Brent Cross Cricklewood in the London Borough of Barnet
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
planning report PDU/1483/02 12 March 2010 Brent Cross Cricklewood in the London Borough of Barnet planning application no. C/17559/08 Strategic planning application stage II referral (old powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000 The proposal Outline application for comprehensive mixed use redevelopment of the Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration area comprising residential, town centre uses including retail, leisure, hotel and conference facilities, offices, industrial and other business uses, rail-based freight facilities, waste handling facility, petrol filling station, community, health and education facilities, private hospital, open space and public realm, landscaping and recreation facilities, new rail and bus stations, vehicular and pedestrian bridges, underground and multi-storey car parking, works to the River Brent and Clitterhouse Stream and associated infrastructure, demolition and alterations of existing building structures, electricity generation stations, relocated electricity substation, free standing or building mounted wind turbines, alterations to existing railway infrastructure including Cricklewood railway track and station and Brent Cross London Underground station, creation of new strategic accesses and internal road layout, at grade or underground conveyor from waste handling facility to combined heat and power plant, infrastructure and associated facilities together with any required temporary works or structures and associated utilities/services required by the development. The applicant The applicants are Hammerson, Standard Life Investments and Brookfield Europe (“the Brent Cross Development Partners”), and the architect is Allies & Morrison Architects. Strategic issues Outstanding issues relating to retail, affordable housing, urban design and inclusive access, transport, waste, energy, noise, phasing and infrastructure triggers have been addressed. Recommendation That Barnet 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. page 1 Context 1 On 11 April 2008 Barnet Council consulted the Mayor of London on an application for planning permission for the above development at the above site. This was referred to the Mayor under Categories 1A, 1B, 1C, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B and 3F of the Schedule to the Order 2000: 1A: ”Development which - (a) Comprises or includes the provision of more than 500 houses, flats, or houses and flats; or (b) Comprises or includes the provision of flats or houses and the development occupies more than 10 hectares”. 1B: “Development (other than development which only comprises the provision of houses, flats, or houses and flats), which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings – (c) Outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres.” 1C: “Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building in respect of which one or more of the following conditions is met – (c) The building is more than 30 metres high and outside the City of London. 2B: “Waste development to provide an installation with capacity for a throughput of more than 50,000 tonnes per annum of waste produced outside the land in respect of which planning permission is sought.” 2C: “Development to provide – (d) a railway station; (f) a bus or coach station.” 3A: “Development which is likely to – (a) result in the loss of more than 200 houses, flats, or houses and flats (irrespective of whether the development would entail also the provision of new houses or flats).” 3B: “Development – (a) which occupies more than 4 hectares of land which is used for a use within Class B1 (business), B2 (general industrial) or B8 (storage or distribution) of the Use Classes Order.” 3F: “Development for a use, other than residential use, which includes the provision of more than 200 car parking spaces in connection with that use”. 2 On 11 February 2009 the Mayor considered planning report PDU/1483/01, and subsequently advised Barnet Council that the proposal was acceptable in principle with regard to strategic planning policy subject to the resolution of issues relating to build out of the new town centre and associated public transport improvements, affordable housing, transport, urban design and inclusive access, energy, waste and infrastructure delivery. 3 A copy of the above-mentioned report is attached. The essentials of the case with regard to the proposal, the site, case history, strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance page 2 are as set out therein, unless otherwise stated in this report. Since then, the application has been revised in response to the Mayor’s concerns (see below). On 18 November 2009, Barnet Council decided that it was minded to grant planning permission for the application, and on 1 March 2010 it advised the Mayor of this decision. Under the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000 the Mayor may direct the Council to refuse planning permission, and has until 14 March 2010 to notify the Council of such a direction. This report sets out the information needed by the Mayor in deciding whether to direct refusal. 4 The decision on this case, and the reasons will be made available on the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk. Update 5 Since the consultation stage response, published in February 2009, the Mayor has published a number of policy documents and strategies, some of which have material weight in the consideration of this case. The most significant document published since this time is the Draft Replacement London Plan (October 2009). Where appropriate this report will highlight reference to these emerging policy considerations. Retail 6 At consultation stage the principle of a new town centre and the associated retail provision was accepted in accordance with the Barnet UDP, the London Plan and the Supplementary Planning Guidance. Further consideration and clarification was, however, required in respect of delivery of the remaining retail floorspace beyond the primary development package (PDP), and concerns were expressed about the adequacy of public transport improvements in the PDP to support the emerging new town centre. 7 The applicant has subsequently advised that the indicative phasing parameter plan, indicative construction programme and infrastructure triggers and thresholds together provide a framework for phased delivery of the new town centre. The section 106 agreement and conditions require the applicants to submit detailed delivery programmes for each phase to ensure that development is delivered in a comprehensive manner. The Council will therefore retain control over any variations to the phasing and programming of the development and delivery of critical infrastructure. 8 In respect of public transport infrastructure, a number of improvements to the package have been secured since the consultation stage, including the setting up of a Transport Strategy Group and obligations in respect of funding and delivery of an enhanced bus station and securing the consolidated transport fund, of which £16.6m is to be provided during the PDP and includes £4.3m in bus subsidy and funding of the rapid transit system. The section 106 agreement also binds the applicants to monitor public transport performance including the Underground to ensure that sufficient capacity is available for each phase or sub-phase; this will ensure that sufficient capacity is available to meet demand arising from the new development prior to implementation. Transport issues are discussed in full later in this report. 9 Since the Mayor’s consultation response was issued and since the Council resolved to approve the application, Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4): Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth has replaced PPG4 (1992), PPG5 (1992) and PPS6 (2005) as national planning policy guidance for retail, leisure, entertainment and other main town centre uses. The key change from PPS6 to PPS4 is the abolition of the need test and the introduction of a new impact test. The sequential test remains, as does the scale test, which has been incorporated into the new impact test alongside accessibility by a choice of means of transport, limiting carbon dioxide emissions, page 3 promoting high quality and inclusive design, impact on economic and physical regeneration and impact on local employment. 10 Whilst the applicant has not submitted an appraisal of the scheme against the new PPS4 tests, it is possible to assess compliance with these tests with reference to the application documentation, including the transport assessment, energy and sustainability strategies, design and access statement, social infrastructure strategy and the environmental statement. These aspects of the application have been assessed in this report and in the stage one report and in all instances meet the objectives of London Plan policy. 11 The Mayor’s attention is specifically drawn to opposition to the retail development from Quintain Estates, who have commercial retail interests in nearby Wembley. Quintain’s representations include their own review of the applicant’s retail and transport assessments and the local authority and GLA’s consideration of the application. Criticisms include failure to assess the need, scale and impact of the retail development, proposed retail quantum exceeding the level endorsed