ADDRESS: 10 Pascal Street, London, Lambeth, SW8 4SH Application Number: 20/02331/FUL Case Officer: Magda Kotyza Ward: Oval Date Received: 13/07/2020 Proposal: Full 'slot-in' planning application for phased residential led mixed-use development above and surrounding Nine Elms Station, comprising three new residential buildings of 21 storeys, 16 storeys and 17 storeys providing a total of 479 homes (Use Class C3), plus small scale commercial floorspace of 108m2 (Expanded Use Classes A1-A4 and D1), works within the Nine Elms Station 'boxes', a new public square, and associated works.
Applicant: Connected Living London (Nine Agent: Avison Young Elms) Limited
RECOMMENDATION
1. Resolve to grant conditional planning permission subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) containing the planning obligations listed in this report and any direction as may be received following further referral to the Mayor of London.
2. Agree to delegate authority to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability to:
a. Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes; and b. Negotiate, agree and finalise the planning obligations as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3. In the event that the committee resolves to refuse planning permission and there is a subsequent appeal, delegated authority is given to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.
4. In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within 6 months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in this report, addendums and/or the PAC minutes.
SITE DESIGNATIONS
Relevant site designations: Opportunity Area Vauxhall Opportunity Area Central Activities Zone Central Activities Zone Flood Risk Zone 3 CAA Helipad Safeguarding Zone CAA Helipad Safeguarding Zone Neighbourhood Planning Area Kennington Oval and Vauxhall Protected Vistas Brixton Panoramic Local View Brixton Historic Towers Local View London Distributor Roads Wandsworth Road
LAND USE DETAILS
Site area (ha): 0.65 hectares
NON-RESIDENTIAL DETAILS
Use Class Use Description Floorspace (m2) (Gross Internal Area) Existing* 0
Extant Consent* C3 Residential 35,782sqm (15/06216/FUL) Class B1a Office 4,811 Class D2** Gym 272 Class A1/A3/A4 Retail 580
Proposed* C3 Residential 39,695 A1/A2/A3/A4/D1 Flexible (Retail and 108 Community) * Does not include Nine Elms Station as this falls outside of the scope of this application. ** Gym for use by residents only
RESIDENTIAL DETAILS
Residential No. of bedrooms per unit Total Type Habitable Rooms Studio 1 2 3 4 Total Existing Affordable n/a Private/Market n/a Total n/a
Extant Affordable 0 11 57 14 2 84 Consent (Intermediate Rent) Private/Market 0 150 98 0 0 248 Total 0 161 155 14 2 332
Proposed Intermediate 21 55 43 36 0 155 404 On-site Discount (32.4% (34.4% of Market Rent of all all hr) (DMR) units) (London Living Rent) Intermediate 0 0 16 5* 0 21 68 DMR (4.4% (5.8% of (Lambeth of all all hr) Tenancy units) Strategy (2020) Equivalents ) Private/Market 32 146 121 4 303 703 (Build to Rent) (63.2 (59.8%) %) Total 53 201 180 45 0 479 1175 (100%) (100%)
Proposed Affordable n/a Off-Site Rented Social Rented n/a Intermediate n/a Private/Market n/a Total n/a * The rents for 3-bedroom units set out in the Lambeth Tenancy Strategy (2020) are at target rent levels
Amount (£)
Payment in Lieu of n/a Affordable Housing Details/Trigger Review Mechanism 1. Pre implementation: if not implemented within 24 months from vacant possession 2. Late Stage Review: triggered at 18 months from first of occupation of market units or 100% occupation of market units (whichever is the earliest)
ACCESSIBILITY
Number of C3 Units M4(2) Units 418 M4(3) Units 61
PARKING DETAILS
Car Parking Spaces Car Parking Spaces % of Bike Motor- (General) (Disabled) EVCP Spaces cycle Spaces Resi Commercial Visitor Resi Commercial Visitor Existing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed 0 0 0 14 0 0 100 851 0
LEGAL SERVICES CLEARANCE
AUDIT TRAIL Consultation Name/Position Lambeth department Date Sent Date Report Comments Received Cleared in para: Susan Boucher Legal Services 29/03/21 30/03/21 31/03/21 Throughout Senior Lawyer
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This application is for a residential-led development by Connected Living London (Nine Elms) Ltd (a joint venture partnership between TfL and Grainger Plc) of a site above the Nine Elms Underground Station which is currently under construction.
The application site is located on the northern side of Pascal Street and corner of Wandsworth Road, approximately 800m to the southwest of Vauxhall Station. The site sits within the Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea Opportunity Area (VNEB OA) and forms the southern boundary of the Central Activities Zone (CAZ), as identified by the London Plan (2020).
This application relates to the development above and surrounding the Nine Elms Station, but does not include the station itself or the external appearance of the station buildings. The site benefits from an extant planning permission (ref: 15/06216/FUL) for a residential led development including three residential towers above the station podium, providing 332 residential units and a new public square between the residential towers with a retail unit fronting it. The extant consent also includes a commercia/office building (Block D) to the north-west of the current application site.
The proposal seeks to ‘slot -in’ into the extant scheme (ref: 15/06216/FUL) and includes a residential led mixed-use development comprising three new residential buildings of 21 storeys (Block A), 16 storeys (Block B) and 17 storeys (Block C) providing a total of 479 homes including 40 per cent affordable housing which would replace the previously approved (ref: 15/06216/FUL) residential towers. This represents an overall increase of 147 residential units (44 per cent) when compared with the extant permission while the number of affordable units would increase by 92 (109 per cent). The proposed residential units are Built to Rent (BtR), which is purpose built housing that is typically 100 per cent rented out and managed by a single professional provider. The proposal also includes a public square (Pascal Square) with a small flexible commercial unit (Use Class A1-A4 and D1) facing the new Pascal Square and associated works. It is proposed to deliver the scheme in phases which would provide for the potential delivery of Block D under the extant consent together with the delivery of Blocks A, B and C as proposed in the current scheme.
The development would maximise housing delivery and provide much needed, good quality housing, including a high level of affordable housing, at a density that makes optimum use of the application site. The level of affordable housing at 40 per cent meets the policy requirement for a scheme on public sector land where a portfolio agreement with the Mayor of London is in place. However, the proposals were viability tested due to their reliance on grant funding and the non-policy compliant tenure split of the residential units. An independent review confirmed that the affordable housing offer is the maximum viable. During the application process extensive discussions with the GLA took place and the applicant secured an in principle additional, bespoke grant offer which enabled the scheme to reduce the originally offered rent levels. An early and a late stage review are recommended to ensure that the affordability of rents is further maximised should the viability improve.
The acceptability of provision of tall buildings has been established through the extant permission, and the proposed towers at 21, 16 and 17 storeys sit within the policy requirements and design aspirations of the London Plan, the Lambeth Local Plan and the emerging draft Lambeth Local Plan. Despite the constraints of the site laid down by the station building, the triangular building form and position of each block, the use of high quality materials, the junction between the station and the development above, and the creation of a significant area of new public realm provides a suitable and positive edge and gateway between the Vauxhall tall building cluster and the lower scale of development to the south. The proposed scheme would not result in harm to any heritage assets or their settings or affect local views from Brockwell Park. In addition, the development has been designed in conjunction with advice offered by the Metropolitan Police’s Design Officer seeking to minimise the opportunity for crime/terrorism.
The development would provide a high quality residential environment for all future occupiers and would contribute significantly to meeting Lambeth’s and London’s housing targets. All of the new dwellings have been designed to meet relevant standards in terms of size, layout, aspect and adaptability. The proposed units will achieve reasonable levels of outlook, daylight and sunlight. In addition, the development is inclusive of generous on-site amenity (both private and communal), play space provision and the delivery of a significant new area of public realm.
The proposals would ensure that levels of privacy and outlook of adjoining residential uses is maintained and in some areas enhanced when compared with the existing situation. In terms of the impact on daylight and sunlight, the change from the ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ application scheme, there is fairly limited effect in absolute terms upon neighbouring properties, with the isolated exception of daylight to three windows. However, these windows have inherent sensitivity to any massing change as each of these rooms have a balcony soffit above windows and consideration should be given to the context of the application site which is located within an opportunity area. Officers are satisfied that the impact of the proposal on daylight and sunlight of neighbouring properties is acceptable.
The development would have an acceptable impact on the highway and transport network. The development would be car free, with occupants of the commercial and residential units not eligible for parking permits. 14 on-site disabled parking spaces would be provided with a parking management plan secured by Section 106 Agreement. The scheme would provide a total of 851 cycle parking spaces, in accordance with the London Plan standards. The new public realm will serve to improve links throughout the area as well as provide an attractive and well-designed area for people to dwell. The development would also contribute to improvements to the Local Healthy Routes network. The development would be suitably mitigated in terms of its impact upon local infrastructure. Subject to conditions, the development would not impact unacceptably upon the function and safety of the highway network (both pedestrian and vehicular).
The principles of the Mayor’s energy hierarchy have been applied to the proposed development and the Energy Strategy demonstrates that a site-wide carbon emissions reduction of 56 per cent would be achieved over the Building Regulations Part L 2013 Baseline. A future financial contribution is required to offset all remaining regulated CO2 emissions to 100 per cent or “zero carbon emissions” will be secured through Section 106 Agreement.
Subject to conditions, the development would meet technical requirements in respect of sustainability, air quality, flood risk mitigation, wind conditions, waste and recycling and water infrastructure.
The development would provide an appropriate balance of uses including private and affordable homes, and commercial uses, and would improve the environment both in terms of linkages and new public realm. The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development conferred upon Local Planning Authorities by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
OFFICER REPORT
Reason for referral to PAC: The application is reported to the Planning Applications Committee in accordance with (1) (A) (a) (i) of the Committee’s terms of reference as it relates to a major application for the provision of more than 35 residential dwellings.
1 THE APPLICATION SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA
1.1 The application site is located on the northern side of Pascal Street and corner of Wandsworth Road, approximately 800m to the southwest of Vauxhall Station. The site sits within the Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea Opportunity Area (VNEB OA) and forms the southern boundary of the Central Activities Zone (CAZ), as identified by the London Plan (2021). Figure 1 below shows the site and its surrounding context.
Figure 1: The site and its surrounding context (including borough boundary)
1.2 The 0.65ha application site is already under construction to deliver Nine Elms Underground Station. Nine Elms forms part of the Northern Line Extension from Kennington to Battersea, approved under a Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO) (ref. TWA 3/1/415). The Nine Elms Station does not form part of this application and the proposed development would be located above it.
1.3 Prior to this, the site accommodated a number of buildings/uses. The eastern part of the site formed part of the car park for the former Sainsbury’s supermarket to the north, while the western part comprised one and two storey buildings with offices for the Covent Garden Market Authority
(CGMA), and offices/workshops for Banham Patent Locks. The CGMA office was relocated to within the remaining CGMA site to the west, while Banham’s relocated to new purpose-built premises in Wandsworth.
Adjoining Sites
1.4 The site is bounded to the north by the former Sainsbury’s supermarket site, which has been recently redeveloped to provide a new Sainsbury’s superstore and 737 residential dwellings (ref. 11/02326/OUT). Blocks C and D of the proposed Sainsbury’s scheme face directly onto the application site rising to a total height of 19 storeys with a commercial frontage at ground floor level.
1.5 To the west of the site is the existing car park for the CGMA site within LB Wandsworth. The market buildings are located approximately 170m to the southwest. This site is also subject to a future redevelopment proposal (ref. 2014/2810), with an outline planning consent for the ‘Apex Site’, which directly adjoins the application site. Further details are set out in Section 3 of this report.
1.6 On the southern side of Pascal Street, the area is predominantly residential in character, with a terrace of two storey homes fronting onto Pascal Street and running around Bramley Crescent to the south. Two, three storey flatted blocks (Charman House and Lockyer House) run perpendicular to the site, fronting onto Wandsworth Road and Bramley Crescent respectively.
1.7 The eastern side of Wandsworth Road is also largely residential in character. The residential units are predominantly contained in formal arrangements of slab blocks either fronting onto or running perpendicular to Wandsworth Road. These blocks range in height from four storeys on the Wyvil Estate in the north to the part five/part six storey Wilbraham House further south. Opposite the junction with Pascal Street is Wilcox Road, which contains a number of retail units and is formally designated in the Local Plan as Wilcox Road Local Retail Centre.
Policy designations, accessibility and constraints
1.8 In terms of policy designations, the site falls within the VNEB Opportunity Area and the Central Activities Zone. The site falls within two local viewing corridors from the east, known as Brixton Panoramic and Brixton Historic Towers respectively. The site is also within Flood Zones 2 and 3. The site is not located within or adjoining a Conservation Area and there are no listed structures on or surrounding the site.
1.9 The site is well served by public transport. Vauxhall Underground and mainline stations are within 800m and various bus routes serve Wandsworth Road. The site largely achieves a PTAL of 6a (very accessible), but there is a small part of the site to the west that drops to level 3. The accessibility will be further enhanced when the new station opens on site. In terms of parking, the site is within the Stockwell Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ).
2 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
2.1 Figure 2, below, shows aerial image of the application site.
Figure 2. View towards north (Source: Google maps)
Figure 3. (Source: Google maps)
2.2 Figure 4, below, shows a range of views from around the site from October 2020.
Figure 4: Images of the site as of October 2020
2.3 Figure 5, below, shows a range of longer views from around the site.
Figure 5: Views towards the application site (Source: Heritage Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment).
3 PROPOSAL
3.1 Summary of the Proposal
3.2 The proposals seek to develop above and around the Nine Elms Station buildings to provide a ‘slot -in’ residential led mixed-use development comprising three new residential buildings (Use Class C3) of 21 storeys (Block A), 16 storeys (Block B) and 17 storeys (Block C) providing a total of 479 homes, and small scale commercial floorspace of 108m2 (Expanded Use Classes A1-A4 and D1), works within the Nine Elms station boxes, a new public square, and associated works. The proposal does not include the station or its appearance. Each element of the scheme is set out in further detail below.
Figure 6. Proposed site layout
3.3 The affordable housing would comprise 176 units in total (40 per cent by habitable room), all of which will be accommodated within Block A. The affordable housing is to be provided at discounted rent levels compared to open market rents as follows:
• 155 units (88 per cent by habitable rooms) at London Living Rent equivalents • 21 units (12 per cent by habitable rooms) at Lambeth Tenancy Strategy (2020) equivalents
3.4 The scheme forms part of TfL’s London-wide Build to Rent (BtR) portfolio which aims to deliver in excess of 3,000 new homes of which a minimum of 40 per cent will be affordable. The first phase of delivery includes six sites in total including Pascal Street (see below for the full list of first phase sites). Connected London Living (CLL) has been created as a joint venture between TfL and Grainger PLC (GPLC) to deliver and manage its BtR portfolio going forward. CLL will manage both private and affordable units on site noting that CLL has applied to become a Registered Provider.
Other Phase 1 Build to Rent sites are: • Montford Place, Lambeth - 139 homes (planning application ref: 20/01086/FUL with a resolution to grant permission on 15.12.2020) • Limmo Peninsula, Canning Town, Newham - with the potential for up to 1,500 homes • Southall Sidings , Ealing - with the potential for up to 400 homes • Cockfosters Tube station, Enfield - with the potential for up to 300 homes • Arnos Grove Tube station, Enfield - with the potential for up to 100 homes
3.5 Detail of the Proposal
3.6 The application follows on, and ‘slots-in’ to the following extant planning permissions:
• Nine Elms Point (ref: 11/02326/OUT) relates to the site immediately to the north of the site and phase 2 of the scheme included the eastern part of the application site. This consent has been recently delivered by Barratt Homes Ltd. The approved scheme includes an underground car park which is to be provided from Pascal Street through the Nine Elms Station box. The relocation of affordable homes which were approved within the current application site to a site on the Fenwick Estate was approved in 2016 (ref: 15/05297/RG3).
• Nine Elms Station (ref: TWA 3/1/415): The station position, internal layout external appearance and associated landscaping has been approved through the Northern Line Extension Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO). This scheme is currently being constructed. Once complete, the two station boxes will provide ‘voids’ at ground and basement levels into which the proposed development will ‘slot-in, and a podium onto which the proposed blocks will sit upon. The station boxes and all subterranean works approved under the TWOA are expected to be carried out in full, while public realm landscape works are to be implemented in part only.
• Nine Elms Over Station Development (ref: 15/06216/FUL): Planning permission was granted in 2016 for a residential led mixed use development above and surrounding the proposed Nine Elms Station comprising four buildings between 5 and 20 storeys above the station podium, providing 332 residential units; 4,811sqm of workspace/office (B1); 272sqm of assembly and leisure (D2) and 580sqm of retail (falling within class A1/A3/A4), a new public square, amenity space, and associated works. The application site comprised the current application site and land to the north which accommodated commercial Block D. The developer (TfL) has advised that they are planning to deliver Block D under the extant consent. The current proposal is to replace the approved Blocks A, B and C and the majority of the ground level public realm.
3.7 Figure 7 below shows the application boundary in the context of the aforementioned extant or implemented schemes and the ‘slot-in’ plan (please also see larger image in Appendix 4).
Figure 7. Extant planning consent boundaries across the application site.
Nine Elms Station 3.8 Although the station and its associated structures above ground level fall outside of the scope of this application, it is important to explain the extent of the station structures as this sets the context for the layout of the proposed scheme above. The station ‘box’ extends four levels below ground and projects two storeys above ground level. The above ground structure is split into two separate buildings, one to the east and one to the west of the application site (see Figure 7, above). The eastern building has a total footprint of 2,454sq.m, while the western building has a smaller footprint of 1,136sq.m. The two buildings are separated by Pascal Square.
3.9 The eastern building provides the main entrance to the new station fronting onto Wandsworth Road (see Figure 8 below), with residential and servicing cores along its northern façade. The western elevation is essentially a flank wall, while the southern elevation provides station access/egress points for maintenance and emergency, along with vehicular access to the basement parking level for this and the Sainsbury’s site.
Figure 8: An indicative image of the station entrance (along with the OSD proposal above) from Wilcox Street. 3.10 The western building of the Nine Elms station has been designed to provide an additional entrance to the station should the need arise in the future. The core to the residential units in Block A above will be located on the northern side of the building. Above ground level of the station both buildings are largely functional in appearance with the presence of ventilation louvers
Figure 9: An indicative image of the station buildings (along with the OSD proposal) facing northeast from Pascal Street.
Basement Level
3.11 While the station structure comprises the majority of the sub-ground level, there is a basement area (see Fig. 10, below) that forms part of this application to provide 14 Blue Badge spaces along with provision of 363 cycle parking spaces to serve the residential element of the proposed development. This basement, accessed direct from Pascal Street, also provides shared access to the adjoining Sainsbury’s scheme residential car park. Basement level 1 would be used by residents from Block A and level 2 by residents of Blocks B and C.
Figure 10: Proposed basement layouts.
Blocks A, B and C
3.12 The proposed block layout follows that of the extant permission (ref:15/06216/FUL). Figure 11 shows the key differences which are the increase in height to blocks B and C and a series of pop outs to each of the blocks. The roof form has also been simplified with the removal of penthouse apartments. In addition, changes to structural strategy allow to increase in the number of residential units on each floor from eight to nine (Block A) and to 10 (Blocks B and C).
Figure 11: Key design changes from extant consent (the image of the left shows increased heights and the image on the right shows the pop outs).
Block A
3.13 Block A is a residential tower that sits on top of the western station building. The tower is triangular in shape, with the diagonal edge facing southwest. The tower rises to a maximum height of 21 storeys (88.8m AOD) which is approximately 3m lower than the approved Block A (See Figure 17 and Appendix 4). Block A provides 176 residential units, comprising 21 studio flats, 55 one- bedroom flats, 59 two-bedroom flats and 41 three-bedroom flats all of which would be intermediate tenure. The standard floorplate shows nine units on each floor around a central core (see Figure12 below). All of the units would have private balconies.
Figure 12: A typical residential floor plate for Block A
3.14 The podium (between the station and the residential units) provides a transfer area between the main access core serving the basement, ground floor and podium area to the residential core serving upper floors. The first floor level also includes communal external amenity space (incorporating play space), a residents’ lounge, plant rooms and refuse and cycle storage for 180 cycles (see Figure 13 below). In terms of separation distances, Block A sits 34m to the west of Block B, 15.7m from the proposed building on the Apex Site (CGMA); between 11m to 13m to the south of approved Block D and at least 17.4m from the residential properties on the southern side of Pascal Street.
Figure 13. First floor layout in Block A.
Block B 3.15 Block B is the middle residential tower sitting on top of the eastern station building overlooking Pascal Square. As with Block A the tower is triangular in shape with its main diagonal facade facing southeast. The tower rises to a maximum height 16 storeys (74.1m AOD) which is 1.1m higher than the approved Block B (See Figure 17 and Appendix 4). Block B provides 146 residential units, comprising 16 studio flats, 68 one-bedroom flats, 60 two-bedroom flats and 2 three-bedroom flats, all of which would be private tenure. The standard floor plate shows 10 units on each floor around a central core. Except for four units, all other units would have private balconies (see Figure 14, below).
Figure 14. A typical residential floor plate for Block B
3.16 The podium (between the station and the residential units) is shared with Block C and provides access cores to the basement and first floor level with a concierge area, internal residential lounges with access to outdoor amenity space, cycle stores (for 264 cycles), refuse stores and plant areas (see figure 15, below). In terms of separation distances, Block B sits 13.2m to the south of the Sainsbury’s scheme (Block D), 34m to the east of Block A, 15.2m (at its closest point) from Block C and at least 20.5m from the residential properties on the southern side of Pascal Street.
Figure 15: First floor layout in Block B and C.
Block C 3.17 Block C is the eastern-most residential tower also sitting above the eastern station building overlooking Wandsworth Road. The tower rises to a maximum height 17 storeys (77.3m AOD) which is 7.3m higher than the approved Block C (See Figure 17 and Appendix 4). Block C provides 157 residential units, comprising 16 studio flats, 78 one-bedroom flats, 61 two-bedroom flats and two three-bedroom flats 11, all of which would be private tenure. The standard floor plate shows 10 units on each floor around a central core. All units would have private balconies. A typical layout is shown in Figure 16, below. As explained above, blocks B and C share a podium level.
Figure 16: A typical residential floor plate for Block C
Figure 17: Proposed southern elevation compared with the extant scheme shown in blue (left to right – Blocks A, B and C)
External appearance
3.18 The proposals use brick throughout with accent brickwork for detail and definition. The façades have been developed using primary and secondary piers, horizontal bands, grouped windows and expressed crowns.
Figure 18. Typical upper floor bay study.
Commercial unit in Pascal Square – Pavilion Building
3.19 The proposed retail units within the station structure do not form part of this proposal, but the scheme does propose a separate, free-standing two storey 108sq.m commercial unit (Use Class A1/A2/A3/A4 and D1) to adjoin the flank wall of the eastern station building. This pavilion building will extend approximately half the length of the eastern building facing onto Pascal Square (see figure 20, below).
Public Realm
3.20 The proposals create more than 2,240sqm of new public realm. This includes the creation of Pascal Square (between blocks A and B) (see Figure 19) and parts of Hebden Way (to the north of the station buildings linking with the public realm provided by the Sainsbury’s scheme). The public realm will be predominantly hard landscaped, with tree planting and areas of soft landscaping, incidental play space and seating. The public realm will accommodate a further 38 cycle parking spaces. Improvements to Pascal Street (outside of the red line) are to be secured to deliver a loading bay and possibly car club bays.
Figure 19: Site layout showing proposed indicative public realm – Pascal Square
Figure 20: CGI showing Pascal Square view looking east towards Block B and the Pavilion Building.
Phasing 3.21 It is proposed to implement the scheme in phases which seek to facilitate part-implementation of the extant consent (ref: 15/06216/FUL) in relation to the consented Block D. The phasing strategy, which would be secured through the Section 106 Agreement, is as follows:
Prior to commencement: the station ‘boxes’ approved pursuant to the TWAO will be completed and the associated public realm works built out. As the station is expected to be delivered in 2021, officers consider it appropriate to extend the normal three-year time period (as set out in Section 91(1)(a) of the TCPA) for the commencement of the current scheme to four years (i.e. three years beyond the intended station delivery) in accordance with part (b) of Section 91. This is reflected in proposed Condition 1 and would not itself be included in a phasing strategy; it is explained here as it provides the context for the rest of the proposed phasing strategy. The extended period for commencement of the scheme is recommended in order to provide for any potential delays to the delivery of the station and would enable the applicant to undertake the necessary procurement arrangements in order to deliver this scheme once the station is delivered.
Phase 1: Enabling works for Blocks A, B and C (including works at basement levels and temporary works such as erection of hoarding, hoist and cabins).
Phase 2: Main construction works for Block A, B and C; the pavilion building; public realm works to provide access to buildings and occupation of Blocks A, B and C.
Phase 3: Construction of Block D (implemented pursuant to the extant consent) to include associated public realm. Pascal Square area to be utilised as construction compound for Block D contractor.
Phase 4: Delivery of Pascal Square following dismantling of Block D construction compound.
3.22 In the event that there is an anticipated delay in the delivery of Block D, provision of temporary landscaping and access rights to Pascal Square following the practical completion of Blocks A, B and C will be required and secured through the S106 legal agreement. Furthermore, the S106 legal agreement will also secure the delivery of a permanent landscaping scheme should development of Block D not come forward within five years of first occupation of any residential unit. Officers acknowledge that should the development of Block D site come forward after that time, sections of Pascal Square may have to be temporarily closed to allow for construction access and compound for Block D and this will be secured through the S106 legal agreement.
Amendments
3.23 During the course of the application, the following amendments were made:
• Removal of A5 use from the flexible uses proposed in the commercial unit • Removal of 4 balconies in Block B to overcome overlooking issues • Incorporation of privacy mitigation measures including realignment of windows and obscured glazing to several windows • Revised design of Pascal Square to overcome transport and accessibility concerns • Updated description of development to include ‘phased’ for clarity
3.24 Due to the minor nature of the amendments it was not considered necessary to re- consult.
Planning Performance Agreement
3.25 The current proposals have been the subject of pre-application discussions (under a Planning Performance Agreement) which commenced in September 2019 and remains in force until the determination of the planning application. The consultation process has included at various stages councillors and officers from development management
planning, transport, highways, heritage and design teams at Lambeth as well as the applicant and their consultant teams. The proposal was considered at the pre-application stage by the Council’s independent Design Review Panel (DRP) on 19 November 2019 where an initial steer was given.
3.26 The applicant has also conducted three separate public consultations events with the local community. The full details including dates and nature of comments made at each event and the applicant’s response to concerns are contained in the statement of community involvement prepared on behalf of the applicant by Cascade Communications Ltd and forms part of the formal submission information.
4 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
4.1 The application has a significant planning application history as part of its previous use as an employment site. However, it is not considered necessary or relevant to set this out in full in this report. Details of the site’s previous uses have already been set out in section 1 of this report.
Application site:
4.2 Sainsbury’s (Nine Elms Point) The eastern part of this site forms part of the original application site for the redevelopment of the Sainsbury’s site to the north. The original planning application (ref. 11/02326/OUT) was a hybrid submission comprising a full planning application for the Sainsbury’s site and an outline application for the site now subject to this application. The full description of development is as follows:
A part detailed and part outline planning application comprising: Full detailed planning permission for the demolition of the existing retail store and petrol station and the erection of a replacement retail store (7,432msq net trading floorspace (13,059msq gross internal floor area); children’s tutoring facility (298msq); lobby/circulation space (1,707msq); energy centre (779msq); flexible retail, community floorspace (787msq); office floorspace (1,860msq) and 645 residential units with ancillary gymnasium arranged in seven blocks including towers of 19, 28 and 37 storeys; 363 retail and 148 residential parking spaces; 882 cycle spaces together with associated open space, children’s play space, landscaping and public realm improvements along Wandsworth Road and a new route from Wandsworth Road to New Covent Garden;
Outline planning permission (with appearance, landscaping and access to be Reserved Matters) for 105msq of flexible A1, A2, A3, A4, D1 floorspace and 92 dwellings within 2 blocks [Blocks A and B]. In addition outline planning permission is also sought for a further 1736msq of flexible floorspace for use in association with the proposed Nine Elms Northern Line station or A1, A2, A3, A4, D1 use.
4.3 The application was approved on 06/11/2013. A number of variations to the original scheme have subsequently been made under Section 73 (ref. 14/05064/VOC, 15/05379/VOC and 17/00114/VOC). The image below shows how the Sainsbury’s scheme and this application relate. Blocks A and B sit within the Nine Elms OSD application site.
Figure 21: Sainsbury’s site and its relationship with the current application site
4.4 The Section 106 Agreement for the Sainsbury’s application made provision for 92 of the 148 affordable homes which had originally been intended to be located within blocks A and B to be provided off-site. Following TfL’s acquisition of the site the obligation was transferred to the Fenwick Estate in Stockwell and the delivery of 55 affordable dwellings in this location instead. The planning application (ref. 15/05297/RG4) was approved by the Council’s Planning Applications Committee on 9th February 2016.
4.5 Transport and Works Act 1982 (ref. 3/1/415) An application was made by Transport for London under the above legislation for the London Underground (Northern Line Extension) Order. The proposal sought the extension of the Charing Cross Branch of the Northern Line from Kennington to a new station at Battersea Power Station, with an intermediate station at Nine Elms (this site).
4.6 Following a public inquiry (19/11/13 – 20/12/13) the Secretary of State approved the Order, th thereby giving deemed planning permission for the extension on 12 November 2014. This consent is currently being implemented.
4.7 Nine Elms Over Station Development (OSD) The majority of this site forms part of the original application for development above the Nine Elms Station (15/06216/FUL) which was approved in 2016. The full description of development is as follows: A residential led mixed use development above and surrounding the proposed Nine Elms Station comprising four buildings between 5 and 20 storeys above the station podium and ranging in height from 29m AOD to 92m AOD, providing 332 residential units (C3) comprising 1 bed, 2 bed, 3 bed and 4 bed apartments; 4,811sqm of workspace/office (B1); 272sqm of assembly and leisure (D2) and 580sqm of retail (falling within class A1/A3/A4), a new public square, amenity space, play space, pedestrian and cycle connections, cycle parking, disabled car parking and associated works.
4.8 An application (ref: 20/03950/NMC) for non-material amendments to planning permission ref: 15/06216/FUL relating to amendments to conditions 5 (Archaeology), 6 (Drainage), 8 (FRA), 10 (External Construction Detailing), 11 (external materials - sample panels), 15 (Crime Prevention Strategy), 17 (Landscaping), 21 (Cycle Parking), 23 (Car parking), 24 (Waste Management Strategy) , 28 (Sound Insulation), 32 (Code for Sustainable Homes), 35 (Photovoltaics) and 38 (Solar Glare) to facilitate phased delivery of the development is pending consideration.
4.9 An application (ref: 20/03994/S106) for a deed of variation to the s106 legal agreement for planning permission ref: 15/06216/FUL relating to amendments to schedules: 3 (Local Labour in Construction and General Employment and Skills contributions); 4 (Intermediate Rental Units); (Affordable Housing Review); 9 (Employment and Skills Plan); 10 (Final energy strategy and District Heating Network Statement) and 13 (Landscaping/Public Realm) to facilitate phased delivery of the development is pending consideration. The proposal seeks to adjust proportionally financial contributions and alter triggers to align with the intended phasing strategy. During the assessment, it was discovered that the public realm plan annexed to the legal agreement incorporated a small piece of land which forms part of the Apex site in LB of Wandsworth which is owned by the CGMA - a third party who was not bound by the legal agreement. This application also seeks to incorporate the correct plan in its place.
4.10 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion A request for a screening opinion (ref: 19/04480/EIASCR) in respect of an Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed residential-led mixed use development was made on 2nd December 2019. Officers considered the proposals in accordance with the regulations and concluded that an EIA was not required. This was communicated formally to the applicant on 13th January 2020.
4.11 Covent Garden Market – Apex Site The Apex Site immediately adjoins the site to the west and forms part of the wider Covent Garden Market Authority (CGMA). This site is within the LB of Wandsworth and has an outline planning permission (ref. 2014/2810) for seven buildings (A1-A7) to provide a mix of uses including retail, offices, leisure and residential. Building A1 adjoins the application site and has an upper height limit of 86.2m AOD, which equates to approximately 20-25 storeys in height. The layout of the Apex Site in relation to this site is shown in Figure 22, below.
Figure 22: CGMA Apex site and its relationship with the current application.
5. CONSULTATIONS
5.1 Statutory and External Consultees
5.1.1 Greater London Authority (GLA) Stage 1 Report (18/11/20) Proposal is generally supported in strategic planning terms, subject to the following: ▪ Strong support for optimisation of housing provision on site; ▪ Affordable housing: The scheme could be eligible for the Fast Track Route, subject to confirmation of the final tenure split. Further discussions are therefore necessary to confirm whether the proposed tenure split is appropriate, based on identified local need. The final rent level assumptions and income thresholds should be secured by the Council. Appropriate review mechanisms should also be secured in the s106 agreement. (Tenures are discussed in the ‘Affordable housing tenure and viability’ section and also see Head of Terms (HoT) of the S106 agreement in section 6.13 of this report.) ▪ The overall unit mix and residential quality is acceptable. ▪ Access to internal and external amenity spaces to be provided to all residents and play space provision to be secured in perpetuity (HoT) ▪ Support for the layout, height and massing, architectural detailing to be secured by conditions (10 and 11) ▪ The proposals would not cause harm to any designated views, heritage assets or their settings ▪ Conditions relating to fire safety (C51); M4(2) and M4(3) units (C13); provision of Legible London Signage (10); Travel Plan (C23 and HoT); Delivery and Servicing Plan (19) Construction Logistics Plan (3) ▪ Removal of on-street car parking rights, 3 year cycle hire membership for all units and a contribution of £20,000 towards 10 additional cycle hire stands to be secured through s106 (HoT) ▪ Cycle parking should accord with the London Cycle Design Standards. Further information was received during application process which is considered to be acceptable given site’s constraints and a condition (21) is recommended. ▪ Commitment to the Street Space for London Plan has been confirmed by the applicant during the application process and this is reflected in Condition 3. ▪ The energy strategy is generally compliant with the London Plan policies however, the applicant is required to submit the additional information, which has been requested below. - Re-modelling of ‘Be Lean’ stage for both uses. Further information was submitted during application process i and a condition is also recommended (7) - Minimisation of energy costs to occupiers – Further information was provided by the applicant to the GLA and considered acceptable - Evidence of correspondence with DHN providers – Further information was provided by the applicant to the GLA - Drawings demonstrating how the site is to be future-proofed for a connection to a District Heating Network and detailed drawings of centralised energy centre have been provided by the applicant and considered to be acceptable by the GLA. - Be green: additional information on the loop system; heat recovery from the tube and the proposed heat pumps has been provided and found acceptable buy the GLA - Increased provision of PV panels was investigated and further area on Block B identified. A condition (43) is recommended to ensure this is further investigated at detailed design stage. - Carbon off setting to be confirmed – further information has been provided to the GLA and the council’s sustainability consultant. The final contribution will be established through revised Energy Strategy (condition 7) and secured through the s106 agreement. ▪ Flood risk and sustainable drainage: recommended further flood resistance measures to
ground floor areas (see Flood Risk section of this report) and a condition relating to a Flood Warning and Evacuation plan (Condition 9). Further information relating to drainage was provided during the application process and conditions recommended by Thames Water are recommended. ▪ Requested further details relating to water efficiency which are secured through conditions (37, 38 and 39) ▪ Urban greening to be maximised – the applicant submitted further information which were considered to be acceptable by the council’s biodiversity and sustainability advisors. ▪ (Officer comment: responses to the GLA comments are provided in each bullet point. Officers consider that the suggested conditions and HoT address matters raised in the GLA Stage 1 response).
5.1.2 Environment Agency (27/08/20) No objection or conditions recommended.
5.1.3 Historic England – Archaeology (20/10/20) No objection. No further assessments or conditions are required.
5.1.4 Historic England No comment
5.1.5 TfL Infrastructure Protection (26/08/20) No objection. The planning applicant is in communication with London Underground engineers with regard to the development above. Subject to the applicant fulfilling their obligations to London Underground and Transport for London under the legal requirements between ourselves and the promoter of the development we have no objection to make on this planning application. (officer comment: Informative 10 added))
5.1.6 Metropolitan Police - Designing Out Crime/Counter Terrorism (18/02/21) No objection in principle, subject to conditions to ensure that the development achieves Secured by Design Standards and the submission of a Counter Terrorism Strategy (officer comment: conditions 51, 52 and 53 are recommended)
5.1.7 Natural England (25/08/2020) No comment
5.1.8 Network Rail (21/10/2020) No objection subject to a requirement that the applicant/developer contacts Network Rail’s Asset Protection and Optimisation (ASPRO) team prior to works commencing and other informatives (officer comment: Informative 12 added).
5.1.9 Thames Water (04/09/2020) No objection subject to conditions. During the application process the applicant submitted additional detailed information relating to foul and surface water and Thames Water subsequently confirmed that both surface and foul water discharge by gravity to the combined sewer in Wandsworth Road via a new combined connection. Due to site constraints, Thames Water agreed with LLFA, that surface water rates cannot be restricted any further due to loading above Nine Elms Underground Station. Requested conditions relating to potable water infrastructure (8) further water capacity analysis (40), piling method statement (condition 18) and informatives (11). (officer comment: conditions recommended as indicated in the brackets)
5.1.10 TfL Spatial Planning (11.20) No objection. In order to be fully compliant with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and the PLP, further action required from the applicant is summarised below:
• Design and access to cycle stores should accord with the London Cycling Design Standards. (officer comment: see assessment under transport section and condition 21) • A contribution of £20k towards the provision of 10 cycle hire docks should be secured (HoT) • A minimum of three years free membership of the Cycle Hire scheme for each dwelling should be provided (officer comment: see HoT)) • Conditions to secure: Car Parking Management Plan London signage, Travel Plan, Construction Logistics Plan and Delivery and Servicing Plan. (officer comment: conditions 22, 10, 23, 3 and 19)
5.1.11 London Borough of Wandsworth (29/11/2020) No objection, made the following comments: ▪ Stressed the importance of providing safe and attractive access from Nine Elms station including provision of active frontages wherever possible (officer comment: the proposals meet those objectives) ▪ Request that daylight/sunlight assessment in relation to Building A1 on the Apex site is undertaken and the internal daylight assessment considers the impact of the approved scheme. (officer comment: this has been received during the application process and is discussed in section 6.12 of this report) ▪ Distance of 15m should be maintained from the Apex site buildings (officer comment: the proposed building would be over 15m from the Apex building) ▪ Development should accord with the Nine Elms Strategy Board’s agreed Employment and Skills Framework (officer comment: the council’s Employment and Skills Team advised that this will be achieved by widening the definition of local resident in the legal agreement – see HoT)
5.1.12 London Fire Brigade (04/03/2021) – no comments.
5.2 Internal:
5.2.1 Parks and Open Spaces– No objection, mitigation measures identified within the Biodiversity Report to be secured through conditions (4 and 15), exterior lighting strategy acceptable; following review of further information received in relation to Urban Greening Factor recommended conditions (41, 42, 44).
5.2.2 Veolia – No objection following a review of additional information requested in relation to collection vehicle size and weight of compacted waste.
5.2.3 Urban Design - No objection subject to conditions (10, 11, 12, 14, 15). Satisfied with further information received relating to circulation space and revisions introduced during the application process.
5.2.4 Sustainability (Bioregional) – No objection subject to conditions relating to: - potential connection to decentralised networks (HoT); - SAP calculations (33); - A revised energy statement to investigate improvements to the be Lean stage and calculate carbon offset contribution (7); - BREEAM (34 and 35) - Overheating analysis (36) - Water efficiency (37, 38 and 39) - Green roofs specification (41) - Urban Greening Factor (44) - Net biodiversity (15)
5.2.5 Policy – No objection but requested that the following is investigated/secured: - Commercial uses acceptable in principle except for A5 use and uses to be regulated through
conditions (46 and 47) (A5 use has been removed from the scheme) - Officers to verify loss of employment generating use (See para 6.1.10 of this report) - Support for increased housing provision on site including BtR, officers to be satisfied that second core option has been sufficiently explored and 25 year covenant should be sought if possible (see section 6.1 of this report) - BtR features to be secured through legal agreement (HoT) - The proposal to be viability tested and affordable housing and review mechanisms secured through legal agreement (See section 6.2 of this report and HoT) - The applicant should be asked to provide more family-sized units and fewer studio units (This was explored by officers and the unit mix is discussed in section 6.3 of this report)
5.2.6 Transport, Parking and Highways – No objection following the review of additional information submitted during the application process and conditions/planning obligations recommended in relation to: - Cycle parking details including lift details (21) - Delivery and Servicing Plan (19) - Construction Management Plan (3) - Electric Vehicle Charging Points (24) - Travel plan and monitoring fee (23 and HoT) - Car Parking Management Plan (22 and HoT) - Parking permit free (HoT) - Financial contribution towards 10 cycle hire docking stands on Hebden Place (HoT) - Three year membership of the Cycle Hire scheme for each dwelling (HoT) - Three year car club membership for each dwelling (HoT) - Two new on-street car club bays to be provided (HoT) - A Heathy Route Network contribution of £ £172,500 for Pascal Street improvements (HoT) - S278 agreement for highway works (HoT)
5.2.7 Travel Plan coordinator – No objections subject to a condition (24) and monitoring fee (HoT)
5.2.8 Building Control – No objection.
5.2.9 Regulatory Support Services (Environmental Health) – no objection subject to conditions: - CEMP (Condition 3) - Flues and extraction plant (Condition 28) - Noise and vibration attenuation of ventilation plant (Condition 29) - Environmental noise and vibration (Condition 6, 25 and 26) - Noise control management (Condition 27) - Commercial uses management (Condition 31) - Delivery and Servicing management plan (Condition 19) - Pedestrian Wind Microclimate (Condition 30) - External Lighting (Condition 32)
5.2.10 Lead Local Flood Officer – No objection . 5.2.11 Air quality – No objections subject to conditions (4 and 5)
5.2.12 Employment and Skills – No objections subject to legal agreement to secure Employment and Skills plans and a financial contribution of £280,961 (HoT)
5.2.13 Arboricultural Officer - No objections subject to conditions (15, 16, 41, 42, 44)
5.3 Adjoining owners/occupiers
5.3.1 Letters were sent to all adjoining properties and wider neighbours (1031). In addition, site notices (x3) were displayed around the site from 7th September to 28th September 2020, and the application was advertised in the local paper (South London Press) on 25th August. In response to consultation seven letters of representation were received of which two were in support and five were in objection. It is noted that one objection (relating to the impact on the Apex site) was withdrawn following a review of additional information provided by the applicant during the application process. The table below summarises the key issues raised.
Summary of objections Response Land Use • There is no need for such dense The site is located in a designated development in this area or more opportunity area and the density of the ‘unaffordable’ homes in the area proposed development is considered to be • What will be done to prevent flats from acceptable. Please refer to section 6.3 of this being sold to investors who will keep them report. empty The scheme includes 179 affordable units which represents 40 per cent of all homes (by habitable room) which is a policy compliant percentage for the nature of the scheme. Please refer to section 6.2 of this report, The proposal includes ‘Built to Rent’ homes which means that they are expected to be rented out rather than sold. A covenant provides for a claw-back arrangement if the homes are sold out of the BtR tenure before the end of 15 years. Please refer to paragraphs 6.1.4 – 6.1.8 of this report.
• Concern that public ream which is said to The proposed Pascal Square would be be available for community use will not delivered as part of the scheme and be materialise accessible to the public. This is proposed to be secured through the s106 agreement. Please also refer to section 6.4.20 – 6.4.25 of this report.
Design - Scale and Massing
• The new buildings should not be allowed Annex 11 of the Draft Revised Lambeth Local at all because they do not fit withing the Plan identifies the application site (as cluster policy of the London and Lambeth appropriate for tall buildings up to 100m AOD Plans. This is because they are and the proposed scheme does not exceed significantly taller than the existing tall that height having a maximum height of buildings which comprise the cluster on to 88.82m AOD. Officers consider that the which they are to be appended. The policy proposal in terms of scale, massing and says that such buildings must become less external appearance creates an acceptable small away from the tallest building. transition in scale between the taller parts of the cluster to the north and east and the lower scale of residential development to the south; further taking into account the delivery of a new station on this site and the intensification opportunity this presents. Please refer to section 6.4 of this report.
• The minimum distance between proposed The proposed Block A sits 15.7m from the Building A and the consented Building A1 proposed building on the Apex site which is on the Apex site should be no less than in no less than the extant consent. the consented scheme.
Amenity • Unacceptable loss of daylight and sunlight The applicant has undertaken a full daylight, sunlight and overshadowing study of the proposed development and all relevant existing uses adjoining the site. The study has been subject to independent assessment, which considers the change from the ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ application scheme and there is fairly limited effect in absolute terms upon existing neighbouring properties, with the isolated exception of three rooms at low level in Block D at Nine Elms Point. The impact on sunlight and daylight received by neighbouring residential occupiers is considered to be acceptable. Please refer to section 6.7 of this report.
• The daylight and sunlight report relies on The BRE guide allows to consider an extant the allegedly approved scheme which will scheme as the baseline for daylight and have significant impact on light and this sunlight assessment and the methodology proposal will make it worse. adopted by the applicant has been found acceptable by the council’s independent advisor. Please refer to section 6.7 of this report.
• The Daylight and Sunlight Assessment A supplementary daylight submission was should be revised to include analysis on received during the application process and impact both to and from the consented reviewed by the council’s advisor. Please Apex scheme refer to section 6.7 of this report.
• Tall building will increase wind tunnels on The application is supported by a Micro- Wandsworth Road Climate Assessment which has been reviewed by the council’s wind expert. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in this respect. Please refer to paragraphs 6.11.18 – 6.11.20 of this report.
• Impact of construction activity including in The impact of construction has been the context of other developments in considered and found to be acceptable Wandsworth. subject to a condition relating to a full • Impact of noise from trucks and HGVs Construction Environment Management Plan. accessing the site It is also recommended that a participation in the Considerate Constructors Scheme and the Vauxhall Nine Elms Construction Charter is to be secured through a legal agreement. Noise related impacts associated with operational phase of the proposed scheme are considered to be acceptable. Please refer to paragraphs 6.7.36 – 6.7.38 of this report.
• Improvements to the safety of pedestrians The assessment of the application is in Wandsworth Road would be welcome. informed by feedback from the TfL Spatial Planning Team and Lambeth Highways and Transport teams who do not consider that improvements to Wandsworth Road are required to make the scheme acceptable in planning terms. The proposal would deliver improvements to Pascal Street and publicly accessible areas within the application site.
Other • The impact on public services and The application is accompanied by an community facilities will be significant Education and Health Needs Assessment which shows that there is sufficient capacity in the area to accommodate demand for GP and educational services created by the proposed development. Summary of comments in support
• The development will provide more Noted.
housing opportunities and closer to TFL station • Planning and development should focus Noted. Biodiversity and air quality and related on the investment in more green spaces matters are discussed in sections 6.8.8-6.8.9 and improvements in air quality in the and 6.11.14 – 6.11.17 of this report. local area to offset the emissions from construction.
5 POLICIES
5.1 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 new London Plan (LP) (2021) and the Lambeth Local Plan (LLP) (September 2015). This application is also subject to the heritage statutory provisions as set out in the agenda pack and heritage analysis of the report.
5.2 The LLP is currently under partial review to ensure it complies with amendments to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the new London Plan. The Draft Revised Lambeth Local Plan (DRLLP) underwent public consultation under Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Plans) (England) Regulations 2012 between 31 January and 13 March 2020 and was submitted to the Secretary of State for examination on 22 May 2020. The examination hearing took place between the 27 October and 13 November 2020. The Inspector’s proposed main modifications will be made available for public consultation between 15 February and 29 March 2021. Those draft policies that are unaffected by proposed main modifications can be considered to have significant weight at this point, with moderate weight afforded to those policies that are subject to proposed main modifications.
5.3 The site falls within Kennington, Oval and Vauxhall designated neighbourhood planning area. A draft Kennington, Oval and Vauxhall neighbourhood plan has undergone pre-submission consultation although no weight can be given to these policies at this stage in the neighbourhood planning process. Kennington, Oval and Vauxhall (KOV) Neighbourhood Forum’s designation as a neighbourhood planning forum expired on 13 July 2020. KOV have submitted an application to be re-designated as a neighbourhood planning forum and a decision is expected in due course.
5.4 The latest NPPF was published in 2018 and updated in 2019. This document sets out the Government’s planning policies for England including the presumption in favour of sustainable development and is a material consideration in the determination of all applications.
5.5 The current planning application has been considered against all relevant national, regional and local planning policies as well as any relevant guidance. A full list of relevant policies and guidance has been set out in Appendix 3 to this report.
6 PLANNING ASSESSMENT
6.1 Land Use
6.1.1 The proposed development is a residential-led mixed use scheme, comprising 479 new homes and a commercial unit above the new Nine Elms station, within the Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea Opportunity Area (VNEB). The VNEB Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) identifies this area for high-density mixed-use development, including office, retail and residential intensification with a tall building cluster with heights up to 150m. As such, the LP states that at least 18,500 new homes and 18,500 new jobs shall be delivered in VNEB during the lifetime of the plan.
6.1.2 Lambeth recognises this opportunity and has adopted the Vauxhall Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), which sets out the key context in which new development will be delivered. The site is located within the Pascal Place Character Area, encompassing this site and the Sainsbury’s site to the north. In this area the SPD seeks to improve connections to and from the new station, access to the linear park, the river and development to the north. Active uses on Wandsworth Road and along Pascal Street are also encouraged. The SPD designates the area to the south
and east of the railway (encompassing this site) as an area of tall building sensitivity. The greatest sensitivity is further away from this site, closer to Vauxhall Park and its surrounding conservation area. Annex 11 of the DRLLP identifies the application site (location V6) as appropriate for tall buildings up to 100m AOD. In light of the above strategy, the overall principle of development is considered acceptable. Each of the specific uses proposed are considered further in land use terms below.
6.1.3 Residential Use The application involves 479 self-contained residential units which is an uplift of 147 units when compared to the extant permission. This use is welcome in principle and helps to achieve the objectives of LLP policy H1 and DRLLP policy H1 around maximising housing growth, as well as LP policy H1 around optimising the potential for housing delivery on suitable and available sites. The proposed mix of uses is also consistent with the objectives of LLP policy PN2 and DRLLP policy PN2 relating to Vauxhall.
Built to Rent (BtR) 6.1.4 The residential element is proposed in the form of BtR units. For clarity, in terms of use class categorisation BtR uses remain undistinguished from traditional residential uses and therefore also fall in C3 use. These units will effectively replace the market sale housing and affordable intermediate rent units of the extant consent. It is considered that the change in residential product from market sale units and affordable intermediate rent to a wholly build to rent is acceptable in principle, subject to the requirements of current and emerging Built to Rent policies being met.
6.1.5 There is no policy specific to Build to Rent in the current LLP. However, there is policy H11 in the LP and emerging policy H12 in the DRLLP, both of which are material considerations. LP H11 has full weight while DRLLP policy H12 is unaffected by the proposed main modifications and can be afforded significant weight.
6.1.6 All proposals for BtR must meet the criteria set out in part B of policy H11 of the LP to qualify as BtR. The criteria and how the proposals comply is as follows:
(a) size of scheme – the proposed scheme provides 479 residential units in total which exceeds the minimum requirement of 50 units; (b) covenanted for at least 15 years - the proposed residential units would be covenanted for rental use for 15 years and will be secured by a S106 planning obligation; (c) clawback mechanism – a clawback mechanism is included to ensure there is no financial incentive to break the covenant. The mechanism will follow the Formula set out in the GLA’s Affordable Housing SPG (2017) and will also be secured as a S106 planning obligation. (d) self-containment and separate letting of units – all the residential units will be self- contained and will be let separately. (e) unified ownership and management of all tenures – the residential units will be held in unified ownership and will be professionally managed by CLL with daily on-site presence. (f) longer tenancies (three years or more) with break clauses – all tenants will be offered a tenancy of up to 5 years with break clauses allowing a tenant to give 1 months’ notice after 6 months. Both will be secured as a S106 planning obligation. (g) rent and service charge certainty - all rents will be inclusive of service charges. Rent certainty will be provided to tenants for the period of their tenancy by clearly setting out how annual rent increases will be calculated (formula-linked) within the tenancy agreement. This will be secured by a s106 planning obligation. (h) on-site management and fees - the proposed development will have an on-site management presence from 8am to 8pm to assist future residents, manage deliveries and resolve any issues. The development will also have a 24 hour security presence. (i) providers have a complaints procedure in place and are a member of a recognised
ombudsman scheme - CLL is committed to having these procedures in place in line with its existing current practices. (j) providers do not charge up-front fees other than deposits – the applicant advises that there will be no upfront letting fees and deposits will be held securely in an appropriate Deposit Protection Scheme.
6.1.7 Policy H12 of DRLLP follows the policy approach set out in LP policy H11 but includes a number of additional requirements including a minimum covenant period of 25 years. It is noted that the applicant disputed this emerging policy through the examination process, but it is now given significant weight as the Inspector has not suggested any modifications to it. The Housing Delivery Statement submitted with the application argues that this requirement is onerous in the investment market, and effectively imposes a discount to the scheme’s investment value. The applicant considers that a 25 year covenant would have a severe impact on the viability and deliverability of the scheme. While this is not agreed by officers, the application was received in July 2020 which pre-dates this policy requirement which when combined with the fact the DRLLP H12 is not given full weight against the adopted LP policy H11 which requires a 15 year covenant period, is considered to be acceptable.
6.1.8 In principle, the proposed BtR units on this site are therefore supported by officers provided that appropriate planning obligations are secured to ensure compliance with the London Plan policy criteria above.
6.1.9 Ancillary Residential Uses The proposals include the provision of an internal shared residential amenity space which could include uses such as a cinema or games rooms. These facilities would only be available for use by all residents of Blocks A, B and C and not by members of the public. As such, the facilities would be ancillary to the C3 use and are considered acceptable in land use terms.
6.1.10 Employment Use Prior to clearance, the site accommodated approximately 4,200sq.m of employment floorspace. In the assessment of the application leading to the extant permission, it was acknowledged that the application under the TWAO addressed the loss of the previous employment floorspace through the relocation of the existing businesses to alternative sites. In addition, the extant permission includes provision of 4,811sq.m of new purpose-built office floorspace in Block D. It is expected that this would be delivered though the extant permission and the proposed phasing secured through the s106 agreement will allow for the implementation of Block D. Officers acknowledge that there is a possibility that Block D from the extant permission may not come forward. The assessment of the application under consideration does not rely on the delivery of Block D to make the current development acceptable. Overall, the proposals are considered to satisfy the requirements of Policy ED1 of DRLLP.
6.1.11 Commercial Use The proposed development seeks to provide a small (108sq.m) commercial unit falling within Use Classes A1-A4 and D1 which would be located within the Pavilion Building adjacent to the eastern station building and facing Pascal Square. The application is considered under the previous use class order due to the timing of its submission. The suitability of a small commercial unit is accepted through the extant permission and complies with policy ED6 of LLP and policy ED7 in DRLLP which support retail, service, leisure and recreation uses in the CAZ and therefore is supported. The originally proposed A5 use has been removed from the proposals due to the proximity of the site to a primary school. Condition (47) is recommended to ensure that the use of the Pavilion Building is not changed to other uses through permitted development rights.
6.1.12 Development phasing and build out
The scheme is intended to be delivered in a phased approach. A detailed phasing plan will therefore be sought through the s106 agreement to confirm delivery timescales. This will allow for the delivery of Block D from the extant permission and ensure that public realm is delivered in a timely manner. As explained in paragraph 3.22, this will include the possibility that the delivery of Block D is delayed
6.1.13 Land Use Conclusion Officers have assessed each of the proposed land uses in relation to relevant policies and other material considerations. It is concluded that the proposed mix of uses would be an acceptable mix, according with the aspirations set out in the Opportunity Area Planning Framework, Local Plan and Vauxhall SPD.
6.2 Affordable housing
6.2.1 Part A of policy H11 of the LP allows for affordable housing to be provided entirely as Discount Market Rent (DMR) units managed by a Build to Rent provider and delivered without grant. In these circumstances a registered provider of affordable housing does not need to be involved. It is expected in relation to this application that the DMR units will be managed by a registered provided as the scheme relies on receipt of grant funding. The proposed DMR units are fully integrated within the development and will be designed to the same specification as the market units. DMR homes must be secured in perpetuity which will be secured through the s106 agreement.
6.2.2 DRLLP policy H12 which is given significant weight builds on the approach of the LP by adding a number of Lambeth-specific requirements which are as follows:
Part (A) of the policy states that, where a development proposal involving Build to Rent has potential to include more than one residential core and/or block, applicants should use this to provide low-cost rented housing to be managed independently by a registered provider of affordable housing.
Part (B) of the policy states that, where an applicant can demonstrate to the council’s satisfaction that it is not feasible in design terms to include a separate residential core and/or block, the council will accept the full affordable housing requirement for the scheme as DMR units managed alongside the market rent units in accordance with the requirements of London Plan policy.
6.2.3 Taking part A first, the applicant has demonstrated that although more than one residential core is being provided, it is not viable for one of these to be provided solely for low cost rent accommodation. The potential of mixing tenures via a single core has also been discounted by the applicant due to the need to accommodate separate servicing and management arrangements for Registered Providers (RPs) and the legal constraints concerning service charges and welfare payments to tenants.
6.2.4 The site’s unique circumstances, whereby the development would be located above the station box with only three access points at ground floor level available, means that it is not possible to introduce a true second core into any of the blocks as only one entrance to each block is available at ground floor level. This means that introduction of a second core would be possible only from the podium level upwards. The shared core and shared amenity spaces could impact on the willingness of RPs to manage affordable units in such circumstances. The applicant’s architect has reviewed the design feasibility of accommodating an additional core within Block A which would be introduced at first floor level and therefore share the main entrance core at ground floor level. They estimated that the additional weight of the second core is likely to result
in a loss of two storeys and overall the introduction of the second core would result in a loss of 34 units and the overall affordable housing provision would be reduced to 34 per cent by habitable room. The two-core option could physically accommodate a 75:25 per cent tenure split with low cost rent and intermediate rent respectively. However, the viability review demonstrated that provision of low cost rent would not viable.
6.2.5 Given the above scheme constraints officers are satisfied that providing an additional separate core (including mixing tenures via a single core) will not be feasible. On this basis, officers would support in principle the provision of affordable housing as DMR units managed alongside the market units in accordance with policy H11 of the LP and part B of policy H12 of the DRLLP.
Quantum of affordable housing
6.2.6 LLP policy H2 states that it will seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing where sites that are over 0.1 hectares or capable of accommodating more than 10 units required to provide at least 50 per cent of units as affordable where public subsidy is available or 40 per cent without public subsidy.
6.2.7 The threshold approach to affordable housing in the Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG 2017 and in the LP is a material consideration with full weight. The LP policy H5 sets the affordable housing threshold at 50 per cent on public sector land where there is no portfolio agreement with the Mayor. Where there is a portfolio agreement in place to deliver at least 50 per cent across the portfolio of site, then the 35 per cent threshold should apply to individual sites.
6.2.8 To be eligible for the Fast Track route, a proposal must meet all four criteria set out in LP policy H5: 1) Meet and exceed the relevant threshold level of affordable housing on site without public subsidy 2) Be consistent with the relevant tenure split 3) Meet other relevant policy requirements and obligations to the satisfaction of the borough and the Mayor where relevant 4) Demonstrate that grant has been sought to increase the level of affordable housing
6.2.9 This approach is also cross-referred to in LP policy H11 on Build to Rent.
6.2.10 In the case of the application site, the land is in public sector ownership (TfL). TfL has a portfolio agreement with the Mayor. The BtR portfolio is required to deliver 40 per cent affordable homes on each site to help meet the wider 50 per cent requirement. Four times a year TfL is required to report to the ‘Homes for Londoners Board’ to provide an update on the delivery of new homes on its land (including the delivery of affordable housing). Chaired by the Mayor, this Board provides an extra level of scrutiny and accountability to ensure that TfL is achieving its 50 per cent portfolio wide requirement (that wider portfolio will include both BtR and non BtR schemes). Examples of recent schemes offering 100 per cent affordable housing include two sites in Harrow (Stanmore and Rayners Lane) which are currently under consideration by Harrow Council and overall include 405 affordable units. The proposed level of affordable housing in percentage terms meets the required proportion for a scheme on public sector land where a portfolio agreement is in place with the Mayor of London, as provided for by LP policies H4 and H5.
6.2.11 The proposed delivery of 40 per cent affordable housing is only achieved with housing grant (see point 1 in paragraph 6.2.8) and the borough’s own affordable tenure split set out in policy H12(b) of the DRLLP is also not met (see point 3 in paragraph 6.2.8). The proposed scheme is therefore subject to viability testing to ensure the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing is being provided. This is discussed further in the following section.
Affordable housing tenure and viability
6.2.12 LP policy H11 requires at least 30 per cent of the DMR homes in Build to Rent schemes to be provided at an equivalent to LLR with the remaining 70 per cent at a range of genuinely affordable discounts below market rent based on local need and to be agreed with the borough and Mayor where relevant (Section C of the policy and para 4.11.6). The rents are also subject to income and affordability caps regulated by the GLA. Boroughs are permitted to publish guidance setting out the proportion of DMR rental levels.
6.2.13 DRLLP policy H12 (b) confirms this position and adds that the range of genuinely affordable rents to meet priority housing need in Lambeth should be in accordance with the preferred approach set out in the Lambeth Tenancy Strategy (LTS).
6.2.14 The Council’s latest LTS, agreed May 2020, states that larger units should be charged at target rent levels (current £163 per week for a 3 bedroom unit), or equivalent, excluding service charges, to help affordability with families affected by the Benefit Cap. Smaller units (1 and 2 bedrooms) may be charged at up to £217 and £282 per week respectively inclusive of service charges (equivalent to LHA levels in 2019/20). These target levels are relevant in guiding the range of rents that the Council will normally seek in BtR schemes in accordance with LP policy H11 and DRLLP policy H12.
6.2.15 The originally proposed affordable housing tenures included 30 per cent of units at LLR and 70 per cent at DMR set at no more than 65 per cent of open market rent. Based on the expected private market rent values, the approximate rents levels would range from £285 per week for a 1 bedroom 1 person unit to £323 per week for 2 and a 3 bedroom units which is higher than the levels stipulated in the LTS.
6.2.16 Overall, the original proposed tenure split included tenures which did not align with the specified requirements of policy H12(b) of the DRLLP and therefore the scheme had to follow the Viability Tested Route.
6.2.17 Table 1 sets out the viability position at the submission, following independent review and the agreed position.
Input/Output At Submission Independent Final agreed Commentary (Avison Young) Review (BPS) position Cost of £144,005,000 £144,005,000 £144,005,000 Agreed between the construction (£305 per sq ft) (£305 per sq ft) (£305 per sq ft) respective QS’s
PRS delivery £2.9 million £2.9 million £2.9 million Agreed cost Finance costs 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% Not agreed, final £31.3 million £29 million £16.9 million calculation based on (sale at the end of (sale at the end (sale at practical revised BPS advice – stabilisation of 12 month completion) see narrative below. period) stabilisation period) Residential Additional evidence Rental Values: £8,715,036 9,451,200 £8,715,036 provided by the Private Market (£44.45 per sq ft) (£48.20 per sq (£44.45 per sq applicant; weakening ft) ft) of the market LLR – annual £626,646 £626,646 £626,646 Agreed net rental value (£20.72 per sq ft) (£20.72 per sq (£20.72 per sq ft) ft)
DMR (at 65% of Linked to private market rent) – £1,577,522 £1,476,613 £1,577,522 market rental values annual net (£23.13 per sq ft) (£21.65 per sq (£23.13 per sq as agreed above; rental value ft) ft) changed by BPS due
to error in affordability calculation
Commercial Values (annual £37.50 per sq ft £37.50 per sq ft £37.50 per sq ft Agreed rental value) Commercial 6% 5.5% 6% Additional evidence Yield provided by the
applicant BTR Yield 3.6% 3.25% 3.25% – 3.51% Not agreed, final calculation based on a yield of 3.51% as recommended by BPS – see narrative below. Profit level Blended profit Blended profit Blended profit Overall blended rate (%GDV) target equating to target equating target equating of 12.51% 12.5% on the to 12.5% on the to 12.5% on the BTR element and BTR element; BTR element; 17.5% on the 6% on the 6% on the commercial affordable affordable element element and element and 15% on the 15% on the commercial commercial element element
BTR 16 months 12 months 16 months Additional evidence Stabilisation provided by the applicant Grant £28,000 per £45,000 per £28,000 per Clarification received availability affordable unit LLR unit and affordable unit from the applicant £70,000 per LAR unit Benchmark £29.3 million £11.1 million 13.9 million Not agreed, final Land Value position based on BPS revised calculation Deficit/Surplus -29,624,509 £28,955,483 -£163,792
Table 1: Summary of viability positions.
6.2.18 BPS reviewed the submitted Viability Appraisal and the costs were scrutinised by a quantity surveyor to inform this. Other development costs such as PRS delivery costs, professional fees, commercial marketing and letting fees, residential sales and disposal fees were found to be acceptable. With regards to finance costs, the applicant’s assessment assumed that the sale of the BtR investment is deferred until the end of the stabilisation period, which is when the development is expected to be fully occupied. This delay of 16 months after practical completion generates significant additional costs on finance. BPS noted in their addendum report that the relevant RICS guidance suggests that the valuation of BTR should be akin to commercial and include the sale of the units on practical completion and for shortfalls in income during stabilisation to be treated as a deduction and this approach has been subsequently applied in this case.
6.2.19 With regards to private market residential values, there was a disagreement on some
comparables used as some were not BtR schemes and BPS also advised that the rental values on the agreed comparable schemes adopted by the applicant were lower than what would be expected. However, the applicant submitted updated evidence during the application process which indicates a downturn in the market caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the effects of which have been noted over the last year and recent market reports suggest rents are down by approximately 12 per cent in prime central London. BPS revised their position given the new evidence, market trend and the fact that the review mechanism will capture any increased rents should the market improve. With regards to DMR values, these are linked to private market values and therefore the above difference in valuations impacted on DMR values too.
6.2.20 AY have adopted a BtR investment yield of 3.6 per cent while BPS originally considered a yield of 3.25 per cent to be more appropriate. BPS noted that the very significant majority of BtR schemes that are developed are forward sold at the point when planning consent is granted. In consequence, there is limited transactional evidence of completed schemes being sold from which to assess market yields as would arise from other investment classes. Following a review of evidence available and industry guidance, BPS advised that an appropriate yield would be likely to fall within a range of 3.25-3.5 percent. BPS acknowledged that the yield evidence inherently includes an element of ambiguity and in accordance with RICS mandatory guidance they have undertaken sensitivity analysis modelling which showed that a yield of 3.5 per cent would bring the scheme into an apparent deficit (approx. £2.5 million). Taking a 0.3 per cent margin being the difference between 3.25 per cent and 3.55 per cent (the effective yield range), it is apparent that a small change to the investment yield has a significant impact on the schemes ability to produce a deficit or surplus.
6.2.21 Where ambiguity exists the generally recognised method for addressing this is through the process of a late-stage viability review. With this approach in mind, BPS have analysed the current scheme based on BPS appraisal inputs and noted that a yield of 3.51 per cent would generate a break-even position. BPS recommended that the late stage review in this case should take place at a point of 18 months post first occupation or 100 per cent occupation rather than the usual 75 per cent of occupation. Adopting the GLA standard review formulas would entail comparison of the scheme GDV at application to GDV at review. Assuming GDV at application reflects the agreed rental income and BPS’ break-even yield, comparison would then be made to the actual rents generated and the market yield at the date of assessment or the actual sale value of the investment if this has occurred during this period. A similar comparison exercise with construction costs would also form part of the review.
6.2.22 The Benchmark Land Value is based on the Alternative Use Value (AUV) approach, based on the extant scheme. BPS queried inputs relating to affordable housing which were subsequently revised and other minor disputed inputs included retail values, commercial disposal fees, CIL and assumed sales period. The main area of disagreement relates to the value of private residential units. The extant scheme includes a number of unusually large penthouses and following a review of additional evidence provided by the applicant BPS increased values for the relevant units. On other unit types, the applicant’s values appeared be more closely linked to the achieved values at Prince of Wales Drive which BPS considered to be at a premium to the subject. BPS considered the most comparable scheme to be Nine Elms Point which adjoins the application site and officers agree with their recommendations.
6.2.23 Overall, the independent review concluded that using the inputs discussed above the scheme broadly achieves a break-even point with a small deficit of £163K. Officers acknowledge difficulties associated with BtR yield and agree with BPS that the proposed later review offers a fair and reasonable way forward to address inherent ambiguity with the yield assessment, whereby the applicant is not required to commit to further upfront delivery of affordable housing, but equally the prospect of a higher income/capitalisation yield remains to be proven by reference to the market as at the date of the review.
Grant availability 6.2.24 The original viability appraisal is based on a grant of £28,000 per affordable unit from the GLA. During the application process, the applicant was asked to investigate further whether additional grant could be secured. As a result of extensive discussions with officers and the GLA, the applicant has secured an in-principal agreement from the GLA that the following higher grant levels would be available for the scheme: £45,000 per DMR unit at LLR equivalents and the Lambeth Tenancy Strategy (LTS) (2020) equivalents.
6.2.25 The applicant has undertaken scenario testing to identify financially viable options which included:
1) 100 per cent of DMR at LLR levels 2) 80 per cent of DMR units at LLR levels and 20 per cent of DMR units at LTS levels which did not include any family sized units within the LTS units 3) 95 per cent of DMR units at LLR levels and 5 per cent of DMR units at LTS levels which consisted of 8 family sized units and no other unit types 4) 90 per cent of DMR units at LLR levels and 10 per cent of DMR units at LTS levels which included 14 two-bedroom units and five three-bedroom units
6.2.26 The first option was discounted by officers as it did not include any units at LTS levels to which DRLLP policy H12 specifically refers. Option 2 would allow to maximise the overall proportion of LTS units but did not include any family sized units. Option 3 focused purely on family sized units which means that only five per cent of units would be at LTS levels. As such, these options were discounted. Officers consider that the fourth option allows to maximise the number of units provided at genuinely affordable rents including a good mix of larger unit sizes including family sized units. As such, the applicant revised the proposals to incorporate the above rent levels. Subsequently, the applicant secured further grant (a total of £49,500 per unit) from the GLA for the units at LTS equivalents. This allowed an increase in the number of two-bedroom units at LTS equivalents to 16 which results in a split of 88 percent of LLR equivalents and 12 percent of LTS equivalents. The application is considered on this basis.
6.2.27 The proposed affordable units will remain as an intermediate Discount Market Rent product, albeit at reduced rents equivalent to 2021/2022 LLR rents and the LTS (2020) rent level. Rental levels will therefore be set out in the s106 agreement as a percentage of the expected market rents agreed through viability review. This is illustrated in Table 2 below. The Mayor’s Housing Strategy definition of ‘genuinely affordable’ confirms a DMR product can be considered genuinely affordable if it is affordable to households with an annual gross income of no more than £60,000 and applying a rent cap of £1,400 per month (including any applicable service charge but ignoring rent increases during the life of the tenancy). The rent cap is taken from the current London Plan AMR and the equivalent figure may be adjusted in future years. The figure of £1400 per month is calculated as 40 per cent of a net income of a household earning £60K gross (this corresponds to £42,000 net per year or £3,500 net per month, and £1,400 is 40 per cent of that net monthly amount). If the AMR figure of £1,400 per month were to be revised downward in the future, the rent cap would be retained at £1,400; if it were to be revised upwards, the increased AMR figure would be used as the rent cap.
6.2.28 The proposal is that for each size of unit, a market rent would be calculated and an agreed percentage discount applied to that market rent calculated using either the London Living Rent (LLR) or the Lambeth Tenancy Strategy (LTS) rent, depending on the size of unit. The relevant figures are shown in Table 2 (the rent figures given are weekly not monthly). For example, for a one bedroom one person unit, applying the current LLR figure to market rent would result in the discounted rent representing 68 per cent of market rent. For a three bedroom unit, applying the LTS figure, the discounted rent would represent 22 per cent of market rent. This discounted rent
is then compared with the rent cap of £1,400 per month. If the discounted monthly rent is lower than the amount of the cap, the discounted rent figure would be used rather than £1,400. If the discounted monthly rent is higher than £1,400, then the rent cap of £1,400 would be applied. The discount percentages for each unit type will be rolled forward to subsequent lettings and will not change in the future. The only exercise to be carried out in relation to those subsequent lettings will be to compare the discounted rent (applying the fixed percentage discount to the market rent at the relevant time) with the applicable AMR figure at that time (or the fall-back monthly figure of £1,400 if the AMR is not increased) and then to take as the rent whichever amount is lower. During the period of a tenancy, rents will be increased annually on the basis of CPI+1% during the tenancy.
Table 2. Percentage discount market rent for LLR and LTS equivalents by unit type
Review mechanisms 6.2.29 In accordance with the Mayor’s Affordable Housing and Viability SPG 2017 and the Lambeth Development Viability SPD 2017, it is recommended that two review mechanisms are secured through the S106 agreement to be carried out at the following points which reflect the development’s specific circumstances: - If construction works have not commenced within 24 months of vacant possession of the site; and - At 18 months post first occupation of market units or 100 per cent of occupation of market units (whichever is the earliest)
6.2.30 Where a viability review demonstrates an improvement in the scheme’s viability, a percentage split of the increase in the scheme’s value would be split in accordance with the Lambeth Viability SPD (2017): 20 per cent of the increase in the scheme’s value to be returned to the developer and 80 per cent to the Council. The Council’s share of any surplus arising from the reviews would be applied by the developer to achieve a closer compliance with the rent levels required in a fully a policy compliant scheme which is 40 percent of DMR units at the following rent levels: • 70 per cent of those units subject to a percentage rent discount that results in the equivalent of rents at 2020 LTS levels (it is not anticipated that LTS rates will be revised in the near future and so the 2020 rate is being used); and • 30 per cent of those units subject to a discount that results in the equivalent of the LLR rental levels which are applicable at the point in time of the viability review.
6.2.31 Within the parameters set out above, provision of 3-bedroom units at the Lambeth Tenancy
Strategy should also be maximised if possible. If there are unlet affordable homes at the point where a late stage review has been conducted, and if the review were to result in a surplus, the rent levels would be reduced at first let. In the event that all affordable homes are let at that point, discounts would be applied at second lettings with a provision that should there be any unallocated surplus 3 years from the late review date, a payment in lieu would apply and would be spent by the Council on provision of affordable housing elsewhere in the borough. Additional surplus profits, once full equivalence had been achieved with the rent levels of the 40 per cent of DMR units as set out above, would then be passed to the developer in their entirety. This mechanism will be secured via the s106 agreement.
Nomination rights and management
6.2.32 The Council also specifies how DMR units should be marketed to future tenants at paragraph 5.116 of the DRLLP. It expects that the 30 per cent element that is secured at rents equivalent to LLR should be advertised via the GLA Homes for Londoners portal and allocated in accordance with the criteria for eligibility for intermediate affordable housing set out in the LTS. The proposal would meet this requirement. In the case of the remaining 70 per cent of DMR units, these must be advertised via the Lambeth Private Sector Solutions service. If in the case a landlord is unable to find a suitable tenant through this process within six months, they will be free to market the properties more widely to other priority groups in the borough subject to income thresholds appropriate to the level of rent secured for the units (social tenants, local residents and those working in the borough).
6.2.33 The applicant has agreed to the principle of a bespoke nominations agreement, which would give letting priority to households who are on the Council’s housing waiting list subject to CLL’s standard tenancy requirements. The details would need to be worked up and agreed with Housing. The nominations agreement would be secured through a planning obligation. As the development relies on a grant from the GLA it is expected that the DMR units will be managed by a Registered Provider. Operational, management and monitoring of tenancies are matters that will be secured via the S106 planning obligation in the event planning permission is given.
6.3 Density and dwelling mix
Density 6.3.1 LP Policy D3 moves away from applying target densities and instead seeks to optimise density through good design. The design-led approach seeks the most appropriate form of development that responds to a site’s context and capacity for growth. Part A of the policy requires the development to make the best use of land and considers design options to determine the most appropriate form of development that responds to a site’s context and capacity for growth. In making a determination on whether a proposal is the most appropriate form of development, Part B of the policy takes the following into account:
• Form and layout (buildings and spaces which respond to locally distinctive forms, encouraging active travel and facilitating efficient servicing and delivery) (See sections 6.5 and 6.14 of this report) • Experience (good quality accommodation, safe and secure environments, and active frontages onto the public realm) (See sections 6.5 – 6.7 and 6.9 – 6.11 of this report) • Quality and character (respond to the existing character, high quality architecture and high sustainability standards) (see sections 6.5 - 6.7 and 6.15 of this report)
6.3.2 Overall, officers are satisfied that the proposal would optimise development on the site in a form which is appropriate and corresponds with the above requirements, which are assessed in further detail within the appropriate sections of this report.
Dwelling mix
6.3.3 Policy H4 of the LLP states that the council will support proposals that offer a range of dwelling sizes and types to meet current and future housing needs. It requires in part (a)(i) that the affordable housing elements of residential developments (including conversions) should reflect the preferred borough-wide housing mix for social/affordable rented and intermediate housing as follows: 1 bed units - not more than 20% 2 bed units - 20-50% 3 bed units - 40%
6.3.4 The policy position is not as prescriptive for private market housing in that it states that a ‘balanced mix of unit sizes including family accommodation’ should be provided.
6.3.5 Policy H10 of the LP requires, for low-cost rent, boroughs to provide guidance on the size of units required (by number of bedrooms) to ensure affordable housing meets identified needs. In accordance with policy H10, policy H4 of the DRLLP requires the low cost rented element of residential developments to reflect the preferred borough-wide housing mix: 1-bed units Not more than 25% 2-bed units 25-60% 3-bed units Up to 30%
6.3.6 The preferred borough-wide size mix for affordable social rent has been amended in favour of a higher proportion of 2 bed units and there is no longer a specified mix for intermediate affordable housing. The DRLLP states that for market and intermediate housing, a balanced mix of unit sizes including family-sized accommodation should be provided.
6.3.7 The supporting text to LLP policy H4 states that to ensure mixed and balanced communities, a range of dwelling sizes including family-sized housing will be sought from all new developments. Family-sized accommodation is defined as having three or more bedrooms. In addition, the supporting text to the LP policy H4 also states that while developments are expected to reflect the preferred dwelling mix set out above, rigid application of these requirements may not be appropriate in all cases. When considering the mix of dwelling sizes appropriate to a development, the Council will have regard to individual site circumstances including location, site constraints, viability and the achievement of mixed and balanced communities. In all cases proposals will be expected to demonstrate that the provision of family-sized units has been maximised although it should be noted that the DRLLP requires proposals to demonstrate that the provision of family-sized units has been considered.
6.3.8 Table 3 below provides a breakdown of the proposed housing unit mix by tenure:
Table 3: Unit size mix
6.3.9 The affordable housing proposes a range of studios, 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units within Block A. The number of studios and 1 bedroom units would be higher than set out in LLP policy H4 while
the number of 3-bedroom units would be lower. Although Policy H4 relates to units only, if this analysis against the adopted Local Plan were applied by habitable room this would result in a closer compliance with 1-bedroom units (including studios) at 29 per cent; 2-bedroom units at 37 per cent and 3-bedroom units at 34 per cent.
6.3.10 The proposed provision of 41 3-bedroom units (23 per cent) is an improvement on the extant scheme which included only 16 family sized units (19 per cent). Also, the mix of the proposed market rent housing, which includes studio flats and several 3-bedroom units, is more diverse than in the extant scheme which includes only 1- and 2-bedroom units. In the assessment of the extant scheme, it was recognised that the scheme had to be designed around the constraints set by the station structure below and the need to achieve a high residential quality in terms of daylight/sunlight, aspect and amenity. As such, the residential units have been arranged on the triangular floor plate which impacts on the unit mix and this is also valid for the current application.
6.3.11 It is argued in the Planning Statement that the proposed unit mix also accords with industry experience by Grainger/CLL that 1 and 2-bed units within BtR developments typically have a much higher demand than larger units. Furthermore, as recognised in the GLA Stage 1 response, the LP policy H10 acknowledges that a higher proportion of 1 and 2 bed units is generally more appropriate on sites close to a station and with higher levels of public transport accessibility. This being an entirely BtR proposal, to be delivered directly on top of a station box, the predominance of 1 and 2 bedroom units is acceptable.
6.3.12 Overall, given the unit mix approved in the extant permission, the site’s specific circumstances, the validation of the financial viability assessment and the relative balance in provision within the scheme as a whole, it is considered that this dwelling mix is appropriate in this instance and meets the requirements of policy H10 of LP, H4 of LLP and H4 of DRLLP.
6.4 Design and Conservation
6.4.1 Good design is central to all objectives of the LP and LLP planning policies. Policy D3 of the LP sets out a series of overarching design principles for development in London which seek to optimise site capacity through design-led approach. Policies D4 and D8, require that all new development be of high quality that responds to the surrounding context and enhances the character, legibility, permeability and accessibility of the surrounding neighbourhood. Policy D9 relates to the specific design issues associated with tall and large-scale buildings.
6.4.2 Policies Q5, Q6 and Q7 of the LLP seek to create high quality urban environments and state that proposals will be supported where the design of development is a response to positive aspects of the local context and historic character. Policies Q22 and Q23 of the LPP seek to protect the character and appearance of conservation areas and undesignated heritage assets on the local heritage list. LLP policy Q26 provides local level guidance on the location of tall buildings and their design, requiring them to: achieve design excellence; make a positive contribution to the townscape and skyline; be of the highest standard of architecture and design; and have no adverse impacts on the significance of strategic or local views or heritage assets including their settings.
6.4.3 The Council’s Urban Design and Conservation Team’s comments and those of the GLA have been incorporated into this section of the report.
Design - Layout, Scale, Views and Townscape
6.4.4 Layout and Scale The site falls within the Vauxhall tall building cluster, as designated in the VNEB OAPF. Policy Q26 ‘Tall buildings’ of the DRLLP supports proposals for tall buildings where they are in locations identified as appropriate for tall buildings in Annex 11. Annex 11 of the DRLLP has been informed by the Vauxhall SPD and identifies the application site (location V6) as appropriate for tall buildings up to 100m AOD.
6.4.5 The consented scheme (15/06216/FUL) was deemed acceptable as the proposed heights were appropriate to the overall approach identified within the OAPF and SPD. The current proposal comprises an increase in height to Blocks B and C of 1 and 3 storeys respectively, Block C now becoming a more prominent marker on Wandsworth Road. This is a height increase which is relative to the surrounding and emerging tall building cluster.
6.4.6 The integration of the consented scheme into the tall building cluster and immediate context was an important consideration. The proposed site layout is similar to the consented in that it is predicated by the new London underground station, the over station buildings are triangular in plan and use the station structures as a podium. Between the two station buildings is a new public square. The over-station development thus begins at second floor level. The three towers sit on top of the two station buildings, Block A on the western building and Blocks B and C on the larger eastern building. The station site runs broadly east to west. The height rationale for the consented scheme comprised an approach whereby angled roofs stepped down in height from the west towards Wandsworth Road. This was to reflect a ‘spiralling down’ of taller buildings set by the context of the adjoining Nine Elms Point (Sainsbury’s scheme) and the approved CGMA scheme to the west and north. The angled roof profile of the previous consent has been omitted with the removal of penthouse apartments the roof profile has been remodelled and simplified to a flat roof. The proposed increase in height to Block C (see Fig 23 and 24 below) differs from the approved scheme however it is acknowledged that it is sited in a prominent location on Wandsworth Road providing a marker for the station.
Figure 23 Visual from the South along Wandsworth Road Figure 24. Sketch showing height increase (red outline indicates extant consent)
6.4.7 On the southern side of Pascal Street is a smaller scale of existing development, predominantly two and three storey houses and flatted blocks. Officers are satisfied that while there is a large variation in scale either side of Pascal Street, this point represents the edge of / gateway to the tall building cluster and the Central Activities Zone. The change in scale at this point also announces the presence of Nine Elms Underground Station with the buildings above being a
marker for this transport node. The residential units to the south will benefit from improved accessibility, a better outlook towards new areas of public realm (as opposed to an industrial site and car park).
6.4.8 Block A is proposed at 21 storeys +88.82m AOD, Block B at 16 storeys +74.11m AOD and Block C at 17 storeys +77.26m (all to top of parapet). The height strategy is acceptable as it constitutes only a marginal increase on the consented scheme for Block B and C and a decrease for Block A and remains within the parameters deemed acceptable within the VNED OAPF and Vauxhall SPD. The proposed heights sit comfortably within the maximum height of +100m AOD stipulated in Annex 11 of the DRLLP.
6.4.9 Views and Townscape A Heritage Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment (HTVIA) has been submitted, and provides an evaluation of the impact of the proposal in terms of its height and form on strategic views, the surrounding context, on other tall buildings including the emerging cluster when perceived from all directions. It should be noted that the site does not sit within any designated strategic view corridors (London Panoramas, Linear Views or Townscape Views), but a range of River Prospects as defined in the London View Management Framework (LVMF) along with a range of other views have been considered. This includes the local viewing corridor Brixton Panoramic and Brixton Historic Towers.
6.4.10 The application site is located approximately 2km from the Westminster World Heritage Site (WHS). The HTVIA demonstrates that the development would be glimpsed in part from only very limited points within the WHS, beyond the existing and emerging cluster of tall buildings at Vauxhall and Nine Elms (see figure 25). The proposed development would not harm any elements of setting that contribute to the heritage significance or outstanding universal value of the WHS and this view is shared by the GLA. The proposal complies with policy Q19 of the LLP and policy HC2 of LP.
Figure 25: The cumulative view from Westminster Bridge (LVMF18A.2). The scheme is shown in green and other consented developments in yellow.
6.4.11 A range of other views (within 500m) and longer views have also been provided. When viewed from the north from Wandsworth Road (north of the viaduct) (View 1) the development is almost completely obscured by the Nine Elms Point scheme, with the exception of the upper floors of Block C. View 2 a bit further south shows Block C can be seen projecting partially above and to the side of the Nine Elms Point Block B on Wandsworth Road.
6.4.12 From the east, a view from Wilcox Road (View 3) shows the eastern elevation of Block C clearly although it would not be considered to be overbearing on the streetscene. A longer view from the
east in Brockwell Park shows the blocks to the edge of the main cluster (see Figure 26, below). Officers are also satisfied that the proposal would have no impact on the Brixton Historic Towers local view due to the site’s location being away from the focus of this view.
Figure 26: Cumulative development view from Brockwell Park (scheme shown in green and consented developments in yellow)
6.4.13 Two views from the west have been provided from the opposite side of the river. The view from Pimlico Gardens (View 9) shows a very small part of the scheme siting to the side of but significantly lower than the American Embassy building. The view from Grosvenor Road (View 10) further south shows the development would be indiscernible in this view with only a small portion visible to the west of Nine Elms Point.
6.4.14 In the views from the south the proposal is clearly more visible in the skyline as it forms the southern edge of the emerging tall building cluster. View 4 (see Figure 27) from Wandsworth Road and view 5 (from the eastern side of Wandsworth Road towards Pascal Street) show the development would define the route of Wandsworth Road / Pascal Street and signpost the location of the new Nine Elms Station. However, the bulk is not considered overbearing by officers as a result of the varying form and architectural detailing which breaks up the perception of mass. View 7, further south around Bramley Crescent shows how the three blocks appear slender within the skyline by virtue of their footprint.
Figure 27: View towards north from Wandsworth
6.4.15 Overall the townscape visual impact assessment illustrates in views that the proposal would not affect any identified strategic or locally protected views and the impact on the townscape is considered acceptable. Officers are satisfied that where visible, the proposed development will be perceived as a high quality, contemporary built form in contextually appropriate materials
which complements the existing and emerging urban fabric of the area and will contribute to establishing an enhanced character for the area in accordance with policies Q25 and Q26 of the LLP and DRLLP and policies HC2, HC3, HC4 and D9 of the LP.
Design and Conservation - Appearance and Materials
6.4.16 The external appearance has changed from the consented scheme, principally in that the materials and façade approach to the station podium is now fully integrated into the towers which is welcomed. A consistent architectural approach is proposed for all three blocks, creating an ordered and cohesive development, with its own distinct character. The overall materials approach using brick as a primary material is welcomed, with each block differentiated by different shades of similar brick tones ranging from pale buff to dark brown such that each block is defined yet together blocks appear as a cohesive group. As recommended by the DRP the proposal has been revised to include a calmer palette which is contextually appropriate. The DRP also recommended using a lighter brick on Block B which has been revised such that Block A comprises a primary dark brown brick with mid brown accent, Block B a primary pale buff brick with accent mid brown and Block C a primary mid brown brick with pale buff brick. Pale coloured reconstituted stone is used as an accent material across the development, with oxblood coloured and pale glazed bricks used to provide legibility.
6.4.17 Balconies have been designed to be either semi or fully recessed where possible to benefit from wind sheltering, especially crucial at upper levels. This strategy contributes to the simplified, sculptural form of each building. The buildings are positively grounded, with each tower brought down to meet the station box. The connection between the buildings and the station box is expressed through the use of an exaggerated shadow gap in dark grey metal. The link buildings between building B and C are distinguished through the use of reconstituted stone clad colonnades. A more open glazing pattern, proportionally similar to the station box identifies the non-residential spaces at first floor level, creating a legibility of uses (see Figure 28).
Figure 28. Bloc B and C façade detail immediately above the station boxes.
6.4.18 The general design approach to denoting entrances and way-finding is welcomed. Care is required to ensure residential entrances are clearly differentiated from the station entrance and full details of signage will be secured by condition together with other external construction detailing (conditions 10 and 15), and samples of materials (condition 11).
Pavilion Building in Pascal Square
6.4.19 The pavilion is split in to three distinct sections. The north-east corner of the square was identified as prime location for the commercial element as it will receive high footfall once the station is opened and will also receive evening sunlight. The service lift is located at the centre, acting as a division between public and private uses and the plant spaces are located in the southern element, allowing access from Pascal Street. The largely glazed design of the commercial unit will provide activation to the public square and is supported.
Figure 29. The Pavilion Building facing Pascal Square.
Design and Conservation – Public Realm and Landscaping
6.4.20 The scheme proposes a new area of public realm (2,240m2) which broadly aligns with the extant consent, including new links through the site and a public square in the centre of the site (See Appendix 4). An indicative hard and soft landscape and public realm strategy has been provided as part of the application. The proposed public realm (Hebden Place) runs between Block D from the extant scheme and the western station building through to Wandsworth Road and linking into the public realm proposed as part of the Nine Elms Point scheme. The main square sits between the two station buildings measuring 28.7m by 47.5m (to Block D). Pascal Street and Hebden Place are designed to enable freedom of movement for residents, office/retail workers and those accessing the station, whilst Pascal Square seeks to provide larger seated areas for people to dwell for longer periods.
6.4.21 The public realm maximises the opportunity to link in with the wider aspirations to improve connectivity through the site to the west, with routes to the linear park (via CGMA) and the river in accordance with the Vauxhall SPD. Overall, the public realm proposals are welcomed and particularly the integration of landscaping and tree planting which was also commended by the DRP and is accordance policies Q9 and Q10.
6.4.22 High quality paving (predominantly granite), soft landscaping and lighting is proposed throughout the public spaces, with specific details secured via condition. The application is accompanied by details showing the public realm will meet the principles of inclusive design, desired pedestrian routes and access points both for the station and the development above. The potential for additional incidental play space within the public realm is also supported, subject to detail design. The Pavilion Building will also create active frontages along the public realm with potential for external seating.
6.4.23 Officers consider that the quality and quantity of the public realm is acceptable and provides relief to the visual massing of the buildings and the necessary and useable space to support surrounding activity and the level of movement associated with the station. Further details will be secured via condition in relation to the management of public realm.
6.4.24 Comments from the Council’s Parks and Open Spaces Officer support the overall thrust of the
proposals and the balance between soft and hard landscaping, subject to further detail secured via condition. The Council’s Tree Officer also supports the proposals in principle, subject to ensuring that the soft landscaping scheme is deliverable (i.e. sufficient root depths) and has requested a more detail soft landscaping specification through conditions, including tree pits.
6.4.25 Design Conclusions In conclusion, officers consider that the proposals sit within the policy requirements and design aspirations of both the VNEB OAPF and Vauxhall SPD. The proposed over-station development is also considered to have been appropriately assessed and considered acceptable in terms of strategic and local views. The use of high quality materials and the creation of new public realm to support the new Underground Station forms a suitable transition between the Vauxhall tall building cluster and the area beyond. Subject to conditions indicated a, the proposal would comply with LLP policies Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q9, Q16, Q25 and Q26 and LP policies D3, D4, D8, D9, HC2, HC3 and HC4.
Design and Conservation – Impact on Heritage Assets
6.4.26 The beginning of the Agenda Pack contains a summary of the legislative and national policy context for the assessment of the impact of a development proposal on the historic environment and its heritage assets. This is in addition to LLP and LP policies.
6.4.27 Turning to consider the application of the legislative and policy requirements referred to above, the first step is for the decision-maker to consider each of the designated heritage assets (referred to hereafter simply as “heritage assets”) which would be affected by the proposed development in turn and assess whether the proposed development would result in any harm to the heritage asset.
6.4.28 The decision of the Court of Appeal in Barnwell Manor confirms that the assessment of the degree of harm to the heritage asset is a matter for the planning judgement of the decision- maker.
6.4.29 However, where the decision-maker concludes that there would be some harm to the heritage asset, in deciding whether that harm would be outweighed by the advantages of the proposed development (in the course of undertaking the analysis required by s.38(6) PCPA 2004) the decision-maker is not free to give the harm such weight as the decision-maker thinks appropriate. Rather, Barnwell Manor establishes that a finding of harm to a heritage asset is a consideration to which the decision-maker must give considerable importance and weight in carrying out the balancing exercise.
6.4.30 There is therefore a “strong presumption” against granting planning permission for development which would harm a heritage asset. In the Forge Field case the High Court explained that the presumption is a statutory one. It is not irrebuttable. It can be outweighed by material considerations powerful enough to do so. But a local planning authority can only properly strike the balance between harm to a heritage asset on the one hand and planning benefits on the other if it is conscious of the statutory presumption in favour of preservation and if it demonstrably applies that presumption to the proposal it is considering.
6.4.31 The case-law also establishes that even where the harm identified is less than substantial (i.e. falls within paragraph 196 of the NPPF), that harm must still be given considerable importance and weight.
6.4.32 Where more than one heritage asset would be harmed by the proposed development, the decision-maker also needs to ensure that when the balancing exercise in undertaken, the cumulative effect of those several harms to individual assets is properly considered.
Considerable importance and weight must be attached to each of the harms identified and to their cumulative effect.
6.4.33 What follows is an officer assessment of the extent of any harm which would result from the proposed development to the significance of the scoped heritage assets provided by the applicant as part of its submission. This includes Conservation Areas, and neighbouring Listed Buildings. Both an individual assessment against each heritage asset as well a cumulative assessment is provided. This is then followed by an assessment of the heritage benefits of the proposals.
6.4.34 The site is not within close proximity to heritage assets however the impact upon all heritage assets within a 500m radius has been assessed. Figure 30 below shows the site in the context of the nearest heritage assets.
Figure 30. Heritage assets nearest to the application site
Impact on heritage assets: conservation areas
6.4.35 The application site is located over 180m away from the Vauxhall Conservation Area. This is a large conservation area, comprising largely of 18th and 19th century development and is urban in character with a mix of residential and commercial uses. Vauxhall Park and Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens are significant, historic open spaces. The setting of this large conservation area, to the north-east of the site, has been transformed by the tall buildings emerging at Vauxhall and Nine Elms, including along Wandsworth Road, immediately north of the site. Considered in the round, the magnitude of change on the setting of the whole conservation area, will be negligible and the effect will be none. As such, there will be no harm to the setting of this conservation area.
6.4.36 The site is located over 260m from the Lansdowne Gardens Conservation Area. The conservation area is characterised by 19th century villas (detached, semi-detached or set in small terraces) with neo-classical or Italianate detailing, built for the middle class. The focal point of the
conservation area is a formal ‘circus’ where the principal axial routes, including the north / south Lansdowne Gardens, meet. The site is located over 460m from the Wandsworth Road Conservation Area which lies to the south-west. This conservation area has a linear form and comprises mostly 19th century development, ranging from housing to commercial and industrial (the former Plough brewery) uses. The part closest to the site includes the Springfield Methodist church (locally listed) as well as some early 19th century villas (some listed grade II).
6.4.37 The setting of both these conservation areas (Lansdowne Gardens CA to the south-east and Wandsworth Road CA south of the site respectively) has changed since they were built, and the area between them and the site comprises interwar and post-war housing estates. If seen from these conservation areas, the proposed development will be experienced against the backdrop of existing and emerging tall buildings at Vauxhall and Nine Elms. In both cases the magnitude of change will be negligible and there will be no effect on the setting of these conservation areas. As such, there will be no harm to the settings of these conservation areas.
Impact on heritage assets: statutorily listed buildings
6.4.38 The nearest statutorily (grade II) listed building is the former congregational mission hall, at No 1 Wheatsheaf Lane, 215 m to the north-east. The development would be seen next to the recent towers on both sides of Wandsworth Road that lie north of the site, which have transformed the setting of this listed building to the north and west, and will simply appear as part of the cluster of towers at Vauxhall and Nine Elms. There will be no effect on any element of setting that contributes to its heritage significance.
6.4.39 Other listed buildings in the area around the site are located further away and are all listed grade II. They are predominantly residential villas and terraces from the 19th century. All are experienced today in the context of substantial post-war and later development typical of central London, not least the growing cluster of tall buildings at Vauxhall and Nine Elms. While the proposed development will be visible (mainly in glimpsed views) in the setting of some of these heritage assets, there would be no harm to their setting due to the distances and the location of the proposed development within a cluster of tall buildings.
Impact on heritage assets: locally listed buildings
6.4.40 The nearest locally listed building is the South Bank Club at 124 – 130 Wandsworth Road. This robust 20th century building lies on the busy Wandsworth Road. The proposed development will be visible in views north along Wandsworth Road (A3036), seen against a backdrop of the existing and emerging cluster of towers at Vauxhall and Nine Elms. There will be no effect on any elements of setting that contributes to its significance and overall there will be no harm to the setting of this locally listed building.
Impact on heritage assets: cumulative impact and summary
6.4.41 It is the view of officers that the proposal would not cause harm to the significance of any designated or non-designated heritage assets, including the WHS discussed in the earlier sections of this report. Officers have also carried out an assessment on the impact cumulatively. As discussed above, the proposal will be seen in a number of views including in some of the settings of heritage assets. The proposal will be generally seen in the context of the existing and growing cluster of tall buildings and its cumulative impact is considered to cause no harm to the setting of heritage assets. Officers consider that there would be no individual or cumulative harm and this view is shared by the GLA. The proposal would accord with LLP policies Q19, Q20, Q21 and Q22, LP policies HC1, HC2 HC3 and HC4 and the statutory obligations in the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act 1990.
Assessment of harm versus benefits 6.4.42 Officers consider that the development would not harm the significance of any designated or non-designated heritage assets and that an assessment of harm versus benefits is not required.
6.4.43 However, should Members come to a different view, they must consider the impact of the proposed development on the significance of each designated heritage asset. Great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance (as per paragraph 193 of the NPPF).
6.4.44 If Members come to a view that there would be substantial harm or total loss of the significance of a designated heritage asset, consent should be refused, unless it is demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the identified harm or loss (as per paragraph 195 of the NPPF).
6.4.45 If Members come to a view that there would be less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, the identified harm must still be given considerable importance and weight when weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including where appropriate, securing the heritage asset’s optimum viable use (as per paragraph 196 of the NPPF).
6.4.46 If Members consider harm to result to a non-designated heritage asset, para 197 of the NPPF states that ‘a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm of loss and the significance of the heritage asset’.
6.4.47 In this case, officers consider that the development provides the following public benefits:
• 479 new homes of which 176 would be affordable which represents an uplift from the extant scheme of 147 and 92 units respectively. • Up to 28 new permanent jobs, employment and training opportunities through the Employment and Skills Plan and a financial contribution secured via s106 • Benefits to local economy associated with new residents supporting local businesses • Enhancements to public realm and creation of active frontages on Pascal Square • Transport improvements including a contribution of £172,500 towards implementation of Healthy Route Networks • Improvements to biodiversity increase the biodiversity and urban greening on the site. • Optimising brownfield land
6.4.48 Officers consider that the above constitutes public benefits that would outweigh any harm to the significance of heritage assets.
6.5 Secured by Design
6.5.1 In accordance with LP policy D11 and LLP policy Q3 and as part of the pre- application process, the applicant has engaged the Metropolitan Police’s Designing Out Crime Officer and Counter Terrorism in an attempt to design out opportunities for crime wherever practicable. The scheme has incorporated a range of design principles in order to promote natural surveillance and ensure the scheme meets the principles of Secured by Design. It has also considered the levels of movement associated with the Underground Station underneath. In particular the scheme provides legible routes through the public realm that would benefit from natural surveillance and activity at different times of the day, which is supported.
6.5.2 In terms of the residential blocks the scheme will be required to install an access control system
for each block along with secure residential foyers/secure access to lifts/stairs/vehicular access, including external lighting and CCTV where appropriate. In addition, the scheme would be required to install blast resistant measures for all glazing to reduce risk in the event of an incident. The applicant will be also required to investigate whether access to UK Power Networks switch rooms could be controlled by means such as gates which would be the preferred option.
6.5.3 In accordance with comments made by the Designing Out Crime and Counter Terrorism Officers the proposals are considered to be acceptable, subject to conditions to secure compliance with the principles of Secured by Design (condition 51 and 52) and the provision of a Counter Terrorism Strategy (condition 53).
6.6 Standard of residential accommodation
Design and layout of accommodation 6.6.1 All units will meet or exceed the minimum space standards set out in the LP policy D6 and provide adequate room sizes, storage space and floor to ceiling height standards. As recommended by the DRP at pre-application stage, there have been amendments to layout of flats to improve efficiency of space. In terms of the internal layout design, core A would serve 9 units per floor and cores B and C would serve 10 units per floor. While this exceeds the recommended 8 units per floor stipulated in the LP Housing SPD, corridors would be 1.5m wide with enhanced width in front of lifts (1.8m). Furthermore, doors to individual flats would be clustered at the end of corridors to facilitate neighbour interaction and there would be clear wayfinding through use of accent materials.
6.6.2 182 units (38 per cent of the total) would be dual aspect and the remaining 297 units (62 per cent of the total) would be single aspect with views to the south, east or west. Over 72 per cent of the single aspect units (216) would have an enhanced aspect as a result of the angled design of the inset balconies. No north facing single aspect units are proposed. The typical location of single and enhanced outlook units is shown in figure 31 below. Officers consider the design approach adopted in this highly constrained location ensures that the residential accommodation in terms of outlook, light and ventilation is of the highest possible quality for future occupiers and exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated in terms of site constraints and the proportion of single aspect units in the extant scheme.
6.6.3 The proposals are also considered to be acceptable in terms of outlook and privacy. Within the development itself the separation distance between block A and B is over 30m. Between block B and C, the distances between windows are reduced to over 15m, however the internal layouts have been arranged so that this relationship is between bedrooms and living rooms, with living rooms benefiting from the main outlook in a different direction.
6.6.4 In terms of adjoining sites, Block A generally sits 13m to the south of the employment uses proposed in Block D in the extant consent with a pinch point of 11m. However, all of the units facing north would have aspects to the east and/or west in addition. Block A sits 15.7m from the proposed building on the Apex Site (CGMA) to the west, although there are no sole habitable windows that face directly onto this building as a result of the proposed footprint of Block A. Blocks B and C sit approximately 13m to the south of the Sainsbury’s scheme, but again all units offer additional views east and/or west. Furthermore, the positioning of windows has been designed to ensure sufficient privacy and a number of windows would be partially obscured. Finally, the proposed blocks would be at least 17m from the residential properties on the southern side of Pascal Street. The separation distances and outlook are highly comparable to the extant consent.
Figure 31. Typical layouts and aspect (for Block B above fifth floor level)
6.6.5 12.7 per cent of the proposed dwellings (61) will be designed to comply with Building Regulations requirements Part M4(3) whilst the remaining 87.3 per cent will be designed to comply with part M4(2). This complies with LP policy D7 and will be secured by an appropriately worded planning condition (13). The M4(3) units are spread throughout the development and include a range of unit sizes.
6.6.6 Overall, officers consider that the proposed internal layout design of the residential accommodation in terms of the units per floor, unit sizes and aspect is acceptable and therefore will comply with policy D6 of the LP; policy H5(a) of the LLP and policy H5(a) of the DRLLP.
Daylight and sunlight 6.6.7 Policy Q2 of the LLP states that development will be supported if it would not have an unacceptable impact on levels of daylight and sunlight on the host property and adequate amenity space is provided free from oppressive overshadowing. Policy D6 of the LP states that the design of development should provide sufficient daylight and sunlight to new and surrounding housing that is appropriate for its context, whilst avoiding overheating, minimising overshadowing and maximising the usability of outside amenity space.
6.6.8 The provision of daylight and sunlight to the new development has been assessed in a Sunlight and Daylight Assessment prepared by Avison and Young which has been independently verified by the Council’s Sunlight and Daylight consultant.
6.6.9 In terms of daylight to the proposed new habitable rooms, consideration is often reviewed on an average daylight factor (ADF) basis, especially since the provision of daylight is targeted to the
actual room use with a standard ADF targeted of 1 per cent bedrooms, 1.5 per cent living rooms and 2 per cent kitchens. In instances of any applicable open-plan arrangements of ‘living/kitchen/dining’ rooms, an alternative methodology to that of the BRE Guide (that simply seeks to apply the highest ADF for a given room use within a multiple-use room to that of the whole room), is that the ADF is based upon the predominant room use. This is more commonly applied within the industry since modern design now often places kitchens typically at the back of such open-plan arrangements and to achieve a 2 per cent ADF for the rear of room is unlikely. Furthermore, in reference to the BRE Guide, internal galley-type kitchens are permissible providing they are directly linked to a well daylit living room which for this scheme, would be the case in any event, albeit the design has typically not sought to isolate the kitchen area. Thus often analysis is on the basis of still including the kitchen area within the assessment (albeit we are then considering a target for the predominant room use of an ADF of 1.5 per cent for living room). Table 4 below provides a summary of ADF review for all habitable rooms.
Table 4. Summary of ADF review
6.6.10 The scheme achieves 92 per cent overall of habitable rooms meeting ADF target criteria which is considered reasonably good for the given context and density (opportunity area). The split between living rooms (including studios) and bedrooms not meeting the target is also similar.
6.6.11 For the respective room use consideration, for living/kitchen/dining rooms (LKD’s) 90 per cent achieved target ADF and in terms of those rooms not meeting target ADF, the actual levels achieved have also been considered. The split for those 48 living/kitchen/dining rooms not meeting target is 18 at an ADF of 1.3 per cent - 1.49 per cent (i.e. within 20 per cent of the target of ADF of 1.5 per cent), 30 at an ADF of 1 per cent - 1.29 per cent (effectively still above bedroom quality).
6.6.12 In respect of bedrooms, 93 per cent would achieve target ADF. For those rooms not achieving target 1 per cent ADF, these rooms are much more ranging, albeit daylight is considered less important to bedrooms. From the 46 bedrooms, the split for those not meeting is 17 at an ADF of 0.8 per cent - 0.99 per cent (i.e. within 20 per cent of the target of ADF of 1.0 per cent), 26 at an ADF of 0.5 per cent - 0.79 per cent (these achieving not less than half ADF target) and three isolated bedrooms at below half ADF target (within Block A – ADF of 0.45 per cent at 2nd floor room and ADF of 0.39 per cent at 3rd floor room ref. and within Block B – ADF of 0.47 per cent at 3rd floor room).
6.6.13 For sunlight review to habitable rooms, results have been provided for all habitable rooms with windows in applicable orientation (i.e. windows facing within 90° of South). For an ‘opportunity area’ scheme of relatively density and with focus on the living rooms, officers consider this multiple unit scheme achieves a reasonable amount of sunlight provision to habitable rooms with
focus on living rooms.
6.6.14 Overall, the proposed design and layout is considered to have sought a balance between different requirements and will provide reasonable daylight and sunlight amenity for the enjoyment of future occupants in compliance with policy Q2 of the LLP.
Residential Amenity Space
6.6.15 The London Plan Housing SPG states that a minimum of 5 sqm of private outdoor space should be provided for 1-2 person residential units and an extra 1 sqm should be provided for each additional occupant. Policy H5 of the LLP similarly sets out requirements in respect of external amenity and children’s play space. For new flatted development, communal amenity space of at least 50 sqm per scheme should be provided, plus a further 10 sqm per individual flat provide either as a balcony/terrace/private garden or consolidated within the communal amenity space. Private amenity requirements under policy H5 of the DRLLP are again similar to the above insofar that provision for communal amenity space will only apply to developments of 10 units or more. The proposed development is therefore required to provide a minimum combined total of private and communal amenity space of 4,840 sqm.
6.6.16 In terms of private amenity, all but five flats (which have no balconies) would have at least 5m2 (plus 1m2 for each additional occupant as required by the LP) of private amenity space, in the form of balconies and/or terraces, equating to 3,936sqm in total. Across the scheme this represents an average provision of 8.3sqm per residential unit.
6.6.17 The external communal amenity provision is split across the two residential podiums and roof terraces and details are shown on Table 7 below. The overall external communal amenity space provision equates to a total of 1,340sqm. The external amenity is protected from wind and noise through the uses of glazed screens and an oversailing crown at roof level. The proposal also provides internal communal areas which are typical of build to rent developments and normally cater for a range of recreational needs of occupiers in addition to traditional open spaces/terraces. Details of the proposed internal amenity spaces are also shown in Table 5 (below) and amount to 849sqm.
External communal amenity space Block A – podium level 270sqm Block A – roof terrace 308sqm Block B and C – podium level 310sqm Block B roof terraces 200sqm Block C roof terrace 252sqm Total external 1,340sqm Internal communal amenity space Block A – 1st floor 152sqm Block B – 1st floor 231sqm Block B – roof terrace level 97sqm Block C – 1st floor 369sqm Total internal 849sqm Total combined 2,189sqm Table 5: Breakdown of external and internal communal spaces
6.6.18 Overall the proposed communal amenity areas (2,189sqm) and private amenity space (3,936sqm) equate to total provision of 6,125sqm which is a significant uplift (1,285sqm) on the minimum required by policy. Furthermore, the scheme will deliver new, publicly accessible open space of over 1,360sqm in the form of Pascal Square. The site is located in an identified area of
open space deficiency and the development meets the requirement of Policy En1(d) which seeks the provision of on-site open space in such cases.
6.6.19 In terms of sunlight availability to the proposed main amenity areas, Avison Young have provided analysis review for the BRE Guide 2 hour sunlight availability test for main amenity areas. The analysis relates to three amenity areas, all of which will achieve the BRE target to receive two hours or more of sunlight on the 21st March to over half of the amenity. These three areas with actual percentages of area that can receive 2 hours or more of sunlight (on 21st March) relate to: • Ground floor amenity between Blocks A & B (Pascal Square) at 100 per cent, • The 1st floor podium to Block A at 58 per cent, • The 1st floor podium between Block B and C at 65 per cent.
6.6.20 No analysis has been provided for the roof terraces on the top of Blocks A, B and C but given their location and orientation, it is considered that suitable levels will also be achieved to these other areas.
6.6.21 Planning conditions are recommended to ensure the landscaping of the terraced spaces are provided to the high standards being proposed. S106 obligations are also recommended to ensure the communal spaces are provided on an inclusive basis to all its residents. Overall, the amount and quality of private, external and internal communal amenity is acceptable and complies with the aims and objectives of policy D6 of the LP; policy H5 of the LLP and policy H5 of the DRLLP.
Play Space
6.6.22 LP policy S4 that proposals that include housing should make provision for play and informal recreation, based on the expected child population generated by the scheme and an assessment of future needs. The Mayor’s Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation SPG (2012) sets out guidance to assist in this process and sets a minimum benchmark standard of 10sqm per child regardless of age.
6.6.23 Policy H5(d) of the LLP states that for developments of 10 or more units with at least one family- sized dwelling, children’s play space should be provided where appropriate to at least the levels set out in the London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation’ 2012. Policy H5 has been amended within the DRLLP to state that the Council will follow the approach to play space set out in LP policy S4 and associated SPG.
6.6.24 Using the GLA’s Population Yield Calculator, it is anticipated that the proposed development would be occupied by 54 children based on an inner London location with a PTAL of 6a/6b. This is divided into three age ranges as follows: 28 under 5 year olds; 19 5-11 year old and seven 12+ year olds. This gives rise to a total child play space requirement of 542sqm. The applicant aimed to provide a higher level of play areas and therefore used a setting for the London wide area and PTAL level 3-4 and the breakdown is shown in the Table 6 below. It demonstrates that the proposed on-site play areas amounting to 852sqm significantly exceeds the required minimum of 542sqm and provision within each block also exceeds the minimum requirements which is welcomed.
Table 6. Play space provision and GLA requirement (London wide, PTAL level 3-4)
6.6.25 The play space would be a made up of areas with prescriptive play and incidental play, ‘hand out’ zones for teenagers and areas to grow food and other plants. Figure 32 shows the indicative layout of the external amenity spaces. The proposal would adequately meet its requirements for children’s play space on-site. Details of the children’s play space shall be secured through Condition 14.
Figure 32. Indicative play areas at podium and roof level
6.6.26 Based on the above, the proposed development complies with the Mayor’s Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation SPG (2012), policy S4 of the LP and policies H5 of the LLP and the DRLLP.
Noise and vibration
6.6.27 LP policy D14 requires that development proposals manage noise by mitigating the existing and potential adverse impacts on noise. Policy D13 of the LP expects that planning decisions reflect the Agent of Change principle and take account of existing noise and other nuisance-generating uses in a sensitive manner when new development is proposed nearby. LLP policy Q2(v) states that proposals should ensure that any adverse impact in terms of noise should be reduced and minimised as far as possible to ensure the amenity of existing and future occupants is protected. Policy Q2(v) of the DRLLP repeats the same approach with reference to emerging DLP policy on noise.
6.6.28 To achieve an acceptable indoor ambient noise level in accordance with British Standard 8233:2014 (‘Guidance on sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings’) the applicant has proposed to use Mechanical Ventilation and Heat Recovery system for all residential dwellings. The applicant’s acoustic consultant has indicated that the façade system (including glazing, frames, seals, any insulated panels and ventilators/extracts) should be designed with sound insulation performance that would enable the recommended noise criteria to be met. Furthermore, noise associated with plant rooms and the ground borne noise and vibration generated by the operation of the underground railway line beneath the site is also a potential issue for the proposed dwellings. The Assessment assumes the adoption of high-level acoustic performance and a rail construction technique designed to address these issues. The consultant anticipates that subject to the detailed design stage considering the above factors, the recommended noise level criteria within residential habitable rooms would be achievable.
6.6.29 The council’s consultant acoustician has not objected to this approach and advises that a suitably worded planning conditions (6, 25 and 27) should be included to ensure that an acceptable noise environment for future occupiers is achieved.
6.6.30 In terms of external amenity areas, the applicant predicts that noise levels on the main roof terraces will not exceed the upper guideline noise value of 55 dB LAeq and provide good quality of amenity. The noise levels on the podium level communal terraces would exceed the guideline levels, however it could be reduced to acceptable levels by use of screens placed at the boundaries of these areas. Therefore, a condition (26) is recommended to secure further details. In terms of noise levels on balconies, those facing Pascal Square and the area between Block B and C would be within the recommended guidelines.
6.6.31 Overall, the quality of communal amenity areas with regards to noise is considered to be acceptable and represents an improvement on the extant consent. This is the extant permission did not include rooftop communal terraces which meet the relevant guidelines or internal communal areas which are now proposed.
6.6.32 Subject to the above conditions that ensures suitable noise mitigation measures are incorporated, it is considered that the development would provide an acceptable noise environment for future residential occupiers having regard to its location. The proposals therefore comply with policy D14 of the LP; policy Q2 of the LLP and DRLLP.
6.7 Amenity for Neighbouring Occupiers
Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing
6.7.1 One of the core planning principles (paragraph 17) in the NPPF is that decisions should “always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings”. LP policy D6 states that in their neighbourhoods, people should have a good quality environment.
6.7.2 The beginning of the Agenda Pack contains broad contextual overview of the assessment framework within which BRE compliant sunlight and daylight studies are undertaken. This includes an explanation of the key terms and targets contained within the BRE guidance. The following assessment has been made in the context of this information.
6.7.3 In accordance with LLP policy Q2 (Amenity) the application has been accompanied by a Daylight and Sunlight Assessment prepared by Avison and Young including three supplementary notes received during the application process. The development has been assessed against the Building Research Establishment (BRE) guidance ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’. The Council has sought independent review of the report findings in respect of possible impacts of the new development on surrounding sites and within the development itself, undertaken by Schroeders Begg.
6.7.4 In reference to the BRE Guide and in relation to the extant planning permission, the BRE Guide appendix F2 states ‘In assessing the loss of light to existing windows nearby, a local authority may allow the vertical sky component (VSC) and annual probable sunlight hours (APSH) for the permitted scheme to be used as alternative benchmarks’. Accordingly, Avison Young have considered the shift change from the consented (extant permission) to the proposal, considering VSC and sunlight. For completeness, they have also considered the shift change to daylight distribution and sunlight to amenity. The council’s advisor considers this approach to be reasonable, however overall reductions and retained values of relevance were also considered.
6.7.5 In terms of properties analysed these are summarised as:
Existing properties:
Broadly to the east of site (opposite side of Wandsworth Road); • Basil House • Adrian House • 2 Wilcox Road • Wilbraham House
Broadly to the south of site; • Lockyer House • Charman House • 39-55 Pascal Street (Apple Blossom Court) • 36-38 Bramley Crescent • 22-24 Bramley Crescent
Recent new-built properties:
Broadly to the north of site: Nine Elms Point (Sainsburys Nine Elms); • Block C • Block D • Block E • Block K
Consented but not yet built properties: To the west of the site: • New Covent Garden Market site – Apex Site
6.7.6 Figure 33 below shows the surrounding properties considered as part of the assessment with the site as proposed in green and Block D from the extant permission in red.
Figure 33. Proposed development and assessed properties.
6.7.7 The extent of neighbouring properties analysed is considered sufficient. It is noted that analysis
has also been provided for David House and Conrad House but these are residential blocks that are further away than the similar blocks of Basil House and Adrian House and therefore are not discussed in more detail in this report.
Neighbouring Daylight analysis review
Existing properties
6.7.8 For existing residential properties, Table 7 below summarises the VSC changes (consented v proposed) as VSC averages for the property under consideration and associated loss (both as a percentage and ranges of loss). As can be seen in Table 7, there is fairly limited difference in absolute terms in the shift change from ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ and, on that basis, the proposal has fairly limited increased effect when compared back to the consented scheme.
Table 7 Summary shift change in VSC (excludes new-builds)
6.7.9 In terms of Apple Blossom Court (39-55), this is a terrace row of maisonettes which appear to be one bedroom dwellings (6 units to the ground floor accessed directly and 6 units at first floor accessed from projecting staircase blocks). The retained VSC assessment results for the proposed development showed negligible differences, ranging between -7.37 per cent (i.e. a small gain) and 50 per cent, when compared to the consented VSC values. The higher percentage differences reflect very small actual changes of around 0.01 per cent VSC. This is due to the inherent design of this property, whereby daylight availability to some windows / rooms is already limited, due to such aspects features as; projecting staircase walls (reducing the availability of daylight from the dome of the sky to the main window elevation), ground floor maisonettes having projecting canopies and porches (which will also reduce the availability of daylight) and other features including projecting car-port structures and first floor window heads positioned directly beneath the projecting eaves which will reduce daylight flow to these windows / rooms. The key aspect in this instance is that impacts are still very similar to the consented
scheme in absolute terms.
Recent new-build neighbouring properties
6.7.10 In terms of the recent new-build Nine Elms Point to the north, these properties will have been designed in reference to the average daylight factor (ADF) for context in an overall ‘opportunity area’ / cumulative massing with neighbouring redevelopment sites. It is apparent that some VSC values are relatively low, given the context of overall re-development density. Whilst VSC (along with daylight distribution) is the standard neighbouring test for occupied properties, Schroeders Begg considered in this particular instance and in reference to ‘masterplan’ / the successive development, to place the main focus in this particular instance on the effect of the shift change from ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’. Schroeders Begg considered ADF review was more meaningful, rather than seeking to gauge changes in VSC review when VSC levels are already limited / low in some particular instances.
6.7.11 From review of the recent new-build (‘Nine Elms Point’ / Sainsburys site) for neighbouring Blocks C, D, E & K, in terms of ADF review, it is evident that there is limited change to ADF to habitable rooms in these neighbouring blocks in consideration of ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ and as such, the shift change in ADF (reductions being considered in this case), does not exceed an absolute reduction in ADF of 0.2 (considered minimal) with the isolated exception of three rooms within Block D.
6.7.12 The impact to these three rooms within Block D relates to living/kitchen/dining rooms and at lower floors within Block D. From more detailed consideration, it is evident that these three rooms have inherent sensitivity to any massing change as each of these rooms have a balcony soffit above their windows and the rooms at lower level are within a greater obstruction context. It is considered that these rooms rely on a degree of reflected daylight and accordingly, consideration to supplementary review has been given to a radiance study of the daylight factor within the room. From this review (which accounts for external reflected daylight within the room), it also determined that the shift change in the daylight factor to these rooms is limited and also equating to circa 0.2 in absolute terms shift change reduction in daylight factor.
6.7.13 It is also noted that, within this ‘masterplan’ development, there are already some similar isolated examples of sensitivity to ADF, especially at lower levels and in the given denser surrounding context and evident that external reflected daylight is of some importance.
6.7.14 In terms of daylight distribution (consideration also of daylight within the room), similar to the ADF review, there are some isolated instances of low daylight distribution that can be found in the consented context overall arrangement. Also similar to the ADF review, typically these are relatively limited changes in absolute terms from consideration of the shift change in analysis from ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’.
Consented but not yet built neighbouring properties – Apex Site
6.7.15 The Apex site to the west benefits from an extant outline permission which includes seven blocks with Block A1 closest to the application site. Given the absence of detailed design (and especially, that there are no definitive floor plans or fenestration details), it is appropriate to consider the availability of daylight across the facade of the proposed blocks forming the Apex Site. Accordingly, daylight VSC has been analysed across the external facades of the Apex site and this is presented within Avison Young’s supplementary daylight submission dated 18th January 2021.
6.7.16 The output of this review indicates some effect to the east facing elevation of Apex Block A1. However, for this elevation, it is evident that the majority of the façade would have a good VSC of
circa 25 and towards the top of the façade, effectively the maximum VSC that could be achieved. Conversely, at the lower storeys, there are some limitations in available daylight VSC, some levels of VSC of circa 10 appearing applicable although in this respect, it is important to highlight that; • This area is quite limited in consideration of the overall ‘east’ facing façade. • That for the lowest floor, it is understood that such areas would be commercial thus daylight ordinarily not reviewed (as opposed to residential). • That this area is focused more towards the northern end of this façade i.e. towards the Apex and as such, it is anticipated that applicable residential use within this vicinity is likely to incorporate dual aspect units (potentially triple aspect) towards this apex corner. Accordingly, reasonable daylight provision within these proposed units (once designed), should readily be possible. • The proposed Block A which is closest to the Apex site is lower than the Block A in the extant permission
6.7.17 In summary, the proposed development is not considered to have any undue significant adverse effect upon the future daylighting within the proposed neighbouring Apex site. Whilst the Apex site may well have gained consent prior to the original consented 10 Pascal Street scheme (planning application 15/06216/FUL), it is reasonable for each site to seek only its fair share of daylight and for neither site to unreasonably constrain development upon each respective site; indeed, the proposed Block A is splayed on plan in order to seek to mitigate the massing closest to the Apex site. Given the review of self-testing within Block A and façade review undertaken on the Apex site (Block A1, especially), it is evident that with suitable detailed design in due course of Apex Block A1, suitable daylighting levels should be readily possible within this neighbouring Block A1. It should be noted that the reserved matters application for the Apex site is required to be supported by a detailed daylight sunlight assessment. Condition 56 of the CGMA planning permission then requires details of mitigation, including daylight, sunlight and overshadowing details, to be submitted for approval before the development commences.
Neighbouring sunlight analysis review
Existing properties
6.7.18 In terms of existing neighbouring residential properties, these are typically not needing to be assessed, as for those to the south of the proposal (generally opposite side of Pascal Street), their windows in the elevations facing the site are typically not facing within 90° of South / not applicable for review. Equally, the properties to the east (opposite side of the Wandsworth Road), for the elevations which front onto Wandsworth Road / facing the site (end elevation of Basil House & Adrian House), windows in these elevations are typically not facing within 90° of South (just north of west facing) so are not applicable for review. For the very few isolated windows that have been assessed, there is no meaningful change in sunlight provision.
Recent new-build neighbouring properties
6.7.19 For the recent new-build Blocks C, D, E & K at Nine Elms Point, habitable rooms have been reviewed for sunlight. From the analysis, Schroeders Begg have focused upon living rooms (including studios) as sunlight important and for those impacts where reductions become applicable for consideration (once below 25 per cent for Annual Probable Sunlight Hours). Given the consented context and density of redevelopment within this opportunity area, properties will typically have limited winter sunlight hours, especially at lower floors and therefore Schroeders Begg have not focused on winter hours.
6.7.20 A review of ‘consented’ versus ‘proposed’ for living rooms (including studios) and consideration of APSHs is summarised below:
Block C 6.7.21 There would be an increased impact to ten living rooms/ LKDs /Studios at 1st to 5th floor. However, APSHs are already typically low to these rooms and in absolute terms, the shift change ranges 1 to 3 APSH percentage points which is considered minimal. Conversely, there are some isolated gains in APSH Sunlight relating to 5 No living rooms/ LKDs / Studios in APSHs.
Block D 6.7.22 There would be an increased impact to ten living rooms/ LKDs /Studios at 1st to 3rd floor. However, APSHs are already typically low to these rooms and in absolute terms, the shift change ranges 1 to 3 APSH percentage points which is considered minimal.
Block E 6.7.23 There would be an increased impact to eight living rooms/ LKDs /Studios at 1st to 6th floor. However, APSHs are already typically low to these rooms and in absolute terms, the shift change ranges 1 to 2 APSH percentage points which is considered minimal. There are some isolated gains in APSH Sunlight relating to 2 two living rooms/ LKDs / Studios in APSHs.
Block K 6.7.24 There would be an increased impact to ten living rooms/ LKDs /Studios at ground to 10th floor. However, APSHs are already typically low to these rooms and in absolute terms, the shift change ranges 1 to 2 APSH percentage points which is considered minimal. There are some isolated gains in APSH Sunlight relating to two living rooms/ LKDs / Studios in APSHs.
Consented but not yet built neighbouring properties – Apex Site
6.7.25 One of the three façades to Apex Block A1 faces the application site and is considered to just fall within 90° of South. However, it is inequitable to consider that all sunlight must be available to Apex Block A1 from the direction of the application site. As beneficial for the daylight provision to neighbouring Apex Block A1, the proposed Block A has been splayed to mitigate sunlight impacts as well. Notwithstanding these comments, a sunlight review across the façade of the Apex Block 1 has been submitted and, it is evident that the proposed scheme will have minimal effect upon the elevation of south/ south-west and whilst there may be some sunlight reduction to the east facing façade, it is considered that Apex Block A1 will still have reasonable access to sunlight provision overall to the whole block and positioning of sunlight important rooms will ordinarily seek to maximise the benefit of such areas.
Sunlight – Impact upon neighbouring amenity
6.7.26 Given the context of existing neighbouring residential properties, these do not need to be reviewed. In reference to the recent new-build Nine Elms Point development, the main amenity area has been reviewed and in the proposed scenario, this will still achieve in excess of half the amenity area (66 per cent of area) having the ability to receive 2 hours or more of sunlight at the 21st March thus meeting BRE Guide target criteria. In summary, for review to either previously existing neighbouring amenity areas or that within the recent new-build Nine Elms Point, there is no meaningful change to that compared to the consented 10 Pascal Street proposal (15/06216/FUL).
Daylight and sunlight conclusion 6.7.27 In consideration of the impact of daylight analysis of the shift change from the ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ application scheme, there is fairly limited effect in absolute terms upon both existing neighbouring properties (VSC review) and the recent new-build Nine Elms Point (primarily ADF review)..
6.7.28 It is also considered the proposal would not have a detrimental effect to the provision of daylight within the consented (but not yet built or detailed design considered in terms of floor plans and fenestration details), of the Apex site proposal upon the neighbouring New Covent Garden Market site redevelopment.
6.7.29 In terms of sunlight impacts, from the analysis considered, there would appear limited difference between the ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ application and no meaningful shift change. On that basis, the impacts are considered acceptable. Overall, officers consider the proposals to be generally in accordance with LLP policy Q2 in respect of daylight and sunlight.
Privacy and Outlook
6.7.30 LLP policy Q2 (Amenity) also seeks to protect the amenity of existing neighbours and the visual amenity of the community as a whole. The proposed scheme layout has been arranged within the constraints of the station building to minimise its impact on neighbouring residential uses. The use of a triangular plan form minimises direct overlooking between habitable rooms over short distances. The LP Interim Housing SPG suggests that a separation between 18 – 21m between habitable rooms (as opposed to between balconies or terraces or between habitable rooms and balconies/terraces) is a useful benchmark, but should not be applied rigidly given the nature of development in urban areas. Only separation distances of less than 18m are therefore considered further in this report.
6.7.31 Block A sits 15.7m from the proposed building on the Apex Site (CGMA) to the west, although there are no habitable windows within Block A that face directly onto this building due to the proposed footprint of Block A. As such there are no issues in terms of outlook or privacy.
6.7.32 Blocks B and C sit approximately 13m to the south of the Sainsbury’s scheme (Blocks C and D). In the case of Block C the triangular footprint ensures that only one unit faces directly onto the Sainsbury’s scheme at this distance. While the Sainsbury’s scheme presents some small windows onto the elevation, the main windows front onto Wandsworth Road. The resulting relationship closely follows on that approved in the extant permission and officers consider this to be acceptable.
6.7.33 There is a proposed pop out element on the northern elevation of Block B which reduces the separation distance to approximately 10.5m. To avoid overlooking the pop out element has been positioned so that it is strategically located between the two buildings directly opposite. There was some potential for increased overlooking between other parts of the proposed Block B and Sainsbury’s Block C when compared with the extant consent. The proposals have been revised during the application process to include the removal of four balconies in Block B, changes to internal layouts of four flats and introduction of small changes to window alignments and the introduction of obscured glazing to some windows to ensure that the impact would be acceptable. Condition 10 is recommended to ensure that the privacy mitigation measures are timely implemented.
6.7.34 Finally, the proposed blocks (A, B and C) would be over 17m from the residential properties on the southern side of Pascal Street. Given that the residential units within the proposal will start above the level of the existing residential properties it is not considered that there will be direct overlooking between the two. As a result overlooking and privacy will not be compromised in respect of the existing or new dwellings.
6.7.35 In light of the above, officers therefore consider that the proposed scheme would have an acceptable impact in terms of privacy and outlook. In particular the scheme will enable views
(both direct and oblique) from residential uses to the north and south to the new areas of public realm proposed by this scheme.
Noise and Vibration 6.7.36 LP policy D14 states that development proposals should avoid adverse noise impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development. LLP policy Q2 requires development to reduce the adverse the impact of noise.
6.7.37 The Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment considers the impact of the proposed plant on neighbouring occupiers and makes recommendations relating to plant operation and installation of acoustic enclosures. This was found acceptable by the council’s acoustic consultant who recommended conditions (28 and 29) to ensure that noise from building services and plant is mitigated. It is not considered that the proposed external amenity spaces would result in any excessive noise or disturbance to neighbouring residents and are these amenity spaces are generally in-keeping with the character of the area.
6.7.38 The proposal includes a small commercial unit and it is recommended that that details relating to operating hours and a management plan are provided and assessed in compliance with LLP policy Q2 and ED7. A condition is suggested (31).
Construction impacts 6.7.39 Noise, disturbance and inconvenience during the construction period can be mitigated through the provision of a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) which has been submitted with the application. However, further detail is required to ensure measures are taken to minimise impacts on the locality and a final CEMP would be secured through a condition (3). It shall include measures in terms of noise, waste and dust mitigation, the management of deliveries, station operation, access along Pascal Street and engagement with the local community (including a named contact point throughout). The developer will be expected to operate and be registered under the Considerate Constructors Scheme and sign up to the Vauxhall Nine Elms Construction Charter.
External Lighting 6.7.40 An Exterior Lighting Strategy details the design parameters for lighting both the tube station entrance, the new public realm, and the private amenity spaces. The report also notes that a high level of coordination will be required to ensure the lighting scheme co-ordinates with adjacent developments and land uses. The council’s environmental health advisor confirmed that the design principles as set out in the Exterior Lighting Strategy are appropriate and a condition (32) is proposed to secure further details.
6.8 Ecology, Trees and Landscaping
6.8.1 LLP policy Q10 states that new development should be designed positively to protect existing trees and as part of a wider soft landscaping scheme to include new trees where appropriate. LLP policy Q9 requires developments to provide landscaping that is fit for purpose, maximises opportunities for greening and makes use of appropriate plant species.
6.8.2 Areas of hard and soft landscaping are proposed across the site with a landscaped podium and roof terraces in all blocks. The landscape and public realm strategy provided in the DAS illustrates the intention to provide a mix of planting including trees and edible planting offering a substantial improvement for a site that currently has no formal landscaping. Indicative species have been chosen from an appropriate palette to match the anticipated micro-climate, clearly define spaces, soften the appearance of the development, promote sustainable drainage, help create variation in
character, enhance ecological diversity and provide visual interest and colour throughout the seasons. The landscaping would incorporate high quality public realm including flexible seating areas. Figure 34 shows the proposed areas of soft landscaping including at roof level.
Figure 34: Proposed landscaping and green roof /terrace plans
6.8.3 The Council’s Arboricultural Officer has reviewed the proposals and raised no objections subject to appropriate conditions relating to the final landscaping scheme details and associated maintenance being secured by conditions (15 and 16). This will also need to consider amenity issues and a possible temporary landscaping scheme as discussed earlier in the report. As such the proposal complies with the requirements of policy Q9 and Q10 of the LLP.
Ecology 6.8.4 LP policy G5 and LLP policy Q9 reflects the aims of policy EN1, promoting opportunities for greening as well as protection and enhancement of existing biodiversity. The site is located in an identified area of open space deficiency. Policy Q9 also supports the use of landscaping to provide strong boundary treatments, together with access routes and parking areas compliant with safety standards and minimum parking standards. LLP policy Q10 states that new development should be designed positively to protect existing trees and as part of a wider soft landscaping scheme to include new trees where appropriate.
6.8.5 The application is supported by a Biodiversity Report which demonstrates that the site is currently devoid of any vegetation and has an high existing level of disturbance (noise, vibration, visual, lighting) and is deemed to be of negligible ecological value. The desk-based review also highlights that prior to the site being cleared for the NLE construction that it was historically considered ‘a relatively habitat poor site’. The site therefore has a blank baseline when considering the site for the potential to achieve a Biodiversity Net Gain. The desk-based review also highlights there is no hydrological connectivity between the site and nearby watercourses, nor is the site within close proximity or to impact any Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC).
6.8.6 In accordance with LP policy G6, a range of measures should be undertaken to satisfy the requirement for ecological enhancement. The landscape design will include biodiversity enhancement measures such as planting using native species and species with biodiversity benefit; ecologically diverse green roofs and incorporation of bird and bat boxes and ‘bug hotels’ and small water features. The Draft CEMP includes measures to heighten awareness of the potential for ecological features such as nesting birds and invasive non-native species to be encountered during works and what to do in the event that they are present (e.g. through toolbox
talks, compliance checks and, where required, the appointment of specialist ecological management contractors).
6.8.7 The Council’s biodiversity officer reviewed the submitted information and is satisfied subject to biodiversity measures set out in the reports being integrated in the final detailed design and mitigation measures secured in the final CEMP. This is secured by conditions (3, 15, 41 and 44). Subject to these conditions, the development would contribute positively to the biodiversity objectives of the above policies.
Urban Greening Factor 6.8.8 LP policy G5 requires proposals within boroughs to develop an Urban Greening Factor (UGF) to identify the appropriate amount of urban greening required within developments. For residential development this is an UGF of 0.4 and for non-residential schemes it is 0.3. The aforementioned green infrastructure and landscape design achieves UGF of 0.37 which is marginally below the recommended UGF of 0.4.
6.8.9 During the application process, the applicant undertook further investigations to verify if a score of 0.4 could be achieved. Deeper green roof substrates and green walls suggested by the GLA were discounted due to feasibility issues. Furthermore, additional soft landscaping was considered and a further 255sqm of planting would be required which is also not feasible as the provision of landscaping has been already maximised on this constrained site. The council’s sustainability advisor and open space officer are satisfied that the originally proposed measures are acceptable. To validate the measures at the as built stage a condition (44) is recommended that evidence is provided to demonstrate the development has achieved an UGF 0.37 or more.
6.9 Transport
6.9.1 LP policies T1, T3 and T4 and LLP Policies T1, T3 and T4 seek to ensure that the impacts of development in transport capacity and the transport network are fully assessed. Policies T3, T6, T7 and T8 of the LLP and policies T3, T7 and T8 of the DRLLP both seek to ensure that proposals for development will have a limited impact on the performance and safety of the highway network and that sufficient and appropriate car parking and cycle storage is provided whilst meeting objectives to encourage sustainable transport and to reduce dependence on the private car. If development will have an unacceptable transport impact, it should be refused in the absence of mitigation measures to make the development acceptable.
Site context 6.9.2 The site is located approximately 800m to the southwest of Vauxhall Station. Pascal Street is a dead-end road that will eventually connect to the CGMA site (pedestrians, cyclists and emergency vehicles only). The site is directly above the proposed Nine Elms Station which is due to open in autumn 2021. The current PTAL rating of 6a (excellent) will increase to 6b once the construction of the Nine Elms Station is complete. On-street parking was previously provided along the north side of Pascal Street with space for up to 14 vehicles and 5 powered two wheelers. This parking was subject to Pay & Display/Residents’ permit parking controls as the street is within the Stockwell ‘S’ Controlled Parking Zone, which operates Monday to Friday 08:30 – 17:30. A number of blue badge bays were provided here.
6.9.3 As the station construction site is now operational the formal on street parking arrangements are no longer in place but some parking may be re-provided there. The extant permission includes provision of two on-street Blue Badge parking spaces on Pascal Street for Block D which would be provided when Block D is delivered.
6.9.4 The vehicular access to the site is via Pascal Street. The access ramp to the basement car park is already constructed and will be accessed via Pascal Street as per the extant permission. It is understood that this ramp is shared with residents of Nine Elms Point. Barrier controls will be in place at the shared entrance and at the entrance to the proposed development’s basement car park. Pedestrians and cyclists will access the development from Hebden Place apart from the retail/commercial unit accessed from Pascal Square.
Trip generation and Impacts 6.9.5 The Transport Assessment (TA) includes a comparison of the extant planning permission trip rates and the current proposals trips. The consented scheme resulted in 1,659 daily two-way person trips (or 191 during the AM peak), while the current proposals are expected to generate 2,393 daily trips (or 275 during the AM peak). The majority of these trips are undertaken by public transport (77 per cent by Underground, Train or Bus) and TfL confirmed that this can be accommodated on the strategic public transport network. The number of vehicular trips that would be generated by the proposed development is limited to disabled car drivers and servicing activity.
6.9.6 The application is supported by a Pedestrian Comfort Level (PCL) assessment of the footways in the vicinity which helps to understand the implications of the uplift in pedestrian activity. The findings suggest that there is expected to be little change in the PCL as a result of the proposed development. The lowest PCL rating is forecast to be A- which is considered ‘comfortable’ and is above the acceptable minimum PCL rating of B+.
Servicing 6.9.7 It is proposed that the vast majority of deliveries will be made from Pascal Street to the south of the site from two on-street loading bays. One bay is to be delivered as part of the S278 works associated with the Nine Elms Underground Station, whilst the western bay would be delivered as part of this scheme. A turning head is proposed in Pascal Square, as per the extant consent. The detailed layout of Pascal Square and associated turning head has been revised during the application process to address safety concerns raised by the transport officer. The revised layout is considered to be acceptable. An on-site loading bay is also proposed within the basement area which will be available by prior arrangement for maintenance vehicles and residents moving in/out.
6.9.8 A residential servicing trip generation assessment provided during the application process includes the worst-case scenario with a maximum of 51 deliveries per day, with the majority of these made by small to medium-sized vehicles. A parcel collection point is proposed as part of the concierge in Block B and C which should reduce the dwell time and number of deliveries per day as loads can be consolidated. The commercial element is estimated to generate two deliveries per day. The servicing requirements of the office space already consented in Block D have also been considered. Overall, it is anticipated that the demand for loading bays generated by the development and Block D would equate to approximately 53 per cent to 71 per cent of the service bay capacity which allows for spare capacity. The proposed draft servicing strategy is considered to be acceptable and the final Deliveries and Servicing Plan will be secured by a condition (19).
Car parking 6.9.9 The development would be secured as car permit free through a S106 agreement. It would provide 14 on-site disabled parking spaces which equates to three percent active provision for the residential use. While the need for additional disabled parking above the 14 spaces on-site is considered to be an unlikely event (particularly given the site’s location above a step-free station), the need for additional disabled parking (up to 7 per cent) would be monitored within the Parking Management Plan, and if additional disabled bays do need to be provided on-street, £10k per bay would be payable. The Parking Management Plan will be secured by s106
agreement and will also ensure that car parking spaces are leased rather than sold and that the management of parking spaces will need to consider safe operation of adjacent cycle stores. All parking spaces will have electric charging facilities, which exceeds the LP requirement and this will be secured by condition (24).
Cycle parking 6.9.10 A total of 805 long-stay residential cycle parking spaces are proposed across the two levels of basement and the first floor of Blocks A, B and C. 25 per cent of these are proposed via Sheffield stands and 5per cent provided for non-standard bicycles, with the remainder via two- tier racks. A further 8 long-stay commercial cycle parking spaces are proposed within the Pavilion Building. A total of 38 short-stay visitor cycle parking spaces, by way of Sheffield stands, are proposed within the public realm for both residential and commercial visitors. The level of cycle parking and the mix of types proposed meets both the LP and the DRLLP requirements.
6.9.11 Cycle stores would be accessed by lifts and while they are expected to well serve the majority of cycles including some non-standard types, it is acknowledged that larger lifts are recommended for non-standard bikes. In this case, the size of the lifts is dictated by the space available within the station structure but there are potential options that can be explored with non-standard lift car sizes and this would require testing with construction details. It is recommended that a feasibility study of larger lift provision is secured through a condition (21). During the application process, additional information relating to the detailed layout and manufacturer’s specifications were provided. It is acknowledged that the indicative location of structural columns at basement level could impact on usability of four stands however these could be provided at podium level if required. The submitted details demonstrate that the proposed stands would be accessible and meet the manufacturer’s recommendations and it is recommended that the final design is secured through condition (21).
6.9.12 Due to fire separation requirements, access to cycle stores in the basement area includes travelling through three sets of doors. Given the site’s constraints, it considered acceptable subject to a condition ensuring automatic doors are provided. The cycle parking in the basement is also located close to disabled parking bays which is not ideal and other options were investigated. While the layout of the basement is restricted due to the built station structure and fire regulations, officers consider that sufficient measures can be secured through the Car Parking Management Plan to achieve an acceptable provision. This would include late allocation of the relevant Blue Badge spaces, appropriate signage, effective complaints procedure and monitoring of the basement area by 24h concierge desk via CTTV. This will be secured by condition (22). Overall, given the constraints of the site, the proposed cycle parking is considered to be acceptable and complies with policy T5 of the LP.
Refuse storage and collection 6.9.13 Residential bin stores would be located on the podium level of all three blocks and accessed from the main core areas with two dedicated bulky waste areas in Block A and B. A commercial bin store would be located within the back of house area of the commercial unit. The refuse stores are designed to meet the quantum of refuse stipulated in the Lambeth Guidance ‘Waste and Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements, Technical Specification for Architects and Developers. Furthermore, each residential bin store would house two in-bin compaction lever arm in a separate area to prevent the residents from accessing these areas. On collection day, the building operations staff will move the bins from the internal bin stores out to the presentation area in Pascal Square via the dedicated service lifts located adjacent to Pascal Square. Once the bins have been emptied, the building operations staff will return these bins to the presentation area from where the internal management team will return these bins to the designated bin stores of all blocks. The application is accompanied by an Operational Waste and Recycling Management Strategy which has been reviewed by Veolia and considered to be acceptable. Condition 20 is
recommended to ensure the development is implemented in accordance with the approved details.
Construction 6.9.14 An outline Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted with the application. All construction traffic will use Wandsworth Road (south) to access the A3. The use of Vauxhall Cross gyratory has been avoided due to the construction of the improvements to the junction planned to occur between 2020 and 2021 which could overlap with the planned construction period of the development. However, it’s noted that a 4.72m height restriction is on place on the A3036 Wandsworth Road and if there are vehicles that are unable to use this route, they will use the A3 and Vauxhall gyratory to travel to/from the development site. The applicant will be expected to operate and be registered under the Considerate Constructors Scheme and sign up to the Vauxhall Nine Elms Construction Charter which will ensure that construction activities on nearby sites are also considered. This will be secured by s106. A full Construction Management Plan will be required for approval via condition (3).
Travel Plan 6.9.15 A draft Travel Plan has been submitted with the application and additional information was provided during the application process to take on board comments received from Lambeth’s Travel Plan Monitoring Officer. A full Travel Plan will be secured via a condition (23) and monitoring via s106.
Sustainable travel and mitigation 6.9.16 The development would secure the following sustainable travel measures: • The proposal includes high quality long-stay and short-stay cycle parking within the site. • EV charge points will also be provided for all on-site parking bays • A Travel Plan will be secured for the development. • The development will be secured parking permit-free • S106 contribution towards an additional 10 Cycle Hire docking stands to be located at the proposed Cycle Hire docking station on Hebden Place • A minimum of three years free membership of the Cycle Hire scheme for each dwelling, secured via S106. • The development will deliver an improved pedestrian experience by way of improved public realm and wider footways. • A contribution of £172,500 towards the delivery of improvements to walking and cycling on Pascal Street which forms part of the Healthy Routes Network • A minimum of three year’s Car Club membership to be provided for each residential unit. • 2 x new on-street Car Club bays to be provided on in the locality
6.9.17 No objection has been raised by the Council’s Transport and Highways Sections to the proposal. Subject to the above mitigation measures, the proposal would have an acceptable impact on the network and would encourage travel by sustainable means of transport be in accordance with LP policies T3, T4, T5, T6 and T7 and LLP Policies T1, T2, T3, T6, T7 and T8.
6.10 Sustainable Design and Construction
6.10.1 LP policies SI 2 and SI 4 state that development proposals should be net zero-carbon and minimise carbon dioxide emissions and manage heat risks. Policy SI3 expects major development proposals within Heat Network Priority areas to have a communal low-temperature heating system in line with LP hierarchy.
6.10.2 The LP also requires that the development follows an energy hierarchy when considering reducing CO2 emissions. The energy hierarchy must consider incorporation of energy efficiency
measures including passive design, supplying energy efficiently (with a particular emphasis on de-centralised energy generation), using renewable energy technologies and monitoring energy performance.
6.10.3 Policy EN3 of the LLP and DRLLP requires development to utilise decentralized heating, cooling or power networks in the vicinity of the site, or future proof for planned energy networks.
6.10.4 In accordance with the principles of policies SI2 and SI3 of the LP, the applicant has submitted an Energy Statement which is generally compliant with the LP policies and Energy Assessment Guidance (2018) Energy Hierarchy.
Decentralised Energy 6.10.5 There are existing decentralized networks in the vicinity of the site. The operator of the US Embassy Quarters district heating network has been contacted by the applicant for further discussion. Whilst interest has been expressed in serving the site in the future, the Nine Elms site and district heating site are located on opposite sides of a railway track and connection is subject to the opening of a railway archway. Due to the many uncertainties surrounding the feasibility of a connection, the proposed development has progressed with a site-specific heating solution - a communal ambient water loop system, with provision for future connection to a single energy centre to serve the proposed development. As requested by the GLA, drawings demonstrating how the site is to be future-proofed for a connection to a district heating network have been provided.
6.10.6 The applicant has confirmed that operators of other District Heating Networks (DHN) in the area include Riverlight (SSE), Nine Elms Point (EON) and Pimlico District Heating Undertaking (Westminster council) have been contacted and as requested by the GLA evidence of this has been provided. The GLA requested further engagement with Engie including to establish possible timing for connection and this will be secured by condition (7). Future connection to a DHN would be secured by a legal agreement.
Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions 6.10.7 For the Be Lean stage, the applicant has demonstrated that improved energy efficiency measures for the residential element result in an improvement against the Part L 2013 Baseline for the Be Lean stage of nine per cent, which falls short of the recommendation of 10 per cent stated in the LP. Similarly, the non-residential element’s improvement against the Part L 2013 Baseline at one per cent would fall short of the 15 per cent LP target. In accordance with policy S12E the Energy Strategy includes calculations of unregulated emissions. The energy efficiency measures for the Be Lean stage include improved heat recovery technologies; glazing reduction designed to achieve a balance between daylighting and overheating; fabric performance savings including enhanced U-values and mitigation of thermal bridging, greater air tightness and optimisation of G- values. The applicant has investigated alternative passive measures, however, none of these were proven feasible at the time and would result in a significant impact on the shape and form of the buildings, the daylight factor and the overall facade design. A condition (7) is recommended to ensure that optimisation of the Be Lean stage is investigated further through a revised Energy Statement including a potential for waste-water heat recovery and a green lease agreement to ensure efficient fit-out of the non-residential unit.
6.10.8 For the Be Clean stage, as discussed above, the applicant provided a commitment that the development is designed to allow future connection to a DHN.
6.10.9 For the Be Green stage the proposals include ambient loop air source heat pumps for the provision of heating and domestic hot water. During the application process the applicant has provided information to demonstrate its combability with a future connection to DHN which satisfied the GLA’s request. The proposal also includes PV panels equating to circa 100sqm of
net PV area and during the application process an area of possible further 100sqm has been identified which would not impact on the biodiverse roofs. The GLA requested further investigations and details will be secured by a condition (43). Utilisation of waste heat from the station was also considered but discounted due to feasibility issues associated with the design of the Nine Elms Station.
6.10.10 For the Be Seen stage, the Energy Assessment confirms that monitoring strategy will be devised to enable the end-user to assess the energy consumption and carbon emission. A central plantroom is proposed with metering for PV, ASHP and Electric Vehicle charging. For domestic unit-level smart metering will be provided. The s106 would include a requirement that the Be Seen guidance is submitted to the GLA’s portal at the appropriate reporting stages in line with the GLA’s request.
6.10.11 Overall, the Energy Assessment provides calculations with BRUKL and SAP reports to show that the development achieves 45 per cent reduction in non-domestic and 57 per cent in domestic carbon emissions over Part L(2013) . The development achieves a 56 per cent reduction in site- wide carbon emissions over Part L which exceeds the LP target of 35 per cent. It is recommended that a Finalised Energy Assessment is secured by a condition (7). A financial contribution which the applicant estimated to be £534,090 relating to the shortfall in carbon reductions would also be secured by s106 legal agreement.
Sustainable Design and Construction 6.10.12 The submitted Sustainability Statement is compliant with the LP policies relating to sustainable design and construction, including a Circular Economy Statement as requested by the GLA. The Sustainability Statement confirms that use of timber with FSC/PEFC certification and use of recycled materials where possible. The waste and water hierarchy will be implemented to manage site waste and water with procedures and work practices to be outlined in a Site Waste Management Plan. The Construction Environmental Management Plan confirms the use of sustainable materials and adherence to the GLA’s Responsible Procurement Policy, as well as making use of the Building Research Establishment’s Responsible Sourcing Standard BES6001. The Sustainability Statement also covers operational stage and confirms measures such as the provision of appropriate cooking ventilation, zero local emission (electric) cooking appliances and smart air quality monitors. Operational waste facilities will be provided to maximise waste recycling including food waste.
6.10.13 The applicant has provided a pre-assessment of non-residential development that a BREEAM rating Very Good (shell & core) would be achieved. It is recommended that this should be resubmitted upon consultation with the design team to confirm whether the improved Excellent rating (noted not unfeasible in the assessment) could be achieved. This will be secured by conditions (34 and 35) as recommended by the council’s sustainability consultant to ensure compliance with LLP policy EN4.
6.10.14 With regards to overheating and cooling for residential uses, the applicant’s assessment is based on windows remaining closed which is required to comply with acoustics and air quality assessments. Flats would be provided with internal blinds and active cooling system is proposed in areas such as gym and cinema rooms and the Pavilion Building. The ambient loop system is proposed to provide tempering of hot air to mitigate overheating risk within the flats. Guidance for the occupants to minimise overheating shall be included within the "Resident Welcome Pack". With regards to non-domestic areas, a condition (36) requesting that Overheating Analysis is submitted to and approved is recommended in line with the recommendations of the council’s sustainability consultant.
6.10.15 The applicant has confirmed the water consumption of the proposed development will meet the Optional Requirement of the Building Regulations, achieving mains water consumption of 105
litres or less per head per day. However, no water efficiency information has been provided for the non-residential components of the development and the GLA noted that the developer should also consider water harvesting and reuse to reduce consumption of wholesome water across the entire development site. Conditions (37, 38 and 39) are recommended to ensure that further details including sanitaryware specification and the water demand per head of external maintenance and features are provided and the details implemented. This would ensure compliance with LP policy SI.5.
6.10.16 Policy SI2 F of the LP introduces a requirement to calculate the whole life-cycle emissions of the development through a nationally recognised Whole Life-Cycle Carbon Assessment (WLC). The WLC assessment includes not only the regulated emissions considered under current energy assessments but also the following: • Unregulated emissions, i.e. those associated with cooking and small appliances • Embodied emissions, i.e. those associated with raw material extraction, manufacture and transport of building materials and construction • Emissions associated with maintenance, repair and replacement as well as dismantling, demolition and eventual material disposal
6.10.17 The Mayor published draft guidance on the approach to WLC emissions assessments, including when they should take place, what they should contain and how information should be reported. The application pre-dated this policy requirement however an assessment was provided within the Sustainability Statement. The council’s sustainability advisor reviewed the submitted WLC and confirmed it complies with the reporting requirements of the GLA guidance. It has a limited scope, however this is understandable given the limited information available at this stage of design. The information provided for the superstructure shows a highly efficient structure with embodied carbon significantly lower than even aspirational targets. A condition (45) is recommended to ensure that appropriate targets are reached and demonstrated through a full post construction WLC.
6.10.18 LP policy S17 of the LP requires development referable applications to submit a Circular Economy Statement, and LP policy D3 requires development proposals to integrate circular economy principles as part of the design process. The GLA has released draft guidance for developers on how to prepare Circular Economy Statements and a ‘Design for a circular economy’ Primer that helps to explain the principles and benefits of circular economy projects. The applicant’s circular economy statement acknowledges that it was developed prior to issuing of this detailed guidance. Given this, the council’s sustainability advisor confirmed that it is reasonable to assess the submission against the core intent of the GLA guidance. The GLA welcomed the applicant’s commitment to reusing/recovering 95per cent of construction waste and requested commitment to achieve targets relating to recycled construction materials (20per cent), provision of notification of the likely destination of waste with suitable capacity and targets relating to municipal waste. The applicant confirmed their commitment to using reasonable endeavours to meet the relevant targets and this will be confirmed within post-completion circular economy statement (Condition 45).
6.10.19 Overall, the proposed development has been designed to be highly sustainable and maximise the potential carbon savings that can be achieved in accordance with the relevant policy and guidance. Therefore, the proposed scheme complies with polices SI2, SI3, SI4 of the LP and policy EN3 and EN4 of the LLP and DRLLP.
6.11 Other Environmental Matters
Flood Risk 6.11.1 The NPPF states that inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by
directing development away from areas at highest risk but, where development is necessary, making it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere. LP policy SI.12 states that development proposals should ensure that flood risk is minimised and mitigated, and that residual risk is addressed. LLP Policy EN5 states that flooding in the borough will be minimised through applying a sequential, risk-based approach to the location of development to avoid flood risk to people and property. This general approach is designed to ensure that areas at little or no risk of flooding from any source are developed in preference to areas at higher risk. For all developments, it must be demonstrated that development will be safe, and where required it will reduce fluvial, tidal, surface run-off and groundwater floor risk through using appropriate flood risk measures, including the use of sustainable drainage systems.
6.11.2 A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted with the application to demonstrate that the development can be satisfactorily accommodated without worsening flood risk for the area and without placing the development itself at risk of flooding, as per national guidance provided within the NPPF and in accordance with LLP policy EN5.
6.11.3 The site is within Flood Risk Zone 3 (high) which means that there is a 1 per cent or greater annual probability of river flooding or 0.5 per cent annual probability of sea flooding. However, the actual risk is lowered significantly due to the presence of the Thames Tidal Defences. In this risk zone, all development must satisfy the sequential test for development set out in the NPPF and ‘more vulnerable’ uses, such as residential, must meet the Exception Test. For the Exception Test to be passed: • it must be demonstrated that the development provides wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk, informed by a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment where one has been prepared; and • a site-specific flood risk assessment must demonstrate that the development will be safe for its lifetime taking account of the vulnerability of its users, without increasing food risk elsewhere, and, where possible, will reduce food risk overall.
6.11.4 In respect of the first point, the development would provide wider sustainability benefits to the community. It would redevelop a site above a station box to provide 479 new homes of which 40 per cent would be affordable and new public realm. Officers consider these benefits outweigh the flood risk.
6.11.5 For the second point, the submitted FRA notes that residential floor levels of the proposed over- station development are above the levels at risk of flooding, currently set at 7.55m AOD above the station building. This exceeds the levels of maximum flood level of 3.25mAOD. The FRA also proposes preparing a Flood Warning and Evacuation plan which is supported by officers and a condition (9) is recommend to secure this in line with the GLA request. The Environmental Agency noted that it was unclear from the FRA if the flood levels were determined using the most up to date data but raised no objections as the residential development being at first floor level would be above the 2100 breach flood level. The LLFA considered that the applicant appropriately assessed and managed the risk of flooding from surface water.
6.11.6 The GLA raised concerns that the FRA considers the risk of flooding from a range of sources but considered that it does not adequately address the residual risk of flooding due to a breach of River Thames and surface water overland flow. Flood resistance and resilience construction should be incorporated into the design to adequately address the residual risk. It advised that particular attention should be given to service rooms and generators on the ground floor to ensure a safe haven can be achieved on upper floors.
6.11.7 In response to the GLA concerns, the applicant advised that the UKPN substation and generator rooms at ground floor level is unavoidable due to the access and maintenance requirements of the service providers. These rooms also require very specific ventilation requirements with the vast
majority of the doors/walls having specified louvers. As noted above, residential accommodation would be provided at first floor levels and above which would be safe from flooding and this includes fire alarm and emergency lighting back-up power provisions. The current proposal also follows on the principles accepted through the extent consent whereby the UKPN substation was also located at ground floor level and therefore the proposed scheme is considered to be acceptable in this respect.
6.11.8 The risk of increasing flood risk elsewhere would be mitigated with an appropriate drainage strategy, discussed below. The proposed development meets the above exception test and thereby complies with the NPPF, LP policy SI.12 and LLP policy EN5.
Sustainable Drainage 6.11.9 LLP policy EN6 require development to utilise sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) unless there are practical reasons for not doing so and should aim to achieve greenfield run-off rates and adequately manage surface water run-off. LP policy SI13 sets out a drainage hierarchy which should be followed.
6.11.10 The proposal would utilise the existing drainage system from the previously approved station box. Due to the site’s constraints associated with the station box it is not possible to provide for additional attenuation volume for water management system. The proposed discharge rate of 89.8l/s represents a reduction of 50 per cent from the existing rates. The drainage strategy demonstrates that the proposed surface water management system will effectively manage runoff within the site up to the 1per cent Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) taking account of climate change. The LLFA noted that the proposed rate is higher than what would be normally expected however the site’s constraints have been acknowledged and the LLFA raised no objection to the proposed drainage strategy which incorporates tree pits with storage crates, rain gardens and a hydrobrake to facilitate attenuation within the network.
6.11.11 The GLA considered that the proposed drainage strategy does not give appropriate regard to the drainage hierarchy and greenfield runoff rate and requested further information. They requested that further details on how SuDS measures at the top of the drainage hierarchy will be included in the development, and how greenfield runoff rate will be achieved. Additional information explaining the site constraints has been provided by the applicant and will be formally considered by the GLA in their Stage 2 response.
6.11.12 In terms of water management, Thames Water raised no objections and advised that they are currently working with the developer to identify and deliver the off-site water infrastructure needs to serve the development. Conditions recommended by Thames Water (8, 18 and 40) are recommended.
6.11.13 Officers consider that subject to the above conditions being imposed, the proposals would satisfy policy requirements in reducing the risk of flooding both on-site and in the surrounding environment.
Air Quality 6.11.14 The whole borough is within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) in relation to a breach of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matters objectives as specified in the Air Quality Regulations 2000.
6.11.15 The LP policy SI1 recognise the need to reduce contributory factors to air pollution and improve the public’s exposure to pollution. It expects developments to at least be Air Quality Neutral and demonstrate how design solutions can address/minimise exposure of those most vulnerable, i.e. children and the elderly.
6.11.16 The applicant has provided a detailed air quality report which assesses both the construction and operational impacts. A review of baseline air quality within the vicinity indicated that the proposed development is likely to be near to or above the AQS objectives at ground level. However, the proposed residential accommodation would be set back at least 7m horizontally and more than 14m vertically from Wandsworth Road and at these locations the modelled road contribution is small with concentrations more akin to urban background conditions as opposed to those typically observed at roadside locations. At this height, concentrations are expected to be below AQS objective levels and therefore the site is suitable for the introduction of residential use. It is noted that the location of proposed residential units is no closer to sources of air quality pollutants than the extant permission and all units would benefit from mechanical ventilation. The estimated transport and buildings emissions for this developed would be below the benchmark levels set by the GLA. As such, it could be considered to be ‘air quality neutral’.
6.11.17 With regards to construction phase, the qualitative assessment of dust effects predicts that there will be a high risk of dust creating nuisance and /or loss of amenity and of PM10 leading to adverse health effects without mitigation. Following the implementation of mitigation measures the impacts are predicted to be not significant. Accordingly, a full Air Quality and Dust Management Plan (AQDMP) would be required by condition (5) and it would need to follow the guidance for high-risk sites set out in the Control of Dust and Emissions During Construction and Demolition SPG (2014). In addition, automatic continuous PM10 monitoring and compliance of non-road mobile machinery with emissions regulations would be required by conditions (5 and 6). Overall, the proposed development is considered to comply with LP policy SI1.
Wind Microclimate 6.11.18 The application is supported by a Micro-Climate Assessment. A model of the proposed development was wind-tunnel tested in order to assess the resulting wind conditions and the impact on pedestrian comfort. The study assessed pedestrian level in the vicinity of the site, roof terraces and balconies. The safety criterium was satisfied at all measuring points and therefore no potential risk for pedestrians or cyclists according to the defined safety criterium was identified.
6.11.19 Nearly all investigated areas at the ground and podium levels and on the roof terraces are wind sheltered or comparable to the wind situation at site without any buildings. A good pedestrian comfort is expected during the summer period with many areas suitable for frequent and occasional sitting. It was identified that the proposed landscape concept with its planting at the ground level has a positive effect on the pedestrian wind comfort and the design of the glass balustrade at roof top levels also has significant impact on the wind comfort levels.
6.11.20 Due to the more wind intensive winter period the wind situation is consequently predicted to be less favourable compared to the summer (still expected to be better than or comparable with the reference situation at the site without any buildings). The majority of the measured locations on the balconies will have a good wind comfort during the more important summer period with most of the balconies being identified as suitable for long-term sitting. Overall the local wind conditions are predicted to be acceptable with no areas requiring any mitigation for pedestrian comfort issues. The council’s consultant wind expert has recommended to include a planning condition (30) to ensure that any future amendment to the current external configuration is assessed from wind - tunnel perspective. The development would be in compliance with LP policy D9 and LLP policy Q26.
Solar Glare 6.11.21 Due to the dominance of non-reflective materials on the exterior of the development there would be little risk of harmful solar glare.
Ground Contamination 6.11.22 In accordance with LLP policy EN4 proposals should include an assessment of existing ground
conditions and identify appropriate remedial measures for any contaminated land prior to development commencing. This aspect has already been covered through the TWAO consent (Condition 9) and as the proposed scheme would be constructed above the station no further conditions are required.
Fire Strategy
6.11.23 LP policy D3 (Inclusive design) requires proposals to set out how access and inclusion will be maintained and managed, including fire evacuation procedures. LP policy D12 (Fire safety) states that all development proposals must achieve the highest standards of fire safety. Whilst fire safety is currently dealt with under Building Control legislation, the planning process acts as a ‘gateway’ to the consideration of the issue and we seek to ensure that appropriate consideration has been given.
6.11.24 The fire statement submitted with the application includes details of construction methods, products and materials; the means of escape including a lift with enhanced facilities for evacuation in each block; access for fire service personnel, equipment and fire appliances. The strategy also incorporates features which reduce the risk to life such as sprinklers, 24/7 management with fire control centre and emergency voice communication devices at each stair core. The Council’s Building Control officer has reviewed the submitted fire strategy and access and consider the approach to be reasonable and achievable. The proposal would be subject to a final assessment of compliance which would be completed when the Building Regulations application is submitted to the nominated Building Control body. This would entail the submission of the final version fire strategy and any amended plans and specifications etc and subject to further consultation with London Fire Brigade. The scheme thereby complies with LP policy D12.
6.12 Employment and Skills
6.12.1 Policy ED14 of the LLP and policy ED15 of DRLLP state that planning obligations should be used to secure employment opportunities and apprenticeships arising from major developments, so that local residents are given access to the right skills training so that they can take advantage of opportunities created by new development.
6.12.2 The development is estimated to support up to 7 permanent full-time jobs through the commercial unit, and further 21 on-site roles associated with BtR management and maintenance roles. The demolition and construction phase could also generate approximately 75 full time equivalent jobs directly and 113 off site jobs indirectly.
6.12.3 The SPD on Employment and Skills (2018) sets out a ‘headline’ target of 25 per cent of jobs generated by developments as being for local residents. In this case, as the application site adjoins a boundary with LB of Wandsworth, the definition of local residents would be broadened to include Wandsworth residents. The council’s Employment and Skills Team confirmed that this would meet the request raised by LB Wandsworth. The SPD envisages that an applicant will be asked to work towards delivery of that target through the carrying out of an approved employment and skills plan, which would be designed so as to include the intended target numbers and types of job opportunities. The SPD envisages an element of flexibility in how an applicant may agree to work towards delivery of employment and skills obligations, for example as regards the target mix of jobs, apprenticeships and/or bespoke employment training and support arrangements. The employment and skills plan should also set out how an applicant will aim to deliver young people’s training and careers initiatives.
6.12.4 The Employment and Skills SPD also seeks a monetary contribution to help support those sections of the Lambeth workforce that are furthest from employment, having been out of work for a long period of time and/or having low levels of skills. The financial contributions are used by the council to
fund training and support to enable access to newly created employment opportunities arising from development. For this development the financial contribution would be £280,961 based on the formula set out in the SPD.
6.12.5 Overall, it is considered that the proposal meets the requirements of LLP policy ED14, DRLLP policy ED15 and the SPD on Employment and Skills.
6.13 Planning Obligations and CIL
6.13.1 The LLP policy D4 and Annex 10 sets out the Council’s policy in relation to seeking planning obligations and the charging approaches for various types of obligation. For contributions that are not covered by Annex 10, the Council’s approach to calculating contributions is guided by the Development Viability SPD (adopted 2017) and the Employment and Skills SPD (adopted 2018).
6.13.2 The planning obligations that are proposed are considered necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, are directly related to the development and are fairly and reasonably related in kind and in scale to the development. They are therefore compliant with the requirements of Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.
6.13.3 The proposed obligations to be secured through the S106 Agreement are as follows:
Item Details Build to rent (BtR) housing • Covenant clause (15 years) and claw back mechanism following the Formula set out in the GLA’s Affordable Housing SPG (2017) which will include a formula for calculating clawback per unit • Provision for unified ownership • Provision for residential management plan (to include minimum tenancy agreement lengths and break clauses, rent and service charge security, management arrangements, complaints procedures) Affordable housing – on site • 40% of units by habitable rooms to be affordable (DMR) provision in perpetuity • The % discount in relation to market rent to be fixed by unit size and to follow the %s in Table 2 of the report. • 12% of DMR units (21 units including 5 x 3 bedroom and 16 x 2 bedroom) to be subject to a % discount that results in a starting rent that is the equivalent to Lambeth Tenancy Strategy 2020 levels and thereafter at the appropriate % discount, subject throughout to a rent cap as explained in paragraphs 6.27-6.28 of the report. • 88% of the DMR units (155 units) to be subject to a % discount that results in a starting rent that is the equivalent of 2021/22 LLR levels and thereafter at the appropriate % discount, subject throughout to a rent cap as explained in paragraphs 6.27-6.28 of the report. • Provision for rent to increase annual during the life of tenancies by CPI + 1%.
• Eligibility and affordability criteria to be specified (including a household gross income cap of £60K per annum) and arrangements for marketing of units to be specified (including through portals: Homes for Londoners for LLR and Lambeth Private Sector Solutions for LTS) and a bespoke nominations agreement provided for all DMR units
Review mechanisms: • Early Stage Viability Review will be triggered if the scheme is not implemented within two years from vacant possession. • Late stage review will be triggered at 18 months post first occupation of market housing or at occupation of 100% of market units (whichever is the earliest) • Where a viability review demonstrates an improvement in a scheme’s viability, a percentage split of the increase in the scheme’s value (the surplus) will be shared between the developer (20%) and the Council (80%) up to a cap which would achieve the equivalent of a fully policy compliant level of affordable housing as set out in paragraph 6.2.30 of the report • The Council’s share of the surplus to be applied by the developer towards reducing the rents of the DMR units to levels that bring the scheme closer to the ‘targets’ set out in paragraph 6.2.30 of the report, using an agreed mechanism to ‘allocate’ that surplus to rent reductions for different sizes of unit and providing for a payment in lieu (to be applied to the provision of affordable housing more generally) if rent reductions are not feasible because all affected units are already rented out. Communal/Children • Secure in perpetuity and access rights to all residents Play space including a Communal Amenity Management Plan.
Public • Delivery of public realm improvements as set out in the realm/Phasing approved plans • Management strategy and public access to public realm with rights for temporary closure in permitted circumstances (as in the extant permission). • Phasing strategy to facilitate delivery of Block D and/or temporary landscaping strategy if required for up to 5 years from first occupation of residential units. • Provision for limiting access to and/or temporary use of parts of Pascal Square in order for it to be used as a site compound and access for construction of Block D.
Transport • Car parking permit free designation for all residential units - – except in instances where additional on-street blue badge parking spaces are required. • Car parking permit free for all non-residential uses • Car club membership for each initial resident for a period of 3 years from first occupation. • Car Park Design and Management Plan (including provision of off-site Blue Badge spaces at £10,000 per
space) and car spaces to be leased not sold. • TFL Cycle Hire Memberships: 1x fob to be provided for each initial resident for a period of min. 3 years from first occupation. • A contribution of £20k towards the provision of 10 cycle hire docks on Hebden Place. • Two new on-street car club bays to be provided in the locality. • Lambeth Healthy Routes contribution of £172,500 towards improvements on Pascal Street. • Travel Plan – 5 year monitoring contribution of £5,300 • Considerate Constructors Scheme • Nine Elms Construction Charter • Enter into a s278 agreement for highways works agreement with regards to works that will affect the highway including improvements to access points, pedestrian footways and carriageway, reinstatement works and provision of a loading bay on Pascal Street - – such works to be shown on a plan and will be separate to the highway works required for Block D (separate s.278 agreement) Employment and • Employment and Skills Plan to cover reasonable Skills endeavours to secure 25 per cent of jobs created by the development during construction and end-use phases in accordance with the SPD on Employment and Skills (2018) including for Wandsworth residents. • Financial contribution of £280,961 to be used towards vocational training and employment support
Carbon Offset • Carbon off-set contribution (approximately £534,090) • Submission of further details relating to future energy network connection, monitoring (Be Seen stage) and to identify the value of final carbon off-setting contribution
Other • Monitoring fee of 5% of total financial obligations.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
6.13.4 If the application is approved and the development is implemented, a liability to pay the Lambeth Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) will arise.
6.13.5 Expenditure of the majority of a future CIL receipt will be applied towards Borough infrastructure needs in accordance with the applicable policies and procedures relating to expenditure decisions.
6.13.6 Allocation of CIL monies to particular infrastructure projects is not a matter for consideration in the determination of planning applications. Separate governance arrangements are being put in place for Borough Infrastructure needs.
7 CONCLUSION
7.1 The proposals result in development of a key site, above and surrounding the new Nine Elms Station for residential led-mixed use purposes. The proposal seeks to develop above and around the Nine Elms Station buildings to provide a ‘slot -in’ residential led mixed-use development comprising three new residential buildings of 21 storeys (Block A), 16 storeys (Block B) and 17 storeys (Block C) providing a total of 479 homes including 40 per cent affordable housing which would replace the previously approved residential towers. This represents an overall increase of 147 residential units (44 per cent) when compared with the extant permission while the number of affordable units would increase by 92 (109 per cent). The proposal also includes a public square with a small flexible commercial unit (Use Class A1-A4 and D1) facing the new Pascal Square and associated works. It is proposed to implement the scheme in phases which incorporates part-implementation of the extant consent (Block D).
7.2 The development would maximise housing delivery and provide much needed, good quality housing, including a high level of affordable housing, at a density that makes optimum use of the site. The level of affordable housing at 40 per cent meets policy requirement for schemes on public sector land where a portfolio agreement with the Mayor of London is in place. However the proposals were viability tested due to their reliance on grant funding and the non-policy compliant tenure split of the residential units. An independent review confirmed that the affordable housing offer is the maximum viable. During the application process extensive discussions with the GLA took place and the applicant secured an in principle additional, bespoke grant offer which enabled the scheme to reduce the originally offered rent levels. An early and a late stage review are recommended to ensure that the affordability of rents is further maximised should the viability improve.
7.3 The acceptability of tall buildings on this site has been established through the extant permission, and the proposed towers at 21, 16 and 17 storeys sit within the policy requirements and design aspirations of the London Plan, the Lambeth Local Plan and the emerging draft Lambeth Local Plan. Despite the constraints of the site laid down by the station building, the triangular building form and position of each block, the use of high quality materials, the junction between the station and the development above, and the creation of a significant area of new public realm provides a suitable and positive edge and gateway between the Vauxhall tall building cluster and the lower scale of development to the south. The proposed scheme would not result in harm to any heritage assets or their settings or affect local views from Brockwell Park. In addition, the development has been designed in conjunction with advice offered by the Metropolitan Police’s Design Officer so as to minimise the opportunity for crime/terrorism as far as is practicable.
7.4 The development would provide a high quality residential environment for all future occupiers and would contribute significantly to meeting Lambeth’s and London’s housing targets. All of the new dwellings have been designed to meet relevant standards in terms of size, layout, aspect and adaptability. The proposed units will achieve reasonable levels of outlook, daylight and sunlight. In addition, the development is inclusive of generous on-site amenity (both private and communal), play space provision and the delivery of a significant new area of public realm.
7.5 The proposals would ensure that levels of privacy and outlook of adjoining residential uses is maintained and in some areas enhanced when compared to the existing situation. In terms of the impact on daylight and sunlight and the shift change from the ‘consented’ to ‘proposed’ application scheme, there is fairly limited effect in absolute terms upon both neighbouring properties, with the isolated exception of daylight to three windows. However, consideration should be given to the context of the application site which is located within an opportunity area. Officers are satisfied that the impact of the proposal on daylight and sunlight of neighbouring properties is acceptable.
7.6 The development would have an acceptable impact on the highway and transport network. The
development would be car free, with occupants of the commercial and residential units not eligible for parking permits. 14 on-site disabled parking spaces would be provided with a parking management plan secured by s106 agreement. The scheme would provide a total of 851 cycle parking spaces, in accordance with the London Plan standards. The new public realm will serve to improve links throughout the area as well as provide an attractive and well-designed area for people to dwell. The development would also contribute to improvements to the Local Healthy Routes network and would be suitably mitigated in terms of its impact upon local infrastructure. Subject to conditions, the development would not impact unacceptably upon the function and safety of the highway network (both pedestrian and vehicular).
7.7 The principles of the Mayor’s energy hierarchy have been applied to the proposed development and the Energy Strategy submitted in support of the application demonstrates that a site-wide carbon emissions reduction of 56 per cent would be achieved over the Building Regulations Part L 2013 Baseline. A future financial contribution is required to offset all remaining regulated CO2 emissions to 100 per cent or “zero carbon emissions” will be secured through s106 agreement.
7.8 Subject to conditions, the development would meet technical requirements in respect of sustainability, flood risk mitigation, wind conditions, waste and recycling, air quality and water infrastructure.
7.9 The development would provide an appropriate balance of uses including private and affordable homes, and commercial uses and would improve the environment both in terms of linkages and new public realm. The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions and completion of a s106 Agreement in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development conferred upon Local Planning Authorities by the National Planning Policy Framework.
8 PROCEDURAL MATTERS
8.1 The application is referrable to the Mayor under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The application has been referred to the Mayor at ‘Stage 1’. Before Lambeth can issue a decision on this application it will need to refer the application again to the Mayor at Stage 2; at which point the Mayor will have the opportunity to elect to become determining authority, direct refusal, or allow Lambeth to proceed and issue the decision in line with its resolution.
9 EQUALITY DUTY AND HUMAN RIGHTS
9.1 In line with the Public Sector Equality Duty the council must have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and advance equality of opportunity, as set out in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. In making this recommendation, regard has been given to the Public Sector Equality Duty and the relevant protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation).
9.2 In line with the Human Rights Act 1998, it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right, as per the European Convention on Human Rights. The human rights impact has been considered, with particular reference to Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of property), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) and Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) of the Convention.
9.3 The Human Rights Act 1998 does not impair the right of the state to make decisions and enforce laws as deemed necessary in the public interest. The recommendation is considered appropriate in upholding the council's adopted and emerging policies and is not outweighed by any engaged rights.
10 RECOMMENDATION
1. Resolve to grant conditional planning permission subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) containing the planning obligations listed in this report and any direction as may be received following further referral to the Mayor of London.
2. Agree to delegate authority to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability to: • Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes; and • Negotiate, agree and finalise the planning obligations as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3. In the event that the committee resolves to refuse planning permission and there is a subsequent appeal, delegated authority is given to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.
4. In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within 6 months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainability to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in this report, addendums and/or the PAC minutes.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Draft Decision Notice
Your Ref: Our Ref: 20/02331/FUL
DRAFT DECISION NOTICE
Dear Connected Living London (Nine Elms) Ltd
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990.
PERMISSION FOR DEVELOPMENT
The London Borough of Lambeth hereby permits under the above mentioned Acts and associated orders the development referred to in the schedule set out below subject to any conditions imposed therein and in accordance with the plans submitted, save in so far as may otherwise be required by the said conditions.
In accordance with the statutory provisions your attention is drawn to the statement of Applicant’s Rights and General Information attached.
Application Number: 20/02331/FUL Date of Application: 13.07.2020 Date of Decision:
Proposed Development At: 10 Pascal Street London SW8 4SH
For: Full 'slot-in' planning application for phased, residential led mixed-use development above and surrounding Nine Elms Station, comprising three new residential buildings of 21 storeys, 16 storeys and 17 storeys providing a total of 479 homes (Use Class C3), plus small scale commercial floorspace of 108m2 (Expanded Use Classes A1-A4 and D1), works within the Nine Elms Station 'boxes', a new public square, and associated works.
Approved Plans CLL-NE1 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0175 Site Location Plan P1; CLL-NE2 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0177 Proposed Site Plan P1; CLL-NE3.1 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0176 Existing Site Plan P1; CLL-NE3.2 OSD-AA- XX-B1-DR-A-0100 Existing Basement Level 1 Floor P1; CLL-NE3.3 OSD-AA-XX-01-DR-A-0103 Existing Ground Floor Plan P1; CLL-NE3.4 OSD-AA-XX-0M-DR-A-0102 Existing Mezzanine Floor Plan P1; CLL- NE3.5 OSD-AA-XX-01-DR-A-0103 Existing Roof Plan P1; CLL-NE3.6 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0104 Existing Site Wide South Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.7 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0105 Existing Site Wide North Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.8 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0106 Existing Building A West Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.9 OSD-AA-XX- ZZ-DR-A-0107 Existing Building A East Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.10 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0108 Existing Building B West Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.11 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0109 Existing Building C East Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.12 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0110 Existing Site Wide Section AA P1; CLL-NE3.13 OSD-AA-XX- ZZ-DR-A-0111 Existing Site Wie Section BB P1; CLL-NE3.14 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0112 Existing Building A Short Section P1; CLL-NE3.15 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0113 Existing Building B Short Section P1; CLL-
NE3.16 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0114 Existing Building C Short Section P1; CLL-NE3.17 OSD-AA-XX-B2-DR- A-0199 Proposed Basement Level 2 Plan P1; CLL-NE3.18 OSD-AA-XX-B1-DR-A-0200 Proposed Basement Level 1 Plan P1; CLL-NE3.19 OSD-AA-XX-00-DR-A-0201 Proposed Ground Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.20 OSD-AA-XX-0M-DR-A-0202 Proposed Mezzanine Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.21 OSD-AA-XX-01-DR-A-0203 Proposed First Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.22 OSD-AA-XX-02-DR-A-0204 Proposed Second Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.23 OSD-AA-XX-03-DR-A-0205 Proposed Third to Fifth Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.59 OSD-AA-XX- 06-DR-A-0208 Proposed Sixth to Fifteenth Floor Plan P1; CLL-NE3.24 OSD-AA-XX-16-DR-A-0218 Proposed Sixteenth Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.25 OSD-AA-XX-17-DR-A-0219 Proposed Seventeenth Floor Plan P2; CLL-NE3.26 OSD-AA-XX-18-DR-A-0220 Proposed Eighteenth Floor Plan P1; CLL-NE3.27 OSD- AA-XX-19-DR-A-0221 Proposed Nineteenth & Twentieth Floor Plan P1; CLL-NE3.28 OSD-AA-XX-21-DR-A- 0223 Proposed Twenty First Floor Plan P1; CLL-NE3.29 OSD-AA-XX-22-DR-A-0224 Proposed Roof Plan P2; CLL-NE3.30 OSD-AA-BLA-02-DR-A-0251 Proposed Building A Buttress Internal Layouts P1; CLL- NE3.31 OSD-AA-BLA-03-DR-A-0252 Proposed Building A Typical Internal Layouts P1 CLL-NE3.32 OSD- AA-BLA-21-DR-A-0253 Proposed Building A Outrigger Internal Layouts P1 CLL-NE3.33 OSD-AA-BLB-02- DR-A-0254 Proposed Building B Buttress Internal Layouts P2; CLL-NE3.60 OSD-AA-BLB-03-DR-A-0260 Proposed Building B Third to Fifth Internal Layouts P1; CLL-NE3.34 OSD-AA-BLB-03-DR-A-0255 Proposed Building B Typical Internal Layouts P2 CLL-NE3.35 OSD-AA-BLB-16-DR-A-0256 Proposed Building B Outrigger Internal Layouts P1; CLL-NE3.36 OSD-AA-BLC-02-DR-A-0257 Proposed Building C Buttress Internal Layouts P2; CLL-NE3.37 OSD-AA-BLC-03-DR-A-0258 Proposed Building C Typical Internal Layouts P2; CLL-NE3.38 OSD-AA-BLC-17-DR-A-0259 Proposed Building C Outrigger Internal Layouts P2 ; CLL- NE3.39 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0301 Proposed Site Wide Section AA P1; CLL-NE3.40 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR- A-0302 Proposed Site Wide Section BB P1; CLL-NE3.41 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0303 Proposed Building A Short Section P1; CLL-NE3.42 SD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0304 Proposed Building B Short Section P1; CLL- NE3.43 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0305 Proposed Building C Short Section P1; CLL-NE3.44 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ- DR-A-0350 Proposed Ladder sections through juliette & projecting balconies P1; CLL-NE3.45 OSD-AA-XX- ZZ-DR-A-0351 Proposed Ladder sections through inset & semi-inset balconies P1; CLL-NE3.46 OSD-AA- XX-ZZ-DR-A-0352 Proposed Ladder sections through amenity & entrance P1; CLL-NE3.47 OSD-AA-XX- ZZ-DR-A-0401 Proposed Site Wide South Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.48 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0402 Proposed Site Wide North Elevation P2; CLL-NE3.49 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0403 Proposed Building A West Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.50 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0404 Proposed Building A East Elevation P1; CLL- NE3.51 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0405 Proposed Building B West Elevation P2; CLL-NE3.52 OSD-AA-XX- ZZ-DR-A-0406 Proposed Building C East Elevation P1; CLL-NE3.53 OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0407 Proposed Hypotenuse Elevations P1; CLL-NE3.54 Rev D General arrangement plan - ground floor; CLL-NE3.55 rev F – Detailed Plan – Pascal Square; CLL-NE4 OSD-AA-ZZ-ZZ-SH-A-0701 Detailed Schedule of Accommodation P11; OSD-AA-XX-06-DR-A-0208 P1 Proposed Sixth to Fifteenth Floor Plan P1; OSD-AA- BLB-03-DR-A-0260 P1 Proposed Building B Third to Fifth Internal Layouts P1; OSD-AA-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0935 P1 Proposed Site Plan with consented context. Reports and other supporting documents: CLL-NE22 Construction Environmental Management Plan by Atkins; Design and Access Statement CLL-NE7 by Assael; Planning Statement CLL-NE8 by Avison and Young; Statement of Community Involvement CLL-NE9 by Casacde; Transport Assessment CLL-NE10 by Aecom; Framework Travel Plan CLL-NE11 by Aecom; Affordable Housing Viability Assessment CLL-NE12 by Avison and Young; Housing Delivery Statement CLL- NE13 by Quod; Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report CLL-NE14 by Avison and Young; Biodiversity Report CLL-NE15 by Atkins; Air Quality Assessment CLL-NE16 by Atkins; Energy Assessment CLL-NE17 by Atkins; Sustainability Statement CLL-NE18 by Atkins; Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy CLL- NE19 by Atkins; Utilities Strategy Report CLL-NE20 by Atkins; Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment CLL- NE21 by Atkins; Heritage Townscape Visual Impact Appraisal CLL-NE23 by Arc; Micro-Climate Assessment CLL-NE24 by Wacker; Fire Statement CLL-NE25 by Hoare Lea; Exterior Lighting Strategy CLL-NE7 by Atkins; DAS addendum Design and Access Statement Addendum P1; External lighting Strategy Addendum by Atkins; Micro Climate Study Addendum Latter by Wacker ; Socio-Economic Impact Assessment by Avison Young; Operational Waste and Recycling Management Strategy by AECOM revised 02.03.21; Drawing: OSD-AA-XX-01-DR-A-0936 R1 Proposed non standard cycles in lifts; Transport Assessment Addendum February 2021 by AECOM ; Email from AY dated 17.12.20 with cycle parking clarifications; Email from AY dated 26/02/21 confirming commitment to Streetscape for London; Josta 2-tier High Capacity Racks details; Daylight an sunlight letter from Avison Young dated 18.01.2021; Daylight and Sunlight analysis results 12.03.2020; Daylight and Sunlight Post submission Queries 03.21; Technical Note ‘Optimisations for Domestic and Non-Domestic areas for GLA's 'Be Lean' targets’ by Atkins; Summary of Ambient Loop DEN Connections by Danfloss; Technical Submittal Heat Exchanger Substations by Danfloss x 3 (500kW, 100kW and 2000kW); General Principle of ambient loop ASHP on each building by Atkins; OSD-AA-XX-00-DR-A- 0201 R10 District Heating Network proposed route; Technical Note GLA District Heating Energy queries clarification by Atkins; Technical Note Surface Water Drainage by Atkins.
Conditions
Standard Conditions
Time Limit
1. The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of four years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (As Amended).
Approved Drawings
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans listed in this decision notice, other than where those details are altered pursuant to the requirements of the conditions of this planning permission.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
Pre-commencement conditions
Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)
3. For each phase, no development shall commence until a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) relating to that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with TfL. The CEMP shall include details of the following relevant measures:
a) An introduction consisting of construction phase environmental management plan, definitions and abbreviations and project description and location; b) A description of management responsibilities; c) A description of the construction and demolition programme which identifies activities likely to cause high levels of noise or dust; d) Site working hours and a named person for residents to contact; e) Detailed Site logistics arrangements; f) Details regarding parking, deliveries, and storage; g) Details regarding dust and noise mitigation measures to be deployed including identification of sensitive receptors, together with arrangements for ongoing continuous monitoring and provision of monitoring results to the Local Planning Authority; h) Details of measures to prevent the deposit of mud and debris on the public highway; i) Any measures to mitigate the impact of demolition and construction upon the function and safety of the surrounding area for cyclists; j) Any other measures to mitigate the impact of demolition and construction upon the amenity of the area and the function and safety of the highway network. k) Details of a temporary lighting strategy, including details of temporary lighting of all public areas and buildings showing acceptable positioning and levels of glare l) measures to heighten awareness of the potential for ecological features as set out in the herby approved Biodiversity Report and m) Communication procedures with the LBL and local community regarding key construction issues – newsletters, fliers etc. n) Details demonstrating that Street Space for London Plan guidance informed the CEMP (where relevant/feasible) The demolition and construction shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the details and measures approved in the CEMP for the related phase, unless the written consent of the Local Planning Authority is received for any variation.
Reason: This is required prior to construction to avoid hazard and obstruction being caused to users of the public highway and to safeguard residential amenity and biodiversity value of the site during the whole of the construction period. (Policies T6, EN1 and Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Non-road mobile machinery (NRMM)
4. If Non Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) of net power of 37kW and up to and including 560kW is required on site during the course of demolition, site preparation and construction phases, it must comply with the emission standards set out in chapter 7 of the GLA’s supplementary planning guidance “Control of Dust and Emissions During Construction and Demolition” dated July 2014 (SPG), or subsequent guidance. Unless it complies with the standards set out in the SPG, no NRMM shall be on site, at any time, whether in use or not, without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. The developer must register all NRMM at https://nrmm.london/user- nrmm/register prior to bringing it on to site and shall keep the register up to date by listing all NRMM used during the demolition, site preparation and construction phases of the development
Reason: To ensure that air quality is not adversely affected by the development (Policy SI 1 of the London Plan (2021))
Air quality impacts (construction stage)
5. No development shall commence until full details of the proposed mitigation measures for impact on air quality and dust emissions, in the form of an Air Quality and Dust Management Plan (AQDMP), have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. In preparing the AQMDP the applicant should follow the guidance on mitigation measures for high risk sites (as a minimum) set out in Appendix 7 of the Control of Dust and Emissions during Construction and Demolition SPG 2014 for demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout. Both ‘highly recommended’ and ‘desirable’ measures should be included. The AQDMP can form part of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The AQDMP shall include the following for each relevant phase of work (demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout): o A summary of work to be carried out; o Proposed haul routes, location of site equipment including supply of water for damping down, source of water, drainage and enclosed areas to prevent contaminated water leaving the site; o Inventory and timetable of all dust and NOx air pollutant generating activities; o List of all dust and emission control methods to be employed and how they relate to the Air Quality (Dust) Risk Assessment; o Details of any fuel stored on-site; o Details of a trained and responsible person on-site for air quality (with knowledge of pollution monitoring and control methods, and vehicle emissions);
The AQDMP must also include details of automatic continuous PM10 monitoring which should be carried out on site. Baseline monitoring must commence at least three months before the commencement of the enabling works. If baseline monitoring can not begin during this time frame, PM10 data for this 3 month advance period from monitors already in place at the site may be submitted, subject to approval of details (monitor locations and specifications) by the LPA. Monitors must then be installed on-site at locations indicative of exposure of sensitive receptors to dust emitted from works from commencement of phase 1 and should continue throughout all construction phases. Details of: o the equipment to be used o its exact positioning o trigger levels above which construction works must stop until the source of emissions can be identified o additional mitigation to be employed during high pollution episodes must be included and approved by the council prior to use. If proposed trigger level is above 190 µg/m3 this must be justified and approved by the LPA. A monthly summary report of continuous monitoring data should be provided to the council for the duration of the development, and monitoring data should be available for download by the local authority on request at any time. Reports of exceedances of trigger levels with details of the source of exceedances, mitigation measures applied and future preventative measures to be taken should be submitted to the local authority by the next working day.
No demolition or development shall commence until all necessary pre-commencement measures described in the AQDMP have been put in place and set out on site. The demolition and development shall thereafter be carried out and monitored in accordance with the details and measures approved in the AQDMP.
Reason: Development must not commence before this condition is discharged to manage and mitigate the impact of the development on the air quality and dust emissions in the area and London as a whole, and to avoid irreversible and unacceptable damage to the environment (London Plan (2021) Policy SI 1, and the London Plan SPGs for Sustainable Design and Construction and Control of Dust and Emissions during Construction and Demolition).
Environmental Noise and Vibration
6. Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted, a scheme of noise and vibration attenuation and ventilation sufficient to prevent overheating and maintain thermal comfort shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall achieve the habitable room standards as detailed in BS8233:2014 and must include details of post construction validation. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and a separate validation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 3 months of first occupation. All work must be carried out by a suitably qualified person and the approved noise, vibration attenuation and ventilation measures shall thereafter be retained and maintained in working order for the lifetime of the development in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the amenities of future residential occupiers (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Energy Statement
7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, Energy Statement details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which confirms the residential and non-residential on-site reductions over Part L 2013 baseline achieved through energy efficiency measures (Be Lean), based on the Energy Hierarchy in the GLA’s Energy Assessment Guidance (2018). This shall include a feasibility study for water heat recovery and a green lease agreement details. Where the reduction of 10 per cent for residential spaces and 15 per cent reduction for non- residential spaces cannot be met, justification should be provided. The Energy Statement shall demonstrate that the development will achieve a reduction in carbon emissions of 35 per cent over that required by Part L of the Building Regulations 2013 and include the calculations for carbon offset payment, using the carbon price of £95 per tonne for 30 years
Reason: To ensure that the development makes the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions (Policy S12 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy EN3 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Water Infrastructure
8. No construction shall take place within 5m of the water main. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, information detailing how the developer intends to divert the asset / align the development, so as to prevent the potential for damage to subsurface potable water infrastructure, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any construction must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved information. Unrestricted access must be available at all times for the maintenance and repair of the asset during and after the construction works.
Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground strategic water main, utility infrastructure. The works has the potential to impact on local underground water utility infrastructure (Policy SI 4 of the London Plan (2021))
Flood emergency and evacuation
9. No development shall commence until the applicant has submitted to and had approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan (FEP). This Plan shall include the following information:
During Construction Process
- command & control (decision making process and communications to ensure activation of FEP); - training and exercising of personnel on site (H& S records of to whom and when); - flood warning procedures (in terms of receipt and transmission of information and to whom); - site evacuation procedures and routes; and, - provision for identified safe refuges (who goes there and resources to sustain them).
During Occupation of Development - occupant awareness of the likely frequency and duration of flood events; - safe access to and from the development; - subscription details to Environment Agency flood warning system, 'Flood Warning Direct'.
The flood evacuation plan shall be implemented during the use of the development hereby approved and maintained in operation for the lifetime of the development.
Reason: In order to mitigate the impact of a flood event on users of the development (Policy SI 12 of the London Plan (2021)) and EN5 of Lambeth Local Plan Policy (2015)).
Design and Appearance
Detailed drawings
10. Notwithstanding any indication on the drawings hereby approved, prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted drawings showing all external construction detailing of all relevant building/block has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing.
The drawings shall include details of: a) the façade of the building including details of ground and first floor. b) main entrances (including service entrances) and how they will be named and numbered permanently including canopies c) balconies and terraces including balustrades d) boundary treatments e) soffits, screens, vents and copings f) roof treatments, cills and parapets including detailed design of plant and associated screening g) windows and doors (including technical details, elevations, reveal depths, plans and cross sections) h) commercial unit shopfront and security details i) building signage strategy and Legible London Signage k) mail boxes l) acoustic screens/barriers for external communal amenity terraces (where required) m) overlooking mitigation measures to relevant windows,
The details set out above shall be provided at 1:10 scale (including sections) or 1:20 elevational studies whichever is most suitable for the detail in question. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details and drawings thus approved and shall thereafter be retained for the lifetime of the development.
Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area and that the amenities of neighbouring occupiers are protected. (Policies Q2, Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q15, Q17 and Q26 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policies D4, D8 and D9 of the London Plan (2021)).
Materials
11. Notwithstanding any indication on the drawings hereby approved, prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, the following details of all materials to be used in the external elevations of each block/building/public realm shall be provided to and approved in writing by the local planning authority:
a. a technical specification schedule of the materials
b. a sample panel to be provided on site
c. a photographic record of the sample panels, taken on site at midday
The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the samples thus approved.
Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area (Policies Q2, Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q15, Q17 and Q26 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policies D4, D8 and D9 of the London Plan (2021)).
Plumbing
12. No vents, plumbing or pipes, other than those approved, shall be fixed to the external faces of any building for the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure an appropriate standard of design (Policies Q6, Q8 and Q26 of the Lambeth Local Plan 2015).
Adaptable and adapted housing
13. Units annotated as ‘WCH’ on the hereby approved plans shall be constructed to comply with Part M4 (3) of the Building Regulations. Any communal areas and accesses serving the M4 (3) compliant Wheelchair User Dwellings should also comply with Part M4 (3). All other residential units, communal areas and accesses hereby permitted shall be constructed to comply with Part M4 (2) of the Building Regulations.
Reason: To secure appropriate access for disabled people, older people and others with mobility constraints (Policy D7 of the London Plan (2021) and Q1 of the London Borough of Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and the guidance in the London Plan Housing SPG (2012)).
Landscaping and playspace
Playspace
14. Notwithstanding details shown on the approved plans, no occupation of the residential parts of the development shall commence until full details of the children's play space provisions (including layout, equipment specification, and phasing of delivery) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the development has been implemented in accordance with the approved details and agreed phasing. The children's play areas shall be maintained for the duration of the development and available for all occupiers irrespective of tenure.
Reason: To ensure appropriate provision for children's play on site. (Policy S4 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Landscaping details and Net Biodiversity Gain
15. Notwithstanding the details on the drawings and documents hereby approved, prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, a hard and soft landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All tree, shrub and hedge planting included within the above scheme shall accord with BS3936:1992, BS4043:1989 and BS4428:1989 (or subsequent superseding equivalent) and current Arboricultural best practice. The details shall demonstrate that net biodiversity has been achieved. The details shall include:
a) The treatment of all parts of the site not covered by buildings including walls and boundary features b) The treatment of the communal residential podium/roof terraces c) The quantity, size, species, position and the proposed time of planting of all trees and shrubs to be planted including details of appropriate infrastructure to support long-term survival d) An indication of how all trees and shrubs will integrate with the proposal in the long term with regard to their mature size and anticipated routine maintenance and protection including irrigation systems e) Details of infrastructure to maximise rooting capacity and optimize rooting conditions; f) All shrubs and hedges to be planted that are intended to achieve a significant size and presence in the landscape shall be similarly specified; g) All hard landscaping including all ground surfaces, planters, seating, refuse disposal points, cycle parking facilities, bollards, vehicle crossovers/access points; h) Biodiversity mitigation and enhancement measures as set out in the herby approved Biodiversity Report
The development hereby permitted shall be thereafter carried out in accordance with the approved details within 6 months of the date of occupation of any part of the site unless an alternative temporary landscaping and phasing scheme has otherwise been submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to introduce high quality 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 and to ensure high quality of housing. (Policy EN1, Q2, Q6, Q9, Q10 and H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan ( 2015) and Policy G6 of the London Plan 2020)).
Landscaping – First Planting
16. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the development hereby permitted or the substantial completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees, hedgerows or shrubs forming part of the approved landscaping scheme which within a period of five years from the occupation or substantial completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
Reasons: In order to introduce high quality soft 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 EN1, Q2, Q9 , Q10 and H5 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy G6 of the London Plan 2020)).
Environmental Management
SuDS Maintenance
17. No development shall be brought in to use/occupied until a management and maintenance plan of the sustainable drainage scheme for the site has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The plan must consider the management and maintenance for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements made to secure the operation of the scheme. The approved plan shall be implemented in full in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions.
Reason: To manage the water environment of the development and mitigate the impact on flood risk, water quality, habitat and amenity value. (Policies EN5 and EN6 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy SI12 of the London Plan (2021)).
Piling method statement
18. No piling shall take place until a piling method statement (detailing the depth and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent
and minimise the potential for damage to subsurface water infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement.
Reason: To ensure that the development does not harm groundwater resources in line with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Paragraph 170). The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground water utility infrastructure. Piling has the potential to impact on local underground water utility infrastructure. (Policy SI 5 of London Plan (2021)).
Transport & Highways . Delivery and Servicing Management Plan
19. The residential and commercial uses hereby permitted shall not commence until a servicing management plan for the relevant use has been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with TfL. The uses hereby permitted shall thereafter be operated in accordance with the approved details. The submitted details must include the following:
a) estimated frequency of deliveries to the site for each use; b) frequency of other servicing vehicles such as refuse collections; c) dimensions of delivery and servicing vehicles; d) proposed loading and delivery locations; and e) a strategy to manage vehicles servicing the site.
Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining occupiers and the surrounding area and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements (Policy Q2 and T8 of the London Borough of Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policies T4 and T9 of the London Plan (2021)).
Waste management 20. The waste and recycling storage shown on the approved plans shall be provided prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted, and shall thereafter be retained solely for its designated use. The uses hereby permitted shall thereafter be operated in accordance with the hereby approved Operational Waste and Recycling Management Strategy.
Reason: To ensure suitable provision for the occupiers of the development, to encourage the sustainable management of waste and to safeguard the visual amenities of the area (Policies Q2 and Q12 of the London Borough of Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Cycle Parking Details
21. Prior to commencement of the residential and commercial uses hereby permitted, full details of the short and long-term cycle parking provision for the relevant use shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include: - Floor plans and detailed construction drawings (where relevant) - Specification of cycle stands including manufacturer’s details - Details of lifts to accommodate non-standard cycles (unless it is has been demonstrated that it is not technically feasible) - Details of automatic doors - Phasing of delivery of short-term cycle parking (including temporary provision if relevant)
The long-term cycle parking shall thereafter be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details before the relevant use hereby permitted commences and shall thereafter be retained solely for its designated use. The short-term cycle parking shall thereafter be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details and the phasing plan and shall thereafter be retained solely for its designated use Reason: To ensure adequate cycle parking is available on site and to promote sustainable modes of transport (policies T1, T3 and Q13 of the London Borough of Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy T5 of the London Plan (2021).
Car Parking Management Plan
22. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a Parking Management Plan for the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include details of: - the monitoring of demand for and implementation of additional disabled parking spaces, - details of how the proposed vehicular ramp will be managed, secured and operated to avoid vehicle conflict. - details of how the proposed car parking will be managed to avoid conflict with users of the cycle stores
The provision of car parking shall thereafter be managed solely in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To prevent the parking areas becoming obstructed, to ensure that pedestrian and vehicular safety is not prejudiced and that sufficient Disabled parking spaces are provided (policies T1, T3, T6 and T7 of the London Borough of Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy D7, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2021)).
Travel Plan
23. The residential uses hereby permitted shall not commence until a Full Travel Pan for the residential use has been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The measures approved in the Full Travel Plan which are required to be implemented before occupation shall so be implemented prior to the residential use commencing and shall be so maintained for the duration of the use, unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority is obtained to any variation. Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the site are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements (Policy T1 and T4 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies T1 and T6 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Electric Vehicle Charging Points 24. 100% of the vehicular parking spaces to be provided within the development hereby permitted shall be provided with electrical charging points for electric vehicles. Reason: To encourage the uptake of electric vehicles (Policy T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021)).
Amenity
Environmental Noise and Vibration
25. All residential units shall achieve the LUL ground borne noise criteria of 35dBLAFMax in the centre of all habitable rooms and shall not exceed ground borne vibration criteria set out in BS6472 of VDVday 0.4ms-1.75 and VDVnight 0.2ms-1.75. A separate validation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 3 months of first occupation.
Reason: To protect the amenities of future residential occupiers (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and D14 of the London Plan (2021)).
Environmental Noise – Residential external amenity spaces
26. Prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, a scheme of measures to ensure that all residential units have access to amenity space within the development where noise levels do not exceed 55dB LAEQ(16 hour) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include the podium level external communal amenity areas (unless it has been demonstrated that it is not technically feasible or would have an unacceptable impact on the appearance of the
building). The scheme shall include details of post construction validation. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and a separate validation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 3 months of occupation.
Reason: To protect the amenities of future residential occupiers (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and D14 of the London Plan (2021)).
Noise Control & Management
27. Prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, a scheme of noise and vibration attenuation to the plant rooms and commercial areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall ensure noise breakout from the proposed plant rooms and commercial uses is properly controlled and as a minimum shall achieve NR25 in adjoining residential rooms. A post installation validation report confirming full installation of the approved scheme and demonstrating compliance with the standards approved shall be submitted by a suitably qualified person and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved noise and vibration attenuation measures shall thereafter be retained and maintained in working order for the lifetime of the development in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the amenities of future residential occupiers (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and D14 of the London Plan (2021)).
Flues and extraction plant
28. The uses hereby permitted shall not commence until details and full specifications of flues extraction and filtration equipment, and ongoing maintenance plan (including elevational drawings) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The uses hereby permitted shall not commence until the approved details are fully implemented. The approved flues, extraction and filtration equipment shall thereafter be retained and maintained in working order for the duration of the use in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the amenities of future residential occupiers (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and D14 of the London Plan (2021)).
Noise and vibration attenuation of plant (to be submitted)
29. The uses hereby permitted, or the operation of any building services plant, shall not commence until an assessment of the acoustic impact arising from the operation of all internally and externally located plant has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
The assessment of the acoustic impact shall be undertaken in accordance with BS 4142: 2014 (or subsequent superseding equivalent) and current best practice and shall include a scheme of attenuation measures to ensure the rating level of noise emitted from the proposed building services plant is 5dB less than background.
The use hereby permitted, or the operation of any building services plant, shall not commence until a post-installation noise assessment has been carried out to confirm compliance with the noise criteria. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and attenuation measures, and they shall be permanently retained and maintained in working order for the duration of the use and their operation.
Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining occupiers and the surrounding area (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and D14 of the London Plan (2021)).
Pedestrian wind microclimate
30. Any variation to the external envelope of the development shall be accompanied by a suitable Wind Microclimate Assessment which details any additional identified adverse wind microclimate impacts. Any additional steps required to mitigate these impacts shall be detailed and implemented, as
necessary. The revised assessment shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the details as approved shall thereafter be permanently retained.
Reason: To avoid unacceptable detriment of the amenities of future occupiers or of the area generally (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy D9 of the London Plan (2021)).
Commercial Uses Management plan (to be submitted)
31. The A1-4 and D1 uses herby permitted shall not commence until a management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing for each use by the local planning authority. This should include but not be limited to, hours of operation, management responsibilities during all operating hours, measures to control noise from live and amplified music (including the screening of sporting events and public address systems). The use hereby permitted shall thereafter be operated in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining occupiers and the surrounding area (policy Q2 of the London Borough of Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
External Lighting Scheme
32. Prior to occupation of each phase a lighting scheme for the relevant phase must be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the Institute of Lighting Professional’s Guidance notes for the reduction of obstructive light and the design principles set out in the Exterior Lighting Strategy reference DAS CLL-NE7and dated 13thMarch 2020. The scheme must be designed by a suitably qualified person in accordance with the recommendations for environmental zoneE4in the ILP document “Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light GN01:2020. Before commencement of operation of the approved lighting scheme the applicant shall appoint a suitably qualified member of the institute of lighting professionals (ILP) to validate that the lighting scheme as installed conforms to the recommendations for environmental zoneE4in the ILP document “Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light GN01:2020
Reason: To ensure minimal nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of adjoining occupiers and of the area generally (Policy Q2 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015))
Sustainability and energy
Reduction in carbon emissions
33. Prior to first occupation of the development As Built SAP and SBEM calculations with a Block Compliance worksheet as an output of the National Calculation Method should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that the development has achieved a 35% reduction in carbon emissions over that required by Part L of the Building Regulations 2013, in line with the approved Energy Statement.
Reason: To ensure that the development makes the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions (Policy SI 2 and SI 3 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy EN3 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
BREEAM – non residential (design stage)
34. Within six months of work starting onsite, a BREEAM Design Stage certificate and summary score sheet shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that a rating of ‘Excellent’ has been achieved (unless it is has been demonstrated that it is not technically feasible or viable to do so, in which case the development should demonstrate a ‘Very Good’ rating with a minimum score of 63 per cent).
Reason: To ensure that the development has an acceptable level of sustainability (Policy EN4 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy SI 2 of the London Plan (2021)).
BREEAM – non residential (post occupation)
35. Within six months of first occupation, a BREEAM Post Construction certificate and summary score sheet should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that a rating of ‘Excellent’ has been achieved (unless it is has been demonstrated that it is not technically feasible or viable to do so, in which case the development should demonstrate a ‘Very Good’ rating with a minimum score of 63 per cent).
Reason: To ensure that the development has an acceptable level of sustainability (Policy EN4 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and Policy SI 2 of the London Plan (2021)).
Overheating and cooling – commercial
36. Prior to occupation of the non-residential spaces, an Overheating Analysis should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that: the non-domestic spaces have been analysed for overheating; that the cooling hierarchy has been followed and that reliance on cooling in has been reduced; that CIBSE TM49 has been considered; and that CIBSE TM52 compliance has been achieved. The mitigation measures shall thereafter be retained for the lifetime of the development. Evidence should demonstrate that the cooling hierarchy has been followed and the reliance on active cooling has been minimized.
Reason: To ensure the design of the development reduces (as far as is possible) the potential for overheating and reliance on air conditioning systems (Policy SI 2 and SI 4 of the London Plan (2021)).
Water efficiency
37. Prior to prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted , manufacturers’ datasheets with a corresponding water efficiency calculator for the proposed fixtures and fittings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the internal water consumption will not exceed 105 litres/person/day in line with The Water Efficiency Calculator for New Dwellings from the Department of Communities and Local Government.
Reason: Occupation must not commence prior to these details being discharged in order to ensure the development would achieve an acceptable standard of water efficiency (Policy SI 5 of the London Plan (2021)).
Water efficiency – post-occupation
38. Prior to first occupation of the development, manufacturers’ datasheets with a corresponding water efficiency calculator for the installed fixtures and fittings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the internal water consumption will not exceed 105 litres/person/day in line with The Water Efficiency Calculator for new dwellings from the Department of Communities and Local Government. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained for the lifetime of the development.
Reason: Occupation must not commence prior to these details being discharged in order to ensure the development would achieve an acceptable standard of water efficiency (Policy SI 5 of the London Plan (2021)).
Water efficiency – non residential 39. Prior to occupation of the non-domestic element of the development herby approved, evidence shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that the BREEAM Excellent Standard has been met for the Wat 01 category(12.5% improvement over the defined baseline. Evidence should include manufacturers datasheets and the BREEAM Wat 01 calculator tool.
Reason: Occupation must not commence prior to these details being discharged in order to ensure the development would achieve an acceptable standard of water efficiency (Policy SI 5 of the London Plan (2021)).
Water network connection – Surface Water
40. There shall be no occupation beyond the 99th dwelling until , a Water Network Upgrade Confirmation Statement has be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with Thames Water), providing either:
a) all water network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows to serve the development have been completed; or b) a development and infrastructure phasing plan has been agreed with Thames Water to allow additional development to be occupied.
Where a development and infrastructure phasing plan is agreed no occupation of those additional dwellings shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed development and infrastructure phasing plan.
Reason - The development may low / no water pressures and network reinforcement works are anticipated to be necessary to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to accommodate additional demand anticipated from the new development. Any necessary reinforcement works will be necessary in order to avoid low / no water pressure issues. (Policy SI 5 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy EN6 (vii) of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Green Roofs
41. Prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, a detailed specification of the green roofs shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The specification shall include details of the quantity, size, species, position and the proposed time of planting of all elements of the green roofs, together with details of their anticipated routine maintenance and protection. The green roofs shall be thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details for the lifetime of the development, as per Lambeth Local Plan Policy EN4 and Draft London Plan Policy G1.
Reason: In order to promote biodiversity and rainwater attenuation on the site. (Policy G1, G5, SI 2 and SI 13 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy EN1, EN4, EN5, EN6 and Q9 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Green roof maintenance
42. If within 5 years of the installation of the green roof any planting forming part of the green roof shall die, be removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased, then this planting shall be replaced in the next planting season with planting of a similar size and species.
Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area and to ensure that the development has an acceptable level of sustainability and biodiversity and to mitigate the impact on flood risk (Policy G1, G5, SI 2 and SI 13 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy EN1, EN4, EN5, EN6 and Q9 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Photovoltaic panels
43. Prior to the commencement of development beyond the superstructure, a scheme showing that the provision of photovoltaic panels has been maximised including the siting, size, number and design of the photovoltaic array including cross sections of the roof of each building showing the panels in-situ shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be completed in strict accordance with the approved details and permanently retained as such for the duration of use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To safeguard the appearance of the completed development and to ensure that the development has an acceptable level of sustainability (Policy SI 2 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy Q2, Q7, Q8 and EN4 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Urban Greening Factor
44. Prior to first occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, evidence shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority to validate the measures at the as built stage to demonstrate that an Urban Greening Factor of 0.37 or more has been achieved.
Reason: To ensure that the urban greening factor has been achieved on site (Policy G5 and G6 of the London Plan (2021).
45. Whole Life Carbon Assessment
Within 3 months of first occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved, a post construction whole life carbon assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the local planning authority confirming whether the total product stage (A1 – A5) target of 450kg CO2/m2 has been achieved (in line with approved whole life carbon assessment, Faithful & Gould, March 2020).
Reason: To ensure that the development reduces life-cycle emissions (Policy SI2 of the London Plan (2021).
Circular Economy Statement
46. Within 3 months of first occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved, a post construction statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the local planning authority. This shall include the quantification of measures and detail of how circular economy proposals have been achieved in line with approved statement (Atkins, March 2020) and including: - strategies to utilise at least 20% of the value of construction materials to be comprised of recycled and reused content (unless it is has been demonstrated that it is not technically feasible or viable to do so); and - strategies to meet the Mayor's 65% target for municipal waste recycling as part of the long-term operation of the development (unless it is has been demonstrated that it is not technically feasible or viable to do so); and - details of the likely destination of all waste streams and a confirmation that the destination landfill(s) has/ have the capacity to receive waste.
Reason: To ensure that the proposal promotes circular economy outcomes (Policy SI 7 of the London Plan (2021).
Control of uses
Removal of PD rights
47. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the floorspace shown on the approved plans to be used as flexible commercial unit within Class A1, A2, A3, A4 and D1 (the Pavilion Building) shall be used as such and for no other purpose in Class A1, A2, A3, A4 and D1 of the Town and Country (Use Classes) Order 1987 or any provision equivalent to those Classes in any statutory instrument revoking and re- enacting that Order with or without modification.
Reason: To enable the LPA to retain control of the use and to ensure that introduction of other uses such as those falling within Use Class A5 or D1 are not introduced without further assessment (Policy ED6, ED7, S2 and T6 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Residents Gym /Amenity Area (Ancillary to Residential)
48. The residents gym/ internal amenity areas shall be used only for purposes ancillary to the hereby approved residential use. The spaces shall at no time be occupied and or operated independently of the residential use including any purpose in Class D2 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2020 or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification.
Reason: In order to ensure that the use remains ancillary to the C3 use and in the interest of amenity and protection of residential floorspace (Lambeth Local Plan (2015) Policies S2, Q2, H3 and H5).
Site management
49. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008 (or any Order revoking or re- enacting that Order with or without modification), no aerials, antennae, satellite dishes or related telecommunications equipment shall be erected on any part of the development hereby permitted, without planning permission first being granted.
Reason: to ensure that the visual impact of telecommunication equipment upon the surrounding area can be considered. (Policies T10, Q6 and Q22 of the Lambeth Local Plan, (2015)).
Other
Fire Statement
50. The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Fire Statement by Hoare Lea prior to the first occupation of any part of the development.
Reason: In the interests of public safety (Policy D12 of the London Plan (2021)).
Secured by design – construction
51. Prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, an application for Secured by Design Certification shall be made for the development hereby approved.
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory attention is given to security and community safety (Policy GC6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy Q3 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Secured by design – certification
52. Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development, evidence of the development having achieved Secure by Design certification shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the measures required to achieve certification for the lifetime of the development. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory attention is given to security and community safety (Policy GC6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy Q3 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Counter Terrorism strategy
53. Notwithstanding the details of the application hereby approved, prior to commencement of the development beyond the superstructure of the development hereby permitted, a confidential Counter Terrorism Strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Metropolitan Police. The strategy should show how the development mitigates any terrorism risks including details of blast resistant measures and investigation of feasibility of a gated access to the UKPN switch rooms. The development shall be implemented and managed in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory attention is given to security and community safety (Policy GC6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy Q3 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2015)).
Informatives:
1. This decision letter does not convey an approval or consent which may be required under any enactment, by-law, order or regulation, other than Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. You are advised that this consent is without prejudice to any rights which may be enjoyed by any tenants/occupiers of the premises.
3. Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Regulations, and related legislation which must be complied with to the satisfaction of the Council's Building Control Officer.
4. Your attention is drawn to Sections 4 and 7 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 and the Code of Practice for Access for the Disabled to Buildings (B.S. 5810:1979) regarding the provision of means of access, parking facilities and sanitary conveniences for the needs of persons visiting, using or employed at the building or premises who are disabled.
5. You are advised of the necessity to consult the Council's Streetcare team within the Public Protection Division with regard to the provision of refuse storage and collection facilities.
6. You are advised that this permission does not authorise the display of advertisements at the premises and separate consent may be required from the Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992.
7. As soon as building work starts on the development, you must contact the Street Naming and Numbering Officer if you need to do the following: 1. name a new street 2. name a new or existing building 3. apply new street numbers to a new or existing building This will ensure that any changes are agreed with Lambeth Council before use, in accordance with the London Buildings Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 and the Local Government Act 1985. Although it is not essential, we also advise you to contact the Street Naming and Numbering Officer before applying new names or numbers to internal flats or units. Contact details are listed below. Street Naming and Numbering Officer e-mail: [email protected] tel: 020 7926 2283 fax: 020 7926 9104
8. You are advised of the necessity to consult the Transport and Highways team within the Transport Division of the Directorate of Environmental Services, with regard to any alterations affecting the public footway.
9. You are advised of the necessity to consult the Council’s Highways team prior to the commencement of construction on 020 7926 9000 in order to obtain necessary approvals and licences prior to undertaking any works within the Public Highway including Scaffolding, Temporary/Permanent Crossovers, Oversailing/Undersailing of the Highway, Drainage/Sewer Connections, Hoarding, Excavations (including adjacent to the highway such as basements, etc), Temporary Full/Part Road Closures, Craneage Licences etc.
10 Infrastructure protection TfL:
The applicant is reminded about fulfilling their obligations to London Underground and Transport for London under the legal requirements between the applicant and Infrastructure Protection TfL.
11. Thames water
The applicant is advised to read Thames Water guide ‘working near our assets’ to ensure your workings will be in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you’re considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your- development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes Should you require further information please contact Thames Water. Email: [email protected].
Thames Water – pilling condition Please read our guide ‘working near our assets’ to ensure your workings will be in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you’re considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your-development/Working-near-or- diverting-our-pipes. Should you require further information please contact Thames Water. Email:[email protected]
The proposed development is located within 15m of Thames Waters underground assets, as such the development could cause the assets to fail if appropriate measures are not taken. Please read our guide ‘working near our assets’ to ensure your workings are in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you’re considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your-development/Working-near-or- diverting-our-pipes. Should you require further information please contact Thames Water. Email: [email protected] The applicant is advised that their development boundary falls within a Source Protection Zone for groundwater abstraction. These zones may be at particular risk from polluting activities on or below the land surface. To prevent pollution, the Environment Agency and Thames Water (or other local water undertaker) will use a tiered, risk-based approach to regulate activities that may impact groundwater resources. The applicant is encouraged to read the Environment Agency’s approach to groundwater protection (available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/groundwater-protection- position-statements) and may wish to discuss the implication for their development with a suitably qualified environmental consultant.
12. Network Rail:
Due to the close proximity of the proposed works to Network Rail’s land and the operational railway, Network Rail requests (if they have not done so already) that the applicant / developer contacts Network Rail’s Asset Protection and Optimisation (ASPRO) team via [email protected] prior to works commencing. The ASPRO team will ensure the works can be completed without posing a risk to Network Rail’s infrastructure. The applicant / developer may be required to enter into an Asset Protection Agreement to get the required resource and expertise on-board to enable approval of detailed works. More information can also be obtained from our website https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/looking- after-the-railway/asset-protection-and-optimisation/. As well as contacting Network Rail’s ASPRO Team, the applicant / developer must also follow the attached Asset Protection informatives (compliance with the informatives does not remove the need to contact ASPRO).
Asset Protection Informatives for works in close proximity to Network Rail’s infrastructure
The developer must ensure that their proposal, both during construction and after completion does not: • • encroach onto Network Rail land • • affect the safety, operation or integrity of the company’s railway and its infrastructure • • undermine its support zone • • damage the company’s infrastructure • • place additional load on cuttings • • adversely affect any railway land or structure • • over-sail or encroach upon the air-space of any Network Rail land • • cause to obstruct or interfere with any works or proposed works or Network Rail development both now and in the future
Network Rail strongly recommends the developer complies with the following comments and requirements to maintain the safe operation of the railway and protect Network Rail’s infrastructure.
Future maintenance The applicant must ensure that any construction and subsequent maintenance can be carried out to any proposed buildings or structures without adversely affecting the safety of/or encroaching upon Network Rail’s adjacent land and air-space. Therefore, any buildings are required to be situated at least 2 metres (3m for overhead lines and third rail) from Network Rail’s boundary. This requirement will allow for the construction and future maintenance of a building without the need to access the operational railway environment. Any less than 2m (3m for overhead lines and third rail) and there is a strong possibility that the applicant (and any future resident) will need to utilise Network Rail land and air-space to facilitate works as well as adversely impact upon Network Rail’s maintenance teams’ ability to maintain our boundary
fencing and boundary treatments. Access to Network Rail’s land may not always be granted and if granted may be subject to railway site safety requirements and special provisions with all associated railway costs charged to the applicant. As mentioned above, any works within Network Rail’s land would need approval from the Network Rail Asset Protection Engineer. This request should be submitted at least 20 weeks before any works are due to commence on site and the applicant is liable for all associated costs (e.g. all possession, site safety, asset protection presence costs). However, Network Rail is not required to grant permission for any third-party access to its land.
Plant & Materials All operations, including the use of cranes or other mechanical plant working adjacent to Network Rail’s property, must at all times be carried out in a “fail safe” manner such that in the event of mishandling, collapse or failure, no plant or materials are capable of falling within 3.0m of the boundary with Network Rail.
Drainage Storm/surface water must not be discharged onto Network Rail’s property or into Network Rail’s culverts or drains except by agreement with Network Rail. Suitable drainage or other works must be provided and maintained by the Developer to prevent surface water flows or run-off onto Network Rail’s property. Proper provision must be made to accept and continue drainage discharging from Network Rail’s property; full details to be submitted for approval to the Network Rail Asset Protection Engineer. Suitable foul drainage must be provided separate from Network Rail’s existing drainage. Soakaways, as a means of storm/surface water disposal must not be constructed within 20 metres of Network Rail’s boundary or at any point which could adversely affect the stability of Network Rail’s property. After the completion and occupation of the development, any new or exacerbated problems attributable to the new development shall be investigated and remedied at the applicants’ expense.
Scaffolding Any scaffold which is to be constructed within 10 metres of the railway boundary fence must be erected in such a manner that at no time will any poles over-sail the railway and protective netting around such scaffold must be installed. The applicant/applicant’s contractor must consider if they can undertake the works and associated scaffold/access for working at height within the footprint of their property boundary. Piling Where vibro-compaction/displacement piling plant is to be used in development, details of the use of such machinery and a method statement should be submitted for the approval of the Network Rail’s Asset Protection Engineer prior to the commencement of works and the works shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved method statement. Fencing In view of the nature of the development, it is essential that the developer provide (at their own expense) and thereafter maintain a substantial, trespass proof fence along the development side of the existing boundary fence, to a minimum height of 1.8 metres. The 1.8m fencing should be adjacent to the railway boundary and the developer/applicant should make provision for its future maintenance and renewal without encroachment upon Network Rail land. Network Rail’s existing fencing / wall must not be removed or damaged and at no point during or post construction should the foundations of the fencing or wall or any embankment therein, be damaged, undermined or compromised in any way. Any vegetation within Network Rail’s land boundary must not be disturbed. Any fencing installed by the applicant must not prevent Network Rail from maintaining its own fencing/boundary treatment. Lighting Any lighting associated with the development (including vehicle lights) must not interfere with the sighting of signalling apparatus and/or train drivers’ vision on approaching trains. The location and colour of lights must not give rise to the potential for confusion with the signalling arrangements on the railway. The developers should obtain Network Rail’s Asset Protection Engineer’s approval of their detailed proposals regarding lighting. Noise and Vibration The potential for any noise/vibration impacts caused by the proximity between the proposed development and any existing railway must be assessed in the context of the National Planning Policy Framework which hold relevant national guidance information. The current level of usage may be subject to change at any time without notification including increased frequency of trains, night time train running and heavy freight trains. Vehicle Incursion Where a proposal calls for hard standing area/parking of vehicles area near the boundary with the operational railway, Network Rail would recommend the installation of a highways approved vehicle incursion barrier or high kerbs to prevent vehicles accidentally driving or rolling onto the railway or damaging lineside fencing. Landscaping Any trees/shrubs to be planted adjacent to the railway boundary these shrubs should be positioned at a
minimum distance greater than their predicted mature height from the boundary. Certain broad leaf deciduous species should not be planted adjacent to the railway boundary as the species will contribute to leaf fall which will have a detrimental effect on the safety and operation of the railway. Network Rail wish to be involved in the approval of any landscaping scheme adjacent to the railway. Any hedge planted adjacent to Network Rail’s boundary fencing for screening purposes should be so placed that when fully grown it does not damage the fencing or provide a means of scaling it. No hedge should prevent Network Rail from maintaining its boundary fencing. If required, Network Rail’s Asset Protection team are able to provide more details on which trees/shrubs are permitted within close proximity to the railway. Existing Rights The applicant must identify and comply with all existing rights on the land. Network Rail request all existing rights, covenants and easements are retained unless agreed otherwise with Network Rail. If you would like to discuss any of the above, please contact your local Network Rail’s Asset Protection team: Anglia: [email protected] Kent and Sussex: [email protected] Wessex: [email protected] To identify your route, please use the link: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes
Notes to Applicants: In dealing with this application the Council has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner. The council has made available on its website the policies and guidance provided by Lambeth Local Plan (2015) and its supplementary planning documents. We also offer a full pre- application advice service in order to ensure that the applicant has every opportunity to submit an application that’s likely to be considered acceptable. Yours sincerely
Assistant Director Planning, Transport & Development Growth, Planning and Employment Directorate
Date printed: 4th March 2021
INFORMATION FOR APPLICANTS GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, OR WHERE PERMISSION HAS BEEN REFUSED.
General Information
This permission is subject to due compliance with any local Acts, regulations, building by-laws and general statutory provisions in force in the area and nothing herein shall be regarded as dispensing with such compliance or be deemed to be a consent by the Council thereunder.
Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Regulations 1985 and related legislation which must be complied with to the satisfaction of the Council’s Building Control Officer, PO Box 734, Winchester SO23 5DG.
The Council’s permission does not modify or affect any personal or restrictive covenants, easements, etc., applying to or affecting the land or the rights of any person entitled to the benefits thereof.
STATEMENT OF APPLICANT’S RIGHTS ARISING FROM THE REFUSAL OF PLANNING PERMISSION OR FROM THE GRANT OF PERMISSION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
Appeals to the Secretary of State
If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the local planning authority to refuse permission or approval for the proposed development or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, he may appeal to the Secretary of State in accordance with Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 within six months from the date of this notice. Appeals must be made on a form which is obtainable from The Planning Inspectorate, Room 3/13 Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN. Alternatively
an Appeal form can be downloaded from their website at www.gov.uk/government/organisations/planning- inspectorate. The Secretary of State has power to allow longer period for the giving of a notice of appeal but he will not normally be prepared to exercise this power unless there are special circumstances which excuse the delay in giving notice of appeal. The Secretary of State is not required to entertain an appeal if it appears to him that permission for the proposed development could not have been granted by the local planning authority, or could not have been so granted otherwise than subject to the conditions imposed by them, having regard to the statutory requirements, to the provisions of the development order, and to any directions given under the order.
Purchase Notice
If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the local planning authority or by the Secretary of State for the Environment, and the owner of the land claims that the land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot be rendered capable of reasonable beneficial use by the carrying out of any development which has been or would be permitted, he may serve on the London Borough of Lambeth a purchase notice requiring that Council to purchase his interest in the land in accordance with the provisions of Section 137 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Compensation
In certain circumstances, a claim may be made against the local planning authority for compensation, where permission is refused or granted subject to conditions by the Secretary of State for the Environment on appeal or on a reference of the application to him. The circumstances in which such compensation is payable are set out in Section 120 and related provision of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Appendix 2: List of consultees (statutory and other consultees)
Statutory
Commission For Architecture & The Built Environment Environment Agency Greater London Authority Historic England - Archaeology Historic England Highways Agency L.F.C.D Authority London Underground Infrastructure London Ecology Unit London Heliport London Borough of Wandsworth Natural England Network Rail Transport for London Network Thames Water
Internal
LBL Arboricultural LBL Building Control LBL Enterprise, Employment & Skills LBL Lead Local Flood Authority (Flooding/SUDS) LBL Conservation and Urban Design LBL Highways LBL Housing LBL Parks & Open Spaces LBL Planning Policy LBL Regeneration LBL Sustainability Team On Air Quality LBL Transport LBL Ward Councillors LBL Waste Services (Veolia) LBL Corporate Asset Strategy Regulatory Support Services (Consultant Environmental Health Advisors) Bioregional (Consultant Sustainability Advisors) Design Out Crime Officer (Metropolitan Police) Schroeders Begg (Daylight & Sunlight Advisors)
Other
Cleaver Square, Cleaver Street , Bowden St Cleaver Square Friends Of Kennington Park Friends Of Lambeth High Street Recreation Ground Friends of The Oval Friends Of Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens
Heart Of Kennington Residents' Association Kennington Association Planning Forum Kennington Park Road Residents' Assocation Kennington Oval & Vauxhall Forum Kennington Park Estate Tenants Association Oval & Kennington Residents Association Oval Mansions Regents Bridge Gardens Ltd Tradescant Area Residents Association Vauxhall Church Leaders Vauxhall Neighbourhood Housing Forum Vauxhall One Bussiness Improvement District Vauxhall 5 Chair of the TRA Vauxhall St Peters Heritage Centre
Appendix 3: List of relevant policies in London Plan, Lambeth Local Plan consultees (statutory and other consultees)
London Plan (2021)
• GG1 Building strong and inclusive communities • GG2 Making the best use of land • GG3 Creating a healthy city • GG4 Delivering the homes Londoners need • GG6 Increasing efficiency and resilience • SD1 Opportunity Areas • SD4 The Central Activities Zone (CAZ) • D1 London’s form, character and capacity for growth • D2 Infrastructure requirements for sustainable densities • D3 Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach • D4 Delivering good design • D5 Inclusive design • D6 Housing quality and standards • D7 Accessible housing • D8 Public realm • D9 Tall buildings • D10 Basement development • D11 Safety, security and resilience to emergency • D12 Fire safety • D13 Agent of Change • D14 Noise • H1 Increasing housing supply • H4 Delivering affordable housing • H5 Threshold approach to applications • H6 Affordable housing tenure • H7 Monitoring of affordable housing • H10 Housing size mix • H11 Build to Rent • S4 Play and informal recreation • HC1 Heritage conservation and growth • HC2 World Heritage Sites • HC3 Strategic and Local Views • HC4 London View Management Framework • G1 Green infrastructure • G5 Urban greening • G6 Biodiversity and access to nature • G7 Trees and woodlands • G8 Food growing • SI 1 Improving air quality • SI 2 Minimising greenhouse gas emissions • SI 3 Energy infrastructure
• SI 4 Managing heat risk • SI 5 Water infrastructure • SI 6 Digital connectivity infrastructure • SI 7 Reducing waste and supporting the circular economy • SI 8 Waste capacity and net waste self-sufficiency • SI 12 Flood risk management • SI 13 Sustainable drainage • T1 Strategic approach to transport • T2 Healthy Streets • T3 Transport capacity, connectivity and safeguarding • T4 Assessing and mitigating transport impacts • T5 Cycling • T6 Car parking • T6.1 Residential parking • T7 Deliveries, servicing and construction • T9 Funding transport infrastructure through planning • DF1 Delivery of the Plan and Planning Obligations
Regional Guidance
Relevant publications from the GLA include:
• Affordable Housing and Viability SPG (August 2017); • Housing SPG (March 2016); • Social Infrastructure (May 2015) • Accessible London: Achieving an Inclusive Environment (October 2014) • The control of dust and emissions during construction and demolition (July 2014) • Character and Context (June 2014) • Use of planning obligations in the funding of Crossrail, and the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy SPG (2013) • Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation SPG (Sep 2012) • London View Management Framework (March 2012) • London World Heritage sites (March 2012) • Planning for Equality and Diversity in London (2012) • London Cycle Design Guide (2014) • Practice note on the on threshold approach to affordable housing on public land (July 2018) • Energy Planning Guidance (2020) • Draft Be Seen Energy Monitoring guidance (2020) • Circular Economy Statements - consultation draft (October 2020) • Whole-life Carbon Assessments - consultation draft (October 2020)
Lambeth Local Plan (2015) policies
Provided below is a list of the key Local Plan policies which are considered relevant in the determination of these applications:
• D2 Presumption in favour of sustainable development • D3 Infrastructure • D4 Planning obligations • H1 Maximising housing growth • H2 Delivering affordable housing • H4 Housing mix in new developments • H5 Housing standards • ED6 Town Centres • ED7 Evening economy and food and drink uses • ED14 Employment and training • S2 New or improved community premises • T1 Sustainable travel • T2 Walking • T3 Cycling • T4 Public transport infrastructure • T6 Assessing impacts of development on transport capacity • T7 Parking • T8 Servicing • EN1 Open space and biodiversity • EN2 Local food growing and production • EN3 Decentralised energy • EN4 Sustainable design and construction • EN5 Flood risk • EN6 Sustainable drainage systems and water management • EN7 Sustainable waste management • Q1 Inclusive environments • Q2 Amenity • Q3 Community safety • Q5 Local distinctiveness • Q6 Urban design: public realm • Q7 Urban design: new development • Q8 Design quality: construction detailing • Q9 Landscaping • Q10 Trees • Q12 Refuse/recycling storage • Q13 Cycle storage • Q15 Boundary treatments • Q16 shop fronts • Q18 Historic environment strategy • Q19 Westminster World Heritage site • Q20 Statutory listed buildings • Q22 Conservation areas
• Q23 Undesignated heritage assets: local heritage list • Q25 Views • Q26 Tall and large buildings • PN2 Vauxhall
Draft Revised Lambeth Local Plan Proposed Submission Version (January 2020)
• D2 Presumption in favour of sustainable development • D3 Infrastructure • D4 Planning obligations • H1 Maximising housing growth • H2 Delivering affordable housing • H4 Housing size mix in new developments • H5 Housing standards • H12 Build to rent • ED7 Town Centres • ED8 Evening economy and food and drink uses • ED15 Employment and training • S2 New or improved social infrastructure • T1 Sustainable travel • T2 Walking • T3 Cycling • T4 Public transport infrastructure • T7 Parking • T8 Servicing • T10 Digital connectivity infrastructure • EN1 Open space, green infrastructure and biodiversity • EN3 Decentralised energy • EN2 Local food growing and production • EN4 Sustainable design and construction • EN5 Flood risk • EN6 Sustainable drainage systems and water management • EN7 Sustainable waste management • Q1 Inclusive environments • Q2 Amenity • Q3 Safety, crime prevention and counter terrorism • Q4 Public art • Q5 Local distinctiveness • Q6 Urban design: public realm • Q7 Urban design: new development • Q8 Design quality: construction detailing • Q9 Landscaping • Q10 Trees • Q12 Refuse and recycling • Q13 Cycle storage • Q15 Boundary treatments • Q16 Shop fronts • Q18 Historic environment strategy • Q19 Westminster World Heritage Site • Q20 Statutory listed buildings • Q22 Conservation areas • Q23 Non-designated heritage assets: local heritage list • Q25 Views • Q26 Tall and large buildings
• PN2 Vauxhall
Local Guidance / Supplementary Planning Documents
Relevant local guidance and SPDs for Lambeth include:
• Development Viability SPD (2017) • Employment and Skills SPD (2018) • Waste Storage and Collection Requirements - Technical Specification (2013) • Air Quality Planning Guidance Notes • Vauxhall SPD (2013)
Appendix 4: Other relevant Plans
Figure 1. The application boundary in the context of the aforementioned extant or implemented schemes and the ‘slot-in’ plan
Figure 2 - Ground level implementation and ‘slot-in’ plan:
Figure 3 Proposed northern elevation (left to right – Blocks C, B and A):
Figure 4 Northern elevation of the extant permission ref: 15/06216/FUL (left to right – Blocks C, B and A):