Sustainable Development Committee April 26th 2012 Sunny Desai e-mail: [email protected] Sarah Smaill email:[email protected]
References: P/2011/3559 00558/A/P43 Address: Land at Centaurs Business Park, Grant Way, Isleworth Ward: Osterley and Spring Grove Proposal: Demolition and/or alteration of existing buildings and structures and development for a media broadcasting and production campus of up to 175,000sq.m. (GIA) comprising office (Class B1A), studio, production and research and development facilities (class B1B), warehouse/ storage (class B8) and retail (class A1 to A4); hard and soft landscaping; reconfigured and new vehicle and pedestrian accesses and works to the public highway; the provision of parking; and all necessary ancillary and enabling works (Hybrid Application-Part Outline Part Detailed) (Including environmental impact assessment)(Amended Description) Documents and TBC drawings: Application Valid: 23/2/12
1.0 SUMMARY
1.1 Outline planning consent (as well as detailed planning consent for phase 1) is sought for the redevelopment of the site for use as a media and production campus comprising of up to 175,000sq.m (GIA) of office (Class B1A), studio, production and research and development facilities (class B1B), warehouse/ storage (class B8) and retail (class A1 to A4) floorspace.
1.2 This report presents the proposed scheme 00558/A/P43, a summary of representations received and an assessment of the implications of the development.
1.3 Approval, subject to appropriate safeguarding conditions and a s106 agreement, is recommended.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 The site contains an area of approximately 13.52 hectares (ha) and is located to the north east of the Great West Road and its junction with Syon Lane.
2.2 The site predominantly contains the BSkyB Osterley Campus, with primary access from Grant Way, which in turn is served by Syon Lane. The site also contains the Harrods Warehouse building and carparking area. The existing Harrods Distribution Centre previously employed between 300 to 500 people and has a site area of 4.3ha.
2.3 In addition to the Former Harrods Warehouse (20m in height), the site contains a number of existing buildings ranging from one to three storeys.
2.4 The largest building on the existing BSkyB site, within the south east corner is the recently constructed Sky Studios Building (formerly known as Harlequin 1) has a height of 40m (at the parapet) and a floor area of 20,831sq.m. The wind turbine that has permission would have a height of 66.5m and would be located on the northern side of Sky Studios. Sky Studios contains eight broadcast studios, technical facilities and supporting office space. It is noted that Sky Studios is contained outside of the site boundary for the purposes of the application, but will eventually form part of the overall campus development.
2.5 The site currently contains 1,689 carparking spaces. This includes 300 car parking spaces at the Harrods warehouse and 264 parking spaces at Athena Court. Parking also occurs alongside Grant Way, providing an additional 75 parking spaces.
2.6 Parking is also provided within New Horizons Court, in a temporary car-park at the Gillette site, Syon Lane and at the Grasshoppers Rugby Club. This results in an additional 1,065 parking spaces for staff.
2.7 The site has a Public Transport Accessibility (PTAL) level of 1a (Very Poor) and 2 (Poor).
2.8 The biomass Combined Cooling and Heating Power plant (CCHP) is currently under construction. This is located adjacent to the railway line on the north-eastern boundary of the site. The plant is contained within an 18m tall building, with a flue with an additional height of 9.7m. Stand-by generators are located alongside the boundary, east of the CCHP plant.
2.9 Grant Way is not included within the application site, although forms the primary access point from Syon Lane. Grant Way is an adopted carriageway.
Figure 1: Existing Site Context
Surrounding Context
2.10 The site is bounded to the west by Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) that is in use as playing fields for the Grasshoppers Rugby Club and adjacent to this the Former Centaurs Rugby Ground which now contains a Goals Soccer centre, a Grade II Listed pavilion. Macfarlane Lane separates the subject site from the MOL. Beyond these is Wyke Green Golf Course.
2.11 To the east of the site is the waste transfer station which is separated from the site by a railhead which formed part of the Brentford Branch Line of the Great Western Line railway. In 1964 the southern end of the branch line from the Great West Road to Brentford Dock closed, leaving the railhead terminating to the east of the site. Beyond this is the M4 motorway, which separates the site from Boston Manor
Playing Fields and the rear of properties facing east onto Boston Gardens. Further to the south of these is the Grade II Listed Boston Manor House.
2.12 To the south east the site, beyond Harlequin Avenue, is bound by an area of mainly light industrial and office development, including the office park known as New Horizons Court and industrial and warehouse units along Amalgamated Drive and Shield Drive.
2.13 To the south is the Grade II Listed Former Gillette Factory, which is now vacant (planning permission exists for the redevelopment of this site).
2.14 In respect of access the site is close to the H91 bus service that runs along the Great West Road. The H28 bus service stops at Tesco’s and is therefore also accessible from the site. The Syon Lane Overground Station is located 500m south of the site. Gunnersbury Overground and Underground Station is located 4.5km east of the site. Osterley London Underground Station is located 1.5km to the west of the site, and Boston Manor London Underground Station is located 2.5km from the site.
2.15 BSKYB operate a shuttle bus service to provide additional connections to the site from the surrounding stations. The shuttle bus service is operated between 6am and 10pm Monday to Friday, with a reduced service on the weekend to Osterley Station (four times per hour), Gunnersbury Station (four services per hour) and Ealing Broadway/South Ealing Station (three buses per hour). The current fleet include includes eight small buses (16 seat capacity) and four large buses (41 seat capacity).
3.0 RECENT HISTORY
3.1 00558/A/P25 Principle of redevelopment of the existing site to create up to 69, 581 square metres of floorspace on the site for a broadcasting facility (use class B1(b)), offices (use class B1(a)) and warehouse/storage uses (use class B8), landscaping, 1125 car parking spaces, access and highway improvements, together with ancillary works, plant and equipment (outline consent).
Approved 23/04/2007
3.2 00558/A/P25A(1) Following approval of the Outline application 00558/A/P25 on 23 April 2007, for the principle of redevelopment of the existing site to create up to 69, 581 square metres of floorspace on the site for a broadcasting facility (use class B1(b)), offices (use class B1(a)) and warehouse/storage uses (use class B8), landscaping, 1125 car parking spaces, access and highway improvements, together with ancillary works, plant and equipment, reserved matters submitted pursuant to condition 1 for siting, design and external appearance for a mixed use media building providing television studios, broadcast support facilities and office space (site area of 20,831 square metres) to be positioned adjoining Harlequin Avenue.
Approved 09/07/2007
3.3 00558/A/P25 Following approval for Outline application 00558/A/P25 on 23 (1A) April 2007, for the principle of redevelopment of the existing site to create up to 69,581 square metres of floorspace on the site for a broadcasting facility (use class B1(b)), offices (use class B1(a)) and warehouse/storage uses (use class B8), landscaping, 1125 car parking spaces, access and highway improvements, together with ancillary works, plant and equipment details submitted pursuant to condition 1 reserved matter (Landscaping) of permission approved.
Approved 18/04/2007
3.4 00558/A/P31 Variation of Condition 34 of approval 00558/A/P25 to change the wording of the condition from 'prior development' to 'prior to occupation'
Approved 9/10/08
3.5 00558/A/P32 Erection of a building housing plant and equipment essential to the operation of the BSkyB Harlequin 1 development.
Approved 23/10/08
3.6 00558/A/P34 Installation of two wind turbines 66.5m high (84.5m high AOD)
Approved and Legal agreement signed 30/12/2010
3.7 00558/A/P35 Erection of a Combined cooling and heating Plant
Approved 30/9/2010
3.8 00558/A/P40 Installation of one wind turbine above the Harlequin 1 plant farm (instead of the two previously approved under planning permission 00558/A/P34 dated 30 December 2010) Approved 21/7/11
3.9 00558/A/P41 Erection of temporary 5-storey office accommodation comprising of 23310sq.m B1 office and associated plant and infrastructure for a period of 5 years. Approved subject to s106 (Not signed todate)
3.10 00558/A/P42 Retention of temporary Class B1 office accommodation as hospitality services facility, ancillary to Sky Studios (1,334 sq m) for a period of 5 years, a new storage building (450 sq m) and associated works comprising access pathway, fencing, cycle parking and landscaping. Approved 6/12/11
4.0 DETAILS
4.1 The proposal seeks outline planning permission for the demolition and alteration of the existing site buildings and the redevelopment of the site to create a new BSKYB Headquarters campus, delivering new broadcast studios, offices, technical spaces, and amenities and open space for the workforce and local community.
4.2 Specifically the current proposal involves a media broadcasting and production campus of up to 175,000m² (GIA) comprising office (Class B1A), studio, production and research and development facilities (class B1B), warehouse/ storage (class B8) and retail (class A1 to A4).
4.3 The application is a hybrid application in that detailed planning permission is sought for phase 1 of the development. The detailed application for Phase One comprises of 33,616m² GIA including 426m² A3-A4; 1,000m² B8, 15,965m² B1(b) and 16,225m² B1(a).
4.4 The proposal would result in a media campus, with a total workforce of approximately 12,000 employees. Some portions of the site will be publicly accessible, which is a change in design rationale from the previous consent (P25) which involved an enclosed campus.
4.5 The proposed floor areas (maximum and minimum) within the overall outline can be broken down as follows:
4.6 In respect of the detailed application for phase 1 the proposed floor areas would be in line with the above parameters:
4.7 These figures are based on what the applicant believes the range of floor areas that will be required to meet the company’s growth forecasts in the coming years and the development would be tied into these ranges by way of a safeguarding condition. It should be noted that the LPA would not seek to restrict the B1b floorspace (up to the maximum development floor area) but would restrict the B1a and A use classes floorareas to the ranges proposed.
4.8 The Planning Statement notes that: ‘At present BSkyB employs 8,375 people in Hounslow, at the Osterley Campus and in properties leased along the Great West Road. This makes BSkyB the second largest employer in the Borough, having grown from around 6,000 employees in 2006’. To accommodate this rapidly growing business BSkyB purchased land and buildings surrounding its current campus. This has given BSkyB a substantial area in which to consolidate its existing operations whilst also providing space to accommodate future growth.
4.9 The application comes in the wake of a previously approved master plan proposal for the BSKYB campus (P25 see history). This application was implemented and phase 1 (Sky Studios) has recently become operational. The site for the P25 application didn’t include the Harrods Warehouse or Athena Court sites and consisted of a campus of 69, 581m² of floor space on the site and 1125 parking spaces.
4.10 The application differs from the approved scheme in the following ways:
• The site now includes the Harrods warehouse and carpark which are located to the north of the existing Centaurs Business Park. The existing Harrods warehouse would be demolished as part of the campus scheme.
• The site now includes Athena Court, which is located immediately south of Sky Building 7 to the east of Grant Way. The existing Athena Court would be demolished as part of the campus scheme.
• The site no longer includes Sky Studios, which was built as part of Phase 1 of the approved scheme. Sky Studios will form part of the overall campus once completed, but for the Outline Planning Application it is located on the immediate eastern boundary.
• The site has therefore increased in size from 8.5ha to 13.5ha.
• The application proposes a significant overall quantum increase in floor area, from 69,581sq.m to a range between 157,000 to 175,00m².
• The amount of B1a floorspace has increased from 29,534m² to between 72.890m² to 112,330m². This results in the proportion of B1a office floorspace changing from 42% to between 42% and 64% of the overall development.
• The proposal was previously to be phased over a five year period. The new application would be phased over a ten year period.
• The previous application would have consisted of a maximum of 1125 carparking spaces. The proposed application is for 1750 carparking spaces.
Application material
4.11 This outline planning permission seeks planning permission for the principle of development and approval of the following matters:
o Access to the site for vehicles, cycles and pedestrians in terms of the position of these points from the public highway;
o Uses proposed within development zones are fixed;
o The quantum of development proposed for each use is identified within maximum and minimum limits;
o The approximate location of buildings, routes and open spaces within the development; and
o The upper and lower limit for the height, width and length of each building included in the proposed development.
4.12 The application is currently under consideration as an outline planning application, with detailed design of phase 1 also under consideration within the same application.
4.13 The detailed appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the development (excluding phase 1) will form “reserved matters” requiring future approval. Detailed design (landscaping, appearance, layout and scale) of Phase 1 has been submitted and forms part of the consideration of the application.
4.14 In respect of the scale and height of the proposed buildings the upper and lower limits for the height, width and length of each are shown on Parameter Plans. The plans fix the form of the buildings for future Reserved Matter applications. The details of phase 1 are in accordance with these parameters.
4.15 Whilst as noted above the detailed appearance of the buildings is a ‘Reserved matter’ a Design Code document forms part of the application that will set the scope of the architecture and materials that would be used. The Design Code includes mandatory requirements for approval as part of this outline application and these form ‘a set of rules’ that fix an approach which must be adopted by the future detailed design and reserved matter application.
4.16 Similarly details of the landscaping will be informed and guided by the Public Realm Design Statement that provides illustrative material to show one way in which the development could be designed.
4.17 The application includes the following reports:
• Planning Statement including draft Heads of Terms Topics prepared by DP9 Planning Consultants;
• Statement of Community Involvement Compliance Report prepared by DP9;
• Design & Access Statement prepared by Amanda Levete Architects (AL_A);
• Design Code prepared by AL_A;
• Drawings and Parameter Plans (for approval) and Illustrative Plans prepared by AL_A;
• Public Realm Statement prepared by Gross Max;
• Environmental Statement prepared by Arup;
• Robert Tavernor Consultancy and Cityscape;
• Transport Assessment including a Travel Plan and Servicing and Waste Management Plan prepared by Arup and iCube;
• Outline Energy Statement prepared by Arup;
• Sustainability Statement prepared by Arup.
4.18 As part of the phase 1 detailed application element the following documents have been submitted:
• Planning Statement Addendum prepared by DP9 Planning Consultants;
• Design & Access Statement Addendum prepared by AL A;
• Planning Drawings - Phase 1 Submission Set prepared by AL A;
• Environmental Statement Addendum prepared by Amp, Robert Tavernor Consultancy and Cityscape;
• Transport Assessment Addendum prepared by Amp and iCube; and
• Detailed Energy Statement Addendum prepared by Amp.
Land Use Proposed
4.19 The broadcast function of Sky’s operation is classified as B1(b) use, and is the key industrial use within the media campus proposed. The proposals would include broadcast studios, galleries, edit suites, audio dubbing suites, graphics, production meeting rooms and production offices.
4.20 The applicant has noted that the B1(a) office floorspace proposed is required to support the consolidation of a major media company on a single site and the expansion in its programming commitments.
4.21 A proportion of B8 use, storage and distribution will also be provided. This will provide a warehouse facility receiving all major deliveries before redistribution via an internal fleet of vehicles.
4.22 The proposal would also provide 2,490m² of publicly accessible amenities on the site. This would provide for small scale retail, cafes, restaurants and bars with public piazzas and open space.
Phase 1
4.23 In respect of the detailed application for phase 1 the proposed floor areas are within the parameters set out in the overall outline application and break down to approximately 50% B1b and B8 and 48% B1a use floor areas being proposed within this phase.
Design and layout
4.24 The proposed development has been divided into five districts for ease of reference and also reflecting the clustering of plots. These districts are: north, south, east (Phase 1), west and central. An outer loop road would run around the perimeter of
the site to provide for vehicle circulation. The upper area of Grant Way would become a shared surface, and would provide access for pedestrians, cyclists and service vehicles only. This would form the core of the Central District.
4.25 Each district would have a differing character, to provide variation across the site, although the districts would work cohesively together. A Design Code has been provided with the application, which would guide the development of the overall site. This provides details of the intended building layout, bulk and massing, materials and colours.
4.26 The East District would be the ‘Events and Production’ district. This would incorporate the existing Sky Studios, and it is intended that this would be Phase 1 of the development (of which detailed design has now been submitted). The East District would contain the Visitor Centre, Sky Studios, offices and the Energy Centre.
4.27 The North District would be the ‘Urban Oasis’ district and would contain a ‘Flex-Box’ which has the potential to be an auditorium or another building. The district would contain office and technical facilities, with the potential for a broadcast studio.
4.28 The Central District would be the ‘Town Square’ district. This would contain the majority of the publicly accessible open space, with cafes, bars and restaurants. Offices would be located above the commercial units.
4.29 The West District would be the ‘Sustainable Living and Allotments’ district. This district would contain food production courtyards, with kitchen gardens and allotments within the centre as well as B1b and B1a floorspace.
4.30 The South District would be the ‘Culture, Education and Arrival’ district. This is the main entry point, providing longer views into the site upon entry.
Figure 2: Proposed Character Areas
4.31 It is intended that the proposal be phased over a ten year period. As noted above the East District would be the first phase and detailed planning consent, including details of materials, appearance etc is sought for this element and will be considered below.
Figure 3: Diagram of phase 1
4.32 This includes detailed drawings of buildings within this phase which have been tested against the Design Code and parameter plans that would cover the wider masterplan.
Heights and massing
4.33 Across the campus development, two types of building typologies are proposed; either the courtyard building or the strip building. Each would have a maximum floor plate width of 18m, to maximise natural ventilation and daylight. Buildings can be linked via a bridge, and some will have an infill podium at the lower level.
Figure 4: Building Typologies: Courtyard and Strip Typologies with Bridges
4.34 The Parameter Plans which form part of the application detail the scale of the development providing an upper and lower limit for plot heights, widths and length. This provides a maximum building envelope from within which the detailed design of the buildings will be constructed. Minimum envelopes would also be provided for links and connections through the buildings.
4.35 Sky Studios would remain the highest building on the overall campus with eight storeys. The massing of the campus would be loaded towards the northern end of the site to avoid competition with the Grade II listed Gillette Building. The overall plot ratio over the entire site would be between 1.21 and 1.45 and buildings would be between three to seven storeys.
4.36 The west and south districts’ would be restricted to a five storey maximum each, with the north and central districts at six storeys and the east district permitted to seven storey’s maximum.
Phase 1 Design
4.37 In terms of phase 1 the buildings would be adjacent to the Sky Studios building and would consist of three buildings.
Figure 5: Phase 1 massing diagram
4.38 Phase 1 would provide for a total area of 33,616sq.m, with 15,965sq.m held as B1b (Broadcast Studios and Technical). Phase 1 of the development would provide for 2,500 employees.
4.39 Building E1 would be a six storey building with two studios and associated broadcast and technical spaces above it. Building E2 would be a five storey office building. Building EP would be a multi-storey car parking building providing 408 car parking spaces.
4.40 Both buildings E1 and E2 would be in the strip typology form shown earlier in the report. The buildings would have a maximum floor plate width of 18m and the touchdowns would be setback at ground level to maximise the external space on the site.
4.41 In terms of landscaping and open space, courtyards will link the proposed buildings with the existing Sky Studios and Sky 8. A bridge would be provided over the sunken courtyard between E2 and Sky Studios. In addition, accessible roof gardens will be provided on the fifth floor of E2 and on the second floor of E1. Trees will vary between evergreen and deciduous. More trees will be planted than will be removed from the site within the Phase 1 part of the site. Raised mounds would be used in the centre of Phase 1, with a second area at a lower level forming edges for seating.
4.42 The exterior facades have a horizontal pattern, to contrast with the existing vertical nature of Sky Studios. The touchdowns would consist of nature concrete materials, with the entrances glazed and opening onto the courtyard areas. All entrances would be double height. The upper level façade would consist of standard glazed panels, with integrated blinds and opening vents. A white frit pattern would be used on a proportion of the external glass and external balconies would be provided.
4.43 The EP building is located towards the northern boundary of the site. The building will have a green sedum roof. Steel mesh would be used at lower levels, with louvres at the upper level of the building.
4.44 There is provision for 15% of the roof of the Phase 1 buildings to be covered in photovoltaic panels.
Public realm
4.45 The proposed development would provide for 9.22ha of publicly accessible open space, with 2.76ha of this comprising of green space. The development would include between 1,200 to 2,490m² of publicly accessible restaurants and retail space, generally based around the main pedestrian routes.
4.46 The vision for the completed campus is for the entire site to be accessible by the public.
4.47 Within Phase 1, public access would be restricted to the café and restaurant within the E1 and E2 buildings.
Access and Parking
4.48 Circulation and access are a key component to creating the proposed development. Details of the principal access points have been submitted for approval as part of the
Outline Planning Application.
4.49 Pedestrian circulation will be encouraged within the development, with the main pedestrian access point from the south of the site. Two options are proposed for pedestrian access from the south, and this would be dependent on the adjacent Gillette site being built out as consented.
4.50 1,750 parking spaces are proposed as part of the scheme. These would replace the current multi-storey, surface and on street parking used by BSkyB on the site.
4.51 The parking would be contained within seven areas including in the form of multi storey car parks and surface car parks. Employees would either access the site via Grant Way or Harlequin Avenue and would enter the site adjacent to WP3 or Sky Studios, connecting to the private perimeter loop road.
4.52 A new link road would be built between Grant Way and Harlequin Avenue, which has the potential to allow a bus route to serve the site and reduce vehicle loads at the Gillette Corner junction.
4.53 A loop road within the site (not Macfarlane Lane) would extend around the perimeter of the campus and remove traffic from key pedestrian routes.
4.54 Cycle parking would be provided as part of each phase.
Additional Information
4.55 The development will provide for additional employment opportunities both during construction and following completion of the development. The campus development would provide for approximately 12,000 staff at the site, with the company currently employing 8,375 people (includes the site, and the surrounding office buildings which are occupied by BSKYB staff).
4.56 During construction it has been calculated that there would be the creation of up to 2,301 gross full time equivalent jobs.
4.57 In April 2012, Sky is introducing a series of programmes known as Sky Skills. This will introduce a new learning centre and provide on-line resources and programmes with local schools to develop skills and learning of students. In addition, Sky already have an apprenticeship programme and links to local schools.
4.58 The application comes in light of pre-application discussion with planning officers, Transport for London and the GLA and three public consultation events held in November 2011. Changes and alterations were made via the pre-application process prior to the lodgement of the application.
5.0 CONSULTATIONS
5.1 Letters of consultation were sent to neighbouring sites and Local Resident Associations, including the Brentford Community Council, on the 19 December 2011 and in respect of the Phase 1 details on the 24 th February 2012. This included residents of Oaklands Avenue, Boston Manor Road, Syon Lane, Rothbury Gardens, Northumberland Gardens and Boston Gardens.
5.2 Press and site notices were also posted. Five representations from local residents were received, commenting:
Representation
Design
The proposal to remove the existing Harrods’s warehouse and replace this with six storey buildings is too high. The current building is low rise and unobtrusive to neighbouring properties in Oaklands Avenue. We request that the height of this building is lowered to mitigate the loss of amenity to local residents.
See paragraph 7.106-7.118
The height of the building in the north district should be reduced to mitigate the loss of amenity to local residents. The plans would be overdeveloping a site adjacent to a Metropolitan Open Land and having a negative impact on local wildlife and through the removal of mature trees.
See paragraph 7.106- 7.118
Transport
The proposal includes plans to widen the road and encourage further pedestrian and vehicular traffic. This will introduce an unacceptable level of traffic to an already busy junction on Syon Lane.
A Transport Assessment has been provided with the application. See paragraph 7.162 – 7.166.
We also have concerns about the danger to school children crossing MacFarlane Lane.
The Council could give consideration to installing a pelican crossing in the vicinity on Syon Lane to support local safety measures.
A Transport Assessment has been provided with the application. See paragraph 7.160 – 7.166
The proposal would result in an increase in cars and lorries, with an increase in vehicles resulting in traffic jams.
A Transport Assessment has been provided with the application. See paragraph 7.135 – 7.166
The proposal to use Grant Way as the main access point will result in traffic problems on Syon Lane.
A Transport Assessment has been provided with the application. See paragraph 7.160 – 7.166
In the morning traffic from Gillette Corner backs up across the A4, with a number of staff crossing the zebra crossing from Syon Lane Station and causing traffic grid lock.
A Transport Assessment has been provided with the application. See paragraph 7.135 – 7.168.
Other
I am all for Sky providing new structures and new jobs, with the provision that the existing state of Syon Lane and surrounding roads are improved; including monthly vehicle checks, appropriate signage, widen paths and roadways, a bridge for pedestrians.
Consideration has been given to the existing environment and improvements for pedestrians at Syon Lane Station and the surrounding roads. See paragraph 7.144 – 7.149
The gas, electricity and water utilities will not be able to handle the proposed development.
Thames Water have reviewed the application and suggested appropriate conditions if the application was to be granted.
The development is too close to residential homes and the noise during demolition and development will be unbearable. The noise from the existing refuse transport site is already too loud for residents in Boston Gardens.
A Construction Environmental Management Plan would be required to be submitted for each phase of the development. This will ensure that mitigation measures are put in place to ensure that the temporary impacts as a result of construction and demolition are mitigated. See paragraph 7.39 – 7.43.
We have concerns for the loss of amenity to local residents living adjacent to MacFarlane Lane and along Syon Lane.
See paragraphs 7.122 – 7.130.
5.3 The application was brought before Members at the Isleworth and Brentford Area Committee on the. Members commented:
• Members felt it would be helpful if more details about how air quality was measured and projected for the future were included in the report to the Sustainable Development Committee.
• A question was asked about the height of the buildings and one member commented that the height would be noticeable from certain angles. Members asked the planning officers to check whether the buildings with existing permission were as high. • A question was raised about job brokerage and training and how this would be progressed. Members noted that there were alternatives and that the Economic Development team would determine the most appropriate means for the site. • A member also suggested that they would like to see a significant contribution to a partnership between the Council and Sky with local schools to encourage and share the experience of a successful company. • There was some concern about access routes and it was felt that clarification of the proposed loop road would be helpful as there could be some issues about access. • The additional employment on the site was welcomed. Members were delighted that the development was coming to the borough and welcomed the employment and apprenticeships. • There was some concern about pedestrian movement from Syon Station to the site and a suggestion to make crossing easier and safer. It was suggested that it would be better to encourage pedestrian access via the west side of Syon Lane to the A4. • A possible footbridge for pedestrians was suggested. • It was noted that vehicle movement when using the station clogged the crossing and caused tail back over the junction with the A4. It was hoped that Sky, the Council and Transport for London could unlock the gridlock as this would be key to making the scheme work. • Members considered that there was a lot of work to do to model peak hour traffic and projected movements in and out of the site, with access via shuttle buses, private vehicles and trains. • In principle support for the scheme was expressed by several members, noting that this would create a centre of excellence and employment opportunities. • It was noted that employment use would be partly 24 hour use so it was important to take a positive attitude to find solutions to ameliorate the traffic problems.
5.4 The GLA have commented and issued a Stage 1 response:
The Deputy Mayor considers that in general, the application complies with the London Plan although some further discussion and commitments are needed as set out in paragraph 89 of the above-mentioned report.
The Deputy Mayor considers that this proposal which involves the consolidation, retention and expansion of jobs by one of London's major employers in this Industrial Business Park and Strategic Outer London Development Centre is welcomed and is strongly supported in London Plan policy terms. Economic development in outer London is a priority of the Mayor and this proposal is a prime example of a proposal which delivers this priority . 5.5 If the Council subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the application, it must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London Order) (2008).
5.6 Thames Water have responded to the application and stated that there is an inability of the existing waste water and water supply infrastructure to accommodate the proposed development. Conditions have however been suggested which would require a drainage strategy and impact study to be completed prior to the commencement of development. This would identify the upgrades required, which would then need to be implemented as part of the overall development.
5.7 Transport For London were consulted and have commented that: 1. Format of Application: It was confirmed that the application is in hybrid format; the outline planning application has now been supplemented by a detailed application for Phase 1. TfL is reviewing the Transport Assessment Addendum which supports this. TfL has reviewed the TA Addendum. No comments are raised further to those outlined below. 2. Parking: Whilst TfL agrees that the proposed level of car parking is within the standards outlined in Table 6.2 of the London Plan, it was agreed that a Car Parking Management Strategy will be produced to provide greater clarity on the allocation and management of car parking in line with the broader objectives of London Plan policy 6.13. This should also demonstrate how car parking will be managed throughout the transition/relocation phases to ensure that there is not an excessive level of parking available on the site at any one point. The Transport Assessment Addendum demonstrates that the occupation of Phase 1 (including 408 parking spaces) will coincide with New Horizon Court (448 spaces) and Great West House (81 spaces) being vacated by BSkyB. It is also possible that the car parking available currently available on the adjacent Gillette site (180 spaces) will have ceased by the time Phase 1 is occupied. This net reduction of BSkyB car parking at Phase 1 is considered appropriate. The Car Parking Management Strategy should identify likely similar processes of car parking transfer throughout the remaining phases. Cycle parking provision should be continuously monitored through the travel plan and increased in line with demand (always remaining above the minimum London Plan requirements). The Car Parking Strategy and Cycling Strategy submitted by the applicant are robust. These should be secured as ‘daughter’ documents of the Travel Plan and be monitored and enforced similarly. 3. Modelling: To assist LB Hounslow and TfL to understand the impact of the proposed development on the wider highway network, it was agreed that the modelling submitted as part of the planning application will be made more robust by including a TRANSYT model for A315 Busch Corner. Whilst TfL can review the additional traffic modelling submitted under the Addendum Transport Assessment, it may be prudent for TfL to consider the updated modelling (with Busch Corner) before responding. 4. Gillette Corner: At the meeting, officers at LB Hounslow presented a drawing showing possible highway alterations at Gillette Corner to improve the pedestrian environment. TfL welcomes the applicant's offer to consider the merits of this or any other option which may enhance accessibility between the site and Syon Lane station. This work will help both authorities identify what alterations, if any, could be made to the network to accommodate the increased pedestrian trips arising from the development. Whilst TfL does not object to the principle of the borough securing a capped contribution towards improving connections around Gillette Corner, much further discussion is needed between TfL and LB Hounslow
on the allocation and management of these funds, and on responsibilities in respect of the feasibility study. 5. Shuttle Buses: TfL agrees that the existing shuttle bus arrangements will continue to play an important role in maintaining access to public transport nodes from the site. A commitment should be made to maintaining and monitoring this service against modal targets. TfL is satisfied that Shuttle Bus service can be monitored and managed through the travel plan (see below). 6. London Buses: TfL will provide further details of the costs of any improvements, with the aim of securing a financial contribution from the applicant in this respect. TfL requests that £900,000 is paid by the applicant towards mitigating the impact of the development on the bus network. 7. Syon Lane station: TfL welcomes further information being prepared by the applicant on how the phasing of development corresponds to the levels of impact at Syon Lane station. This will allow TfL and LB Hounslow to consider any necessary mitigation. TfL is satisfied that works in this respect are ongoing and has nothing further to add. 8. Travel Plan: The Travel Plan is being reviewed by TfL and we will provide any specific feedback shortly. TfL has reviewed the travel plan and agrees that it is robust. This should be secured through the section 106 agreement. At our last meeting, we agreed that maintaining a certain level of service on the Shuttle Buses is necessary to ensure travel plan targets are met. The section 106 agreement should therefore reflect the need to ensure that the ability of the shuttle buses to meet travel plan targets is constantly monitored 9. PERS: It was agreed that a PERS assessment is not necessary, given that TfL has evidence of the quality of the environment along the A4 from its own PERS assessment. A contribution to further improve pedestrian and cycle routes on the A4 within the TLRN boundary would be welcomed. Subject to a contribution being agreed towards improving connections in the vicinity of Gillette Corner (see item 4) TfL considers that this point has been satisfied.
5.8 Highways Agency
The Highways Agency offer no objection to the proposal. However, they have recommended that the potential impacts on the M4 are identified and monitored to ensure any impacts are minimised and mitigated.
5.9 BAA Airports have responded and recommended a condition which would require the submission of a Bird Hazard Management Plan and careful design of the landscaping to minimise the attractiveness of the proposed landscaping to hazardous species of bird.
5.10 The London Borough of Ealing have provided comment, stating they have no objection to the proposed application.
5.11 The Environment Agency were consulted and commented:
‘Having reviewed the Environmental Statement and associated information, we consider that planning permission should only be granted to the proposed development as submitted if the following planning conditions are imposed. Without these conditions, the
proposed development on this site poses an unacceptable risk to the environment and we would wish to object to the application’.
Safeguarding conditions are proposed.
5.12 British Waterways were consulted and have no objection. They have commented that a contribution towards improved links to the canal and the surrounding environment would be supported.
5.13 The Brentford Community Council were consulted and commented:
- The BCC welcomes the application and the opportunities it brings for the local community. Our comments are all addressed to ensuring that the Sky Campus will not develop as an isolated site but will fully participate in the re-growth of the local economy. - Employment. We welcome the growth of job opportunities both during the construction and in the operational stage. We look for specific commitments to ensure that preference is given to the employment of local labour to minimise journey to work times, and to encourage the local economy including local apprenticeship schemes, work experience opportunities. - That all measures possible are taken to encourage the increasing work force at Sky to live and bring up their families in Brentford. This will reduce commuter traffic, ease transport both at peak times and at unsociable hours and help to establish Sky as a major part of the local community. - Measures might include purchasing housing in Brentford to lease to new employees while they establish themselves in the area. Opening an estate agent for new employees in the Sky Campus, building a cycle route link from the site to join the proposed Hyde Park/Hounslow cycle route. Re routing the existing Shuttle bus to serve residents working for Sky. - That the provision of shops and other facilities on site are deferred until the facilities in the town centre are established. That the shuttle bus service includes Brentford Town Centre, particularly at lunch time and after working hours. That Sky promotes the Waterman’s Art Centre, assist with its policy development, encourage employees to participate and help secure its funding. We hope that Sky will collaborate with Waterman’s to promote the Arts Centre in Brentford and to use it in their broadcasts. - We would encourage Sky to make maximum use of the Brentford Football Stadium and to support future moves to relocate it in Brentford. - Brentford needs a greater diversity of sports and fitness club facilities. Some could be provided on site in the Sky Campus for the benefit of employees and local residents. - That Sky helps us to promote Brentford as a destination of choice as it emerges from a long period of decline to become a suitable setting for a major international enterprise. - The Brentford Community Council welcomes this application and looks for ways to ensure that as the Sky campus is re-built it becomes an ever more welcome and vital part of Brentford.
5.14 GSK have provided comments on the application:
- Note that the change in car parking provision is relatively modest in the overall context. Accordingly, traffic congestion levels are unlikely to change significantly once any necessary network adjustments have been made. - If the proposed figures are incorrect, and more carparking is required in the future, then that would be subject to a further planning application. - We note that a significant proportion of travellers would more appropriately use the Piccadilly or Great Western lines if access to these were better. This makes clear the importance of improving connections to the Great Western Crossrail and Central London. - We note that estimates for walking and cycling are much higher than for public bus. This mirrors our own experience. We would urge that any section 106 contributions associated with the proposals reflect the relative importance of these modes.
5.15 Bonningtons (owners of the Former Gillette Factory) were consulted and have commented: - the proposal would result in a substantial increase in office space on the site above that which was originally approved; - the approval of a large amount of unjustified office floorspace would detrimentally impact on the viability of the existing planning permission for the Bonnington site; - A number of concerns are raised with construction impacts of the phased development, in regards to the impacts on neighbouring properties. A Construction Management Plan should be required; - the proposed application should incorporate additional transport and road infrastructure improvements to deal with the increased flows and demands as a result of the proposal; - there should be further commitments within the travel plan for pedestrians, cyclists, buses and shuttle buses; - approval should be withheld until basic infrastructure issues have been assessed with Thames Water; - there is a concern about the visual impact of the proposal and the potential impact on the neighbouring property; - A clearer commitment should be made regarding publicly accessible open space on the site and the long term provision of this.
6.0 POLICY FRAMEWORK
6.1 The relevant Polices in relation to this application are contained within an Appendix (1) to this report.
7.0 PLANNING ISSUES
7.1 The main planning issues to consider are:
1. Principle of development
2. Environmental Impact
3. Visual Impact
4. Impact on amenity of neighbouring properties
5. Highways, traffic and Parking
6. Sustainability
7. Planning obligations
Issue 1: Principle of development
Policy Context
7.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that an economic role is a key dimension in achieving sustainable development. It states that the planning system should seek to contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure.
7.3 In addition the NPPF states that ‘At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking’.
7.4 The NPPF (para 18) states that the Government is committed to securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity, building on the country’s inherent strengths, and to meeting the twin challenges of global competition and of a low carbon future.
7.5 It goes on to note (para 19) that the Government is committed to ensuring that the planning system does everything it can to support sustainable economic growth. Planning should operate to encourage and not act as an impediment to sustainable growth. Therefore significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system.
7.6 Brentford Area Action Plan Policy BAAP1 (Sustainable Development) seeks to ensure that new development makes the most efficient use of resources such as land and energy; addresses local environmental issues such as poor air quality, noise pollution and flood risk; and contributes to the provision of the social and physical infrastructure required to support the area’s rapidly growing community. Policy BAAP2 (Urban Design) identifies the Great West Road as a key area for improvement setting out how proposals should enhance this ‘gateway’ location and deliver improvements to the quality of the public realm. It also requires proposals to demonstrate how they have realised opportunities for improving the character and quality of their local context.
7.7 Policy BAAP4 (The Great West Road) also seeks to showcase innovation and high quality sustainable design, as well as taking into account the economic, social and environmental contributions made to the sustainable regeneration of the area. Policy BAAP7 (Delivering Sustainable Access) requires new developments to promote sustainable movement and access. The BAAP makes clear the Council’s the Council’s objective for an exemplar sustainable development in this location.
Land Use
7.8 The site is designated in the London Plan as being a Strategic Industrial Location and Policy 2.17 (Strategic Industrial Locations) states that the Mayor and Boroughs should promote, manage and where appropriate, protect the strategic industrial locations. Supporting paragraph 2.79 notes that Industrial Business Parks are particularly suitable for activities that need better quality surroundings including research and development and light industrial uses.
7.9 It goes on to state that IBPS are not intended for primarily large scale office development. Where office development is proposed on an IBP, this should not jeopardise local provision for light industrial. Development proposals in SIL’s should be refused unless ‘they fall within the broad industrial type activities outlined in London Plan paragraph 2.79’.
7.10 Brentford Area Action Plan Policy BE4 BSKYB, Centaurs Business Park, Syon Lane, Isleworth) covers the majority of the subject site and existing BSKYB campus. It seeks the retention and consolidation of BSkyB Broadcasting Head Quarters through intensification and redevelopment to provide high quality flexible business space to accommodate and facilitate the company’s future growth on this site. This recognises the value of the Company remaining located within the Borough in respect of investment and the levels of employment generated.
7.11 The allocation could only be made if it was in policy terms consistent with the SIL policy designation. The existing permission was granted for 69,581sqm which comprised 55% B1b floorspace with 42% B1a floorspace. Whilst this is a high proportion of office space on an industrial site the BAAP states ‘it is recognised that the nature of broadcasting does not fit neatly into planning use classes so flexibility is imperative in order that the business can grow without onerous planning restrictions’ . The policy is therefore reflecting that this is not a typical industrial type use but the core and dominant use is industrial in being B1b and the high levels of ancillary B1a can be justified in this business model.
7.12 The policy goes on to state that in the event that BSkyB decide to relocate, an alternative use compatible with the site’s designation as an Industrial Business Park, B1b, B1c and high value B2 activities, will be encouraged. This acknowledges the specific nature of the BSKYB operation in that as a media campus ancillary B1a office would be required to support the operation but that a B1A led development without the special, specific nature of the BSkyB operation would be unacceptable based on the sites designation as an IBP and the unsuitability of the site for office accommodation in sustainability terms (i.e. not in a town centre or with Chiswick Business Park). Indeed the supporting text to the policy notes ‘The Council is committed to supporting BSkyB to continue to operate from this site and value the company’s major contribution to economic regeneration. It is recognised that the nature of broadcasting does not fit neatly into planning use classes so flexibility is imperative in order that the business can grow without onerous planning restrictions. It is also recognised that due to the nature, scale and variety of activity associated with such a use, a site within a town centre would not be forthcoming due to competition for space for other high value town centre uses’.
7.13 The Employment Development Plan Policy EP7 is relevant as a result of the sites designation as an Industrial Business Park. The policy states that the Council will
promote, manage and where necessary protect the Great West Road Industrial Business Park as a location for industrial uses including research and development and industrial-related uses that require better quality surroundings.
7.14 The policy states that a change of use from industrial uses in the Great West Road IBP will be acceptable subject to the primary function of the IBP for industrial uses not being undermined and that there is no significant net loss of industrial capacity. Industrial capacity can be measured by the net loss of floorspace, land (ha) and jobs.
7.15 Again, as noted above in paragraph 7.11 it was considered that the approved master plan was acceptable in land use terms and was defined as a ‘Light Industrial Development’, which was suitable within an IBP based on both the fact that B1b floor space was the predominant use proposed and when taking the specific nature of the media and production operation conducted by BSKYB as accepted in Policy BE4 of the BAAP.
7.16 The proposed development differs from the previous masterplan consent in that it proposes a significant increase of B1a floor space and that the site red line now includes the Harrods Warehouse site, currently in B8 use (4.3ha). Officers were therefore concerned that the amount of B1a floorspace was both inappropriate within the IBP and when taken with the loss of the Harrods Warehouse would harm the Industrial capacity of the IBP.
7.17 It should be noted however that the maximum B1a level now proposed has been amended to be 112,000m 2 (down from 137,000m2). By reviewing the amended floor area figures and when incorporating the existing Sky Studios building (which is not part of the site but is a B1b use and would form part of the BSKYB campus) the breakdown of the maximum B1a and the minimum B1b across the campus would be 57% B1a, 42% B1b and B8 uses. It should be noted that a safeguarding condition would restrict the amount of B1a that could be provided in line with the maximum parameters proposed but would not restrict B1b floor space (up to the maximum of 175,000m² overall across the campus) thereby encouraging the maximum quantum of B1b as possible.
7.18 However it should also be noted that the detailed proposals for Phase 1 would comprise of close to the maximum levels of B1b and B8 but only the mid range point of B1a. The phase 1 breakdown of uses is therefore approximately 50% B1b and B8 and 48% B1a.
7.19 Looking at Industrial capacity, which is defined in the EDPD as the net loss of floorspace, land (ha) and jobs, the proposal would in fact result in an upturn in industrial floorspace (B1b and B8) at the site. Specifically this involves an increase of between 31,577m 2 and 51377m 2 of B1b floorspace and would therefore also result in a significant increase in industrial jobs within the site.
7.20 The applicant has provided further evidence in respect of the impact upon Industrial use footprints. Specifically comparing the existing building footprint’s use with the proposed footprint’s use across the site which results in a reduction of industrial footprint (B1b and B8 floor areas) from 64% but still maintains a footprint of 50%.
7.21 Notwithstanding the above and as with the previous scheme the premise behind the application is that the BSkyB operation is as a ‘media campus’ which would be
considered a B1b use. Indeed the office floor area proposed would be more akin to research and development as a result of BSKyB’s unique situation recognized by the GLA (in the Mayors’ Stage 1 response) and in the BAAP which states that it is recognised that the nature of broadcasting does not fit neatly into planning use classes so flexibility is imperative in order that the business can grow without onerous planning restrictions’.
7.22 As noted above the GLA have also confirmed they believe that the application is compliant with London Plan Policy commenting that ‘as such this proposal which involves the consolidation, retention and expansion of jobs by one of London's major employers in this Industrial Business Park and Strategic Outer London Development Centre is welcomed and is strongly supported in London Plan policy terms’.
7.23 Policy EP7 states that proposals for office development (B1a) within the IBP will be subject to Policy EP1, unless it is ancillary to the primary use of the premises for industrial and related uses. This policy directs new office based employment to the most appropriate and accessible locations and provides criteria to assess proposals for other locations. The final criteria against which this floorspace needs to be assessed is that ‘the site is or will be made accessible by sustainable modes of transport’. Therefore whilst the principle of the floor areas and their mix may be acceptable the acceptability of the quantum proposed would be subject to having a satisfactory impact on transport infrastructure and the environment (discussed later in this report).
7.24 The proposal also seeks planning permission for between 1,200m2 and 2,490m 2 of A1/A2 or A3/A4 uses. It is considered that given the employment levels proposed that this would be appropriate and would not undermine Brentford District Centre. Further to this Officers would look to control the nature of any ancillary uses that would be incorporated into the campus both in terms of their actual use, amount and accessibility to the public in order to protect the vitality and viability of Brentford District Centre.
7.25 The proposed development would bring significant investment to the area and will contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy in the area. The proposal would result in significant job creation within the area with the development expected to create in the order of 2,625 additional full time equivalent jobs over the coming years in line with the applicant’s growth plans. In addition 2,301 jobs would be created during the construction process.
7.26 The jobs created both during the construction and operation phases of the development will be significantly beneficial to the local economy. In addition, opportunities will be made available to local people through local training and skills programmes required and funded by a new S106 Agreement. The s106 would require an employment initiative steering group to be created which would include members of the Council’s Economic Development Team and the applicant. This group would seek to further the work and initiatives that BSKYB already undertake such as the apprenticeship programme with local schools and the Sky Skills programme, which has introduced a new learning centre and provides on-line resources and programmes with local schools to develop skills and learning of students. These measure will help local people benefit from the development and BSkyB’s investment in the site.
Summary
7.27 Accordingly, it is considered that the principle of development is acceptable based on the specific nature of the operation proposed (media campus) and the economic benefits the development would deliver and therefore the proposal is in line with the National Planning Policy Framework, the London Plan, as well as the aspirations of the EDPD and BAAP.
Issue 2: Environmental Impact (Air Quality, Noise, Land quality, Flood risk, Wind, Ecology)
7.28 An Environmental Statement has been submitted to support the application.
7.29 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has been adopted. This includes policies for conserving and enhancing the natural environment and states that the planning system should contribute and enhance the natural and local environment by:
- protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils;
- recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services;
- minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures;
- preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability; and
- remediating and mitigating despoiled, degraded, derelict, contaminated and unstable land where appropriate.
Air Quality
7.30 The London Borough of Hounslow has been designated as an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and this covers the Brentford Area which suffers from poor air quality. The designation of the AQMA does not in itself prevent development; however consideration needs to be given to reducing the air quality implications of traffic and providing sustainable means of transport to the site.
7.31 The London Plan Policy 7.14 (Improving Air Quality) states that development proposals should minimise increased exposure to existing poor air quality and make provision to address local problems of air quality such as design solutions, buffer zones or steps to promote greater use of sustainable transport modes through travel plans. Sustainable design and construction should be promoted to reduce emissions from demolition and construction of buildings following the best practice guidance,
and development proposals should be at least air quality neutral and not lead to further deterioration of existing poor air quality designated as Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs). Proposals should ensure that where provision needs to be made to reduce emissions from a development, this is usually made on-site, and where this is inappropriate or impractical, planning obligations or planning conditions should be used to put in place measures having equivalent air quality benefits.
7.32 The air quality implications of the proposed development in regards to both construction and operation have been assessed in the Environment Impact Assessment provided with the application. The Environment Statement concludes in respect of air quality:
- the proposal is identified as a high risk site in terms of the potential for air quality impacts during construction due to the size of the site and the proximity to receptors;
- site specific mitigation measures are proposed as per GLA Best Practice Guidance which relate to the site layout, demolition, construction traffic, earthworks and excavation works will mitigate the impacts of construction.
- The assessment concludes that there would be a negligible change at all receptors for nitrogen dioxide and fine particulate matter. The majority of receptors would experience no change from the existing situation.
- The proposed development is not likely to lead to a worsening of air quality within the AQMA.
- It is assessed that the impact of the Energy Centre emissions is negligible. Any impact would be limited to the north-east of the site, away from residential properties.
- The cumulative impact of the proposed development and the operation of the energy centre is considered be negligible.
- Mitigation measures would be used at both the subject site and Gillette Corner development site during construction to ensure that there would be no cumulative impacts during construction.
7.33 It is noted that a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be required to be provided and approved by the Local Planning Authority at each phase. This will ensure that the mitigation measures proposed are included and adhered to.
7.34 In order to achieve the negligible results above, the proposal is dependent on meeting the targets for on-site parking and mitigation measures, identified and controlled through the travel plan. The Travel Plan would be attached to the section 106 and therefore would be enforceable for the lifetime of the development.
7.35 The Council’s Air Quality Officer has reviewed the application as have the GLA who comment that the development is air quality negligible and note the limited trip generation above existing levels that the development would result in. It is
considered therefore that the application is acceptable in air quality terms subject to the mitigation package to be secured through conditions, such as significant tree planting and the use renewable energy sources, and the s106, involving travel plan monitoring and contributions towards sustainable modes of travel.
Noise
7.36 This issue of exposure to noise is referred to under UDP Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development); new development and the uses being proposed should respect the local environment and community and should “ensure any noise is minimised at source and provides measures to protect local and neighbourhood amenity; ensure protection from any adverse impact of external noise.” In addition, the Council has a general policy on noise pollution, UDP Policy ENV-P.1.5 (Noise pollution), which states that the Council will not allow any development proposals that could result in unacceptable levels of noise nuisance to nearby existing or future occupiers. The stated reason for the policy is to protect the amenity of adjacent occupiers, the aim being to reduce as far as practicable noise from all sources.
7.37 The London Plan Policy 7.15 (Reducing Noise and Enhancing Soundscapes) states that development proposals should seeks to reduce noise by minimising the existing and potential adverse impacts of noise from or within the vicinity of development proposals, separating new noise sensitive development from major noise sources and promoting new technologies and improved practices to reduce noise at source.
7.38 A Noise Assessment has been provided as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment. This includes an assessment of noise from construction, noise from road traffic noise and plant noise from operation.
Construction Period
7.39 Detailed construction method statements would be required at each phase of development. However, at this stage it can be determined that the core working hours for demolition and construction would be 0800 – 1800 hours weekdays and 0800 – 1300 hours on Saturday. This would be secured by condition.
7.40 The noise assessment recognises that without mitigation there would be a significant impact on residential properties along Syon Lane and MacFarlane Lane and adjacent commercial properties.
7.41 Accordingly, a 3m high hoarding would be erected around the eastern southern and western perimeter boundaries of the site. This would be made of suitable material to ensure effective noise screening.
7.42 In addition, the general principles of construction site noise control would be followed according to the guidance within BS5228: Part 1, 2009 ‘Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites’. Specific noise control practices would be agreed between the contractor and the local authority at each phase through a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) as part of the conditions of the proposal.
7.43 It is recognised that the period of construction would occur over a long time period due to the size of the site and the phasing of the development. However, it is considered that adherence to the hours of construction and demolition and the
provision of a Construction Environmental Management Plan at each phase will ensure that the mitigation measures are satisfactory and will ensure that there would not be an adverse noise impact on the surrounding residents.
Operational Effects
7.44 The main effect during the operation of the proposed development would be from road traffic noise and plant noise. These have been assessed in detail in the noise assessment.
7.45 There is not considered to be any increase in noise levels from roads where there are residential noise sensitive receptors. There would be an increase of 1.0dB on Grant Way which is an increase of minor significance, and an increase of traffic noise of 4.1dB on Harlequin Avenue. There are no residential properties within the vicinity of Grant Way/Harlequin Avenue and accordingly the proposal is not considered to result in a significant adverse noise effect as a result of the development.
7.46 The application has confirmed that the proposed target levels for plant equipment would be 10dB below the existing background noise level at sensitive locations. This is in accordance with the recommendations made by the Council’s Pollution Control Team.
7.47 The assessment recognises the adjacent development of the Gillette Building for a hotel with ancillary conferencing, meeting, bar and restaurant and gym facilities.
7.48 There is not considered to be an unacceptable adverse noise impact as a result of the operation or construction of the development this is subject to the applicant signing up to the Considerate Contractor programme and provide Construction Logistics and Construction Environmental Management plans prior to commencement or works and subsequently adhere to the approved plans.
Land Quality
7.49 The National Planning Policy Framework states that that where a site is affected by contamination, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner. Local Planning Authorities should focus on whether the development itself it an acceptable use of the land, and the impact of the use, rather than the control of processes or emissions themselves where these are subject to control under pollution control regimes.
7.50 London Plan Policy 5.21 (Contaminated Land) states that appropriate measures should be taken to ensure that development on previously contaminated land does not activate or spread contamination.
7.51 A detailed ground investigation will be undertaken, including a hydro geological risk assessment. If contamination is found this would be treated and removed as necessary. This work can be dealt with by way of condition that would require the submission of details to the Local Planning Authority for approval. This would ensure that the proposed development would not result in an adverse impact as a result of contaminated land.
Flood risk
7.52 Policy 5.12 (Flood Risk Management) of the London Plan states that development proposals must comply with the flood risk assessment and management requirements set out in PPS25 (and carried over into the NPPF Technical Guidance) over the lifetime of development. The site is not located within a flood zone.
7.53 The Environment Agency has reviewed the application and considers that conditions should be imposed on any permission granted. Conditions would require the provision of a Surface Water Drainage Scheme and conditions that would restrict piling, surface water runoff and contamination.
7.54 British Waterways also have no objection to the proposal.
Ecology and Biodiversity
7.55 The NPPF provides broad objectives for conserving and enhancing biodiversity at a national level. Planning decisions should encourage the effective use of land by re- using land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of a high environmental value.
7.56 Policy 7.19 (Biodiversity and Access to Nature) of the London Plan states that development proposals should wherever possible make a positive contribution to the protection, enhancement, creation and management of biodiversity. Policy 7.21 (Trees and Woodlands) of the London Plan states that existing trees of value should be retained and any loss as a result of the development should be replaced. The planting of additional trees should be included in new developments.
7.57 The Environmental Assessment provided with the application assesses the potential impacts associated with the construction, land use and operation of the proposed development.
7.58 The site itself is not designated in regards to nature conservation value. Syon Park, a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is located 1500m to the south-east, with Long Wood Local Natural Reserve (LNR) located 950m to the north-east and Blondin Nature Area, also a Local Nature Reserve (LNR) located 700m to the north (within the London Borough of Ealing).
7.59 There are a number of Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) within 2km of the site. The canal located 120m to the north of the site is identified as a Site of Metropolitan Importance (SMI), with Boston Manor Park identified as a Site of Borough Importance (SBI). Wyke Green Golf Course is also a Site of Borough Importance (SBI).
7.60 A green chain runs in parallel and adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. This chain links two important habitat areas of Syon Park (SSSI) and the Wyke Green Golf Course (SBI), which links to Osterley Park to the west (SBI).
7.61 A Field Survey was carried out to supplement a Desk Study. This concluded that whilst much of the site has low or no potential for biodiversity. However, there are some areas of amenity grassland which have a mix of species that would provide a benefit for insects and bees. There are also a high number of trees and shrubs on the site. Shrub and tree planting of particular note exists on the southern edge of the site within the Tesco’s site, and a dense band of ornamental trees forms the northern boundary to the Harrod’s site.
7.62 The habitat survey concludes that it is unlikely that any statutorily designated site would be affected by the proposals given the distance from the site. The London Canals site is 120m north of the site, separated by a goods yard and a concrete crushing facility.
7.63 It is recognised that the trees that will be removed along the northern boundary would have a significant impact, and this will reduce the value of the habitat corridor and the relationship with the adjacent Green Chain. However, the habitat corridor is considered to be compromised by the security lighting of the adjacent waste transfer station, the narrow nature of the band of trees and the species poor composition.
7.64 It is considered that the replacement planting, which will include green roofs, additional trees and grasslands throughout the development will mitigate the loss of the trees. The completed development would provide for a significant increase in the vegetation planting over the site, with areas of trees planting within each phase. For example within the north district there would be a swamp garden within the water retention ponds, a bamboo garden and a fern garden. The west district would include a series of productive gardens, including allotments, orchards and demonstration gardens, allowing employees to grow herbs, fruit and vegetables.
7.65 All vegetation clearance works would be undertaken outside of the bird breeding window, generally from March to August. This would ensure that the proposal would have a negligible impact on breeding birds.
7.66 A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be required at each phase of the development. In addition, a Ecological Management Strategy would be produced which would detail plant types and the biodiversity enhancement features proposed. The biodiversity enhancement features proposed include log piles (particularly within the pond area), allotments, grasslands, orchard and green roof areas, insect hotels, urban bee hives and bat and bird boxes.
7.67 Accordingly, it is considered that subject to the conditions proposed for the submission of further details, the proposed mitigation measures would be acceptable to ensure that the proposal would enhance ecology and the biodiversity value of the site and the surroundings.
Wind
7.68 Policy 7.6 (Architecture) of the London Plan states that buildings and structures should be of the highest architectural quality and should not cause harm to the amenity of surrounding land and buildings, particularly for residential buildings, in relation to privacy, overshadowing, window and microclimate.
7.69 A Wind Assessment has been provided with the application. This recognises that the westerly edge of the proposed development is exposed to the strongest prevailing winds.
7.70 As a result of the development, an area of the neighbouring sports fields will experience a slight increase in wind for a distance of 10-20m from the edge of the buildings where these fields are not protected by vegetation.
7.71 The assessment includes mitigation measures for the impacts on the playing fields including the treatment of building NG with a porous façade, and hedge and tree planting to mitigate the effects of back-winding onto the playing fields.
Issue 3: Visual Impact and design
7.72 The National Planning Policy Framework has a requirement for development to achieve a good design and states that new development should respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation.
7.73 Policy ENV-B.1.1 of the UDP promotes high quality design that enhances the overall environmental quality and townscape. Section 1.0 of the UDP Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) states that the design and layout of proposed developments must enable them to be compatible with, and make a positive contribution to the character of the locality. New buildings must relate satisfactorily to adjoining and neighbouring buildings and spaces. The scale, massing, siting, size and height of these buildings should be respected by new development, although this need not exclude original innovative design.
7.74 Policy 7.1 of the London Plan provides overarching principles for good design within London. Policy 7.4 states that new development should have regard to its context, and make a positive contribution to local character within its neighbourhood.
7.75 The contribution of the scheme to the townscape is therefore considered to be critical.
7.76 It should be noted that the application is an outline planning application and details regarding the appearance of the proposed buildings and detailed design would form a reserved matter. The detailed design of Phase 1 has now been submitted and forms part of the application. A Design Code has been submitted with the application and this provides detailed mandatory rules and guidance on the design and appearance of the buildings within the overall campus.
Existing
7.77 With the exception of Sky Studios and Sky 8, the remainder of the buildings and structures on the site will be demolished. The existing buildings that will be demolished are Sky 1, Sky 2 Sky 3, Sky 4, Sky 6 and Sky 7, as well as Athena Court and the Harrods warehouse.
Figure 4: Existing Buildings on site to be retained
7.78 Each of the Sky buildings are two storeys in height and are generally characterised by banding of grey facades and windows. Under the previous permission the buildings Sky 1, 2 and 3 would have been retained. Athena Court is a three storey building, made of light coloured brick with an atrium feature. This would have been retained within the previous proposal. The Harrods warehouse will also be demolished. This has an existing height of 20m with a flat roof and is a light coloured green and grey.
7.79 It is not considered that any of the existing buildings have any architectural or historical features that require preservation and their demolition is accepted. However, the existing industrial nature of the Harrods warehouse is recognised as part of the Industrial Business Park.
7.80 In terms of vegetation, a number of existing trees alongside Grant Way will be retained. The existing trees alongside the northern boundary of the site will be removed, in order to facilitate the location of the loop road. A small stand of planting will be reintroduced, and additional planting will be introduced on the western side boundary shared with the MOL land. (this has been amended to contains a wider area for tree planting).
7.81 Sky 8 is to be retained and is located off Harlequin Avenue, just south of Sky Studios. The building is a double height, four bay warehouse-type building. This was part of the early expansion of Sky in the 1990s. The building currently contains office accommodation with a data centre, switchboards and support services. These facilities will eventually be moved into the new development, with the building converted to provide for a visitor centre.
7.82 The existing generators and CCHP plant that are located north of Sky Studios will be retained. These will be retained and will contribute towards the overall sustainability strategy for the site.
The Development Site and comparison with existing consented scheme
7.83 The campus is being extended and consolidated northwards although there are alternative buildings which could have been chosen and acquired for redevelopment which would be closer to the road, railway and town of Brentford. The land chosen for re-development is flatter than land to the south because the Brent river valley scarp returns south and west and affects levels alongside Harlequin Way. The Harlequin 1 (now Sky Studios) has been built out in accordance with a detailed planning consent on a very visible site on the edge of the scarp, together with various energy centre buildings along the north east boundary with the railway.
7.84 Much of the land benefits from an existing outline approval from which Sky Studios derived. This proposal extends the site area to include the Harrods warehouse. The site slopes across this additional land so that the furthest NE corner of the main site itself is some 5m lower than the head of Grant Way. The acquisition includes the whole of the NW boundary of the developed land as far as the MOL, and a great number of trees along the boundary, and less formal trees and scrub along the ditched boundary with the playing fields / MOL.
7.85 The outline identifies that the alteration to the previously approved (in outline) master plan was to do with sustainability, notably the reduction in floor-plate width (to a maximum of 18m) to aid natural lighting and ventilation.
7.86 A noticeable difference to the site layout has accrued from the acquisition of the Harrods warehouse and attached land. This warehouse is a “quiet” almost disappearing green hulk of a shed with no windows or other aspects to catch the eye, and little impact of activity on its interface with the MOL.
7.87 The scale and massing of the proposal were tested by the applicant with the aim of “producing a varied but cohesive design that provided for a sufficient quantum of development for the anticipated growth of Sky’s business”. It is noted that during modelling of alternatives, the designers tried a high rise version with the maximum height in the north and east, although not quite on the MOL boundary. The version chosen is described as one of the relatively low-rise ones, although with the extreme visibility of buildings on the scarp of the river valley and closest to the MOL the buildings proposed are in fact tall. The scheme continues nearly at what was intended as the zenith of future height, that of Sky Studios.
7.88 It is noted that there have been significant amendments made to the application during pre-application meetings. This resulted in a reduction in height and mass,
following officer concerns over the impact of the proposal on the Grade II listed Gillette building and the character and appearance of the MOL land.
7.89 A condition for “an interesting skyline based preferably on sustainability requirements” has been fulfilled by the giant passive ventilation flues on the outside face of the Sky Studios building; which continue above it and, although visible from sensitive places such as the Lion Gateway and Syon House itself, appear as giant crenellations on the skyline.
7.90 The new scheme eliminates the long pedestrian spine altogether. A pedestrian access is provided to the area of the main entrance from Harlequin Way, otherwise access is from between / under the proposed buildings. An existing vehicular access south of Sky 8 is to be retained. (All accesses from adopted roads have security or security check points).
7.91 The proposed land is parceled in a similar way to the existing layout, for a phased build-out, with Grant Way retained as a central spine road. A road around the northern end of Sky Studios, from Harlequin Way, originally to by-pass the Harrods site, will be retained, and extended to form a loop road right around the north-east and south-west boundaries, including adjacent to the MOL land.
7.92 This vehicular perimeter loop road would include a length of Grant Way and Harlequin Way (both adopted) with the remainder within the site private and controlled. All accesses from adopted roads have security or security check points. The far end of Grant Way, north of the loop, would be redesigned and form a hub for a hierarchy of shared access routes, again private and controlled.
7.93 The outline consent was based on envelopes of development height in a graduation from lowest on the MOL boundary to the furthest away area of Sky Studios at the highest point. Maximum height restrictions were attributed to the envelopes, together with a maximum total amount of floor space. Thus the total volume of the envelopes could not be built out.
7.94 As with the P25 masterplan the proposed building heights would be greatest adjacent to the existing Sky Studios building and would reduce in height towards the south west and Oaklands Avenue and Syon Lane. The previous consent did not incorporate the Harrods warehouse in the northern section of the site, which now forms part of the site boundary and therefore there would be a height increase in this section of the site above both the existing situation and from the approved masterplan. With the western section of the site (adjacent to the MOL and the Former Centaurs Rugby Ground) the proposed heights would be below what was previously approved apart from proposed Building W1 which would be 1m higher than the maximum parameter as part of the P25 masterplan. A reduction in the proposed central district buildings from the P25 maximum height parameters of between 7-10m would occur on buildings adjacent to Harlequin Avenue. Although to the south of this it is noted that Athena Court is now proposed to be replaced and height would increase here.
7.95 Apart from the loop roads, the major change is in proposed form and layout of the buildings and the spaces between them. For natural light and ventilation efficiency, and in order to retain the quantum of floor space which may become necessary for the business, the majority of the buildings are changed from wide floor plates to
narrow ones. The other major change is from right angled corners of buildings, to acute or obtuse ones, although wider / more rectangular buildings have had to be included for logistical reasons in Phases 1 and 2. Along the scarp there is a lower building for parking, and a theatre, which is parallel with the boundary up to a podium deck; above that form reverts to narrow with angles.
The Design Concept
7.96 The forms and shapes of the buildings will be sited in clusters resulting in irregular routes and spaces between them and under them since the ground floors beneath the strip buildings are to be discontinuous. The landscape design aspiration has then been to achieve visual continuity of these spaces between and under as well as around buildings, for pedestrian access and use of the spaces, or for views through and between the touch-down lower areas of buildings.
7.97 The proposed development would range from three to seven storeys in height, with Sky Studios remaining at eight storeys in height the tallest building (albeit outside the application site). The mass of the development would be concentrated towards the northern, eastern and centre of the site with the southern and western buildings being smaller in scale.
Figure 5: Proposed Height Strategy
7.98 Plant equipment would not exceed 4.5m from the roof level, and satellite dishes would not exceed 13.5m from roof level (and would be only positioned in set areas). A site wide setback would ensure that plant and equipment was setback from the facades of the building which limit their visibility form outside the site.
7.99 Sometimes the strips are put together to form angular doughnut shapes and spaces, but there is no standard street front and back as such. Space within the site is fragmented with few long vistas. Enclosure is formed with streamlined idiosyncratic buildings of similar style, making spaces with strong but varied landscape characters to help give legibility. The potential use and appearance of these will undoubtedly be very interesting.
7.100 The Public Realm document illustrates that all space other than buildings and Grant Way are “publicly accessible open space.” There are a number of flexible parameters which will affect the amount and distribution of land, buildings and surface parking. The degree of security is still to be high, with all accesses secured or with security guards and there will be a number of car parking areas and courtyards not immediately accessible. Nevertheless the landscape concept is that of a flowing landscape around between and under the buildings, also on the tops of them.
7.101 The proposed landscape is considered to form outdoor rooms and aid legibility as well as enhance enjoyment, environment and microclimate. The redevelopment removes all existing trees and shrubs in the Harrods site, and most trees within the red line boundary except for a few mostly alongside the south end of Grant Way, and some recently planted north of Sky Studios. The existing continuous line of poplars north of Harrods is not indicated on the application drawings. The loss of so many poplars, planes and oaks amongst others is most regrettable. However, there will be significant replanting on the site, with the numbers of trees replanting exceeding the number of trees that will be removed.
7.102 An interesting use of planting characters within the development is described, however it would be preferred if poplars were restricted to the north eastern boundary, and that on the MOL boundaries mostly native species were used, including Scots Pine, alder, birches and larger deciduous native species; and that invasive species such as bamboo were not. Similarly the lighting levels along those boundaries should be kept low in height as well as in lux, and shrub planting should also be used to reduce light spillage.
7.103 The GLA have stated that ‘the proposed development is well designed, maximizing the potential of the site and creating a new type of business park that will be more vibrant and sustainable than other more conventionally laid developments of this type. The architects are commended on the amount of work done overall, in particular in their consideration of alternative building typologies, landscape strategy and character areas all which are strongly supported. Whilst all of the objectives set out in the Design and Access Statement are strongly supported, in particular the desire to create a ‘piece of city’, there are a number of aspects in the design of the scheme that need further work and articulation’.
7.104 The GLA comments conclude ‘the design approach is imaginative and singular and would give a strong and distinct identity to the site, one entirely appropriate to its function as the major base of one of the country’s major broadcasters and is on the whole supported and in line with London Plan policy’.
Context and Surroundings
7.105 The site is surrounded by a variety of different character areas, including Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and industrial land, with residential development and listed buildings also in close proximity. Accordingly, consideration has been given to the proposed massing and scale of the development from a number of sensitive viewpoints within the EIA.
7.106 The proposal would result in a visual change for the surrounding environment, as a result of the demolition of the existing buildings on site and the erection of a
comprehensive campus development. However, the existing industrial nature of the site, the distance to residential properties and the existing vegetative screening would mitigate the impacts of the proposed development.
7.107 The proposed campus redevelopment now incorporates the previous Harrods’s warehouse site, and would result in the demolition of the existing industrial building. The incorporation of the Harrods’s site results in the proposed development being closer to the MOL boundary than the previous consented development.
7.108 From the west of the site (Former Centaurs Rugby Ground, Oaklands Avenue) the proposed development would be visible above the tree line and would be larger in scale than the existing buildings on the site. However, the variation in height and the angular forms of the buildings would create more permeability and the facetted elevations will assist modeling by light and shade.
7.109 The height of the buildings is reduced towards the residential areas to the west of the site, and this provides a termination to the development that is separated from the existing residential development as well as the Grade II listed Gillette Tower and Centaurs Sports Pavilion.
7.110 As this is an outline application, the detail and parameters would be reserved for consideration at reserved matters and conditions stage. The detail and materials will be important in achieving a softening of the scheme from the west of the site.
7.111 Whilst the proposal would result in a visual change to the environment, it is considered that the diagonal transitions of the buildings, the additional tree planting proposed and the distance over the former Centaurs Rugby Ground will reduce the impression of massing for the residential properties on Oaklands Avenue. The dwellings would retain an open outlook to the playing fields, and the development would be seen in conjunction with the existing Sky Studios building.
7.112 The applicant’s townscape assessment has concluded that due to the alignment of the streets, the mature street trees and the scale of the proposed development that it is unlikely that the proposed development would be visible from the majority of properties to the south of the site, including Syon Lane and the properties to the south of the A4.
7.113 Boston Manor Park and the canal are located towards the east of the site. From Boston Manor House itself, the proposed development would be screened by the existing mature vegetation. From Boston Manor Playing Fields and within Boston Manor Park south of the M4, the proposed development would be visible above the existing tree line.
7.114 The proposed development would be differentiated from the existing Sky Studios through the use of materials and the horizontal nature of the development. The distance across the Waste transfer station and Transport Avenue, will help mitigate the visual impact of the development.
7.115 It is recognised that the proposed development will result in a visual change in the outlook from Boston Manor Park. However, the view of the development will be contained by the significant mature trees which provide screening and a visual edge to the park. The development would sit below the existing height of Sky Studios and would be significantly less than the turbine that is currently under construction. The
later phases of development would be visible beyond the existing waste transfer station.
7.116 From the Grand Union Canal it is not considered that the proposed development would have an adverse visual impact. The existing Sky Studios is visible and a prominent feature on the skyline. The proposed development would be adjacent to this, and would only be just above the existing tree line. From this point, the proposed development would be visibly less in height than the existing Sky Studios. It is not considered that the additional built form would be harmful from this viewpoint given the existing and surrounding context.
7.117 From Boston Manor Station the proposed development would be visible and would result in an extension to the existing building line as a result of Sky Studios. However, this would be punctuated by the existing vegetation adjacent to the station. The heights of the development would vary from this viewpoint, and combined with the differing material palette for each phase, the proposal would form a facetted elevation. Boston Manor Station is a Grade II listed building. However, it is not considered that the proposal would impact on the setting of the station, as the development would sit within the wider backdrop to the setting.
7.118 Elthorne Park is located to the north of the site, approximately 1km from the subject site. As a result of the distance, the details of the elevation of the existing Sky Studios are less discernable. From this point, the proposed development would be visible above the skyline of the existing vegetation. The proposal would extend the existing built form of Sky Studios. However, given the distance between the park and the subject site it is not considered that the proposed development would have an adverse impact on the townscape.
7.119 Consideration has also been given to the visual impacts of the construction phase of the development within the assessment. The construction will be phased, and whilst the construction will be visible it will not encompass the entire site at any one time. A Construction Environmental Management Plan will be submitted which will address these details at each phase.
Phase 1
7.120 The application includes details of Phase 1 of the development, including detailed building design and materials. Accordingly, an assessment needs to be made on the impact of the proposed Phase 1 of the development being completed, with the remainder of the site remaining as is (including the Harrods’s warehouse).
7.121 The EIA was updated with the submission of Phase 1 details, including rendered views showing the Phase 1 development with the proposed appearance.
7.122 A light colour palette is proposed and this would complement the existing Sky Studios and would ensure the development does not create a dominant presence on the skyline.
7.123 The proposed buildings are intended to have a consistent appearance, with a strong contrast between the vertical emphasis of Sky Studios and the horizontal nature of the detailing for the proposed Phase 1 buildings.
7.124 The northern buildings of Phase 1 sit further forward than the existing Sky Studios, and the closest block is the tallest, 3m lower than Sky Studios, with a further 2m of plant area over a large part of the roof. It is an angled L shape around and above a larger podium containing a studio, the roof of which is to be used as a north-west facing roof garden. The ends of the upper building have been splay-cut at the upper levels so as to retain some views of the characteristic Sky Studio flues from the north-east.
7.125 It is considered that the proposed details submitted for Phase 1 are acceptable. The proposal fits within the maximum and minimum parameters proposed at outline stage. The layout and landscaping within the Phase 1 of the development will create an attractive and interesting environment, with linked courtyards and landscaping. The proposed materials are considered to be appropriate and will provide a strong contrast with the existing Sky Studios buildings to differentiate the skyline.
Issue 4: The impact on amenity of neighbouring properties
7.126 The site is situated within an Industrial Business Park and there are no immediately adjoining residential properties. The site is bound by the railway line, refuse transfer station and Transport Avenue to the north.
7.127 Harlequin Avenue and the West Cross Centre are located to the east of the site. This generally contains light industrial and office accommodation.
7.128 The existing Gillette Factory is located to the immediate south. This is currently vacant and planning permission exits for the redevelopment of the site.
7.129 Tesco’s Superstore is located to the south and immediately adjoins the site.
7.130 A key consideration has been the impact of the proposed development on neighbours’ living conditions at the closest residential properties within Oaklands Avenue. The proposed development would replace existing buildings on the site that are not considered to be aesthetically pleasing and therefore the proposal could be considered to improve the quality of outlook from the west as a result of the high quality design proposed.
7.131 Whilst the proposed buildings would be of a greater height than these existing buildings they would be lower in this section than the maximum heights approved under the previous masterplan. Further to this the proposed building would not project across the rear elevation of the majority of properties along Oakland’s Avenue that back onto the former Centaurs Rugby Ground. Where properties do face towards the subject site they would be separated by over 100m ensuring no unacceptable sense of enclosure would occur. Indeed where the buildings would be visible, albeit at some distance, the design has seen the heights varied and the diagonal transitions of the buildings at certain points (buildings step down in a series of terraces at some ends), as well as breaks in the building line and footprints, help to reduce the impression of massing when viewed from the west and would ensure that the development does not result in unacceptable harm to outlook from neighbouring properties.
7.132 It is not considered that there would be any harm to neighbours along Syon Lane as a result of the significant separation distances involved and the fact that the existing Tesco store would also be between the two and form a visual barrier.
7.133 It is not considered there would be any harm to neighbours’ living conditions within Boston Gardens as a result of the significant separation distance between these neighbours and the subject site (approximately 530m and separated by the elevated M4). Again where the buildings would be visible within the wider outlook, they will be softened by the distance across the open fields and existing mature screen planting. Furthermore the design and layout of the proposed development would ensure that it does not represent a incongruous or overbearing addition to the skyline.
7.134 As a result of the site orientation and the significant separation distances towards neighbouring properties it is not considered that the proposed development would have any unacceptable impact upon daylight/sunlight or overshadowing.
Issue 5: Traffic and parking
7.135 The National Planning Policy Framework notes that all developments that generate significant amounts of movement should be supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment. Plans and decisions should take account of whether:
• the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure; • safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and • improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limit the significant impacts of the development. • Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe. 7.136 Policy BAAP4 (Great West Road) states that consideration will be given to the way in which development impacts on the highway and contributes to overall improvements to sustainable access and movement to and from, along and across the strategic road corridor. Policy BAAP7 (Delivering Sustainable Access) states that all major developments will need to contribute to the delivery of sustainable access through a package of measures which promote sustainable movement and restrain the use of the car. Policy EP1 of the Employment Development Plan Document also directs that sites should be made accessible by sustainable modes of transport.
7.137 London Plan policy is directed towards reducing the need to travel by car, and improving conditions for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users. Maximum parking standards are provided, along with minimum cycle parking, electric charging points and disabled parking standards.
7.138 A Transport Assessment report has been submitted and has been updated to include details of phase 1 of the development.
Trip Generation
7.139 In respect of trip generation the Transport Assessment concludes that, subject to an appropriate mitigation package, the impact of the development can be accommodated within the local transport infrastructure.
7.140 The figures within the Transport Assessment are based on a parking provision of 1,750 car parking spaces on site for the completed masterplan. The premise behind the proposal is to reduce car journeys in favour of more sustainable modes of travel (public transport/cycling etc) to the site which would result in sustainable levels that the local highway infrastructure can cope with. To achieve this a number of measures would be introduced:
1) Limiting parking available on site to 1,750 (only 61 above the current parking amount on the site -1,689)
2) Encourage modal shift and the use of more sustainable modes of transport including public transport and cycling.
3) Improvements to local junctions and pedestrian and road infrastructure
4) To avoid overspill parking in adjacent residential areas through the above measures and a commitment to review parking levels in surrounding roads (a s106 contribution to consult upon and implement if necessary Controlled Parking Zones within these areas if the parking beat surveys indicate need in future years including following completion of the development).
Modal shift, public transport, cycle facilities and pedestrian links
7.141 To encourage the use of public transport and more sustainable modes of transport instead of private vehicle trips the applicant will sign up to a robust Travel Plan, which will seek to achieve a significant modal shift in the way people travel to the site. The applicant has stated that over the last five years BSkyB has implemented a successful Travel Plan which has resulted in a significant reduction in the number of staff using private cars to access the site.
7.142 The Travel Plan will be secured in the s106 and will illustrate compliancy with the best practice set out in the Council’s ’10 point guide’. It will incorporate the proposed cycle strategy, car parking management strategy and shuttle bus operating strategy. It will also include measures to reduce overall emissions generated from unavoidable car travel, as well as achieve modal split (e.g. through active promotion and enabling of low emission vehicles etc).
7.143 In the event that the travel plan has not achieved modal split targets within three years of the end of each phase of development a revised set of measures would be required. This would include:
i) A commitment to review the car parking management strategy, including car park permitting policy, in order to achieve agreed modal split targets and reduced environmental impact from unavoidable car use. ii) A commitment to explore feasibility of partnership working (including joint procurement) with neighbouring employers in the provision of bespoke collective transport solution (shuttle buses).
7.144 As part of the travel plan the applicant will expand its existing bus shuttle service. The shuttle bus network is critical to improving the public transport accessibility level of the site to achieve a 'moderate' PTAL level. The Council recognises that the applicant should be able to develop this network in response to demand and
changes in staff origins etc, but that its successful (and continual) operation is essential for this scheme to be acceptable in transport terms, in the absence of any other 'fixed link' improvements which improve accessibility of the site. As such, the applicant will need to submit an annual shuttle bus operating strategy as noted above (as part of the annual review of its travel plan) detailing the routes being operated, the frequency of the services, capacity of the vehicles and details of accessibility arrangements in place to cater for mobility impaired people, for approval by the council/TfL. The statement should summarise the broad rationale for the network being proposed, including an evidence base for how this will achieve modal shift away from private car use and to encourage a distribution of trips across the different rail/tube corridors serving the site (to reduce the impact on the Hounslow Loop). The requirement to implement and monitor the Travel Plan, including the Shuttle Bus Operating Strategy, will remain an obligation on this site for the life of the development.
7.145 In terms of public transport the development coincides with capacity improvements on the Hounslow Loop overland service being undertaken by South West Trains and Network Rail. This would result in train lengthening, adding two carriages to each of the four services per hour by the year 2014. These works are already committed and are not linked to this application.
7.146 As part of TfL’s Tube Upgrade Plan the Piccadilly line, accessible from Osterley, Boston Manor and South Ealing LU stations, will be upgraded to deliver new trains, signalling and control centres which will increase the capacity on the line in due course .
7.147 The applicant has provided evidence that there is sufficient capacity available to accommodate the increase in trips to the site on the Hounslow Loop and the Piccadilly Line.
7.148 However the additional passengers at Syon Lane Station would lead to significant passenger congestion, which has a knock on effect on vehicle flows and people crossing Syon Lane.
7.149 Subsequently a package of improvements to Syon Lane Station has been secured. This would involve an accessible ramp linking the westbound platform with Syon Lane and would also include an additional or improved staircase serving the platform and linking the two Syon lane access points. Improvements to the existing access from Rothbury Gardens to the eastbound platform would also be secured making it more accessible. These works would reduce passenger waiting times and congestion at the access points to Syon Lane, as well as providing DDA compliant ramp access to the station.
7.150 It is noted that the works proposed require third party land and may be undeliverable in the form noted above, albeit the Council believes agreement with relevant parties including network rail can be reached. Therefore a capped fee will be secured by the s106.
7.151 The proposal would also seek to improve pedestrian routes and facilities from the station and across Syon Lane, reducing the disruption to vehicle flows created by the passengers crossing at the existing Zebra crossing. These are discussed in more details below.
7.152 The s106 would also seek to secure a contribution towards local bus services. This would expand upon contributions already received by the Council as part of the P25 application. The exact nature of the works has yet to be fully agreed but discussions with TfL are ongoing. It has been suggested that the contributions go towards helping connect the site to the north and enhancing bus services to Brentford Town centre.
7.153 In addition the s106 would also seek a contribution towards local cycle routes, specifically this would involve a contribution used to enhance links to the site and the Great West Road with the planned Cycle Superhighway along London Road.
7.154 Further to this the development would provide cycle provision on site and this would be reviewed as part of the Travel Plan for each phase. London Plan Policy 6.9 states that developments should provide secure, integrated and accessible cycle parking facilities in line with the minimum standards set out in Table 6.3 (1:250/1:500) which equates to between 350 and 700 spaces. The proposal achieves this. Indeed 140 cycle spaces for staff are provided as part of Phase 1 alone. The cycle provision would be secured by way of a condition . Additional visitor cycle stands are provided along the perimeter of the site in convenient, overlooked locations close to the building entrances.
7.155 The s106 would also secure a contribution to the public realm part of which will seek to improve pedestrian links between the site and Brentford and along the Great West Road. This is in addition to the funding already received as part of the Outer London Fund towards upgrading the adjacent canal links to Brentford.
Parking and restricting overspill parking
7.156 As noted above the amount of onsite parking would be restricted to 1750 spaces. It is considered that the parking levels proposed are in line with London Plan table 6.2 at a provision of 1:100m².
7.157 The 1750 car parking spaces proposed would be located across six areas within the site and are all accessible via the outer loop road. The largest car parking area is located in the north district where up to 770 spaces will be provided split across two levels. Within the east district up to 450 spaces are provided and in the west district two car parks will provide up to 150 spaces each. A small (up to 25 space) at grade car park is proposed to potentially serve Sky 8 and up to 80 space car park is located opposite Sky Studios.
7.158 The proposed development will provide disabled spaces to the requisite levels (minimum 5% provision) within each car park in suitable locations that provide direct and level access to building entrances. This provision would be secured by condition.
7.159 A Car Parking Management Strategy will be produced and secured in the s106 to provide greater clarity on the allocation and management of car parking in line with the broader objectives of London Plan policy 6.13. A safeguarding condition would also seek to ensure that sufficient electric charging points for vehicles are provided in accordance with the London Plan.
7.160 To restrict any overspill parking the application aims, as discussed above, to achieve a modal shift in terms of people accessing the site by more sustainable modes of
transport using the measures outlined above. The success of this would be monitored by the Travel Plan.
7.161 In addition the Transport Assessment notes that a parking beat survey undertaken in 2011 found there to be approximately 366 on-street spaces within walking distance of the site. These unrestricted on-street spaces could be utilised by residents, visitors or those visiting the area for work. The parking beat survey results show a peak usage of these spaces of approximately 76%.
7.162 The Travel Plan would include regular updates of this parking beat survey and there would be provision within the s106 for the applicant to cover the cost of a feasibility study for the implementation of a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in the local area if found to be necessary by the surveys. If a CPZ is determined necessary then the applicant would also be obliged to provide the funding necessary to introduce the CPZ.
7.163 It is therefore considered that the parking levels proposed are acceptable and with the safeguards in the Travel Plans and s106 would ensure no unacceptable overspill parking would result.
Junction improvements and pedestrian facilities
7.164 The applicant has conducted further modelling of the impacts of the proposed development on local junctions. The modelling and trip generation methodology is now agreed with the Council and TfL. Again by limiting parking and promoting the use of more sustainable modes of transport the applicant states that the development would not harm the operation of local junctions, albeit there would be an increase in their loads.
7.165 It should be noted that whilst many employees work traditional office hours, a significant number operate non-standard hours as befitting a 24 hour, 7 day operation such as BSkyB. Previous surveys at BSkyB have indicated that only 60- 70% of staff work the traditional office hours – the remainder working shift hours which dictate travelling earlier or later than the commuter peaks. This would further limit, in addition to the drive to achieve modal shift to sustainable modes of transport, the impacts at local junctions in the peak hours when loads will be there highest.
7.166 In addition the proposal includes a link road between Grant Way and Harlequin Avenue. This would therefore provide two access and egress points for the development, enhancing the permeability of the site and reducing pressure on Gillette Corner and the Syon Lane / Grant Way junctions. It should be noted that signalisation improvements have recently taken place at the Harlequin Avenue/Great West Road junction.
7.167 The transport assessment recommends that improvements would be required to the Syon Lane/Grant Way junction, which would near capacity following the completion of the development. 278 works would be required to either signalise or provide a new roundabout at this junction, which would improve capacity and vehicle flows.
7.168 In respect of the Gillette Corner junction, the Transport Assessment notes that the proposed development would not result in the junction’s capacity being compromised in the peak hours. Notwithstanding this, it is apparent that the junction loads would increase as a result of the development and therefore a s106 contribution has been
secured towards the applicant funding a feasibility study which would consider what improvements can be made to the junction to increase capacity and facilitate improved pedestrian flows. The scope of this feasibility has been agreed with TfL and LBH Transport officers. In addition to this the applicant has agreed to contribute a capped contribution towards enhancements to the junction. These enhancements would be informed by the findings of the feasibility study and the contribution would either go towards a specific improvement (for example upgrading one arm of the junction) or be pooled with other funding (possibly from wider s106, TfL or LBH funds) for a wider junction upgrade. It is considered that this is appropriate as the subject development would not in itself result in the failure of the junction and the costs of a comprehensive upgrade would be beyond what is reasonable in planning terms to be achieved through s106.
7.169 The s106 agreement would also secure the funding to improve the pedestrian crossing facilities across Syon Lane. This work is likely to be done in line with any Gillette Corner junction improvements and is aimed to reduce the disruption to vehicle flows that result from pedestrians crossing Syon Lane near to the Station as well as creating more pedestrians friendly facilities.
7.170 It is considered that, subject to the mitigation package proposed, that the proposed development would have an acceptable impact upon local junction capacity and the free and safe flow of vehicles and pedestrians in the locality.
Mitigation package
7.171 In summary the proposal includes the following transport mitigation package that it is considered would be required for the development to result in an acceptable impact upon local highway and parking conditions:
5) Alterations to Grant Way/Syon Lane junction – to include a new signalised junction or roundabout (278)
6) S106 would secure a feasibility study for improvements to the Gillette Corner junction and in addition a capped fee towards junction improvements.
7) Alterations to pedestrian facilities along Syon Lane (including alterations to pedestrian crossings)
8) New internal loop road connecting Harlequin Avenue and Grant Way – serves to reduce impact upon surrounding junctions.
9) Contribution towards consultation on and implementation if required of a CPZ to protect residents parking in nearby roads.
10) Travel plan to secure a modal shift
11) Extension of Sky Shuttle bus scheme
12) Improvements to Syon Lane Station
7.172 In addition the following are relevant:
1) New signals implemented at Harlequin Avenue
2) South West Trains undertaking train lengthening along the Hounslow Loop, adding two carriages to each of the four services per hour by the year 2014
3) Contributions already received from the P25 S106.
Issue 6: Sustainability
7.173 The broad aim of sustainable development is to ensure that the quality of social, economic and ecological environments are improved and maintained for future generations. The UDP and London Plan encourage sustainable development through many policies including promoting the use of energy efficient building design and materials, re-use of previously developed land and existing buildings, and location of development in or close to town centres and areas with good public transport.
7.174 Sustainability underpins many of the UDP policies and the London Plan. These require developments not only to be sustainable in transport terms; but also to include energy efficiency measures and measures to promote the use of renewable energy; and not to significantly increase the requirement for water supply or surface water drainage. The Planning Brief for the site notes that all new buildings should be designed in such a way to achieve the highest levels of energy efficiency in terms of design and layout and the use of materials from sustainable sources.
7.175 As a comprehensive new development, the proposal can make a substantial contribution to sustainable development in the Borough and it is important that it recognises and adopts sustainable development principles.
7.176 The proposal constitutes the redevelopment of a previously developed site in accordance with sustainable development principles.
7.177 London Plan Policy 5.2 (Minimising carbon dioxide emissions) states that development proposals should make the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the following energy hierarchy:
• Be lean: use less energy
• Be clean: supply energy efficiently
• Be green: use renewable energy
7.178 It goes on to note that major development proposals should include a detailed energy assessment to demonstrate how the targets for carbon dioxide emissions reduction outlined above are to be met within the framework of the energy hierarchy.
7.179 Policy 5.6 (Decentralised Energy in Development Proposals) states that development proposals should looks at connecting to existing heating or cooling networks.
7.180 Policy 5.11 (Green Roofs and Development Site Environs) states that major development proposals should be designed to include roof, wall and site planting,
especially when green roofs and walls where feasible, to aid in adaption to climate change, sustainable urban drainage, mitigation of climate change, enhancement of biodiversity, accessible roof space, improvements to appearance and growing food.
7.181 An Outline Energy Statement and Sustainability Statement have been provided. There is currently a CCHP Plant under construction on the site. This will serve the Sky Studio’s building, but initial investigations show that this can be extended to include a boiler plant, absorption chillers and an internal store to serve the entire campus development. It is noted that the capacity of the existing CCHP is not being extended, but the waste heat generated by the plant would be used elsewhere on the site via an extension to the existing district heating network.
7.182 It is intended that each building would attain an ‘Excellent’ BREEAM rating.
7.183 Within the development, 15% of the building roof area will be reserved for the installation of PV panels. A minimum of 10% of the roof space will be green roofs.
7.184 It has been concluded within the application that the combination of passive design measures, active design measures, the CCHP network and additional renewables could potentially reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 29% on regulated energy levels compared to the baseline.
7.185 The strategy proposed would ensure that the scheme would meet the sustainability targets set in the London Plan. The safeguarding conditions would ensure that detailed energy statements are provided with each reserved matters application, thereby ensuring that the best possible carbon reduction is gained.
Issue 6: Planning obligations
7.186 UDP policy IMP6.1 states that the Council will seek to ensure that a developer enters into a planning obligation to secure planning benefits related to the proposed development. A payment or other benefit offered pursuant to a section 106 agreement is not material to a decision to grant planning permission and cannot be required unless it complies with the provisions of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (regulation 122), which provide that the planning obligation must be:
(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
Accordingly, it is mandatory that each criterion be satisfactorily addressed prior to granting planning permission subject to a section 106 agreement.
7.187 Government Circular 05/2005 provides guidance on the use of planning obligations, which may impose a restriction or requirement, or provide for payment of money from the developer to make acceptable development proposals that might otherwise be unacceptable in planning terms. The Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligations (which was adopted in March 2008) contains guidance on the imposition of planning obligations in compliance with Circular 05/2005. These obligations may offset shortfalls in the scheme or mitigate the impacts of the development.
7.188 The applicant has submitted draft Section 106 Heads of Terms Topics. The headings include:
- Public Realm
- Construction Training
- Job brokerage and training
- Syon Lane pedestrian crossing contribution
- Syon Lane Station accessibility contribution
- CPZ contribution
- Air Quality contribution
- Creative and media industries support commitment
- Education commitment
- Listed building contribution
- Street tree contribution
- Canal route contribution
- Community Infrastructure Levy.
7.189 It is noted that the previous application was subject to a section 106 agreement, and a number of these contributions have been paid. Consideration needs to be given to contributions that have already been made and utilised and any other contribution that may be required.
7.190 Subsequently the proposed heads of terms would be as follows (it should be noted that the contributions are subject to final agreement with the applicant):
Obligation Contribution sought Comment
ENVIRONMENTAL
Public realm £531,695 Contribution to include street trees, planting and (Includes £188,872 paid as part of P25) improving links to Brentford
Energy Maintain/operate CCHP/obligation to extend network to wider area
ECONOMIC DEVELPOPMENT
Construction £1,875,000 This contribution would be Training held by the developer to (Includes £102,093 paid as part of P25 spend in accordance with ) a Training Scheme programme which would have to be entered into with the Council.
Training and £1,141,875 This contribution to be employment spent as part of projects Initiatives (Includes 115,212 paid as part of P25) agreed by a steering group which would be required to be set up and include LBH officers and the applicant.
Project spending to be in tranches linked to phasing or years
If agreement cannot be made by steering group as to where money should be spent or if a steering group is not set up money to be paid to council in tranches.
TRANSPORT
Bus £575,818 Towards possible links infrastructure/service from site to the north and (Includes £340,818 as part of the P25) links to Brentford
Traffic management £180,000 Consultation and (CPZ) implementation of a CPZ if required Grant Way/Syon Section 278 Works to wither signalise Lane junction or introduce a round-about
Gillette Corner £130,000 Feasibility study/capped Junction contribution to works
Syon Lane £77,837 Improvements - (includes £40,837 paid as part of P25 scheme)
Syon Lane Station £1,051,047 Works to improve - accessibility/pedestrian (Includes £51,047 paid as part of P25 flows scheme) Cycle superhighway £100,000 Links to cycle superhighway Travel Plan - including shuttle bus use - potential tying in later phases to
modal shift performance - remedial measures if targets are not achieved
Car Park To be provided Management Plan
Considerate To be signed up to Contractor
Electric Charging Or to be provided within Condition (Tbc) Point
Total Contribution £5,613,272 sought
7.191 All payments would be index linked and the phasing of the payments and the construction programme subject to detailed negotiation (as it would be necessary to ensure delivery of the scheme as a whole and the full range of benefits).
8.0 EQUALITES DUTIES IMPLICATIONS
8.1 The Council has to give due regard to its Equalities Duties and in particular with respect to its duties arising pursuant to the Equality Act 2010, section 149. Following a relevance test, which is available at:
http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/index/council_and_democracy/equality/eias/environmen t_eias.htm it is considered that there will be no specific implications with regard to the Council’s duty in respect of its equalities duties and that if approving or refusing this proposal the Council will be acting in compliance with its duties.
Relevant Section of Offices/R&D/Light Industry Relevance Test
9.0 LOCAL FINANCE INITIATIVES
Community infrastructure levy
9.1 Some new developments granted planning permission on or after 1 st April 2012 will be liable to pay Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to the Mayor of London with respect to the funding of Crossrail. This is at the rate of £35 per m 2 of new floor space.
9.2 This proposal is liable to pay £4,373,530 Community Infrastructure Levy on commencement of development.
Grants or other financial assistance from a minister of the crown to a relevant authority
9.3 No grant or other financial assistance shall be provided by a Minister of the Crown to the Council or to any other relevant authority
10.0 RECOMMENDATION
Approval
With appropriate safeguarding conditions, having had full regard to the relevant information (including environmental information), the proposed redevelopment of the site for a media and broadcasting campus is considered acceptable and compatible with policy, in light of redevelopment offering the benefits of regenerating the site in terms of unlocking the site’s potential, developing the economic position of the site, improving the appearance and character of the site and enhancing the site’s sustainability, whilst not harming neighbours’ living conditions, local transport infrastructure or the character and apperance of the surrounding area and adjacent historic assets. The proposal therefore complies with policy including the National Planning Policy Framework, London Plan Policies 4.1 (Developing London’s Economy), 4.4 (Managing Industrial Land and Premises), 4.10 (New and emerging economic sectros), 5.2 (Minimising carbon dioxide emissions), 6.9 (Cycling), 7.6 (Architecture), 7.5 (Public Realm ), 7.2 (An inclusive environment), 8.2 (Planning obligations), Unitary Development Polices ENV- B.1.1 (New Development), ENV-P.1.5 (Noise pollution), T.1.2 (The movement implications of development), T.1.4 (Car and cycle parking and servicing facilities for developments, T.2.1 (Pedestrian access) as well as the Employment Development Plan Document and the Brentford Area Action Plan.
Draft Safeguarding Conditions
1 A1a Time Limit – full permission.
2 B5 The proposed d evelopment shall be carried out in all respects in accordance with the proposals contained in the application and the plans submitted therewith and approved by the Planning Inspectorate, or as shall have been otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3 Non std Phasing - Prior to commencement of development a Phasing Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The phasing of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved phasing plan, unless an alternative phasing plan is first submitted to the Local Planning Authority with an assessment of any effects, including any different impacts on the environment, and that alternative plan and assessment is approved by the Local Planning Authority pursuant to this condition.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development is carried out in accordance with the planning permission and scheme of works, and to avoid any detriment to the comprehensive development and to amenity and any harm to the interests of highway safety that may be caused by any phase remaining uncompleted in accordance with UDP Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development).
4 Construction Works - No demolition or construction work shall take place on the site except between the hours of 8am to 6pm on Mondays to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays and Public Holidays without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In order to safeguard the amenities of adjoining residents and the amenities of the locality in accordance with Policies ENV- B.1.1(New development), ENV-P.1.7 (Light pollution)and ENV-P.1.5 (Noise pollution) of the Hounslow Unitary Development Plan and Policies 7.15 (Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes) and 5.3 (Sustainable design and construction) of the London Plan
5 Development shall not commence until a drainage strategy detailing any on and/or off site drainage works, has been submitted to and approved by, the local planning authority in consultation with the sewerage undertaker. No discharge of foul or surface water from the site shall be accepted into the public system until the drainage works referred to in the strategy have been completed”.
Reason - The development may lead to sewage flooding; to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to cope with the new development; and in order to avoid adverse environmental impact upon the community.
6 Development should not be commenced until: Impact studies of the existing water supply infrastructure have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority (in consultation with Thames Water). The studies should determine the magnitude of any new additional capacity required in the system and a suitable connection point.
Reason: To ensure that the water supply infrastructure has sufficient capacity to cope with the/this additional demand.
7 No impact piling shall take place until a piling method statement (detailing the type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential for damage to subsurface water or sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with the relevant water or sewerage undertaker. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement.
Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground water and sewerage utility infrastructure. Piling has the potential to impact on local underground water and sewerage utility infrastructure.The applicant is advised to contact Thames Water Developer Services on 0845 850 2777 to discuss the details of the piling method statement.
8 Prior to commencement of the development, a surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
local planning authority. The scheme shall be prepared in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Scheme Report prepared by Arup (Appendix 23 of the Environmental Statement, dated 7 December 2011). The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.
Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water quality, improve habitat and amenity, and ensure future maintenance of these.
9 Condition EA2: Prior to the commencement of development (or such other stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 1. A site investigation scheme prepared in accordance with Chapter 6 and Appendices 13-16 of the Environmental Statement (December 2011) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. 2. The results of the site investigation and detailed risk assessment referred to in (1) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. 3. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (2) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.
Any changes to these components require the express consent of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.
Reason: To protect the quality of the water environment, because the site is located in a sensitive location for groundwater.
10 Prior to commencement of development, a verification report demonstrating completion of the works set out in the approved remediation strategy required under Condition EA2(2), and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan required under Condition EA2(3) to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a "long-term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan, and for the reporting of this to the Local Planning Authority. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved.
Reason: To confirm that the site no longer poses a risk to groundwater by ensuring that any remedial works required by Condition EA2 are
successfully completed.
11 Condition EA4: If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.
Reason: To protect the quality of the water environment by ensuring that any unsuspected contamination is properly addressed by following Environment Agency guidance and industry best practice.
12 Condition EA5: No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that surface water runoff does not result in polluting substances finding their way into controlled waters, as infiltration of surface water runoff would create a potential pathway for contamination to migrate into the underlying aquifer and adjacent surface waterbodies.
13 Condition EA6: Piling or any other foundation designs, or the construction of boreholes for Ground Source Heat Pump systems, using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the quality of the water environment, as deep piles or boreholes that penetrate through the London Clay would provide a potential connection between the surface and the deep Principal aquifer in the chalk.
14 Maximum Floorspace - The total floorspace areas of the uses hereby approved shall be limited to the following: a) overall floorspace area of all the uses shall not exceed a) 175,000sqm Gross Internal Area (GIA); b) Class B1a (offices) shall not exceed 112,336 sqm GIA; c) B8 (Warehouse) shall not exceed 4000sqm GIA; d) A1/A2 (Retail) shall not exceed 200 sqm GIA e) A3/A4 (Leisure) shall not exceed 2290 sqm GIA.
Reason: The development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any change to the development from the particulars assessed might have an impact, which has not been identified and assessed, in accordance with UDP Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development).
15 Minimum Floor areas – The Minimum floorspace areas to be provided in each phase shall be in accordance with the schedule set out in Document (tbc)
Reason: The development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any change to the development from the particulars assessed might have an impact which has not been identified and assessed, in accordance with UDP Policies ENV-B1.1 (New Development) and the Employment Development Plan
16 Maximum Floor Areas and Land Uses. The maximum floor space area to be provided in each phase shall not result in the maxima set out within Document (tbc) being exceeded for the phase as a whole
Reason: The development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any change to the development from the particulars assessed might have an impact which has not been identified and assessed, in accordance with UDP Policies ENV-B1.1 (New Development) and the Employment Development plan Document.
17 No additional floor space shall be formed within the bu ildings hereby permitted by means of internal horizontal division without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: The development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any change to the development from the particulars assessed might have an impact which has not been identified and assessed, in accordance with UDP Policies ENV-B1.1 (New Development) and ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas).
18 Distribution of Uses - The distribution of uses within each phase shall be in accordance with Document (tbc) hereby approved unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority pursuant to this condition.
Reason: The development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any change to the development from the particulars assessed might have an impact, which has not been identified and assessed, in accordance with ENV-B.1.1 (new Development), the BAAP and the EDPD.
19 Maximum Parking Provision - The car parking provided on the site shall not exceed a maximum of 1750 spaces. This parking shall be provided in accordance with Document (tbc)
Reason: The development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any change to the development from the particulars assessed might have an impact, which has not been identified and assessed, in accordance with policy T.1.4 (Car and cycle parking and servicing facilities for development) of the Unitary Development Plan.
20 Building Heights - No building or any part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed the specified height AOD as set out in approved documents a) Drawings and b) Design Code c) and no
louvre, ducts or other external plant equipment shall be installed on any building without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied as to the details of the development relating to height in the interests of the visual amenity of the area, in accordance with PoliciesENV-B.1.1 (New development), ENV- B.1.2 (High buildings or structures affecting sensitive areas), ENV-B.1.3 (High buildings in areas other than those listed in ENV-B.1.2), and ENV- B.2.8 (Views and landmarks) of the Hounslow Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and Policies 7.6 (Architecture), 7.7 (Location and design of tall and large buildings), 7.8 (Heritage Assets and archaeology) of the London Plan, and to safeguard the amenities of (prevent noise and disturbance to) residential properties in the locality in accordance with Policies ENV- B.1.1(B.7) (New development), ENV-P.1.5 (Noise pollution) and ENV-P.1.6 (Air pollution) of the Hounslow UDP and Policies 7.15 (Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes) and 5.3 (Sustainable design and construction) of the London Plan.
21 Commercial Deliveries - No commercial deliveri es shall be taken at or dispatched from the site outside the hours of 07.00 hours to 22.00 hours Monday to Saturday nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority
Reason. In order to ensure satisfactory environmental conditions for the occupiers of the residential accommodation and to safeguard the amenities of adjoining properties in accordance with development plan policies including ENV-B.1.1 (New Development) of the Hounslow UDP.
RESERV ED MATTERS
22 Compliance with Outline Application - The details submitted in relation to Conditions 23 and 24 shall be in accordance with requirements of the following approved plans and documents: a) Design Code; b) Drawings; c) Transport Assessment; d) Public realm and design statement e)Design and Access Statement; and f)Sustainability statement.
Reason: In order to ensure compliance with the outline planning permission and to secure a high quality design in accordance with policy ENV- B.1.1(New Development).
23 Approval of Reserved Matters Relating to Layout, Scale, Access, Landscaping and Appearance - Prior to the commencement of development for each phase (Excluding Phase 1), the following Reserved Matters shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that phase: a) layout; b) scale; c) access; d) landscaping and e) appearance (including materials)
Reason: In order to ensure compliance with the outline planning permission and to secure a high quality design in accordance with policies of UDP and London Plan.
24 Details Required for Each Phase (Excluding Phase 1) - Prior to the commencement of development on each phase and in support of the information submitted under Condition 12 details of the following shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval: a) an illustrative build-out plan; b) a Design and Access Statement; c) Energy Statement; d) Environmental Assessment Verification
Reason: In order to ensure compliance with the outline planning permission and to secure a high quality design in accordance with policies of UDP and London Plan.
DETAILS REQUIRED FOR EACH PHASE
25 Phased Contamination Condition - Before the development on any given phase hereby permitted commences: a. A contaminated land Phase 1 desk study report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should the Phase 1 report recommend that a Phase 2 site investigation is required, then this shall be carried out and submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The site shall be investigated by a competent person to identify the extent and nature of contamination. The report should include a tiered risk assessment of the contamination based on the proposed end use of the site. Additional investigation may be required should it be necessary. b. If required, a scheme for a phased decontamination of the site shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, for written approval. The scheme shall account for any comments made by the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby permitted is first occupied. c. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately if additional contamination is discovered during the course of the development. A competent person shall assess the additional contamination, and shall submit appropriate amendments to the scheme for decontamination in writing to the Local Planning Authority for approval before any work on that phase of development continues. Before any phase of the development is first brought into use the agreed scheme for decontamination referred to in clauses b) and c) above, including amendments, shall be fully implemented and a written validation (closure) report submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.
Reason: Contamination is known or suspected on the site due to a former land use. The LPA therefore wishes to ensure that the development can be implemented and occupied with adequate regard for public and environmental safety.
26 Archaeological Wor k - No development shall take place on any phase until the applicant has provided a strategy for the implementation of a phased programme of archaeological work for that phase (including field evaluation and a subsequent mitigation strategy, if necessary) in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the programme shall be carried out as approved .
Reason: In order to protect any archaeological remains present on the site in accordance with London Plan Policy 7.8 (Heritage assets and
archaeology).
27 Construction Environmental Management Plan - A Construction Environmental Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the implementation of development of any phase. The construction of the proposed development shall then be carried out in accordance with the details set out within the approved Construction Environmental Management Plan.
Reason: In order to protect the environmental quality of the surrounding area in accordance with policies ENV-B.1.1 (New Development) and ENV- P.1.5 (Noise Pollution).
28 Construction Logistics Plan - No development of any phase shall commence until a site wide Construction Logistics Plan has been submitted to the Local Planning authority and approved in writing. The CLP should include for the relevant phase: a) booking systems b) consolidated or re-timed trips c) secure, off-street loading and drop- off facilities d) using operators committed to best practice, demonstrated by membership of TfLs Freight Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS), or similar.
Reason: In order to ensure that deliveries to the site during construction are managed effectively so as to minimise impact upon theroad network and to safeguard the amenities of residential properties in the locality and in the interest of road safety, in accordance with Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development), ENVP.1.5 (Noise pollution), ENV-P.1.6 (Air pollution), ENV- P.1.7 (Li ght pollution), T.2.2 (Pedestrian safety and security) and T.4.4(Road safety) of the Hounslow Unitary Development Plan and Policies 7.15(Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes), 7.14 (Improving air quality)and 5.3 (Sustainable design and construction) of the London Plan.).
29 Details of Materials - Prior to the erection of the superstructure on each phase of development, details of materials (including all materials samples) to be used in that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details so approved.
Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development in accordance UDP policy ENVB.1.1 (New Development) and ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas).
30 SUDS - Prior to the commencement of development on any given phase as approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme so approved shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period that may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning
authority.
Reason: To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water from the site in accordance with UDP Policy ENV-W.2.4 (Floodwater) and ENV-P1.3 (Surface water run off).
31 Sustainable Construction – No development shall take place on any phase until details of sustainable construction demonstrating that phase shall comply with the"essential" standards for materials in the Mayor's Sustainable Design and Construction SPG. These being- 50% timberand timber products from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) source and balance from a known temperate source.- Insulation materials containing substances known to contribute to stratospheric ozone depletion or with the potential to contribute to global warming must not be used.- Minimize use of new aggregates- Reduce waste during construction and demolition phases and sort waste stream on site where practical -Specify use of reused or recycled construction materials -minimising solargain in summer – minimising water use - protecting and enhancing green infrastructure- outdoor lighting should be energy efficient and minimize light lost to sky.- All boilers installed must be low NOx boilers, conforming to at least NOX class 5.
Reason. In the interest of sustainability andcomply with essential standards in the London Plan and Policy 5.3 (Sustainable Design and construction).
32 Renewable Energy - No development shall take place until an energy assessment has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority which demonstrates how the hierarchy of energy efficiency, efficient supply of energy and renewable energy generation has been observed. The assessment should show that the Building Emissions Rate is at least 25% lower than the Target Emission Rate as calculated using the National Calculation Methodology. Associated calculations should be submitted as part of the application, alongside full details of the proposed energy efficiency measures and renewable energy technology(ies).
The building shall not be occupied until evidence (e.g. photographs and copies of installation contracts) has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the development has been carried out in accordance with the approved details
Reason: To comply with the London Plan Policies 5.1-5.7 and to ensure the overall environmental sustainability of the development.
33 Green Roofs
34 PVS –In accordance with Condition 32
35 The hereby approved buildings shall be constructed so as to achieve no less than a "very good" rating as defined by BREEAM and to use reasonable endeavours to achieve an "excellent" rating as defined by BREEAM unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. A final Certificate certifying that BREEAM (or any such equivalent national measure of sustainable building which replaces
that scheme) rating (no less than a ‘Very Good’) has been achieved for the retail store shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority within 6 months of the opening of the retail store unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
(Reason: To ensure that the development achieves BREEAM rating level (“very good”) (or any such equivalent national measure of sustainability for building design which replaces that scheme) and assessment and certification shall be carried out by a licensed BREEAM assessor and to ensure that the development contributes to mitigating and adapting to climate change and to meeting targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.)
36 Hard and soft landscaping - No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include (proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing material; minor artefacts and structures (eg. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (eg drainage power, communications cables, pipelines etc. indicating lines, manholes, supports etc); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant).
Soft landscape works shall include (planting plans; written speci fications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; implementation programme)
Reason. To ensure a satisfactory appearance of the site and improve the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with policy ENV.B.1.1 New development
37 Boundary treatment - No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before (the use hereby permitted is commenced) or (before the building(s) is/are occupied) or (in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the local planning authority). Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason. To safeguard the visual amenities of the locality and privacy of adjoining properties locality in accordance with policy ENV.B.1.1 New development
38 Landscape Management Plan - A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all hard and soft landscape areas, and details of any temporary landscaping (including boundary treatment) to be provided and management thereof pending the redevelopment
of future phases of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of each phase of the development. The maintenance schedule shall be for a minimum period of ten years and include details of the arrangements for its implementation. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance of the site and the Conervation Area adjacent the site, that the development will be accessible to all and in order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied that there will be ecological enhancements and as to the management of minor artefacts and structures, in accordance with Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development) of the Hounslow UDP and Policies 7.19 (Biodiversity and access to nature), 5.3 (Sustainable design and construction), 7.8 (Heritage assetts and archealogy) and 7.2 (An inclusive environment) of the London Plan.
39 Replacement Tree - If within a period of five years from the date of planting any tree or specimen shrub, that tree or specimen shrub, or any tree or specimen shrub planted in replacement for it, is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies (or becomes, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective), another tree or specimen shrub of the same species and size as that originally planted shall be planted at the same place, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its written approval to any variation. (b) If within a period of five years from the date of occupation of any phase any existing tree or specimen shrub within the relevant phase which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies (or becomes, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority,seriously damaged or defective), another tree or specimen shrub shall be planted at the same place and that tree or specimen shrub shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of the visual andecological amenities of the area, in accordancewith Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development),ENV-N.2.3 (Promotion of nature conservationmanagement) and ENV-N.2.7 (Trees andcommunity woodland) of the Hounslow UnitaryDevelopment Plan and Policies 7.19 (Biodiversity and access to nature) and 7.4 (Local Character) of the London Plan.
40 Waste and Recyling -Prior to any occupation of the development of any phase a scheme for the storage and collection of commercial waste and materials to be recycled including a timetable for implementation shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the approved scheme shall then be managed as approved unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
(Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied as to the refuse and recycling arrangements for the development to ensure that waste and materials to be recycled can be properly stored and removed from the site as soon as the commercial units are occupied in accordance with Hounslow Unitary Development Plan Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New
development), ENV-P.2.1 (Waste management), ENV-P.2.4. (Recycling facilities in new developments), H.4.1 (Housing standards and guidelines), T.2.2 (Pedestrian safety and security) and T.4.4 (Road safety).
41 Bird Hazard Management Plan - Development shall not commence on any phase until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted plan shall include details of: a) management of any flat/ shallow pitched/ green roofs on buildings within the site which may be attractive to nesting, roosting and loafing birds. The management plan shall comply with Advice Note 8 Potential Bird Hazard from Building Design. The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved on completion of development and shall remain in force for the life of the development. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning authority.
Reason: To manage the development in order to minimise its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Heathrow Airport.
42 Access Strategy - Prior to commenceme nt of development on any phase, an access strategy, to include disabled access, for the buildings and spaces within that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In order to ensure that the proposed development is in compliance with London Plan Policy 7.2 (An inclusive environment).
43 Car and Cycle Parking Provision – A) Car Parking for each phase shall be provided in accordance with Document ** or such 'temporary' car parking layout as may be agreed in writing by the local planning authority provided that no subsequent phase of the development shall result in the removal of that temporary arrangement unless another temporary arrangement has been agreed or unless the car parking provision for the completed development complies with Document (tbc). B) Cycle parking for each phase shall be provided in accordance with London Plan Cycle Parking Standards.
Reason: To provide an appropriate level of parking for future occupants in the interests of delivering sustainable development and to comply with the Environmental Impact Assessment submitted in support of the application, in accordance with UDP policy T.1.4 (Car and cycle parking and servicing for developments).
44 Disabled Parking - A minimum of 175 o f the parking spaces hereby approved shall be suitable for the use of wheelchair users. These spaces shall be laid out in a location and in a manner that shall first be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Any amendments to the location of the spaces thereby agreed shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing in advance of their provision.
Reason: To ensure a socially inclusive and sustainable development in
accordance with policy 7.2 (Cr eating an inclusive environment) of the London Plan.
45 Electric charging points
46 Plant and Equipment - Details of any external plant or ventilation equipment, including ducting and communcation equipment (satelittes), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before installation and the development shall conform to the details so approved before it is first occupied.
Reason: To protect the amenities of existingand future residents and ensure that the development provi des a high quality design in accordance with UDP Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development)
47 Details of exterior lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the use commences. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained .
(Reason. In order that the council may be satisfied as to the details of lighting in the interests of pedestrian safety and the visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development), ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas), ENV-N.1.7 (Development near metropolitan open land boundary) and T.2.2 (Pedestrian safety and security) of the Hounslow Unitary Development Plan.)
48 Ecological management strategy
49 Wind Management s trategy
Informatives:
Advice to the Applicant - Surface Water Drainage Section 11.2.2 of the Environmental Statement confirms that the surface water drainage concept design limits the discharge rate to match the greenfield runoff rate through a combination of SUDS techniques including oversized pipes, detention basins, swales, roof storage, and permeable paving. Although we are satisfied at this stage that the proposed development could be allowed in principle, the applicant will need to provide further information relating to the proposals to an acceptable standard to satisfy Condition EA1 and ensure that the proposed development can go ahead without posing an unacceptable flood risk.
If greenfield runoff rates cannot be achieved with the stated storage capacity of 4580m³ after confirming details of infiltration and hard and soft landscaping as outlined in Paragraph 7.2.10 of the FRA, the applicant will need to investigate whether it is possible to provide further storage to achieve the greenfield rates. It may be possible to increase attenuation storage capacity using tanked storage if space for more preferable SUDS techniques has been exhausted. A proposed runoff rate greater than the greenfield rate will only be acceptable in terms of discharging Condition EA1 if it is clear that it is the most sustainable rate which is practicably achievable.
The proposed development (as approved) may be affected by the designation of the Olympic Route Network (ORN) and Paralympic Route Network (PRN), under the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006.
The ORN and PRN will enable key Olympic and Paralympic participants such as athletes and officials, to travel safely, securely and efficiently between venues and their accommodation.
The ORN and PRN will operate during the Olympic and Paralympic Games period (the run- up to the Games, the Games themselves and the dispersal afterwards) between June and September 2012. During this period, there will be an impact on construction works, utility works and highway licensed activities (for example, skips and building materials) if they affect the roads designated as a part of the ORN/PRN. Other routes might also be affected and will also be required to be clear of any kinds of obstruction. These are not yet finalised, but will be advised as further information becomes available.
Other users of road space may also be affected including road freight deliveries and public transport.
Requests to utility providers to provide any additional water, gas, electricity or telecommunications connections should be made sufficiently well in advance of the Games period.
In addition, from mid-2011 through to start of the Games period, there will be works taking place on some parts of the ORN at different times to implement the temporary traffic measures which are necessary for the ORN to operate as intended. Works and licences could therefore be affected on occasions during this period.
Temporary traffic measures to manage the movement of spectators and others close to the competition venues may also affect works and other activities in some of the surrounding streets during the Games period. Further information will become available as the local area traffic management plan for each venue is drawn up later in 2011.
This note is for information only and is provided without prejudice to the legal rights of the ODA or any other relevant authority whether under the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006, planning, traffic or highway legislation or otherwise. Further information and the latest news on the ORN and PRN can be found on the London 2012 website at http://www.london2012.com/olympic-route-network/home.html.
Background Papers:
The contents of planning file ref.00558/A/P43 and 00558/A/P25 save for exempt or confidential information as defined in the Local Government Act 1972, Sch. 12A Parts 1 and 2.