First Central, Park Royal in the London Borough of Brent Planning Application No
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
planning report PDU/2159/02 13 March 2012 First Central, Park Royal in the London Borough of Brent planning application no. 10/3221 Strategic planning application stage II referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The proposal This is an outline application and proposes development of 544 new residential units in four residential buildings ranging in height from 6 to 9-storeys; 60,000 sqm. of office space in three new buildings ranging in height from 9 to 10-storeys. The scheme includes 1,700 sqm. of retail space; 2,500 sqm. of leisure space; 1,081 car parking spaces a new ‘plaza’ and a landscaped park. The applicant The applicant is Guinness Ltd. and London & Regional Properties Ltd. and the architect is Sheppard Robson. Strategic issues The principle of providing a mix of residential, office, retail and leisure space on this site in the ‘Western Gateway’ in the Park Royal Opportunity Area, is acceptable in strategic planning policy terms. The housing make up, design and layout of the scheme, access and inclusive design, transport, energy and climate change and flood risk matters have been broadly resolved. The Council’s decision In this instance Brent Council has resolved to grant permission. Recommendation That Brent Council be advised that the Mayor is content for it to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and does not therefore wish to direct refusal or direct that he is to be the local planning authority. Context 1 On 24 January 2011, the Mayor of London received documents from Brent Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. This was referred to the Mayor under Category 1A.1, 1B.1c) and 1C.1c) of the Schedule to the Order 2008: page 1 Category 1A.1 Development which comprises or includes the provision of more than 150 houses, flats, or houses and flats. Category 1B.1 Development (other than development which only comprises the provision of houses, flats, or houses and flats) which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings— (c) outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres Category 1C.1 Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building of one or more of the following descriptions— (c) the building is more than 30 metres high and is outside the City of London 2 On 23 February 2011, the Mayor considered planning report PDU/2159/01, and subsequently advised Brent Council that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 114 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 116 of that report could address these deficiencies. 3 A copy of the above-mentioned report is attached. The essentials of the case with regard to the proposal, the site, case history, strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance are as set out therein, unless otherwise stated in this report. On 14 December 2011 Brent Council decided that it was minded to grant planning permission and on 1 March 2012, following a period of negotiation, it advised the Mayor of this decision. Under the provisions of Article 5 of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor may allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, direct Brent Council under Article 6 to refuse the application or issue a direction to Brent Council under Article 7 that he is to act as the Local Planning Authority for the purposes of determining the application. The Mayor has until 15 March 2012 to notify the Council of his decision and to issue any direction. 4 The environmental information for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 has been taken into account in the consideration of this case. The decision on this case, and the reasons will be made available on the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk. Update 5 At the consultation stage Brent Council was advised that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 114 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 116 of that report could address these deficiencies: Housing: a detailed financial appraisal, further discussion on the potential models of affordable housing and the tenure split, and an increase in the number of family units and seeking to improve the quality of some of the internal residential corridors. Design: delivery of a new north/south route through the site, further work on the ground floor of the residential and office blocks, further detail on the ‘plaza’ space, further design code detail. Access: Provide further information on the level changes across the site. Transport: The applicant must improve access to Park Royal station, provide further detail on the transport assessment, reduce the level of car parking and increase the level of cycle parking, provide further detail on the travel plan and other plans, contributions towards improved bus network. page 2 Energy: There are a range of technical issues relating to the proposed energy strategy that need to be addressed in greater detail, as set out above. Summary of amendments 6 Since then, the housing mix has been amended as set out below and as reported in the Council’s planning report: Table 1 bedroom size mix 1-bed 2-bed 3-bed Total Social rent 12 43 13 68 Intermediate 13 41 16 70 Market 92 25 57 406 Total 117 110 86 544 7 The following sections set out the response to the Mayor’s comments made at the consultation stage. Affordable housing 8 The housing offer is set out in table 1 above and has been the subject of continued discussion with the Council and the applicant. The Council provides a useful summary of the agreed position on page 105 of the officer report: “The applicants submitted a viability assessment to support their S106 contributions and proportion of affordable housing. This consisted of a bespoke viability assessment and a Three-Dragons toolkit. The applicants argued that the toolkit showed that the site could not afford 25% affordable housing (and £2m S106 contribution) even with £9m contribution from an affordable housing provider. The council was concerned that the applicants included all of their historic site development costs of about £15m in the toolkit and thus distorted the picture. The true picture will be clouded by the fact that the office development remains unviable until market conditions significantly improve. Following discussions, the developer is prepared to give the land for one affordable housing block –block C-at no cost to Catalyst Housing Association and also to provide a serviced site with road access, provide the new road link and the necessary part of the decentralised energy centre, at no cost to the Housing Association. This will allow Catalyst to build 138 affordable flats. In the current market 28% affordable housing provision by unit is particularly good given the significant reductions in grant that occurred over the last financial year. 68 units will be for rent and a maximum of 70 for shared ownership (this is increased to 76 if no HCA grant comes into the scheme). It is proposed that the one and two bed units will be at the new affordable rent level (of up to 80% of market rental value in the local area, inclusive of service charges, and to be agreed in writing by the Council), and the 3 bed units will be at or near current housing association rent levels-thus safeguarding some new traditionally affordable family housing. These rent levels meet the new definition of affordable housing, moreover the new rents must be charged if housing associations want to receive grant on affordable units. The affordable housing site will be available for development no later than six months from the reserved matters application being approved on block C and the developer must get the site ready for development, making the road link and energy centre in time to service the development for construction and so as not to delay page 3 occupation. This means that early provision of affordable housing with the market housing following in the other three blocks as the housing market improves.” 9 GLA officers are broadly satisfied with the approach adopted in this instance. The offer is broadly consistent with the objectives of policy 3.12 of the London Plan. Urban design and access 10 The Mayor raised a number of detailed design comments at the consultation stage. These have been broadly addressed. The main issues related to the provision a public access through the site and matters regarding layout and design quality. 11 The applicant has continued to resist GLA officers suggestion that the central open space of the site could be a controlled public space with careful management and access at appropriate times of the day to provide the key desire line through the development and integrate the masterplan with the surrounding network and desire lines. The applicant has rejected such an approach due largely to commercial reasons. In particular the impact of letting the office units within the masterplan. The applicant is concerned that future office tenants would be discouraged by associated charges and security matters of a public open space. 12 Officers remain disappointed by the applicant’s rigid approach to the masterplan and the resistance of greater integration into the wider area with a possible north-south link through the site.