Planning Applications Committee

Home , Hammersmith Palais

London Borough Of Hammersmith & Fulham

------Planning Applications Committee

Agenda for 9th February 2011

Index of Applications, Enforcement Actions, Advertisements etc. ------WARD: SITE ADDRESS: PAGE: REG NO:

Hammersmith Hammersmith Palais 242 Shepherd's Bush Road 8 Broadway London W6 7NL 2010/03497/FUL

Hammersmith Hammersmith Palais 242 Shepherd's Bush Road 46 Broadway London W6 7NL 2010/03499/CAC

Addison The Old Mill House And The Mill House Miller's 49 2010/03576/FUL Way London W6 7NH

Fulham Broadway 314 - 320 North End Road London SW6 1NG 65 2010/00175/FUL

------Ward : Hammersmith Broadway

Site Address : Hammersmith Palais 242 Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7NL

Reg. No : Case Officer : 2010/03497/FUL Sophie Morris

Date Valid : Conservation Area : 04.11.2010 : Hammersmith Broadway Conservation Area - Number 22 Committee Date : 09.02.2011

Applicant : London And Regional (Hammersmith) Ltd C/o Agent

Description : Redevelopment involving erection of a part-five and part-ten storey building plus basement for 2,802 m2 of leisure floor space (Class D2), including 195m2 of flexible leisure (Class D2) and/or retail floor space (Classes A1/A3); 15,065m2 of student accommodation floor space (418 units and 418 bed spaces); provision of 4 car parking spaces, 222 cycle parking spaces, and external amenity space following demolition of existing buildings/structures on site Drg Nos: Planning Statement dated October 2010;Design and Access Statement dated October 2010;Noise Assessment dated October 2010;Daylight and Sunlight report October 2010;Flood Risk Assessment and Outline Surface Water Strategydated October 2010P1101 Rev 01; P2019 Rev 00; P2020 Rev 01; P2021 Rev 02;P2022 Rev 02; P2023 Rev 02; P2024 Rev 00; P2025 Rev 02;P2029 Rev 02; P2030 Rev 01; P2110 Rev 03; P2111 Rev 01;P2112 Rev 01; P2113 Rev 01; P2114 Rev 01; P2115 Rev 01;P2201 Rev 01; P2202 Rev 01; P2203 Rev 01;

Application Type : Full Detailed Planning Application

Officer Recommendation :

Subject to there being no contrary direction from the Mayor for London; that the Committee resolve that the Director of Environment be authorised to determine the application and grant permission up on the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement

1) The development hereby permitted shall not commence later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this planning permission.

Condition required to be imposed by section 9 (1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2) The development hereby permitted shall not be be carried out other than in accordance with the following approved plans:- P1101 Rev 01; P2019 Rev 00; P2020 Rev 01; P2021 Rev 02; P2022 Rev 02; P2023 Rev 02; P2024 Rev 00; P2025 Rev 02; P2029 Rev 02; P2030 Rev 01; P2110 Rev 03; P2111 Rev 01; P2112 Rev 01; P2113 Rev 01; P2114 Rev 01; P2115 Rev 01; P2201 Rev 01; P2202 Rev 01; P2203 Rev 01.

In order to ensure full compliance with the planning application hereby approved and to prevent harm arising through deviations from the approved plans, in accordance with policies EN2 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

3) The development above ground level shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details and samples, of all materials to be used on the external faces of the building and surface treatments (which shall include details of the bonding and pointing of any external facing brickwork), and no part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the implementation of the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance, in accordance with policies EN2 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

4) The development above ground level shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details and samples, of all hard and soft landscaping, paving and external hard surfaces, boundary walls, and other means of enclosure. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the implementation of the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance, in accordance with policies EN2 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

5) The development shall not commence above ground floor until a scheme showing the layout, use and areas of hard and soft landscaping for the communal external terrace at first floor level has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The student accommodation shall not be occupied until the scheme has been implemented in accordance with the approved plans. The development shall thereafter be permanently retained in this form.

To apportion use of the communal external terrace and to restrict use by students of the southern part of this area which would otherwise give rise to conditions which would be detrimental to the amenities of occupiers of surrounding occupiers by reason of noise and disturbance occasioned by use, and in the interest of ensuring a satisfactory appearance, in accordance with policies EN21 and EN8 and standard S13.2A of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

6) The development above ground level shall not commence until detailed drawings in plan, section and elevation, at a scale of not less than 1:20 showing typical bays of the elevations of the building, including details at 1:20 of the cladding, entrances, and fenestration have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The relevant work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and prevent harm to the street scene, in accordance with policies EN2 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

7) The development above ground shall not commence until details in plan and elevation at a scale of no less than 1:20 showing the junctions of the proposed buildings with the adjoining listed buildings and building of merit have been

submitted to and approved in writing by the council. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the implementation of the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and prevent harm to the street scene and to ensure that the setting of the listed buildings and building of merit is not compromised, in accordance with policies EN2, EN3, EN6 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

8) Detailed drawings of any roof-top plant and lift over-run including the location and height above roof level shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council prior to its installation on site. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and prevent harm to the street scene, in accordance with policies EN2 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

9) Prior to occupation of the development full details of all proposed external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. Such details shall include the number, exact location, height and design and appearance of the lights and any lighting columns, together with data concerning the levels of illumination and light spillage and the specific measures proposed to ensure that the lighting does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the implementation of the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to prevent harm to the occupiers of neighbouring properties, in accordance with policies EN2, EN8, EN20C and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007

10) The buildings hereby approved shall incorporate an historic reference to the former Hammersmith Palais use which could include a plaque detailing the history of the property and a legacy wall in the main student entrance. Details of the historic reference to be incorporated on the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council prior to the relevant part of the development commencing. The details as approved shall be incorporated in accordance with such approval before the development is occupied and permanently retained thereafter.

In order to ensure that the historic identity of the site is commemorated as a point of reference for the future, in accordance with Policies EN2 and EN6 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

11) The existing 'Palais de Danse' paintwork as detailed on the western elevation of the existing rear boundary wall shall be retained as part of the development and it shall not be removed or painted over.

In order to retain an original element of the historic identity of the site, in accordance with Policies EN2 and EN6 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

12) The window glass of the ground floor units on the Shepherd's Bush Road elevation hereby approved shall not be painted, mirrored nor otherwise obscured.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and prevent harm to the street scene and conservation area in accordance with policies EN2, EN8 and EN8D of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

13) Prior to occupation of the use of any part of the building hereby approved, the 4 off-street car parking spaces designed for wheelchair users and those with disabilities hereby approved shall be provided, marked out and reserved for wheelchair users and those with disabilities, and these spaces shall be permanently retained for this purpose unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council.

To ensure satisfactory provision and retention of car parking spaces for wheelchair users and so that the development does not result in additional on street car parking stress, detrimental to the amenity of surrounding residents, in accordance with policy TN15 and standard S18 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

14) Prior to commencement of the development above ground a scheme shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Council to show (i) a minimum of 5% of the student accommodation shall be wheelchair accessible and laid out/fitted to meet the needs of wheelchair users and (ii) an additional 5% of the student accommodation shall be capable of adaption for the needs of wheelchair users. None of the student accommodation shall be used or occupied until the minimum of 5% of the student units have been provided and fitted out to meet the needs of wheelchair users, in accordance with the details agreed. The development shall be permanently maintained in this form thereafter.

To ensure satisfactory provision for people with disabilities, including people who use wheelchairs, in accordance with the Council's Access for All SPD and policies 4B.5 and 4B.1 of The London Plan, as amended 2008.

15) All external entrance doors/gates onto Shepherd's Bush Road to the development hereby approved shall be designed and installed so that they only open inwards, and the entrance doors/gates shall thereafter be retained in this form.

To ensure pedestrian flow is not unduly affected, in accordance with policy TN5 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

16) The development hereby approved shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details of the proposed refuse storage

arrangements, including facilities for recyclables, which shall include a demonstration of how refuse servicing will not adversely affect the use of the public highway. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the provision of the refuse storage arrangements in accordance with the approved details. The refuse/recycling storage facilities shall thereafter be permanently retained.

In order to ensure that satisfactory provision is made for refuse/recycling storage and collection, so that the use does not give rise to smell nuisance and to prevent harm arising from the appearance of accumulated rubbish and to ensure that the use of the highway is not adversely affected; in accordance with Policies ENI7 and TN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007 and the Council's Supplementary Planning Document 'Storage of Refuse and Recyclables'.

17) The development above ground shall not commence until a statement of how 'Secured by Design' requirements are to be adequately achieved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The approved details shall be carried out prior to occupation of the development hereby approved and permanently maintained thereafter.

To ensure a safe and secure environment for users of the development, in accordance with policy EN10 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

18) The communal external terrace, other than the covered walkway, located at first floor level of the development hereby permitted shall not be used between 2200 and 0900 hours the following day.

To restrict use of the area which would otherwise give rise to conditions which would be detrimental to the amenities of occupiers of the development and surrounding occupiers by reason of noise and disturbance, occasioned by the use of this area in accordance with policy EN21 and standard S13.2A of the Unitary Development Plan, amended 2007.

19) Prior to the occupation of the student accommodation, the windows, fin details and materials as detailed on the drawings hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The windows to the student rooms shall be fitted with window opening restrictors to limit the window opening beyond 100mm. The details as approved shall be provided prior to first occupation of the student accommodation and permanently retained in this manner thereafter.

To ensure that the operation and security of the adjoining police station is not adversely affected by the development, in accordance with policies 4B.1 and 4B.6 of The London Plan, as amended 2008.

20) The development above ground shall not commence until details of rooflights to be incorporated within the dormer windows on the Shepherd's Bush Road elevation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The details as

approved shall be implemented prior to occupation of these rooms and permanently retained thereafter.

In order to ensure a satisfactory standard of accommodation, in accordance with Policy 4B.1 of the London Plan, as amended 2008.

21) The student accommodation use hereby approved shall not be used nor occupied until details of a management scheme for the proposed student accommodation has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Council. The management plan shall include 24 hours on site professional security and the installation and operation of CCTV and detector alarms at roof levels. The student accommodation shall thereafter be managed in accordance with the approved scheme unless agreed in writing by the council.

To ensure that the proposed student accommodation does not give rise to conditions which would be detrimental to the amenities of surrounding occupiers by reason of noise and disturbance, safety and security and highways congestion in accordance with Policies EN21, G3 and G4 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

22) There shall be no public access to any of the rooftop areas. Access is permitted for maintenance staff and emergency escape purposes only.

To ensure that the operation and security of the adjoining police station is not adversely affected by the development, in accordance with policies 4B.1 and 4B.6 of The London Plan, as amended 2008.

23) In the event of any floorspace at ground floor level hereby approved being used for Class A3 (of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1997) purposes, no organised delivery of food shall take place from the premises using motor vehicles (which include motorcycles, mopeds and motor scooters.

No provision has been made for the parking of vehicles off-street in connection with a delivery service. Any such vehicles would be likely to park on the public highway, which would prejudice the free flow of traffic and public safety contrary to policy TN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, amended 2007.

24) No customers shall be on the premises in connection with the commercial uses hereby permitted between 2400 hours and 06.00 hours the following day.

In order that noise and disturbance which may be caused by customers leaving the premises is confined to those hours when ambient noise levels and general activity are sufficiently similar to that in the surrounding area, thereby ensuring the use does not cause demonstrable harm to surrounding residents in compliance with policies EN21 and SH11 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended September 2007.

25) Construction at basement level shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details of the provision of secure and weather proof cycle storage facilities within the property for 222 bicycles. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the installation of the secure cycle storage in accordance with the approved details. Further, no part of the student accommodation hereby permitted shall be occupied until the ramp into the basement level of the building alongside the staircase, to allow for easy movement for bicycles, has been installed. These facilities shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that satisfactory provision is made for cycle parking and to promote alternative, sustainable forms of transport, in accordance with policy TN6 and standard S20.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

26) No development shall commence until a contaminated land desktop study, site investigation scheme, intrusive investigation and risk assessment have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The desk study will identify all previous site uses, potential contaminants associated with those uses, a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors and any potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The site investigation scheme will provide information for an assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. The risk assessment will assess the degree and nature of any contamination on site and to assess the risks posed by any contamination to human health, controlled waters and the wider environment. A detailed method statement for any required remediation works will need to be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Council. All works must be carried out by a competent person conforming to CLR 11: Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (DEFRA 2004).

To ensure that any contaminated land on the application site is identified and remediated in accordance with policies GO, G3, EN2OA and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

27) No development shall commence until any required remediation works have been completed and a validation report to verify these works has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Council unless otherwise authorised. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site the Council is to be informed immediately and no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council) shall be carried out until a report indicating the nature of the contamination and how it is to be dealt with is submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Council. Any required remediation should be detailed and verified in an amendment to the remediation statement. All works must be carried out by a competent person conforming to CLR 11: Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (DEFRA 2004).

To ensure that any contaminated land on the application site is identified and remediated in accordance with policies GO, G3, EN20A and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

28) No demolition shall take place prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of a Demolition Management Plan. This shall include hours of demolition works, details of the methods proposed for the demolition of the existing buildings on the site including dust and noise monitoring and control, details of 24 hour on-site security and associated boundary treatment to prevent access to the police station, provisions within the site to ensure that all vehicles associated with the demolition works are properly washed and cleaned to prevent the passage of mud and dirt onto the highway and other matters relating to traffic management to be agreed, including maintaining vehicular access to the police station, details of the steps to be taken to re-use and recycle demolition waste and details of the measures proposed to minimise the impact of the demolition process on the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The demolition process shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The details shall include a scheme for liaison between the Metropolitan Police, the developer/developers agent(s) and the contractor, including two meetings a week, to address any operational impacts on the Metropolitan Police. The developer shall use all reasonable endeavours to address the reasonable concerns of the Metropolitan Police.

To ensure that provision is made as appropriate for any recycling of demolition waste, to ensure that the occupiers of neighbouring properties are not unduly affected by the demolition process and to ensure that the use of the highway is not compromised during demolition, in accordance with policies EN19A, EN21 and TN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

29) The student accommodation hereby permitted shall not be used or occupied until the noise mitigation and ventilation measures identified in the Noise Assessment (Entec UK Ltd.), dated October 2010 have been fully implemented and achieve the 'Good' standard of BS8233:1999. These measures shall thereafter be permanently retained thereafter, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site is not adversely affected by noise/ vibration from dominant transport and industrial/ commercial noise sources, in accordance with policies EN20A, EN2OB and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

30) No construction above the first floor shall take place until the developer has secured: i) the completion of a Base-Line Airwaves Interference Study (the Base-Line Study) to assess airwave reception to/from the adjacent police station. ii) the implementation of a Scheme of Mitigation Works for the purposes of ensuring nil detriment during the construction of the development identified by the Base-Line Study. Such Scheme of Mitigation Works shall be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Council.

To ensure that the existing airwaves reception at the adjacent police station is not adversely affected by the proposed development, in accordance with policy 3A.18 of The London Plan, as amended 2008 and policies EN21 and CS8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

31) No occupation of the development shall take place until the developer has secured: i) the completion of a Post-Construction Airwaves Study (the Post-Construction Study) to ensure nil detriment to airwaves reception attributable to the development. ii) the implementation of a Scheme of Mitigation Works for the purpose of ensuring nil detriment to the airwave reception attributable to the development identified by the Post-Construction Study. Such Scheme of Mitigation Works shall be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Council.

32) Prior to commencement of the development above ground, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, of the sound insulation of the floor/ceiling/walls separating the commercial part(s) of the premises from dwellings/habitable rooms and noise sensitive premises. Details shall ensure that the sound insulation and any other mitigation measures are sufficiently enhanced in order that vibration from commercial activities including amplified sounds and the use of equipment will not be perceptible in noise sensitive premises and the noise standard specified in BS 8233:1999 is achieved within noise sensitive premises and their external amenity areas. The measures shall ensure that machinery, plant/equipment, extract/ventilation systems, ducting, exercise equipment and loudspeakers are mounted with proprietary anti-vibration isolators and that fan motors are vibration isolated from the casing and adequately silenced. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site and surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise and/or vibration transmitted-through- the building structure and/or omitted to external amenity areas, in accordance with policies EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

33) Prior to commencement of the development, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, to detail how the development will provide an energy efficient building and to ensure that sustainable design methods are incorporated into the development. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council.

To ensure that the development is consistent with the Mayor's sustainable design objectives in accordance with policies 4A.3 and 4A.4 of the London Plan as amended 2008.

34) Prior to the development above ground commencing the application will provide the Council with a BREEAM assessment that demonstrates that the development will achieve a BREEAM rating of `very good'. The approved scheme shall be implemented in accordance with these details. The student accommodation shall not be occupied until such measures associated with the student accommodation have been implemented. The commercial units at basement and ground floor shall not be occupied until such measures associated with the commercial units have been implemented.

To ensure the construction of a sustainable development, in accordance with policy 4A.3 of The London Plan, as amended 2008.

35) Surface water management shall be designed in accordance with the principles, volumes and flow rates enclosed in Section 4 and Appendix B of the Flood Risk Assessment submitted with this application, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council.

In order to reduce the amount of surface water run-off from the site and to comply with PPS25 and policy 4A.14 of The London Plan, as amended 2008; recommended by the Environment Agency.

36) Prior to the development of the development hereby permitted the applicant shall provide a commitment in writing to ensure that the development is designed to connect to a future district heating scheme should one become available in the vicinity. Furthermore, in the event that a district heating system becomes available locally the developer shall make every effort to connect into this system.

To ensure the construction of a sustainable development, in accordance with policy 4A.3 of The London Plan, as amended 2008.

37) Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, of the external noise level emitted from plant/ machinery/ equipment and mitigation measures. The measures shall ensure that the external noise level emitted from plant, machinery/ equipment will be lower than the existing background noise level by at least 10 dBA, as assessed according to BS4142:1997 at noise sensitive premises, with all machinery operating together. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site and surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise from mechanical installations/ equipment and their uses, in accordance with Policy EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

38) The development hereby permitted shall not commence until impact studies of the existing water supply infrastructure have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the council (in consultation with Thames Water). The studies shall

determine the magnitude of any new additional capacity required in the system and a suitable connection point.

To ensure that the water supply infrastructure has sufficient capacity to cope with the additional demand arising from this development, in accordance with the requirements of Thames Water and Policy 4A.16 of The London Plan, as amended 2008.

Justification for Approving the Application :

1) Land Use: The proposed use at basement and ground floor levels would comply with the Unitary Development Plan's site specific policy HTC7 in retaining a leisure use for the site. The student accommodation on the upper floors would comply with objectives to increase student accommodation in London without detriment to the surrounding area.The development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with policies HTC7, CS1, and Policies 3A.25, and 3D.1 of the London Plan, as amended 2008.

Design: The design has taken on board the concerns previously raised by Council officers and supported by the Planning Inspector to create a design which would now appear appropriate in its immediate setting, without causing detriment to the streetscene, including the setting of the adjoining listed buildings, and listed library opposite, and the surrounding conservation area. As such, it is considered that the design is acceptable and is in accordance with Policies EN2, EN3, EN8 and EN8D of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007 and Policies 4B.1, 4B.3 and 4B.7 of the London Plan, as amended 2008.

Highways: The impact of the proposal on the highway network and local parking conditions would be minimal. The site has good local public transport accessibility and provision would be made for cycle parking for the student units and visitors. With the use of conditions, the student accommodation, leisure space and retail uses would not result in any unacceptable highways conditions or pedestrian- vehicular conflict. It is not considered that the proposal would result in a significant increase in car parking demand or have an adverse impact on the highway network. Adequate provision for storage and collection of refuse and recyclables would be provided. The development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with Policies EN17, TN5, TN6, TN13, TN15 and Standards S18.1, S19, S20.1, S22 and S23 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

Residential Amenity: The impact of the proposed development upon adjoining occupiers is considered acceptable. The proposal would not have a harmful impact on neighbouring residential amenity in terms of light, outlook or privacy and noise and disturbance and, through conditions, the use of the building would not result in unacceptable noise and disturbance to nearby residents. In this regard, the development would respect the principles of good neighbourliness, and would therefore be acceptable in accordance with Policies EN8, EN20A, EN20B, EN20C, and EN21 and standard S13 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

Access and Safety: Subject to conditions the development would provide a safe and secure environment for all users. The development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with Policy EN10 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007; Policy 4B.5 of the London Plan, as amended 2008; and the Council's adopted Supplementary Planning Document 'Access for all'.

Quality of Residential Accommodation: The proposal would provide an acceptable standard of accommodation for future occupiers of the student accommodation facility, in terms of living space, aspect and communal facilities. The development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with Policy 4B.1 of the London Plan, as amended 2008.

Environment: The scheme is considered to provide a safe and secure environment and would incorporate suitable facilities for the storage and collection of segregated waste so as to avoid undue pollution, with no significant worsening of air quality or undue noise and, with other pollution controls in place, the development would not cause undue detriment to the amenities of neighbours. The development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with Policies EN10, EN17, EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

Sustainability: The application proposes a number of measures to reduce Co2 emissions from the baseline. The proposal would seek to reduce pollution and waste and minimise its environmental impact. The development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with policies G0 and G3 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007 and Policies 4A.3, 4A.4 and 4A.7 of the London Plan, as amended 2008.

Flood Risk: A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted and has considered possible risks of flooding to the site, and has identified adequate preventative measures, in accordance with Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25. Sustainable urban drainage matters are considered satisfactory and the development would therefore be acceptable in accordance with Policies 4A.3 and 4A.14 of the London Plan, as amended 2008.

------

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

All Background Papers held by Michael Merrington (Ext: 3453) :

Application form received: 3rd November 2010 Drawing Nos: see above

Policy documents: The Revised London Plan 2008 Unitary Development Plan as amended September 2007.

Consultation Comments :

Comments from: Dated:

Metropolitan Police Licensing Officer 06.01.11

Environment Agency - Planning Liaison 10.12.10

Hammersmith And Fulham Primary Care 20.12.10

Transport For London - Street Management Administration 04.01.11 Team 25.01.11 Transport For London - Street Management Administration Team 06.12.10

Metropolitan Police Licensing Officer 14.12.10

The Hammersmith Society 04.01.11

Hammersmith & Fulham Historic Buildings Group 13.12.10

Transport For London - Street Management Administration 19.11.10 Team 15.11.10 Environment Agency - Planning Liaison 17.01.11 Thames Water - Development Control 01.12.10 Commission For Architecture And The Built Environment 22.11.10 Government Office For London 02.12.10 Greater London Authority - Planning Decisions Unit 13.01.11 London Fire And Emergency Planning Authority 31.12.10 Commission For Architecture And The Built Environment

Greater London Authority - Planning Decisions Unit

Neighbour Comments :

Letters from: Dated:

C/o H&F Community Engagement Team Hestia The Quad, Unit 18, 49 Atatlanta Street Fulham, SW6 6TU 25.01.11 Level 5, Sherfield Building South Kensington Campus London SW7 2AZ 24.12.10

85 Brook Green London W6 7BD 26.11.10 NAG 25.11.10 15 Winslow Road London W6 9SF 11.11.10

OTHER DOCUMENTS Transport Statement October 2010; Energy Statement October 2010; BREEAM Pre- assessment October 2010; Air Quality Assessment October 2010; Ecological Appraisal October 2010; London Student Accommodation Report October 2010; Assessment of the Impacts of Student Accommodation October 2010; Student Accommodation Management Plan October 2010; Letter dated 8th October 2010 from Colliers CRE regarding proposed leisure use.

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 The application site is a largely rectangular area of 2,950m2 in size, located on the western side of Shepherd's Bush Road, within the Hammersmith Town Centre (which is identified as a regeneration area in the Core Strategy) and Hammersmith Broadway Conservation Area. The site has a continuous frontage (66 metres in length) to Shepherd's Bush Road except for where the locally listed two-storey Laurie Arms Public House building is located, which the application site wraps around. The property is located within Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3. The Palais is also locally listed as a building of merit.

1.2 The site is bounded to the north and south (on Shepherd's Bush Road) by the Hammersmith Police Station and the former fire station respectively, both of which are Grade II listed buildings. The Hammersmith & City and Circle lines run adjacent to the rear (western) boundary of the site. Across Shepherd's Bush Road, and opposite the application site, the library building is also Grade II listed.

1.3 The site was historically used as a dance hall and music performance venue and most recently operated as a nightclub until 2007, since which time the existing two storey building has been vacant.

1.4 The surrounding area is characterised predominantly by commercial uses including offices, retail, cafes and restaurants. The nearest residential accommodation to the site is located within the adjacent former fire station on its upper floors, which is in use as a bar/pub at ground floor level; and adjacent to the library on the opposite side of the road (Carnegie House).

1.5 There are a number of recent planning records pertaining to the property.

1.6 Planning permission and conservation area consent were granted on 30th September 2002 for demolition of all the existing buildings and redevelopment of the site to erect a part two storey, part four storey building to the front and a five/six storey element to the rear totalling 10,968m2 (gross), incorporating leisure (Class D2) at ground and mezzanine floor levels (3396m2); café/restaurant (Class A3) at ground floor level (225m2), offices (Class B1) at ground to fifth floor levels (6747m2). A Section 106 agreement required a minimum provision of 2,765m2 of Class D2 (assembly and leisure) floor space (Refs: 2000/01537/FUL and 2000/01539/CAC.)

1.7 Planning permission was granted (ref: 2006/02084/VAR) on 8th November 2006 to vary condition 1 of planning permission 2000/01537/FUL, to extend the time period for commencement of the development by 3 years. Planning ref: 2006/03300/CAC granted conservation area consent for demolition of all existing buildings in connection with this matter (Permissions expired on 7th November 2009).

1.8 Planning permission was granted on 7th August 2006 (ref:2006/01629/FUL) to form a replacement vehicle access from the highway and inclusion of seven off-street car parking spaces in connection with planning permission ref:2000/01537/FUL.

1.9 More recently, planning permission and conservation area consent were refused for the redevelopment of the site involving the demolition of all buildings and the redevelopment by the 'erection of a part five and part ten storey building, comprising 2,802m2 of leisure floor space (Class D2) at basement and ground floor levels, including 195m2 of flexible leisure (Class D2) and/or retail floor space (Class A1/A3) to the Shepherd's Bush Road frontage, and 15,173m2 of student accommodation floor space (429 units); provision of 4 car parking spaces, 232 cycle parking spaces, and an external communal terrace at first floor level.' (refs: 2009/02040/FUL and 2010/02041/CAC).

1.10 The applications were refused by the Planning Applications Committee by decision notices dated 6th November 2009. There were 8 reasons for refusal. These related to the following:-

Impact upon visual amenity; impact upon residential amenity; impact on traffic conditions as a result of loading/unloading; inadequate transport impact information; failure to provide an inclusive environment; unsatisfactory student environment in relation to communal living and amenity space; unacceptable environment in relation to noise exposure; unsatisfactory cycle parking provision.

1.11 The applicant lodged appeals against the Council's decisions to refuse planning permission and conservation area consent. A public inquiry was held in June 2010. In the lead up to the public inquiry, the Council withdrew four of the reasons for refusal;- impact upon residential amenity (reason 2); inadequate transport impact information (reason 4); noise environment within the development (reason 7) and inadequate cycle parking facilities (reason 8). These reasons for refusal were withdrawn either on the basis of further information provided by the applicant or on the basis that the concerns previously identified could satisfactorily be dealt with by condition should planning permission be forthcoming.

1.12 The four reasons for refusal which were considered at the Inquiry related to impact upon visual amenity (reason 1); impact upon traffic conditions as a result of loading/unloading arising from the seasonal vehicular travel needs of students (reason 3); failure to provide an inclusive environment (reason 5); and unsatisfactory student environment in relation to communal living and amenity space (reason 6).

1.13 Both appeals were dismissed by the Inspector by decision notice dated 16 July 2010. However, the only element of the scheme which the Inspector felt was unacceptable related to the design of the building fronting onto Shepherd's Bush Road. In his decision, he stated that to the road frontage, the development 'would have a relatively imposing monumental quality, the alignment of projecting brick piers and intervening glazing, panelling and ventilation details giving a strong and deliberate

vertical emphasis. This would contrast with the more balanced horizontal and vertical elements in the compositions of the nearby listed buildings which contribute much of the special interest of the Conservation Area.' (para 19). He further stated that 'The strong vertical quality of the proposal together with the exposed flank wall would in my opinion create a massing which would be visually dominant against the Police Station, in spite of the actual separation by the lower side wing to this. Although the height of this block would be similar to the previous approval, its design and materials would emphasise the perceived height and degree of solidity in the oblique view. I judge that the effect would be to compete with and diminish the status of the Police Station in the street scene, which is an important part of its setting.' (para 23).

1.14 The current applications seek to address the issues outlined within the Inspector's decision and propose the following:-

'Redevelopment involving erection of a part-five and part-ten storey building plus basement for 2,802 m2 of leisure floor space (Class D2), including 195m2 of flexible leisure (Class D2) and/or retail floor space (Classes A1/A3); 15,065m2 of student accommodation floor space (418 units and 418 bed spaces); provision of 4 car parking spaces, 222 cycle parking spaces, and external amenity space following demolition of existing buildings/structures on site.'

1.15 The main difference between the current and previously refused proposal relates to the revised design treatment of the façade fronting Shepherd's Bush Road which also involves a reduction in its height of this section of the building of approximately 2.6 metres when compared to the previously refused scheme. The incorporation of a pitched/hipped roof in the design of the frontage buildings results in the overall bulk of the building also being reduced. The amendments to the proposal have resulted in a reduction in the number of bed spaces proposed which is now 418 rather than 429.

1.16 As with the previous application, this current application has been referred to the Mayor of London's office pursuant to the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 as the proposal would involve the erection of a building more than 30 metres high outside the City of London and would be larger than 15,000sqm.

1.17 This is a joint report covering matters raised by both the planning application and the conservation area consent application (2010/03499/CAC), which is also on this committee agenda.

1.18 As previously proposed, pedestrian entry and a single vehicle crossover would be provided along the Shepherd's Bush Road frontage. There would be a separate pedestrian entrance for students to the north of the site, next to the police station.

1.19 The basement would comprise plant, cycle parking and some multi-function leisure use. At ground floor level, the development would comprise 195m2 of flexible leisure (Class D2 and/or retail (Class A1/A3), and approximately 1,800m2 of multi purpose leisure use (Class D2), 4 car parking spaces for use by disabled students, cycle parking, refuse storage and plant. The end use of the multi-purpose leisure floor space has not been confirmed; the applicants state it has been designed to accommodate a range of leisure uses including: a health and fitness club, cinema, bowling alley, pool hall and dance hall. The proposed cycle parking would be located at ground and basement levels comprising 209 spaces for the student accommodation and 9 for the commercial units. Four additional spaces would be proposed to the Shepherd's Bush

frontage, the location of which would be agreed with the Council through a Section 106 agreement should planning permission be granted.

1.20 At first floor level, the development would provide a reception and security desk for the student accommodation, an internal student amenity area (900m2) and external communal terrace (290m2). There has been an increase in the provision of internal student amenity space of 335 sq.m when compared with the previously refused scheme. This comprises further study areas and has been made possible as a result in the reduction in number of units within the proposal and would amount to approximately 2.15 sq.m. of internal amenity space per occupant. When combined with the proposed external amenity terrace, the overall amount of amenity space associated with the proposal now amounts to 1190sqm.

1.21 The proposed student accommodation would occupy all floors above ground level (floors one to nine) and comprise 418 bedspaces in total. The typical sizes of 395 of these would measure 17.4sq.m (gross internal area). The remaining 23 units would be wheelchair accessible units measuring 25.4sq.m, amounting to 5.5% of units, so meeting BS8300:2009 recommendations for at least 5% of bedrooms to be accessible, which the Inspector considered the appropriate guidance to follow in this case.

1.22 Each of the student accommodation units would be fully furnished and self- contained with a bed, desk, storage, kitchen and bathroom facilities.

1.23 The application is accompanied by the following documentation: Design & Access Statement, Transport Statement, Daylight and Sunlight Report, BREEAM Pre- Assessment, Energy Report, Air Quality Report, Noise Assessment, Flood Risk Assessment, Ecology Appraisal, Student Accommodation Management Plan, London Student Accommodation Market Report, letter detailing the continued marketing of proposed leisure use and assessment of the impacts of students.

2.0 PUBLICITY AND CONSULTATIONS

2.1 The application has been publicised by means of a site notice and a press advert. Individual notification letters have also been sent to the occupiers of adjoining and surrounding properties. Other consulted parties include the Greater London Authority (GLA), Government Office for London (GOL), Transport for London (TfL) Metropolitan Police - Crime Prevention Design, English Heritage, Environment Agency, Thames Water, Commission for Architecture & Built Environment (CABE), Hammersmith Society, Hammersmith & Fulham Historic Buildings Group, local residents groups and amenity groups.

2.2 The GLA have responded and advise that whilst they consider the scheme to be broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, they do not consider that the scheme would fully comply with the London Plan in respect of Inclusive Design, Energy and Transport issues. These issues will be discussed in the relevant sections of the report below.

2.3 Transport for London (TfL) responded and stated that they maintain their previous position in that the impact of the proposal could be accommodated on the local transport network. However, they recommended further information to be added to the Student Management Plan and conditions to be imposed in relation to securing the car free nature of the development; the submission of a Construction Logistics Plan and

Delivery and Servicing Plan; for the submitted travel plans to be developed further and once agreed by TfL and the Council, for them to be secured, enforced, monitored, reviewed and funded through a Section 106 Agreement.

2.4 The applicant has subsequently contacted TfL and confirmed their intention to address all the matters raised within TfL's response through the submission of all of the above reports which would be secured by condition (condition 21) and through a S106 agreement in the event that planning permission is granted. TfL have confirmed in writing that they are happy that the issues raised by TfL at stage 1 have now been satisfactorily addressed.

2.5 English Heritage have replied to the consultation, and they state that they consider the revised proposals to be contextually appropriate in terms of height, massing, materials and elevational articulation within the streetscene. They consider that the development would now not dominate the abutting Grade II Listed Police Station nor the locally listed Laurie Arms public house.

2.6 The Government Office for the West Midlands has responded to both applications and advise that as local planning authorities make decisions for planning applications, they are unable to make any comments. In respect of the conservation area consent application, they advise that it would not be appropriate to make any comments as to do so may prejudice the Secretary of State should the application be referred back to them in the future.

2.7 The NHS have responded and have asked for a contribution to be secured towards healthcare provision. This matter is currently under discussion with the applicant.

2.8 CABE have responded that they are unable to support the scheme as currently proposed. Their views are summarised as follows:-

- the buildings fronting Shepherd's Bush Road are weak imitations of the neighbouring listed buildings and are not the right architectural approach; - there may be a conflict between the privacy of the units overlooking the communal amenity space and noise; - the height of wall between terrace and Laurie Arms PH dominates the rear of the public house; - the standard of student accommodation is questioned in relation to space standards and daylight and sunlight, particularly 3 of the units at fourth floor level; - appropriate measures should be put in place to ensure that noise from the railway line to the rear will not be detrimental to the amenity of the occupants; - question whether the building could be adapted for reuse in the future if student accommodation is no longer viable.

The issues raised above will be discussed within the relevant sections of the report below.

2.9 The Environment Agency have responded and advise that they have no objection to the proposal but recommend an informative be placed on any approval in relation to water abstraction. They also provide comments in relation to surface water drainage which would also be attached as informatives if planning permision is granted.

2.10 Thames Water have reported that the existing water supply infrastructure has insufficient capacity to meet the additional demands for the proposed development and recommend the submission of impact studies to be submitted, assessed and approved by the council, in liaison with them. A condition is recommended in this matter (condition 38).

2.11 The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority advise that they are satisfied with the proposals subject to relevant planning and building regulation approvals.

2.12 The Hammersmith and Fulham Action on Disability Group (HAFAD) welcome the changes on the previous application which would result in the number of wheelchair accessible units equating to 5.5% of the total number of units. This has increased from 3.7% from the previous scheme. Further comments relate to ensuring that the leisure area is fully accessible; that fenestration markings are placed on the glass doors to ensure the safety of visually impaired persons; that there are accessible toilets in all the public areas and that all student amenity areas are fully accessible.

2.13 The Metropolitan Police's Crime Prevention Design Officer (CPDO) advises that the comments relating to the previous scheme still stand (this was not an objection to the proposal, but a number of recommendations relating to a number of matters for the applicants to consider to help them achieve a secure design environment).

2.14 The most recent response from the Metropolitan Police CPDO requests a condition to the effect that the Metropolitan Police have the ability, without rental charge, to install a radio antenna (if it becomes necessary for operational requirements). The antenna would then be linked into the Police Station TER allowing for radio transmissions. An informative would be recommended on this issue should planning permission be forthcoming.

2.15 The Metropolitan Police Authority's response advises that they have no operational concern with the revised scheme, subject to the proposed conditions which were agreed at the Public Inquiry (conditions 7,9,17,18,21,22,28,30,31,36). Their request for a Construction Logistics Management Plan would be secured under a S106 agreement. They also request further details by way of condition relating to the proposed metal fins on the windows in order to address any security implications on the police station site (condition 19).

2.16 The Hammersmith Society have submitted a response, the contents of which can be summarised as follows:

- Proposed `bookends' on either side of Laurie Arms leaves the pub less isolated and dominated by the new buildings; - The bookend to the north of the Laurie Arms is a bleak and unrelieved rectangular block when compared with the design approach of the rest of the Shepherd's Bush Road frontage; - New proposed roofline meets Police Station and old fire station rooflines more appropriately; - Design and materiality of new scheme offers more visual variety and responds to surrounding conservation area better than previous scheme; - Still object to height of rear 10 storey building- it falls outside the area where tall buildings may be appropriate on the Tall Buildings Spatial Analysis map associated with

the background paper on Tall Buildings; block is too high for the location and will excessively dominate its surroundings - Concern that the access for the multi-purpose leisure facility is adequate for range of uses; - Concern over acoustic nuisance from TfL station to the rear.

2.17 Hammersmith and Fulham Historic Buildings Group have also responded to the consultation exercise. They consider that whilst there have been changes to the scheme including a reduction in height, the changes do not adequately respond to the Inspector's detailed criticisms;-

- Quieter design style has made the new frontage buildings better neighbours; - Reduction in height is welcome but rear building is still too high and will dominate views in the conservation area; - The site is outside the area suggested as suitable for tall buildings on the spatial map accompanying the Council's Background paper on Tall Buildings; - The Laurie Arms PH is still over-dominated by the proposed development and the new `bookends' are an unworthy solution with inelegant attempts to be contextual to the adjoining properties in Shepherd's Bush Road: - resultant scheme is a mish mash of clashing styles, different heights and materials; - Concern over whether the leisure area in respect of height, layout, and access would be appropriate for dance band, pop group or orchestra; if scheme is approved, a condition should be imposed to ensure this is the case. - The group would like to see the interior of the Palais building; - References to previous uses suggest an archaeological investigation would be appropriate.

2.18 A total of three responses have been received from members of the public. Their comments can be summarised as follows:-

- Concern over noise and disturbance associated with the use - Palais is an important part of the local history and should not be turned into more retail space; - Only 4 car parking spaces will result in impact upon surrounding streets; - Ten storeys is too high/out of scale for the area

2.19 The emerging designs for the scheme were presented by the applicant at the Council's Design Review Panel on 7th September and again on 5th October. A number of recommendations were made at the meeting of 5th October in relation to what emerged into the current scheme, these included the following: To explore whether appropriate illumination of the main entrance would evoke the history of the site, and to anchor the building; use of contemporary and transparent materials to increase views through the buildings; create glimpses of the courtyard area at the rear from the street; to aspire for creative use of the ground floor `commercial' units rather than standard retail uses; to encourage the use of canopies to improve the definition at ground floor and the shadow line on the building adjacent to the Fire Station; to explore the use of bookends to provide an improved transition link to each building; returning the eaves and roof lines to both `bookend' blocks would provide a more resolved building; to increase the height of the return linking all there buildings; to continue the `legacy' wall reference throughout the student common areas and through the `commercial' units. These matters were considered by the applicant, and are discussed in the report below.

3.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 The main considerations in determining the application relate to whether it is considered that the resubmitted scheme has satisfactorily overcome the concerns raised by the Inspector within the appeal decision. The following considerations also remain to be relevant within this application:- Retention of leisure space in accordance with town centre policies, the principle of the proposed student accommodation use in land use terms; the design and appearance of the building and its impact on the street scene, and character and appearance of the conservation area and listed buildings located adjacent and opposite the application site; impacts of the development on the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, in terms of noise and disturbance, daylight/sunlight, privacy and outlook; quality of the residential accommodation; traffic generation and car parking; the accessibility of the development for wheelchair and disabled users, and energy efficiency.

LAND USE

Leisure use 3.2 The UDP town centre policies have a site proposal specific to the Hammersmith Palais (HTC7 - Site F) which emphasises the site should be retained for leisure uses with or without other appropriate town centre uses. The UDP continues to state that B1 offices and other uses appropriate to Hammersmith Town Centre may be acceptable, but only if these are necessary to enable leisure uses to remain on site on the ground floor and at an amount no less than the existing leisure floor space. Any new development should have regard to the site's position within the Hammersmith Broadway Conservation Area.

3.3 UDP policy CS1 states that 'the Council will seek to retain arts, cultural or entertainment use of buildings or land and will not normally allow change of use to other purposes'. It continues to state that 'where redevelopment is proposed the council will require replacement ACE uses on site'. The Palais was previously used as a nightclub, falling within Class D2. Submitted details state the previous consent for office use on the site has not gone ahead, due to the level of vacant floor space in Hammersmith Town Centre.

3.4 London Plan Policy 3D.1 states that boroughs should encourage retail, leisure and other town centre uses within town centres and support a wide role for town centres as locations for leisure and cultural activities. The proposed inclusion of leisure floor space in this application would support this role and function.

3.5 The existing leisure floor space is 2,765m2 and the proposal would provide 2,802sqm of leisure floor space at basement and ground floor levels, which would satisfy policy HTC7.2.

3.6 The applicants have not confirmed an end user for the leisure floor space, however, the application is accompanied by an updated leisure report which sets out details of the continuing marketing of the proposed development, with interest being generated from a range of leisure uses. As with the previous application, the development has incorporated a 4.5 metre high floor to ceiling height in order to accommodate a range of leisure uses which could potentially include a health and fitness centre, cinema, bowling alley, pool hall and/or dance hall. The GLA advise that

whilst it would be preferable for an end-user to have been established, they accept that the principle of a flexible leisure use has been established through the appeal process.

3.7 Officers consider a flexible leisure use would be acceptable in this location and consider that the interest expressed from a number of potential end users indicates that the proposed layout would be suitable for a range of leisure activities. The space would be offered as an open shell in order that the eventual fit-out would be to the individual requirements of the eventual end user. In the event that planning permission is granted, a number of conditions would be recommended in order to ensure that the potential end uses of both the leisure and retail uses would not have a detrimental impact upon local amenity or give rise to concern on crime prevention issues (conditions 16,17,23,24,32). It is noted that as with the previous scheme, the police's Crime Prevention Design advisor has raised no objection to the proposal.

3.8 The response received from CABE questioned the capability of the building being adapted for alternative uses in the future should the student accommodation no longer be required. Officers consider that the proposed layout of the development would readily lend itself to alternative uses such as a hotel or another form of residential accommodation should that situation occur (subject to planning permission being sought).

Student Accommodation 3.9 The Unitary Development Plan (UDP) has no specific policies that apply to student accommodation. However, London Plan Policy 3A.25 and policy 3.19 of the Draft Replacement London Plan support the provision of accommodation for further and higher education institutions and student accommodation in accessible locations such as the application site. Elsewhere, the London Plan notes (Para 3.39) that `provision of purpose built student housing adds to the overall supply of housing and may reduce pressure on the existing supply of market and affordable housing.'

3.10 The Draft Replacement London Plan, published in October 2009,has limited weight. However, it states in Policy 3.8, section B, paragraph g, that 'boroughs should ensure that strategic and local requirements for student housing meeting a demonstrable need are addressed by working closely with higher and further education agencies and without compromising capacity for conventional homes'. Paragraph 3.45 states that 'unless student accommodation is secured through a planning agreement for occupation by members of specified educational institutions for the predominant part of the year, it will normally be subject to the requirements of affordable housing policy' (Policies 3.11& 3.14). However, the GLA have acknowledged that within the appeal decision the Inspector did not advise that the proposal would need to be tied to a particular end institution and they have raised no objection in this respect in relation to the current application.

3.11 The Council's Proposed Submission Core Strategy document dated October 2010 states that 'The council recognises the London-wide need for student accommodation, and to assist in meeting this need it will support applications for student accommodation as part of mixed use development schemes within both the White City and Earls Court and West Kensington Opportunity Areas' (Borough Wide Strategic Policy H6). The application site is not situated within an opportunity area identified above, however, the policy continues to state that 'Applications for student accommodation outside of these areas will be assessed on a site by site basis, but the council will resist proposals which are likely to have adverse local impacts.'

3.12 The Council's Generic Development Management Options document dated November 2009 sets out the main criteria against which student housing applications will be judged. Officers note that neither of these documents are currently adopted and therefore have minimal statutory weight, however, they provide a clear indication of the Council's intentions in relation to emerging student accommodation policy and the below criteria are based on other established policies: a) the site should be in an area with good public transport accessibility (normally PTAL 4-6) with access to local convenience services and would not generate additional demands for on-street parking; b) there would be no loss of existing housing; c) the application would need to provide a management and maintenance plan for the accommodation; d) the council would need to be satisfied by the quality of the accommodation in terms of the unit sizes, daylight and sunlight standards; and e) any application for student accommodation should be accompanied by a signed agreement with a London university stating that the facility is to provide accommodation for that university.

3.13 With regard to part a), the application site has a PTAL of 6b (the highest) and is located in proximity to Hammersmith Broadway bus and tube stations, as well as the Hammersmith and City Underground Station. The students would not be entitled to apply for car parking permits thus minimising additional on-street parking demands. The site also lies within Hammersmith Town Centre which provides a good range of convenience services.

3.14 With regard to part b) there would be no loss of housing. Therefore, the above criteria would be satisfied.

3.15 With regard to part c), the applicants have agreed to submit a management and maintenance plan by way of condition, that the council need to be satisfied with.

3.16 With regard to part d), standards for student room sizes have not yet been set. However, it is acknowledged that in order to make rooms affordable for the majority of students, it would not be wise to apply usual residential standards. Each unit would contain a separate shower/wc, with a kitchen area and a main bedroom/study. Officers are of the opinion that the units have been designed to be fit for their purpose and a satisfactory standard of accommodation would be provided. Officers are satisfied that each room provides enough space to ensure a healthy quality of life for the occupants and is acknowledged that communal amenity space has also been provided as part of the application.

3.17 With regard to part e) although the proposal would not be directly linked to one particular end institution, clauses would be included within the Section 106 Heads of Terms requiring occupation of the units to only be for full-time students enrolled on a full-time course at a higher education establishment. Officers consider that these clauses would be acceptable in satisfying the requirement of part e).

3.18 The applicants have re-submitted a student demand assessment prepared by King Sturge (Property Consultants) with the current application which concludes there is a significant demand/need for purpose built student accommodation across London

including within the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. Although the proposed student accommodation would not be directly linked to one particular higher education establishment, a letter of support has been submitted from Imperial College which states that notwithstanding the new student accommodation planned at Wood Lane, and at Winstanley Road in Battersea, a recent review of demand indicates that there will remain a clear demand for additional purpose built accommodation for postgraduate students and that the proposal at the Palais would assist in meeting some of that demand. They therefore continue to support the principle behind the proposal.

3.19 Based on the current policy context and information submitted by the applicant, officers accept that there appears to be an identified need within west London and within the borough for student accommodation. The main consideration therefore relates to whether the proposed town centre location would be appropriate for student accommodation. This issue will be discussed later within the report below.

DESIGN

3.20 Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) states that `Planning authorities should plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design for all developments, including individual buildings, public and private spaces and wider development schemes. Good design should contribute positively to making places better for people. Design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions should not be acceptable' (para 34)

3.21 London Plan policy 4B.1 `Principle of design for a compact city' states that `boroughs should seek to ensure that developments:

- Respect local context, character and communities - Are attractive to look at and, where appropriate, inspire, excite and delight - Respect the natural environment - Respect London's built heritage'

3.22 Policy 4B.2 complements policy 4B.1, seeking to promote world class design and explaining the Mayor's view on how this is to be secured. This includes recognition that good design is rooted firmly in an understanding and appreciation of the local social, historical and physical context. It is expected that in this diverse and constantly changing city, developments should show an understanding of and respect for existing character.

3.23 Policy EN2 of the UDP relates to development in conservation areas and seeks to ensure that in considering new development, the character and appearance of a conservation area is either preserved or enhanced. Particular regard will be given in the design of new developments to details such as the scale, massing, bulk, height, materials, colour, vertical and horizontal emphasis, and the relationship to adjoining buildings, the street building line and open spaces. New developments in conservation areas must, where possible, respect the historic context, volume, scale, form, materials and quality. These will be matters of particular importance to the historic context. Policy EN3 relates to listed buildings and states 'the council will not normally grant permission for any development which would not preserve the setting of any listed building'.

3.24 Policy EN8 is also relevant and states that 'Development will not be permitted unless it is of a high standard of design, and compatible with the scale and character of existing development and its setting. The use of innovative and contemporary materials will be welcomed, provided these enable the design to be sensitively integrated into the existing built form and landscape. All proposals must be formulated to respect the historical context of the area and its sense of place, scale, mass, form and grain of surrounding development, relationship of the proposed development to the existing townscape, including the local street pattern and landmarks and the skyline and skyspace, the prevailing rhythm and articulation of frontages, local building materials and colour, locally distinctive architectural detailing, sustainability objectives and principles of good neighbourliness'.

3.25 The development site is located within a conservation area and bounded to the north and south by the Grade II listed police station and former fire station buildings. The Laurie Arms sits centrally within the otherwise continuous frontage on Shepherd's Bush Road.

3.26 Conditional conservation area consent has been granted previously for demolition of the existing buildings on site, in connection with the consented office scheme and the buildings have been stripped out internally (in preparation for demolition). Overall the existing buildings are considered to make a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area and there would be no objections to their demolition providing that there is an acceptable proposal for a replacement building.

3.27 The overall layout of the current scheme would largely remain unaltered from that of the appeal scheme and would still replace all existing buildings on site with the exception of the rear (western) boundary wall adjacent to the train tracks. Officers support the retention of this boundary wall and the 'artwork' thereon. The proposed building would be five storeys in height to the Shepherd's Bush Road elevation, running the full length of the site, but with a split frontage around the locally listed Laurie Arms Public House (two storeys in height). To the rear of the site (west), the proposed building remains to be proposed at ten storeys in height for the full length of the site. The front and rear elements of the building would be separated by an open amenity courtyard at first floor level.

3.28 The previous scheme was refused on the basis of the harmful impact that it would have both on the conservation area and the setting of the adjoining listed buildings. The bulk, height, and scale of the proposal were felt to be in abrupt contrast to the existing street frontage. In particular, the design of the frontages with unbroken projecting brick piers rising significantly above the eaves line of the neighbouring listed buildings appeared overbearing and monumental. Furthermore, in oblique views, the deep solid brick piers would coalesce to give the buildings a wholly solid appearance.

3.29 The Inspector agreed with most of the Council's design representations, and concluded that the scheme would cause significant harm to the setting of the Police Station and the Laurie Arms PH, as well as impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area.

3.30 The inspector had no dispute with the proposed architectural style, stating 'This is not a matter of the style of the development but its relationship to the contextual setting as shaped by the historic assets'. The Inspector identified contextual design elements

common on adjoining buildings and appropriate in any new scheme; they included materials - brick and stone, the double-height entrance, the building alignment, and design connections between base, middle and top of the buildings.

3.31 Officers consider it appropriate that attention should be focussed on the buildings on the west side of Shepherd's Bush Road which form the setting. These are generally three, four, or five storeys high, clad in brick and stone, with shallow pitched roofs some with dormers behind parapets. Fenestration is traditional in form and regularly spaced. Elevations are often broken down by string courses and cornice lines which give a balance between horizontal and vertical elements.

3.32 The architect's response has been to reduce the proposed height such that the roofline meets the adjoining listed buildings more appropriately. The revised design of the facades has been strongly influenced by neighbouring buildings. It responds to the adjoining window grids, cornice, sill and roof lines.

3.33 Officers consider that the proposed facades would retain the rigour of vertical stacked rooms and the rhythm that gives. With the current scheme, this form is applied to a new architectural expression of stone base, brick body and pitched recessive roof form in a more traditional manner. The glazing would now be clearly expressed. Particular attention has been paid to overall massing, and the scheme proposes 'bookend' bays, a similar architectural device to those found on the former Fire Station and Police Station, which are used as transition elements to address the differential in scale between the Laurie Arms PH and the neighbouring larger buildings. The flank walls of these buildings are linked with the rear wall to the podium amenity space to give connectivity between all three buildings and a continuous setting for the Laurie Arms PH.

3.34 The ground floor frontage would be more legible with the design providing a framework for a series of openings to a more transparent base. The potential for a 'palais' wall with artwork celebrating the Palais, within the highly visible double height entrance lobby to the student accommodation is retained and a condition would secure further details of this to be submitted to the council (condition 10). The current scheme is considered to be more integrated into the existing urban form and respects the principles of good neighbourliness as required by national guidance in PPS1, London Plan policy and UDP policy EN8.

3.35 The design also takes into account the general character and distinctiveness of the local buildings and views to and from the site and its surroundings, such that the new buildings preserve the prominence and role of the existing buildings. New buildings on this site would be experienced obliquely. The revised proposals have been assessed in computer generated images of views obliquely along Shepherd's Bush Road. These views demonstrate that the current proposals would preserve the setting of the adjoining listed buildings and buildings of merit.

3.36 Officers consider that the applicants have taken the previously raised issues on board and have prepared a revised design which meets national guidance and London and local plan policies.

3.37 English Heritage consider the revised proposals to be contextually appropriate in terms of height, massing, materials and elevational articulation within the streetscene.

They consider that the development would now not dominate the abutting Grade II Listed Police Station nor the locally listed Laurie Arms public house.

3.38 The GLA also raise no objection in relation to design issues and consider that 'The changes to the buildings fronting Shepherd's Bush Road would, in many regards, result in a proposal that achieves greater harmony with the neighbouring heritage assets and within the streetscene.' Whilst they are of the view that the applicant has responded cautiously to the Inspector's comments on the design of the appeal scheme resulting in a lack of some of the architectural expression of the previous proposal, they conclude that the design of the scheme would now avoid harm to the setting of the neighbouring buildings and the character and setting of the conservation area.

3.39 Both the Hammersmith Society and the Hammersmith and Fulham Historic Building Groups object to the 10-storey element of the scheme which, as previously proposed would be located to the rear (west) of the site. Their objections refer to the Council's background paper on Tall Buildings which forms part of the Council's Core Strategy. This paper is accompanied by a map which indicates areas within the borough where tall buildings (generally considered to be 20m or higher) may be appropriate. The application site falls outside of such an area identified within Hammersmith Town Centre. However the background paper does not state that tall buildings will necessarily be inappropriate outside these areas, but that there may be limited scope for such buildings. The previously approved scheme for the site included a 6-storey high office block.

3.40 Whilst it is accepted that the rear building would be four storeys taller than the previously approved scheme for the site, the Inspector considered that as this part of the proposal would be set well back from the Shepherd's Bush Road frontage, it would have limited visual impact due to screening by other buildings in street views. Officers concur with this view and the visuals within the design and access statement demonstrate that this rear element of the building would be largely obscured from views along Shepherd's Bush Road. Officers therefore consider that the proposal would avoid harm to the character and appearance of the streetscene and the surrounding conservation area.

STANDARD OF ACCOMMODATION

3.41 A total of 418 student accommodation units are proposed at all levels of the development above ground floor level. All units would be self-contained with ensuite and cooking facilities, with studios being 17.4m2 GIA and accessible units being 28.3m2. The UDP does not have a specific standard for student accommodation unit sizes, and similarly The London Plan does not include specific space standards for student accommodation, though there are policies seeking to ensure high quality residential environments.

3.42 When considering the previously refused scheme, the GLA raised concerns in relation to the size of a number of units measuring 17.4m2 with provision of a centralised internal communal space of 565m2 (equating to approximately 1.2m2 per student). However, within his appeal decision, the Inspector noted that the sizes of the units would compare reasonably well with those in a number of other student accommodation schemes that have been approved across London. He also considered that whilst the units would be compact, they would be efficiently laid out, providing self- contained facilities together with space for studying and a limited area for

relaxing/socialising. Although the Inspector noted that the designated internal amenity area also included the spaces such as the post room, toilets, entrance corridor, reception, laundry and circulation space he was of the view that with the additional 147 sq.m. of study area which was considered within amendments at the Inquiry, the proposal would provide an acceptable standard of accommodation within the development.

3.43 The current scheme includes an additional 335 sq.m. of internal amenity/study area when compared with the refused scheme (which is the same as that indicated within the amendments considered by the Inspector) and the internal layout of the units remains generally the same as that considered at the Inquiry. However, the number of units and potential number of maximum occupiers have fallen. Officers are satisfied that the layout and standard of accommodation would be acceptable and appropriate for the intended use. The GLA have raised no objection in respect of this issue and accept the Inspector's view in relation to the appeal. All units would be single aspect, and mechanically ventilated, orientated east or west, and one third of each unit façade would comprise floor to ceiling glass, a number of these would face into the courtyard area. Officers previously raised concerns in relation to privacy, and noise and disturbance given the large numbers of students that could utilise this area at any one particular time. However, the design of this area is now proposed to be separated into different `zones' (details secured by condition 5) and the hours of its use would be secured through condition (condition 18) and the student management plan.

3.44 CABE's letter questioned the standard of accommodation and in particular whether the daylight/sunlight received to three rooms located on the fourth floor would be acceptable. The three rooms referred to would front onto Shepherd's Bush Road and the windows serving the rooms would be in the form of dormer windows within the roofspace rather than windows in the vertical face of the building as the majority of the remaining rooms would have. Two of these rooms would contain 2 windows, however, due to the extent that the dormer windows would project out from the roof, these rooms could potentially feel darker than other rooms in the development. As such, a condition in proposed (condition 20) requiring details of rooflights to be incorporated into the top of these dormers in order to ensure a satisfactory living environment.

3.45 Due to the layout and orientation of the development, including the proposed amenity terrace which would separate the east and western block and the fact that none of the proposed units would be north facing, Officers are satisfied that the development would provide an acceptable standard of accommodation in respect of daylight/sunlight.

3.46 Taking the above considerations into account, Officers are satisfied that the current proposed accommodation would provide a satisfactory standard of accommodation and provision for communal living and amenity space, in accordance with UDP Policy EN8 and Policy 4B.1 of The London Plan.

RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

Privacy and Outlook 3.47 Standard S13.2 of the UDP requires that there is no significant loss of outlook or privacy to occupiers of surrounding residential properties. S13.2 states that new windows should be no less than 18 metres away as measured in an arc of 60 degrees from any existing residential windows (habitable rooms).

3.48 The nearest residential properties to the application site are located in the upper floors of the adjacent former Fire Station, and the ancillary residential accommodation located above the Laurie Arms public house. The former fire station has no windows to the flank elevation facing the application site. Those windows on the projecting rear elevation closest to the development are cosmetic only and bricked up internally, no other windows fall within the specified range. The only window located at the rear of the Laurie Arms public house which would fall within the 18m range is located at ground level and does not serve the residential element of this building. Notwithstanding this, the proposed courtyard wall located at first floor level would restrict views into this window. Officers are therefore satisfied that, as with the previous proposal, the current scheme would accord with UDP Standard S13.2.

3.49 In relation to the proposed courtyard wall which would be located along the rear boundary of the Laurie Arms public house, CABE are of the view that this would dominate the rear of this building. However, there is an existing wall currently in this location and the replacement wall would be of a similar height. Its design would be such that glimpses of the landscaping to the courtyard area would be visible which, in Officers view would help to soften its visual impact. As such, Officers do not consider that when compared to the existing situation, the proposed wall would be visually dominant or demonstrably harmful in respect of outlook.

Daylight and Sunlight 3.50 New development should allow for the protection of adequate light to reach adjacent buildings. In considering this, the council has regard to the guidance set out in `Building Research Establishments' (BRE) Report 1991 'Site Layout planning for Daylight and Sunlight - A guide to good practice.' The BRE methodologies set out a range of non-statutory guidelines which need to be used in conjunction with on site judgement, in assessing the potential for any development to result in demonstrable harm.

3.51 The BRE provides for a number of ways to assess potential reduction of light. The most common methods are calculation of a Vertical Sky Component (VSC) and Average Daylight Factor (ADF). Should a development proposal meet either of these tests then it is deemed to accord with the BRE for daylight. In addition orientation to the sun is taken into account in regard to direct sunlight. Each of these methods were used by the applicant in their assessment which considers the existing situation, the consented scheme and the amended proposed development.

3.52 Vertical Sky Component (VSC) is the measure of light to a potentially affected window by calculating the angle of vertical sky at the centre of each of the windows serving a residential building which look towards the site. Obstructions, existing or proposed, in front of the window are factored into the calculation and result in a reduction in available daylight. The guidelines state that if as a result of any proposal there is reduction of less than 20% in the amount of light previously available to any window then day lighting is unlikely to be seriously affected. Average Daylight Factor (ADF) is a more detailed analysis which calculates the amount of sky visibility on the vertical face of the window and also considers the window size and room use. In relation to direct sunlight, the criteria in the BRE requires calculation of the annual probable sunlight hours, which considers the amount of sun available in both the summer and winter months for each window which faces within 90 degrees due south.

The BRE states that windows which may be adversely affected are those that lose greater than 20% of their currently available direct sunlight.

3.53 The nearest residential development is located in the upper floors of the former fire station, located adjacent to the southern boundary of the application site and the ancillary accommodation located on the first floor of the Laurie Arms PH. There are no windows to the flank walls of the former fire station building and those windows located on the projecting rear elevation closest to the application site are bricked up. Windows to the rear of the fire station building comprise kitchens and bedrooms (living rooms located to the front of the building) and face west. These are partially compromised in the existing situation by the overhanging balconies/walkways on each level. Officers have previously visited this property to verify windows and room locations and have checked the submitted assessment against the BRE guidelines.

3.54 The assessment concludes that in respect of the accommodation on the upper floors of the former fire station, the development would not cause any significant changes in light beyond what has been permitted by the previous planning permission. In particular, only two (2) windows would experience more than a 20% reduction in VSC. However, these windows serve an ancillary space to one unit rather than a habitable room, and as such, Officers do not consider that the living conditions within this flat would be significantly harmed as a result of the development.

3.55 With regards to the accommodation above the Laurie Arms PH, the assessment concludes that when compared with the consented scheme, three (3) windows would actually receive more daylight. Only one room would be materially affected, however, given the current low levels of light afforded to this room due to its location on the back addition, any change in situation would be likely to represent a high percentage alteration. With regards to sunlight issues, the BRE makes reference to living rooms being the most important habitable space for receiving sunlight. There are no living rooms located on the rear elevation of the former fire station building and the sunlight to only one room on the rear of the Laurie Arms PH would be reduced beyond the BRE recommendations. However, as this does window does not appear to serve a living room (with the main living accommodation being at the front of the building), Officers do not consider that the quality of living within this accommodation would be significantly harmed.

3.56 In conclusion, the daylight and sunlight tests submitted by the applicant and undertaken by Council officers show that the habitable rooms to neighbouring properties would not be reduced to a demonstrably harmful extent beyond those recommended by the BRE guidance. This situation has not changed from the previously refused scheme.

Noise and Disturbance 3.57 Policy EN21 of the UDP relates to environmental nuisance and states that 'all developments shall ensure that there is no undue detriment to the general amenities at present enjoyed by existing surrounding occupiers of their properties particularly where commercial and service activities are close to residential properties.' Officers previously raised concern in relation to the potential impact of the quantum of proposed student accommodation upon existing residential amenity. However, this reason for refusal (reason 2) was withdrawn prior to the public inquiry. In preparation for the Public Inquiry officers came to the view that through appropriate management of the site, the proposed student use could be accommodated in this town centre location and

therefore it was considered that this reason for refusal could not be successfully defended at appeal.

3.58 The proposal would contain an additional 37 sq.m. of leisure floor space when compared with the site's most recent use; however with the addition of student accommodation. The previously consented scheme provided leisure use with office use above, however the office use would likely have been limited to business hours.

3.59 Officers acknowledge that student housing as opposed to other town centre uses such as offices or shops, is likely to be a 24 hour use and that the proposed use is likely to lead to increased levels of activity, particularly given the potential numbers of students and staff, coming and going from the site at any particular time. However, given that the site is located within a town centre and not within a predominantly residential area, Officers consider that the comings and goings of students to and from the site (which are likely to be at staggered intervals through the day and evening) would be unlikely to result in levels of noise and disturbance within the area which would be to a demonstrably harmful extent. A student management plan has been submitted with the application and confirms that the site would be managed 24 hours a day. An onsite management team would be available Monday to Sunday from 0830 to 1730. An overnight security team would manage the site out of these hours and a 24 hour number would be available to local residents should they wish to report any issues

3.60 The use of the external amenity space was previously a concern in respect of potential noise and disturbance and privacy issues. However, within the current scheme the proposed landscaping of this space would be such that the southern end of the area (closest to the residential flats above the Old Fire Station building) would not be accessible to students. It would, however, be landscaped in order to provide visual amenity. The remainder of this space would include a variety of soft and hard landscaping, with box hedging being situated along the windows serving the student rooms which would face out onto the courtyard. It is proposed that this would serve as a privacy buffer for the occupants of such units. Further details of the soft and hard landscaping of this area would be secured by condition (condition 5). Furthermore, the hours of use of this area would be restricted by condition (condition 18) in order to protect the amenities of both surrounding occupiers and students living within the development.

3.61 Officers therefore consider that subject to conditions referred to above, the site's location within a predominantly commercial setting within the town centre is such that the impacts of the activity and movements both within the development and the surrounding area would not be demonstrably harmful to the amenities of existing surrounding residential occupiers. Officers therefore consider that in the policy context (both current and emerging) the quantum of proposed student accommodation use in this location would be acceptable, in accordance with UDP policies EN8 and EN21.

3.62 The site is located between the rail line and Shepherd's Bush Road and would therefore be exposed to noise associated with transport sources, particularly traffic noise in the evening given the proximity of student accommodation to the road. PPG24 recommends that the planning system should ensure that, wherever practicable, noise- sensitive developments are separated from major sources of noise and that those sites within noise exposure category (NEC) D should be refused. However, it acknowledges that noise mitigation measures could make a development acceptable. Should planning permission be forthcoming for this development, it is recommended that a condition

would be imposed requiring the implementation of noise mitigation measures as detailed within the noise assessment document (condition 29). Furthermore, the student rooms would be mechanically ventilated and the windows would be double-glazed. However, they would be able to open out to about 100mm, should students wish to naturally ventilate their rooms.

3.63 Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposal would not result in undue detriment to the amenities of surrounding properties in terms of noise and disturbance, and pedestrian flow, in accordance with Policy EN21 of the UDP. Subject to appropriate conditions, the environmental quality of the student accommodation is also considered to be acceptable in accordance with PPG24 and Policy EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION

3.64 The council's decision notice on the previously refused scheme included three reasons relating to transportation issues. These related to issues surrounding vehicular and pedestrian flow (reason 2); impact on traffic conditions as a result of unloading and loading (reason 3); and failure to provide acceptable cycle parking facilities (reason 8). However, two of these reasons were withdrawn prior to the Public Inquiry (reasons 2 and 8). Further details were provided in respect of the access arrangements to the cycle parking provision within the basement which was the council's main concern in respect to reason 8. TfL retracted their previous objection, and reason 2 could effectively not be sustained. Reason 3, relating to concerns surrounding loading/unloading associated with the proposal, was therefore the only transportation related issue that was considered at the Inquiry and the Inspector concluded that the proposal would give rise to a frequency and intensity of traffic on Shepherd's Bush Road as to not be objectionable.

3.65 Notwithstanding the above, the following transportation issues need to be addressed and considered for the purposes of the current proposal.

Trip generation 3.66 The site is located in Hammersmith Town Centre in an area of excellent public transport accessibility (PTAL 6b, the highest). Trip rates have been provided for the various land uses utilising a variety of methods and in line with the appeal proposals. This represents a similar trip profile to the appeal scheme, which is considered to be an acceptable assessment given the modest changes made to the proposal.

3.67 The vast majority of trips to the development are likely to be made on foot and by public transport. Given the nature of the bus and rail networks that serve the site modest increases in patronage have been predicted per vehicle which can be accommodated by the existing networks. TfL also consider that the impact of the proposal could be accommodated on the local transport network.

3.68 In order to achieve the trip patterns predicted the refinement and monitoring of the two draft travel plans should be secured as part of the s106 agreement for the various land uses which make up the development. TfL have also requested that the submitted travel plans are developed further, and have confirmed that they are happy for this to be through condition or a s106 legal agreement.

Parking 3.69 The development proposes four parking bays for disabled people or those with impaired movement, which is in accordance with the requirements of UDP policy TN15 and these would be secured by condition (condition 13). There are no further off-street parking spaces associated with the proposal, and whilst TfL have requested conditions to restrict students from applying for parking permits officers do not consider that this is necessary, as the students would not be eligible to apply for permits in any event, given that the accommodation would not be their permanent residential address.

3.70 Policy TN6, Standard S20 and Table 12.2 of the UDP set out the cycle parking requirements for developments. In terms of student accommodation one cycle parking space per two students would be required, therefore 209 cycle spaces. The proposed development would provide a total 222 parking spaces with around half of these at ground floor level. This is considered acceptable given the high level of public transport accessibility. The ground floor level cycle parking would be accessed through the vehicular entrance to the car parking area and those spaces located in the basement would be accessible by a staircase with a track running alongside the stairwell to facilitate wheeling cycles to the basement. This provision is considered to be in accordance with Policy TN6 and Standard S20 and Table 12.2 of the UDP.

Highway performance 3.71 The council previously raised concern in relation to issues surrounding loading and unloading associated with the arrival/departures of students at the beginning and end of terms and the potential impact that this would have upon congestion on Shepherd's Bush Road. However, the Inspector gave substantial weight to the exceptional public transport accessibility level of the site and considered that clear information on this and on the (limited) availability of parking could be given to students as a means of encouraging public transport use. He also gave considerable weight to TfL's view that with robust measures to prevent congestion at the start and end of term, they did not object to the proposal in this respect. Therefore, in light of the Inspector's view regarding the appeal proposal, it is deemed that with robust travel plans in place which addresses the start and end of term travel arrangements for students, as well as travel arrangements in respect of the end leisure and retail uses, the impact of the development would not compromise the function of Shepherd's Bush Road, and that the proposal would be in accordance with UDP policy TN8 and policy 3C.2 of The London Plan.

Servicing 3.72 Servicing of the development would take place on street in accordance with the restrictions on Shepherd's Bush Road. This is acceptable, on balance providing that a servicing and delivery management plan would be required as part of the s106 agreement, which TfL have also requested. ACCESS

3.73 The Council's adopted Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) 'Access for All' is relevant in consideration of the acceptability of the scheme in terms of disabled access. London Plan Policy 4B.5 - 'Creating an inclusive environment' and the corresponding draft replacement London Plan policy 7.2 seek to ensure that proposals achieve the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion.

3.74 The amended development proposal would provide 23 accessible units (2 per floor above from second to ninth floor levels), representing 5.5% of development), which would exceed the 5% British Standard ('Access for All' SPD) requirement. The Hammersmith and Fulham Disability Forum welcome this increase in provision from the previously refused scheme. Whilst the GLA note that the design of the units is flexible to allow all units to be adapted to future wheelchair use, if required, they consider that the applicant should demonstrate how a proportion of the units could be adapted for use by wheelchair users, in order to ensure that at least 10% of the units would be accessible or adaptable. The figure of 10% is sought in case the student accommodation comes to be be offered at times, as it is in other parts of London, for overnight conference, tourist or hotel accommodation (out of term time). Condition 14 requires such information to be provided).

3.75 Refuge bays would be provided on all levels and four disabled parking spaces would be provided at ground level level, with lift access into the property. The provision and permanent retention of these spaces would be secured by condition (condition 13).

3.76 The Inspector considered the appropriate minimum provision in this student accommodation should be 5%, and it is therefore important to ensure that in addition to the bedroom space required by wheelchair user or other disabled student, that there is suitable space for study, mobility, cooking and for any extra storage arising from a disability need in each unit. Imperial College disability office and national organisations representing disabled students are known to be concerned that adequate space should be available in accessible study bedrooms. Without the accessible study bedrooms in this development providing a minimum provision of suitable size accommodation, disabled students including those who are borough residents, may have no choice but to move to other accommodation centres that are remote from local college and University campuses, or from local family and carer support networks on which disabled students may rely.

3.77 Comments from Hammersmith and Fulham Disability Planning Forum relate to fenestration markings, internal fit-out requirements and accessible toilets in communal student and leisure parts of the complex. As a new building, detailed fit-out facilities are covered by Building Regulation requirements. These apply irrespective of whether communal areas in the building are for public or ancillary student use, and include the reasonable access provision required of all new construction in Parts M and N of the building regulations.

3.78 With the amendments made to the previously refused scheme and subject to conditions and the S106 agreement, officers consider the overall accessibility of the scheme to now be acceptable in accordance with BS 8300 referred to within Council's Access for All SPD, Policy G4(4) of the UDP and London Plan Policies 4B.5 'Creating an Inclusive Environment' and draft replacement London Plan policies 7.2 and 3.8.

CONTAMINATION

3.79 The site is located in proximity to a number of historical potentially contaminative land uses including a former coal depot and a former fire station. Therefore, in order to ensure that no unacceptable risks are caused to the wider environment during and following the development works, and in accordance with policies GO, G3, EN20A and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, conditions relating to submitting a contaminated

land desktop study and a validation report (if so required) are recommended (condition 26 and 27).

CRIME PREVENTION

3.80 Policy EN10 of the UDP requires developments to provide a safe and secure environment. Details have been provided regarding measures that would contribute to achieving secured by design standards for the site, including CCTV, secure reception area with 24 hour attendance, and fob key entry etc. Officers raise no objection to the scheme on these grounds and a condition is recommended requiring submission of details relating to how the whole scheme would satisfactorily achieve secured by design standards (condition 17).

REFUSE and RECYCLING

3.81 Refuse storage associated with the proposal would be located at basement level. However, further details of the refuse and recycling facilities would be required by condition, including a demonstration of how refuse servicing would not affect the use of the public highway. Such details would be required prior to commencement of development to ensure compliance with policies EN17 and TN8 of the UDP and the council's SPD on the storage and refuse of recycling (condition 16).

ENERGY, SUSTAINABILITY, FLOOD RISK

Air quality 3.82 An assessment of current and expected future local air quality has been carried out by the applicants, focusing on nitrogen dioxide and particle (PM10) levels. The potential future exposure of residents is also assessed. Traffic flows on Shepherd's Bush Road and other roads in the vicinity such as Hammersmith Broadway are predicted to increase by c.5% from current levels by the time the new development would become operational in 2012. Officers concur with this assessment.

3.83 The results of the assessment show that levels of No2 and PM10 are expected to reduce from their current levels by 2012, due to expected improvements in vehicle technologies and fuels helping to reduce emissions. PM10 objectives would be met around the site however No2 levels are predicted to still be 5% higher than the governments objective. Given No2 levels are predicted to continue to fall beyond 2012 and the small margin of exceedence this is not considered a significant concern. Mechanical ventilation is planned for the residential units in any event, so residents would have a choice of whether or not to naturally ventilate their rooms.

Energy 3.84 As required by the London Plan policy 4A.4, an Energy Demand Assessment has been carried out to calculate the likely energy use from heating, hot water, cooling, lighting, electrical equipment in order to check the building's baseline Co2 emissions. These are calculated to be 1,064 tonnes of Co2 per year. Through improved design and layout, and integration of energy efficiency measures, this baseline Co2 emission rate is calculated to reduce by about 10%, down to 957 tonnes of CO2 a year. The use of two Combined Heat and Power systems are proposed for the development, which is calculated to reduce Co2 emissions by a further 123 tonnes a year. Installation of solar panels on the roof is also expected to reduce emissions by about 4 tonnes of Co2 a

year. In total the sustainable energy measures are calculated to reduce annual Co2 emissions by 220 tonnes, in line with the requirements of The London Plan.

3.85 The GLA's response advised that further information on the load profiles of the two CHP systems and the passive measures of the cooling elements should be provided. However, the applicant has advised that such details will not be possible to provide until the requirements for the proposed leisure facility are finalised. This information would therefore be recommended to be submitted under the requirements of condition 33.

3.86 The integration of renewable energy technologies has also been assessed and some are deemed to be inappropriate for the site, with limited space being a key problem. However, there is some available space for 70m2 of solar PV roof panels on the Western block. The Eastern block roof is not suitable as there is too much shading to make it a suitable area for solar panels to be installed. Although the panels are only expected to reduce Co2 levels by 1% (equivalent to 5 tonnes a year), which is some way from the 20% target in London Plan policy 4A.7, no other technology is feasible and only a relatively small area of roof space is available for un-shaded use. The development's other sustainable energy measures reduce Co2 emissions by 224 tonnes a year, so overall the measures planned for implementation would significantly reduce Co2 emissions compared to the expected emissions if the building was built to minimum Building Regulations standards.

3.87 The GLA requested the applicant to model, and commit to additional measures that can be adopted to enable the development to exceed the 2010 Building Regulations compliance through energy efficiency alone. The applicant has responded to the GLA advising that the current design is likely to exceed Part L Building Regulations by approximately 7.6%. However, the GLA have not responded to date to confirm whether they are happy with this response. As such, the requirements of condition 33 would expect the requested information to be provided.

Sustainable Design and Construction 3.88 The development has been designed to meet the `very good' rating under BREEAM (the BRE's Environmental Assessment Method for assessing environmental performance of new buildings), which shows a significant number of measures have been incorporated into the building design to reduce its environmental impacts. Whilst further information and clarification is required regarding the CHP proposals and overheating issues (which would be submitted under condition 34), the proposals are considered acceptable in principle.

3.89 Whilst the GLA commented that the applicant has not provided details of a sustainable urban drainage system nor consideration to rainwater harvesting, this information was provided within the Flood Risk assessment and outline Water Strategy submitted with the application. Officers found the details to be acceptable and therefore recommend a condition requiring implementation to be in accordance with the report (condition 35).

3.90 The GLA also require the applicant to provide a commitment to ensure that the development is designed to connect to a future district heating scheme should one become available in the vicinity. The applicant has confirmed agreement to this which can be secured by condition. (condition 36)

3.91 The property is located within Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3. Student halls of residence are identified in PPS25 as a 'more vulnerable' type development. Accommodation is proposed from first floor level and above only. The level of existing hard standing surfaces on site (100%) will not increase as a result of the proposed development however PPS25 requires new development to ensure surface water runoff is appropriately managed within the site boundaries. A Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted with the application and concludes that the surface water runoff from the site would present a risk but that there is no actual tidal, ground water risk to the site. A Surface Water Runoff Management Strategy has also been submitted and officers have found this satisfactory and raise no objection on flood risk grounds. Condition 35 requires the development to be carried out in accordance with the submitted Flood Risk Assessment.

S106 Heads of Terms 3.92 A section 106 was negotiated with the applicant for the purposes of the public inquiry in the event that the planning Inspector granted planning permission and conservation area consent. It is proposed that the heads of terms agreed for the inquiry would generally remain for the purposes of this application should permission be forthcoming. These would relate to: (i) ensuring that the accommodation shall be for use of students only studying a course full-time in a further educational institution in London (ii) a contribution towards securing local employment opportunities during the construction of the development and regeneration of the town centre (iii) highways works to be carried out in the locality of the site, at the applicant's expense (iv) submission of travel plans relating to the leisure and retail elements of the scheme (v) a Construction Logistics Management Plan and a Servicing Management Plan to be submitted (vi) marketing of the accessible units

4.0 CONCLUSION and RECOMMENDATION

4.1 Taking the above considerations into account, including the views of the Inspector within the appeal decision, officers consider that the proposed redevelopment of the former Palais site would be acceptable in land use terms and would provide a satisfactory standard of accommodation for its future occupiers without prejudice to the amenities of existing surrounding occupiers. The scheme is considered to have satisfactorily addressed the design concerns raised within the appeal decision and the proposal is considered to be acceptable in this regard. The proposal is also considered to be acceptable and in accordance with relevant national guidance, London Plan policies and UDP policies and standards relating to inclusive access, transport, environmental impacts and sustainability. Therefore, subject to the planning conditions and a legal agreement as set out in this report, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

4.2 The proposed demolition is considered to be acceptable on the basis that planning permission would exist for a satisfactory redevelopment scheme. Accordingly, it is not considered that the demolition would have an unacceptable impact on the character or appearance of the conservation area, and it is recommended that conservation area consent be granted.

------Ward : Hammersmith Broadway

Site Address : Hammersmith Palais 242 Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7NL

Reg. No : Case Officer : 2010/03499/CAC Sophie Morris

Date Valid : Conservation Area : 04.11.2010 : Hammersmith Broadway Conservation Area - Number 22 Committee Date : 09.02.2011

Applicant : London And Regional (Hammersmith) Ltd C/o Agent

Description : Demolition of all existing buildings and structures, excluding the western boundary wall. Drg Nos: P2101;P2401;P2103;P2403;P1100;P2002;P2303;P2003;P2304;P2102;P2001;P2302;P 2100;P2400;P2000;P2301;P2402;P23001 Rev 1.

Application Type : Conservation Area Consent

Officer Recommendation :

That the application be approved subject to the condition(s) set out below:

1) The works hereby granted consent shall not commence later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date upon which this consent is granted.

Condition required to be imposed by Section 18(1)(a) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended by section 91 of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004).

2) The demolition of the building hereby permitted shall not be undertaken before:

- a building contract for the redevelopment of the site in accordance with planning permission reference 2010/03497/FUL has been entered into and - notice of demolition in writing and a copy of the building contract has been submitted to the Council

To ensure that the demolition does not take place prematurely and to safeguard the character and appearance of the conservation area, in accordance with policy EN2 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

3) None of the demolition works hereby granted consent shall be undertaken before a scheme for temporary fencing and/or enclosure of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, and such enclosure has been erected in accordance with the approved details. The enclosure of the site shall be remain in place for the duration of the works.

To ensure that the site remains in a tidy condition during and after demolition works and during the construction phase and to prevent harm to the street scene and character and appearance of the conservation area, in accordance with policy EN2 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

4) Prior to the hereby approved demolition work taking place, a detailed photographic survey of the interior and exterior of the property shall be carried out and a copy lodged with the Archives of the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham.

To ensure that a proper record is made of the building of merit prior to its demolition and so that this information is made available to the appropriate statutory bodies, in accordance with Policies, EN2, EN6 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

Justification for Approving the Application :

1) The proposed demolition is considered to be acceptable on the basis that planning permission exists for a satisfactory redevelopment scheme. Accordingly, it is not considered that the demolition would have an unacceptable impact on the character or appearance of the conservation area, in accordance with Policy EN2 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

------

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

All Background Papers held by Michael Merrington (Ext: 3453) :

Application form received: 3rd November 2010 Drawing Nos: see above

Policy documents: The Revised London Plan 2008 Unitary Development Plan as amended September 2007.

Consultation Comments :

Comments from: Dated:

Government Office For London 20.01.11

Please see joint report under application ref: 2010/03497/FUL elsewhere on this agenda.

------Ward : Addison

Site Address : The Old Mill House And The Mill House Miller's Way London W6 7NH

Reg. No : Case Officer : 2010/03576/FUL Katherine Wood

Date Valid : Conservation Area : 28.10.2010 : Shepherds Bush Conservation Area - Number 21

Committee Date : 09.02.2011

Applicant : The Old Mill And Mill House LLP C/o Agent

Description : Erection of a four-storey in-fill extension between the Old Mill House and the Mill House and erection of two additional floors to both buildings, in connection with the change of use of the property from offices (B1) to nine self-contained residential units, with eight car parking spaces at ground floor level and associated landscaping. Drg Nos: 010 P2; 011 P3; 012 P3; 013 P2; 014 P2; 015 P2; 016 P2;020 P2; 021 P1; 022 P3; 023 P3; 024 P3; 025 P1

Application Type : Full Detailed Planning Application

Officer Recommendation :

That the application be approved subject to the condition(s) set out below:

1) The development hereby permitted shall not commence later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this planning permission.

Condition required to be imposed by section 91(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2) The building development shall not be erected otherwise than in accordance with the following approved plans: 010 P2; 011 P3; 012 P3; 013 P2; 014 P2; 015 P2; 016 P2;020 P2; 021 P1; 022 P3; 023 P3; 024 P3; 025 P1.

In order to ensure full compliance with the planning application hereby approved and to prevent harm arising through deviations from the approved plans, in accordance with policies EN2, EN6 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

3) No development shall take place until details of the materials, including samples and details of brickwork bond and pointing style and a sample of the new glazing, to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the council. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order that the Council may be satisfied as to the details of the development in the interests of visual amenity of the area in accordance with policies EN2, EN6 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

4) The development hereby permitted shall not commence until details of the hard and soft landscaping of all areas external to the building, including planting, paving, boundary walls, fences, gates and other means of enclosure, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, and the development shall not be occupied or used until such landscaping as is approved has been carried out.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance, satisfactory provision for soft landscaping and to ensure that the development permits access for all, in accordance with the Council's 'Access for All' SPD general guidance and Policies EN8 and EN2 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

5) Prior to the occupation of the development, the vertical full-height window on the south elevation at third floor level shall be obscurely glazed and fixed shut, and permanently so maintained.

To prevent overlooking and loss of privacy to the residents of the neighbouring properties, in accordance with standard S13.2 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

6) The development shall not be occupied until 1.7m high obscurely-glazed screens have been first erected on the western elevation of the roof terraces to the proposed apartment nos. 3 and 6, as shown on drawings nos. 011 P3; 012 P3; 023 P3 and 024 P3. A sample of the obscure glazing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the council prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be permanently retained in this form.

To avoid unduly affecting the amenities of the neighbouring premises by reason of overlooking or loss of privacy, in accordance with Standard S13 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

7) The development shall not commence until a statement of how 'Secured by Design' requirements are to be adequately achieved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The approved details shall be carried out prior to occupation or use of the development hereby approved and permanently maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council.

To ensure a safe and secure environment for occupiers of the development, in accordance with Policy EN10 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

8) The development hereby permitted shall not commence until full details of how the development would accord with Lifetime Homes standards taking account of general guidance in the Council's adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance (Access for All) and, as relevant to this development, the Mayor's Interim Edition Housing Design Guide 2010, have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure that the proposal provides an inclusive and accessible environment in accordance with the Council's 'Access for All' Supplementary Planning Document and London Plan Policy 4B.5.

9) The development shall not commence until full details of the strategy for the storage and collection of refuse/recycling for the new development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The strategy shall include details and location of the proposed refuse/recycling stores to be provided as part of the development and how access would be given for refuse to be collected. The refuse and recycling facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to first use or occupation of the developemnt hereby approved, and shall thereafter be permanently retained.

In order to ensure a satisfactory provision for refuse and recycling, in accordance with Policy EN17 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007 and the Council's Storage of Refuse and Recyclables Supplementary Planning Document.

10) The development shall not be occupied until details of all proposed artificial and external lighting, including any security lights have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The submitted details shall include their proposed locations, design and height and shall demonstrate that the recommendations of the Institution of Lighting Engineers in the `Guidance Notes For The Reduction Of Light Pollution 2005' have been taken into account in respect of: - minimising glare, - limiting the use of lights to periods of need for safety, security or permitted site use, - preventing upward illumination and sky glow, - controlling vertical illuminance of neighbouring property facades to a maximum of 10 lux at ground floor level and 5 lux at first floor.

To ensure that lighting does not adversely affect occupiers of the surrounding premises, in accordance with Policies EN20C and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

11) The development shall not commence until details of a Noise Exposure Category (NEC) assessment (according to PPG24) is submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The assessment shall also include details of sound insulation measures for the building envelope, orientation of habitable rooms away from the major external noise sources and silenced mechanical ventilation with air intake from the cleanest aspect, in order that `Good' internal room and (if provided) external amenity noise standards will be achieved, in accordance with BS8233:1999. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained, unless subsequently otherwise approved in writing by the Council.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site is not adversely affected by noise from transport noise, in accordance with policies EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

12) The development shall not commmence until details of the external noise level emitted from any plant/ machinery/ equipment and mitigation measures have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The measures shall ensure that the external noise level emitted from plant, machinery/ equipment will be lower than the existing background noise level by at least 10 dBA, as assessed according to BS4142:1997 at noise sensitive premises, with all machinery operating together. Approved details shall be implemented prior to occupation of the development and thereafter be permanently retained, unless subsequently otherwise approved in writing by the Council.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site and surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise from mechanical installations/ equipment and their uses, in accordance with policies EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

13) No occupier of the new residential units hereby permitted, with the exception of disabled persons who are blue badge holders, shall apply to the council for a parking permit or retain such a permit and if such a permit is issued it shall be surrendered to the Council within seven days of written demand.

In order to ensure that the development does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties by adding to the already high level of on-street car parking stress in the area, in accordance with Policy TN15 and standard S18.1 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

14) The development shall not be occupied until such time as a scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority to ensure that all occupiers, other than those with disabilities who are blue badge holders, have no entitlement to parking permits from the council and to ensure that occupiers are informed, prior to occupation, of such restriction. The development shall not be used otherwise than in accordance with the approved scheme unless prior written agreement is issued by the council.

In order that the prospective occupiers of the flats are made aware of the fact that they will not be entitled to an on-street car parking permit, in the interests of the proper management of parking, and to ensure that the development does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties by adding to the already high level of on-street car parking stress in the area, in accordance with Policy TN15 and standard S18.1 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

15) The development shall not be occupied until the council has been notified in writing (and has acknowledged such notification) of the full postal address of the nine flats within the Mill House and Old Mill House site. Such notification shall be to the Council's Head of Development Management and shall quote the planning application number specified in this decision letter.

In order that the Council can update its records to ensure that parking permits are not issued to the occupiers of the new residential units hereby approved, and thus ensure that the development does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties by adding to the already high level of on- street car parking stress in the area, in accordance with Policy TN15 and standard S18.1 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

16) The development shall not commence until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The details shall include any external illumination of the site during construction, contractors' method statements, waste classification and disposal procedures and locations, dust and noise monitoring and control, provisions within the site to ensure that all vehicles associated with the construction works are properly washed and cleaned to prevent the passage of mud and dirt onto the highway, and other matters relating to traffic management to be agreed. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plan.

To ensure no unacceptable adverse effect on the amenities of surrounding occupiers in accordance with policies EN20A, EN20B, EN20C and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

17) The development shall not commence until a Vehicle Management Plan for the vehicle access has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The management plan shall include a strategy for avoiding conflict with pedestrians (including a plan for the demarcation of pedestrian and vehicle routes on Miller's Way and a plan showing how two approaching vehicles would manoeuvre pass one another). The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the Vehicle Management Plan.

To ensure that the development does not result in conflict with vehicles or pedestrians using the highway and Miller's Way, in accordance with Policies TN5 and TN8 and standard S23.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

18) Prior to the commencement of any works on site a chestnut paling fence or similar barrier of a height not less than 1.5 metres shall be erected at a radius of no less than 3 metres from the trunk of each tree to be retained; the area thus enclosed shall be kept clear of all excavated materials, building materials, plant and rubbish. Further, the destruction by burning of materials shall not take place within 10 metres of the furthest extent of the canopy of any tree on the site or adjoining land.

In order to adequately safeguard the trees in the vicinity of the building works and in the interests of visual amenity, in accordance with policy EN25 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

19) No development shall commence until a desktop study, site investigation scheme, intrusive investigation and risk assessment have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The desk study will identify all previous site uses, potential contaminants associated with those uses, a conceptual model of the site

indicating sources, pathways and receptors and any potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The site investigation scheme will provide information for an assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. The risk assessment will assess the degree and nature of any contamination on site and to assess the risks posed by any contamination to human health, controlled waters and the wider environment. A detailed method statement for any required remediation works will need to be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Council. All works must be carried out by a competent person conforming to CLR 11: Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (DEFRA 2004).

To ensure that no unacceptable risks are caused to humans, controlled waters or the wider environment during and following the development works, in accordance with policies G0, G3, EN20A and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

20) No development shall commence until any required remediation works have been completed and a validation report to verify these works has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Council unless otherwise authorised. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site the Council is to be informed immediately and no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council) shall be carried out until a report indicating the nature of the contamination and how it is to be dealt with is submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Council. Any required remediation should be detailed and verified in an amendment to the remediation statement. All works must be carried out by a competent person conforming to CLR 11: Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (DEFRA 2004).

21) The cast iron lamps and foundation stone at the Old Mill House, and the clock tower at the Mill House, shall be preserved during construction and retained within the development. Details of the final position of these features shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council prior to development commencing. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the agreed details.

To ensure the preservation of features of interest in accordance with Policies EN6 and EN2 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

22) Prior to the occupation of the development, the 9 cycle parking spaces shown on drawing no.101 Rev.P2 shall be provided. Thereafter they shall be permanently available and accessible for the storage of bicycles for the residents within the development.

To ensure the provision of bicycle spaces in accordance with Policy TN6 and standard S20.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

Justification for Approving the Application :

1) 1. Land Use: It has been demonstrated that the existing office space is surplus to requirements. The redevelopment of the site is in compliance with London Plan Policies 3A.2 and 3B.2. The proposal would provide a mix of family and non-family units and would contribute to much needed additional housing, in accordance with London Plan Policies 3A.1 and 3A.3. The scheme would help to meet the London Plan target of 30,500 net additional homes to be delivered per annum in London and the local targets of 450 and 615 net additional dwellings per annum, in accordance with the aims of PPS3 which seeks to create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas.

2. Design: The proposal would bring a Building of Merit back into active use without causing harm to its character or appearance. The development would make innovative use of materials and design and is not considered to cause harm within the street scene or to the conservation area. It would not detrimentally affect the setting of the adjacent listed building. Policies EN2, EN6, EN3 and EN8B of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007, Policies 4A.3 and 4B.1 of The London Plan as amended 2008 and PPS1 and PPS5 would thereby be satisfied.

3. Highways: Subject to conditions there would be no adverse impact on traffic generation and the scheme would not result in congestion of the local road network. Satisfactory provision would be made for cycle parking and car parking, to help prevent overspill of parking onto the local highways. The accessibility level of the site is excellent, and there are public transport and other services are available nearby. Adequate provision for storage and collection of refuse and recyclables would be provided. The proposal is thereby in accordance with Policies EN17, TN4, TN6, TN15 and Standards S18.1 and S20.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

4. Amenity: Occupiers of the proposed units would have sufficient internal floor space, lighting and aspect. There would be a sufficient amount of private amenity space provided to meet the requirements of future occupiers of the proposed units. The proposal thereby satisfies the requirements of Policy EN23 and standards S5, S7 and S13.3 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

5. Access: The development would comply with Lifetime Homes standards and would provide a safe and secure environment for all users in accordance with Policy EN10 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007, Policy 3A.5 of The London Plan as amended 2008 and the Council's adopted supplementary planning document 'Access for all'.

6. Residential Amenity: The impact of the proposed development upon adjoining occupiers is considered acceptable. In this regard, the proposal would accord with UDP Policy EN8, which requires developments to be of high quality design which, amongst other things, respects the principles of good neighbourliness, and with standard S13 which requires that there be no significant loss of outlook or privacy to neighbouring occupiers and that no new roof terraces nor balconies be created, use of which might cause harm to the amenities of neighbours by reason of noise and disturbance.

------

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

All Background Papers held by Michael Merrington (Ext: 3453) :

Application form received: 27th October 2010 Drawing Nos: see above

Policy documents: The Revised London Plan 2008 Unitary Development Plan as amended September 2007.

Consultation Comments :

Comments from: Dated:

Grampian Residents Association 22.11.10

Grampian Residents Association 25.11.10

Neighbour Comments :

Letters from: Dated:

42 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7LY 06.12.10 12, Ashley Drive North Ashley Heath Ringwood Hants 04.12.10 51 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7LY 09.12.10 41 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7LY 09.12.10 101 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7LZ 03.12.10 64 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7LY 09.12.10 133 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7NB 09.12.10 165 The Grampians Shepherd's Bush Road London W6 7NB 23.11.10 101 The Grampians 29.11.10 NAG 22.11.10 NAG 07.12.10 NAG 07.12.10

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 The application site relates to two separate adjacent buildings, known as the Old Mill House and the Mill House, located to the rear of Shepherd's Bush Baptist Church which is on Shepherd's Bush Road. The site is accessed from Miller's Way. The Old Mill House is a four storey industrial building dating from 1894 which is on the Local

Register of Buildings of Merit.The Mill House is a modern two storey building built in the 1980s. Both buildings were in use as Class B1 offices. The site is bounded by residential blocks of flats on three sides: The Grampians to the south, the flank wall of Romney Court to the north and the car park and upper floor deck of Roseford Court to the east. To the west lies the hostel and offices behind the Baptist Church at 1A Shepherd's Bush Road. The site is within the Shepherd's Bush Conservation Area and Shepherd's Bush Town Centre. It is within the Environment Agency's Flood Risk Zone 1, which is the area of lowest risk to flooding.

1.2 Consent was granted in 2010 (ref: 2010/03314/TREE) to fell three trees on the site: an ash, a sycamore and a leyland cyprus, and to raise the crown of a lime tree overhanging Miller's Way (none of these trees were subject to a tree preservation order). No other relevant planning history relates to the site.

1.3 The current application is for the erection of a four-storey in-fill extension between the Old Mill House and the Mill House and erection of two additional floors to both buildings, in connection with the change of use of the property from offices (B1) to nine self-contained residential units, with eight car parking spaces at ground floor level and associated landscaping.

2.0 PUBLICITY AND CONSULTATIONS

2.1 Notification letters were sent to 510 surrounding properties and residents' associations and a site and press notice were posted. Eleven responses have been received from individual neighbours in the Grampians and the Grampians Residents' Association and the Shepherd's Bush Baptist Church

The following objections and concerns have been raised:

- Development would lead to loss of light for flats within the Grampians - Loss of privacy from new windows and southern glass roof - Building would appear as six storeys rather than four as the Grampians are on a lower level. - Harm to the TPO'd horse chestnut tree which is on the Grampians property - Risk of flooding and too many flats attached to sewerage system - Development may cause structural damage to the Grampians - Development would affect the setting of the Grampians which is a listed building - Loss of property value - Development represents a major change of use (B1 offices to C3 residential) in a conservation area - Access road not capable of supporting extra traffic - Noise and disturbance from additional flats - Applicants do not have right of way over privately-owned Miller's Way.

2.2 Officers' note: matters relating to property value are not valid reasons for objecting to a planning application. The structural stability of the development and neighbouring properties is a matter for building control, but the development would not involve lowering existing floor levels. The site is within Flood Risk Zone 1, the lowest flood risk zone and Thames Water have not objected to the proposed development in relation to its impact on the existing sewerage network. The proposed south-facing roof would be constructed from lead, not glass. Issues of land ownership are not matters for planning,

although this issue will be discussed further below. The planning issues raised will be considered in the report below.

2.3 Thames Water has responded to the consultation process, raising no objection.

3.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 The main planning issues to be considered in the light of relevant national policy, London Plan and Unitary Development Plan policies and standards include the principle of development in land use terms, the impact of the design and scale of the proposed extensions, the effect on residential amenity of adjoining properties, the quality of the proposed residential units, impact on trees and highways impacts and parking

Land use and residential density 3.2 Whilst the Council does not have any UDP policies concerned with the retention of Class B1 office space, the assessment of any changes of use is guided by national policy and the London Plan policies on employment land and residential development. These policies specify that 'employment land and premises should be retained where needed and intensified where appropriate, but that surplus land or premises should be released to provide for increased housing either as a single use or as a mixed use scheme' (PPS3 Housing para. 38 and 44 and London Plan policies 3A.2 and 3B.2).

3.3 The proposal is to change the use of both buildings, which currently provide approximately 650 sq.m. of office space, to Class C3 residential use in a scheme comprising one 1-bedroom and eight 2-bedroom flats. The application has been accompanied by a marketing report that outlines the current office letting conditions in the local area including Shepherd's Bush and Hammersmith Town Centre. Details of an ongoing marketing exercise by Wilmots of these particular premises is also appended to this statement. The offices within both buildings have been marketed at a competitive rate for a period of over a year, but despite several viewings there have been no offers of lettings during this period and the buildings have remained vacant. The report suggests that the buildings themselves are unlikely to be suitable for occupation by office users seeking more modern IT enabled office accommodation and that the more medium size of office unit is likely to be less in demand than either smaller or larger units. For this reason, the offices have failed to let.

3.4 It is considered that this evidence demonstrates that the existing office use is surplus to requirements. Despite being in a town centre, the site is a backland site surrounded by residential properties and the marketing attempts to date have indicated that the offices are unlikely to let in this location. The proposed use would bring the buildings back into an active use, suitable for this town centre location.

3.5 Policy 3A.1 of the Mayor's London Plan states that 30,500 net additional homes should be delivered per annum in London. Of this, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham has a target to deliver 450 net additional dwellings per annum. In the Core Strategy it is proposed that the target would increase to a target of 615 additional homes per annum. The proposed redevelopment to provide 9 residential units would contribute to these targets. The quality of the proposed residential accommodation and the effects of the proposed additions will be considered further below, but in principle the change of use is considered appropriate and in compliance with London Plan policies 3A.2 and 3B.2 and national guidance.

3.6 The proposed density would be 458 habitable rooms/hectare or 153 dwellings/hectare. The site has a PTAL of 6. The proposed density falls within the London Plan's density matrix for an "urban" site which would give a guideline density for acceptability of between 200 and 700 hr/ha. Given the considerable site constraints of this site including relationship to neighbouring residential property and the need to sensitively re-use a Building of Merit, it may not be desirable to try to achieve a greater number of units and a higher density within this scheme; and the proposed density is therefore considered acceptable in this context.

Impact of Design and Scale 3.7 Policies EN8 and EN8B of the UDP require new developments and extensions to buildings to have 'a high standard of design, and state that the physical character of new development should respond to that of the surrounding area, taking into account amongst others historical context, height, scale, massing, form, grain and use of materials. Although use of innovative and contemporary materials is encouraged, these must be sensitively integrated into the existing built form and townscape'. Policy EN2 states that 'development within conservation areas, including alterations or additions to existing buildings, will only be permitted if the character or appearance of the conservation area is preserved or enhanced' Policy EN6 states 'that development will not be permitted if it would result in the demolition, loss or harmful alteration to buildings, structures and artefacts that are of local townscape, architectural or historic interest, including all buildings identified on the council's Register of Buildings of Merit'. Development should also preserve the setting of statutorily listed buildings, in accordance with Policy EN3.

3.8 This backland site is concealed from all public vantage points, and Miller's Way is a private access road and not public highway. There are buildings of 6, 12 and 19 storeys on three sides of the site. Whilst it would be considered important to preserve the character of the Building of Merit, then, it is also acknowledged that the existing buildings contribute little to the townscape. The extensions to the Old Mill House would consist of two additional floors, stepped back from the front of the building by 2m and 6.5m. The additional floors would be constructed from brickwork to match the main building, with glazed front elevations and a pitched zinc-clad roof to the upper storey. Whilst the extensions would create additional height and bulk, the set-back means that the additional levels would be recessive viewed from ground level. The prominence of the form and façade of the Old Mill House as viewed from the courtyard would not be undermined by the development, and it is thus considered that the development would cause no significant harm to the character of the Building of Merit.

3.9 The adjacent modern Mill House is of less architectural merit. Additions to this building would consist of an upward extension of the rear part of the building, continuing the sloped side roof profile, terminating in a pitched roof at second floor level. Between the two buildings, an in-fill extension would be constructed, with a lightweight fully glazed front elevation which would appear visually subservient to the solidity of the existing buildings on either side. The extensions to all parts of the buildings would form a coherent architectural approach and would be constructed from of high quality materials

3.10 It is noted that the Grampians, to the south of the site, is a Grade II listed building. This building is 12 storeys in height and the rear of the building, where the application site is located, is dominated by densely built 19th and 20th century buildings of between 4 and 6 storeys in height, and rising to 19 storeys to the east. The proposed

development would add to this mix, but would not result in a development out of scale with its context. The setting of the listed building would not be affected significantly by development to the rear, and the prominence of its public facades and the views of the building from the surrounding area would remain unaffected.

3.11 It is therefore considered that the proposed development would not result in harm to the character of the building of merit or the conservation area or the setting of the adjacent listed building, and is appropriate in scale and design. The proposal thus complies with Policies EN2, EN3, EN6 and EN8.

Residential amenity 3.12 The additional storeys to the Mill House have been designed to follow the pitch of the existing roof, and would thus slope away from the rear elevation of the Grampians at an angle of 45 degrees. The Grampians has a projecting annex with windows on the north elevation facing towards the proposed development. Most of these windows serve studio rooms (which also have windows facing east) although some of the flats have the original one-bedroom layout with the north facing window serving a bedroom. Flats at ground, first and second floor level face on to the existing vertical brick wall and sloping roof, and the outlook to these flats would not be significantly affected as the angle of the sloping roof would remain the same. The flats at third and fourth floor levels would have an outlook towards the extended floors over the Mill House where currently the open aspect extends to the flank wall of the Old Mill House. Given the continuing 45-degree slope of the extended roof, however, there would be a gap of 12.5 metres from the third floor and 15 metres from the fourth floor to the proposed development (currently there is a distance of 22 metres from these windows to the next building). It is considered that this is an acceptable distance to maintain a reasonable outlook and aspect on this north-facing backland site which is surrounded by tall development.

3.13 There are also westward-facing studio rooms within the annex to the Grampians. These windows do not have a direct view over the proposed development and although a part of the additional floors would be visible, this would at an oblique angle and would not significantly affect outlook to these rooms.

3.14 To the southern boundary are offices connected with the Baptist Church and a hostel for homeless people. The proposed development would not extend beyond a line drawn at 45 degrees at ground level on the rear boundary with these buildings, and is not considered to have an unduly detrimental effect on outlook.

3.15 There are no windows on the side elevation of Romney Court and this building would not be affected by the development. To the north, the site adjoins the deck over the car park to the Charecroft Estate, and to the north west is the tall block of Roseford Court. The southernmost windows on this building would have sight of the development at a distance of approximately 14 metres, but the view would be at an oblique angle as the additional storeys to the Old Mill House would not be directly in front of this building. It is not considered that there would be a significantly detrimental impact on outlook in this respect.

3.16 With regard to light conditions, the applicants have submitted a daylight and sunlight impact assessment based on the British Research Establishment (BRE) guidelines. Windows to residential properties within the Grampians and Roseford Court have been assessed. The BRE assessment shows that none of the windows in Roseford Court would experience a noticeable reduction in sunlight or daylight (defined

as a greater than 20% reduction) as a result of the proposed development. Equally, none of the windows in the annex to the Grampians, which is the closest part of the building to the proposed development, would experience more than 20% reduction in daylight and any loss of light would not therefore be noticeable. Nine windows within the main part of the Grampians at first and second floor levels (or mezzanine and street levels) would technically experience greater than 20% reductions (20-40%). Most of these windows serve kitchens or bathrooms, but three are bedrooms and one is the second window to a dual aspect bed-sit. These are north facing windows, which (in the case of the second floor level) open on to the communal walkway and are obscurely glazed for privacy, and on both levels the existing poor light conditions are exacerbated by the overshadowing effect of the overhead walkways. The percentage reduction in VSC is therefore exaggerated because the starting value is so low, and in fact these windows would not experience more loss of daylight than the other, technically unaffected windows within the building. It is not therefore considered that any loss of daylight would be noticeable to the occupiers within the Grampians; and a refusal of planning permission on this basis could not be reasonably justifiable.

3.17 The windows at the Grampians facing towards the development are north-facing and are therefore not relevant for sunlight analysis. It is not to be expected that the development would have an impact on sunlight to this building. The windows to Roseford Court face within a few degrees of due south and therefore have been analysed with regard to the effect of the proposed building on Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH). It has been demonstrated that none of the windows would receive less than 25% total ASPH following the development, and would receive at least 5% of the total during winter months, and the windows would not receive a total reduction of more than 20% on existing totals. It is considered that there would not be a noticeable loss of sunlight to these properties. It is not therefore considered that the proposed development would have a significant impact on overshadowing and loss of daylight and sunlight.

3.18 There would be one vertical window on the southern elevation facing towards the Grampians within an 18m distance. This would be a secondary window to the living room to Flat 8 on the third floor and will be conditioned to be obscurely glazed and fixed shut (Condition 5). The other windows to this side would be rooflights within the sloping roof which would be above head height and would not cause overlooking. The Grampians would not experience further loss of privacy as a result of the development. The boundaries of the proposed roof terraces would be at least 18m away from the windows within the Grampians. 1.7 metre high obscure glazed screens would be provided on the western boundary of the roof terraces on the Mill House side of the development, in order to avoid overlooking from the windows and terraces of these proposed flats into the windows of the hostel beyond. This would be a condition of any approval (Condition 6). It is thereby not considered that the development would cause loss of privacy to any neighbour.

3.19 The originally proposed large roof terraces have been reduced in size during the course of the application to no more than 14 sq. metres. It is not considered that the terraces would now give rise to significant concerns about the creation of further noise and disturbance. Most of the proposed car parking spaces are within the building at ground floor level and any noise from cars manoeuvring would thus generally be shielded by the building itself. It is not considered that the development would cause any significant additional noise, but conditions are recommended to be attached to

ensure that occupants of the neighbouring properties are not disturbed by mechanical noise (Condition 12).

Quality of accommodation 3.20 The proposal would provide units with floor areas of between 58 and 107 sq.m. which are in excess of the Council's minimum standards. None of the units would have all of its habitable rooms facing in a northerly direction, and the units' aspect is considered acceptable. All flats apart from one flat at second floor level have a private balcony or terrace. Considering the flat at ground floor level is within a converted part of an existing building rather than a new-build, there is no minimum applicable standard for the size of amenity space, but in any case this flat would be provided with a private garden of 24sqm. Where feasible, rooms with similar use have been stacked above one another to reduce the transmission of noise to noise-sensitive rooms. It is considered that the proposed development would provide a satisfactory standard of living for all potential occupants.

Accessibility 3.21 All of the nine proposed units would accessible to Lifetime Homes standards as required by the Strategic Housing Mix Policy 3A.5 in the London Plan 2008, following minor modifications to door swings and bathroom fittings in some of the flats. This can be shown on final detailed floor layouts to be submitted as part of a condition confirming compliance with Lifetime Homes standards and the Council's Access for All SPD. (Condition 8)

Parking, Highways and refuse collection. 3.22 Eight car parking spaces would be provided within the development for the nine proposed flats. Standard S18.1 requires one off-street parking space per new dwelling but in view of the location which is highly accessible by public transport a lesser provision is acceptable in this case. It would be a condition of an approval that future occupiers of the units would be ineligible for residents' parking permits from the Council to avoid placing additional parking stress on the surrounding streets (condition nos. ). It has been demonstrated, via tracking diagrams, that it is feasible to manoeuvre in and out of the parking spaces and to exit the site in a forward gear.

3.23 Miller's Way is not public highway but is privately owned by the Shepherd's Bush Baptist Church. The church recently erected an electric gate across this road close to the junction with Shepherd's Bush Road. Whilst there is a pedestrian right of way via Miller's Way to the development site, the applicants and the Church will need to reach agreement that the residents of the proposed development can use Miller's Way for vehicle access. Ideally, the existing electric gate should be moved back by approximately 5m, to allow an entering vehicle to wait for the gates to open without obstructing the footway on Shepherd's Bush Road. This would be more important if the proposed development goes ahead because of the increased use by vehicles of Miller's Way. The applicants are willing to fund this alteration, as well as paying for improvements to Miller's Way such as delineating the vehicle and pedestrian routes to increase safety for pedestrians using the shared surface. However given that this cannot be shown on the drawings until agreement is reached with the owners of the land, a condition is recommended requiring the submission of a strategy for the management of the vehicle access, including provision for the manoeuvring of two approaching vehicles to pass one another in Miller's Way, before the development is commenced (Condition 17).

Refuse and Recycling 3.24 An area for three 1280 litre Eurobins would be provided inside the entrance to the site, which would be sufficient for the storage of refuse and recycling for the nine flats. Refuse vehicles currently have agreement with the church to use Miller's Way for accessing the refuse stores for Romney Court. It is proposed to use the same collection to collect refuse from the Mill House development. Whilst it is not ideal for refuse vehicles to reverse out of Miller's Way on to the highway, as this already occurs it is not considered that the proposed development would result in additional harm to the safe operation of the highway.

Cycle storage 3.25 Nine covered and secure cycle parking spaces have been shown within the garages, in accordance with Standard S20.1. This would be secured by condition 22.

Trees 3.26 It is proposed to fell the ash, sycamore and leyland cyprus trees in the courtyard of the Old Mill House, and to lift the crown of an overhanging lime tree to 4 metres. All these works have already been approved under a separate application ref: 2010/03314/TREE. Three new trees would be planted near the entrance to the site as part of the landscaping proposals which would offer compensation for the loss of soft landscaping. The landscaping strategy will be conditioned to ensure adequate soft landscaping (Condition 4). It is also proposed to prune and lift the crown of the horse chestnut tree over the boundary with the Grampians, which is subject to a Tree Preservation Order. This is the subject of a separate application for works to a protected tree ref 2010/04004/TPO. There are no objections to these works from an arboricultural or conservation perspective as officers are satisfied that the tree's health would not be compromised by the proposal. It would be ensured by way of condition (Condition 18) that the root protection area is fenced off during construction to prevent harm to this tree.

3.27 Potentially contaminative land uses (past or present) are understood to occur at, or near to, this site. Therefore, in order to ensure that no unacceptable risks are caused to humans, controlled waters or the wider environment during and following the development works, and in accordance with UDP policies G0, G3, EN20A and EN21, conditions requiring the submission of a contamination survey and remediation report if necessary are recommended (Conditions 19 and 20).

4.0 CONCLUSION and RECOMMENDATION

4.1 It is not considered that the proposed extensions and change of use would cause demonstrable harm to the amenities of neighbouring residents to justify the refusal of planning permission. The design of the proposal is considered acceptable and would not cause significant harm to the character of the Building of Merit or the setting of the adjacent listed building. The impact on trees in the locality is considered to be acceptable. The development would not impact significantly on the highway network or local parking conditions, subject to the development being 'permit free'. The principle of the land use is considered to be acceptable and the quality of accommodation proposed is acceptable. In view of the above it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.

------Ward : Fulham Broadway

Site Address : 314 - 320 North End Road London SW6 1NG

Reg. No : Case Officer : 2010/00175/FUL Neil Egerton

Date Valid : Conservation Area : 18.01.2010

Committee Date : 09.02.2011

Applicant : Fulham Properties Ltd 88 Lower Leeson Street Dublin 2 Ireland

Description : Demolition of the existing buildings at 314-320 North End Road (with the exception of the facade on North End Road, which is retained) and the redevelopment of the site to provide a part two-storey, part three-storey replacement building, comprising two retail shops (Class A1) at ground floor level with 18 residential units on the upper floors.

Drg Nos: 2688/D/60, 61F, 62K, 63G, 65F, 66F, 67I, 68E

Application Type : Full Detailed Planning Application

Officer Recommendation :

That the application be approved subject to the condition(s) set out below:

1) The development hereby permitted shall not commence later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this planning permission.

Condition required to be imposed by section 91(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2) The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the following approved plans: 2688/D/60, 2688/D/61F, 2688/D/62K, 2688/D/63G, 2688/D/65F, 2688/D/66F, 2688/D/67I and 2688/D/68D.

3) No demolition or construction works shall commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of a demolition method statement, a construction management plan and a construction logistics plan (in accordance with Transport for London guidelines), which shall include details of the steps to be taken to re- use and recycle demolition waste and details of the measures proposed to minimise the impact of the demolition and construction processes on the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, including monitoring and control measures for dust, noise, vibration, lighting and working hours, waste classification and disposal procedures and locations, and the measures proposed to prevent the passage of mud and dirt onto the highway by vehicles entering and leaving the site in connection with the demolition and construction processes. All

demolition and construction works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order that appropriate steps are taken to limit the impact of the proposed demolition and construction works on the amenities of local residents and the area generally, in accordance with ordnance with policies EN19A, EN20A, EN20B, EN20C and EN21 and of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

4) No demolition shall commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details of a scheme for the temporary fencing and/or enclosure of the site, and the temporary fencing/means of enclosure has been constructed in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure that the site remains in a tidy condition during and after demolition works and during the construction phase and to prevent harms to the street scene, in accordance with policy EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

5) The development hereby permitted shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details in plan, section and elevation (at a scale of not less than 1:20) of the following matters, and no part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the completion of that part of the development in accordance with the approved details.

a) Details of both the Tournay Road and the North End Road frontages of the development; b) Full details of the screens/means of enclosure to the proposed roof terraces/flat roofs.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to prevent harm to the streetscene, in accordance with Policy EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

6) No occupier of the 18 residential units hereby approved indicated on approved drawings, with the exception of disabled persons who are blue badge holders, shall apply to the Council for a parking permit or retain such a permit , and if such a permit is issued it shall be surrendered to the Council within seven days of written demand.

In order to ensure that the development does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties by adding to the already high level of on-street car parking stress in the area, in accordance with Policy TN15 and Standards S8.2 and S18.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

7) The 18 residential units hereby approved, shall not be occupied until such time as a scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority to ensure that all occupiers, other than those with disabilities who are

blue badge holders, have no entitlement to parking permits from the council and to ensure that occupiers are informed, prior to occupation, of such restriction. The flats shall not be occupied otherwise than in accordance with the approved scheme unless prior written agreement is issued by the Council.

In order that the prospective occupiers of the 18 residential units concerned are made aware of the fact that they will not be entitled to an on-street car parking permit, in the interests of the proper management of parking, and to ensure that the development does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties by adding to the already high level of on-street car parking stress in the area, in accordance with Policy TN15 and Standards S8.2 and S18.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

8) The 18 residential units hereby approved, shall not be occupied until the council has been notified in writing (and has acknowledged such notification) of the full postal address of these residential units. Such notification shall be to the council's Head of Development Management and shall quote the planning application number specified in this decision letter.

In order that the Council can update its records to ensure that parking permits are not issued to the occupiers of the 18 residential units concerned, and thus ensure that the development does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties by adding to the already high level of on-street car parking stress in the area, in accordance with Policy TN15 and Standards S8.2 and S18.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

9) The development hereby permitted shall not commence until particulars and samples of materials to be used in all external faces of the new buildings (which shall include details of the bonding and pointing of the external facing brickwork and details of all paving and external hard surfaces, boundary walls, railings, gates, fences and other means of enclosure have been submitted and approved in writing by the Council. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance, in accordance with policy EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

10) Any alterations to the elevations of the existing adjoining buildings shall be carried out in the same materials as the existing elevation to which the alterations relate.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to prevent harm to the street scene, in accordance with Policy EN8B of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

11) No alterations shall be carried out to the external appearance of the building hereby approved, including the installation of new windows or door openings in the building hereby approved, the installation of air conditioning units, ventilation fans or extraction equipment not shown on the approved drawings, without planning

permission first being obtained. Any such changes shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and prevent harm to the streetscene, and to safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers, in accordance with Policies EN8, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

12) The development shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details and samples where appropriate of the proposed obscurely glazed screens to the terraces hereby approved at first and second floor levels and the obscured glazing proposed to the northern windows to units 01 and 10, as indicated on the approved drawings, and no part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the installation of the screens and the obscured glazing in accordance with the approved details. The screens and obscured glass shall thereafter be retained in their approved form.

In order to safeguard the existing residential amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in Haldane Road and avoid unnecessary overlooking and loss of privacy, in accordance with Standard 13.2 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

13) The window glass of the shopfronts hereby approved shall not be mirrored, painted or otherwise obscured, or used for the display of advertisements

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to prevent harm to the street scene, in accordance with Policy EN8B of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

14) No fascia signs or projecting box advertisements shall be displayed on the Tournay Road elevation of the premises.

In order to ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to ensure that the residential character of the street is not harmed in accordance with policies EN8 and EN14 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

15) No advertisements shall be displayed on or within the shopfronts on the North End Road elevation of the building itself, without details of the advertisements having first been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Council.

In order that any advertisements displayed on the building are assessed in the context of an overall strategy, so as to ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to preserve the integrity of the design of the building, in accordance with policies EN8B and EN14 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

16) The commercial (A1) floorspace hereby approved at ground floor level shall be provided in the form of at least 2 separate units, as indicated on the approved

drawing no. 2688/D/61 Revision F. The floorspace shall thereafter be retained in this form and shall not be amalgamated or occupied as one larger single unit.

The use of the retail floorspace as a single shop unit could raise materially different considerations which the Council would wish to have an opportunity to consider at that time, in accordance with policies TN13, TN15 and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

17) No plant, water tanks, water tank enclosures or other structures, that are not shown on the approved plans, shall be erected upon the roofs of the building hereby permitted.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance, in accordance with policy EN8B of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

18) No plumbing, extract flues or pipes, other than rainwater pipes, shall be fixed on the Tournay Road elevations of the building.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to prevent harm to the street scene, in accordance with policy EN8B of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

19) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order amending, revoking and re-enacting that Order no aerials, antennas, satellite dishes or related telecommunications equipment shall be erected on any part of the development hereby permitted.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance, in accordance with policy EN8B of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

20) No persons shall be on the premises in connection with the operation of the ground floor commercial (A1) floorspace hereby approved between midnight and 07:00 hours the following day.

To ensure that the amenities of the occupiers of surrounding residential properties are not unduly affected as a result of noise and disturbance, in accordance with Policy EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

21) Prior to commencement of the development, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, of the noise and vibration levels of proposed commercial noise sources & building services plant including appropriate noise mitigation measures to ensure that the external noise level at the development site and nearest and/or most affected noise sensitive premises is 10dBA Leq below background LA90, as assessed according to BS4142:1997, with all machinery operating together and internal room and external amenity noise standards will be achieved in accordance with BS 8233:1999. No part of the development shall be

used or occupied prior to the implementation of the approved details, which shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/surrounding premises is not adversely affected by noise/ vibration from commercial noise sources, in accordance with Policy EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

22) The development shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details of a Noise Exposure Category (NEC) assessment (according to PPG24), including details of sound insulation measures for the building envelope and any silenced mechanical ventilation, in order that internal room and external amenity noise standards will be achieved in accordance with BS8233:1999. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the implementation of the sound insulation measures in accordance with the approved details, and the sound insulation measures shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the proposed flats is not harmed as a result of noise disturbance, in accordance with Policy EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

23) The development shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details of the proposed sound insulation of the wall/floor/ceilings separating the residential units hereby approved, and the walls separating the residential units from the adjoining property. These details shall ensure that the sound insulation and any other mitigation measures are sufficiently enhanced in order that the standard specified in BS 8233:1999 is achieved within the residential units. No part of the development shall be used or occupied prior to the installation of the sound insulation in accordance with the approved details, and the sound insulation measures shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site are not adversely affected by noise, in accordance with Policy EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

24) Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, of the sound insulation of the floor/ceiling/walls separating the commercial parts of the premises from adjoining residential units. Details shall ensure that the sound insulation (DnT,w and L'nT,w ) and any other mitigation measures are sufficiently enhanced in order that the standard specified in BS 8233:1999 is achieved within noise sensitive premises and their external amenity areas. No part of the residential units shall be used or occupied prior to the implementation of the approved details, which shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of the development site/ adjacent dwellings/ noise sensitive premises is not adversely affected by noise, in

accordance with Policy EN20A, EN20B and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

25) With the exception of the terraces indicated on the approved drawings, the flat roofs at the rear of the property at first, second and third floor levels, shall not be used as a terrace or other amenity space, and no alterations shall be carried out to the rear elevation of the property to form access out onto the flat roofs.

The use of these flat roofs as terraces, by virtue of its size and proximity to adjoining residential properties, could harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of these properties as a result of increased noise and disturbance, contrary to Policy EN21and Standard 13.2A of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

26) The development shall not be occupied prior to the provision of the refuse storage arrangements as detailed in approved drawing no.2688/D/61 revision F. The refuse storage facilities shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure that the use does not give rise to smell nuisance and to prevent harm arising from the appearance of accumulated rubbish, in accordance with Policy EN17 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

27) The development shall not be occupied prior to the provision of the cycle storage arrangements as detailed in approved drawing no.2688/D/61 revision F The cycle storage facilities shall thereafter be permanently retained.

To ensure the provision of bicycle spaces in accordance with policy TN6 and standard S20.1 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended in 2007.

28) No development shall commence until a desktop study, site investigation scheme, intrusive investigation and risk assessment have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The desk study will identify all previous site uses, potential contaminants associated with those uses, a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors and any potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The site investigation scheme will provide information for an assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. The risk assessment will assess the degree and nature of any contamination on site and to assess the risks posed by any contamination to human health, controlled waters and the wider environment. A detailed method statement for any required remediation works will need to be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Council. All works must be carried out by a competent person conforming to CLR 11: Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (DEFRA 2004).

To ensure that any contaminated land on the application site is identified and remediated in accordance with Policy G0, G3, EN20A and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

29) No development shall commence until any required remediation works have been completed and a validation report to verify these works has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Council unless otherwise authorised. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site the Council is to be informed immediately and no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council) shall be carried out until a report indicating the nature of the contamination and how it is to be dealt with is submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Council. Any required remediation should be detailed and verified in an amendment to the remediation statement. All works must be carried out by a competent person conforming to CLR 11: Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (DEFRA 2004).

To ensure that any contaminated land on the application site is identified and remediated in accordance with Policy G0, G3, EN20A and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan as amended 2007.

30) The development shall not commence prior to the submission and approval in writing by the Council of details of any proposed external lighting, including security lights, and no part of development shall be use or occupied until the lighting has been installed in full accordance with the approved details. Such details shall include the number, exact location, design and appearance of the lights, together with data concerning the levels of illumination and light spillage and the specific measures, having regard to the recommendations of the Institution of Lighting Engineers in the `Guidance Notes For The Reduction Of Light Pollution 2005' to ensure that the any lighting proposed does not harm the existing amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to prevent harm to the occupiers of neighbouring properties, in accordance with Policy EN2B, EN8B, EN20A, EN20C and EN21 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

31) The development shall not commence until a statement of how 'Secured by Design' requirements are to be adequately achieved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The approved details shall be carried out prior to occupation or use of the development hereby approved and permanently retained thereafter.

To ensure a safe and secure environment for users of the development, in accordance with Policy EN10 of the Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

32) No development shall commence until a sustainability statement, incorporating an energy assessment, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the council. The approved details shall be carried out before any use of that part of the development to which the approved details relate.

To ensure an energy efficient development to help reduce its carbon dioxide emissions, in accordance with Policies 4A.3, 4A.4, 4A.6 and 4A.7 relating to

energy demand, energy efficiency and renewable energy of The London Plan, amended 2008.

Justification for Approving the Application :

1) 1. The proposed development results in the refurbishment of the existing retail floorspace. The proposed development will bring forward much needed additional housing in accordance with London Plan policy 3A.3. The internal design and layout of the new residential units is considered satisfactory having regard to Standard S8, and the amenity space provision is also considered satisfactory, having regard to the physical constraints of the site, judged against Standard S6 of the UDP.

2. The development is considered to comply with UDP policies EN8, and London Plan policy 4.B1. The proposals are considered to represent an enhancement of the public realm and provision of a high quality scheme that will respect the local setting. Policy EN8 requires a high standard of design in all developments, compatible with the scale and character of existing development and its setting. London Plan policy 4B.1 also seeks to ensure that, within developments, which should maximise the potential of sites, design should, in all its aspects, be of high quality.

3. The Council is satisfied that the scheme represents the principles of good design and properly addresses environmental issues. It considers that UDP policy EN10, which requires a safe and secure environment, is complied with. The proposals, similarly, accord with UDP policies EN17 in that they incorporate suitable facilities for the storage and collection of segregated waste in accordance with standard S5, and with policies EN20A and EN20B because the development would not cause any undue pollution, with no significant worsening of air quality nor undue noise and with other pollution controls in place, which would also ensure compliance with EN21, which requires that development does not cause undue detriment to the amenities of neighbours.

4. The impact of the proposals on the highway network and local parking conditions will be minimal, and the development accords with UDP policies TN6, TN13 and TN15. TN6 requires direct, convenient, safe and secure facilities for cyclists. TN13 requires all development proposals be assessed for their contribution to traffic generation and their impact on congestion. TN15 requires developments to conform to parking standards S18, S19 and S20.

5. The impact of the proposed development upon adjoining occupiers is considered acceptable. In this regard, the proposals accord with UDP policy EN8, which requires developments to be of high quality design which, amongst other things, respects the principles of good neighbourliness, and with standards S12 and S13 which state that there be no significant loss of outlook or privacy to neighbouring occupiers and that no new roof terraces nor balconies be created, use of which might cause harm to the amenities of neighbours by reason of noise and disturbance.

6. Flood Risk: A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted and has considered all possible risks of flooding to the site, and has identified adequate preventative measures, in accordance with Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25.

------

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

All Background Papers held by Michael Merrington (Ext: 3453) :

Application form received: 15th January 2010 Drawing Nos: see above

Policy documents: The Revised London Plan 2008 Unitary Development Plan as amended September 2007.

Consultation Comments :

Comments from: Dated:

Crime Prevention Design Advisor - Hammersmith 16.02.10

Environment Agency - Planning Liaison 18.02.10

Thames Water - Development Control 04.02.10

Crime Prevention Design Advisor - Hammersmith 08.02.10

Fulham Society 30.11.10

Neighbour Comments :

Letters from: Dated:

31 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 30.01.10 33 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 27.02.10 1 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 05.02.10 13 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 07.02.10 23 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 28.04.10 7 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 19.02.10 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 15.02.10 NAG 23.02.10 Flat Second And Third Floors 18 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 22.02.10 15 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 15.02.10 1 Rosaville Road London SW6 7BN 21.02.10 18 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 17.02.10

18 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 22.02.10 33 Tournay Road 27.02.10 50 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 29.01.10 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 10.02.10 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 12.02.10 29 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 10.02.10 13 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 10.02.10 Top Floor Flat, 18, Tournay Road, Fulham 23.02.10 14 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 12.02.10 16 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 10.02.10 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 30.12.10 322a North End Rd., Fulham London 25.02.10 8 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 03.02.10 16 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 24.02.10 16 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 09.02.10 Flat1, 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 10.02.10 NAG 12.02.10 1 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 12.02.10 38 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 28.01.10 26 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 23.02.10 11 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 17.02.10 Flat Basement And Ground Floor 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 30.12.10 1 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 01.01.10 13 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 24.11.10 8 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 23.11.10 8 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 09.12.10 10 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 30.12.10 House Of Commons London SW1A 0AA 30.12.10 Flat 3, 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 23.11.10 1 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 09.11.10 5 Tournay Road London SW6 7UG 23.11.10 72 Welbeck Street London W1G 0AY 20.12.10 10 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 22.12.10 NAG 03.12.10 16 Tournay Road London SW6 7UF 30.11.10

OFFICER'S REPORT

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 The application site comprises three, three-storey (plus basement) terraced properties, located on the west side of North End Road, at the junction with Tournay Road. The site is occupied by 3 retail units, of which 2 are currently vacant and the third is occupied by WH Smiths. The northern end of this short terrace of properties (not included in the application) comprises MacDonald's. The site forms part of the Prime Retail Frontage of Fulham Town Centre, and is situated within Flood Risk Zone 2.

1.2 There is no relevant planning history

1.3 The current planning application is for the demolition of the existing buildings at 314-320 North End Road (with the exception of the facade on North End Road) and the

redevelopment of the site to provide a part two-storey, part three-storey replacement building, comprising two retail shops (Class A1) at ground floor and basement level with 18 residential units on the upper floors.

1.4 The application has been revised since its original submission. These revisions included the removal of one floor, and the reduction in the number of flats proposed (from 23 to 18).

1.5 The applicants have commented as follows in support of their proposals: - - Scheme designed to complement the area generally and reflect the character of the area - All residential units will be built to Lifetime Homes Standards - The development will be car-free, with a legal agreement to prevent occupiers obtaining parking permits - Two flats will be fully wheelchair accessible - Scheme will not harm daylight/sunlight to neighbouring properties - Scheme designed to prevent overlooking and loss of privacy - Scheme retains quality retail floorspace, whilst allowing for the provision of new residential accommodation - Financial appraisal submitted to demonstrate that the current scheme cannot support the provision of affordable housing - Retail units to be serviced from Tournay Road

2.0 PUBLICITY AND CONSULTATIONS

2.1 The application has been advertised by means of a site notice and a press advert, and individual notification letters have been sent to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. Thames Water and the Environment Agency have also been consulted, and both have confirmed that they have no objections to the proposed development.

2.2 32 representations were received from local occupiers in response to the original proposals, from 1(3 representations), 5 (3), 7, 8, 11A, 13, 14, 15, 16(2), 18(2), 23, 26, 29, 31, 33(2), 38, 50 Tournay Road; and 322a North End Road objecting to the development on the following grounds:

- Design - Overdevelopment - "will result in loss of Post Office" - Increased demand for on-street car parking spaces - Loss of views - Permit Free approach is challengeable - Too many one bedroom units, "resulting in social imbalance" - Overlooking and loss of privacy - Impact of servicing on adjacent occupiers - Loss of light - Increased vermin - Noise nuisance - No need for commercial window to wrap around into Tournay Road - Insufficient affordable units

- in addition, a number of objections were raised concerning noise/disturbance/dirt and disruption from building works, and negative impact on property values: Officers Comment: these are not grounds for withholding planning permission.

2.3 A representation was also received from the Fulham Society, objecting to the development on the following grounds: " We consider it an over development of the site - the bulk to Tournay Road is very large and overbearing - and not particularly attractive. We hope that car owning restrictions will be imposed on any residential development. Above all we are concerned about what will happen to the Post Office".

2.4 The application has since been revised (removal of the third floor and the reduction of 5 of the proposed flats, some change in materials and alterations to the flank elevation); neighbours were reconsulted. In addition, the applicants held a meeting close to the site to explain the revised scheme.

2.5 12 further representations have been received in response (1(2 representations), 5(3), 8(2), 10, 13, 16, 29 Tournay Road; and one with no address given), reaffirming the earlier objections on the following grounds:

- Design - Too large - Residential access from Tournay Road - Increased demand for parking - Retail creep - Noise and disturbance from the 18 additional residential units - Access to refuse stores should be improved - Vermin - Larger flats should be provided

2.6 The Fulham Society also reaffirmed their objections: "We still consider the back extension to be and over development and too bulky along Tournay Road. The back extension bears little relation to the adjacent houses and the large glass (presumably) extensions at third floor level are inappropriate in this largely brick domestic area. We are also extremely concerned about what will happen with the Post Office currently situated in Smiths."

2.7 A letter has also been received from agents representing WH Smiths, stating that WH Smiths are supportive of the proposals put forward which will provide well- proportioned modern retail units in line with operational requirements.

3.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Demolition of the existing buildings (with exception of the North End Road façade):

3.1 With the exception of the front façade the existing building is of little merit in terms of its design and appearance. The rear parts of the premises are utilitarian in design and appearance and present a bland unsympathetic elevation to the street scene at this point. These rear extensions have been modified over the years. Therefore, officers raise no objection in principle to the demolition of the rear parts of 314-320 North End Road, subject to a satisfactory replacement building being provided.

Land use: Retail

3.2 The site forms part of the prime retail floorspace for Fulham Town Centre. Policy TC2 states that within this area of prime retail frontage, permission will not be granted for any change of use that would result in the loss of A class floorspace, or reduction in the proportion of the length of frontage in Class A1 use at street level. Furthermore, Policy SH1 states that the Council will seek to retain and improve accommodation suitable for A class uses, and that in town centres, where redevelopment is necessary, replacement A class floorspace will normally be required. Currently, two of the units are vacant with only the corner unit occupied. The redevelopment would provide two replacement retail units and would not lead to a reduction in the length of the retail frontage. The redevelopment will provide refurbished quality retail accommodation, designed to meet modern retail requirements. The applicant states that the 1st and 2nd floors of the properties are currently used as ancillary office space to the ground floor retail units. It is felt in this instance that the viability of the ground floor retail units would not be affected by the loss of the upper ancillary space and therefore its loss is considered acceptable. Accordingly, officers consider that the proposed replacement retail accommodation is acceptable under both policies SH1 and TC2 of the Council's Unitary Development Plan, as amended 2007.

Housing

3.3 Policy 3A.1 of the Mayor's London Plan states that 30,500 net additional homes should be delivered per annum in London. Of this, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham have a target to deliver 450 net additional dwellings per annum. The current proposal would contribute to the borough's targets and comply with the London Plan and LBHF policies. The scheme would provide 18 additional residential units, which is above the threshold for provision of affordable housing. Policy 3A.9 and 3A.10 of the London plan relate to affordable housing and it is recommended that boroughs negotiate to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing. No affordable housing is proposed as part of this development, and the applicants have submitted a financial appraisal to demonstrate that it is not viable in this case. This report has been independently assessed and this backed up the conclusions of the financial assessment. Accordingly, the lack of affordable housing in this instance is not considered to be grounds for withholding planning permission.

Density

3.4 The development provides 8 one bedroom flats and 10 two bedroom flats, which results in 46 habitable rooms. The proposals would provide a residential density of approximately 400 hr/ha, which is considered to satisfy in principle in this location, and in accordance with the London Plan, and therefore no objections are raised on the grounds of density.

Design and external appearance:

3.5 The site is located on the west side of North End Road, between Tournay Road and no. 312 North End Road at the end of the terrace, at its junction with Haldane Road. The site is located at the heart of the commercial area of North End Road. The main street frontages along this part of North End Road are generally three-storey in

height, the height of the buildings, despite varying in architectural character and style, gives a remarkably consistent scale to this part of the street, visually expressed by a strong parapet line. The rhythm of the street blocks along North End Road is defined by the breaks formed by the orthogonal streets. Most of these adjoining streets are residential and have a reduced, more domestic scale behind the principal street frontage of North End Road. The site occupies a corner location on North End Road where both front and side elevations directly address their respective street frontages and thereby contribute to the townscape and scale of the street.

3.6 The design of the corner part of the terrace follows the pattern commonly found in the area where the flank return wall has a reduced height and massing, marking the transition in scale between the principal street frontage and the more domestic scale of the terraces in the orthogonal streets. The stepped massing providing the 'gap' between adjacent terraces is found opposite on the south side of Tournay Road as no. 324 North End Road turns the corner. The reduced scale of the flank return also provides a break in the dense urban form of the street block. The elevation onto North End Road is particularly fine with a wealth of architectural detail. The highly decorative stone dressings and detail contrast with the plain brick elements of the facade which are used as infill panels. The terrace to the south, nos. 322-334, is of a similar design, and has a similarly strong parapet line.

3.7 The application site, similar to other parts of North End Road has been compromised by inappropriate alterations to the ground floor retail frontage which has had the effect of detaching the base of the building from the upper parts in design terms. An opportunity exists to repair the ground floor frontage and restore the integrity of the complete façade.

3.8 In particular, the design and form of the proposed shopfronts respects the architectural character and design of the North End Road façade. The proposed shopfronts are judged to be properly proportioned with appropriate materials and design. Furthermore, the line of the pilasters, which give the terrace its primary rhythm, have been reintroduced.

3.9 The retained façade now turns the corner into Tournay Road, strengthening the appearance of the premises on this corner and also introduces a small retail display window at ground floor level in this elevation (similar to the majority of retail premises in this part of North End Road). To the rear, the scheme has been designed to step down from three storeys to a single storey element. As well as stepping down, the rear building line is also staggered at ground, first and second floor level. The Tournay Road elevation is much more contemporary in appearance with a simple palette of materials including, brickwork, render and aluminium windows. Many of the return frontages off North End Road are fairly simply detailed. The proposed elevation is characteristic in this respect with a restrained approach to the façade design. At upper levels the façade is of a rendered appearance with contemporary vertical-format glazing.

3.10 The proposed design retains the characteristic gap, the bulk and height of the proposed extension is considered to be acceptable being lower than the existing frontage building, and then stepping down. As such the development is judged to be subservient to the main building.

3.11 Officers are of the opinion that the proposed development has been informed by a considered analysis of existing context and situation. The proposed refurbishment of the

front façade would be a significant improvement to the street scene in this part of north End Road. The height rhythm simplicity of the design and materials of the proposed façade to Tournay Road would compliment the street scene. Accordingly, the proposed replacement building complies with Policies EN2 and EN8 in that it would be consistent with scale mass form of surrounding development, and respects the prevailing rhythm and articulation of its surroundings.

Internal layout; daylight/sunlight; amenity space:

3.12 The replacement building would provide 18 self contained flats (8 one bed and 10 two bed), all built to Lifetime Homes Standards. Although some of the flats would be predominantly single aspect, none would have all their habitable rooms in a predominantly northern aspect. Officers consider that the proposed flats would receive adequate levels of natural light. The proposed flats would also provide acceptable space requirements and layouts for the prospective occupiers, in accordance with Standards S7A and S13.1 of the UDP.

3.13 Policy EN23 of the UDP states that `all new developments will be required to make provision for open space to meet the needs of the occupiers and users'. These will need to be in accordance with standards S5 and S7 of the Unitary Development Plan. Standard S5A.1 and S5A.2 of the UDP identifies amenity space requirements for family and non family units which are located at ground level and requires an area of private open amenity or garden space of not less than 36 square metres for family units and 14 square metres for non-family units.

3.14 In this case none of the residential units are located at ground floor level. 8 of the proposed flats would have access to private amenity space in the form of terraces/balconies of various sizes (from 3.0m to 15.5m). Given the town centre location of the development and the physical constraints of the site, this is considered to be satisfactory in this instance.

Impact on neighbouring properties:

3.15 The main issue in this case is the impact of the development on neighbouring residential occupiers, in particular the adjacent terrace in Tournay Road, and the adjacent premises within Haldane Road. Officers consider that the units proposed within the development would not have an unacceptable impact on the existing amenities of neighbouring occupiers in terms of loss of outlook or increased sense of enclosure; overlooking or loss of privacy; undue noise and disturbance and loss of light and is judged to be acceptable in the context of Policies EN8 and Standard S13 of the UDP. Each issue will be addressed in turn.

Loss of outlook

3.16 The replacement building will be of a similar height as the existing property, with the exception of the second floor element. This new second floor element is recessed and set back from the rear and flank elevations to both Tournay and Haldane Roads. Accordingly, it is not considered the replacement building would give rise to unacceptable levels of loss of outlook to warrant refusal of planning permission. In this respect the proposed development is considered to comply with Policy EN8 of the UDP.

Overlooking/loss of privacy

3.17 New windows and terraces/balconies are assessed in the context of Standard S13.2. This seeks to ensure that new windows are not within 18m of existing windows, and if they are they must be designed to ensure no loss of privacy. The standard also relates to terraces/balconies. In this case the proposed terraces/balconies and windows are within 18m of adjacent occupiers, and as such are screened by 1.8m high obscurely glazed screens to limit any potential overlooking/loss of privacy. These obscure screens also act to limit views from the new windows in the flank elevations. There are two windows not limited by the proposed screens and the applicants propose that these windows be obscurely glazed. Officers consider that it would be difficult to sustain an argument that the terraces and windows proposed would be unacceptable due overlooking and loss of privacy. In this respect the proposal complies with Standard S13.2 of the UDP.

Noise and disturbance

3.18 Policy EN21 of the UDP deals with environmental nuisance and states that all developments shall ensure that there is no undue detriment to the general amenities at present enjoyed by existing surrounding occupiers of their properties particularly in mixed use areas such as this, where commercial and service activities are close to residential properties.

3.19 The premises currently have permission to be used for retail purposes. The replacement building would re-introduce the retail elements as well as providing additional residential accommodation. In this case officers do not consider that the provision of replacement retail accommodation, together with residential accommodation would result in noise nuisance and disturbance, that would warrant withholding planning permission for the development.

3.20 Similarly, given the limited size and location of the balconies it is not considered that the use of these balconies would give rise to unacceptable levels of noise and disturbance to warrant refusing planning permission. In this respect the proposed development is considered to comply with Policies EN21 and Standard S13.2A of the UDP.

Sunlight and daylight

3.21 In terms of measuring any impact on daylight and sunlight reaching neighbouring properties, guidance is set out in the Building Research Establishments (BRE) Report 1991 "Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight-A guide to good practice". The proposed development has been assessed against the BRE daylight/sunlight guidelines, in terms of its impact on neighbouring properties, and the scheme has been found to comply with these guidelines.

Traffic generation and car parking:

3.22 The proposal does not propose any off-street parking and the urban design requirements of the development are such that none could realistically be provided.

3.23 This site is on the corner of Tournay Road and North End Road. It has a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of 5, so has good public transport accessibility. North End Road is a borough distributor road under the Borough Road

Network - Hierarchy of Roads, in the UDP. The site is near bus and cycle routes, and is within reasonable distance of Fulham Broadway Underground Station. The developer has proposed that the units be permit free and officers consider that this is an acceptable solution in this instance. This matter will be dealt with by condition (06, 07 and 08). Therefore in this respect the proposal is considered to accord with Policy TN15 and Standards 18 and 19 of the UDP.

3.24 Standard S20.1 of the UDP, as amended 2007, requires the provision of secure cycle parking, in accordance with Table 12.2 of the UDP. The application identifies cycle parking provision at ground floor level for 26 cycles. This is considered to be acceptable.

Refuse:

3.25 Policy EN17 of the UDP and the Council's Storage of Refuse and Recyclables SPD 2007 requires development to provide adequate waste storage. The applicants have identified a storage area at ground floor level, for both the commercial and residential parts of the development. The revisions to the scheme mean that the commercial refuse storage is now fully enclosed, and a second door has been added to the residential storage area to allow residents to access this area internally. This is considered to be acceptable.

Flood Risk:

3.26 The site lies within Flood Zones 2 and 3 which is normally considered by the Environment Agency to be high risk in terms of potential to flood. The applicant has submitted a flood risk assessment for the development. This assessment has been considered by the Environment Agency who confirmed that they have no objection to the proposed development. Accordingly, the development is considered to be acceptable in the context of PPS25 in this instance.

Energy Issues:

3.27 The applicants have stated that the development will be built to level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes standard. The roof would also house further renewable energy measures to help reduce CO2 emissions by 20%. Further details are required to show compliance with the relevant London Plan policies - namely 4A.3 on sustainable design and construction; 4A.4 on energy assessment; 4A.5 and 4A.6 on heat networks and CHP and 4A.7 on renewable energy generation, and accordingly these matters will be reserved by condition (Condition 32).

4.0 RECOMMENDATION

4.1 Grant planning permission.