consultant, showing how the principles of inclusive design, including the specific needs of disabled people, have been integrated into the proposed development, and how inclusion will be maintained and managed shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority REASON: To ensure that the needs of disabled people are integrated into the development.” 10 As such, the access and inclusion issues have been suitably addressed in line with London Plan policy 4B.5. Climate change mitigation and adaptation 11 The applicant has provided further information relating to the energy strategy. This confirms that the energy efficiency measures would reduce carbon dioxide by 12% compared with baseline emissions, with the proposed use of a Biodiesel Combined Cooling Heat and Power (CCHP) to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by a further 55%. The cooling would be delivered through chilled beams and supplied partly by a 200 kW absorption chiller heated by the CHP engine. The existing buildings heating and domestic hot water system is based upon a steam system and this system would be upgraded at a later date so that it can also be supplied by the new energy centre. 12 Should the biomass CCHP for any reason not become a viable solution, an alternative ‘back-up’ energy strategy has been proposed comprising natural gas fired CCHP instead of biodiesel, with 140 sq.m. of photovoltaic panels to contribute towards the renewable energy carbon dioxide reduction target. Given the outline nature of the proposals, the following condition has been applied to secure the detail of the energy strategy: “A heat network supplying the heat loads in the development shall be installed and sized to the space heating and hot water requirements, and shall have the following characteristics: • It shall be operational prior to the occupation of the development and shall thereafter serve all heat loads. • It should be supplied with heat from either: page 3 o combined heat and power system sized to the average combined heating and hot water load supplemented by condensing gas top-up boilers OR o an external district heating network OR o a combination of the two options above.” 13 As such, the climate change mitigation and adaptation elements have been satisfactorily resolved in line with London Plan policies 4A.5, 4A.6 and 4A.7. Transport 14 Transport for London’s (TfL’s) initial comments in relation to this application were set out within the GLA Stage 1 Report dated 2nd February 2010. Supplementary information was received on 17 February 2010. 15 TfL welcomes the submission of a full supplementary transport assessment. Further analysis has now been undertaken in relation to the number of additional bus trips generated as a result of these proposals. This illustrates that the increase in bus trips is expected to be minimal, in addition there appears to be sufficient spare capacity on existing bus services, at this point to adequately absorb the forecast demand. However, the condition of the existing bus stops on Wrythe Lane requires improvement and the applicant has agreed to a £7,000 contribution to address this, this is welcomed.