Zenith House II, Edgware Road, Colindale

planning report PDU/1447b/02 8 February 2011 Zenith House II, Edgware Road, Colindale

in the London Borough of Barnet planning application no. H/04167/10

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

The proposal Detailed planning permission is sought for 309 residential units in the form of 292 flats and seventeen mews houses, 1,611 sq.m. of office (B1) or community (D1) floorspace and 97 sq.m. retail (A1 or A3). The proposal comprises two and three storey mews houses, a 6-storey perimeter block around a central landscaped courtyard, a seven storey street block fronting Edgware Road and a sixteen storey tower. 226 residential car parking spaces, 335 cycle parking spaces and refuse storage are proposed at basement level, with vehicular access from Colindeep Lane. The applicant The applicant is Genesis Housing Group, and the architect is Pollard Thomas Edwards architects.

Strategic issues Having regard to the details of the application, the matters set out in the committee report and the Council’s proposed conditions, the outstanding issues relating to housing, urban design, children’s play space, inclusive design, climate change mitigation and transport have been satisfactorily addressed.

The Council’s decision In this instance Barnet Council has resolved to grant permission subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement. Recommendation That Barnet Council be advised that the Mayor is content for it to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and does not therefore wish to direct refusal or direct that he is to be the local planning authority.

Context

1 On 27 October 2010 the Mayor of London received documents from Barnet Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site

page 1 for the above uses. This was referred to the Mayor under Categories 1A and 1C of the Schedule to the Order 2008: ”Development which comprises or includes the provision of more than 150 houses, flats or houses and flats” and “Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building…more than 30 metres high and outside the City of London.”.

2 On 30 November 2010 the Mayor considered planning report PDU/1447b/01, and subsequently advised Barnet Council that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 86 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 88 of that report could address these deficiencies.

3 A copy of the above-mentioned report is attached. The essentials of the case with regard to the proposal, the site, case history, strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance are as set out therein, unless otherwise stated in this report. Since then, the application has been revised in response to the Mayor’s concerns (see below). On 19 January 2011 Barnet Council decided that it was minded to grant planning permission for the revised application, and on 31 January 2011 it advised the Mayor of this decision. Under the provisions of Article 5 of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor may allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, direct Council under Article 6 to refuse the application or issue a direction to Council under Article 7 that he is to act as the Local Planning Authority for the purposes of determining the application and any connected application. The Mayor has until 13 February 2011 to notify the Council of his decision and to issue any direction.

4 The decision on this case, and the reasons will be made available on the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk.

Update

5 At the consultation stage Barnet Council was advised that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 86 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 88 of that report could address these deficiencies:

 Housing: the applicant should demonstrate that the three-bed intermediate units will meet the London Plan affordability criteria.

 Urban design: the applicant should address the concerns raised in respect of materials, wind levels, cycle access and the design of the retail unit.

 Inclusive design: the applicant should seek to provide additional blue badge holder parking spaces.

 Children’s play space: the applicant should seek to provide additional on-site play space for the under 5’s.

 Climate change mitigation: an estimate of carbon dioxide savings compared to a Building Regulations 2010-compliant scheme should be provided, along with further information in respect of the proposed quantum of PV panels relative to the available roof space.  Transport: heads of terms for a car and cycle parking management plan including introduction of parking controls, pedestrian and cycling improvements and a revised travel plan need to be provided.

Housing

6 The proposed level of affordable housing, tenure split and mix of units were considered compliant with the London Plan but further information was sough to demonstrate that the three-

page 2 bed intermediate units would meet the London Plan affordability criteria. The applicant has confirmed that assuming a minimum share of 25% and 2.75% rent on the unpurchased equity, the three-bed intermediate units would be affordable to households whose annual income is in the range £18,000 to £74,000 in accordance with the definition of affordable housing set out in the London Plan. This is acceptable.

Urban design

7 At consultation stage, concern was expressed about the orientation of the small shop on Edgware Road. The applicant has subsequently reoriented the shop to provide a frontage with direct access to Edgware Road. The split-level layout of the shop is accessible and will offer entrances at both street and residents’ levels. The changes are therefore supported.

8 In response to officer concerns that the use of two similar colours of brick throughout the development may result in monotonous facades, the applicant has provided additional information in respect of the materials strategy. This explains how the mews blocks will differ from the tower and mansion block elements of the scheme. Whilst the concerns related specifically to repetition over long elevations, the detailed facade panels provided appear interesting and have alleviated concerns that materials could be unsuitable.

9 The three southernmost mews flats, which are located above the parking ramp, were previously underpinned by a blank brick facade. The applicant has revised the materials used on the ground floor elevation, replacing some brick with hardwood louvers and defined planter box locations. These improvements are welcomed.

10 Wind mitigation was identified as a concern at the consultation stage, but it is acknowledged that the provision of landscaping and additional mitigation measures (as a condition of approval) would be appropriate. The Council did not address this within its committee report or draft conditions of approval. However, there is an opportunity to incorporate mitigation measures within the landscaping plan, which would be assessed as a condition of approval. The applicant and Council should seek to minimise wind conditions and maximise mitigation as recommended within the wind study, for the benefit of future residents and users. Although this situation is not ideal, mitigation unable to be achieved through landscaping could be managed as minor amendments to the approved scheme.

11 Cycle access arrangements have not been altered. At consultation stage, the applicant was requested to provide further information justifying the convoluted access from site boundaries to the basement level. Specifically, cyclists using the central lifts would need to turn their bikes sharply to exit the lift areas. Although the information provided by the applicant clarifies routes at ground level, this does not improve basement access. However, measurement of the plans by officers has indicated that while cycle access would be difficult, it would be achievable. Cycle storage areas would also be directly visible from the lift area exits, which is welcomed.

12 The design revisions to the scheme are appropriate and all outstanding design matters have been resolved. However, additional work on wind mitigation is recommended at the discharge of conditions stage.

Inclusive design

13 The applicant was asked to revisit the basement layout plan to provide eight extra accessible parking spaces, in order to ensure compliance with revised Lifetime Homes standards (July 2010). As a revised basement plan has not been forthcoming, the Council has imposed a condition requiring a revised car parking layout providing 39 accessible spaces to be submitted and approved prior to commencement of development. In practice this is likely to involve the widening of standard bays to accessible standards, thereby maintaining the overall 226 spaces. Supply and

page 3 demand for the accessible spaces will be managed through the parking management plan, which has also been secured by condition. This aspect of the scheme is now acceptable.

Children’s play space

14 At consultation stage the scheme did not comply with London Plan policy 3D.13 because it did not provide adequate on-site play space to meet the needs of the under 5’s expected to reside in the development.

15 This issue had not been satisfactorily addressed in time for committee. The applicant has, however, produced a draft revised courtyard plan which demonstrates that through some relatively straightforward alterations to the courtyard layout, it is possible to meet the minimum requirement for 440 sq.m. of under 5’s playspace on site. The landscaping condition provides scope to require a revised layout and the Council has committed to consult the GLA on the discharge of this condition in order to ensure our concerns are addressed. On this occasion officers are satisfied that this arrangement is sufficient to overcome the previous objection in relation to London Plan policy 3D.13.

Climate change mitigation

16 At consultation stage further information was requested with regard to carbon dioxide savings compared to Building Regulations 2010 Part L requirements, connection of all parts of the scheme to the communal heat network, the size of the combined heat and power (CHP) plant and in respect of the proposed quantum of photovoltaic panels.

17 The applicant has subsequently undertaken additional modelling work and has improved energy efficiency standards. All the flats and houses will comply with Building Regulations 2010 standards through energy efficiency alone; this is welcomed. Energy efficiency measures have also been maximised on the non-residential parts of the scheme. The applicant has confirmed that all parts of the development will be connected to the communal heat network, and the CHP has been optimised in size to provide a large proportion (61%) of the total heat demand in conjunction with thermal storage.

18 The proposed location of the PV panels has also been confirmed. Taking account of the shading from the tallest part of the development and that some roof space will be required for other uses, it is accepted that there is limited additional space to accommodate more PV, whilst still maintaining efficient operation.

19 The issues raised at consultation stage have been satisfactorily addressed and the application now complies with London Plan and draft replacement London Plan climate change mitigation policies.

Transport

20 At consultation stage, TfL highlighted a number of issues including the need for bus network enhancements and contributions, step-free access at Colindale Station, heads of terms for a car and cycle parking management plan, pedestrian and cycling improvements, a revised travel plan and securing of sustainable transport measures.

21 TfL supports that the following contributions, payable to TfL, have been secured within the s106 agreement; £135,000 to be paid towards bus network enhancements, £100,000 to be paid towards the implementation of step free access at Colindale Underground station and a capped £20,000 contribution towards bus stop upgrades.

22 TfL also welcomes the following contributions, payable to the council, which have been secured within the section 106 agreement: £100,000 towards the upgrade of the junction of the

page 4 A5 Edgware Road and Colindale Avenue and £50,000 towards public realm, walking and cycling improvements.

23 A contribution of £10,000, payable to Barnet Council, has been secured within the s106 agreement to carry out a CPZ review and implement any required changes. TfL requests that the exemption of eligibility to purchase a permit is secured through the s106 agreement.

24 A parking management plan and construction management plan have been secured by condition; these are welcomed. TfL requests that a delivery and servicing plan is secured through the section 106 agreement.

25 The submitted framework travel plan failed the ATTrBuTE assessment and required improvement. Following discussion with the applicant TfL is satisfied that the travel plan is now of an acceptable standard and is secured within the section 106 agreement. TfL welcomes the travel plan incentives including £150 oyster card/car club vouchers and a further £150 bicycle vouchers per residential dwelling. TfL supports the provision of two car club spaces secured within the section 106 agreement.

26 In summary, the transport issues raised at consultation stage have been addressed, including an improved travel plan and a total of £92,700 in oyster card, car club and bicycle vouchers. Junction works and pedestrian and cycling improvements of £150,000 have been secured within the section 106 agreement. A parking management and a construction management plan have both been secured by condition. Exemption from any present and future controlled parking zone permit eligibility and a delivery and servicing plan should be secured within the section 106 agreement. TfL is satisfied that the application now complies with the relevant London Plan policies: 3C.21 Improving conditions for walking, 3C.22 Improving conditions for cycling, 3C.2 Matching development to transport capacity, 3C.13 Improved Underground and DLR services and 3C.20 Improving conditions for buses. Response to consultation

27 The Council carried out statutory consultation including sending consultation letters to 300 local residents. Eight objection letters were received, six of which were duplicates from residents in Colindale Avenue, objecting to the scheme on four grounds:

 Proximity to rear garden boundaries and associated loss of sunlight to affected gardens.

 Loss of existing trees.

 Overlooking and associated invasion of privacy.

 Increase in vehicle movements and insufficient parking spaces.

28 The other two letters raised objections in relation to the height of the development, insufficient shops and services, existing new properties not being sold, increased traffic congestion, inadequate car parking spaces and impact on road safety.

29 The Council has considered and responded in detail to each of these issues in its committee report. They do not raise any strategic issues that warrant refusal of the application.

30 The Environment Agency originally objected to the application on the grounds of an inadequate flood risk assessment. This objection was withdrawn after the applicant submitted additional information. At the request of Thames Water a condition requiring submission of a drainage strategy will be attached to the planning permission.

page 5 31 The Metropolitan Police, London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and Brent Council have confirmed that they have no objection to the development. Article 7: Direction that the Mayor is to be the local planning authority

32 Under Article 7 of the Order the Mayor could take over this application provided the policy tests set out in that Article are met. In this instance the Council has resolved to grant permission with conditions and a planning obligation, which satisfactorily addresses the matters raised at stage I, therefore there is no sound planning reason for the Mayor to take over this application. Legal considerations

33 Under the arrangements set out in Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has the power under Article 6 to direct the local planning authority to refuse permission for a planning application referred to him under Article 4 of the Order. He also has the power to issue a direction under Article 7 that he is to act as the local planning authority for the purpose of determining the application and any connected application. The Mayor may also leave the decision to the local authority. In directing refusal the Mayor must have regard to the matters set out in Article 6(2) of the Order, including the principal purposes of the Greater London Authority, the effect on health and sustainable development, national policies and international obligations, regional planning guidance, and the use of the River Thames. The Mayor may direct refusal if he considers that to grant permission would be contrary to good strategic planning in Greater London. If he decides to direct refusal, the Mayor must set out his reasons, and the local planning authority must issue these with the refusal notice. If the Mayor decides to direct that he is to be the local planning authority, he must have regard to the matters set out in Article 7(3) and set out his reasons in the direction. The Mayor must also have regard to the guidance set out in GOL circular 1/2008 when deciding whether or not to issue a direction under Articles 6 or 7. Financial considerations

34 Should the Mayor direct refusal, he would be the principal party at any subsequent appeal hearing or public inquiry. Government guidance in Circular 03/2009 (‘Costs Awards in Appeals and Other Planning Proceedings’) emphasises that parties usually pay their own expenses arising from an appeal.

35 Following an inquiry caused by a direction to refuse, costs may be awarded against the Mayor if he has either directed refusal unreasonably; handled a referral from a planning authority unreasonably; or behaved unreasonably during the appeal. A major factor in deciding whether the Mayor has acted unreasonably will be the extent to which he has taken account of established planning policy.

36 Should the Mayor take over the application he would be responsible for holding a representation hearing and negotiating any planning obligation. He would also be responsible for determining any reserved matters applications (unless he directs the council to do so) and determining any approval of details (unless the council agrees to do so). Conclusion

37 At consultation stage, outstanding issues were raised in relation to housing, urban design, children’s play space, inclusive design, climate change mitigation and transport. These issues have been satisfactorily addressed through the submission of further information and conditions. The application now complies with the London Plan.

page 6

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager – Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Claire O’Brien, Senior Strategic Planner 020 7983 4269 email claire.o’[email protected]

page 7

planning report PDU/1447b/01 30 November 2010 Zenith House II, Edgware Road, Colindale

in the London Borough of Barnet planning application no. H/04167/10

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

The applicant The applicant is Genesis Housing Group and the architect is Pollard Thomas Edwards architects.

Strategic issues The principle of the proposed development and mix of uses is acceptable. The proposed level of affordable housing, tenure split and mix of units is acceptable. The scheme broadly complies with London Plan design policies but the outstanding minor concerns identified in this report should be addressed. Other outstanding issues relate to inclusive design, children’s play space, climate change mitigation and transport.

Recommendation That Barnet Council be advised that while the application is generally acceptable in strategic planning terms, the application does not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 86 of this report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 88 of this report could address these deficiencies.

Context

1 On 27 October 2010 the Mayor of London received documents from Barnet Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 7 December 2010 to provide the Council with a

page 8 statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under Categories 1A and 1C of the Schedule to the Order 2008: ”Development which comprises or includes the provision of more than 150 houses, flats or houses and flats” and “Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building…more than 30 metres high and outside the City of London.”

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

4 The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Site description

5 The 1.1 hectare application site is on the east side of Edgware Road (A5) and was previously occupied by a 1970’s office building, which was demolished in 2008. Edgware Road forms the boundary between the London boroughs of Barnet and Brent, with Brent being on the west side of Edgware Road.

6 The site is bounded to the south west by Edgware Road, the south east by Colindeep Lane and the north west by the rear boundary of properties fronting Colindale Avenue. To the north east are residential and commercial properties and an electricity sub-station. The surrounding area is varied in character, comprising a mix of large scale buildings including retail warehouses and offices and more traditional two storey semi detached residential properties to the south and west.

7 The site is located approximately 600 metres from Colindale Underground station, which is served by trains that operate on the Edgware branch of the Northern Line, with an average frequency of 22 trains per hour. There are no Network Rail services available within easy walking distance of the site. There are a number of bus stops in the vicinity of the site, which are served on a regular basis by routes 32, 142, 204, 292 and 303, with a peak frequency of five buses on average per hour which makes the site very accessible by bus. The public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of the site ranges from 2, to the north of the site, 3 to the east and 4 to the south and west (where 1 is low and 6 is high). The site is in easy reach of a wide range of transport services.

Details of the proposal

8 The proposed development comprises 309 residential units in the form of 292 flats and seventeen mews houses, 1,611 sq.m. office (B1) or community (D1) floorspace and 97 sq.m. retail (A1 or A3). A variety of building typologies are proposed, in the form of two and three storey mews houses, a 6-storey perimeter block around a central landscaped courtyard, and a street block and tower element of seven and sixteen storeys respectively. The office or community floorspace is located at the ground and lower ground floors of the block fronting Edgware Road. Vehicular access is proposed off Colindeep Lane, with a ramp into the basement which provides 226 residential car parking spaces, 355 cycle spaces and refuse storage.

page 9

Figure 1: general arrangement plan Case history

9 The site has the benefit of planning permission for 215 residential units and 4,286 sq.m. of community (D1) floorspace in buildings ranging in height from two to sixteen storeys. This permission was granted in 2007 and was renewed for three years in August 2010.

10 In 2008, a series of pre-application meetings were held in respect of a new development proposal for the site, which comprised a residential-led mixed use development of 347 residential units, 8,025 sq.m. retail/restaurant/ take-away use and 3,336 sq.m. community use. This proposal did not proceed to a planning application.

11 The current proposal was the subject of pre-application meetings with GLA officers on 6 July and 20 September 2010. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

12 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 Housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG; Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG, Housing Strategy; Interim Housing SPG; Housing SPG EiP draft  Affordable housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG, Housing Strategy; Interim Housing SPG; Housing SPG EiP draft  Density London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG; Interim Housing SPG; Housing SPG EiP draft  Urban design London Plan; PPS1  Tall buildings London Plan; RPG3A, Revised View Management Framework SPG  Mix of uses London Plan  Transport London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; PPG13;  Parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; PPG13

page 10  Access London Plan; PPS1; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM)  Climate change London Plan; PPS1, PPS1 supplement; PPS3; PPG13; PPS22; draft PPS Planning for a Low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate; the Mayor’s Energy Strategy; Mayor’s draft Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies; Mayor’s draft Water Strategy; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG

13 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the 2006 Barnet Unitary Development Plan and the London Plan (Consolidated with Alterations since 2004).

14 The following are also relevant material considerations:  The draft replacement London Plan, published in October 2009 for consultation.  The Barnet Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (Pre-Submission Stage)  The Colindale Area Action Plan.

Land use

15 The site is located in the Colindale Opportunity Area, which is identified in the London Plan as having capacity for at least 10,000 new homes and 500 jobs between 2001 and 2026. The Council has produced the Colindale Area Action Plan, which provides the spatial development framework for the area. The application site is located in the Edgware Road Corridor of Change and is identified as a development site for housing, community facilities, jobs and shops. It is also identified as being suitable for a tall building of ten or more storeys. The previous use of the site was as offices but it is not protected for employment-generating use.

16 The extant planning permission for the site established the principle of redeveloping the site for mixed residential and community uses, and also established the principle of a tall building on the site. The current application proposes a reduced quantum of community floorspace, as the previously identified community use is no longer required. The space is flexible and could also be used as office space, but the applicant is in discussion with the Council to provide a Centre for Independent Living to serve the wider Colindale area. The number of residential units has been increased from 215 to 309 and the height of the tower, at sixteen storeys, is equivalent to that previously approved. The principle of the mix of uses and proposed height remains acceptable.

Housing

17 The application proposes 309 residential units comprising 292 flats and seventeen mews houses, in the following mix:

page 11

1-bed 2-bed 3-bed 4-bed Total habitable rooms Private 64 103 7 0 174 (56%) 470 (52%) Intermediate 15 15 8 0 38 (12%) 115 (13%) Social rented 30 42 14 11 97 (31%) 313 (35%) Total 109 160 29 11 309 (100%) 898 (100%)

18 London Plan Policy 3A.10 requires borough councils to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on individual private residential and mix-use schemes. In doing so, each council should have regard to its own overall target for the amount of affordable housing provision. Policy 3A.9 states that such targets should be based on an assessment of regional and local housing need and a realistic assessment of supply, and should take account of the London Plan strategic target that 35% of housing should be social and 15% intermediate provision, and of the promotion of mixed and balanced communities. In addition, Policy 3A.10 encourages councils to have regard to the need to encourage rather than restrain residential development, and to the individual circumstances of the site. Targets should be applied flexibly, taking account of individual site costs, the availability of public subsidy and other scheme requirements.

19 The corresponding policies are set out in Chapter 3 of the draft replacement London Plan. Policy 3.13 seeks the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing and 3.12 seeks to ensure that 60% is social housing and 40% is intermediate housing.

20 The application includes 135 affordable units, of which 97 are social rented and 38 are intermediate (shared ownership). This represents 44% affordable housing by units or 48% by habitable rooms, with a tenure split of 72% social rented: 28% intermediate, which is acceptable in relation to London Plan policy 3A.9.

21 The applicant has submitted viability information including a Three Dragons toolkit appraisal which demonstrates that the proposed quantum of affordable housing is the maximum reasonable amount, in accordance with London Plan policy 3A.10. The applicant proposes to utilise the existing grant funding allocation secured in relation to the consented scheme, which is supported.

Mix of units

22 London Plan Policy 3A.5 encourages a full range of housing choice. This is supported by the London Plan Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance, which seeks to secure family accommodation within residential schemes, particularly within the social rented sector, and sets strategic guidance for councils in assessing their local needs. Policy 3.12 of the draft replacement London Plan states that within affordable housing provision, priority should be accorded to family housing. Recent guidance is also set out in the London Plan Interim Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (April 2010) and draft replacement London Plan policy 3.8, which seeks to widen housing choice. Also relevant is policy 1.1C of the London Housing Strategy, which sets a target for 42% of social rented homes to have three or more bedrooms.

23 The scheme contains a broad mix of unit types and sizes including flats, duplexes and mews houses ranging from one-bed, two-person to four-bed, seven-person accommodation and complies with London Plan policy 3A.5. Within the social rented tenure, 26% of the units have

page 12 three or more bedrooms. Whilst this does not meet the London Housing Strategy target for family-sized social rented homes, the majority of the two-bedroom units accommodate four persons and are therefore suitable for families. Furthermore, given the constraints to the provision of additional amenity space on the site it would not be desirable to seek a higher proportion of family-sized social rented units in this instance.

24 The provision of eight three-bed intermediate units is welcomed and will contribute to meeting an identified strategic need for family-sized intermediate housing. However, the applicant should demonstrate that these units can be made available to households whose annual income is in the range £18,000 to £74,000, in accordance with the definition of affordable housing set out in paragraph 3.55 of the draft replacement London Plan.

Housing density

25 London Plan policy 3A.3 seeks to maximise the potential of sites. Draft replacement London Plan policy 3.4 moves away from ‘maximise’ in favour of ‘optimise,’ having regard to local context, design principles and public transport accessibility.

26 The site has a public transport accessibility level of 3 and its immediate setting is urban in character. The London Plan density matrix therefore suggests a residential density of between 200 and 450 habitable rooms per hectare.

27 In this instance, the scheme density is approximately 816 habitable rooms per hectare (based on total site area), which substantially exceeds the density matrix guidance and is also significantly higher than the density of the permitted scheme, mainly due to the reduction in the amount of non-residential floorspace and increased number of dwellings. However, the scheme is generally well designed, will provide good quality accommodation with adequate amenity space, and will relate positively and be well integrated into the existing and emerging context. Urban design

Tall buildings

28 London Plan policies 4B.8 and 4B.9, which relate to the specific design issues associated with tall and large-scale buildings, are of particular relevance to the proposed scheme. These policies set out specific additional design requirements for tall and large-scale buildings, which are defined as buildings that are significantly taller than their surroundings and/or have a significant impact on the skyline and are larger than the threshold sizes set for the referral of planning applications to the Mayor.

29 The height of the proposed scheme is lower, and the tower element less bulky, than that of the previous proposal. Although the majority of the scheme is not generally tall, the opportunity for a tall building at the site’s street corner, as noted within the Colindale Area Action Plan (AAP) urban design framework, has been incorporated within the design.

30 The development does not affect any strategic views as set out within the Revised London View Management Framework (July 2010).

31 The townscape impact of the development should be considered cumulatively with other approved and future schemes in the area, and particularly in views along Edgware Road. The townscape impact of the building could be significant, and the Mayor will account of any concerns that the Council has in this regard, should the application be referred back to him.

page 13 Land uses and connectivity

32 The current scheme is an improvement on the previously approved scheme; the layout has been simplified and it will have better legibility, which will provide a better environment for residents and other users. Edgware Road would have a public-facing street frontage within a ‘barrier’ block, with residential uses concentrated in domestically scaled streets behind this block. The scheme would enable good connectivity throughout the site and allow views along streets from within the scheme to the outside, and vice versa, successfully overcoming the varying levels across the site, which act as a constraint. These visual and physical links would assist residents of the development to feel engaged with the surrounding community.

33 The changes of level across the site present interesting challenges. The largest difference is a drop of approximately 1.8 metres between Edgware Road and the proposed ‘mews’ street close to the site’s northern boundary. Steps and a separate ramp would be provided to negotiate the level change. Views along this street have been taken into account, and the residential accommodation at this location has been arranged to protect residents’ privacy and provide satisfactory light access.

34 The block along Edgware Road would have a dual-fronted community or commercial space within its lower two levels. The main entrance into the use would be from Edgware Road, and the space has flexibility to operate either as one unit, or be subdivided into several units. The use would also overlook the central residential courtyard and the entrances into the site, providing additional surveillance and passive security. Although residential uses were considered on the ‘internal’ edge of the building, the remaining shallow footprint would have been unsuitable for commercial uses, which are considered necessary to present an active elevation onto the busy frontage of Edgware Road. It is the applicant’s intention that the flexibility offered by both the prospective uses and layout will maximise the space’s attractiveness to potential tenants; this is welcomed.

Scale and massing

35 The reduction in massing compared with the previous application, and pre-application versions of the present proposal, is welcomed. The scheme provides a satisfactory response to its context and uses steps in the buildings’ height and form to create an appropriate transition between existing and proposed development.

36 The massing of the larger blocks, particularly the largest block along Edgware Road, is well proportioned with appropriate use of bays and inset areas. The narrower streets are enclosed by buildings of a lower height, particularly the lane that would lead out the northern boundary to Colindale Avenue and Colindale Underground station. It is expected that this would be a well used route, and the homes along this section have been redesigned from their previous single-aspect configuration, to a narrower depth that allows the mews space to be widened and the privacy of these dwellings to be improved.

Appearance, materials and landscaping

37 The facade articulation is interesting, especially for the tower, although officers are concerned that the use of two similar colours of brick throughout the development may result in monotonous facades, given the long elevations of some of the buildings. The design is modern and in keeping with the contemporary form of development expected to transform this part of Colindale over the next few years. The massing and appearance enables the tower element to be read as an independent element of the building, while sharing some design features with the

page 14 remainder of the development, and this helps to reduce the overall impression of the massing of the Edgware Road block.

38 The landscaped areas within the site have been divided into ‘zones’ with the central courtyard as the focus. The level changes would make this an interesting space, with appropriate areas set aside for active and passive recreation, transport and servicing. The layout is appropriate, with axial routes following intended desire lines. The hard and soft landscaping materials, as described within the landscape design report, are acceptable.

39 The small retail unit facing Edgware Road is currently orientated to face a plaza at the top of the aforementioned stairs and ramp. The building has been kept low to allow sunlight through to the development and adjoining properties, but in its current form it appears incongruous in the street scene (referencing the Edgware Road south-facing visualisation within the supporting material). The retail entrance may be more appropriate facing Edgware Road; alternatively, the elevation of the Edgware Road frontage should be amended to provide a better transition between the existing row of shops and the new development.

Residential configuration and access

40 Access to residential dwellings within the main perimeter block (surrounding the central courtyard) is acceptable, and whilst we are keen to see the routes through core entrances, although some of these would be ‘open,’ which raises concern regarding the proposed wind levels through these areas. The applicant’s wind study recognises that this could be a problem for residents. The applicant should seek to mitigate against the creation of unreasonable conditions for residents using these areas.

41 The layout of the units within the main perimeter building is good, with a reasonable number of dual-aspect flats and frequent cores. Several of the affordable units are slightly below the levels within the London Housing Design Guide and Housing SPG (EiP draft), which apply to this scheme. However, the differences are small (falling short by 1-2 sq.m) and are offset by the generally high standard of the flats and wider development. The provision of balconies, gardens, wintergardens or terraces for the all homes is strongly supported.

42 The design of the houses along the mews linking the site with Colindale Lane has been improved to a level of acceptability. These homes, although predominantly north-facing, have a dual aspect and the revised entrance arrangements would afford greater privacy for residents. Although most of the homes at ground floor level elsewhere in the development would have small garden providing privacy for ground floor units, some face directly onto streets. However the provision of car parking spaces directly in front of rooms would provide a degree of privacy, and is acceptable.

43 The location of the southernmost houses above the ramp into the parking areas ramp is also of concern. Although these have been improved from the pre-application iteration, through the provision of a common entrance (which would improve residents’ sense of ‘connectedness’ with the rest of the development), the visualisations indicate that the blank facade below these homes could appear oppressive. Introduction of glazed or lighter elements in this area would be welcomed. The reduction of the height of these dwellings is welcomed, as detrimental amenity effects to residents of existing homes to the east would be reduced.

44 Car access into the parking area is appropriate in design terms, but it would be useful to have more information on cycle access to the underground parking facilities. The design and access statement notes that cyclists would be expected to use the lifts within the central courtyard to access the basement parking rooms. Access to and from the lifts appears convoluted, with some

page 15 sharp turns involved. Further consideration or justification for this arrangement should be provided.

45 The majority of residential cores extend into the basement, which would allow residents to directly access their flats, rather than needing to use the central courtyard lifts as previously proposed. While this latter arrangement would have added activity to the communal space, this must be balanced against the convenience of access to residents, the safety of the environment within the underground parking area, and the needs of wheelchair or other disabled users who may have long distances between their cars and front doors. The submitted scheme represents the preferred option.

Sustainable design

46 The design and access statement should demonstrate how the design of the building would promote sustainability, including descriptions of the approach to solar gain, passive cooling and water use or recycling (including any proposals for sustainable urban drainage). The inclusion of biodiverse roof areas on the perimeter blocks is strongly supported, as it the commitment to achieving level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.

Summary

47 The scheme is an improvement when compared with the previously approved scheme, and will provide a better quality of accommodation for residents. The applicant has been proactive in incorporating officers’ suggestions for design improvements, and with these alterations the proposal complies with the London Plan. However, there are still minor concerns that should be resolved prior to referral back to the Mayor; these include the materials selection and application across the development, wind levels close to certain residential areas, cycle access, and the design of the retail unit close to the Edgware Road northern site entrance. Inclusive design

48 London Plan policy 4B.5 and draft replacement London Plan policy 7.2 require all future development to meet the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion, and requires design and access statements submitted with planning applications to explain how the principles of inclusive design, including the specific needs of disabled people, have been integrated into the proposed development and how inclusion will be managed and maintained. London Plan policy 3A.5, and draft replacement London Plan policy 3.8, expect 10% of all new housing to be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for wheelchair users. Further guidance to this policy is provided in the Mayor’s Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment.’

49 The design and access statement and landscape strategy describe how inclusive design principles have been incorporated into the scheme. All units have been designed to meet Lifetime Homes standards, and large scale layout plans of typical units have been provided to support this. Ten per cent of units will be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for wheelchair users in the future and there is a good spread between unit size and tenure. Blocks with wheelchair accessible units have been provided with two lifts; this is welcomed. The level change across the site has been addressed through the landscaping scheme via a series of steps and ramps, which will be no steeper than 1:21 and will enable access through all parts of the site for mobility impaired users.

50 Thirty one blue badge parking spaces are proposed, which is equivalent to ten per cent of the total number of units. However, the revised Lifetime Homes standards recommend one extra space per lift core, which generates a need for an additional eight blue badge spaces (one for each

page 16 lift core to the basement). The applicant should revisit the basement layout plan with a view to providing these extra spaces. Children’s play space

51 Policy 3D .13 of the London Plan sets out that “the Mayor will and the boroughs should ensure developments that include housing make provision for play and informal recreation, based on the expected child population generated by the scheme and an assessment of future needs.” Using the methodology within the Mayor’s supplementary planning guidance ‘Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation’ it is anticipated that there will be approximately 126 children within the development, of which 44 would be 0-4 year olds, 49 5-11 year olds and 33 12-16 year olds. The guidance sets a benchmark of 10 sq.m. of useable child playspace to be provided per child, with under-5 child playspace to be provided on-site. As such the development should make provision for 1260 sq.m. of playspace, of which at least 440 sq.m. should be on site.

52 The development provides 126 sq.m. of dedicated doorstep playable space for the under 5’s in the central courtyard. The applicant suggests that there is a further 274 sq.m. of informal play and activity space although it is unclear which areas this refers to. In its current form the scheme is considered to fall short of the SPG guidance and the applicant should consider the potential for increasing the amount of dedicated play space for the under 5’s. For example, the garden terrace could be reconfigured as a dedicated play area or some roof space could be utilised.

53 The play space requirements of the over 5’s are proposed to be met off-site. The applicant has identified three local playable spaces within 400 metres of the site and two neighbourhood playable spaces within 800 metres, but information on the quality and suitability of these spaces is limited. Given the absence of on-site play provision for older children, the Council may wish to consider seeking section 106 contributions towards improvements to these facilities Climate change

54 The London Plan climate change policies as set out in chapter 4A collectively require developments to make the fullest contribution to the mitigation of and adaptation to climate change and to minimise carbon dioxide emissions (Policy 4A.1). Chapter 5 of the draft replacement London Plan also requires developments to make the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions.

Climate change mitigation

55 London Plan policies 4A.4-11 focus on mitigation of climate change and require a reduction in a development’s carbon dioxide emissions through the use of passive design, energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. The London Plan requires developments to make the fullest contribution to tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions, adopting sustainable design and construction measures and prioritising decentralised energy, including renewables.

Energy efficiency standards

56 A range of passive design features and demand reduction measures are proposed to reduce the carbon emissions of the proposed development. Both air permeability and heat loss parameters will be improved beyond the minimum backstop values required by building regulations. Other features include mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, minimising the use of thermal bridging and low energy lighting.

page 17 57 The development is estimated to emit 477 tonnes of regulated carbon dioxide per annum after the application of passive design and energy efficiency measures.

58 Based on the information provided, the proposed development is likely to just exceed 2010 Building Regulations compliance through energy efficiency measures alone. Although the modelling provided uses 2006 Building Regulations compliance software, a reduction in regulated emissions of 32% will be achieved through the first element of the energy hierarchy.

59 The applicant should confirm that the development will comply with 2010 Building Regulations through energy efficiency measures alone, making use of 2010 Building Regulations compliance software where necessary.

District heating

60 The applicant states that there is no viable district heating system in close proximity to the proposed development. The applicant has however provided a commitment to ensuring the site is designed to connect to future district heating should one become available; this is welcomed.

61 A communal heat network is proposed to serve the whole site. A single energy centre will be located in the basement below the main tower and will contain gas fired boilers, and gas fired CHP. The applicant should confirm that all dwellings and other building uses will be connected to the network and this should be secured by condition.

Combined heat and power

62 A 110 kiloWatt (electrical) capacity combined heat and power (CHP) unit is proposed to meet the base hot water load and 40% of the space heating load. A thermal store is proposed to work in conjunction with the CHP unit to capture all heat generated to prevent ‘heat dumping’.

63 The development is estimated to emit 223 tonnes of regulated carbon dioxide emissions per annum after the application of CHP. A reduction in regulated carbon dioxide emissions of 254 tonnes per annum (53%) will therefore be achieved through this second part of the energy hierarchy. Expressing this on a whole energy basis, a reduction of 30% from CHP is planned. This level of saving is welcomed, but appears high. The applicant is requested to confirm these figures.

Cooling

64 The applicant states that no active cooling will be provided in the dwellings. Dwellings will be provided with mechanical ventilation with heat recovery. Cooling will be provided via air source heat pumps for the commercial areas.

Renewable energy

65 London Plan policy 4A.7 and draft replacement London Plan policy 5.7 require the inclusion of complementary on-site renewable energy technologies.

66 300 square metres of roof-mounted photovoltaic (PV) panels are proposed. A reduction of eighteen tonnes of carbon dioxide per annum will be saved through this third element of the energy hierarchy, which is equivalent to a 3% saving on a whole energy basis. In order to ensure compliance with London Plan policy 4A.7, a better understanding of the proposed quantum of PV panels relative to the amount of available roof space is required, and the applicant should provide roof drawings to demonstrate this.

page 18 Summary

67 The applicant should provide an estimate of the overall regulated carbon dioxide savings, expressed both in tonnes of carbon dioxide per annum and percentages, compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development.

68 The estimated regulated carbon emissions of the development are 205 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year after the cumulative effect of energy efficiency measures, CHP and renewable energy has been taken into account.

Climate change adaptation

69 London Plan policy 4A.3 seeks to ensure future developments meet the highest standards of sustainable design and construction, and policy 4A.9 identifies five principles to promote and support the most effective adaptation to climate change. These are to minimise overheating and urban heat island effects; minimise solar gain in summer; incorporate sustainable drainage systems; minimise water use; and protect and enhance green infrastructure. Specific policies relate to overheating (4A.10), living roofs and walls (4A.11) and sustainable drainage (4A.14). Further guidance is provided in the London Plan Sustainable Design and Construction SPG. Policies 5.3, 5.9 to 5.13, 5.15 of the draft replacement London Plan are also relevant.

70 The applicant has submitted a sustainability statement which demonstrates broad compliance with these policies. Specific measures include the provision of brown roofs, the incorporation of sustainable urban drainage systems including permeable surfaces and attenuation tanks, rainwater harvesting and reducing water consumption to a maximum of 105 litres per person per day. The proposed measures are acceptable and comply with London Plan climate change adaptation policies. Transport

71 The trip generation was in the submitted transport assessment was derived from the TRICS database. At TfL’s request, a technical note was prepared which provides a comparison with sites from the TRAVL database. This has been accepted as being in accordance with TfL’s best practice guidance. The trip generation is now considered to comply with draft replacement London Plan policy 6.3 Assessing transport capacity and London Plan policy 3C.2 Matching development to transport capacity.

72 TfL welcomes the preparation of a PERS audit which identified that the majority of routes are rated amber. However, the audit must be supplemented by a schedule of recommended improvements and how these will de delivered. The applicant has agreed to provide a schedule of improvements to be secured within the section 106 agreement. This will encourage the uptake of cycling and walking as a sustainable mode of transport and ensure that the local pedestrian and cycling networks are of a quality that can sustain the expected growth within the Colindale area. This will ensure compliance with London Plan policies 3C.21 Improving conditions for walking, 3C.22 Improving conditions for cycling and draft replacement London Plan policies 6.9 Cycling and 6.10 Walking.

73 The proposal will result in additional bus trips during the AM and PM peak. This will give rise to the need to increase bus capacity cumulatively in order to mitigate the impact on the local bus network. The applicant has agreed to provide a £135,000 contribution towards bus network enhancements in accordance with circular 05/05, as has been sought from other developments in the Colindale AAP area. TfL welcomes this offer and can confirm that the application is considered

page 19 to comply with draft replacement London Plan policy 6.7 Buses, bus transits, trams and London Plan policy 3C.20 Improving conditions for buses.

74 To encourage inclusive access the applicant has agreed a £100,000 section 106 contribution to be paid towards the implementation of step free access at Colindale Underground station in accordance with circular 05/05, as has been sought from other developments in the Colindale AAP area. TfL welcomes this offer and can confirm that the application is considered to comply with draft replacement London Plan policy 6.4 Enhancing London’s transport connectivity and London Plan policy 3C.13 Improved Underground and DLR services.

75 The bus stops nearest to the site need to be upgraded to bring them up to current accessibility standards. A capped section 106 contribution of £20,000 has been agreed with the applicant towards these works in line with London Plan policy 3C.20 Improving conditions for buses, and draft replacement London Plan policy 6.7 Buses, bus transits, trams.

76 226 car parking spaces, inclusive of 31 disabled bays and six car club spaces, are proposed, which equates to 0.71 per unit. This level of provision represents an appropriate level of constraint on car ownership which TfL considers acceptable in accordance with draft replacement London Plan policy 6.13 Parking and London Plan policy 3C.23 Parking strategy. However, the heads of terms for a car and cycle parking management plan will need to be agreed prior to determination.

77 TfL welcomes provision for 44 electric vehicle charging points, which represents 20% active provision. The applicant must agree to monitor take up and where appropriate provide a further 20% passive provision should demand dictate. This will ensure compliance with emerging best practice and draft replacement London Plan policy. These must be secured through the section 106 agreement or by planning condition as shown on drawing L(00) 099.

78 There is currently no controlled parking zone (CPZ) operating within the vicinity of the site. TfL encourages the applicant to enter into discussion with the local planning authority to determine an appropriate contribution towards the installation and operation of a local CPZ scheme. This will ensure that any overspill parking can be catered for appropriately. TfL requests the section 106 agreement include restrictions on residents obtaining parking permits. This will ensure compliance with draft replacement London Plan policy 6.13 Parking and London Plan policy 3C.23 Parking strategy. Parking management must be included within the heads of terms for the car and cycle parking management plan.

79 TfL welcomes the 349 cycle parking spaces proposed, of which 31 will be at surface level, with the remainder provided in the basement. All staff and visitor spaces must be provided at ground level. All spaces must be safe, covered and secure with good lighting and CCTV. Showering and changing facilities will need to be provided for all employees on site to ensure compliance with London Plan policy 3C.22 Improving conditions for cycling and draft replacement London Plan policy 6.9 Cycling.

80 The applicant has agreed to prepare a construction logistics plan and a delivery and servicing plan. These should be secured by use of planning conditions. This will ensure compliance with London Plan policies 3C.17 Tackling congestion and reducing traffic and 3C.25 Freight strategy and draft replacement London Plan policy 6.14 Freight.

81 TfL welcomes preparation of a framework travel plan (FTP); however, a full travel plan is required. The submitted FTP has failed the ATTrBuTE assessment and a number of changes need to be made before the travel plan can be deemed acceptable. The travel plan assessment, which identifies required improvements, has been forwarded to the applicant separately. The travel plan must be secured, enforced, monitored, reviewed and funded through the section 106 agreement.

page 20 The applicant has agreed to fund travel plan incentives including £150 Oyster cards pre-paid and a further £150 bike vouchers per residential dwelling. This is welcomed by TfL and is considered to be in accordance with the London Plan and best practice guidance.

82 In summary, TfL welcomes the agreed contributions towards transport including £100,000 for step free access, £135,000 for buses, £20,000 for bus stops and travel plan measures. However, a number of issues remain outstanding including agreeing heads of terms for a car and cycle parking management plan including introduction of parking controls, pedestrian and cycling improvements and a revised travel plan. Local planning authority’s position

83 As yet unknown. Legal considerations

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

85 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

86 London Plan policies on housing, urban design, inclusive design, children’s play space, climate change mitigation and adaptation and transport are relevant to this application. The application complies with some of these policies but not with others, for the following reasons:  Housing: the proposed level of affordable housing, tenure split and mix of units comply with London Plan policies 3A.9, 3A.10 and 3A.5, but there is an outstanding concern regarding the affordability of the family-sized intermediate units.

 Urban design: the scheme is generally well designed and broadly complies with London Plan design policies, but there are minor concerns regarding materials, wind levels, cycle access and the design of the retail unit adjacent to Edgware Road.

 Inclusive design: the proposed development broadly complies with London Plan policies 3A.5 and 4B.5, but the proposed number of blue badge parking spaces falls short of Lifetime Homes guidance.

 Children’s play space: in its current form the proposal does not comply with London Plan policy 3D.13.

page 21  Climate change mitigation: further information is required in order to ensure compliance with London Plan climate change mitigation policies.

 Climate change adaptation: the proposal complies with London Plan policies 4A.3, 4A.9, 4A.10, 4A.11 and 4A.14.

 Transport: the application broadly complies with London Plan transport policies but some minor outstanding issues need to be addressed prior to stage two.

87 Whilst the application is broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, on balance, the application does not comply with the London Plan.

88 The following changes might, however, remedy the above-mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan:  Housing: the applicant should demonstrate that the three-bed intermediate units will meet the London Plan affordability criteria.  Urban design: the applicant should address the concerns raised in respect of materials, wind levels, cycle access and the design of the retail unit.

 Inclusive design: the applicant should seek to provide additional blue badge holder parking spaces.

 Children’s play space: the applicant should seek to provide additional on-site play space for the under 5’s.

 Transport: heads of terms for a car and cycle parking management plan including introduction of parking controls, pedestrian and cycling improvements and a revised travel plan need to be provided.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager - Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Claire O’Brien, Senior Strategic Planner 020 7983 4269 email claire.o’[email protected]

page 22