Subject: Plot R3, Land to the south of High Street Stratford, east of Sugar House Lane and west of Three Mills Wall River, Stratford, E15 (application reference numbers 16/00499/NMA and 16/00412/REM) Meeting date: 22 November 2016 Report to: Planning Decisions Committee Report of: Sara Dawes, Senior Planning Development Manager
FOR DECISION
This report will be considered in public
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 This report considers two separate but linked applications for Non-Material Amendments and Reserved Matters/Approval of Details respectively, submitted by Vastint UK BV for Plot R3 of the proposed redevelopment of a 10 hectare site at Sugar House Lane and Hunts Lane.
1.2 The overall site benefits from part outline and part full planning permission granted by the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation on September 2012 ref: 12/00336/LTGDC/LBNM (“the 2012 permission”). Plot R3 falls within the part of the site with outline planning permission with the Reserved Matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping required to demonstrate compliance with the approved parameter plans, Design Code and relevant planning conditions that form part of the 2012 permission.
1.3 The first application (ref: 16/00499/NMA) relates to Non Material Amendments (NMA) to vary the ‘Maximum Storey Heights and ‘Characterisation of Open Spaces’ parameter plans approved under the 2012 permission. The amendments are detailed at paragraph 6.10 and summarised as follows: a) Provision of stair/Lift cores to Eastern and Western elements of Perimeter Block A; b) Provision of pitched roof incorporating stair/Lift cores to Northern/Southern Accents of Riverside Block A; c) Provision of Set-back storey to Northern/Southern Element – Perimeter Block A; d) Footprint of the Riverside Block B Accents; e) Reclassification of Riverside Block B from ‘Public Shared Surface’ to ‘Private Residential Garden Zone’ to provide private terraces; and f) Reclassification of Riverside Block B from ‘Public Shared Surface’ to ‘Semi- Private Residential Amenity Courtyard’ to provide semi-private courtyard and a garden for residents of the Three Mills Residential Moorings; 1.4 The second application (ref: 16/00412/RMA) seeks Reserved Matters approval for 156 residential units (Use Class C3), comprising 15 x studios, 55 x 1 bedroom, 12 x 2 bedroom, 60 x 3 bedroom, and 14 x 4 bedroom units. The application also seeks Approval of Details (AOD) that require evidence that all residential units comply with the London Housing Design Guide (or its successor) (condition C8), the submission of daylight, sunlight and overshadowing analysis (condition C11), parking management plan (condition C15), cycle parking (condition C16), and waste management plan (condition C36), all of which are required by planning condition on a plot by plot basis.
1.5 The building use, and number and mix of homes is compliant with the requirements of the 2012 permission, as well as the Local Plan Site Allocation. The buildings are designed to achieve a high standard of living accommodation in terms of their access, aspect, size, access to amenity space, car and cycle parking and refuse and recycling storage and collection.
1.6 While there are a proportion of habitable rooms and some whole dwellings that will experience daylighting standards below the BRE guidance, on balance, this is considered to be offset by the benefits of the overall design quality of the scheme, including 76% of homes to be duel aspect and no single aspect north facing units.
1.7 One representation received from the Three Mills Moorings Association, raising concern about loss of daylight and sunlight, overlooking to the Residential Moorings. The technical assessments undertaken in support of the Reserved Matters application, EIA Screening request and NMA demonstrates that localised changes in site level and building heights will not create new or different significant environmental impacts to surrounding residential occupiers. Officers note that the proposals include a private garden for the residential moorings, which will be accessed directly from the moorings.
1.8 No objections have been received from statutory consultees, including the Environment Agency, Historic England and the Canal and River Trust.
1.9 The proposed layout and scale complies with the maximum storey heights, underground parking strategy, and characterisation of open spaces parameters approved by the 2012 permission (as amended). An increase in height in response to design development, adjusted site levels and more generous floor to ceiling dimensions above that assumed in the 2012 permission is not considered to give rise to any new or different significant townscape, heritage or environmental effects.
1.10 The Quality Review Panel (QRP) offers its strong support for the Reserved Matters application for Plot R3, finding the architecture to be particularly distinctive and attractive, and supports the planning application for approval.
1.11 The landscaping scheme forms part of the approved site-wide public realm infrastructure design. There is overlap between the site-wide strategy and plot- specific RMAs to ensure individual building designs and the public realm they define are considered together. The residential courtyards and shared streets adopt the principles previously approved as part of the Plot R6, Plot R1 and public realm infrastructure Reserved Matters, and a new private garden for the Three Mills Moorings is proposed adjacent to the river.
1.12 The scheme includes a level of car and cycle parking that complies with the 2012 permission, as well as the more recently adopted London Plan and Local Plan policies that seek a higher provision of cycle parking provision, and raises no objections in relation to servicing and deliveries and refuse storage and collection.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 The Committee is asked to:
Non Material Amendments (ref: 16/00499/NMA)
a) Approve the Application for Non-Material Amendments to Parameter Plans PP-1-103 rev E (Maximum Storey Heights) and PP-1-109 rev G (Characterisation of Open Spaces) attached to planning permission reference 12/00336/LTGOUT/LBNM dated 27 September 2012 (as amended) to accommodate amendments to the number of storeys permitted at Plot R3, comprising the provision of single storey lift cores to Block A; the fifth floor set back storeys to Block A; the pitched roof incorporating a lift core to Block B; footprint of the block B accents; and the reclassification of the public realm to the east of the plot’s ‘Riverside Block’ from ‘Public – Shared Surface’ to ‘Private Residential Garden Zone’ and ‘Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard’ to accommodate private terraces, semi-private courtyard and a garden for the residents of the Three Mills Residential Moorings.
Reserved Matters and Approval of Details (ref: 16/00412/REM)
b) Approve the Application for the Approval of Reserved Matters for the construction of two blocks comprising 156 residential units, basement car park, and the provision of hard and soft landscaping for Development Plot R3 submitted pursuant to conditions A3 (Time Limits) and C1 (Reserved Matters – Layout, Scale, Appearance and Landscaping), and the partial submission of details pursuant to conditions C8 (Housing Standards), C11 (Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing), C15 (Parking Management Plan), C16 (Cycle Parking) and C36 (Waste Management Strategy) of planning permission reference 12/00336/LTGOUT/LBNM dated 27th September 2012 (as amended) and subject to the planning conditions set out at section 11 of this report; and
2.2 Agree to delegate authority to the Director of Planning Policy and Decisions to finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Director of Planning Policy and Decisions considers reasonably necessary.
3. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 3.1 None.
4. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 None.
Site plan:
© Crown copyright and database rights 2012 Ordnance Survey 100050265
Location: Land to the south of High Street Stratford, east of Sugar House Lane and west of Three Mills Wall River, Stratford, E15 London Borough: Newham Proposal: 16/00499/NMA Application for Non-Material Amendments to Parameter Plans PP-1- 103 rev E (Maximum Storey Heights) and PP-1-109 rev G (Characterisation of Open Spaces) attached to Hybrid Planning Permission reference 12/00336/LTGOUT/LBNM dated 27 September 2012 (as amended) to accommodate amendments to the number of storeys permitted at Plot R3, comprising the provision of single storey lift cores to Block A; the fifth floor set back storeys to Block A; the pitched roof incorporating a lift core to Block B; footprint of the block B accents; and the reclassification of the public realm to the east of the plot’s ‘Riverside Block’ from ‘Public – Shared Surface’ to ‘Private Residential Garden Zone’ and ‘Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard’ to accommodate private terraces, semi-private courtyard and a garden for the residents of the Three Mills Residential Moorings. 16/00412/REM Application for the Approval of Reserved Matters for the construction of two blocks comprising 156 residential units (Use Class C3), basement car park, and the provision of hard and soft landscaping for Development Plot R3 submitted pursuant to conditions A3 (Time Limits) and C1 (Reserved Matters – Layout, Scale, Appearance and Landscaping), and the partial submission of details pursuant to conditions C8 (Housing Standards), C11 (Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing), C15 (Parking Management Plan), C16 (Cycle Parking) and C36 (Waste Management Strategy) of planning permission reference 12/00336/LTGOUT/LBNM dated 27th September 2012 (as amended) Applicant: Vastint UK BV Planning Consultant: GL Hearn Architect: Duggan Morris
5. SITE & SURROUNDINGS
5.1 The application site forms part of a 10 hectare peninsular of land bounded by Stratford High Street, Three Mills Wall River and the River Lea Navigation. The majority of the peninsular, including the application site, has been cleared, with remediation and earthworks being undertaken in preparation for redevelopment.
5.2 The application site is located at the eastern edge of the peninsular and is bounded by Sugar House Lane and residential development Plot R6 to the west, Three Mills Wall River to the east, residential development Plot R2 to the north, and residential development Plot R4 to the south.
5.3 The Three Mills residential moorings are located on the Three Mills Wall River adjacent to Plot R3, and Three Mills Green is across the river to the east.
5.4 The site boundary deliberately includes the adjacent sections of Sugar House Lane to the west and shared street to the north and south to demonstrate its integration with the design of the public realm.
5.5 The site comprises and falls within the Local Plan - Sugar House Lane Site Allocation SA4.2, and is partially located within the Three Mills Conservation Area (TMCA) along the eastern boundary and the Sugar House Lane Conservation Area (SHLCA); and Flood Zone 3.
5.6 The site is shown at Appendix 1 (Site location and layout)
6. APPLICATION PROPOSAL
Background 6.1 The application site measures approximately 0.88 hectares and is one of thirteen development plots and associated public realm infrastructure that forms part of a masterplan which benefits the 2012 permission. Each plot within the outline part of the 2012 permission requires the submission of a Reserved Matters application (RMA) to be prepared in accordance with the associated parameter plans, Design Code, planning conditions and Section 106 (s106) Agreement.
6.2 The parameters plans, when considered alongside planning conditions and a Design Code, establish part of the brief for the detailed design of each building. The parameter plans establish the following:
Building line requirements; Maximum storey heights; Ground, first and upper floor uses; Characterisation of open spaces; Levels strategy; Underground car parking strategy.
6.3 The Design Code identifies the different block typologies (commercial, hotel, mews/perimeter, riverside, mixed-use, towers and public buildings) within the masterplan and recommends design principles (access, levels, parking, massing, materials, fenestration, signage and plant/rooftop service) to be adopted in the design of each building.
6.4 The application site is referred to as Plot R3: a residential perimeter block with a mews and a separate riverside block serviced by a basement car park and adjacent public realm. Plot R3 is one of five plots that include or consist of a perimeter block and mews. The Planning Decision Committee approved the Plot R6 Reserved Matters on 25 November 2015, and Plot R1 Reserved Matters on 26 July 2016, which both have perimeter blocks and mews houses.
6.5 The 2012 permission permits buildings ranging from a maximum of 3 to 7 storeys for Plot R3. The east and west facing sections of the perimeter block are approved to be 4 storeys; the north and south facing sections are approved to be 4 storeys with localised single storey set backs; and the mews houses are approved to be 3 storeys. The riverside block is approved to be predominantly 4 storeys with a single storey set back, and 7 story accents at the northern and southern end.
Environmental Impact Assessment 6.6 In support of the Reserved Matters application the applicant submitted a request for a Screening Opinion as to whether the proposed development (including the proposed amendments to the parameter plans, would generate new or different significant environmental effects that would require an update to the 2012 Environmental Statement.
6.7 The information submitted in support of the request concluded that there would be no new or different significant effects on traffic and access, socio-economics, noise, air quality, ecology, townscape and visual, daylight and sunlight, wind, hydrology, flooding and drainage, ground conditions, heritage assets, waste, and sustainability compared to the 2012 Environmental Statement. To inform this conclusion, further assessments were undertaken in relation to townscape and visual, daylight and sunlight, and heritage assets as well as cumulative effects.
6.8 The PPDT’s Environmental Consultants requested further information relating to daylight assessments on the habitable rooms of the development, which has now been submitted. PPDT’s Environmental Consultants have advised that the 2012 Environmental Statement stated that based on the worst case assessment of Average Daylight Factor (ADF) for new residential units, there would be no rooms across the Masterplan area that fail to meet the thresholds set out in BS 8206-2 Lighting for Buildings: Code of Practice for Daylighting. However, at this time, no units in Plot R3 were considered to be the ‘worst case’; therefore no ADF data for these units was presented. The daylight report submitted as part of this RMA in order to discharge Condition C11 of the outline planning permission, demonstrates that there are a number of incidences across most floors of Plot R3, though predominantly on the ground and first floors, where ADF values for rooms in residential units are below the relevant thresholds. This is therefore not in line with the presentation of potential ADF across the Masterplan area as described in the 2012 Environmental Statement. However, the presentation of ADF within the 2012 Environmental Statement was to demonstrate that suitable designs could be achieved throughout the Masterplan area and no formal assessment of significant effects relating to ADF was made, as there is no baseline from which effects can be assessed. As such the discrepancies between the presentation of ADF from the 2012 Environmental Statement and the daylight report submitted as part of this RMA are considered a matter of design and do not demonstrate new of different significant effects, within the context of the EIA Regulations, which would require the submission of an Environmental Statement Addendum.
Non-Material Amendment (reference 16/00499/NMA) 6.9 As part of the detailed design of Plot R3 (as proposed by Reserved Matters application reference 16/00412/REM), the applicant has submitted an application seeking Non-Material Amendments to the ‘Maximum Storey Heights’, and ‘Characterisation of Open Space’ parameter plans attached to the 2012 permission. (See appendix 2 and 3)
6.10 The application proposes the following non-material amendments: a) Stair/Lift cores (Eastern and Western elements (Perimeter Block) Provision of two full-height stair/lift cores on the western and eastern element of the perimeter block to provide access to the proposed roof terraces. b) Stair/Lift cores (Northern/Southern Accent – Riverside Block) Provision of two full-height stair/lift cores to form part of the pitched roof elements of the Riverside Block. c) Set-back storey (Northern/Southern Element – Perimeter Block) The permitted set-back storeys on fifth floor level of the northern and southern elements of the perimeter block are wider then 2/3rds of the plan area of the typical floor plate. However, it accords with the 2012 Design Code which requires this element to be set back from the building edge by a minimum of 2m. In addition, a continuous set-back element is proposed on the southern element of the Perimeter Block d) Width of seven storey element (Northern/Southern Accent – Riverside Block) For architectural reasons, the northern/southern accent towers of the Riverside Block are not set back from the four storey riverside elevation. e) Private Residential Garden Zone (Private Terraces Riverside Block) A small private residential garden zone is proposed along the eastern elevation of the Riverside Block to enable the creation of private terraces (I.e. private amenity space for the ground floor units within this block. This space is currently allocated as Public-Shared Surface and this application seeks to amend its characterisation to Private Residential Garden Zone. f) Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard The Plot R3 RMA proposes to allocate the northern part of the riverfront to a designated garden (‘Moorers’ Garden’) for the residents of the Three Mills Residential Moorings (3MM). The remaining part of the riverfront will be allocated to a Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard.
6.11 While the proposed changes to the ‘Maximum Heights’ Parameter Plans deals only by reference to storey heights, the proposed changes to the true height of the development – when compared to that assumed in the 2012 permission - have been amended as follows:
Block A (Perimeter Block): • from 18.5m (4 storeys max) to 20.96 (+2.46) • from 21.5m (5 storeys-set back) to 25.245m (+3.745m) Block A (Mews) • From 15.5 (3 storeys) to 16.285m (+0.785m) Block B (Riverside Block): • from 18.5m (4 storeys max) to 18.995 (0.495m) • from 21.5m (5 storeys-set back) to 22.145m (+0.645m) • from 27.5m (7storeys max-tower) to 28.760m (+1.26m) • Addition of roof pitch to 33.840m (at its highest point)
Reserved Matters (reference 16/00412/REM) (see appendices 4-7) 6.12 The Reserved Matters application seeks approval for the layout, scale appearance and landscaping of a perimeter/mews block and riverside block comprising 156 residential units (8 mews houses and 148 units), basement car park and the provision of hard and soft landscaping for Plot R3 submitted pursuant to conditions A3 (Time Limits) and C1 (Reserved Matters – Layout, Scale, Appearance and Landscaping) of the 2012 permission.
6.13 The application also seeks the plot-specific approval for details submitted pursuant to conditions C8 (Housing Standards), C11 (Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing), C15 (Parking Management Plan), C16 (Cycle Parking), and C36 (Waste Management Strategy) of the 2012 permission.
6.14 The scheme comprises two blocks: a perimeter block (Block A) and an independent riverside block (Block B). The perimeter block has four storeys, with a set-back fifth floor element along the north and south edge; the eastern and western wings have set-back lift overruns. Block A contains a central mews enclave that is truncated and irregular in plan form, providing 8 no. three storey family homes. An internal courtyard is provided for residents of Block A and Mews. The perimeter block accommodates 72 apartments served by 8 cores. 14 ground floor units have secondary front doors on street. The mews provides 8 homes accessed individually from the Mews Yard.
6.15 The Riverside Block B is a linear block that addresses the Three Mills Wall River, with taller accent elements which bookend a subtly cranked central section. Block B is between five and seven storeys with pitched roofs, that is set back approximately 9m to 10m from the Three Mills Wall River. It is separated from Block A by a shared street. The block accommodates 76 apartments served by 4 cores.
6.16 The mews is between 5m and 12m wide. The Sugar House Lane pavement, which has been approved as part of the Public Realm Infrastructure Reserved Matters, is 4.0m wide, incorporating a 2.0 wide clear zone for pedestrians and a 2.0 wide zone for motorcycle parking and loading and unloading where provided. The shared space between Block A and B, and Plots R3 and R2 to the north and R4 to the south are deliberately designed to reduce traffic speeds and encourage pedestrian use by removing kerb lines and using trees and street furniture to define the narrow chicane for vehicle movement and parking.
6.17 The design of the plot has been driven by the approved 2012 Design Code and heavily influenced by the industrial heritage of the wide Sugar House Lane peninsula, in terms of choice of materials and the form and massing of the plot, particularly Block B with its pitched roofs and bookend accents. The proposed palette of materials includes brick piers to provide a strong vertical presence, layered with horizontal banding and textured precast elements in Block A. Block B, while of similar ‘hard’ materials, has a flusher solid appearance appropriate to its scale and presence. The material palette responds to the emerging context of the Strand East Masterplan, and the colour palette complements that approved in nearby Plots R1 and R6.
6.18 The perimeter block’s ‘U’ shaped residential courtyard is 9m wide and approximately 43m-47m long between the mews and the perimeter block. It provides a combination of communal and private amenity space, including facilities for doorstop play. The courtyard can be accessed directly via each lobby and lift/stair core, meaning that it can be used by all residents from Block A, including the mews residents. Residential units on ground floor of Block A are provided with private external terraces within the courtyard. Block B’s communal garden is accessed from the southern end of the plot from the public realm.
6.19 The Three Mills Mooring Private garden is located adjacent to the moorings, accessed from the northern end of the plot. Direct access into the garden from the moorings is proposed as part of planning application 16/00439/FUL. The residential units on ground floor in Block B are provided with external terraces facing the river.
6.20 The landscape material palette applies a combination of bituminous surfaces and clay paving to Sugar House Lane, and clay paving within the shared space and the mews, complimented by tree and localised ground cover planting. The residential courtyard is finished using clay paving, concrete plank paving, trees, hedging, and shrub and herbaceous planting (please refer to Appendix 5), and also incorporate timber play equipment for 0-5 year olds and communal tables and seating for residents. The riverside communal garden is finished using clay paving, trees, hedging, ornamental shrub and herbaceous planting, and incorporates covered sandpit, play trail, tables and seating. Trees and shrub planting are used to screen adjacent residential windows.
6.21 The development includes the following unit size mix:
Unit size Block A Block B Total Number Percentage Studio 9 6 15 10% 1 bed 3 52 55 35% 2 bed 12 0 12 8% 3 bed 44 16 60 38% 4 bed 10 4 14 9% Total 78 78 156 100%
6.22 There are no affordable housing units proposed within Plot R3. The 2012 permission requires the site wide provision of either 8% (without grant) or 11% (with grant) with a three stage viability review to be undertaken in completion of a certain number of units.
6.23 The scheme includes 16 (10%) wheelchair adaptable/accessible units (Building Regulations Part M4(3) distributed throughout the scheme provided in 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom types (7x1 bed, 1x2 bed, 6x3 bed, 2x4 bed). Each wheelchair adaptable home is allocated at least one car parking space within the basement which can be accessed from each lift core.
6.24 All homes meet the minimum space standards. 82% of homes exceed minimum space standards by between 2% and 24%. 76% of homes are dual aspect. There are no single aspect north facing units.
6.25 83% of homes benefit from access to private amenity space provide in the form of ground and rooftop terraces, loggias and balconies. The 17% (26no.) of homes that do not have access to private amenity space have access to communal courtyards and/or roof terraces. In addition, the majority have the equivalent or larger space incorporated within the unit. 6.26 The basement car, cycle and motorcycle park provided under Blocks A and B, is accessed from the shared street that runs along the site’s southern edge (opposite Plot R4) and includes the following:
312 cycle parking spaces (minimum) within bicycle/storage lockers allocated to each apartment/mews house; 94 car parking spaces (including 20 Blue Badge car parking spaces (of which 4 are dedicated to residents of Plot R4), 20 parking spaces for the residents of the Three Mills Moorings) and 20% electrical vehicle charging spaces); 17 motorcycle parking spaces; Plant room
6.27 The refuse and recycling storage and collection is based on an Underground Refuse System (URS). The URS has been planned to minimise the distance between flats and URS access points located within the pavement. The URS are in four locations around the site, on northern and southern shared streets and on Sugar House Lane, all cores are within 30m of an URS. In addition, bulky waste storage for furniture and white goods is provided for residents of the plot on the quieter street sides.
Approval of Details 6.28 The application also seeks the partial approval of plot-specific details submitted pursuant to the following conditions of the 2012 permission.
Condition C8 (Housing Standards) Condition C11 (Daylight/ Sunlight/ Overshadowing) Condition C15 (Parking Management) Condition C36 (Waste Management)
6.29 The assessment of these aspects of the submission are detailed in the relevant sections below.
7. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
Sugar House Lane (Strand East) 7.1 On 27 September 2012 the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation granted planning permission (12/00336/LTGOUT) for a hybrid planning application for comprehensive mixed use development comprising:
Detailed application
Demolition of existing buildings where stated; 8 residential units (C3); 300sqm financial and professional services (A2); 500sqm public house/bar (A4); 2,620sqm office and workshops/non-residential institution (B1/D1); 8,170sqm offices (B1); public square; access including limited emergency services access along Three Mills Wall River and east-west along Sugar House Lane; 28 parking spaces; hard and soft landscaping.
Outline application (all matters reserved except access)
demolition of buildings where stated; 1192 residential units (C3) of which 10% of properties wheelchair accessible; 12,593sqm flexible uses including retail (A1), financial and professional services (A2), restaurants, cafes and bars (A3/4), offices and workshops (B1), non-residential institution (D1) and assembly and leisure (D2); 33,950sqm offices and workshops (B1); 22,500sqm (350 bedroom) hotel (C1); pedestrian bridge across Three Mills Wall River; a riverside park; car, motorcycle and bicycle parking; servicing and ancillary highway works.
7.2 The 2012 permission includes a planning condition that requires compliance with the Design Code submitted in support of the original planning application.
7.3 There is a s106 Agreement attached to the 2012 planning permission which requires the applicant to, in summary:
1. Contribute a Discounted Standard Charge of £7,838 per residential unit in accordance with the LTGDC’s Planning Obligations Community Benefits Strategy comprising the Works in Kind at (3. below) and ring fenced contributions at (4. below);
2. Provide 8% (without grant) (96 units) and 11% (with grant) (132 units) affordable housing split 50:50 split between affordable rent and intermediate tenures subject to a review mechanism following completion of the 400th, 800th and 1001st units.
3. The cost of the following Works in Kind to be offset against the Discounted Standard Charge and Deferred Charge as reflected above and in accordance with the Planning Obligations Community Benefit Strategy: a) 75% (£999,000) of the cost of Bridge 1 (a two way single lane bus, cycle and pedestrian bridge between the site and Bromley by Bow North Phase 1); b) 90% (£279,720) of the cost of Bridge 2 (a pedestrian and cycle bridge between the site and Bromley by Bow Northern Phase); c) 60% (£293,040) of the cost of Bridge 3 (a pedestrian and cycle bridge between the site and Three Mills Green); d) 75% (£83,250) of the cost of works to Bridge 4 (the vehicular, pedestrian and cycle bridge between the site and Three Mills island and 3 Mills Studios) e) 50% (£1,387,500) of the All Movements Junction Works between Stratford High Street and Sugar House Lane; f) 50% (£616,050) of the cost of the Hub & Open Space at Riverside Park; g) 80% (£133,200) of the Water Bus Stop; h) The cost (£2,600,000) to the scheme of Providing “Low Cost” Accommodation (in relation to Community Use floorpsace)
4. The following financial contributions to be ring fenced within the Discounted Standard Charge: a) £2,390,000 contribution towards education improvements in the locality (ring fenced for London Borough of Newham) b) £1,100,000 contribution towards diverting and extending a bus service through the site when Bridge 1 and the necessary road network within Bromley by Bow North is implemented and pedestrian improvements at Bow roundabout and improvements to Bromley by Bow station (ring fenced for TfL); c) £70,000 towards bus infrastructure d) £150,000 towards Skills and Training to be agreed (ring fenced for London Borough of Newham)
5. Local Labour, Skills and Training Initiatives:
6. Enter into S278 and S38 Agreements with the Local Highway Authority to undertake the Highway Works;
7. Review the provision of a Controlled Parking Zone and indemnify the reasonable costs of the Council to implement a CPZ within the site if required.
8. Implement a Community Facilities Strategy to be submitted prior to the anticipated completion date of each Plot containing community uses and include details of advertising and letting terms.
9. To implement a Creative Industries Strategy including advertising and heads of terms for first letting (see DCMS definition of creative industry).
10. To prepare and implement a site-wide Energy Strategy
11. Contribute £150,000 towards the River Lea Tidal Mill Trust House Mill restoration project.
Strand East Plot MU2, R6, MU1, R1 and Public Realm Infrastructure 7.4 On 28 September 2015, 24 November 2015, 22 February 2016, May 2016 and 26 July 2016 the Planning Decisions Committee resolved to grant/delegate authority to grant planning permission for Plot MU2, Plot R6, Plot MU1, Plot R1 and Public Realm Infrastructure Reserved Matters respectively. The following plots are subject to Reserved Matters applications which have been submitted and are currently under consideration: R3 (subject of this report), MU5, R4, R8 and MU3.
7.5 On 26 April 2016 Planning Decisions Committee considered the Reserved Matters application for the Site Wide Public Realm Infrastructure (reference 15/00239/REM). Members resolved to delegate the decision to the Director of Planning Policy and Decisions with a view to resolving the issue of the location of the residents’ garden for the moorings community. The applicant ‘carved out’ the section of riverfront that forms part of Plot R3 from the application boundary of the Public Realm Infrastructure RMA, and Reserved Matters approval was granted on 6 June 2016. The decision included the following informative:
“You are reminded that the application for the Plot R3 Reserved Matters and/or the application for Approval of Details pursuant to Condition C3 of planning permission reference 12/00336/LTGOUT dated 27 September 2012 (as amended) shall include a strategy for the maintenance, management and right of access of the Three Mills Moorings Association residents’ garden.”
7.6 The section of the riverfront ‘carved out’ from the Public Realm and Infrastructure RMA forms part of this current application and is proposed to accommodate the Three Mills Moorings Association residents’ garden. The management strategy will be submitted as a separate approval of details application pursuant to Condition C3 of the outline planning permission, prior to commencement of development of Plots R2, R3 and R4.
Three Mills Moorings applications 7.7 An application for Approval of Details (15/00535/AOD) was submitted that seeks to discharge condition C3a (Interim Mooring Facilities). It is currently awaiting determination.
7.8 On 7 September 2016 an application for Full Planning Permission (16/00285/FUL) for the erection of floating pontoons and associated structures to provide facilities ancillary to the residential moorings on the Three Mills Wall River.
7.9 An application for full planning permission (16/00439/FUL) has been submitted that seeks the relocation of the existing Three Mills Moorings ramp (and associated structures) to enable direct access to the moorings from the proposed Moorers’ garden. It is currently awaiting determination.
7.10 An application for Approval of Details (16/00551/AOD) has recently been submitted that seeks to fully discharge condition C3 (Three Mills Moorings facilities design, location and implementation strategy) of planning permission reference 12/00336/LTGOUT dated 27 September 2012 (as amended). The application is being considered.
Housing Mix: Non Material Amendment (reference 16/00081/NMA) 7.11 On 10 June 2016 the Legacy Corporations granted the following non-material amendments to the site-wide dwelling mix.
Approved–2012 Permission Proposed – February 2016 Unit Type No. of units Unit Type No. of units Difference Studio 8 (1%) Studio 65 (5.4%) +57 1-bed 468 (39%) 1-bed 435 (36.3%) -33 2-bed 244 (20%) 2-bed 217 (18.1%) -27 3-bed 430 (36%) 3-bed 364 (30.3%) -66 4-bed 34 (3%) 4-bed 118 (9.8%) +84 5-bed 16 (1%) 5-bed 1 (0.1%) -15 Total 1,200 (100%) Total 1,200 (100%) Provision of Family Housing 2-bed+ 724 (60%) 2-bed+ 700 (58.3%) 3- 3- 4 80 (40%) 3- 3-bed+ 4 83 bed+ (40.3%)
7.12 The revised mix has informed the mix proposed within the Plot R3 scheme.
8. POLICIES & GUIDANCE
8.1 National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) (NPPF)
Building a strong, competitive economy Promoting sustainable transport Requiring good design Conserving and enhancing the historic environment
8.2 Regional Planning Policy
London Plan (March 2016) Policy 2.4 The 2012 Games and their legacy Policy 2.9 Inner London Policy 2.13 Opportunity Areas and Intensification Areas Policy 3.3 Increasing housing supply Policy 3.4 Optimising housing potential Policy 3.5 Quality and design of housing developments Policy 3.6 Children and young people’s play and informal recreation facilities Policy 3.7 Large residential developments Policy 3.8 Housing choice Policy 3.10 Definition of affordable housing Policy 3.11 Affordable housing targets Policy 5.3 Sustainable design and construction Policy 5.11 Green roofs and development sit environs Policy 6.7 Better streets and surface transport Policy 6.9 Cycling Policy 6.10 Walking Policy 6.13 Parking Policy 7.2 An inclusive environment Policy 7.3 Designing out crime Policy 7.4 Local character Policy 7.5 Public realm Policy 7.6 Architecture Policy 7.7 Location and design of tall buildings Policy 7.8 Heritage assets and archaeology Policy 7.9 Heritage-led regeneration Policy 7.15 Reducing and managing noise, improving and enhancing the acoustic environment Policy 7.19 Biodiversity and access to nature Policy 7.21 Trees and woodlands
8.3 Local Planning Policy
London Legacy Development Corporation Local Plan (July 2015) Policy SP.2 Maximising housing and infrastructure provision within new neighbourhoods Policy H.1 Providing a mix of housing types Policy H.2 Delivering affordable housing Policy BN.1 Responding to place Policy BN.3 Maximising biodiversity Policy BN.4 Designing residential schemes Policy BN.5 Requiring inclusive design Policy BN.8 Maximising opportunities for play Policy BN.10 Proposals for tall buildings Policy BN.16 Preserving or enhancing heritage assets Policy IN.2 Planning for waste Policy T.4 Managing development and its transport impacts Policy T.8 Parking and parking standards in new development Policy T.9 Providing for pedestrians and cyclists Policy S.2 Energy in new development Policy S.3 Energy infrastructure and heat networks Policy S.4 Sustainable design and construction Policy 4.4 Protecting and enhancing heritage assets at Three Mills Island and Sugar House Lane Policy SA3.1 Stratford High Street Policy Area
Site Allocation SA4.2 - Sugar House Lane
8.3.1 The site allocation proposes “a new medium-density, mixed-use area of business (including cultural and creative) and local retail space focussed in the northern and southern part of the site; new homes with a significant number of family homes; Local Open Space, play space and public realm. A new all movements junction to enable access to the area and new and enhanced bridges to link the area to surrounding communities will be required alongside development. Proposals for development above 15 metres above ground level will only be acceptable subject to the provisions of Policy BN.10.”
8.3.2 The relevant supporting development principles refer to: The area adopting a genuinely mixed use character retaining a strong employment focus that includes a base for creative industries and introduces a new residential community served by a range of local amenities and high quality public transport, pedestrian and cycle connections. The area will be defined by its unique natural environmental and historic industrial legacy that includes extensive canal and river frontage, robust yet adaptable buildings and intricate yards and passages; The historic character of the area should be celebrated by weaving high- quality new development into the historic fabric; High quality public, communal and private amenity spaces that create a sense of place and meet the needs of residents, workers and visitors; Preserve or enhance the Sugar House Lane Conservation Area.
8.3.3 The site allocation makes specific reference to the scheme granted planning permission in 2012 meeting the requirement of the Site Allocation.
8.4 Other Relevant Guidance Considerations
Sugar House Lane Conservation Area Appraisal and Development Management Guidelines (2010)
8.4.1 The Sugar House Lane Conservation Area was designated by the London Borough of Newham in June 2008. An analysis of the key buildings and spaces contained within the Conservation Area Appraisal identifies ‘Buildings of Note’, ‘Yards of Note’ and ‘Chimneys of Note’ that contribute to the conservation area’s historic and architectural interest.
8.4.2 The Conservation Area’s summary of special interest references the intimate sequence of spaces and waterways; plain, simple buildings with strong group value; rich silhouette and skyline; and palette of traditional material, including granite setts, red and London stock brickwork.
8.4.3 The application site is partly within the Sugar House Lane Conservation Area. The focus of the Conservation Area is around the buildings and yards located within the north and north east corner of the site. The site is located adjacent to the focus of the Conservation Area, including the Sugar House ‘Building of Note’.
9. CONSULTATION
Non-Material Amendment Application 9.1 A local planning authority has discretion as to what consultation to undertake in relation to applications submitted under s96A of the Town and Country Planning Act (as amended). No consultation was undertaken.
Reserved Matters and Approval of Details 9.2 69 neighbour letters were sent to the residents of Bisson Road and the Three Mills Mooring Association were consulted directly. The application was also advertised by press and site notices dated 31 August 2016 (Newham Recorder) and 25 August 2016. The deadline for responding was 20 September 2016 and 14 September 2016 respectively.
9.3 One letter of representation received from the Chair of the Three Mills Moorings Association raising the following concerns/questions:
Parking: Does the application re-provide 20 car parking spaces for the moorings? (Officer comment: 20 spaces are provided for moorings residents). Height and overlooking: Concern about the height of this block and impact on daylight and sunlight to the moorings, and whether it has been assessed? Concern about overlooking by people in the flats from balconies. (Officer comment: see paragraphs 10.106-10.111 for assessment of daylight sunlight and overlooking to moorings.)
9.4 The following statutory and non-statutory consultees were consulted:
London Legacy Development Corporation Quality Review Panel (QRP) 9.5 On 8 October 2016 the QRP undertook a post-submission review of the scheme and made the following summary comments:
The panel finds the architecture to be particularly distinctive and attractive and supports approval of the planning application; The use of different colour tones in the palette of materials for each block, adds character and delight; The panel is supportive of the landscape design, including the proposal to create a private riverside garden, where a public route was shown at outline application stage. There is already a public footpath on the other side of the Three Mills Wall River, and new pedestrian bridges are being built as part of the Strand East development. The panel thinks public access on one side, and private gardens on the other will be successful. The main issue that the panel thinks requires further thought is the ongoing management and maintenance of the landscape.
The full QRP report has been included at Appendix 8
Environment Agency 9.6 On 8 September 2016 the Environment Agency confirmed that it had no comments on the application.
Historic England 9.7 On 1 September 2016 Historic England advised that it did not consider it necessary for to be notified of the application.
Canal and River Trust 9.8 On 21 September 2016 the Canal and River Trust advised that it considers this to be a well considered scheme, which is likely to make a positive contribution to the wider development, and made the following comments: Cladding: Concern about the proposed use of a grey/green pre-cast concrete (Officers consider the choice of materials to be appropriate) Riverside Public Realm: Public realm adjacent to the river is accessed via a gate from the southern access road. Query whether the area is likely to be well used given that it will be segregated and that people would not be able to connect north due to position of 3MM Association’s garden. Prefer the first option for the new railing along the waters edge which is more open and transparent. (Officers comment: Details of railings will be submitted pursuant to condition C3 prior to commencement of development of Plots R2, R3 and R4) Riverside Lighting: No light should spill onto the waterway, and any proposed nearby should be ‘bat friendly’ with a lux level of 3 or below. Request a lighting condition (Officers comment: condition 5 attached).
9.9 On 2 November 2016 the Canal and River Trust subsequently advised that the Trust’s Principal Architect met with the applicant’s architects to discuss the proposed material choice, and was satisfied that this was acceptable.
Transport for London 9.10 On 12 September 2016 Transport for London made the following comments:
The provision of cycle parking was defined and secured as part of the outline application which predates current London Plan standards. It is welcomed that there will be provision of 312 cycle parking spaces, at a ratio of 2 spaces per unit which will be in line with current London Plan Standards. The Parking Management Plan states bicycles must use lifts or access the basement parking as the car ramp gradient is too steep for bicycles. London Cycling Design Standards identify that to accommodate all types of cycle, lifts should have minimum dimensions of 1.2 by 2.3 metres, with a minimum door opening of 1000mm, and any door to a cycle parking area should be automated – push button or pressure pad operated. It should also be clarified if a wheeling ramp for bicycles could be provided on the side of the car ramp if that provided a potential access into the basement. (Officer comment: applicant has confirmed that the ramp is too steep to provide a wheeling ramp). The car park management plan sets out how parking will be managed, for occupants of Block R3 and R4 and the Three Mills Moorings. The original condition A17 did not include reference to passive provision for residential properties (also at 20%) and it would be welcomed if car parking provision was constructed in such a way to allow further charging points. (Officer comment: Proposal includes 20 electric vehicle charging points in Plot R3 which exceeds the 20% requirement.)
Metropolitan Police 9.11 On 26 September 2016 the Metropolitan Police confirmed that it had no objection subject to the use of a planning condition that requires the development to be implemented and managed in accordance with Secure by Design principles. (Officer comment: Condition 4 is attached.)
London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority 9.12 On 7 September 2016 the Fire and Emergency Planning Authority provided the following comments: There should be access for a pump appliance to within 45m of all points in all dwellings. If this cannot be achieved a fire main complying with BS 9990:2015 should be provided. A pump appliance should be able to approach to within 18m of the fire main inlet which should be visible from the appliance. In the case of this application a fire main will be required in each of the stair cores. Access roads should be a minimum of 2.7m in width between kerbs and capable of supporting a vehicle with a minimum carrying capacity of 14 tonnes. Any dead end access road in excess of 20m in length should be provided with adequate turning facilities. There should be a fire hydrant within 90m of the inlet to a fire main. (Officers comment: A tracking plan for fire service vehicles around Plot R3 has been submitted. The access road widths are never less than 3.7m. Fire mains will be provided in each of the stair cores, Thames Water will consider final positions for washouts/fire hydrants to meet requirements during the next design stage.)
PPDT Environmental Consultants 9.13 PPDT’s Environmental Consultants assessed the Heritage Statement, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Code for Sustainable Homes, BREEAM, Waste, Overheating elements of the proposal. After additional information/clarification was submitted on some areas, details were found to be acceptable.
9.14 PPDT’s Environmental Consultants also considered the daylight, sunlight and overshadowing assessment, and advised that whilst the availability of daylight within Plot R3 is low, this is considered within the parameters of what is regarded as acceptable development in daylighting terms. Further details are provide in paragraph 10.100.
PPDT Transport Consultants 9.15 On 3 October 2016 PPDT’s Transport Consultant raised no objections. Parking provision meets the standards set out in the 2012 permission.
9.16 No response was received from the following consultees: London Borough of Newham Lee Valley Regional Park Authority National Grid Thames Water Authority 10. ASSESSMENT OF PLANNING ISSUES
Non Material Amendment (reference 16/00499/NMA) 10.1 The application for Non Material Amendments proposes amendments to Parameter Plans PP-1-103 Rev E (Maximum Storey Heights) and PP-1-109 Rev G (Characterisation of Open Spaces) as set out at paragraph 6.10 of the report. a) Add two no. single storey stair/lift cores to the eastern and western elements of the perimeter block to provide access to the proposed roof terraces and for maintenance reasons. b) Add two no. single storey stair/lift cores to the northern and southern accent towers to form part of the pitched roof elements to the riverside block. c) Increase the footprint of the permitted set back storey to the northern and southern elements of the perimeter block, and provide a continuous set-back element to the southern element. d) The northern/southern 7 storey accent towers of the Riverside Block are not set back from the four storey riverside elevation, for architectural reasons. e) Re-classify ‘Public-shared surface’ at the riverside block to ‘Private Residential Garden Zone’ to incorporate a small private residential garden zone along the eastern f) Re-classify ‘Public-shared surface’ at the riverside block to ‘Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard’ to allocate the northern part of the riverfront to a designated garden (‘Moorers’ Garden’) for the residents of the Three Mills Residential Moorings (3MM). The remaining part of the riverfront will be allocated to a Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard.
10.2 The proposed amendments to the maximum building heights have been tested in the technical assessments submitted in support of the RMA for Plot R3 and the EIA Screening Opinion request and no significantly new or different environmental effects other than those already identified in the Environmental Statement accompanying the 2012 Permission have been identified.
10.3 The proposed single storey stair/lift cores at the eastern and western elements of the perimeter block that provide access to roof terraces and for maintenance have comparatively small footprints, and will not increase the overall height of the development or alter the approved frontage height. The proposed amendment is not considered to materially alter the 2012 permission or create any new or different significant townscape or environmental effects.
10.4 The single storey stair/lift cores to the north and south accent elements of the riverside block form part of the pitched roof elements. These are in response to the context and industrial heritage of the site, and conceal lift overruns and rooftop plant. The cores provide access to rooftop terrace amenity space. The proposed amendment is not considered to materially alter the 2012 permission or create any new or different significant townscape or environmental effects.
10.5 The increase in the depth of the fifth floor set back to the northern and southern elements of the perimeter block, and the provision of a continuous set-back on the southern element to provide additional accommodation, does not increase the overall height of the building or alter the approved frontage height. It will remain largely concealed from view when the building is experienced from the street. The set-backs are wider than 2/3rds of the plan area of the typical floor plate. However, it accords with the 2012 Design Code which requires this element to be set back from the building edge by a minimum of 2m. 10.6 The proposed amendment to not set-back the northern and southern accent towers on the riverside block is not considered to materially alter the 2012 permission or create any new or different townscape of environmental effects.
10.7 The reclassification of the ‘Public -shared surface’ to ‘Semi-Private Residential Amenity Courtyard’ to allocate the northern part of the riverfront to a designated ‘Moorers’ Garden’ for the residents of the Three Mills Residential Moorings, and the remainder to be allocated to the residents of Block B does not create any new or different significant environmental effects. The provision of a ‘Moorers’ Garden’ adjacent to the existing moorings is welcomed, and results in increased privacy levels for the residents of the moorings (and residents of Plot R3), and provides more space for its residents than a floating garden facility could have ever done. Whilst the proposal will result in a loss of public access along the river at this point, it will not materially alter the connectivity across the wider site.
10.8 When committee members considered the ‘Site Wide Public Realm and Infrastructure’ Reserved Matters application on 26th April 2016, they delegated the decision to the Director of Planning Policy and Decisions with a view to resolving the issue of the location of the residents’ garden for the moorings community. The current proposal is considered to be the preferred solution, which provides a moorers garden adjacent to the moorings, where direct access from the moorings can be achieved. A full planning application (16/00439/FUL) for the relocation of the existing Three Mills Moorings ramp (and associated structures) to enable direct access to the moorings from the proposed Moorers’ garden is currently awaiting determination.
10.9 The reclassification of the ‘Public – shared surface’ to ‘Private Residential garden Zone’ along the eastern elevation of the Riverside Block to enable the creation of private terraces for the ground floor units within the Block does not create any new or different significant environmental effects.
10.10 The application for non-material amendments is recommended for approval.
Reserved Matters (reference 16/00223/REM) 10.11 The following paragraphs consider the Reserved Matters (layout, scale, appearance and landscaping), and the supporting technical information required by the 2012 permission specification.
10.12 The application for Reserved Matters is submitted on the basis that the application for Non Material Amendments to the 2012 ‘Maximum Storey Heights’ and ‘Characterisation of Open Spaces’ parameter plans considered at paragraphs 8.1 to 8.9, and recommended for approval at paragraph 2.1 of this report, has been approved. The following paragraphs consider the Reserved Matters - layout, scale, appearance and landscaping – of Plot R3 and related planning issues.
Land Use 10.13 The 2012 permission approved parameter plans determine the permissible ground, first and upper floor building uses across the site. Plot R3 has permission to be redeveloped for residential use. The application complies with the land use parameter plans.
10.14 The total number of units within the outline part of the 2012 permission is capped by planning condition (A8) at 1,192 units. The application contributes 156 units towards this total. The following table shows how the number of residential units proposed within Plot R3 and other plots whose Reserved Matters are under consideration contributes to the total number of permitted units:
Plot Reserved Matters Maximum number Number of Application Status of residential units residential units (as restricted by proposed planning condition A9) Plot R6 RMA approved 103 Plot R1 RMA approved 1,192 units 161 Plot MU5 RMA submitted 42 Plot R4 RMA submitted 95 Plot R8 RMA submitted 113 Plot MU3 RMA submitted 21 Plot MU4 RMA to be submitted - Plot R2 RMA submitted 215 Plot R3 RMA under 156 consideration Plot R5 RMA to be submitted - Plot R7 RMA to be submitted - Total 1192 906
10.15 The site is located within the Local Plan Site Allocation SA4.2: Sugar House Lane. It makes explicit reference to the 2012 permission and its compliance with the objectives of the site allocation to create a new medium-density mixed use area including new residential accommodation and a significant number of family homes.
10.16 The application is considered to comply with the 2012 permission and Site Allocation SA4.2: Sugar House Lane of the Local Plan.
Scale 10.17 The 2012 permission approved ‘Maximum Storey Heights’ parameter plan and Design Code establish the maximum storey heights for individual buildings within Plot R3 and across the entire site. The maximum heights are defined as storey heights rather than heights above ordnance datum or true heights above ground level. The 2012 permission (as amended) supports buildings ranging between 3 and 7 storeys.
10.18 The application is supported by a Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment (TVIA) which describes the increase in ground levels and building heights above those assumed in the 2012 Environmental Statement and demonstrates how the increase in height and scale does not create a new of different significant environmental impacts.
10.19 The approved ground levels have changed from a consistent 5.3m AOD across the plot to approximately 7.550m AOD at the north-west corner, 6.35m AOD at the north-east corner, 6.20m AOD at the south-east, and 6.550m at the south-west corner of the plot.
10.20 The true building heights have been amended:
Block A (Perimeter Block): • from 18.5m (4 storeys max) to 20.96 (+2.46) • from 21.5m (5 storeys-set back) to 25.245m (+3.745m)
Block A (Mews) • from 15.5 (3 storeys) to 16.285m (+0.785m)
Block B (Riverside Block): • from 18.5m (4 storeys max) to 18.995 (0.495m) • from 21.5m (5 storeys-set back) to 22.145m (+0.645m) • from 27.5m (7storeys max-tower) to 28.760m (+1.26m) • Addition of roof pitch to 33.840m (at its highest point)
10.21 The increase in true building height takes into account the new ground levels listed above; a general increase in floor to floor heights of 3m to 3.465m to achieve more generous floor to ceiling heights within homes; the addition of lift overruns to provide access for residents of the riverside block; pitched roofs within the riverside block responding to the historic context of the site and to conceal rooftop plant and lift cores; and increased footprint of the 5th floor set-back within the perimeter block, including creating a continuous set back to the south of the block in order for efficient unit plans which comply with the minimum space standards set out in the Housing SPG (2016).
10.22 The change in site levels and increase in building heights, both individually and cumulatively, is not considered to result in any new or different significant townscape or heritage impacts, particularly as they are ‘contained’ within the site and maintain the human-scale attributes of the masterplan. The environmental impact of taller buildings, particularly in relation to daylight and sunlight, has been subject to detailed assessment and this is considered below. It is noted that, notwithstanding the net increase in overall heights, the application remains compliant with the ‘Maximum Storey Heights’ parameter plan (as amended).
10.23 The parameter plan compliant buildings result in buildings with true heights that vary from 8.74m (mews houses) to 27.9m (top of pitched roof of riverside block) above ground plane.
10.24 The Local Plan Site Allocation requires the ‘prevailing and generally expected heights’ at Sugar House Lane to be 15m (5 residential storeys) above existing ground level with development proposed above that height to be subject to the tests of Policy BN.10. Where the proposed true heights exceed those recommended within the Local Plan, they are compliant with the 2012 permission and successful in terms of their urban design and placemaking response. The scale and heights proposed are considered to be acceptable in townscape terms, and the quality of the residential accommodation and architectural expression is considered to be high.
10.25 Despite complying the storey heights permitted under the 2012 permission, the detailed design is required to meet Policy BN.10. The first criteria is to exhibit outstanding architecture and incorporate high-quality materials, finishes and details. QRP is very supportive of the Reserved Matters for Plot R3 and commented that the architecture is particularly distinctive and attractive.
10.26 Policy BN10 also requires tall buildings to respond to existing grain and street widths; contribute positively to the streetscape; provide high quality private and communal amenity space and public realm; define public routes and spaces; and promote legibility. The extent to which the application meets these policy tests in more detailed is discussed in the ‘layout’, ‘appearance’ and ‘housing quality’ sections below.
Layout 10.27 Policies BN.1, BN.5 and BN.10 of the Local Plan require new development to consider how uses integrate with, and relate to, public and private space; provide an accessible and inclusive environment; contribute positively to the streetscape; generate an active frontage; provide accessible public space; define routes and spaces; and promote legibility.
10.28 The 2012 permission approved ‘Building Line Requirement’ parameter plan establishes ‘obligatory’, ‘partially obligatory’ (i.e. facades must 75% to the building line), ‘maximum’ (i.e. no projection beyond) and ‘indicative’ (i.e. to be determined through detailed planning application) lines for buildings permitted within Plot R3 and across the entire site. Plot R3 is subject to partially obligatory building lines around the perimeter of the block and indicative buildings lines at the mews entrance, car park entrance, eastern and northern parts of Block B. The proposed layout complies the requirements of the 2012 permission.
10.29 The ‘Building Line Requirement’ parameter plan specifies a minimum distance of 8m at the pinch points between Blocks A and B and Block B and the river wall. The scheme has been designed with 8m separation distances between Blocks A and B at either ends widening to a minimum of 12m wide in the central section.
10.30 The ‘Building Line Requirement’ parameter plan also requires the width of Sugar House Lane between Block A and Plot R6 to be a minimum distance of 14m, and the width of the shared space between Block A and Plots R2 and R4 to be a minimum distance of 12m. The block layout is based on these street widths.
10.31 There is no minimum requirement for the width of the mews or the residential courtyards. The mews yard measures 5-12m wide to provide space for informal recreation and landscaping. The ‘U’ shaped residential courtyard measures 9m in width between the perimeter block and mews, and increases to 24m to 30m in width at the bottom of the ‘U’. The approved Plot R6 scheme included a mews street measuring 6.9m wide and residential courtyards measuring 10-12m and 12m wide.
10.32 The 2012 Design Code requires the design of each mews block and riverside block to incorporate the following:
Perimeter (Mews) Block A at least 6 six entrances from the surrounding streets into the perimeter block; vertical circulation and cores to be located internally and away from principal elevations; no dedicated car parking within the mews; semi private courtyards for the use of residential only; ground floor residential units to be set above street level to provide adequate privacy (between 0.5m and 1.0m considered acceptable); ground floor access to individual dwellings within the shared streets; the level of the courtyard between mews houses and perimeter blocks shall be set generally set at the ground floor of the residential units; only one entrance (single lane, traffic light controlled) to the underground car park; secure stairs and lifts from the car park level; secure cycle storage within the mews, at ground floor entrances or in the basement car park; predominantly dual aspect apartments and fully dual aspect mews houses; mews houses incorporating roof terraces that are not overlooked by neighbours; All mews houses, except the ones above the mews entrance, shall have a private roof terrace which is not overlooked by the immediate neighbour; All ground-floor units shall have direct access to a private external space; secondary spaces (bathroom, WC and storage) shall be internal given maximum perimeter space for living rooms, dining rooms, bedrooms and kitchens.
Riverside Block B at least three entrances; vertical circulation and cores to be located internally and away from principal elevations; ground floor residential units to be set above street level to provide adequate privacy (between 0.5m and 1.0m considered acceptable); along quieter shared surface areas, it shall be possible to provide ground floor access to individual units from the street. only one entrance (single lane, traffic light controlled) to the underground car park which shall be shared by all residents and accessible via secure stairs and lifts; predominantly dual aspect apartments within only studio or 1 bedroom flats permissible as single aspect;
10.33 The perimeter block is served by eight entrances. They are generous, legible, regularly placed and clearly articulated around the block; include lifts and stair that are positioned away from the principal elevations; include naturally lit stair cores; achieve level access between the street and the residential courtyards; and provide a view through to the internal courtyards. The entrance core to Block A serve only two units per core, and the entrance cores to Block B serve 4 units, which is welcomed.
10.34 The riverside block is served by four entrances, regularly spaced along the western side of the block; include lifts and stair; and include naturally lit stair cores. The entire ground floor of the block is raised by approximately 3 steps, for privacy reasons, with a through lift provided in the communal entrances to enable full accessibility.
10.35 The mews yard is designed as a car free shared space to be informally used and ‘owned’ by the residents for planting, and social interaction. The residential courtyards are designed for communal use and are accessible from all ground and upper floor apartments and mews houses. To reduce its visual impact in the street and traffic levels within the shared street, the basement car park is accessed via a single lane, traffic light controlled entrance located in the southern end of the site, accessed from the shared street, close to Sugar house Lane. The layout of the basement car park and the number of cores ensures that residents have convenient access to allocated cycle storage and Blue Badge car parking spaces via each stair and lift core.
10.36 The residential floorplans ensure that the significant majority of flats within Plot R3 are dual aspect (76%). All mews houses are dual aspect.
10.37 The ground floor accommodation within the perimeter block is typically arranged to include through living/kitchen/dining rooms that overlook both the public realm and the courtyard.
10.38 In accordance with the 2012 Design Code, the finished ground floor levels within bedrooms along the street sides in the perimeter block is raised above the street level by approximately 3 steps (approx. 0.5-0.7m) to provide privacy and minimise overlooking issues, with the steps provided within the domain of the flat. Living spaces on the courtyard side are level with the core and the external amenity space.
10.39 The kitchen space within ground floor units is located on the street side to enable the living space to have a direct relationship to the private amenity space on the courtyard side. The kitchens are raised along the street side by approximately 3 steps to provide privacy and minimise overlooking issues. A secondary entrance is to be provided into the kitchen, enabling direct access from the street when required. This is welcome and serves to provide a sense of address and sense of ownership of the street. The entrance from the core remains the primary entrance, which is fully accessible.
10.40 To ensure the scheme complies with the planning condition (C9) that requires 100% lifetime homes, the internal floorplans demonstrate that a bedspace and a WC and shower can be achieved at entrance level. However, there are 2 x one bedroom units that don’t meet Building Regulations Part M4(2) criteria 2.29a. The decision to introduce a level difference within ground floor flat (as opposed to within each lobby) is considered to represent the preferred solution to achieving a balance between level access to the greatest number of homes and privacy from and natural surveillance over the street. This arrangement impacts on only 14 (9%) units and ensures all other apartments served by lobbies achieve entirely level access.
10.41 The QRP strongly supports the arrangement of residential units in the Block A perimeter blocks, including the clever use of levels to address privacy issues.
10.42 The proposed layout of the block and the internal floorplans are considered to comply with the 2012 ‘Building Line Requirement’ parameter plan, the 2012 Design Code and Policies B.1, BN.5 and B.10 of the Local Plan.
Appearance 10.43 Policy B.1 and BN.10 of the Local Plan require careful consideration to be given architectural style, materials, fenestration, colour, building orientation and overall appearance and the 2012 Design Code identifies a number of design principles.
10.44 The appearance of the building has been developed in response to a primary regular grid of 8.1m and 5.4m; designing apartments from the inside out; achieving a clear ceiling height of between 2.5 and 2.7m; incorporating private amenity spaces; and combining a pre-cast concrete structural frame for speed of construction with a modular façade system. The external design of plot R3 has been developed to respond to the emerging context of the Strand East Masterplan.
10.45 The application site is partly within the Three Mills Conservation Area and the Sugar House Lane Conservation Area. Therefore it is considered appropriate to consider the impact of the proposal on the conservation area in accordance with paragraphs 132 and 137 of the NPPF in addition to the requirements under part 10 of Local Plan Policy BN10 and part 8 of Local Plan Policy BN16 for such assessment.
10.46 Paragraph 132 of the NPPF states that: “Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting.” Officers have considered the impact on the Three Mills Conservation Area and the Sugar House Lane Conservation Area in accordance with paragraphs 132 and 137 of the NPPF and have concluded that the design, massing and scale of the proposals are acceptable, modest and sympathetic to the surrounding historical context. The proposal has also been assessed against the provisions of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Officers support the proposals and consider that they would comply with the NPPF in terms of making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Officers are satisfied that the proposal would not adversely affect the setting or significance of the Conservation Areas.
10.47 The architecture is informed by a common structural approach and variation in material and proportion to enable the blocks to mediate between different contextual relationships. Block A reads as a robust urban block with brick piers providing a strong vertical presence, layered with delicate horizontal banding and textured precast elements. A heavy base acknowledges the ‘hard’ edge of the plot, whilst stepping up to acknowledge key corners and entrances around the periphery of the building. At roof level there are ribbed profiled metal pop-ups /set back units.
10.48 Block B has pitched roofs along the central section and accent bookends, which are very successful. The court side and Riverside elevations, whilst of similar hardy materials to Block A, has a more flush, solid appearance appropriate to its scale and presence. The Mews features a characterful frontage with considered use of colour and a more delicate composition, as well as playful set-back roofs.
10.49 Blocks A and the Mews will utilise light red (perimeter block) and light grey/plum pre-cast concrete for its base and other specific details within the façade, with brick forming the primary external cladding. Block B will be comprised of a green/grey pre-cast with two textures utilised to delineate horizontal banding across the façade in response to its riverside location, mass and form. The material palette is considered to successfully combine the use of precast concrete; brick; ribbed profiled metal, and anodised aluminium windows. To ensure the architectural quality is delivered, a condition attached to the 2012 permission requires samples and specifications of all external materials to be submitted for approval before commencement of the development.
10.50 The appearance of the perimeter block, mews houses and riverside block deal successfully with the buildings’ scale, form and context. The choice of materials and detailed design result in elevations which exhibit subtle variation; proportion in the arrangement and size of window openings; rhythm through horizontal and vertical expression; and interest through three dimensional articulation of the facade.
10.51 The QRP offers its strong support for the Reserved Matters application for Plot R3, finding the architecture to be particularly distinctive and attractive – and supports the planning application for approval. The panel welcomes the architecture proposed for all elements of this scheme. The architecture successfully blends an industrial and domestic aesthetic resulting in a highly distinctive – and delightful – character. Particularly successful are the proposed pitch roofs of Block B along the riverside. The central mews promises to be a particularly distinctive component of the scheme.
10.52 The panel supports the materials proposed, and the use of different colour tones in the palette of materials for each block. The quality of detailing, such as jointing, consistency of colour, and resistance to weathering will be key.
10.53 The proposed development is considered to adopt an appearance that incorporates, subject to agreeing samples and specifications, high-quality materials, finishes and details that combine to achieve an architectural quality that is supported by officers and the QRP. The application is considered to be in accordance with Policies BN.1 and BN.10 of the Local Plan.
Landscaping 10.54 Policy 7.5 of the London Plan requires the public realm to be secure, accessible, inclusive, connected, easy to understand and maintain, relate to local context, and incorporate the highest quality design, landscaping, planting, street furniture and surfaces. Policies BN.1 and BN.3 require development to relate well to an area’s natural and man-made landscape features and contribute to tree planting. Policy 7.2 of the London Plan and Policy BN.5 of the Local Plan make specific reference to the need for new development to achieve the highest standards of accessible and inclusive design.
10.55 The 2012 approved ‘Characterisation of Open Spaces’ parameter plan identifies the character of spaces to be included within Plot R3. The perimeter block is edged by Sugar House Lane to the west and shared streets to the north and south. The mews is defined as an ungated ‘semi-private residential mews’ and the residential courtyards are defined as ‘semi-private residential amenity courtyard’.
10.56 The 2012 Design Code requires:
the mews shall be predominantly pedestrian spaces and provide both access to individual houses and a pedestrian through route; the mews shall be surfaced in a hard material with planting provided in containers and the responsibility of residents; the courtyards shall be split between private and shared space; all main cores shall provide access to the courtyard and be linked with a path through the courtyard; each courtyard shall be landscaped with a mix of appropriately sized trees, hedging, grass and ornamental planting, with trees providing clear definition to play, seating and entrance points; each courtyard shall provide a hard surface area for communal use and play space for 0-5 year olds. ground floor apartments and mews houses shall have direct access to the courtyards.
10.57 The proposed landscaping treatment comprises the following:
a) Sugar House Lane carriageway finished using bituminous surfaces and clay paving; b) Sugar House Lane pavement finished using clay paving and providing a 2.0m wide clear pedestrian zone and a 2.0m wide zone incorporating street trees, bicycle parking, car parking and underground refuse storage; c) Shared space finished using clay paving and incorporating street trees, underground refuse storage, Blue Badge car parking spaces and informal seating; d) Mews finished using clay paving; e) Residential courtyard finished using clay paving (private outdoor spaces), concrete plank paving and stepping stones and incorporating informal solid block and timber seating and play equipment; f) Rooftop garden incorporating raised planting beds and timber seating; g) Private Moorers’ garden for the residents of Three Mills Moorings.
10.58 The public realm infrastructure Reserved Matters (with the exception of the area between Plots R2 and R3 to its detailed design to be developed between officers, the applicant, the Three Mills Moorings Association) was recently approved under delegated powers following delegation to the Director of Planning. The approved scheme is reflected in the design of Sugar House Lane, the shared streets, the residential courtyard, riverside communal garden and the mews yard. The design of the residential courtyards is based on the principles incorporated as part of the previously approved Plot R6 and R1 schemes.
10.59 The central courtyard has been designed to provide a mix of door step play, communal gathering space, seating areas and private residential terraces to meet the needs of residents. Some areas of the communal courtyard receive limited daylight. The QRP notes that play areas and seating have rightly been located in the sunniest areas. QRP also welcomes the use of low hedges to define private patio areas within the courtyard.
10.60 The courtyard includes two ramps to provide wheelchair access from the cores into the courtyard to deal with the level changes within the courtyard. An accessible 1:30 ramped route is proposed to the western side, and a ramp of 1:15 to the eastern side, which comply with Building Regulations Part M4.
10.61 The proximity of the eastern ramp to habitable room windows to mews house M007 raises potential privacy issues in terms of overlooking into a habitable room window. To date appropriate measures of how to address the privacy issue have not been submitted, and Officers recommend that Condition 6 is attached to secure details of how privacy will be protected for the unit, so the proposal does not result in loss of privacy. 10.62 A communal riverside garden is proposed to the east of the riverside block, along with a private ‘moorer’s garden’ (see paragraphs 10.7 and 10.8). Whilst there would be no direct access from the riverside block to the communal garden, residents will benefit from this riverside space, that includes planting, trees, seating opportunities and play space including covered sandpits and timber play equipment.
10.63 The QRP supports the landscape design and welcomes the concept of a communal riverside garden, with a series of landscaped ‘rooms’. Access to the riverside garden is from each end, with no direct access from the residential block. Because of this, careful thought will be needed about landscape design and maintenance, to ensure it does not become a neglected space.
10.64 QRP highlighted the importance of a robust strategy for future management and maintenance of the landscape at Strand East. For courtyard and communal gardens, a management strategy will be needed to avoid conflict between residents enjoying those spaces, and those overlooking them – perhaps with the access gates locked in the evening.
10.65 Condition C3 of the outline planning permission requires a strategy for the maintenance, management and right of access of the Three Mills Moorings Association residents’ garden. Condition 7 is recommended to secure the submission of a Management Strategy for the Riverside communal garden prior to first occupation of the riverside block.
10.66 The application is considered to comply with Policies 7.2 and 7.5 of the London Plan and Policies BN.1, BN.3 and BN.5 of the Local Plan.
Housing Mix and Tenure 10.67 The 2012 permission (condition A15 and the s106 Agreement), requires the following housing mix and tenure to be provided across the entire development:
Open Open Discount Discount Affordable Affordable Total Market Market Market Sale Market Rent Rent (no (grant) (no grant) Sale (no grant) (with grant) (with grant) grant) Studio 8 8 - - - - 8 (1%) 1 bed 430 416 19 26 19 26 468 (39%) 2 bed 224 218 10 13 10 13 244 (20%) 3 bed 396 382 17 24 19 27 433 (36%) 4 bed 32 30 2 3 - - 33 (3%) 5 bed 14 14 - - - - 14 (1%) Total 1104 1068 48 (4%) 66 (5.5%) 488 66 1200
10.68 On the 10 June 2016 the Legacy Corporation granted a non-material amendment to the 2012 approved housing mix as set out in the table below. The table provides a cumulative total of the amount and type of affordable housing proposed (figures in bold have been approved):
Total to 16/00081/ date - Plot Unit NMA Plot Plot Plot Plot Plot Plot Plot Plot Plot Plot all plots NEQ MU Type (March R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 MU3 MU4 proposed 5 2016) / approved Studio 65 (5.4%) 4 10 24 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 (6%) 435 320 1-bed 3 28 97 55 30 0 24 0 51 21 0 11 (36.3%) (35%) 217 178 2-bed 1 38 17 12 35 0 30 0 18 0 0 27 (18.1%) (19%) 364 286 3-bed 0 74 68 60 22 0 34 0 24 0 0 4 (30/3%) (31%) 118 4-bed 0 11 9 14 8 0 15 0 20 0 0 0 77 (8%) (9.8%) 5-bed 1 (0.1%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (0%) 1,200 914 Total 8 161 215 156 95 0 103 0 113 21 0 42 (100%) (76%)
10.69 Within Plot R3 the proposed dwelling mix is detailed in the table below:
Unit size Block A Block B Total Number Percentage Studio 9 6 15 10% 1 bed 3 52 55 35% 2 bed 12 0 12 8% 3 bed 44 16 60 38% 4 bed 10 4 14 9% Total 78 78 156 100% 10.70 The housing mix is considered to successfully reflect the block typology and the opportunity to provide larger units with convenient access to high quality communal amenity space and pedestrian-friendly public realm. The provision of 47% 3 bedroom or larger units exceeds the requirement to provide 40% family sized units. The provision of 55% of units with 2 bedrooms or more complies with Local Plan Policy H1.
10.71 The approved site-wide mix requires 8% (without grant) or 11% (with grant) affordable housing to be provide on a 50:50 split between affordable rented and discounted market sale. Affordable rented accommodation is defined as 80% of market rents for 1 and 2 bedroom homes and 60% of market rent for 3 and 4 bedroom homes. Discounted market sale is defined as 70% of open market value (with no rent payable on the unpurchased option) with eligibility based on household incomes of no more than £71,000 (gross) to purchase a 1 or 2 bedroom home and no more than £85,000 to purchase a 3 or 4 bedroom home. When the owner of a DMS home wishes to sell, the s106 Agreement requires them to offer the property to Newham Council at 70% of the market value, or, if sold on the open market, pay 30% of the value achieved to Newham Council for its investment in additional affordable housing.
10.72 The s106 Agreement also requires a financial review of the development on the completion of 400, 800 and 1,200 units to determine whether additional affordable housing financial contributions are made.
10.73 No affordable housing units are proposed within Plot R3. The applicant has confirmed that the affordable units will be located in forthcoming Plots R2, R5, R7 and MU4. 35 affordable units have already been approved in Plot R1 (17x affordable rent and 4x DMS), and Plot R6 (8x affordable rent, 6x DMS units). The table below provides the cumulative affordable housing totals:
10.74 The application is considered to be in accordance with the 2012 permission.
Housing Quality 10.75 Policies 3.5 and 3.6 of the London Plan and Policy BN.4 of the Local Plan require housing developments to be of the highest quality internally and externally, referring to the requirement to meet the minimum space standards adopted in the National Described Space Standards – Technical Requirements and the Mayor of London’s Housing SPG and ensure children have safe access to good quality, secure, and stimulating play and informal recreation.
10.76 All homes meet the minimum internal space standards adopted in the Mayors Housing SPG. 82% of homes exceed minimum space standards by between 2% and 24%.
10.77 Condition C9 requires that Lifetime Homes Standards (or any standard amending or replacing it, i.e. Part M) should be adopted ‘where physically and financially practical’. As set out in Policy 3.8 of the London Plan and Policy BN5 of the Local Plan 90% of new building homes should meet Part M4(2) of the Building Regulations, with the remaining 10% meeting Part M4(3).
10.78 10% (16no.) units are wheelchair adaptable/accessible, in accordance with Building Regulations Part M4(3) ‘wheelchair user dwellings’, 9 units are provided in Block A and 7 units in Block B. Of the 90% (140no.) of dwellings that should meet Building Regulations Part M4(2) ‘accessible and adaptable dwellings’, all but two units comply with all requirements.
10.79 The 2 units (1.4%) that do not meet Building Regulations Part M4(2) criteria 2.29a. which requires every dwelling to have a bathroom that is located on the same floor as the double bedroom. The two 1 bedroom units (A023 and A015) are ground floor corner units in the perimeter block, that have two street elevations. The units have been designed to improve privacy levels of habitable rooms on ground floor by raising the habitable rooms with windows facing on to streets. It is not possible or practical to provide an additional bathroom due to the size of the 1 bed units. Whilst not meeting criteria 2.29a is not ideal, given the very small proportion (1.4%) of units this applies to and balancing the benefits that the split level apartment provides in terms of privacy levels, it is considered that it is permissible in this unique situation or the applicant to apply for a dispensation from the Building Regulations on that one point.
10.80 76% (124no.) homes are dual aspect. The 32 single aspect units are studio and 1 bedroom units located within the Riverside block. There are no single aspect north facing units, all have either east or westerly aspects.
10.81 All proposed dwellings also exceed the minimum floor to ceiling height (2.5m) by achieving 2.7m generally and between 3.0m and 3.6m in living/dining rooms overlooking the street and/or courtyards where higher floor to ceiling heights are required to achieve a stepped section which raises bedrooms and kitchens above the street level.
10.82 The Housing SPG states that a minimum of 5m² of private outdoor space should be provided for 1-2 person dwellings and an extra 1m² should be provided for each additional occupant. The SPG also advises that where site constraints make it impossible to provide private open space for all dwellings, a proportion of dwellings may instead be provided with additional internal living space equivalent to the area of the private open space requirement.
10.83 83% (130no.) homes benefit from access to private amenity space provide in the form of ground and rooftop terraces, loggias and balconies designed to meet or exceed the amenity space standard. Of the 17% (26no.) homes that do not have access to private amenity space, 22 homes would have the equivalent or greater amount of additional internal living space in accordance with the Housing SPG. The remaining 4 homes exceed the minimum unit size space standards but not the full equivalent amount of internal living space. All units have access to communal amenity space in the form of communal courtyards and/or roof terraces. The corner units in Block B without balconies have access to rooftop terraces.
10.84 All residents of the perimeter block and mews houses have direct access to a communal courtyard; communal roof gardens are also provided for the majority of residents of the perimeter block apart from the 4 ground floor corner units of the perimeter block, however they do have easy access to the courtyard.
10.85 All residents of the riverside block have access to a communal riverside garden. Access to the riverside garden is via a gate at the southern end of the garden. It is perhaps disappointing that there is not direct access from the cores, however the provision of private terraces facing the river for the ground floor units are welcome. Those units in riverside block that do not have private amenity space (due to privacy issues) have access to roof gardens.
10.86 The extent to which all homes meet or exceed minimum space standards; the incorporation of private amenity space to the significant majority of homes; the predominant use and versatility of loggias; and the provision of courtyard and rooftop communal amenity space results in a high standard of living accommodation.
10.87 The proposal is considered to meet the requirements of condition C8 (Housing Quality).
10.88 Children’s play is expected to take place formally within the residential courtyards and informally within the mews and shared space, with the shared spaces specifically designed to give pedestrian priority with very low levels of traffic, the majority of which will be generated by local residents. The landscape architects have advocated this approach on the basis of implemented precedents. The safe and secure residential courtyard and riverside communal garden specifically include sand pits and timber play equipment for 0-5 year olds which are adjacent to entrance lobbies and where higher levels of sunlight are received. Within Strand East, play areas are provided in the Riverside Park and The Hub, for all age groups. In addition, Three Mills Green is located within a short walk from the site and provides high quality play equipment and a large playing field.
10.89 The quantum of open spaces and play space for the whole scheme is set out in Condition A13 of the 2012 permission and the public realm and infrastructure RMA. This plot contributes the appropriate amount towards open space and play space provision in accordance with the outline planning permission.
10.90 The application is considered to be in accordance with Policies 3.5 and 3.6 of the London Plan and the Housing SPG and Policy BN.4 of the Local Plan, and it is recommended that condition C8 of the 2012 permission is partially (insofar as it relates to Plot R3) be discharged.
Daylight and Sunlight 10.91 Policies 7.6 and 7.7 of the London Plan and Policies BN.1, BN.4 and BN.10 of the Local Plan require new development to demonstrate that they will not create unacceptable daylight, sunlight and overshadowing impacts.
10.92 The 2012 permission includes a planning condition (C11) which requires the submission and approval of a Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Assessment for each development plot. The assessment is required to ensure the impact of each residential development plot on the living conditions (internal rooms and external amenity space) of future residents is properly considered and addressed.
10.93 The applicant has submitted a Daylight and Sunlight Assessment which considers the extent to which the daylight and sunlight levels experienced within habitable rooms and the residential courtyards complies with the BRE guidance ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight – A Guide to Good Practice’. The scope of the assessment takes into account the height and massing of development either consented or proposed on adjacent plots and includes: a) Daylight levels within habitable rooms using Average Daylight Factor (ADF) criterion which quantifies the level of daylight received in a room taking in account colours (reflectance) of walls, floors and ceilings; b) Distribution of natural light within habitable rooms using No Sky Line (NSL) criterion which estimates the percentage of the working plane that receives direct sunlight; c) Access to direct sunlight to each façade using the Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH) criterion which quantifies light that falls directly from the sun on a façade. d) Access to sunlight to the external courtyards and roof terraces.
10.94 The Daylight and Sunlight Assessment takes into account the changes in ground levels and building heights when compared to that tested by the 2012 permission.
10.95 The daylight assessment concludes that 65% of all habitable meet or exceed recommended ADF levels and NSL. 71% of bedrooms and 51% of living rooms are expected to achieve recommended ADF levels. Of the failing units, approximately 45% reflect marginal incompliances (0.1%-0.2%).
10.96 Of the rooms that do not meet the ADF levels, the lower floors perform poorly, with all living/kitchen/diners in the perimeter block at ground floor and all living rooms and kitchens the mews failing to meet the recommended levels.
10.97 There are 18 units (11.5% of units in the scheme) that would have no habitable rooms that meet the recommended minimum ADF levels, comprising 6 ground floor units and 1 second floor unit in the perimeter block, 8 first floor level units and 3 second floor units in the Riverside block. While all the ground floor rooms in the mews houses fail to meet ADF levels, they would recieve adequate levels of daylight at first and second floor level.
10.98 The poor performance of the lower floors of the blocks in terms of daylight is due to overshadowing from surrounding buildings; the unique geometry of the site, with enclosed southern elevation; tight grain and narrow streets that were fixed by the outline planning permission in the ‘building line requirement plan’.
10.99 The sunlight assessment concludes that 66% of living rooms will receive the amount of annual sunlight recommended by the guidance, with the winter sunlight target expected to be met by 85.6% of living rooms oriented within 90º of due south. Sunlight availability during the winter is most desirable. It is the living rooms in the lower floors that would receive limited sunlight.
10.100 The BRE guidance recommends that a minimum of 50% of amenity space receives a minimum of 2 hours of sunlight on 21 March. The assessment demonstrates that 64% of the courtyard will receive the minimum of 2 hours of sunlight on 21 March. The courtyard will provide a valuable amenity for residents and has been designed to ensure some children’s play and seating is located in the sunniest part.
10.101 91% of the western roof top amenity space, and 83.8% of the eastern roof top amenity space on Block A would receive the minimum 2 hours of sunlight on 21 March. Similarly the roof top amenity space for Block B would receive similar levels. Some areas of the Mews roof top terraces receive less than the recommended 2 hours, but they still provide valuable amenity and also have access to the courtyard.
10.102 The poor levels of expected daylight and sunlight for the lower floor dwellings needs to be weighed up against the benefits that the scheme provides, such as the overall architectural and design quality of the plot, including generous internal floor to ceiling heights; the high proportion of dual aspect units which benefit from aspects over the surrounding streets and courtyards; unit sizes regularly exceeding minimum space standards; low number of units per core; flexible floorplans; high levels of privacy; access to private and/or semi-private external amenity space in the form of balconies, loggias, terraces, courtyards, and roof terraces. It is important to note that no affordable housing units are proposed in Plot R3, which means that the future sale of these units will be regulated by market demand.
10.103 PPDT’s environmental consultants have verified the methodology and results of the Daylight and Sunlight Assessment, and have advised that whilst the availability of daylight (as a percentage of units that exceed ADF thresholds) within Plot R3 is low, this is considered within the parameters of what is regarded as acceptable development in daylighting terms. Living conditions are also improved through the better than standard floor to ceiling height and the open plan nature of many of the units.
10.104 On balance, Officers consider that given the fixed parameters, the proposals have sought to achieve the optimum solution in terms of the detailed design quality, which overall results in a high standard of living accommodation. As such, the withholding of Reserved Matters approval on this ground is not considered to be justified.
10.105 The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable within the context of Policies 7.6 and 7.7 of the London Plan and Policies BN.1, BN.4 and BN.10 of the Local Plan and it is recommended that condition C11 of the 2012 permission is partially (insofar as it relates to Plot R3) discharged.
Daylight/sunlight impact on surrounding residential amenity 10.106 The Three Mills Mooring Association raised concern regarding the height of the blocks and impact on daylight and sunlight to the moorings. An assessment of likely significant daylight and sunlight effects on Three Mills Moorings and 86-128 Bisson Road was undertaken by BRE in May 2016 as was submitted as part of the EIA Screening Request. These properties are the most likely to be affected by changes in building heights of Plot R3 and therefore represent a worse case assessment scenario.
10.107 The effect of the developed scheme on Three Mills Moorings is considered to be minor-adverse. This was also the case in the original assessment reported in the Environmental Statement (2012). Of the 20 Moorings points analysed, 6 (30%) would not retain at least 0.8 times their existing daylight. These would be marginally outside the BRE guidelines. Vertical sky components (VSC) would be reduced as a result of the change in building height by between 0.55 and 1.23% of VSC in absolute terms. The changes in ratio would be minor, 0.04 or less. Compared to the scenario in the original 2012 ES assessment, 4 more points would be outside the BRE guidelines, but these would all be marginal, changing from just above to just below 0.8.
10.108 The total amount of cumulative sunlight received by habitable rooms in the narrowboats would be well within the guidelines in the BRE report. The impact of the development on sunlight is therefore considered to be negligible, as in identified in the original Environmental Statement (2012).
10.109 With regard to assessment of sunlight, the rooms would continue to receive unobstructed sunlight across Three Mills Green. All the points assessed would receive well in excess of the recommended levels of sunlight, both year round and in the winter months. APSH would be reduced as a result of the change in building height by between 1.2 and 4.5% in absolute terms. Winter sunlight hours would be reduced to between 0.2 and 0.9%.
10.110 Similarly, the effect of the development on Bisson Road is considered to be minor adverse. This was also the case in the original assessment reported in the May 2012 Environmental Statement. The assessment concluded that the changes as a result of the new building heights would be comparable to those previously reported in May 2012 Environmental Statement. PPDT’s Environmental Consultant concurs with this assessment.
10.111 The Three Mills Moorings also raised concern about the potential for overlooking from people in the riverside flats from balconies. Given the relative levels of the river and the adjacent ground level, plus the height and locations of the balconies and the raised terraces with planting on the riverside blocks, it is considered that the proposed residential blocks would not result in an unacceptable level of overlooking to the moorings. The private terraces of the Riverside Block B are raised above the level of the Moorers’ garden which will provide an element of privacy between private terraces and the Moorer’s garden. The proposal also accords with the building line requirements of the 2012 Outline Consent. Additionally it has been concluded that the amendment to the ‘characterisation of open space’ parameter plans for the riverside at this location from ‘public-shared surface’ to ‘semi-private residential amenity courtyard’ will improve the privacy afforded to the moorers’ when compared to the 2012 consent.
Transport 10.112 The 2012 permission includes planning conditions (A16, A17, A18 and A19) which set the maximum or minimum number of car, motorcycle and cycle parking spaces to be allocated to each land use type, including associated provision of Blue Badge and electric vehicle parking spaces and a planning condition (C15) which requires the submission of a Parking Management Plan development plot. In support of the Reserved Matters application and to discharge condition C15 the applicant has submitted a Parking Management Plan.
10.113 The application proposes 94 car parking spaces for Plot R3 of which 20 will be for blue badge holders (including four for the residents of Plot R4) and 20% electrical vehicle charging spaces) located within the basement car park. 312 cycle parking spaces are located within the basement.
10.114 The following table demonstrates that the proposed number of car parking spaces allocated to Plots R3, when considered independently and in aggregate with other approved plots, complies with the relevant planning condition:
Condition A16 – Maximum Number of Car Parking Spaces Use Maximum Approved Approved Approved Approved Proposed No. of Plot MU2 Plot R6 Public Plot R1 Plot R3 Car (including (including Realm Parking previously MU5 Spaces approved allocation) allowed MU1 and in Outline MU4 Planning allocation) Area Residential 0.85 28 80 120 94 (inc. (C3) spaces (including (including (including 20 Blue per 4 blue 13 Blue 17 Blue Badge dwelling badge Badge Badge spaces, or up to and 5 and 11 car inc. 4 for 1,013 electric electric parking the spaces in vehicle) vehicle) spaces residents total and 20 of Plot (10% electric R4, 20 Blue vehicle) car Badge parking and 20% spaces electric for 3MM, vehicle) 20 electric vehicle)
Employment 1 space 42 N/A N/A N/A (B1) per (including 1,000m² 9 Blue or up to Badge 54 39 (10% and 8 (including Blue electric 17 blue badge) Badge vehicle) and 20% electric vehicle) Retail Up to 27 N/A N/A N/A N/A (A1/A2/A3/A4) at grade (10% Blue Badge) Community Up to 42 N/A N/A N/A N/A Use (D1/D1) spaces (of which 14 will be for Blue Badge) Hotel (C1) Up to N/A N/A N/A N/A 160 spaces 10% Blue Badge) Total 1,121 70 80 54 120 94
10.115 312 cycle parking spaces are provided in lockers in the basement, on the basis of 2 spaces per unit. The following table demonstrates that the proposed number of cycle parking spaces provided within the basement car park exceeds the number required by the relevant planning condition and complies the more recently adopted London Plan standards.
Condition A19 – Minimum Cycle Parking Spaces Use Minimum Approved Approved Proposed Approved Proposed number of Plot MU2 Plot R6 Public Plot R1 Plot R3 cycle basement Realm parking spaces allowed in Outline Planning Area (Condition A19) Residential 1 space 312 28 in (C3) per unit or N/A 217 public 286 1,192 realm spaces) Employment 1 space N/A (B1) per 125m² 42 in 300 N/A N/A N/A or 157 312 public spaces 48 in realm Community 50 spaces public N/A use (D1/D2) realm N/A and Retail N/A N/A N/A (A1/A2/A3/A4) combined Total 1399 348 245 312 328 312
10.116 The following table demonstrates that the proposed number of motorcycle parking spaces provided within the basement car park contributes towards the minimum requirement of the 2012 permission:
Condition A18 – Minimum Motorcycle Parking Spaces Use Minimum Approved Approved Proposed Approve Proposed number of Plot MU2 Plot R6 Public d Plot R1 Plot R3 motorcycle basement (including Realm parking (including MU5 spaces MU4 allocation) allowed in allocation) Outline Planning Area (Condition A19) Residential 14 17 119 10 15 (C3) Employment 39 29 N/A 47 N/A 4 (B1) N/A
Retail (A1- 27 N/A N/A A2) N/A N/A
Other use N/A 19 N/A N/A N/A combined Total 204 39 15 47 18 17
10.117 The application is considered to comply with the relevant planning conditions (A16, A17, A18 and A19) of the 2012 permission and the more up-to-date minimum cycle parking standards adopted by Policy T.9 of the Local Plan and Policy 6.9 of the London Plan, and it is recommended that condition C15 of the 2012 permission is partially (insofar as it relates to Plot R3) be discharged.
Waste Management 10.118 Policy S.6 of the Local Plan requires new development to demonstrate that adequate provision has been made for domestic and commercial waste storage and collection.
10.119 The 2012 permission includes a planning condition (C36) which requires the submission and approval of a Waste Management Strategy for each development plot. In support of the Reserved Matters application and to discharge condition C15 the applicant has submitted an Operational Waste Management Plan.
10.120 The application proposes the use of a site wide Underground Refuse System (URS), which has been approved for MU2, R6 and R1, and agreed with the London Borough of Newham’s Waste Disposal and Reduction Manager. The use of an underground system has several benefits; it improves the ground floor design of buildings as refuse stores do not need to provided; it can be sensitively located as street furniture within the public realm; and its location means large refuse vehicles can collect efficiently.
10.121 The application is considered to comply with Policy S.6 of the Local Plan and it is recommended that condition C36 of the 2012 permission is partially (insofar as it relates to Plot R3) be discharged.
Sustainability 10.122 Policies 5.2 of the London Plan and Policy S.2 of the Local Plan requires development to minimise carbon dioxide emissions by reducing energy; supplying energy efficiently; and meeting remaining energy requirements through renewable energy sources where viable in order to achieve a 40% improvement on the 2010 Building Regulations Target Emission Rate between 2015-2016 and zero carbon from 2016. Policy 5.6 of the London Plan and Policy S3 of the Local Plan require major development to maximise the opportunities to connect to existing or proposed decentralised energy networks.
10.123 The s106 Agreement relating to the 2012 permission requires: a) Approval of the Energy Study before any Reserved Matters are approved; b) The Energy Study to consider connection to a district heating network, with details provided of the connection timing and reasonable endeavours to achieve and maintain the connection; c) If the Energy Study concludes that connection to a district heating network is not preferred, then an alternative strategy shall be developed, implemented and maintained which shall achieve a reduction of at least 25% in carbon dioxide emissions
10.124 To discharge the s106 obligation the applicant has submitted an Energy Study identifies which identifies the following options as having the potential to achieve a reduction of at least 25% in carbon dioxide emissions measured against Part L of the Building Regulations 2010: a) Connection to the Cofely East London Energy (CELE) district heating network; b) A site-wide energy network through the provision of an on-site energy centre; and c) A community heat pump approach.
10.125 The submission describes the Energy Study as being prepared to take into account and balance the environmental benefits; economic benefits for end-users; cost of installation; and impact on development viability. The Energy Study shows that connection to a district energy network will achieve the 25% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, with the de-carbonisation opportunities of a network connection offering “carbon resilience” if the use of biomass as a fuel increases. The Energy Study also shows that a district energy approach can offer an economic benefit to home owners if the services provided and customer charging strategy are carefully designed.
10.126 The Energy Study concludes that connection to CELE district heating network is the preferred approach to supply base energy to the development, noting that the viability and overall suitability of this is subject to the terms and conditions of the final contract proposal. Compliance with the CO2 reduction target is also dependent on Cofely achieving a sufficiently low CO2 emissions factor.
10.127 In the event that the connection to the CELE district heating network is not feasible (it is noted that it does not currently serve the site), the Energy Study confirms that a site-wide energy network will be implemented, including the provision of an on- site energy centre, the location and design of which would be determined at a later date. The applicant has confirmed that the detailed design of each plot (residential and commercial) assume connection to the CELE district heating network.
10.128 The 2012 permission includes a planning condition (C38) which requires all residential units to achieve a Code for Sustainable Homes Level (or the equivalent at the time of submission). The applicant has submitted a Code for Sustainable Homes Pre-Assessment which confirms that the scheme will achieve this performance level.
10.129 The 2012 permission includes a planning condition (B27) which requires all residential units to meet BREEAM standard “very good”. The applicant has submitted a BREEAM pre-assessment tracker which confirms that the scheme will achieve this performance level.
10.130 The application is considered to comply with the 2012 permission and Policy 5.6 of the London Plan and Policy S.3 of the Local Plan.
11. HUMAN RIGHTS & EQUALITIES IMPLICATIONS
11.1 Members should take account of the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 as they relate to the application and the conflicting interests of the Applicants and any third party opposing the application in reaching their decisions. The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in the processing of the application and the preparation of this report. In particular, Article 6 (1), of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation civil rights and a fair hearing; Article 8 of the ECHR in relation to the right to respect for private and family life and Article 1 Protocol 1 of the ECHR in relation to the protection of property have all been taken into account 11.2 In addition the Equality Act 2010 provides protection from discrimination in respect of certain protected characteristics namely: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion, or beliefs and sex and sexual orientation. It places the Local Planning Authority under a legal duty to have due regard to the advancement of equality in the exercise of its powers including planning powers. Officers have taken this into account in the assessment of the application and Members must be mindful of this duty inter alia when determining all planning applications. In particular Members must pay due regard to the need to: a) Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under the Equality Act; b) Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; and; c) Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.
11.3 Officers are satisfied that the application material and Officers’ assessment has taken into account these issues, with particular regard to the creation of a high quality city and providing homes for all.
12. CONCLUSION
12.1 The proposed non-material amendments submitted under application reference 16/00499/NMA are not considered to materially alter the 2012 permission or create any new of different significant environmental impacts.
12.2 The proposed Reserved Matters – layout, scale, appearance and landscaping – under application reference 16/00412/REM are considered to result in a scheme which is compliant with the parameter plans (as amended by the NMA), Design Code and planning conditions that form part of the 2012 outline planning permission, and the relevant London Plan and Local Plan policies. The comments received have been considered in detail and addressed in this report and the scheme would not have any significant adverse impacts and will not result in any new of different significant environmental effects from those set out in the 2012 Environmental Statement.
12.3 It is recommended that the applications for non-material amendments, Reserved Matters and approval of details are GRANTED in accordance with section 2.0 of the report and subject to the following conditions:
13. CONDITIONS
1. Subject to the submission of details submitted pursuant to any planning condition attached to this planning permission and unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the following drawings:
Drawing Title Drawing No. Site Location Plan (OS Base Map) A232-A-P-P-(00)-001 P01 Site Plan (Masterplan Base) A232-A-P-P-(01)-100 P01 Proposed Basement Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-101 P01 Proposed Ground Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-102 P02 Proposed First Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-103 P01 Proposed Second Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-104 P01 Proposed Third Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-105 P01 Proposed Fourth Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-106 P01 Proposed Fifth Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-107 P01 Proposed Sixth Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-108 P01 Proposed Seventh Floor Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-109 P02 Proposed Roof Plan A232-A-P-P-(01)-110 P01 Communal Roof Gardens Plan (Fourth Floor) A232-A-P-P-(01)-111 P02 Proposed Elevation - Block A - West - SHL A232-A-P-E-(01)-201 P01 Proposed Elevation - Blocks A & B - South - A232-A-P-E-(01)-202 P01 SS Proposed Elevation - Block A - East - Court A232-A-P-E-(01)-203 P01 Proposed Elevation - Blocks A & B - North - A232-A-P-E-(01)-204 P01 SS Proposed Elevation - Block A - West- A232-A-P-E-(01)-205 P01 Courtyard Proposed Elevation - Block A - South - A232-A-P-E-(01)-206 P01 Courtyard Proposed Elevation - Block A - East - A232-A-P-E-(01)-207 P01 Courtyard Proposed Elevation - Block A - North- A232-A-P-E-(01)-208 P01 Courtyard Proposed Elevation - Block B - East - A232-A-P-E-(01)-209 P01 Riverside Proposed Elevation - Block B - West - Court A232-A-P-E-(01)-210 P01 Proposed Elevation - Block B-North & South- A232-A-P-E-(01)-211 P01 Court Proposed Elevation - Mews - West - Yard A232-A-P-E-(01)-212 P01 Elevation - Mews - East - Yard A232-A-P-E-(01)-213 P01 Proposed Elevation - Mews - Back A232-A-P-E-(01)-214 P01 Courtyard-West Proposed Elevation - Block A - Detailed A232-A-P-E-(01)-250 P01 Study Proposed Elevation - Block A - Detailed A232-A-P-E-(01)-251 P01 Study Proposed Elevation - Block B- Detailed Study A232-A-P-E-(01)-252 P01 Proposed Elevation - Block Mews - Detailed A232-A-P-E-(01)-253 P01 Study Section AA A232-A-P-P-(01)-301 P01 Section BB A232-A-P-P-(01)-302 P01 Section CC A232-A-P-P-(01)-303 P01 Section DD A232-A-P-P-(01)-304 P01 Section EE A232-A-P-P-(01)-305 P01 Section FF A232-A-P-P-(01)-306 P01 General Arrangement SE-R3-PNT-LAN-211 Rev 01 Levels and Hardworks SE-R3-PNT-LAN-212 Rev 01 Softworks SE-R3-PNT-LAN-213 Rev 01 Public Realm General Arrangement SE-R3-PNT-LAN-214 Rev 01
Reason: To ensure the quality of architecture and townscape amenity.
2 The development shall be constructed and occupied only in accordance with the following reports: Parking Management Plan prepared by Peter Brett Associates dated July 2016 Operational Waste Management report Rev A prepared by Peter Brett Associates dated August 2016
Reason: In the interests of highway management and safety and promoting sustainable travel patterns.
3 The basement level shall not be occupied until details of the car parking allocation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The car parking allocation shall be implemented and maintained only in accordance with the approved details and to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of estate management and promoting sustainable travel behaviour.
4. The development hereby approved shall only be implemented and managed in accordance with the principles of Secure by Design.
Reason: In the interests preventing crime and anti-social behaviour.
5. Prior to the first occupation of the ‘riverside block’, details of lighting proposed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved lighting scheme should be implemented prior to first occupation of the development.
Reason: In the interest of ecology, visual amenity and the waterway setting.
6. Prior to commencement of the superstructure of Block A, details of how privacy will be protected for mews house M007, including details of landscaping, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details as approved shall be implemented in accordance with the improved drawings, and thereafter retained. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity
7. Prior to the first occupation of the ‘riverside block’, a management and maintenance strategy for the communal riverside garden has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The communal riverside garden shall be implemented, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved strategy.
Reason: To promote residential amenity and ensure the quality of the amenity space.
INFORMATIVES
1. Positive and Proactive Statement
In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and with Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), the following statement explains how the LLDC as Local Planning Authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with this planning application:
Following submission of the planning application to LLDC, the local planning authority continued to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner. The planning application complies with planning policy as stated above and was determined in a timely manner.
The applicant has been kept informed of the progress of the application and has been given the opportunity to respond to and address any problems arising.
2. The applicant/developer should refer to the current “Code of Practice for Works affecting the Canal & River Trust” to ensure that any necessary consents are obtained (https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/business-and-trade/undertaking-works-on- our-property-and-our-code-of-practice).”
3. The applicant/developer is advised that any encroachment or access onto the canal towpath requires written consent from the Canal & River Trust, and they should contact the Canal & River Trust’s Estates Surveyor, Jonathan Young ([email protected]) regarding the required access agreement.
APPENDICES Appendix 1 - Site Location and Layout Appendix 2 - Approved ‘Maximum Building Heights’ and ‘Characterisation of Open Space’ Parameter Plans Appendix 3 - Proposed ‘Maximum Building Heights’ and ‘Characterisation of Open Space’ Parameter Plans Appendix 4 - Proposed Floor Plans Appendix 5 - Landscape Plan Appendix 6 - Proposed Elevations Appendix 7 - Images Appendix 8 - QRP Comments (8 September 2016)