planning report PDU/2935/01 13 February 2013 The former tent site, Chelsea Harbour Drive in the London Borough of and planning application no. 2012/03395/FUL

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

The proposal Residential-led mixed use redevelopment to provide 89 dwellings and 995 sq.m. of ground floor retail/restaurant/cafe uses, within a building of between six and twelve-storeys.

The applicant The applicant is Chelsea Harbour Ltd., and the architect is Powell Dobson Architects.

Strategic issues The benefits associated with the proposed residential-led mixed use development of this site are likely to outweigh the risks associated with the proximity to the hazardous installation at the Fulham gasholder site, and the proposal is broadly supported in strategic planning terms. However, strategic issues with respect to housing, urban design, inclusive access, sustainable development and transport should be addressed to ensure accordance with the London Plan.

Recommendation That Hammersmith and Fulham Council be advised that, whilst the application is generally acceptable in strategic planning terms, the application does not comply with the London Plan for the reasons set out in paragraph 76 of this report. However, the resolution of those issues could lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan.

Context

1 On 8 January 2013 the Mayor of London received documents from Hammersmith and Fulham Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 18 February 2013 to provide the Council with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under the following categories of the Schedule to the Order 2008:

page 1  1B 1.(c) “Development… which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings… outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres”; and,

 1C 1.(c) ”Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building… more than 30 metres high and is outside the City of London”.

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

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

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

6 The site comprises 0.56 hectares of hard-standing, and is located at the north-western end of Chelsea Harbour. The plot is bounded to the west by the overland railway line, to the east by Chelsea Harbour Drive and Lots Road, to the south by Harbour Avenue and to the north by Chelsea Creek. Land uses at the rest of the Chelsea Harbour include a mix of retail showrooms, office, hotel and residential uses, and the setting is urban in character.

7 Fulham gasholder site lies to the west of the plot, on the opposite side of the railway line. The gasholder site is identified as a ‘control of major hazards’ installation, and the proposal site is subject to associated Health and Safety Executive development consultation zones and ‘Planning Advice for Developments near Hazardous Installations’ guidance.

8 There are a number of heritage assets in the area surrounding the application site. Those of particular relevance for this application include Number 2 Gasholder (Grade II*), Office at the Former Imperial Gas Works (Grade II), War Memorial (Grade II), Former Gas Works Laboratory (Grade II), Cremorne Bridge (Grade II*), and Sandford Manor House (Grade II*) (in the general vicinity of the site); and, (Grade I) and Church of Chapel (Grade II*), within the Brompton Cemetery Conservation Area.

9 Imperial Wharf rail station is approximately 150 metres south of the site, and the nearest station is Fulham Broadway (District Line) located approximately one kilometre to the north west. The closest bus stops to the site are located on Lots Road (served by route C3), and Kings Road (served by routes 11 and 22). The site records a public transport accessibility level of three, on a scale of one to six, where one is poor and six is excellent.

Details of the proposal

10 The proposal is for a building of six, eight and twelve-storeys in height, to accommodate 89 residential apartments, and 995 sq.m. of ground floor retail/restaurant/cafe uses. The proposed development also includes 59 car parking spaces within a basement, and the formation of a new public plaza adjacent to Chelsea Creek.

page 2 Case history

11 On 5 April 2012 a pre-planning application meeting was held at City Hall to discuss this scheme. The advice issued by GLA officers, on 19 April 2012, stated that the emerging scheme responded well to the challenges and opportunities presented by this site and its context. However, whilst support was given for the development in principle, the applicant was advised to respond to a number of strategic issues with respect to hazardous installations, mix of uses, housing, urban design, inclusive access, sustainable development and transport. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

12 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 Hazardous installations London Plan;  Mix of uses London Plan;  Housing London Plan; Housing SPG; Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy; Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG;  Affordable housing London Plan; Housing SPG; Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy  Density London Plan; Housing SPG;  Urban design London Plan;  Tall buildings London Plan;  Historic environment London Plan;  Inclusive access London Plan; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM);  Sustainable development London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy;  Ambient noise London Plan; the Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy;  Air quality London Plan; the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy;  Transport and parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy;  Crossrail London Plan; and, Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy.

13 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the 2011 Hammersmith and Fulham Core Strategy, the 2003 Hammersmith and Fulham Unitary Development Plan saved policies and the 2011 London Plan.

14 The following are also relevant material considerations:  The National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guide to the National Planning Policy Framework;  Planning Advice for Developments near Hazardous Installations; and,  The draft Revised Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan.

page 3

Principle of development

Hazardous installations

15 As discussed in paragraph seven, the site is subject to Health and Safety Executive (HSE) development consultation zones, associated with Fulham gasholder site which contains several operational gas holders and is identified as a hazardous installation.

16 London Plan Policy 5.22 states that the Mayor will work with all relevant partners to ensure that hazardous substances, installations and materials are managed in ways that limit risks to London’s people and environment. Part B of this policy sets out strategic considerations for assessing development near to hazardous installations, and identifies that site specific circumstances and proposed mitigation measures should be taken into account when applying the Health and Safety Executive’s planning advice, and that the risks should be balanced with the benefits of development and should take account of existing patterns of development.

17 The Mayor’s proposals for ‘Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan’ indicate his intention to provide supplementary planning guidance to assist with the implementation of this policy. At this point, however, the emerging guidance is still at an early stage, and has not been published for public consultation.

18 The Fulham gasholder site is split into two parts, north and south, and each part has a separate HSE consultation zone. The overlap of the published consultation zones at the proposal site result in the majority of the site falling within the outer consultation zone for the south gasholder installation, and the middle consultation zone for the north gasholder installation. The HSE ‘Planning Advice for Developments near Hazardous Installations’ guidance advises that, within the middle zone, developments that propose more than 40 dwellings per hectare should be classified as ‘sensitivity level three’, and would generate an HSE ‘advise against’ recommendation. Given that the density of this proposal is in the region of 180 dwellings per hectare, the scheme would trigger an automatic objection from the HSE.

19 Nevertheless, as part of pre-application discussions, officers noted that the Council was in negotiations with the operator of the Fulham gasholder site (Transco), to reduce the hazardous substance licence for the installation, so that it would more closely reflect the level of gas that is actually stored at the site.

20 Recent advice from the HSE has confirmed that the Executive recognises that the level of gas held at the site is considerably less than that covered by the hazardous substance licence. In this case, therefore, the HSE has used the actual storage capacity of the site to define draft revised consultation zones for the purpose of assessing this proposal.

21 Based on the information provided to GLA officers, it is evident that the revised consultation zone boundary between the middle and outer zones for the north installation would bisect the site, leaving much of the plot within the outer zone. Under this scenario, the majority of the development would fall within the outer zone, save for a block providing residential and cafe uses (and the proposed public plaza adjacent to Chelsea Creek), which would extend slightly into the middle zone. This is, nevertheless, still expected to trigger an HSE ‘advise against’ recommendation.

22 Notwithstanding this, officers note that the HSE has further advised that the Fulham gasholder site is shortly expected to be decommissioned, which would result in the hazardous

page 4 substance licence being revoked. Following removal of the hazardous substance licence the HSE would have no objection to the development.

23 At this point, however, it is unclear whether the hazardous substance licence would be revoked in time to avoid an HSE objection on this application. Therefore, the HSE is expected to recommend the inclusion of a planning condition to ensure that parts of the development within the middle consultation zone would not be occupied until the hazardous substance licence for the Fulham gasholder site has been revoked. GLA officers would support such a condition in principle, and will update the Mayor with respect to the HSE’s formal representations on this application, and the outcome of any further discussion/negotiation, at the decision making stage.

24 In strategic terms, based on the information currently available, GLA officers are of the view that the benefits of this development (including: the delivery of housing; creation of a generous new public space; and, improved Thames Path connections) are likely to outweigh the risks associated with the proximity to the Fulham gasholder site. Nevertheless, a full assessment against London Plan Policy 5.22 will be provided at the Mayor’s decision making stage.

Mix of uses

25 Subject to the consideration above with respect to hazardous installations, officers are content that the mix of uses proposed (residential, retail and cafe/restaurant) would be suitable at this site. With respect to the proposed retail provision, officers are broadly satisfied that the offer envisaged (high-value product showrooms) would have the potential to compliment existing provision at the adjacent Design Centre, and would serve to enliven and activate the ground floor level of this development, and the associated public realm. Based on pre-application meeting discussions, officers understand the proposed retail element of the scheme would be highly locally specific in nature, and unlikely to divert trade from surrounding centres. The proposed retail component is, therefore, supported in accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 4.7. Housing

26 The scheme would deliver 89 dwellings at the site. The table below sets out the proposed residential mix within the application.

Unit type Intermediate affordable Private market Total One-bedroom 1 9 10 Two-bedroom 2 66 68 Three-bedroom 0 11 11 Total 3 86 89

Affordable housing

27 The mix proposed would result in just over 3% provision of affordable housing by unit. Whilst it is acknowledged that this is a comparatively small-scale residential scheme in strategic planning terms, the affordable housing provision appears unexpectedly low, particularly given the high-end nature of the private market housing products envisaged.

28 To support the proposed level of provision, and in response to the requirements of London Plan Policy 3.12 (which seeks to secure the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing), the applicant has submitted an affordable housing viability report.

29 The viability report, and the financial modelling which underpins it, is currently undergoing a locally-led assessment to verify whether the proposed affordable housing provision would be the

page 5 maximum reasonable. GLA officers will update the Mayor of the findings of the assessment, and of any further negotiations, at the decision making stage.

30 Irrespective of the findings of the appraisal, the GLA would expect a suitable financial review mechanism to be included within the section 106 legal agreement, in order to reappraise the scheme at a suitable point, and capture any additional financial surplus generated by an uplift in residential sales values. Such a mechanism would need to be designed so as to ensure an appropriate proportion of any financial surplus would be awarded to the Council, and ring-fenced for the delivery of additional affordable housing units.

Tenure

31 As currently proposed the affordable housing provision within the scheme would be 100% intermediate. Whilst it is acknowledged that (at the level of affordable housing provision currently proposed) it would be unrealistic to seek a mix of affordable tenures on-site, GLA officers await the findings of the locally-led viability review, to inform the assessment of the scheme against the strategic aims of London Plan Policy 3.11. Officers will update the Mayor accordingly at the decision making stage.

Mix of units

32 Notwithstanding the low provision of affordable units, officers are broadly content that the proposed residential mix would provide a reasonable range and balance of unit sizes for this location. Officers will, nevertheless, provide an updated assessment against London Plan Policy 3.8 at the decision making stage, following the findings of the viability review.

Residential design standards

33 The submitted documentation confirms that all dwellings will meet or exceed the minimum space standards within London Plan Table 3.3. Based on detail within the design and access statement officers are content that unit layouts and other facets of residential design have been well addressed by the scheme, and will be delivered in broad accordance with guidance in the ‘Housing SPG’ (2012) and the best practice principles of the ‘London Housing Design Guide’ (2010). Subject to the incorporation of suitable noise mitigation measures (discussed in paragraph 59), residential standards within the proposal are supported in line with London Plan Policy 3.5.

Children’s play space

34 Based on the residential mix presented in support of paragraph 26 above, and the methodology within the Mayor’s ‘Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation SPG‘ (2012), GLA officers have calculated an expected child population of 11 for the development. Based on this, the SPG indicates that the development would need to make provision for 110 sq.m. of children’s play and informal recreation space.

35 Based on the material provided it is evident that the development would exceed this requirement through the provision of 186 sq.m. dedicated children’s play space, to be incorporated as part of the wider 1,963 sq.m. public open space adjacent to Chelsea Creek. This provision is strongly supported in line with London Plan Policy 3.6.

Density

page 6 36 Given the characteristics of the site, discussed in paragraphs six to nine above, the London Plan density matrix (Table 3.2 in support of London Plan Policy 3.4) would suggest a residential density of approximately 450 habitable rooms per hectare for the development.

37 The planning statement submitted in support of the application states that the residential density of the scheme would be 696 habitable rooms per hectare. Whilst this would exceed the range indicated by the London Plan density matrix, having had regard to the site context and constraints, design quality, and the proposed provision of play and amenity space, officers accept the density proposed in this instance, in accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 3.4. Urban design

38 The scheme is generally very well designed. It optimises the potential of the site to provide a good mix of active uses, and would add positively to the public realm network in the area. Officers welcome the progress that has been made in evolving the design since the last review at pre-application stage, and an updated assessment of the proposed design is provided below.

Layout

39 The development has been laid out in a form that follows the line of Harbour Avenue, and focuses the majority of development at the plot in a way which would minimise the risk associated with the Fulham gasholder site. This approach is strongly supported, and has the additional benefit of providing a good frontage onto Harbour Avenue, to improve the definition of this route. The consolidation of the entrance space to the underground car park at the Harbour Avenue frontage is also particularly welcomed, in line with advice provided at pre-application stage.

40 The proposed provision of the new public space, adjacent to Chelsea Creek, is strongly supported, and, as discussed at pre-application stage, it is important that this space is as welcoming and activated as possible. The proposed provision of a ground floor cafe, and retail showrooms, will greatly assist in this regard. The submitted plans indicate that two of the three showroom units proposed would effectively be dual aspect, fronting both the public space to the north, and Harbour Avenue to the south. Whilst this is supported in principle, GLA officers seek to avoid a situation where these units would be occupied in a way which would establish only one frontage as active, (effectively deactivating the other). Officers would, therefore, welcome further discussion with respect to the emerging strategy for managing and fitting out these retail spaces, to ensure they would provide the desired response at both frontages, and support the role and vitality of the third showroom unit, which fronts only the northern public space.

41 The primary access to the new public space is proposed to be provided via a single-storey covered passageway through the building. At pre-application stage it was noted that this link aligned well with the route though from the Design Centre, however, officers sought the provision of a wider and taller passage through the building, to ensure that this would be a legible and inviting connection. Whilst it is acknowledged that changes have since been proposed to improve the passageway (through materials, lighting and splaying of the southern entrance), officers remain of the view that a genuinely wider and/or taller passageway would be the most effective way to promote the presence of the new open space, and support the vitality of the third showroom unit discussed above. In the spirit of promoting the highest standards of urban design in line with London Plan Policy 7.1, the applicant should give consideration to this accordingly.

Scale, height and massing

42 The massing of the development is arranged as a curved block of six to twelve-storeys in height, with a taller element located at the north-east corner of the site, marking the road entrance

page 7 into the harbour. The height of the taller element has been reduced by three storeys since pre- application stage, and officers are satisfied that the proposal is in keeping with the scale of surrounding development, and provides an appropriate response to context in the various key townscape views in which it will feature. The application therefore accords with London Plan Policy 7.7.

Historic environment

43 As discussed in paragraph eight above, the site is surrounded by a number of heritage assets, comprising both Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas. The applicant has submitted a townscape, heritage and visual impact assessment, which considers the impact of the development on these assets. Having considered the assessment and visualisations provided, officers are content that the development would not harm the setting of the identified Listed Buildings, or adversely affect the character of the surrounding Conservation Areas. The application therefore accords with London Plan Policy 7.8. Inclusive access

44 The applicant has confirmed its commitment to ensure that 100% of the proposed new dwellings would meet the Lifetime Homes standard, and that a 10% provision of wheelchair accessible/adaptable dwellings (nine units) would be provided across the scheme. This is supported in line with London Plan Policy 3.8, and the Council is encouraged to secure these standards by way of planning condition.

45 The layout of the scheme promotes a generally well defined public realm, and is supported. Officers also note that the development would allow at-grade access to the proposed retail showrooms and residential entrances, and that the new public space at Chelsea Creek would benefit from level access to and from Harbour Avenue. The applicant should, nevertheless, have regard to the comments made within the urban design section of this report, to ensure that the connection between Harbour Avenue and the new public space would be as inviting as possible.

46 As discussed in the transport section of this report, six dedicated disabled parking bays (10% of the overall provision) are proposed to be provided on site. Whilst this is supported in principle, given the commitment to provide up to nine wheelchair accessible dwellings in future, and in accordance with the principles of London Plan polices 6.13 and 7.2, officers would welcome discussions with the applicant and the Council with respect to the development of a parking management strategy that would allow for a potential increase in the provision of Blue Badge parking for the scheme, where there is demand in future. Sustainable development

Energy strategy

47 In line with London Plan Policy 5.2, the applicant has submitted an energy and sustainability statement for the development, setting out how the scheme will reduce carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the London Plan energy hierarchy. The components of the proposed energy strategy are assessed below.

Energy efficiency

48 Based on the information provided, the proposed development would not be capable of exceeding 2010 Building Regulations (in terms of carbon dioxide savings) through energy efficiency measures alone. In accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 5.2, the

page 8 applicant is encouraged to model additional energy efficiency measures in order to achieve the highest possible carbon dioxide savings through the first stage of the London Plan energy hierarchy.

District heating

49 Following an investigation, the applicant has confirmed that there are no existing or planned district heating networks within the vicinity of the proposed development. The applicant has, nevertheless, provided a commitment to ensure that the development is designed to allow future connection to a district heating network, should one become available. This is supported.

50 In accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 5.6, the applicant is proposing to install a site-wide heat network. Whilst this is supported, the applicant should confirm that all apartments, and non-domestic building uses within the development, will be connected to the network. A drawing showing the route of the heat network, linking all buildings uses on the site, should be provided to demonstrate this. The applicant should also confirm that the site heat network will be supplied from a single energy centre, and provide information on the floor area and location of the energy centre for verification accordingly.

Combined heat and power

51 The applicant is proposing to install a 200 kWt gas fired combined heat and power plant (CHP) as the lead heat source for the site heat network. The CHP is sized to provide for the domestic hot water load, as well as a proportion of the space heating. A reduction in regulated carbon dioxide emissions of 65 tonnes per annum (32%) will be achieved through this second stage of the energy hierarchy.

Renewable energy technologies

52 The applicant has investigated the feasibility of a range of renewable energy technologies and is proposing to install air source heat pumps (ASHP) and 150 sq.m. of photovoltaic panels (PV).

53 With respect to the ASHP, the applicant should confirm that this would be a centralised unit, serving a heating/cooling network. The applicant should also provide details of the energy efficiency ratio, and coefficient of performance, of the heat pump. Furthermore, officers seek a description of how the ASHP will operate in conjunction with the CHP, to support the provision of heat to the development.

54 The proposed provision of PV within the energy strategy for this scheme is supported. However, the applicant should provide a drawing showing the location and layout of the PV panels for verification.

55 A reduction in regulated carbon dioxide emissions of 11 tonnes per annum (8%) will be achieved through this third stage of the London Plan energy hierarchy.

Overall carbon dioxide savings

56 Based on the information provided, a reduction of 76 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year in regulated emissions compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development is expected. This is equivalent to an overall saving of 37%, which would exceed the current (2010-2013) target within London Plan Policy 5.2, and is supported.

Climate change adaptation

page 9 57 The applicant has set out its proposed climate change adaptation measures within the design and access statement and environmental statement. These documents confirm that a formal green roof area is proposed at the top of the sixth-storey of the development, and that this coupled with generous soft landscaping within the public realm, and an associated sustainable urban drainage strategy, will reduce surface water runoff at the site. These proposals are strongly supported in accordance with London Plan policies 5.10, 5.11 and 5.13, and the Council is encouraged to secure the detailed approval of these measures by way of planning condition.

58 The proposed flood risk mitigation measures (including new flood defences along part of Chelsea Creek, and the inclusion of a safe refuge area within the scheme) are supported in line with London Plan Policy 5.12. The Council is encouraged to secure these measures by way of planning condition, in conjunction with any further advice from the Environment Agency.

Ambient noise

59 The applicant has submitted a noise and vibration assessment in response to London Plan Policy 7.15, which seeks to minimise existing and potential adverse impacts of noise on development proposals. The assessment identifies the adjacent railway line to the west of the plot as the primary noise source impacting on the site. Under the worst case scenario a number of dwellings with a western external facade will be subject to noise category level ‘C’. However, it is noted that the report finds that it would be possible to insulate dwellings, using conventional materials and construction techniques, to achieve the ‘reasonable’ British Standard BS8233:1999 as an absolute minimum. Given the constrains at this site, GLA officers are content that this would represent an acceptable response, and the Council is strongly encouraged to secure detailed approval of the necessary mitigation measures by way of planning condition.

Air quality

60 The site is located within an air quality management area and, in accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 7.14, the applicant has submitted an air quality assessment which considers the air quality issues associated with the proposed development. It is noted that the assessment finds that the effect on local air quality arising from the completed development is likely to be negligible. However, effects arising from construction dust and traffic may result in a temporary minor adverse impact at the site boundary, reducing to a negligible impact at the nearest sensitive receptors. On the basis that the air quality issues associated with construction traffic will be appropriately controlled through a construction logistics plan, to be secured by condition (refer to paragraph 68), GLA officers are broadly content that the impact on air quality is acceptable. Transport

Impact on the transport network

61 The applicant’s approach to the trip generation analysis is supported, and following a review of the figures presented, TfL is satisfied that the proposed development is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the operation of the strategic highway or the local public transport network.

Car parking

62 Given the good public transport accessibility of the site, TfL welcomes the fact that the applicant has reduced car parking provision at the site since pre-application stage (from a total of one space per unit, to a ratio of 0.66 spaces per unit). As discussed in paragraph 46, however, the applicant should ensure that spaces are flexible enough to respond to any potential increase in the need for Blue Badge provision in future. Disabled parking bays should also be placed in convenient

page 10 locations, close to the lift cores. It is noted that the applicant proposes that all spaces will be fitted with electric vehicle charging points from the outset. This is strongly supported and the Council is encouraged to secure this by way of planning condition.

63 To avoid any potential issues of overflow parking, TfL requests that a clause is included within the section 106 legal agreement to ensure that new occupants of the proposed development would not be entitled to apply for an on-street resident’s parking permit. The Council is also encouraged to use the legal agreement to secure the provision of two car club spaces.

Cycling

64 A total of 146 cycle parking spaces are being proposed for the residential component of the development, with an additional twenty visitor cycle parking spaces proposed along the Thames Path, at Chelsea Creek. This is supported in accordance with the London Plan standards, however, in accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 6.9, the applicant should seek to ensure that the cycle spaces are secure, covered and in an easily accessible location. TfL also recommends that shower and locker facilities are provided for members of staff at the commercial component of the development, who may wish to cycle to work. Furthermore, the applicant is encouraged to use measures within the travel plan to promote the use of the existing cycle facilities in the area, as identified within the transport assessment.

65 In line with pre-application advice, TfL seeks the identification and safeguarding of land for the future provision of a Barclay’s Cycle Hire Docking Station at the site. Accordingly, the applicant and the Council are asked to ensure that suitable provisions for the future delivery of a medium- sized docking station (including land safeguarding and a financial contribution) are secured as part of the section 106 legal agreement.

Walking

66 The proposed development will see an increase in pedestrian trips to and from the site, and through the local area. On this basis the proposed improvements to the pedestrian environment, comprising the delivery of the new public plaza and Thames Path connections at the north of the site are strongly supported. These improvements should be secured through the section 106 agreement, and, where necessary, implemented through a section 278 agreement accordingly.

67 To promote the use of these new public realm assets, and to support walking as a local mode of transport in accordance with London Plan Policy 6.10, the applicant is strongly encouraged to implement a wayfinding strategy. TfL’s ‘Legible London’ scheme is the preferred method of promoting wayfinding, and both the applicant and the Council are encouraged to consider the benefits of delivering ‘Legible London’ infrastructure as part of the public realm improvement planning obligations for this development.

Travel planning

68 In accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 7.14, a delivery and servicing plan should be secured for the site by way of planning condition. This could form an appendix to the travel plan, and should include information on the proposed servicing regime, and the measures that will be used to manage deliveries to the site once the development is operational. Similarly, a construction logistics plan which identifies efficiency and sustainability measures to be undertaken whilst the development is being built out, including measures to control dust and manage air quality, should also be secured by condition.

69 A residential travel plan has been submitted as part of the application material. TfL is satisfied that the plan is of a good standard, and the Council is encouraged to ensure that it is

page 11 secured, managed, monitored and enforced through the section 106 legal agreement. The residential travel plan includes a proposal to reimburse the first occupiers of the proposed development with up to £100 towards the cost of an Oyster Card, or annual membership of the Barclay’s Cycle Hire scheme. This measure is particularly supported, and TfL encourages that this proposal is itemised as a specific obligation within in the section 106 legal agreement.

Community infrastructure levy

70 The Mayor has introduced a London-wide community infrastructure levy (CIL) to help implement the London Plan, particularly policies 6.5 and 8.3. The Mayoral CIL formally came into effect on 1 April 2012, and it will be paid on commencement of most new development in Greater London granted planning permission on or after that date. The Mayor's CIL will contribute towards the funding of Crossrail.

71 The Mayor has arranged boroughs into three charging bands. The rate for Hammersmith and Fulham is £50 per sq.m. The required CIL should be confirmed by the applicant and the Council once the components of the development, or phase thereof, have themselves been finalised.

72 The applicant should note that London borough councils are also able to introduce CIL charges which are payable in addition to the Mayor’s CIL. Hammersmith and Fulham Council has yet to adopt a CIL, but is expected to begin consultation on a draft charging schedule during the first quarter of 2013. Further details are available on the Council’s website. Local planning authority’s position

73 Hammersmith and Fulham Council is expected to formally consider the application at planning committee in February/March 2013. Legal considerations

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

75 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

76 London Plan policies on hazardous installations, mix of uses, housing, urban design, inclusive access, sustainable development and transport are relevant to this application. The application complies with some of these policies but not with others, for the following reasons:

page 12  Hazardous installations: On the basis of the information currently available, the benefits of this development are likely to outweigh the risks associated with the proximity to the Fulham gasholder site. However, a full assessment against London Plan Policy 5.22 will be provided at the Mayor’s decision making stage.  Mix of uses: The proposed residential, retail and cafe/restaurant uses are supported in accordance with London Plan policies 3.3, 4.7 and 7.1.  Housing: Whilst the housing mix, density and quality standards are generally supported, the provision of affordable housing appears low. The viability of the scheme should be fully assessed at the local level to ensure that the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing would be delivered by this scheme. A financial review mechanism is also sought in accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 3.12. A full assessment with respect to tenure balance will be provided following the outcome of the viability assessment, and any subsequent negotiations.  Urban design: Whilst the overall design is supported, the applicant should respond to the issues raised with respect to the ground floor retail spaces, and the north-south covered passageway, to ensure that the development would deliver the highest standard of design in accordance with the principles of London Plan Policy 7.1.  Inclusive access: Whilst the overall response to access and inclusion is supported, further discussion is sought with respect to Blue Badge parking, in accordance with the principles of London Plan policies 6.13 and 7.2.  Sustainable development: The proposed energy strategy is broadly supported, however, the applicant should respond to matters raised with respect to: energy efficiency; district heating; and, renewable energy technologies to ensure accordance with London Plan policies 5.2, 5.6 and 5.7. Planning conditions are also sought with respect to: climate change mitigation measures; ambient noise; and, air quality in accordance with London Plan policies 5.10, 5.11, 5.13, 5.14 and 5.15.  Transport: Whilst the development is broadly supported in strategic transport terms, further discussion, clarification and/or commitments are sought with respect to car parking; cycling; walking; and travel planning, to ensure accordance with London Plan policies 6.9, 6.10, 6.13 and 6.14.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager - Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Graham Clements, Strategic Planner (case officer) 020 7983 4265 email [email protected]

page 13