planning report D&P/2208e/01 5 February 2014 , Isle of Dogs in the Borough of Tower Hamlets planning application no. PA/13/02966

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

The proposal Outline planning application for mixed use redevelopment of the site comprising 13 development zones with a series of buildings with heights of up 211.5 metres containing approximately 730,000 sq.m. floor space for a range of business, retail, hotel community, leisure and residential uses, together with landscaping and public realm.

The applicant The applicant is CWG (Wood Wharf Two) and the masterplanning architect is Allies and Morrison.

Strategic issues The principle of a high density mixed use development with homes, offices and other commercial uses within the Town Centre and Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area is in accordance with strategic objectives for this highly accessible location, and would benefit London’s World City status. The site is within a location identified for tall buildings, and the indicative architecture, form and scale of development is acceptable in principle. The scheme includes affordable housing, which is still the subject of discussion and negotiation to ensure the maximum reasonable amount would be delivered. Other strategic issues such as inclusive design, climate change mitigation and adaptation and residential quality are generally acceptable. Some further work on the transport strategy is required together with wider section 106 contributions, in order to ensure that the scheme fully accords with the London Plan.

Recommendation That Tower Hamlets Council be advised be advised that the scheme is broadly acceptable in strategic policy terms however, the matters set out in paragraph 99 require further consideration and discussion before it can be confirmed that the proposal fully complies with the London Plan.

page 1 Context

1 On 30 December 2013 the Mayor of London received documents from Tower Hamlets 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 February 2014 to provide the Council with a 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 the following categories of the Schedule to the Order 2008:

1A Development which comprises or includes the provision of more than 150 houses, flats, or houses and flats;

1B Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building in Central London (other than the City of London) and with a total floorspace of more than 20,000 square metres;

1C Development which comprises the erection of a building that is more than 30 metres high and is outside the City of London.

3 Once Tower Hamlets 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 environmental information for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 has been taken into account in the consideration of this case.

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

6 The scheme relates to a 13.5 hectare site known as Wood Wharf, located in the north-east of the Isle of Dogs, immediately to the east of Canary Wharf and to the west of Preston’s Road. Blackwall Basin defines the northern boundary of the site, Graving Dock the north-west boundary, with the River Thames locks and South Dock forming the southern boundary.

7 The site presently a number of vacant low-rise, poor quality, light industrial, office and warehouse units, including a telecommunications hub, a data centre, sheds, and offices. It is currently accessed on foot from the north via steps leading down from Cartier Circle with the only vehicular access via a private estate road to the east of the site from Preston’s Road. A second access from Preston’s Road provided to a row of terrace properties on Lovegrove Walk. There is no direct vehicular access from Canary Wharf.

8 Preston’s Road is a borough road. The nearest part of the Transport for London Road Network is the A1261 Aspen Way, 450 metres to the north of the site and connected to Preston’s Road by a major roundabout. To the east of Wood Wharf a cycle route runs along Preston’s Road and there are a series of informal cycle routes through the Canary Wharf estate.

page 2 9 The site has a moderate to good public transport accessibility level ranging from 4 in the west to 3 in the east, on a scale of one to six, where six is excellent. The nearest underground station is Canary Wharf station on the Jubilee Line which is located approximately 550 metres to the west. Three Docklands Light Railway stations are also located within walking distance of the site; Blackwall, Canary Wharf and Heron Quays West. The nearest bus stops are situated on Prestons Road and Churchill Place and both are within a 150-300 metre radius of the site. Four bus routes serve these stops; D6, D7, D8 and 277. Furthermore routes C3 and 135 are accessible from Bank Street at a distance of 350 metres from the western part of the site.

10 should be operational by 2018 and the Isle of Dogs station (being constructed by the applicant) will be located at North Quay, some 400 metres to the north-west of Wood Wharf with access from Trafalgar Way.

11 The site contains a number of features which are considered to be of historical importance: Blackwall Basin is Grade I listed; part of the former West India Dock walls is Grade I listed; three cranes which were relocated from elsewhere on the Isle of Dogs, front onto the lock on the south- east corner of the application site.

12 Wood Wharf is surrounded by a number of conservation areas. The Coldharbour Conservation Area is immediately to the east. A number of listed buildings are present in this conservation area and are generally located on the Thames waterfront. The area is generally of mixed character with new development sitting alongside remaining historic elements. The West India Dock Conservation Area is located approximately 1 kilometre to the north-west of the site and was designated to protect the remaining buildings and spaces of the West India Docks.

Details of the proposal

13 Outline planning permission is sought for redevelopment of the site for a mixed use development comprising 728,880 sq.m. of floor space to be used for residential, office, retail, hotel, and community/leisure uses. Approval is also sought for streets, landscaping and public realm, bridge links, parking and servicing, and utilities – including energy centres and electricity substations. All matters are reserved.

14 The applicant has come forward with a masterplan that is based on a series of specified parameters, with a development specification and design guidelines having been submitted. Within the parameters, an indicative scheme has been developed to demonstrate one way in which the masterplan could come forward, but this is for information only, rather than approval. Listed building consent is sought, and the applicant has submitted a detailed application for information purposes only for part of the scheme

15 Up to 1,300 car and motorcycle parking spaces are proposed. A data centre of up to 3,000 sq.m., together with ancillary floorspace and other sui generis uses (such as conference centres, theatres, launderettes which fall outside the use classes) are proposed above and below ground. No minimum or maximum floor space is set for these latter uses, but rather would be subject to the overall maximum threshold of 728,880 sq.m. that the applicant is seeking planning permission for across the site, working in with the other uses set out above. At least 2.5 hectares of publically accessible open space is also proposed.

16 The parameter plans and application documents set out minimum and maximum floor space for each land use, as follows:

page 3 17 A series of 13 development zones are proposed, with a maximum height of 211.5 metres proposed in Development Zone A - the equivalent of up to 56 residential storeys. The applicant has also provided design guidelines that any future reserved matters application, for the development of any of the development zones defined in the parameter plans or open spaces would look to follow: Case history

18 Planning permission was granted in 2009 for a comprehensive office-led, mixed use scheme, which was supported by the Mayor (GLA ref: PDU/2208). The scheme included approximately 450,000 sq.m. of office space, up to 1,668 residential units, 20,000 sq.m. of retail space, a hotel, community uses and public realm, including a new canal linking Blackwall Basin and the dock. A total of 829 car parking spaces were proposed. The maximum building height in that scheme was 206 metres, and the layout is shown below.

19 The section 106 agreement included a contribution of up to £100 million towards Crossrail.

20 A renewal of the planning permission was granted in 2012.

Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

21 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 World city role/opportunity areas London Plan  Mix of uses/retail/town centres London Plan; draft Town Centres SPG  Housing – affordable housing London Plan; Housing SPG; Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy;; Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG  Density London Plan; Housing SPG  World Heritage Sites London Plan; World Heritage Sites SPG; Circular 07/09  Tall buildings/strategic views London Plan, LVMF SPG (2012)  Urban design London Plan;  Access London Plan; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM)  Sustainable development London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy  Blue Ribbon Network London Plan  Biodiversity London Plan  Transport and parking London Plan; revised Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy  Crossrail/CIL London Plan; Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy; Crossrail SPG

22 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 saved policies from the 1998 Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan, the Tower Hamlets Core Strategy (2010), the Tower Hamlets Managing Development Document (MDD) (2012) and the 2011 London Plan (with 2013 Alterations).

page 4 23 The National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guide to the National Planning Policy Framework and the draft 2014 Further Alterations to the London Plan (FALP) are also material considerations.

24 In particular, the FALP introduces amendments to Table A1.1 in Annex One, setting out that consideration is being given to refining the framework in order to address barriers to the delivery of development. This will focus on realising local benefits arising from improvements in public transport across London, and reviewing the balance between housing and employment in light of changing commercial occupier requirements. There is also an intent to undertake more effective coordination of social infrastructure, especially schools, and to explore ways in whciht eh town centre offer of Canary Wharf can be broadened.

Principle of development

25 The scheme proposes a mixed use development, including residential, offices and retail uses in accordance with London Plan policies relating to town centres and the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area, providing a mixed use scheme that would deliver jobs and homes, in accordance with London Plan policy 4.1. The principle of mixed use redevelopment has been established by virtue of the extant permission, and whilst the office floor space that is proposed would be much lower than that approved, the redevelopment would meet the London Plan aspirations for providing jobs and homes. This scheme is capable of accommodating up to approximately 17,000 jobs, together with approximately 2,000 construction jobs. The scheme would make a significant contribution towards the indicative employment capacity set out in Annex One of the London Plan.

26 The scheme proposes high quality, flexible floor plates, with some smaller spaces to cater for a mixture of future tenants, so as to suit a range of potential occupiers. These uses are concentrated to the west of the site, adjacent to the existing Canary Wharf Estate The development would make a significant contribution to the Canary Wharf office market and whilst it comprises less office space than previously proposed, it has been designed to respond to the changing market conditions that would make such a commercially-led scheme unviable at the current time. The intent to create a new development quarter of London, to reflect its global city status is supported.

27 The economic benefits of the scheme, in terms of increased local spending and job opportunities for local people are welcomed. In this respect, in its Statement of Developer Contributions, the applicant has committed to providing job brokerage, by ensuring that 20% of jobs created by construction and end-user by advertised exclusively to local residents, together with local training and employment, apprenticeships, and procurement. These commitments should be secured as part of any section 106 agreement.

28 The scheme proposes ground floor shops, cafes, restaurants, bars, leisure and community uses, fronting on to the public spaces and pedestrian routes. The scheme creates an appropriate level of active frontage with uses to serve the new residential and office populations, as well as visitors to and through the site in accordance with London Plan policy 2.10. The applicant has submitted a retail study, which confirms that the proposed retail uses in the scheme would enhance and complement the existing local and specialist independent retail offer found in Canary Wharf, rather than compete with them. Consideration should be given to offering a range of retail offers, including some small and affordable or subsidised shop units, in accordance with London Plan policy 4.9. The hotel is an appropriate use in a town centre location, in accordance with London Plan policy 4.5.

29 The scheme includes provision for community uses, and whilst no minimum or maximum quantum has been provided at this outline stage, the indicative scheme makes provision for 6,751 sq.m., which includes provision of a 2-Form entry primary school in Development Zone H. The

page 5 provision of a school on the site is strongly supported, and GLA officers would welcome continued discussions with the applicant and Council given the acute need for new schools and other infrastructure on the Isle of Dogs, as identified in the FALP changes to the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area as noted in paragraph 24 above, and in accordance with London Plan policy 3.7. Noting the outline nature of the scheme and flexibility sought by the applicant, the phasing and programming for the school implementation will need to be clarified as part of the s106 agreement. Housing

30 The principle of residential development of the site is acceptable –Tower Hamlets annual monitoring target as set out in the London Plan is 2,885 units, which increases to 3,931 units in the 2014 FALP. This scheme would represent between 50% and 150% of the Council’s annual provision, depending on the number of units delivered, which could make the single largest contribution to the borough’s housing target.

Affordable housing

31 The applicant is putting forward an affordable housing “package” for the scheme, which looks to achieve provision of up to 35% affordable housing - delivered on-site and off-site and with two appraisal review points. In the first phase, the applicant is looking to provide 15.7%, with up to 23.8% in the second phase, and up to 34% in the third phase. Together, this would result in the provision of approximately 25% affordable housing across the site. The applicant also proposes a commuted sum or off-site development partnership with the borough to bring the overall offer to 35% (i.e. 10%), in order to meet the Council’s affordable housing policy requirements.

32 In relation to the principle of a phased affordable housing package, this could be an appropriate way of bringing forward the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing on a large, outline scheme with the parameter thresholds and build out programme proposed. This is however, subject to on-going discussions and assessment of the applicant’s development viability assessment, which at the time of reporting was still under review by the Council’s independent surveyor. This review will need to analyse in detail the costs that have been inputted to the toolkit and verify the assumptions that have been made in relation to sales values, rent levels and the phasing programme, for example.

33 In relation to the provision of a commuted sum for the 10% off-site affordable housing provision, this should be reconsidered as the first principle and priority should be given to the applicant bringing forward affordable housing on site as a priority, followed by the possibility of bringing forward alternative development sites nearby to the site, and securing planning permission for these. Further discussion about this aspect is required and it should be explicitly referenced in the s106 agreement, with robust legal mechanisms secured. The reference in the affordable housing statement to the provision of “up to” 35% affordable housing also requires clarification and whether a calculation based on units should also be provided (noting the variances in unit sizes). As this is an outline application, the Mayor and GLA officers would not be party to subsequent negotiations at reserved matters stage, and there needs to be clarity provided on what the baseline affordable housing provision would be and when it would be provided, noting London Plan requirements that the “maximum reasonable amount” of affordable housing is expected.

34 In terms of tenure, the applicant is proposing a 70/30 split between affordable rent and intermediate provision, which complies with local policy but not with London Plan policy 3.12, which seeks to ensure that development proposals deliver a 60:40 tenure split. Further discussion regarding this would be appropriate, with an assessment of the implications of providing a 60:40 split coming forward to understand what this would do to overall provision. Further discussion

page 6 regarding the off-site affordable housing delivery and what tenure this would comprise would also be appropriate.

35 It is acknowledged that discussions regarding the affordable housing offer, tenure, rent levels and phasing of delivery are on-going, particularly noting the outline nature of the application. Further analysis is required in order to satisfy London Plan policies and the Housing SPG that seek to maximise affordable housing provision, as well as the borough’s housing policies. A draft of the section 106 legal agreement will need to be provided to the GLA prior to the Stage 2 referral in order that a transparent programme of affordable housing is delivery secured as part of the development.

Housing mix

36 Noting this is an outline planning application that allows for the delivery of between 1,700 and 4,500 units, the applicant has not specified an exact residential mix, but has set out the following target residential mix and ranges, for which approval is sought as part of the specified parameters:

37 The indicative masterplan assesses a mix that includes 45% family sized accommodation in the affordable rented provision, and 23.7% in the intermediate provision. Overall, a range of unit sizes is proposed, which is welcomed at this outline stage, but in order to reflect identified local housing needs as reserved matters come forward, there will need to be robust mechanisms in the s106 agreement to review the provision coming forward as part of each phase, with negotiation with the Council’s housing department and registered providers being appropriate at each stage.

Density

38 The site is located in a town centre, which is a Central setting, and with the introduction of Crossrail, the public transport accessibility (PTAL) would reach 4. The applicant has calculated the density of the indicative scheme (3,107 units), based on net residential area, which is approximately 1,500 habitable rooms per hectare (hrha). This exceeds the density range of 650- 1,100 hrha, but in light of the location within the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area and town centre, contribution that the scheme is making in terms of creating a new part of the city on an underutilised site, such a density is appropriate, reinforced by its high quality design, and commitments towards residential quality, generous public realm and open spaces. For clarity, the applicant should calculate the density of the scheme based on the minimum and maximum thresholds as well, in order to be clear as to where these would sit on the London Plan density matrix.

Children’s play space

39 Using the methodology within the Mayor’s play space SPG, the applicant has calculated that there would be between 322 and 553 children residing within the residential element of the development. The guidance sets a benchmark of 10 sq.m. of useable child playspace to be provided per child, with under-5 child playspace provided on-site. The redevelopment proposals would include approximately 2.5 hectares of public open space as a minimum, and a detailed landscaping strategy has been produced which shows a series of parks, public squares and promenades. This would provide formal, informal and incidental children’s play areas for a range of ages and the commitment provided by the applicant at this stage is welcomed in terms of providing a clear indication of the minimum specifications for the spaces between buildings.

page 7 40 The indicative scheme shows that approximately 4,500 sq.m. of child play space could be accommodated on the site, with a range of play and recreation facilities indicated at ground level, and with communal gardens/roof terraces. Under-5s space would be provided in four areas, within 100 metres of residential doors. There is one formal dedicated play area of over 2,100 sq.m. shown for 5-11 year olds in East Park, which can provide for a range of casual sports including 5-a-side cricket, football, volleyball or tennis. Additional informal play and youth space has been allocated in South Dock Park, a 1-hectare space fronting the water and East Park, a 5,600 sq.m. space between Areas G and H. A sports hall is shown on the indicative plan in the basement of Zone H, where the proposed school is located.

41 Detailed play strategies would need to be secured by the Council for future approval as the reserved matters applications come forward. Commitments in terms of the layout and landscaping arrangements as set out in the design guidelines would need to be secured, as well minimum space requirements and maximum travel distances from front doors, for instance. Tall buildings, urban design and strategic views

42 The proposed scheme has been discussed extensively at pre-application stage and has evolved into a well-designed masterplan for a vibrant, well located mixed use neighbourhood. The proposal is accompanied by a well-crafted set of design codes that will ensure key aspects of the scheme are delivered whilst providing enough flexibility for the masterplan to evolve and adapt to change without undermining its quality.

43 The masterplan is laid out in a simple grid form defining a number of well-proportioned development parcels. The grid arrangement makes for a legible and permeable public realm network, providing easy and direct routes across the whole site and connecting to Preston’s Road to the east, Cartier Circle to the north and Montgomery Square to the west. All servicing and car parking is from the basement, removing the need for extensive stretches of blank frontage along the public realm which is welcomed.

44 Central to the masterplan is a spine route that links to Montgomery Square across a new bridge to a new proposed Junction Square. This provides the main connection to the west allowing both the new neighbourhood and the existing office precinct to benefit from each others adjacency which is welcomed. This new square is well sized and located to become a central hub of activity for future residents of the scheme as well as office workers from the existing Canary Wharf buildings.

45 Two secondary routes provide the main north south movement linking the South Dock waterfront to Blackwall Basin and Cartier Circle and beyond. As well as providing legible and direct routes across the site, these allow the waterfront character of the site to penetrate deep into the scheme.

46 As noted above, a large park (East Park) of approximately 2,100 sq.m. is provided to the west of scheme surrounded by residential development parcels and a school. The park is well sized to accommodate a range of activities and buildings around it to provide enclosure, definition and good quality frontage that ensure it feels safe and well used which is welcomed.

47 The southern edge of the neighbourhood is defined by South Dock. A narrow strip of development along this edge accommodates taller buildings that will create good quality frontage along the route that links to Preston’s Road to the east and a good quality public waterfront and linear park.

page 8 48 The residential quality of the scheme is secured in Chapter 5 of the Design Guidelines. Individual building typologies and general area wide residential standards are specified. The number of dwellings accessed from a single core (should not normally exceed eight per floor), residential entrances, aspect, floor to ceiling heights and internal spaces are set out in the design guidelines, which will ensure that a good residential quality will be delivered. Whilst a certain amount of flexibility is allowed in the wording of these codes, there is a clear intention to meet all relevant standards, which is welcomed. Before the scheme is referred back at stage two the Council will need to secure such provision accordingly.

49 A height parameter plan sets out the maximum building envelopes for each individual parcel of land. This has been designed so the buildings along the spine route are medium rise buildings of up to 74 metres AOD, with the buildings around the edges of the development are up to 211metres AOD (approximately 56 storeys). The massing of each of these elements is constrained by maximum plot extents that ensure taller buildings are well proportioned yet have good sized flexible floor plates.

50 A scheme of this height and scale will invariably change the skyline of the surrounding area. A visual impact study has been undertaken illustrating what this impact will be on both local views and strategic views. This study assesses the impact the development will have on a LVMF Views 4A.1, 5A.1 and 15.B1. Of each of these views the scheme is most prominent when viewed from Greenwich Park overlooking Queen’s House (LVMF view 5A.1). In this view the development is clearly visible to the right of Queen’s House, but is distinctly in the background of the view and appears only as an extension to the existing Canary Wharf tall building cluster creating no adverse impact to the setting of the World Heritage Site. The impact the development has on other protected views is minimal and also presents no strategic concern.

51 The detailed element of the application sets an impressive the baseline quality for future phases of the development and proves the deliverability of the design codes. This element also includes the tallest of the buildings being proposed. Designed by three different architects, this element is considered well designed providing good quality residential accommodation in distinctive and well detailed buildings.

52 In summary the masterplan, design codes and detailed element of the scheme are all very well designed providing a good range of high quality accommodation, public spaces and a vibrant public realm which are all strongly supported by officers.

Inclusive design

53 The application is accompanied by an access statement, which cover the principles of inclusive design, access across the site, pedestrian routes, drop off points, and a commitment to Lifetime Homes and wheelchair housing standards. The level of detail provided is welcomed given the outline nature of the application. The size of this proposal is effectively creating a new neighbourhood, and it therefore provides an excellent opportunity to demonstrate compliance with the Lifetime Neighbourhood principles in line with policy 7.1, with an exemplar scheme, that enables all parts of the site, including waterways to be accessed by all residents and visitors. The site is largely level, with the main level changes occurring as it drops to dock level and rises up to Cartier Circle, The applicant should retain an access consultant through the reserved matters applications so as to ensure that the landscaping, entrances, internal layouts and level changes, particularly from Cartier Circle, can be designed to ensure that step-free routes are available to all buildings and external spaces.

54 The applicant has committed to ensuring that over 10% of units would be provided as wheelchair accessible, and these details would need to be secured as part of the planning

page 9 permission with detailed specification regarding the location across the range of unit sizes and tenure. All of the units would have access to at least two lifts, which would meet minimum Lifetime Homes standards. Entrances would be level and sheltered.

55 All the access related commitments outlined in the application in relation to the commercial, recreation and educational buildings, together with specifications in relation to the public realm should be secured by way of condition at detailed design stage. This includes a requirement that 10% of hotel rooms are wheelchair accessible, and investigating the possibility of a Changing Places facility. Any amphitheatre style seating /seating steps should provide spaces for wheelchair users and children in pushchairs integrated into the seating spaces, and step free routes to the dock edge must be ensured. A car parking management plan would be appropriate so as to ensure that there are sufficient blue badge spaces kept available for the accessible units, and the management of taxi drop-off and community transport points should also be subject to a management plan.

Climate change mitigation

56 The applicant has broadly followed the energy hierarchy and is proposing to reduce carbon emissions by 30%. A total of 15% savings will be achieved from energy efficiency measures and 17% savings from a combined heat and power plant, which will provide the lead source of heat for the site wide energy network. Approximately 2,430 sq.m.of photovoltaic panels will provide a further 1% savings.

57 The Barkantine district heating network (DHN) has been identified as within the vicinity of the development but as it is over 1.5km away, connection is not possible at this time. The applicant has, however, provided a commitment to ensuring that the development is designed to allow future connection to a district heating network should one become available, and further details of how this would be achieved should be provided together with a commitment secured in the s106 agreement.

58 The applicant is proposing to install a site heat network serving all building uses. A schematic showing the route of the network linking all buildings on the site has been provided. The applicant is proposing that four energy centres are installed to supply the site. The first energy centre is proposed for the initial phase in the western part of the site. Two energy centres will be located centrally. Finally, the fourth energy centre would be located in the eastern part of the development. The applicant suggests that in this development multiple energy centres are required, whilst also arguing that there are site specific constraints (e.g. routing of exhaust flues) related to adopting a single energy centre in this case.

59 Reducing the number of energy centres would enable a small number of larger CHP units to be accommodated, rather than the five CHP units of equivalent overall capacity proposed. This approach often results in CHP with significantly higher electrical efficiencies, while maintaining high overall efficiency, leading to increased on-site carbon reduction. However, the applicant has provided evidence that, at the particular scale found in this development, the improvement in CHP electrical is marginal between the smaller (37%) and larger (41%) CHP units and the benefits usually found do not arise.

60 The on-site carbon dioxide savings fall short of the targets within policy 5.2 of the 2013 London Plan. The developer is proposing to make a cash-in-lieu contribution to Tower Hamlets relating to the short fall in carbon dioxide reductions, equivalent to 1,343 tonnes of CO2 per annum.

Climate change adaptation

page 10 61 The applicant has submitted a sustainability statement, which includes an assessment against the GLA’s standards. The applicant states that it is intended that all homes meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 and ‘Excellent’ for the non-residential space, and with all of the relevant London Plan policies and the Mayor’s SPG.

62 The documents set out a number of techniques proposed to reduce energy consumption and cut carbon emission, with commitments to using high performance building fabric, shading systems, low energy lighting, energy efficient appliances, metering, high levels of insulation, and by maximising natural sunlight and solar gain when the reserved matters applications come forward. Greywater recycling and rainwater harvesting is proposed. The site is in Flood Zone 3, surrounded by Blackwall Basin, Graving Dock and South Dock and a surface water drainage system would be introduced, with stormwater attenuation and discharge to the dock. The indicative scheme shows nearly 3,000 sq.m. of green and brown roofs, contributing towards SUDS and biodiversity values (as discussed below). Suitably worded condition would be expected to ensure that these commitments are secured in the reserved matters schemes. Blue Ribbon Network and Biodiversity

65 The site includes the listed East Quay and Blackwall Basin, and listed building consent is required for the partial demolition and alterations of sections of the listed dock walls. The scheme proposes the partial infilling and decking over of the Blackwall Basin and South Dock, with new bridge links over Water Square to link the site to Canary Wharf. In total, there would be displacement of approximately 18,000 sq.m. of existing waterspace as a result of the proposal, which must be assessed in terms of the impact upon the Blue Ribbon Network.

66 The previously approved masterplan included a new canal linking Blackwall Basin and South Dock, through the centre of the site. As the current masterplan has developed, the applicant has reviewed the approach to this canal link, and has taken the decision to remove this element from the scheme on the basis that it significantly reduces the usable area of public realm that is important in the success of high density developments such as this. Existing access to Blackwall Basin is maintained via Bellmouth Passage. A pontoon and new permanent houseboat moorings are proposed, and the scheme also includes soft landscaping behind a boardwalk along the edge of South Dock and Graving Dock.

67 Whilst there would be an increased water take as a result of the proposal, given the evolution and reconfiguration of the docks that has taken place over time and contribution that the scheme makes in terms of enhancing public access to the water’s edge and overall provision of public open space, there are no strategic concerns regarding the absence of a new canal link or reduction in water space in the current scheme. The proposals are supported in terms of safeguarding and enhancing the Blue Ribbon Network – improving access to it, providing for waterbourne leisure, and in terms of protecting its open character, in accordance with the London Plan. It also maintains navigability for boats.

68 In terms of biodiversity values, the application site contains two sites of importance for nature conservation: Blackwall Basin (a Borough 1 SINC), and Millwall & West India Docks (a Borough 2 SINC). Both are principally of importance for the regular presence of breeding and overwintering birds. Of the two, Blackwall Basin is most important and an area of wasteland habitat within the Blackwall SINC would be removed by the development proposals, as was the case with the previous application. The scheme proposes the creation of new habitats through the landscape planting, with a dock edge park and green/brown roofs being included in the scheme to mitigate this impact. Biodiversity islands are also proposed in the Graving Dock, to provide habitat for redstarts and other dockland aquatic species. The Environmental Statement includes a detailed assessment of the impacts of the scheme, both during construction and through the operation of the development. Suitably worded conditions will be required

page 11 regarding the phasing of mitigation works to ensure that alternative habitats are provided for any nesting birds and bats, for instance, as construction takes place.

Transport

63 The proposals have been the subject of pre application discussions between TfL, the applicant and Tower Hamlets Council. Whilst the transport assessment refers to the specified development parameter, set out above, it is mainly based on the indicative scheme to determine the number of parking spaces and to estimate future traffic flows.

Vehicular access and car parking

64 The existing vehicular access to the site from Preston’s Road would be enhanced with the creation of new vehicular links from Cartier Circle, the proposed Montgomery Bridge and an additional access onto Preston’s Road, which is supported.

65 For the indicative scheme a total of 1,229 car parking spaces, including 942 residential and 217 commercial spaces within the basement are proposed, in line with the London Plan maximum. Within the overall total, 60 short stay/drop off and 10 car club bays would also be created on street. Regardless of the eventual content of the development, an overall cap of 1,300 spaces has been agreed along with a maximum for each phase to ensure policy compliance. The principle of capped parking levels is welcomed and this should be secured by planning condition.

66 The impact of the car parking would also be mitigated by a management plan, permit free agreement, electric vehicle and blue badge parking in line with London Plan standards and such measures are therefore supported

Cycle parking

67 Cycle parking has been specified by phase for the indicative scheme. Overall, 6,137 spaces would be provided for the office, residential and retail elements, which would accord with London Plan standards. Regardless of the scheme mix, the applicant has committed to providing cycle parking for each phase in line with current policy which is accepted and welcomed. As such this should be secured by condition for each phase of development, along with end of journey facilities where appropriate.

Trip generation and mode split

68 During discussions with TfL, the applicant has clarified various aspects of their trip generation/mode split methodology such as the assumptions made about development scenarios, occupancy rates, phasing and data. Upon receipt of an updated assessment, TfL expects to be able to agree the predicted trip generation as a basis for identifying necessary mitigation. The applicant is also clarifying the scope of committed developments and how they have been applied to the assessment.

Traffic & Highways

69 It is noted that the trip distribution of residential and non-residential vehicle trips is based on travel to work data from the 2001 Census. In the absence of more recent relevant data, this approach is considered reasonable and therefore supported.

page 12 70 In order to validate vehicle trips and outcomes based on them, the various issues with the trip generation and mode split assessment detailed above need to be resolved. It is noted however, that various junctions within the vicinity of the site have been individually modelled including the Preston’s Road roundabout and Aspen Way Upper Bank Street junctions to the west, which provide access to the TLRN. In order that the outcome of such modelling can be verified, the applicant has agreed to provide modelling outputs to TfL.

71 An initial review of the modelling results does nevertheless indicate that both Preston’s Road roundabout and Aspen Way are already operating at capacity during the peak periods. Despite this no specific mitigation measures have been identified with these proposals and it has not, therefore been demonstrated that the highway network would operate satisfactorily with the planned and committed developments in accordance with London Plan policy 6.12.

72 The applicant has therefore been advised to undertake area wide highway modelling. Some preliminary modelling has already been undertaken though not validated, using TfL’s corridor model, and discussions are ongoing to establish whether this exercise can be completed before determination as it would be the most appropriate means of determining the impact on journey time reliability for both general traffic and buses The applicant’s current preference however, is that contributions from this and other nearby developments should be pooled towards the development of an area wide model to identify appropriate mitigation. That said, the previously consented scheme provided £3,750,000 towards highway mitigation. TfL considers that the scope and content of this obligation should be the starting point for any ongoing discussion about modelling and potential mitigation.

Walking

73 As the links between Wood Wharf and Canary Wharf will be enhanced through the creation of new bridges, walkway and road links, Tower Hamlets Council should ensure that their delivery is appropriately phased in line with the masterplan development through section 106 obligations or conditions as appropriate.

74 TfL welcomes the submission of an updated pedestrian (PERS) assessment for this area and Tower Hamlets Council is encouraged to allocate monies from any section 106 tariff contribution towards necessary improvements that are identified.

75 Whilst the submission of a wayfinding report is welcomed, the Legible London scheme should be promoted in line with London Plan policy 6.10 as a cost effective solution to wayfinding. Further discussion with the applicant with regard to this matter would be appropriate, including the potential for developing new Legible London products to fulfil the requirements of the local area if required.

Taxis

76 The considerable scale and mix of proposed development will generate a demand for taxi and private hire services. Accordingly, the layout of the proposed development should allow space for a taxi rank, booked private hire vehicle (PHV) pick up area and the highway layout should also facilitate suitable taxi and PHV drop off. Further discussion with Tower Hamlets Council would be appropriate to establish how best to capture this requirement as part of any planning permission.

Docklands Light Railway

page 13 77 At present, the transport assessment does not accurately represent the current DLR peak hour capacity nor how development trips are distributed across the network. That said, since the previously consented scheme was considered, 3-car operation has been implemented on all Bank-Woolwich Arsenal weekday services. As such the £9 million that was secured as part of the previous application to mitigate the impact of additional DLR trips on the network is no longer considered necessary.

Buses

78 The indicative design of the site would enable buses to operate from Preston’s Road to Cartier Circle and to Montgomery Square via the proposed Montgomery Bridge. As such the potential for increasing bus movement through this part of the Isle of Dogs represents a significant improvement from the previously consented scheme and is therefore strongly supported. Tower Hamlets Council should therefore ensure that, through the approval of any reserved matters application, all of the ‘primary routes’ through the site, including Montgomery Square will be suitable for bus operations.

79 The indicative scheme is predicted to generate around 7,600 two-way bus trips per day with the greatest demand in a single direction of 466 trips - the equivalent of 7 double deck buses. Subject to confirmation about trip generation referred to above, the expected increase in demand for bus travel from the indicative scheme will require mitigation. The requirement would be even greater with a maximum commercial development; up to 610 bus trips arriving in the AM peak hour, the equivalent of 9 double deck buses.

80 The previously consented scheme generated a section 106 requirement for £5 million based on 557 additional peak hour trips. A contribution of £150,000 towards the upgrade of bus stands was also secured. The current trip generation for the indicative scheme is of a similar magnitude and therefore comparable bus contributions will be required. Depending on the outcome of any highway modelling, any adverse impact on bus performance may also necessitate physical mitigation measures as well as additional bus capacity to maintain current performance levels.

81 In order to ensure that the buses are able to be routed through the site, and to allow for the potential for buses to terminate at the site during the earlier phases, conditions should be attached to any planning permission that require details of stops, stands and driver toilets to be provided in consultation with TfL.

Underground

82 The transport assessment states that from 2018, rail based trips would be split between 54% on Jubilee Line, 23% on the DLR and 23% on Crossrail. The assumptions for such proportions are not clear however and should be clarified.

83 With a lower quantum of proposed commercial floorspace, TfL expects that the ability of the Jubilee line to cope with the proposed development will improve. The current indicative phasing also means that less development will come forward prior to 2018 and as such the anticipated transfer of demand to Crossrail will mitigate the impact of additional rail based trips on the capacity of the Underground network.

84 The assessment should nevertheless consider the capacity of nearby station infrastructure to accommodate additional demand. The closest entrance to Canary Wharf station from Montgomery Square currently has only one escalator operating, usually in the exit direction. There is also a fixed stair at this entrance which can be used for entry. Depending on

page 14 the predicted demand, TfL may be able to improve this arrangement. With any improvements, the lift from Montgomery Square must nevertheless be retained and further discussion with TfL is welcomed about this matter.

85 The proposed construction of the Montgomery Bridge will also impact on TfL’s underground infrastructure. TfL is currently in separate discussion with the applicant with regards to the commercial and operational implications of this matter.

Cycle Hire

86 The development will increase demand and modify the pattern of cycle hire usage in this area - with nearby docking stations at Churchill Place, Montgomery Street and Lancaster Drive expected to experience the greatest impact. The installation of new docking stations within the application site itself will therefore be necessary. Provided the new stations are of a reasonable size, they will also overcome any potential issues with the distribution of cycles required to serve a mixed use development.

87 It is therefore recommended that at least two docking stations with a combined minimum of 90 docking points are secured with this development. They should ideally be split between a 45 point docking station to the north west of the site to manage the demand coming from Canary Wharf and a 45 point station in the south east to manage demand to the eastern side of the development, as well as to link the proposed river pier proposed as part of the Mayor’s River Strategy. Further discussion is welcomed in order to identify potential locations. The total cost of two 45 docking point stations would be £420,000 and safeguarded land will also need to be set aside. Both should be secured through the section 106 agreement. The previously consented scheme was approved prior to the introduction of the Mayor’s cycle hire scheme, but it is noted nevertheless that a £250,000 was secured for cycle hire hubs.

Travel Plan, Servicing & Construction

88 Both a side wide framework travel plan and a residential travel plan have been submitted and are considered satisfactory, using TfL’s ATTrBuTE assessment tool.

89 With the previously consented scheme, the travel plans were secured through the section 106 agreement along with a sum for monitoring. The applicant advises however that they already monitor the effectiveness of their existing travel plan for the Canary Wharf Estate and that this arrangement would be preferred. Further discussion with Tower Hamlets Council about this matter is therefore welcomed

90 A draft construction logistics plan and delivery and servicing plan hav also been prepared by the applicant, which is welcomed. The use if the adjacent waterways for the transport of demolition and construction materials are particularly encouraged. Final Final documents should be secured through planning condition.

Crossrail SPG

91 The site is within an area where section 106 contributions for Crossrail will be sought in accordance with London Plan policy 6.5 and the associated supplementary planning guidance (SPG) ‘Use of planning obligations in the funding of Crossrail and the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy’, April 2013.

page 15

92 Wood Wharf is acknowledged as one of the most significant development sites within the Isle of Dogs charging area. With the consented scheme, a contribution of £100 million (with the timing calculated according to the final floorspace of the offices buildings only at the reserved matter stage) was secured. This contribution reflected the offer of £100 million funding to TfL that had been made by the applicant and which formed part of the Mayoral bid for Crossrail funding to Central Government.

93 Based on the proposed indicative floorspace; 285,560 square metres of B1 office, 35,000 square metres of A1 to A5 retail and 12,475 square metres of hotel floorspace (all GIA), a contribution of £59,539,300 will be required. Should a scheme approaching the maximum commercial floorspace be delivered however, the office element alone could attract a Crossrail contribution of £66,500,000.

94 The section 106 agreement should be therefore be flexibly worded to reflect the parameter based nature of the proposals as well as incorporate suitable triggers to ensure that the timing of the contribution reflects the commencement of each phase of development, based on the methodology specified in the SPG.

95 In line with the advice in paragraph 4.20 of the SPG, the Mayoral CIL will be treated as a credit towards the section 106 Crossrail liability and should therefore be reflected in the wording of the section 106 agreement.

Local planning authority’s position

96 The Council is currently reviewing the application, which is the subject of a planning performance agreement. It is understood that a March 2014 committee is being targeted but that this may slip to summer. Legal considerations

97 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

98 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

99 This is a very major development of one of the largest sites within the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area. If delivered, the development will be transformative and have significant regeneration, visual and economic impacts on the area, as well as provide significant new housing and affordable housing. The application is broadly acceptable in strategic policy terms however,

page 16 further information and/or clarification as detailed below is required before it can be confirmed that the proposal is in full accordance complies with the London Plan:

 Principle of use: The principle of a mixed use scheme with retail, offices, hotel, community uses and homes in the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area is accordance with London Plan policies 2.10, 2.11, 2.13, 3.7, 4.2, 4.5, subject to appropriate conditions being secured as part of any planning permission.  Housing: The principle of housing on this site is acceptable however, the affordable housing offer is still the subject of negotiation and verification in order to ensure the maximum reasonable amount is secured in accordance with London Plan policy 3.12 and that on-site affordable housing is prioritised. The scheme proposes a range of units in accordance with London Plan policies 3.8, which will need to be secured by condition. The applicant’s design guidelines set out commitments to ensuring that the residential quality is in accordance with the Housing SPG. Extensive areas of play and open space would be provided in accordance with the Mayor’s SPG. The density exceeds London Plan guidelines, but optimises development on the site in accordance with London Plan policy 3.4.  Tall buildings, views, urban design: The design is of a high standard and would provide a positive contribution to the Canary Wharf and London’s skyline, without detriment to the views from or the setting of the Greenwich World Heritage Site. The design guidelines set out a number of commitments in terms of residential quality, which should be secured as part of any planning permission.

 Inclusive design and access: The applicant’s commitment towards creating an inclusive environment is welcomed and and the access statement and design code set out a number of guidelines which would be adhered to including Lifetime Homes standards, 10% wheelchair accessible units, and in relation to routes, levels, and landscaping. These details should be secured as part of the planning permission to ensure they are adhered to at reserved matters stage.

 Climate change: The applicant has broadly followed the energy hierarchy to reduce CO2 emissions. Sufficient information has been provided to understand the proposals as a whole and whilst the carbon savings fall short of London Plan standards, a carbon off-setting payment is proposed. Sustainability measures are proposed and should be secured by way of condition.

 Blue Ribbon and biodiversity: The scheme proposes the partial infilling and decking over of waterways and would impact upon existing wildlife habitats. A number of design features and mitigation measures are proposed, including landscaping, biodiversity islands and green/brown roofs to compensate for this loss and as such, the scheme is acceptable in strategic planning terms, subject to the measures being secured by condition.

 Transport: The proposal is generally acceptable in relation to access, parking levels, and walking routes however further information is required regarding trip generation, modelling, public transport is required, and appropriately worded conditions and s106 contributions secured.

page 17

for further information, contact GLA Planning Unit (Development & Projects Team) Stewart Murray, Assistant Director - Planning 020 7983 4271 email [email protected] Colin Wilson, Senior Manager – Development & Projects 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Samantha Wells, Case Officer 020 7983 4266 email [email protected]

page 18