SECTION 1 – SITE LOCATION MAP
Museum of Garden History, St Mary’s Church, 5 Lambeth Site address Palace Road, London, SE1 7LB
Ward Bishops
Restoration, internal and external alterations (including partial Proposal demolition and provision of additional mezzanine display floorspace) to the existing church abuilding, construction of single storey extensions within rear garden to provide a café and educational facilities, alterations to the rear churchyard including landscaping and relocation of tombs, removal and reconstruction of existing boundary treatment.
Application type Full Planning Application Listed Building Consent
14/01448/FUL Application ref(s) 14/01450/LB
27 March 2014 (14/01448/FUL) Validation date 27 March 2014 (14/01450/LB)
Name: Nicholas Linford Case officer details Tel: 020 7926 4069
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Christopher Woodward Applicant
Agent Ms Anna Cullum
Kennington Cross Neighbourhood Association Considerations/constraints South Bank Employers Group Conservation Area Environment Agency Flood Zone Listed Building Sites of Borough Nature Conservation Importance London Plan Thames Policy Area Tree Preservation Order Historic Parks and Gardens on English Heritage Register Protected Vistas
Ex010; Ex050; Ex100; Ex110; Ex120; Ex130; Ex200; Ex210; Approved plans Ex220; Ex230; Ex301; Ex302; Ex303; Ex305; Ex306; Ex309; Dm100; Dm301; Dm302; Dm303; Dm305; Dm306; Dm309; PA/001; PA/010; PA/100; PA/101; PA/102; PA/110; PA/120; PA/130; PA/200; PA/210; PA/300; PA/301; PA/302; PA/303; PA/304; PA/305; PA/306; PA/307; PA/308; PA/309; PA/310;
PA/311; PA/312; PA/313; PA/400; PA/401; PA/402; PA/403; Arboricultural Report (Rootcause); Crime Prevention design report; Historic Environment Assessment (MOLAS); Assessment of Flood Risk (Water Environment); Accessibility Statement (David Bonnett Associates); Planning Statement (MoGH); Statement of Community Involvement (MoGH); Travel Plan (MoGH); Heritage Statement (AHP); Customer/Visitor Management Plan(MoGH); Design and Access Statement (Dow Jones); Landscape Design Report (Dan Pearson Studio)
Full planning application (14/01448/FUL Recommendation(s) Grant planning permission subject to conditions.
Listed Building Consent (14/01450/LB)
Grant Listed Building Consent subject to conditions.
SECTION 2 – APPLICATION SUMMARY
Consultation Review
Consulted? Date Response Department(s) or Organisation(s) Received
Lambeth Legal Services, Integrated Support - N Enabling Cluster
Consulted? Date Response Department(s) or Organisation(s) Received Internal
Conservation and Urban Design Y 24 April 2014
Transport Y 25 April 2014
Neighbourhood Regeneration Project Manager Y No response
Lambeth Arts Y No response Building Control Y No response Crime Prevention Y 4 April 2014 Education Y No response Regulatory Services Entertainment/Licensing Y No response Regulatory Services Food Safety Y No response Parks and Open Spaces Y 6 April 2014 Streetcare Y No response Arboricultural officer Y No response
External
Environment Agency Y 16 April 2014 Transport for London Road Network Y 14 April 2014 Ancient Monuments Society Y No response Council for British Archaeology Y No response English Heritage Y 24 April 2014 English Heritage Archaeology Y 11 April 2014
The Garden History Society Y No response
London Ecology Unit Y No response
Port of London Authority Y 7 April 2014 Thames Water Y 31 March 2014 City of Westminster Y No response
South Bank Employers Group Y No response Kennington Cross Neighbourhood Association Y No response Association of Waterloo Groups Y No response Lambeth Estates Residents Association Y No response South Bank Management Company Y No response Waterloo Community Development Group Y No response Ashmole Tenants Association Y No response Lambeth Towers and Lambeth Road TA Y No response Kennington Oval and Vauxhall Forum Y No response
Background Papers: Case File (this can be accessed via the Planning Advice Desk, Telephone 020 7926 1180)
1 Summary of Main Issues
1.1. The main issues involved in the assessment of this application are as follows:
• The principle of the partial demolition of a Grade II listed building within the Lambeth Palace Cluster and the affect of the proposed extensions and alterations on the setting, interest, value and visibility of the Grade I listed Lambeth Palace
• The principle of the internal alterations and expansion to enlarge the Museum of Garden History and whether; if there is harm occurring to the interior and exterior of the building, whether this harm can be outweighed by a defined and justified public benefit in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
• The principle of the impact on the archaeological assets below ground and the scheduled ancient monuments and listed tombs including those of Ashmole and Bligh that might arise from the redesign and relocation of the garden and the erection of the rear garden structures
• Whether the existing trees that are of intrinsic character value within the site and the wider conservation area would be able to successfully co-exist in conjunction with the development or would suffer a significant loss in respect of visual amenity
• The acceptability of the changes to the boundary wall in Lambeth Road; whether the replacement boundary is acceptable; whether it sufficiently protects the existing trees and whether it allows the boundary to be removed from the Buildings at Risk Register.
• Whether the proposed development can deliver sufficient safeguards to protect the Site of Natural Conservation Importance and that the proposed landscaping can contribute to its enhancement.
• The acceptability of the proposal on land use grounds
• The implications of flood risk for the retention of the building.
• The impact of the development upon the highway network, conditions of highway safety and levels of parking provision;
• The incorporation of sustainability implications within the retained development.
• Whether the enhancement and the expansion of the site as a visitor attraction maintain acceptable levels of residential amenity for adjoining residential occupiers.
• Whether the site can enhance its role and participation as a community facility.
2 Site Description
2.1 The application site consists of a 0.267ha site at the junctions of Lambeth Palace Road, Lambeth Road, Albert Embankment and Lambeth Bridge. It consists of the former parish church of Lambeth known as St Mary’s and its burial grounds and graveyard. The building forms part of the cluster of buildings within Lambeth Palace which is situated directly to the north and east separated by a substantial boundary wall tot the north and the Morton’s Gateway to the northwest. The church is separated from Lambeth Road by St Mary’s
6 Gardens which is public open space owned by the Council but managed and maintained by volunteers and the Museum of Garden History. To the south of the site are a range of mixed uses including residential development in Parliament View, offices in 1 Lambeth High Street and a hotel development to its immediate east. Beyond this to the east in Lambeth Road is residential development on the north side of the street and commercial development to the southern side including a police station, a bakery and retail units. To the south of the site and to the south of Parliament View apartments, the land use is principally commercial and office floorspace. The application site overlooks the Thames to the west.
Fig.1: Layout and location of existing church.
7
Fig 2: Southern elevation of St Mary’s Church.
2.2 The church on this site was first thought to be in existence on this site in the 11 th Century and the church has been rebuilt or extended a number of times through the 14 th to 18 th centuries. Prior to its deconsecration in the 1970s, the last period of reconfiguration of the church took place in the 1850s with the church fundamentally being demolished and rebuilt into the structure that is now in existence today. The main body of the church was demolished and the walls of the aisle, porch, chancel and vestry were rebuilt while the north side was largely retained. Windows were either retained and restored or replaced. Substantial restorations were carried out inside the building. Further changes were carried out to the building up to the Second World War. After the War, the building required repairs and there was a reduction in congregation numbers, leading to the commencement of redundancy proceedings against the church which resulted in its closure in 1972.
2.3 The Tradescant Trust acquired the church in 1979 and works to repair and restore the buildings were carried out into the early 1990s, although the Museum of Garden History began in the early 1980s. Alongside the repairs to the fabric, the Trust and its founders oversaw the development of a programme of activities with the church being used for various community events and exhibitions and externally, the rear garden was redesigned. After 2000, various displays were installed inside the church and internal partitioning allowed for the creation of administration space and café space although this removed from public view key historical features of the church.
2.4 The site lies within the Lambeth Palace Archaeological Priority Area and the heritage assets that may be affected by the Development comprise the following:
• The site contains six statutorily listed buildings and structures (high significance) • The site lies within the Lambeth Palace Conservation Area (high significance) • The north west corner of the site lies within the Grade II Listed Lambeth Palace Registered Park and Garden (high significance). • The site has a known potential for Late Saxon to post medieval burials (high significance) • The site contains the foundations for the late Saxon to post medieval church of St Mary at Lambeth (medium to high significance). • The site has a moderate potential for prehistoric features (medium significance).
8 2.5 The rear garden of church contains a number of important tombs including those of John Tradescant and Admiral Bligh and are listed as Grade II* structures. The boundary wall of the churchyard makes an important contribution to the status of the listed buildings and the character and appearance of the conservation area and the wall was constructed in the late 1860s and early 1870s. A row of London Plane trees were planted approximately 100 years ago and these have now matured and have become substantial character contributors to the Conservation Area, however, despite the wall being listed in 1981 the roots and trunks of the trees have caused significant damage to the boundary wall which is now disintegrating with the boundary railings now becoming integrated into the tree trunk of one tree.
Fig. 3: Damage to boundary walls
2.6 Within St Mary’s Church, the building is now arranged over three levels. The building is accessed from the southeast corner through its porch and this enters into the reception desk and visitors’ pay area. To the immediate right of this is the shop while the main floorspace is dominated by a multi use area which is used for either displays, venue hire or education and activity space. There are also archive storage rooms attached to this central area. Close to the internal south wall is a staircase and lift tower leading up to the 1 st floor mezzanine which accommodates further display and exhibition material as well as a meeting room and educational space. Further private access exists to an additional level for the storage of further archive material.
9
Fig. 4: Existing layout
Fig. 5: Interior of the church
10 2.7 Returning to the ground floor level, there is a café area with internal seating space, further administrative offices, kitchens and staff and public toilets. There is subsequent access leading to the rear garden which are also used in part as extended café seating space. To the rear of the church in the garden is a recreated Elizabethan Knot Garden as well as smaller structures to accommodate materials, tools and storage in relation to the landscaping and gardening aspects of the site. Between the north wall and the flank of the Lambeth Palace are further storage structures and further above ground chest tombs as well as a means of access and egress from the premises.
2.8 The church already accommodates 745sq.m of floorspace within the D1 use class. It employs 15 people (FTE) and is open daily from 1000 to 1800.
2.9 The site is principally accessed from the vehicular access shared with Lambeth Palace by Morton’s Gateway for deliveries, servicing and loading. There is pedestrian access from the western end of the church as well from the souheastern corner in Lambeth Road. There is currently no vehicular access on to the site from the highway network.
2.10 The site is well served by bus routes with bus stops on Albert Embankment, Lambeth Palace Road and Lambeth Road. However, railway stations and the London Underground are not within a close walking distance from the site. There are currently 4 cycle spaces on the site.
3.0 Site Planning History
3.1 06.12.1991 – Planning permission granted for the upgrading of existing open space to include new central area with fountain, seating and pergola, replacement pathway and additional planting (91/00954/PLANAP).
3.2 12.09.2003 – Certificate of Lawfulness (existing) for the continued use of a the first floor room of the church tower for non-self contained accommodation ancillary to the museum (03/01654/LDCE).
3.3 10.09.2003 – Listed Building Consent granted for the Installation of a new oak floor in place of existing chipboard floor (03/01687/LB).
3.4 31.05.2005 – Listed Building Consent granted for the Replacement of existing asphalt roof covering to top of tower with sheet lead roof covering (05/01074/LB).
3.5 02.05.2008 – Listed Building Consent granted for the Removal of existing stud wall partition to create a Gallery on ground and first floor level and internal works for an education room on 1st floor level. New store rooms, new reception area with new timber doors and office on ground floor level, together with the installation of new lift (08/00575/LB).
4 Proposal
4.1 Planning permission and Listed Building Consent is sought for the restoration, internal and external alterations (including partial demolition and provision of additional mezzanine display floorspace) to the existing church building, construction of single storey extensions within rear garden to provide a cafe and educational facilities, alterations to the rear churchyard including landscaping and relocation of tombs, removal and reconstruction of existing boundary treatment.
4.2 The overall aims of the proposed works is to improve the facilities for the display and storage of the museum’s collection and archives inside the church and to provide new
11 spaces for staff, museum visitors and the education programme in the eastern part of the churchyard.
4.3 In providing additional and enhanced public display space within the museum building, the organisation will provide an additional 134.5 sq.m for both public and private administrative use and also for the storage of artefacts and relevant materials. Externally, the cumulative floor area of the extensions will equate to 535 sq.m.
4.4 Inside the church, the present timber office enclosures in the south east chapel and chancel will be removed and the modern timber gallery in the south side will be continued eastwards above the Pelham Memorial Chapel and into the chancel. This will allow the monuments and fittings of the chancel and chapel spaces beneath to be properly displayed and will provide more upper level exhibition space. A room for archive storage will be formed in the roof space above the south east chapel. The present timber floor installed in 2004 will be replaced by a new timber floor with underfloor heating. The timber draught lobby inside the south door will be removed. In replacing the timber floor, the proposal will seek to reduce and minimise the internal level changes in floor level that currently exist in the passage from the southwest entrance to the northeast corner, thereby providing better access across the site for visitors with mobility difficulties. The ground floor works will also allow for a reconfiguration of the café floorspace, the kitchens and the offices and will also allow for new and additional ventilation, extraction and filtration for the café and kitchen cooking functions.
Fig. 6: Proposed site layout
12
Fig. 7: Proposed first floor
4.5 In the north yard, the former north vestry and the row of brick and timber sheds along the north wall will be removed and the stone tomb slabs will be moved to the main churchyard. The whole of the yard space between the church building and the boundary with Lambeth Palace will be roofed over with a new flat roof and converted to provide top lit offices for the Museum staff.
4.6 In the eastern part of the churchyard, there will be three new single storey pavilions, linked by a glazed covered walkway enclosing a square central area. The two larger pavilions, one along the north wall and the other linked to the south east vestry, will house the education rooms and the café and the shop respectively. The smaller pavilion at the southeast corner of the churchyard will be a community reading room. All the pavilions will be of lightweight construction and clad in copper. The tomb slabs within the building area will be incorporated in to the floor paving. The grassed open central area will form the setting for the Tradescant and Bligh tombs which are both Grade II* listed and also for the knot garden designed for the Museum in 1994.
4.7 The Grade II listed churchyard boundary will be repaired and restored. At the south eastern corner of the churchyard where the wall has been badly damaged and pushed out of alignment by trees, reconstruction on the present building line is not possible and the wall and the south eastern gate piers will be removed and will be replaced by modern fencing which can accommodate the inevitable further tree growth. The piers may be re-used at a new location in the wall.
4.8 The scheme will permit an increase in the number of staff who work at the Museum both voluntary and paid. The extensions will facilitate an uplift from 9 to 13 permanent staff and from 12 to 15 part time staff. The full time equivalent number of positions will therefore rise from 15 to 21 positions.
4.9 There would be an increase in the cycle parking spaces from 4 to 12 while the site will also benefit from the proliferation of Transport for London cycle hire facilities in London recently and also from municipal cycle parking facilities that exist around the site. There is no on site
13 car parking facilities and visitors currently use the facilities at the Novotel on the southern side of Lambeth Road or use pay and display facilities in Lambeth High Street. In respect of servicing and deliveries, it is also proposed to create a new opening from the south eastern corner of the site accessible from Lambeth Road into the site where vehicles will be able to load and unload. However, in the short term, it is proposed that vehicles will retain the right to use the Lambeth Palace Forecourt which is an on street facility.
4.10 In addition to being the Museum of Garden History, the site is also a venue for family and community visits, particularly by schools and the organisation is working to extend its outreach programme to all age groups and to other areas within Lambeth and London. It also hosts public events for up to 140 people (usually ending at 8pm) and venue hire for up to 250 guests on 45 occasions per year.
4.11 It is proposed that public events will increase from 25 events per year to 50 events per year with more emphasis on day time events with events in the new classroom which would have a capacity of 60 people. The number of private venue hire events is proposed to increase from 45 events to 157 events which would maintain the 0130 closing time agreed with Lambeth Palace.
4.12 This application is subject to a Planning Performance Agreement that commenced in September 2013 and was presented to a Strategic Panel meeting in January 2014. The application is being presented to the Planning Applications Committee on the basis of its controversial nature and its impact on designated heritage assets and the level of interest that it has generated. The Planning Performance Agreement is programmed to end in July 2014.
5 Consultations and Responses
Statement of Community Involvement
5.1 The applicants have commissioned the preparation of a programme of local community consultation. A summary of the programme and the results and lessons of the community involvement have been collated within a Statement of Community Involvement which has been submitted with the planning application.
5.2 The organisation commissioned Julia Holberry Associates to carry out community consultation which comprised various activities. A wide range of the individuals were interviewed by JHA during the spring and summer of 2013 including current partners and potential future partners, users of the museum and non users. JHA held two focus groups with non users of the Museum and prepared a digital survey which was completed by 241 people.
5.3 On 30 October 2013, a public exhibition day was held for local residents. The aim of the event was to consult on plans and to launch the Neighbours Scheme, giving local residents free access to the scheme and also to consult on the proposed scheme. A general exhibition was held within the museum during the course of November while details of the online consultation was circulated on a mailing list of approximately 10000 people. In parallel to this the organisation’s staff held meetings with various local councillors, politicians and others within the community.
Application Stage
5.4 The occupiers of 301 neighbouring properties were notified of this planning application and no representations were received.
5.5 Site notices were displayed on 04/04//2014 and a press notice was published on the same day.
14
5.6 The Council has received one objection to this application at the time of writing which is set out as follows:
Objections: Council’s Response:
To add extensions to The proposed extension to the Garden Museum has been the rear garden is to carefully designed following extensive negotiations and compromise the discussions with the Council and English Heritage to address the appearance of the significant constraints that could be unreasonably comprised by church and destroy the proposed development. The site has several designated the beautiful garden. heritage assets attached to it including Grade II listed buildings on site, Grade I listed adjoining, Conservation Area with protected trees, scheduled ancient monuments and biodiversity protection.
The National Planning Policy Framework has formed the basis of ongoing negotiations between the Council and the applicants. The applicants have provided a heritage assessment which seeks to assess the nature of the heritage assets on the site. The Council has determined that the heritage assets are of national, regional and local significance and that had the scheme not been amended, there would have been significant harm arising to these assets with insufficient public benefit arising from the scheme to offset this harm.
The application scheme has evolved drastically during the pre- application stage from a two storey building which would have obscured views of the church elevations and Lambeth Palace and would have also resulted in the loss of one tree and damage to others as well as being visually dominant within the Conservation Area to the extent that it would fail to preserve and enhance its character and appearance.
The development has been amended in respect of its footprint, its location and its dimensions within the rear garden. The structure has now moved away from the trees and has reduced in height thereby protecting the root systems for the trees and also the tree canopy. As the trees would not be affected by the proposed development, the development can be supported by a foundation system that better protects historic human remains below ground.
The reduction in height of the building to a single storey structure protects views of the existing church and views of Lambeth Palace and its boundary wall.
In developing the scheme, officers have insisted that the applicants demonstrate the public benefits of the scheme to counteract and offset impact on designated heritage assets in line with the guidance set out in the NPPF. The Museum of Garden History is a unique cultural asset within Lambeth which provides an additional focus to Lambeth’s wide range of cultural and historical facilities particularly within the north of the Borough. The museum provides a historical link with the Borough in relation to Tradescant and Bligh and the
15 continual occupation of the building by the Museum has allowed the previous parish church building and its gardens to be retained, protected and maintained in the long term. Furthermore, the extensions to the building would allow the organisation to extend its display space and enhance and expand the nature of its public display and archive storage creating a more diverse and coherent demonstration of garden history and horticulture. In addition, the organisation is also seeking to expand its role working in the local community by being able to accommodate larger groups of school children across a wider range of age groups as well as offer more space for working with vulnerable community groups.
The proposed development would accommodate café, retail and educational space taking this out of the existing building, thereby enhancing the existing building’s capacity to deliver its cultural offer. It should also be noted that the proposed development would be constructed in such a way that were the organisation to leave the premises, the structures could be removed and the site restored to its previous condition without damage to the building.
It is therefore considered that there is now an appropriate balance between acceptable harm and public benefit which can be supported by the National Planning Policy Framework. The movement of The site contains the tomb of Admiral Bligh (Grade II* listed), the the tombs, including tomb of John Tradescant (Grade II* listed) and the tomb of the Tradescant William Sealy (Grade II* listed). A compare and contrast exercise tomb, is considered between existing and proposed garden layouts shows that the to be a harmful listed tombs referred to above remain in place. intervention to structures of national It is also suggested that the interior of the church building hosts importance. the ‘ledger slab’ of Ashmole. This is currently obscured by the current flooring material. Changes to the floor covering for accessibility purposes will also allow the slab to become visible within the interior of the church. It is considered therefore that this objection cannot be sustained. The boundary wall The boundary wall is currently significantly constrained by the constitutes a historic boundary trees which have been in existence for 100 years. The monument of great trunks of these trees and the root spread have caused the character which existing boundary wall to break with the railing above being should be protected. incorporated into the tree growth. The damage to the wall is so significant that the boundary wall has been placed on to the listed buildings at risk register.
The applicants have investigated a number of options for the wall, which is an extremely complicated relationship between the gatepost, the railings, the trees, archaeology and other heritage assets. The main issue is that the trees have come so far through the wall that any attempt to straighten the wall or the gatepost would impinge on the highway to such an extent that it would make the pavement unsafe.
It is therefore proposed to disentangle the boundary from the tree line, by dismantling the wall from the east gatepost, westward to a point three metres beyond the second plane tree. The east gatepost will be rebuilt in this new position and the wall rebuilt with the railing into the back of the gatepost as it would
16 have been when it was originally built. In this case, the gatepost will be reused for its original intention and the wall and the railing can be terminated correctly. The space between the rebuilt gatepost and the corner Plane tree will be filled with a contemporary steel railing and the former east gate will be replaced with a contemporary steel gate. This railing will be designed to avoid the tree trunks and roots as they pass through the pavement and will therefore follow a non linear path.
This approach has been supported in consultation with English Heritage, Conservation and Urban Design officers as well as the arboricultural officer. This solution would also allow this individual part of the site to be removed from the Statutory Buildings at Risk Register.
Internal Consultation
5.7 The Council’s Conservation and Urban Design Officer: No objections were raised.
5.8 The Council’s Highways and Transportation Officer: No comments have been received.
5.9 Lambeth Arts: No comments have been received
5.10 Building Control: No comments have been received
5.11 Crime Prevention (including Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism): No objections subject to the use of planning conditions relating to Secured by Design, CCTV, prevention of unlawful access, passive surveillance and the prevention of loitering by rough sleepers and alcoholics. In addition, the applicants consulted with the Counter Terrorism Officer prior to the submission of the application and observations and recommendations were provided. Subject to compliance with these recommendations no objections would be raised.
5.12 Education: No comments have been received.
5.13 Regulatory Services Entertainment and Licensing: No comments have been received.
5.14 Regulatory Services Food Safety : No comments have been received
5.15 Regulatory Services: Noise and pollution: No comments have been received.
5.16 Parks and open spaces: The officer supports the application subject to compliance with conditions that maintain and enhance biodiversity.
5.17 Streetcare: No comments have been received.
5.18 Transport and Highways: No objections have been raised against the application in principle.
5.19 Arboricultural Officer: No comments have been received.
External Consultations
5.20 English Heritage responded stating the application should be determined in line with local policies.
17
5.21 English Heritage (Archaeology): No objections, subject to conditions.
5.22 Transport for London: No objections subject to compliance with conditions in relation to cycle use and cycle parking, construction management and protection of the Transport for London Route Network.
5.23 Council for British Archaeology: No comments have been received.
5.24 The Garden History Society: No comments have been received.
5.25 Greater London Authority : The GLA will not be making comments on this planning application.
5.26 London Ecology Unit: No comments have been received.
5.27 Thames Water: No objections have been raised against the scheme.
5.28 Port of London Authority: No objections
5.29 City of Westminster: No comments have been received.
5.30 South Bank Employers Group : No comments have been received.
5.31 Kennington Cross Neighbourhood Association: No comments have been received.
5.32 Association of Waterloo Groups: No comments have been received.
5.33 Lambeth Estates Residents Association: No comments have been received.
5.34 South Bank Management Company: No comments have been received.
5.35 Waterloo Community Development Group: No comments have been received.
5.36 Lambeth Towers and Lambeth Road Tenants Association: No comments have been received.
5.37 Kennington Oval and Vauxhall Forum: No comments have been received.
5.38 Environment Agency: No objections
6 Planning Considerations
National Guidance
6.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires planning decisions to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan in Lambeth is the London Plan (July 2011), the Lambeth Core Strategy (adopted 19 January 2011) and the remaining saved policies in the ‘Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011’. Material considerations include national planning policy statements and planning policy guidance.
6.2 On 27 March 2012, the Government published the National Planning Policy Framework. The applicant’s planning statement sets out how this development meets the aspirations of the NPPF.
18
6.3 The National Planning Policy Framework sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. It reinforces the Development Plan led system and does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. The NPPF sets out that the National Planning Policy Framework must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration in planning decisions. Moreover, it sets out that in assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
The London Plan 2011
6.4 The London Plan was published in July 2011 and replaces the previous versions which were adopted in February 2004 and updated in February 2008. The London Plan is the Mayor’s development strategy for Greater London and provides strategic planning guidance for development and use of land and buildings within the London region.
6.5 The London Plan is the overall strategic plan for London, and it sets out a fully integrated economic, environmental, transport and social framework for the development of the capital over the next 20-25 years. It forms part of the development plan for Greater London. All Borough plan policies are required to be in general conformity with the London Plan policies.
6.6 The key policies of the plan considered relevant in this case are:
• Policy 1.1 - Delivering the strategic vision and objectives for London • Policy 2.9 - Inner London • Policy 2.10 - CAZ - Strategic Priorities • Policy 2.13 - Opportunity Areas and Intensification Areas • Policy 4.6 – Arts, Culture, Sport and Entertainment provision • Policy 5.1 - Climate change mitigation • Policy 5.2 - Minimising carbon dioxide emissions • Policy 5.3 - Sustainable design and construction • Policy 5.7 - Renewable energy • Policy 5.9 - Overheating and cooling • Policy 5.12 - Flood risk management • Policy 5.16 - Waste self-sufficiency • Policy 6.3 - Assessing effects of development on transport capacity • Policy 6.7 - Better streets and surface transport • Policy 6.9 - Cycling • Policy 6.10 - Walking • Policy 6.13 - Parking • Policy 7.2 - An inclusive environment • Policy 7.4 - Local character • Policy 7.5 - Public realm • Policy 7.6 - Architecture • Policy 7.8 - Heritage assets and archaeology
Lambeth LDF Core Strategy (2011) 6.7 The following policies are considered to be of relevance to the assessment of this application:
• Policy S1: Delivering the Vision and Objectives • Policy S3: Economic Development • Policy S5: Open Space • Policy S6: Flood Risk
19 • Policy: S7: Sustainable Design and Construction • Policy: S9: Quality of the Built Environment • Policy PN1: Waterloo
London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): ‘Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011’
6.8 The following policies are considered to be of relevance to the assessment of this application:
• Policy 7: Protection of Residential Amenity • Policy 26: Community Facilities • Policy 30: Arts and Culture • Policy 31: Streets, Character and Layout • Policy 33: Building Scale and Design • Policy 35: Sustainable Design and Construction • Policy 36: Alterations and Extensions • Policy 39: Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design • Policy 45: Listed Buildings • Policy 47: Conservation Areas
Local Guidance
6.9 The council has adopted the following Supplementary Planning Documents, which are relevant:
• SPD: Safer Built Environments • SPD: Sustainable Design and Construction • SPD: Waterloo
7 Land use
7.1 Planning permission is sought for the internal and external enlargement and extension of the Museum of Garden History at the former Lambeth parish church of St Mary’s. The proposed development involves the creation of additional internal mezzanine floorspace within the building and the erection of an external cloister style extension to the rear of the church and surrounding the existing eastern garden.
7.2 The Museum of Garden History was the first museum of garden history in the world and was founded by volunteers as a means to rescue the church from demolition. The building and its associated gardens has added significance in respect of its connections with British Gardening History. The Museum has not been a beneficiary of Government grant and has found that in the era of free entry to museums and galleries, has not been able to survive as easily as other institutions in Central London. In order to generate sufficient income to survive in this climate, the Museum has had to combine its cultural role in respect of the display, study, storage and education, with a revenue and income generating function in relation to the shop, café and venue hire.
7.3 The organisation is especially active within the community contributing to school education as well as providing support for vulnerable and older age groups within Lambeth. It is the objective of the Museum to become the most important centre for exhibitions, events and public information in respect of garden history; to create the leading collection of material in relation to gardening; to restore, preserve and make accessible heritage assets which would otherwise be lost; to unite heritage and bio diversity and well being in one space; to provide education and engagement to young people in horticulture; to achieve financial self reliance and to promote the role of open space in London.
20
7.4 In order to achieve this, the applicant is seeking to extend its internal display space through the installation of new internal mezzanine floorspace within the church which at 1 st and 2 nd floor level and the rationalisation of the existing ground floor space. The proposal would seek to create an additional 112sq.m of floorspace for the purposes of public display for the permanent collection, 22.5sq.m for the archive storage at second floor level.
7.5 Within the rear gardens, the scheme would provide an additional 535sq.m of floorspace which would be used for retail floorspace, café, educational workspace, staff offices, circulation space and studio/storage space for plants and associated equipment. The rear garden will therefore be reduced in area, although the Knot Garden (a decorative garden) will be retained within the scheme. Although the scheme results in a reduction of this rear garden area, this space is currently private for either fee paying museum visitors or visitors to the café. To offset the reduction in outdoor garden space that would arise from this scheme, the retained garden area post – development would become available for all members of the public and would form an area of public open space that would co-exist with St Mary’s Gardens.
7.6 The current Museum operates both as a valuable community facility within Lambeth and also as a diverse art and cultural destination that operates separately from the South Bank Centre and County Hall. Policy 30 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (2007) Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) sets out a presumption that supports the retention and development of arts and cultural facilities within the Borough. In addition, policy S3 which supersedes part of policy 28 (which previously set out the spatial designation of the Waterloo Visitor Management Area) state at paragraph (e) that the Council will safeguard and improve leisure, recreation, arts and cultural facilities where they meet local and wider needs.
7.7 However, policy 30 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that where commercial developments associated with arts and cultural uses are proposed, these should be ancillary to and complementary to the arts and cultural use or where there is a clear and lasting benefit to the arts and cultural uses. Given that the museum seeks to improve and enhance its education role and function through the provision of purpose built education workspace and also wishes to maximise the space afforded to the permanent collection and thematic displays as well as the key exhibits including the Tradescant Ark, it is considered that the erection of these new structures within the rear garden would be sufficiently complementary in function to support the continued use of the building as an arts and culture facility.
7.8 It is also considered that the proposals would contribute to the thematic issues (E and F) set out in the Local Development Framework Core Strategy which seeks to promote community cohesion, safe and liveable neighbourhoods and also in creating and maintaining attractive and distinctive places. The proposals create better opportunities in relation to citizenship, volunteering, local food production, cultural events and activities as well as working with groups of people who may not have regular access to gardens or horticulture.
7.9 On this basis, it is considered that the proposed development would be consistent with the aims of the Development Plan in respect of land use terms.
8. Conservation and design
8.1 Saved Policy 45 states that consent for alterations and extensions to listed buildings may be granted where the result preserves the special interest of the building. The policy states that where extensions are necessary, they must relate sensitively to the original building.
21 The policy goes on to state that development which adversely affects the setting of a listed building, or significant views of a listed building, should be refused. Where development affect listed buildings at risk, the Council will work with developers to bring into sustainable use and status of good repair the Borough’s Buildings at Risk.
8.2 Saved Policy 47 advises that development in a conservation area should preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. Alterations to or extensions to buildings within a conservation area should not lead to an erosion of the character and appearance of a listed building and characteristic features should be protected. Furthermore, where they form integral parts of the site or the conservation area, the loss of landscaped areas or gardens or the views of these and trees which make an amenity contribution will not be supported.
8.3 Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) sets out the Council’s updated position in relation to the protection of heritage assets including the necessity to safeguard and promote improvements to the Borough’s heritage assets which include Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings and identified archaeology.
8.4 The site comprises of a number of statutory heritage assets which are of national and local significance. St Mary’s Church was first listed in 1951 and upgraded to a Grade II* status in 1978. The churchyard boundary walls were listed Grade II and the Tradescant, Bligh and Sealy tombs were listed Grade II*in 1981. The whole site is located within the Lambeth Palace Conservation Area which was designated in 1969. The trees within the churchyard, particularly those at the boundary with Lambeth Road are subject to individual Tree Preservation Orders. These trees have significantly impacted on the listed boundary wall to Lambeth Road to the extent that this now features on the listed buildings at risk register. Lambeth Palace adjoins the site to the immediate north and east and these buildings are Grade I listed and remain perceptible and visible from Lambeth Road.
8.5 The church of St Mary Lambeth has served as the parish church for Lambeth since the middle ages. As well as the being the regular place of worship for the community, it also served as the church for the Archbishops’ Palace and as the burial place of Archbishops, their staff and servants. Many of these functions continued for nearly a 1000 years until the closure of the burial ground in the mid 1850s and the church itself in 1972. The church contains several important monuments including the tombs and memorials to a number of significant Archbishops as well as Tradescant and Ashmole. The Churchyard has over the centuries accommodated several thousand burials.
8.6 In respect of trees, there are 20 items which fall within the eastern churchyard garden and may be considered to be affected by the proposed development in the rear garden. These trees have been categorised for their value including landscape value, longevity and their contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Of the 20 trees considered, only four will be removed which have been classed as Category B or C and are within the building footprint. There are 8 A1 categorised trees which are all London Planes and include three located on the boundary and are compromising the integrity of the boundary wall.
8.7 The gardens surrounding the church include three Grade II* listed tombs. Two of these are situated within the rear eastern garden.
8.8 The Lambeth Palace Conservation Area is important to London, with Lambeth Palace being a complex of great significance both architecturally and historically. It contains elements dating from the early 12 th Century and has a strong constitutional and physical relationship with the Palace of Westmisnter. Its presence has significantly influenced the development of the wider area over the centuries and many local buildings and projects have carried a connection with the Palace. Lambeth Palace’s substantial private gardens and the adjoining Archbishop’s Park encompass a large proportion of landscaped open space which, being
22 so close to the centre of the city, has great importance as an amenity space, public park and habitat.
8.9 The former church, the churchyard and adjoining landscaped open space are an exceptionally important group of spaces within the conservation area – the charming churchyard, the mature trees, boundaries and monuments creating a tranquil character which is exceptionally rare so close to the heart of the city. They define this very attractive entrance point into Lambeth from Lambeth Bridge. Whilst it has been the Garden Museum since the 1970s it has retained its ecclesiastical character and modest historic churchyard setting. The trees are very important, though their growth has significantly harmed the structural integrity of the listed churchyard wall. A small part of the churchyard is enclosed by a modern hedge and railing to provide secure space for the Garden Museum however the presence of monuments and appropriate landscaping means that this area still retains its burial ground character.
8.10 Inside the church, the present timber office enclosures in the south east chapel and chancel will be removed and the modern timber gallery in the south side will be continued eastwards above the Pelham Memorial Chapel and into the chancel. This will allow the monuments and fittings of the chancel and chapel spaces beneath to be properly displayed and will provide more upper level exhibition space. A room for archive storage will be formed in the roof space above the south east chapel. The present timber floor installed in 2004 will be replaced by a new timber floor with underfloor heating. The timber draught lobby inside the south door will be removed. In replacing the timber floor, the proposal will seek to reduce and minimise the internal level changes in floor level that currently exist in the passage from the southwest entrance to the northeast corner, thereby providing better access across the site for visitors with mobility difficulties. The ground floor works will also allow for a reconfiguration of the café floorspace, the kitchens and the offices and will also allow for new and additional ventilation, extraction and filtration for the café and kitchen cooking functions.
8.11 In the north yard, the former north vestry and the row of brick and timber sheds along the north wall will be removed and the stone tomb slabs will be moved to the main churchyard. The whole of the yard space between the church building and the boundary with Lambeth Palace will be roofed over with a new flat roof and converted to provide top lit offices for the Museum staff.
8.12 In the eastern part of the churchyard, there will be three new single storey pavilions, linked by a glazed covered walkway enclosing a square central area. The two larger pavilions, one along the north wall and the other linked to the south east vestry, will house the education rooms and the café and the shop respectively. The smaller pavilion at the southeast corner of the churchyard will be a community reading room. All the pavilions will be of lightweight construction and clad in copper. The tomb slabs within the building area will be incorporated in to the floor paving. The grassed open central area will form the setting for the Tradescant and Bligh tombs which are both Grade II* listed and also for the knot garden designed for the Museum in 1994.
8.13 The Grade II listed churchayard boundary will be repaired and restored. At the south eastern corner of the churchyard where the wall has been badly damaged and pushed out of alignment by trees, reconstruction on the present building line is not possible and the wall and the south eastern gate piers will be removed and will be replaced by modern fencing which can accommodate the inevitable further tree growth. The piers may be re- used at a new location in the wall.
8.15 The scheme has various aspects that need to be assessed individually. Within the church building, it is considered that the various alterations to the flooring surface across the ground floor will significantly enhance the accessibility for visitors. In addition it would also simplify the appearance of the interior of the church, removing the multiple level changes
23 within the building. The removal of the shop and café creates a more functional venue for the display of the public collection and exhibitions as well as the use of the ground floor for functions which are vital for this cultural asset to be retained. Officers have consistently requested that the delivered scheme retains as a core objective the emphasis on enhancing its role as a museum, visitor attraction and thematic public display. In conjunction with the space dedicated to the Tradescant Ark and the extension of public display space on the first floor and archive storage on the second floor, it is considered that a coherent thematic facility can be created.
8.16 In order to further maximise the layout and function of the organisation, the current staff offices will also be relocated from their internal position to a new location within an extension to the northern elevation of the church building between St Mary’s Church and the boundary to Lambeth Palace. This area of the site is not currently visible from the public realm and would be sufficiently discreet as to not detract from the interest, character and setting of the listed buildings or the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
8.17 Returning to the interior of the building, the Council has previously approved a temporary and reversible structure constructed from a product called EURBAN which is of a timber appearance. This structure is freestanding and does not require any fixing to the internal structure of St Mary’s Church. Listed Building Consent (08/00575/LB) was granted in May 2008. The officer’s report described that proposal as being a sensitive, carefully considered and imaginative solution to an awkward problem (of creating more usable internal floorspace) and the new structure was a bold and highly visible intervention into the principal space of the church, which replaced various highly unsatisfactory ad hoc structures present at the time. The new work itself has significant architectural merit and it was considered that it would greatly improve the museum without damaging the intrinsic architectural and historic interest of the church. The proposal is now for a much larger structure within this building at the first and second floor level which has been supported by both English Heritage and Conservation and Urban Design officers.
8.18 The existing structure and the proposed extension to the EURBAN will be treated and coated to ensure that it retains a uniform and comprehensive finish. This will prevent an awkward conjunction between old and new structures and would not detract from the internal interest and value of the church building. In any case, the structures both internal and external are designed to be dismountable and removed from the premises.
8.19 The greatest constraints imposed by the site’s location relate to the exterior of the building. The scheme has evolved from a two storey building which was located close to the boundary with Lambeth Road which would have had a significantly deleterious impact on the heritage assets which affect this site. It was considered that the earlier stages of the proposed development would also have detracted from the appearance, setting and interest of the listed buildings and tombs around the site as well as create a visually dominant structure within the Conservation Area. Furthermore the previously proposed building would have failed to adopt any contextual relationship with St Mary’s Church.
8.20 However, the applicants have reconsidered the layout in response and recognition of the site constraints, particularly the A1 categorised (highest value) trees adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. The revised layout is now influenced by the constraints that the trees present. Hence, the building layout avoids any damage to the root protection zone of these key trees and the single storey height also avoids conflict with the canopies of these trees. In addition, as the proposed development does not give rise to any harmful impact on trees including the root protection zones, the development can utilise a much shallower foundation system which would have lesser impact on human remains beneath ground level. As a result, the proposed development would preserve the retained trees and planting of high value within the rear garden.
24 8.21 As a result of the decrease in the height of the building, the proposed development now incorporates a significantly larger footprint than that which was previously proposed. The new build elements follow a cloister type layout with two three principal buildings surrounding a square garden interconnected by lightweight covered walkways. As such, the proposed development would incorporate a cloister arrangement which, although not typical of the existing place of worship, has an ecclesiastical connection.
8.22 One of the biggest problems that the Museum endures is that potential visitors are unaware of the existence of this institution as a separate entity from Lambeth Palace. The principal architectural question is how to make a building that would address the client’s need to make a visual impact in London, attract visitors and provide a public face for the institution whilst also addressing the requirement to make a single storey building that would minimise the impact on heritage assets.
8.23 The main concept is to take the three main elements for the pavilion which comprise the education room, café and studio and to create a separate building for each connected by a glazed cloister. It is envisaged that the cluster of small buildings would be read as a small series of pavilions in the garden framing the listed tombs. It is also proposed that these buildings will interrelate with the knot garden which in itself will form a high value landscaped space.
8.24 The pavilions and cloister form a spatially continuous sequence of buildings that frame the know garden and the tombs. The single storey buildings are organised to frame the specific views into the gardens either from the street or from St Mary’s Gardens as well as permit views towards the boundary wall and buildings beyond of Lambeth Palace. The emphasis of the building is one of lightness and delicateness framing the garden and permit transparency. The siting of the pavilions are influenced by the constraints at ground level comprising the trees and the tombs and they also respond to the layout and boundaries of the site which are irregular. The rectilinear form of the development adds visual interest to the site allowing it to be viewed sympathetically from Lambeth Bridge and the City of Westminster side of the river.
8.25 The pavilion building will be a lightweight timber construction sitting on a concrete raft foundation. The external skin will be a lightweight copper cladding. The cloister columns would be constructed in thin steel. The cladding will be in a red or brown colour and has been chosen to contrast with the overt green nature of the existing church and reflects the colours of Lambeth Palace and the existing site identification site at the front of the site’s curtilage.
25
8.26 Ultimately, the configuration of the pavilions around the knot garden joined by the cloister, enables the Museum to operate the café, education room and the studio as independent entities to serve the local community without the need for the visitor in this case to enter the Museum as a paying visitor. As such, the organisation can clearly operate its various strands of without any compromising the other. The exhibition and archiving function occurs within the building. In separation from this, the building can function as an after public hours event venue with greater capacity. Externally, the café and community outreach and education functions will operate with the level of capacity that meets the organisation’s current aspirations and responsibilities.
8.27 Fundamentally, the proposals allow this building which would otherwise have no function, following its de-consecration to be retained and protected for public benefit.
8.28 As with the works to the mezzanine floors within the building, the buildings and structures have been designed to be easily reversible and dismountable should the organisation decide to leave the premises. A condition will be imposed on any recommendation for approval.
8.29 Officers initially had significant concerns about the impact of development on this exceptionally historic churchyard. The loss of open space, disturbance of monuments and the visual encroachment of development on the setting of designated heritage assets are all issues here. However, the significant changes which have been made constitute a better scheme and an appropriate mitigation of the impacts on archaeology, burials, trees and listed structures combined with a good design and a contextual and sympathetic approach have resolved this. In respect of the considerations of the NPPF, the proposals for this site, still have an impact on designated heritage assets. However, the significance of the impact has been reduced, an exercise which has gone hand in hand with an enhancement of the public benefit that the proposals would achieve. Furthermore, the scheme accords with the NPPF which states that listed buildings are better protected if they are occupied and used.
26 8.30 English Heritage have also been part of the process to develop a suitable scheme for this site. In respect of the harm and impact on listed buildings (as opposed to archaeology) the development would cause harm to the setting of the Listed Buildings and diminish the contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area, the harm is less than substantial and when this is the case, reference is made to Paragraph 134 of the NPPF which states that a less than substantial harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including securing the optimum viable use. The development will allow in this case, the expansion of its curatorial and educational programmes. English Heritage offer the view that sustaining and enhancing the Museum on its current site is an important heritage objective, both in terms of public understanding and enjoyment of the building and its collections delivering benefits that will overweigh the harm. On this basis, it is considered and recommended that the proposals would not be contrary to the Development Plan. In respect to archaeology, English Heritage considers that the scheme to be acceptable and that the development proposals would not result in significant long term or irreversible damage to assets within the site and would therefore be supported.
8.31 In respect of the buildings on the site and the remainder of the site, the scheme will also seek to secure permission for a range of minor amendments to the building, such as new doors, security and protective coverings for windows, discreet installations of PV cells and changes to windows. These are considered to be non invasive to the building and to their significance. The scheme also proposes the relocation of the southern boundary treatment. This involves disentangling the original railings from the trunks of the London Plane trees and the erection of new railings, a distance of 1m away from the original line and a circumvention of the tree trunks. This would allow the trees to remain uncompromised by the boundary and to allow for the retention of as much as possible of the existing boundary wall and railings and therefore also remove it from the buildings at risk register.
8.32 In light of these considerations, it is recommended that the proposed development would be acceptable on conservation and design grounds and would be compliant with the policies of the Development Plan listed above.
9. Biodiversity and landscaping
9.1 In relation to the potential for the presence of flora or fauna of ecological value on the site, reference is made to Policy 5.3 of the London Plan, which seeks to protect and promote biodiversity and nature conservation. New developments are required to provide opportunity to incorporate features for wildlife and local biodiversity.
9.2 The application site forms part of a designated Site of importance for nature conservation (SINC) which is combined with similar designations covering the Lambeth Palace complex and Archbishops Park to the north.
9.3 In terms of ecology and landscaping, the proposals will exert an impact, albeit partial and contained, upon an existing Borough Grade Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), and affect existing landscaping within the churchyard grounds. Therefore, we will expect that the development mitigates for these impacts by providing enhancements to the retained SINC and the retained/redesigned buildings. The final development must include features (trees, shrubs, grasses, ground cover plants and herbs) that a) improve the ecological status and value of the existing Borough Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), b) are compatible with and complement the site's heritage and conservation status, and c) have high visual, aesthetic and cultural benefit. We will expect detailed plans, planting specifications and maintenance schedules for all soft landscaping to be provided as a subsequent condition of consent.
9.4 Proposals for a set of green ('living') roofs on the new development are welcomed, and further information on their design, installation, planting and maintenance can be secured by condition. It is expected that any living roofs to be 'extensive' ('brown') in specification,
27 and of high biodiversity value in order to mitigate for any impacts upon the current SINC and to also enhance or extend it.
9.5 Previous ecological assessments and reports have been to an acceptable standard and sufficient to inform use of and impacts upon the site, and provided suitable proposals for mitigation. The ecological assessments identified a risk that the buildings can or may be used by bats and nesting birds, but identified procedures and strategies to minimise potential disturbance or harm to these species. Provided that these recommendations as to mitigating for potential disturbance of bats and nesting birds are implemented during all demolition, clearance and construction phases then the application can be supported.
9.6 A number of conditions have been proposed by the consultee which would seek to secure details of the proposed soft landscaping, protection of species and also the specification of brown and green roofs.
10. Amenity
10.1 Saved policy 7 of the UDP states that the right of people to the quiet enjoyment of their homes will be respected. In mixed use areas, the scale, design, layout, hours of use, intensity, concentration and location of non-residential uses, will be controlled in relation to residential uses to protect residential amenity.
10.2 Saved policy 33 of the UDP sets out that building scale and design should protect the residential amenity of existing and future residents by having an acceptable standard of privacy, having an acceptable impact on levels of daylight and sunlight and not creating unacceptable overlooking; not creating an undue sense of enclosure, and where appropriate having sufficient outdoor amenity space.
10.3 The application site is in an area of mixed use and character including the Lambeth Palace complex to the immediate north, commercial and hotel uses within Lambeth Road and Albert Embankment to the south and the nearest residential uses within Parliament View apartments directly to the south of the site.
10.4 Given the low rise nature of the buildings, it is considered that the proposed development would not have any harmful impact on outlook, privacy or sense of enclosure to these properties. The proposed development would not encroach on any existing public open space and the scheme would open space that was previously only accessible to paid visitors to the general public thereby adding to the amenity and open space portfolio in the area.
10.5 The principal impact of the proposed development to the nearest residential occupiers would be the enhancement of the existing site buildings in respect of its function as a commercial venue. The expansion and rationalisation of the floorspace and the buildings would permit the organisation to operate a considerably greater number of revenue generating events that are both related to and unrelated to the Garden Museum.
10.6 In addition to being the Museum of Garden History, the site is also a venue for family and community visits, particularly by schools and the organisation is working to extend its outreach programme to all age groups and to other areas within Lambeth and London. It also hosts public events for up to 140 people (usually ending at 8pm) and venue hire for up to 250 guests on 45 occasions per year.
10.7 It is proposed that public events will increase from 25 events per year to 50 events per year with more emphasis on day time events with events in the new classroom which would have a capacity of 60 people. The number of private venue hire events is proposed to increase from 45 events to 157 events which would maintain the 0130 closing time agreed with Lambeth Palace. It is considered that an enhancement of its day time events, or those
28 which end no later than 8.30pm would not have an impact on residential amenity, given the Central London and CAZ location. The use of the premises for an additional 112 events, some of which may end at around 1.30am may have implications on amenity during the course of dispersal of guests and attendees.
10.8 A visitor and customer management plan has been submitted with the application which sets out in brief detail, the nature of movements, activities and numbers of visitors to the premises. A condition can be imposed on the recommendation for planning permission that prior to the commencement of the operation, an updated visitor management plan setting out measures for the safe and neighbourly disposal from the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
10.9 The works to the premises will also incorporate and enlargement of the café, kitchen and cooking facilities. As a result, a new ventilation and extraction system will be installed at the eastern end of the building within the kitchen. The system will be visually non-intrusive from the exterior of the site and will vent out vertically at low level. However, it is considered that the distance from the nearest residential and from the public realm in general will permit it not to have any unduly deleterious impact on residential amenity, although it will operate in tandem with the principal building also operating as a commercial function venue until 1.30 am. The café in the garden will operate in line with the operating hours of the museum and as a result will have limited impact on residential amenity. The submitted visitor and customer management plan states that the café will open from 8am to serve breakfasts and will not operate into the evening. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to add a condition to the planning permission that would restrict the opening hours of the café to 6pm.
10.10 The Council’s noise pollution officers and food safety officers were notified of this application and comments have yet to be received at the time of writing. However, it is considered that the amenity of neighbouring occupiers would be further protected by conditions relating to the restriction of amplified noise audible from outside of the premises, background noise as well as a separate condition in relation to any proposed lighting strategy.
10.11 On this basis, it is considered that the proposals to enhance and enlarge the Garden Museum and its facilities would not have any unduly harmful impact on the amenities of the nearest residential occupiers to the site. As such, the scheme would be compliant with the policies listed above.
11. Highways and transportation
11.1 Saved policy 9 of the UDP states that planning applications will be assessed for their transport impact including cumulative impacts on highway safety; on the environment and the road network; and on all transport modes, including public transport (in particular, the impact on demand for and the operation of public transport), walking and cycling.
11.2 Policy S4 of the Core Strategy seeks to ensure that on site car parking at new developments is the minimum necessary and there is no over provision that could undermine the use of more sustainable non car modes of travel.
11.3 The Council’s Transport Planner has undertaken an assessment of the planning application having regard to the information contained within the submitted Transport Assessment and to the objectives of saved policies 9 and 14 of the UDP and policy S4 of the Core Strategy. Transport for London has also provided comments.
11.4 The current site is located in a PTAL 5 (very good) area. The site is well served by bus routes in Lambeth Road, Albert Embankment and Lambeth Palace Road. The nearest railway and underground stations are some considerable walking distance from the site and
29 the organisation is somewhat reliant on these bus connections and cycle use for its visitor attraction. There are substantial numbers of TfL cycle hire docking bays within the locality and there are existing cycle stands close to and within the site. The site has no car park, although there is an NCP car parking within the locality.
11.5 Access and servicing is currently limited for the site although the organisation benefits from the use of the principal servicing area in front of the Morton Gateway to Lambeth Palace. As a result, all servicing and deliveries takes place safely off the street.
11.6 Current visitor numbers are 42,000 per annum incorporating museum, café and event hire. This breaks down to 34,200 visitors for the museum and café during opening hours. With approximately 100 visitors to the building on a daily basis, a typical day will see 20% arriving by train (from outside Lambeth), 25% arriving by tube and 30% arriving on foot. 21% would arrive by bus. There are approximately 30 delivery and servicing trips to the site on a weekly basis.
11.7 As a result of the developments on the site, the organisation envisages an increase of (all) visitors from 42,000 to 72,000. However, the organisation also anticipates that the proportions for the transport modes will remain similar. Servicing trips would rise to approximately 41 per week. In respect of future servicing requirements, the organisation anticipates that the southeastern gate (from Lambeth Road to just inside the boundary of the rear garden) will be brought back into use and this will provide separate access independent of the Lambeth Palace forecourt.
11.8 However, changes are proposed to the churchyard walls at the southeastern corner of the site, to accommodate two large trees which have damaged the existing walls. New railings are shown around the trees, which would encroach into the public footway on Lambeth Road. The existing footway in this location is some 2m wide at the pinchpoint between the gatepost in the south eastern corner of the site, and the kerb which meets a zebra crossing. The proposed new railings would reduce this pinchpoint to around 1m width which is too narrow for a footway, particularly one immediately adjacent to a zebra crossing, where pedestrians will congregate and street furniture such as the Belisha beacon pole further restricts usable width.
11.9 In respect of visitor numbers, this is not expected to have a detrimental impact on the local public transport and highway networks. Furthermore the Transport Planner considers that the increases in school and community visits would not be expected to have any detrimental impact on the highway network given the use of public transport and pedestrian and cycle usage. However, the number of private hire events is expected to increase more significantly, from some 45 per year to 157 per year, or which 47 would be hire of the nave for wedding receptions etc. Since these events have a larger capacity, are often in the evening when CPZ controls are not in force, and have greater servicing and delivery requirements, this is the area where the proposals are expected to have the greatest impact in terms of parking and servicing.
11.10 The site is located within the Waterloo ‘W’ CPZ which is operational 08:30-18:30 Monday to Friday, and 08:30-13:00 Saturday, but borders the Kennington ‘K’ CPZ to the south which is not operational on a Saturday. Generally the opening hours of the museum and café will be covered by parking restrictions, but evening events such as private hire events would not be covered, and visitors may therefore choose to drive and park on surrounding streets.
11.11 No specific disabled parking is currently available on site, and none is proposed. However, on-street parking is available to Blue Badge holders on surrounding streets.
11.12 It is understood that the Garden Museum currently uses the Lambeth Palace forecourt to receive deliveries. The submitted Travel Plan provides details on the existing and expected increase in the number of servicing trips generated by the Garden Museum. It is anticipated
30 that the weekly number of servicing trips will increase from 28 to 40. It is understood that the Garden Museum would like to reduce their reliance on the Lambeth Palace forecourt and therefore para 9.6.7 of the Design and Access Statement states that ‘The former south east gate will be recuperated as the service access, and will provide service access to the site. The organisation also proposes to lay out a loading bay further to the east that would also be utilised by coaches. However, it is considered that this may compromise road markings and the bus stops/stands on Lambeth Road. As such, this is not considered within this application.
11.13 The proposals are supported by the Transport Planner, however, various details of the development remain inconclusive and require further consideration. This is particularly in relation to the servicing strategy and the pavement width at the south eastern corner of the site where the boundary is to be realigned.
11.14 In order to resolve these issues, it is recommended that conditions relating to Delivery Management, Cycle Parking and Method of Construction should also be submitted. The Transport Planner also recommends that the draft Travel Plan submitted by the applicants with the application should be updated for adoption prior to the commencement of development.
11.15 Concern about the pavement width in this location as expressed by the Transport Planner is clearly acknowledged and that increases in visitor numbers to the site may increase pedestrian numbers along Lambeth Road. The impact that may arise must be balanced with the benefits associated with the scheme such as the protection of the trees along the boundary, the restoration of the boundary treatment which would remove it from the buildings at risk register. The applicants have discussed the option with Transport officers, the concept of compensatory increase of the pavement width with parallel decrease in carriageway width and this could be considered further. In addition, the redevelopment of 1 Lambeth High Street (the Royal Pharmaceutical Society building) may deliver other local highway pedestrian and cycle enhancements which will ameliorate this issue.
Fig 8: Proposed new railing
11.16 As a consequence, it is considered that the improvements and enhancements of the heritage assets should take priority over the pedestrian considerations in an on balance approach to the acceptability of this application.
11.17 Subject to the imposition of conditions as set out above including compliance with an updated Travel Plan, the proposed development would on balance be acceptable.
31
12.0 Refuse and recycling
12.1 Core Strategy Policy S8 and NPPF seek to achieve sustainable waste management. The Council’s ‘Waste & Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements: Guidance for Architects and Developers’ (2006) supplements Policy S8.
12.2 The Museum currently operates two large general waste bins and one large recycling bin which are collected three times a week. They are located in an unsightly and prominent position in the churchyard.
12.3 The project will provide a designated bin area adjacent to the east delivery gate. This will be close to the service lay by and screened with a garden structure that will be subject to the landscaping treatment. Collection frequency will be increased rather than an increase in collection containers.
12.4 The capacity and emptying of containers has been considered by the Transport Planner who holds no objections to the proposals in this respect (in the absence of comments from Streetcare) and it is considered appropriate to attach a condition that would secure the submission and approval of details prior to the commencement of development.
12.5 The enhancement of the kitchen and café facilities is likely to increase the food and catering by products that might arise from cooking processes. Appropriate means to address the storage and collection of cooking fats and oils will also be secure through condition.
13.0 Sustainability
13.1 Policy S7(a) of the Core Strategy requires all major developments to achieve a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions in line with London Plan targets. The London Plan requires developments to make the fullest contribution to tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions, adopting sustainable design and construction measures and prioritising decentralised energy, including renewable technologies. Policy 5.2 sets out a minimum carbon reduction requirement in buildings of 40% below the Target Emissions Rate outlined in the national Building Regulations Part L. The London Plan states that that a development proposal should contribute to this by minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the Mayor's energy hierarchy ('Be Lean, Be Clean, Be Green').
13.2 The constraints of the site generated by the age and heritage significance of the buildings has a limiting affect on the measures that can be implemented in respect of the existing buildings. Nevertheless, the organisation will seek to undertake specific measures that will reduce energy use and consumption within the buildings. The scheme also proposes to install pv cells to the roof slope of the church building to further contribute to this aim. These pv cells cannot be viewed from the public realm or from other vantage points except from the air. The studio and education buildings will contribute to a reduction of 40% over the Part 2A of Approved Document L. Other extensions and structures would be constructed so as to ensure that reductions will be in accordance with Part 2B of the Approved Document L.
14. Flood Risk
14.1 This site is located in Flood Zone 3. The Environment Agency have commented that they have no objection to the proposals, but do require that an emergency flood evacuation plan must be submitted as well as the incorporation of specific flood mitigation measures. Furthermore, the Environment Agency is supportive of the use of green roofs within the proposed development.
32
15. Crime
15.1 Saved policy 32 of the UDP sets out that development should enhance community safety. Development would not be permitted where opportunities for crime are created or where it results in an increase risk of public disorder.
15.2 The Council’s Crime Prevention Design Advisor has been consulted on the application and has not raised any objections subject to conditions relating to the management of the attraction and the surrounding area. The consultee has advised that a visitor management plan should be updated and conditions should be imposed in relation to secured by design.
15.3 The application has also been referred to the Metropolitan Police’s counter terrorism security advisor who has made a number of recommendations. An informative would be added to advise the applicant to adhere to these recommendations.
16. Section 106 Planning Obligations/Community Infrastructure Levy
16.1 Policy S10 of the Core Strategy (January 2011), and the SPD on s106 planning obligations, sets out the circumstances in which the Council will seek planning obligations from a developer to mitigate against the potential impacts of a scheme.
16.2 Following a consideration of the proposed development in accordance with the Council’s SPD on Section 106 planning obligations, it is considered that the proposed development would not generate any contributions in relation to the toolkit contained within the SPD.
16.3 The applicant in this case is a charitable organisation and as a result, would not be liable for payment of the Community Infrastructure Levy.
17. Conclusion
17.1 The proposal would see the additional and enhanced provision of tourist and visitor and arts culture facilities within the North Lambeth area. The scheme has been significantly modified since first being proposed and considered by the Council in 2012 – 2013 when it is considered that the scheme would significantly harm assets of international significance. Following extensive discussions with the Council it is now considered that the scheme sympathetically responds and considers the designated heritage assets within the site. Fundamentally, the scheme is now influenced by the heritage assets and the desire to protect them as well as enhance the organisation’s role as being a unique historic public collection of horticulture and gardening. The scheme subject to this application still generates a level of harm to these assets. However, this harm is less than substantial and in this case, there is demonstrable evidence that the development of this scheme would lead to compensatory public benefit that would satisfy the requirements of the NPPF.
17.2 Further that the proposal would not have a detrimental affect on nearby residential occupiers or to the wider public in relation to noise, transport or crime considerations.
17.3 It is therefore considered that the development is compliant with the planning policies of the development plan and that no other material planning considerations of sufficient weight exist that would dictate that the applications should nevertheless be refused.
18. Recommendation
Full planning application (14/01448/FUL)
Grant planning permission subject to conditions.
33
Listed Building Consent (14/01450/LB)
Grant Listed Building Consent subject to conditions.
Conditions (14/01448/FUL)
Implementation
1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun no later than three years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.)
2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed in this notice.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
Conservation and design
3 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a schedule and samples of the materials (which shall be inspected on site) to be used in the external elevations of the proposed extensions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with English Heritage. The development hereby permitted shall be thereafter built in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, that it preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and protects the setting and interest of the listed buildings. (Policies 33, 36, 45 and 47 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
4 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, drawings at 1:20 scale for all external and internal construction details for both new build and making-good to historic fabric shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, that it preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and protects the setting and interest of the listed buildings. (Policies 33, 36, 45 and 47 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
5 Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for the siting and design of all boundary treatments (gates, railings and means of enclosure) showing all fixtures, fittings and hinges etc shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with English Heritage. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before the use hereby permitted commences and retained for the duration of the development.
34 Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, that it preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings. (Policies 33, 36, 45 and 47 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
6 Prior to the commencement of development, a method statement for the treatment of all tombs and slabs within the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with this method statement.
Reason: To ensure that the special historic and archaeological interest of the site and buildings are protected and maintained (Policy 45 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (2007) Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), policies S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and Policy 7.8 of the London Plan (2011).
7 No vents, extracts or plant other than those shown on the submitted and approved plans shall be affixed or installed within the building.
Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, that it preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and protects the setting and interest of the listed buildings. (Policies 33, 36, 45 and 47 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
8 Notwithstanding the information shown on the accompanying plans, a method statement for the dismantling, movement and re-ereciton of the churchyard gate pier and associated boundary wall shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Authority in consultation with English Heritage before commencement of works.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings, structures and boundary treatments within the site. (Policies 33, 36, 45 and 47 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
9 Notwithstanding the information shown on the accompanying plans, full drawn details at a scale of no less than 1:50 of the proposed refuse storage area, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with English Heritage before commencement of the works.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings, structures and boundary treatments within the site. (Policies 33, 36, 45 and 47 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
Landscaping and biodiversity
10 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailed schemes of all external/soft landscaping for the application site, including the final selection of species, planting plans/programmes and schedules for the maintenance of landscaped features, whether formal or natural in nature and purpose. These
35 proposals should include new plantings of trees, hedges, grass, shrubs, ground flora or climbers, and cover areas of open space within the development including roofs, walls and boundary features.
Reason: In order to ensure correct implementation of landscaping in and around the site in the interests of the ecological value of the site and to ensure a satisfactory landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity (Policy 39 of the Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011)).
11 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailed schemes for the design, construction, establishment and sustainable management of all areas of green roof proposed for the application site. This should be developed using good practice based on current advice provided by qualified experts and advisors. The schemes should aim to will assist with rainwater attenuation and management, in terms of its design and integration into other aspects of the development designed to reduce flooding and reduce potable water wastage.
Reason: In order to ensure correct implementation of landscaping in and around the site in the interests of the ecological value of the site and to ensure a satisfactory landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity (Policy 39 of the Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011)).
12 Any trees, shrubs or hedges included in the landscaping scheme for the development hereby permitted that die, are removed, become seriously damaged or diseased, within five years of planting, shall be replaced within six months of death, removal, damage or disease.
Reason: In order to ensure long term retention of the landscaping in and around the site in the interests of the ecological value of the site and in the interests of visual amenity (Policy 39 of the Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011)).
Arboricultural Protection
13 No trees other than those identified to be removed in the Approved Arboricultural Report prepared Rootcause Arboriculture dated 15/03/14 by shall be felled, pruned, uprooted, damaged or otherwise disturbed without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the retention of, and avoid damage to, the retained trees on the site which represent an important visual amenity to the locality (Policies 31, 33, 38 and 39 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011 and Policies S1 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011)).
14 Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the construction foundation system and method to be used during the implementation of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the details as approved.
Reason: To ensure the retention of, and avoid damage to, the retained trees within the site that represent an important visual amenity to the locality and the wider surrounding area (Policy 39 of the Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011)).
15 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, an Arboricultural Method Statement in accordance with section 6 of the BS5837:2012 and in relation to (a) changes in existing ground
36 levels within the Root Protection Area (RPA) of any retained tree and b) the installation of any foundation construction within the RPA of any retained tree and c) the location of all utility and service routes in proximity to retained trees shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the Method Statement shall be implemented in strict accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the retention of, and avoid damage to, the retained trees on the site which represent an important visual amenity to the locality (Policies 31, 33, 38 and 39 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011 and Policies S1 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011)).
16 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a site specific Tree Protection Plan in accordance with BS5837:2012, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the Tree Protection Plan shall be implemented in strict accordance with the approved details and remain in place for the duration of the development.
Reason: To ensure the retention of, and avoid damage to, the retained trees on the site which represent an important visual amenity to the locality (Policies 31, 33, 38 and 39 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011 and Policies S1 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011)).
17 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details of all Tree Protection Monitoring and Site Supervision (where arboricultural expertise is required) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Tree Protection Monitoring and Site Supervision Schedule shall include details of a ‘Pre-Start / Arboricultural induction meeting.’ The development shall thereafter be implemented in strict accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the retention of, and avoid damage to, the retained trees on the site which represent an important visual amenity to the locality (Policies 31, 33, 38 and 39 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011 and Policies S1 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011)).
Transport, servicing, access and deliveries
18 No development shall take place until a method of construction statement (including construction logistics) which sets out details of how construction of the development hereby permitted will be managed, including: a) means to ensure construction impacts on neighbouring occupiers are minimised, b) means to mitigate impacts, c) details of how neighbours will be consulted during the construction process, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These details shall include the use of a banksman and shall ensure that there is no unacceptable obstruction to Wandsworth Road. Construction works, including parking, deliveries and storage, shall take place solely in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To avoid hazard and obstruction being caused to users of the public highway and local businesses and in the interest of public safety (Policies 9 and 31 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (2007) Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and policy S4 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).
19 Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 10, details of a waste management plan, incorporating provision for refuse storage and recycling facilities on the site, detail of the disposal of cooking oil, and details of how containers will be relocated to the highway for collection and a commitment for the return of refuse containers to the prescribed storage area following empyting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted. The refuse storage and recycling facilities shall be provided in accordance with the
37 approved details prior to commencement of the use and shall thereafter be retained as such for the duration of the permitted use.
Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the storage of refuse and the provision of recycling facilities on the site, in the interests of the amenities of the area. (Saved Policies 9 and 33 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan (2007) and policy S8 of the Core Strategy (2011) refer.)
20 No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a detailed strategy for the management of deliveries and servicing has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall include measures to avoid localised congestion, parking on footways and damage to buildings caused by vehicles. The applicant shall detail a booking system to be operated for the servicing which will co-ordinate the arrival of deliveries to ensure that all associated vehicles can be accommodated within the site with no need to wait on the adjoining highway and also set out a robust eforcement regime to ensure that no unauthorised use occurs. Deliveries and servicing shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To avoid hazard and obstruction being caused to users of the public highway (Policy 9 of the Saved Unitary Development Plan 2007 and Policy S4 of the Core Strategy).
21 A travel plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the uses hereby permitted commencing. The Travel Plan should also include a Coach Management Strategy. The measures approved in the travel plan shall be implemented prior to the uses hereby permitted commencing and shall be so maintained for the duration of the uses, unless the prior written approval of the local planning authority is obtained to any variation.
Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the uses within the building are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements (Saved Policy 9 of the UDP and Policy S4 of the Core Strategy refers)
22 Prior to the occupation of the development full details of cycle parking shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details of cycle parking approved shall be provided in advance of the first occupation of the development and retained thereafter for the duration of the permitted use.
Reason: To ensure adequate cycle parking is available on site and to promote sustainable modes of transport. (Saved Policies 9 and 14 of the UDP and Policy S4 of the Core Strategy).
Amenity
23 The proposed buildings to be erected in the garden hereby approved shall only be used during the following hours.
08.00 Hours to 18.00 Hours - Monday through to Sunday
Reason: To ensure that no nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of adjoining occupiers or of the area generally. (Policy 7 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011).
24 The existing buildings shall be only be used between the following hours.
08.00 Hours to 01.30 Hours (the following day) - Monday through to Sunday
Reason: To ensure that no nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of adjoining occupiers or of the area generally. (Policy 7 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011).
38
25 Prior to the commencement of the relevant building works, full details of internal and external plant, equipment, and trunking, including building services plant, ventilation and filtration equipment, and exhaust ducting / ventilation, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The details submitted shall demonstrate that the filtration process will remove all odours, fumes and smells from public areas.. All flues, ducting and other equipment shall be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to the use commencing on site and shall be retained for the duration of the use.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents, in accordance with the provisions of saved UDP Policies 7 and Policy 7.15 of the London Plan.
26 Noise from any mechanical equipment or building services plant shall not exceed -5dB(A) below the background noise level when measured outside the window of the nearest noise sensitive or residential premises, when measured as a L90 dB(A) 1 hour.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents, in accordance with the provisions of saved UDP Policies 7 and Policy 7.15 of the London Plan
27 There shall be no amplified sound, speech or music used in connection with the commercial premises hereby approved which is audible above background noise levels when measured outside the nearest residential property.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of future residential occupiers and the surrounding area (Policies 7 and 29 of Lambeth's Unitary Development Plan and Policy S2 of Lambeth's Core Strategy).
28 Prior to the commencement of development, an updated visitor and customer management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The use of the site shall be undertaken in accordance with the measures set out in this plan.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of future residential occupiers and the surrounding area (Policies 7 and 29 of Lambeth's Unitary Development Plan and Policy S2 of Lambeth's Core Strategy).
29 Full details of the lighting of all external areas of the development (including the public realm/highway and all landscaping and amenity areas) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the use of the site commences. The approved lighting shall be installed before the commencement of the use, and maintained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that the external areas of the development are suitable for purpose and in the interests of minimising opportunities for crime and impact upon neighbouring amenity (Core Strategy Policies S9 and Saved Unitary Development Plan Policies 7, 9, 32 and 39).
Crime prevention and visitor safety
30 A crime prevention strategy shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This shall demonstrate how the development shall be constructed and operated thereafter to ‘Secured by Design Standards’. A certificate of accreditation to Secured by Design Standards shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing prior to the residential occupation of the development. The Crime Prevention strategy shall also include measures for the installation of CCTV and suitable protection for glazing to buildings and access to the site.
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory attention is given to security and community safety (Policy 32 of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan and Policy S9 of Lambeth’s Core Strategy).
Archaeology
31 No development related activity shall occur until the applicant (or their heirs and successors in title)
39 has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological mitigation in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the local planning authority in writing and a report on that evaluation has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The applicant (or their heirs and successors in title) shall implement a programme of archaeological mitigation in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation. The development shall not be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved and the provision for analysis, publication and dissemination of the results and archive deposition has been secured.
Reason: Heritage assets of archaeological interest may survive on the site. The planning authority wishes to secure the provision of appropriate archaeological investigation, including the publication of results, in accordance with Section 12 of the NPPF
Environment and sustainability
32 An emergency flood evacuation plan for this development demonstrating safe egress from the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority within three months of the date of this permission. The development shall be carried on in accordance with the approved details.
To ensure the safety of the users of the building. (Policy S6 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) refers).
33 The development hereby approved shall be carried out in full accordance with the details set out in the Energy Strategy (OR Consulting Engineers, 12 March 2014).
Reason: To ensure that the development makes the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with London Plan Policy 5.2 and Core Strategy Policies S7 and PN2
Conditions (14/01450/LB)
1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 18(1) (a) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed in this notice.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
3 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a schedule and samples of the materials (which shall be inspected on site) to be used in the external elevations of the proposed extensions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with English Heritage. The development hereby permitted shall be thereafter built in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings and structures within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
40 4 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, drawings at 1:20 scale for all external and internal construction details for both new build and making-good to historic fabric shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings, structures and boundary treatments within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
5 Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for the siting and design of all boundary treatments (gates, railings and means of enclosure) showing all fixtures, fittings and hinges etc shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with English Heritage. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before the use hereby permitted commences and retained for the duration of the development.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings, structures and boundary treatments within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
6 Prior to the commencement of development, a method statement for the treatment of all tombs and slabs within the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with this method statement.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings and structures within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
7 No vents, extracts or plant other than those shown on the submitted and approved plans shall be affixed or installed within the building.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings and structures within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
8 Notwithstanding the information shown on the accompanying plans, a method statement for the dismantling, movement and re-ereciton of the churchyard gate pier and associated boundary wall shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Authority in consultation with English Heritage before commencement of works.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings, structures and boundary treatments within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
9 Notwithstanding the information shown on the accompanying plans, full drawn details at a scale of no less than 1:50 of the proposed refuse storage area, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with English Heritage before commencement of the works.
41
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings and structures within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
10 Notwithstanding the information shown on the accompanying plans, full drawn details at a scale of no less than 1:20 of the proposed new doorway beneath the East window of the North Aisle, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with English Heritage before commencement of the works.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sustains and enhances the setting and interest of the listed buildings within the site. (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
11 Elements of the building to be demolished will be recorded at level 3 in accordance with English Heritage’s Understanding historic buildings guidance and the results deposited with the Greater London Historic Environment Record (HER).
Reason: To record and enhance the understanding of the heritage asset to be lost (Policy 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011 and S9 of the London Borough of Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) refer).
42