Mayor of London
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MAYOR OF LONDON Agnieszka Nowak Our refi D&P/3213/PR London Borough of Hammersmith and Fuiham Your ret 2013/03799/FUL Development Management Service Date: 21 January 2014 5th Floor, Hammersmith Town Hall Extension King Street London W6 9JU Dear Ms Nowak Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Ads 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 Queens Wharf and Riverside Studios Local Planning Authority Reference: 201 3/03799/FU L I refer to your letter of 6 January 2014 informing me that Hammersmith and Fulham Council is minded to grant planning permission for the above planning application. I refer you also to the notice that was issued on 10 January 2014 under the provisions of article Sfl)(b)(i) of the above Order, following the receipt of referral documentation. Having now considered a report on this case I am content to allow Hammersmith and Fulham Council to determine the case itself, subiect to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and do not therefore wish to direct refusal or to take over the application for my own determination. Yours sincerely ) I Boris Johnson Mayor of London cc Kit Malthouse, London Assembly Constituency Member Nicky Gavron, Chair of London Assembly Planning and Housing Committee National Planning Casework Unit, DCLG Alex Williams, Transport for London Agent, Ms Jan Donovan, Rolfe Judd Planning, Old Church Court, Claylands Road, The Oval, London SWS 1 NZ City Hall, London, SE1 2AA • mayor(&Nondon.gov.uk • Iondon.gov.uk • 020 7983 4000 GREATERLONDONAUTHORITY planning report D&P/3213/02 21 January2014 Queen’s Wharf and Riverside Studio, Crisp Road in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fuiham planning application no. 201 3/03799/FUL Strategic planning application stage II referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 The proposal Demolition of the existing buildings and the redevelopment of the site via a comprehensive proposal comprising the erection of a six to eight storey building with balconies and roof terraces and the provision of 165 residential units (Class 0) and 8,633 sq. m of commercial floor space for television and film recording studios, storage, dressing rooms, offices, theatre, cinema and other facilities ancillary to those uses including cafe, restaurant, bar and other uses for the sale of food and drink, together with car and cycle parking, storage and plant space and the creation of a riverside walk along the frontage of the site facing the River Thames. The applicant The applicant is Mount Anvil Ltd and the architect is Assael Architects. Strategic issues At consultation stage, the principle to deliver a mixed use development and re-provision of the studio use on this site was acceptable; however, further information in relation to affordable housing, residential quality, children’s playspace, urban design, inclusive access, sustainable development and transport were required for the scheme to be considered as fully compliant with the London Plan. There have subsequently been design alterations and further information provided in an attempt to resolve those issues, as detailed in this report. The Council’s decision In this instance Hammersmith and Fulham Council has resolved to grant permission. Recommendation That Hammersmith and Fulham Council be advised that the Mayor is content for it to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and does not therefore wish to direct refusal or direct that he is to be the local planning authority. page 1 Context 1 On 24 September 2013 the Mayor of London received documents from Hammersmith and Fulham Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above sites for the above uses. 2 The application was referable to the Mayor under the following Categories of the Schedule to the Order 2008, as follows: • Cotegoiy 1,4 “Development which comprises or includes the provision of 750 houses, flats, or houses and flats”. • Category 1 C (a) “Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building that is more than 25 metres high and is adjacent to the River Thames.” 3 On 30 october 2013 the Mayor considered planning report D&P/3213/O1, and subsequently advised Hammersmith and Fulham Council that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 68 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in this paragraph could address these deficiencies. 4 A copy of the above-mentioned report is attached. The essentials of the case with regard to the proposal, the site, case history, strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance are as set out therein, unless otherwise stated in this report. On 18 December 2013, Hammersmith and Fulham Council decided that it was minded to grant planning permission and on 8 January 2014 it advised the Mayor of this decision. Under the provisions of Article 5 of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor may allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, direct Kammersmith and Fulham Council under Article 6 to refuse the application or issue a direction to Hammersmith and Fulham Council under Article 7 that he is to act as the Local Planning Authority for the purposes of determining the application. The Mayor has until 21 January 2014 to notify the Council of his decision and to issue any direction. 5 The decision on this case and the reasons will be made available on the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk. Update 6 At the consultation stage Hammersmith and Fulbam Council was advised that the application did not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 58 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in this paragraph could address these deficiencies: Principle of development: The principle to deliver enabling residential development to fund the refurbishment of the Riverside Studios is acceptable in strategic terms. • Housing: The approach to deliver a 100% private housing scheme to enable refurbishment of the Riverside Studios is accepted. Notwithstanding this, in order to satisfy polices 3.11 and 3.12 of the London Plan, the applicant will need to submit appropriate viability work which will need to be independently assessed by Hammersmith and Fulham Council. The housing mix put forward is acceptable in strategic terms. With regards to residential quality, the applicant will need to amend the number of units per core. The residential density of the propo5ed scheme is broadly in line with London Plan policy 3.4 and table 3.3 respectively but further clarification regarding the applicants density calculations are requested. page 2 • Children’s playspace: Further information and clarification of the applicants approach to piay space Is needed for the scheme to comply with London Plan policy 3.6. • Urban design: The proposed design is generally accepted; however the applicant will need to undertake some minor changes along Crisp Road in line with comments made in this report. In an addition, the applicant will need to ensure that the Riverside Studio use is clearly defined as integral part of the proposed design. • Inclusive access: Further information is required as to the location of the wheelchair accessible units and details of how the 5tudio use and public realm will be made inclusive for all, to meet London Plan Policies 3.8 and 7.2. • Sustainable development: The applicant should provide further clarification with regards to the use of heat pumps and heating/cooling loads for the scheme to meet policy 5.2 of the London Plan. • Transport: Further information on trip generation, parking and cycling matters with mechanisms to secure works and financial obligations is requested. Travel, Delivery and Servicing and Construction Logistics Plans should be secured through conditions or the section 106 agreement. • The applicant has provided further information addressing the issues outlined above; paragraphs 7 to 22 below set out how the issues have been addressed. of the 7 At consultation stage, the omission of affordable housing to enable refurbishment of Riverside Studios was accepted. Notwithstanding this, in order to satisfy polices 3.11 and 3.12 the London Plan, the viability work submitted by the applicant has been independently assessed on behalf of the Council and it has been concluded that the development which includes re-provision of bespoke studio space could not viably deliver any affordable housing. Following further section 106 discussion the Council has decided to allocate £405,000 for a commuted payment for affordable housing in-lieu of onsite provision, which would secure a minimum of two DM5 homes within the borough (as verified by the Council’s Housing and Regeneration team). Given this as well as consideration of the individual circumstances of the proposal, the off-site affordable housing offer and use of a payment in lieu is acceptable, on balance in this instance. there were some S With regards to residential quality, at stage one it was highlighted that have long, convoluted corridors, to which a high number of units (up to 14 units in some cases) will access on the lower residential floors (levels one to three). Since stage one, the applicant has made some amendments to the lower residential uses and as a result the corridors have been split and residential units have been separated into separate clusters each accessed by individual cores from the ground level. The numbers of units per core have been reduced and as such the scheme is acceptable in this regard and broadly complies with Mayor’s Housing SPG.