HM Remand Centre, Latchmere Lane, Kingston Upon Thames, KT2 5NX

Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee 18 June 2014 Planning Consultation (14/12146/FUL): HM Remand Centre, Latchmere Lane, Kingston Upon Thames, KT2 5NX

Report by Director of Place

Purpose

This report seeks the Committee’s views on planning application 14/12146/FUL for the “Erection of 31 dwellings 2/3 storeys high with access from Latchmere Lane, Ham as part of the creation of 89 dwelllings through the conversion and extension of Latchmere House to create 7 flats and the demolition of existing buildings and erection of 82 new dwellings with access from Latchmere Lane and Church Road in conjunction with application 14/0450/FUL in the London Borough of Richmond.” prior to consideration of the application by the Development Control Committee.

The application is still under consideration and although the period set aside for consultation responses has expired, some may still be received. Further information will be circulated to the Sub-Committee upon the receipt of any further consultation responses. The proposal raises a number of considerations which are set out below in the main body of the report.

RECOMMENDATION

It is RECOMMENDED that the Sub-Committee express its views on the application so that the Development Control Committee can consider them when it determines this planning application.

SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

1. The site is located approximately 1.2km north from the northern edge of Kingston Town Centre towards Richmond Park/ Ham Common in the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames. The site is located 100m from Tudor Drive which forms part of a Strategic Walking/ Cycling Network. 2. The current access to the site is via Church Road within the London Borough of Richmond. There is an existing pedestrian access via Anne Boleyn’s Walk through Latchmere Close, although Latchmere Close is not a public highway. There are no Local Development Framework designations on the part of the site within the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, although a number of the trees are subject to a Tree Preservation Order. Tudor Drive Local Centre is located approximately 100m to the south of the site. The northern part of the site is in the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames and part is within the Ham Common Conservation Area. 3. To the north of the site is the wooded area of Ham Common, which is designated as Metropolitan Open Land, Public Open Space and an Other Site of Nature Importance. To the west, south and east of the site is generally two storey semi-detached houses most of which back onto the site, except Garth Road where the sides of the houses at the end of the cul de sac face the site, which is at the end of the cul de sac. 4. The site has been previously used as a Remand Centre (use class C2A). The Remand Centre was closed in 2011 and is now surplus to requirements. The total site area across both boroughs extends to approximately 3.6 hectares. Within the Royal Borough of Kingston, the site area is 1.3 hectares. The site consists of single/ two storey buildings, a hard surfaced central area with green spaces to the east and west, including a number of trees. Latchmere House, a two/ three storey building, is located in the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames and is a Building of Townscape Merit.

PROPOSAL

5. The application seeks permission for the demolition of existing single and two storey buildings and erection of 31 dwellings 2/3 storeys high with access from Latchmere Lane, Ham within the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames. This is part of a joint planning application with the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames for the creation of 89 dwellings through the conversion and extension of Latchmere House to create 7 flats and the demolition of some existing buildings and the existing security boundary around the site and erection of 82 new dwellings in conjunction with application 14/0450/FUL in the London Borough of Richmond. 6. The western end of the site to the west of and fronting the proposed north- west to south-east road which connects to Garth Road as a pedestrian/ cycle link consists of a detached house at the south-eastern end, 3 pairs of semi- detached houses located centrally and a detached house at the north-western end. Each property includes a garage and two off-street parking spaces. All units are two storey plus roof accommodation 5 bedroom units. These properties include rear gardens that back onto the gardens of houses in Tudor Drive. Two detached houses front this road at the south-eastern end of the road on the north-eastern side. Both are 5 bedroom units with a garage space plus one or two off-street parking spaces and a rear garden. 7. To the north-east of this road is a proposed road leading north-east. On the north-western side from the south-west is a detached house and a pair of semi-detached houses all two storey plus roof accommodation five bedroom units, each with a garage and two off-street parking spaces. To the north-east of this is a terrace of three four bedroom houses, all two storeys plus roof accommodation with front dormers, two including off-street parking spaces and one including one off-street parking space. To the north-west adjacent to the boundary between the boroughs is a three storey flat roofed terrace of five three bedroom houses, two with two off-street parking spaces and three with one off-street parking space. All these properties have rear gardens which back onto the gardens of properties in Latchmere Close. Beyond these properties to the north-east is a pair of proposed semi-detached houses and three storey terrace which are the part of the overall development which are located in the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames. 8. On the southeastern side is a detached house, two pairs of semi-detached houses and a detached house, all are two storey plus roof accommodation five bedroom units. All include a garage, the detached houses include one off- street parking space and the semi-detached houses include two off-street parking spaces. 9. An access road to the south-east of this road provides access to two five bedroomed two storey detached houses with roof accommodation, one with a double garage and one with a single garage and both with two other off-street parking spaces. The side of the garden of the end property backs onto gardens in Garth Close. 10. To the north-east of this access road is a pair of five bedroomed two storey plus roof accommodation semi-detached houses, each with a garage and two off-street parking spaces. Part of the garage of the adjoining property to the east is also located within the Royal Borough of Kingston. Beyond this to the east are a proposed pair of five bedroomed semi-detached houses and a detached house within the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames. 11. All the properties would be set back from the access roads, generally by 4.5- 5m, although this varies across the development. All properties would benefit from private rear gardens. The proposed houses would consist of buff brickwork with feature brick string courses, flat arch brick lintels, slate effect pitched roofs and reconstituted stone capped flat roofs and timber sash windows. The ground floor level of the three storey townhouses would be rendered. Front gardens would generally include grass, some would incorporate trees and all would have hedging and flag stone paving for the pedestrian paths and tegula block paving for the driveways. 12. Access to the part of the site within the Royal Borough of Kingston would be via a newly created access road from Latchmere Lane within the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames. This would be surfaced in bitumen macadam with some feature block paving. 13. None of the units within the Royal Borough of Kingston are proposed to be affordable units, however, 28 affordable rent units (8 No. 1 bedroom, 7 No. 2 bedroom units, 10 No. 3 bedroom units and 3 No.4 bedroom units) and 6 intermediate 1 bedroom units making a total of 34 units of the 89 units (38%) across the two boroughs are proposed to be affordable and the nomination rights to the affordable housing would be split between the two boroughs. 14. There is a concurrent planning application 14/12144/FUL which has been submitted jointly to the Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames and the London Borough of Richmond. The development within the Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames is identical to this application. The main differences in the other scheme are in the London Borough of Richmond part of the site and the proposal which includes 66 houses (instead of 55 new houses and 27 new apartments), a total of 13 affordable units and all vehicular access from Church Road in conjunction with application 14/0451/FUL in the London Borough of Richmond. This application is to be considered within another report on this agenda.

CONSULTATIONS

15. Neighbouring Occupiers: 354 notification letters have been sent, and the proposal has been advertised in the press and by site notice. 16. 155 signature petition objecting to the unnecessary new road from Latchmere Lane. 17. 9 letters of objection have been received from local residents on the following grounds: 1) Proposal does not comply with the Planning Brief 2) Excessive height of buildings adjoining Latchmere Lane 3) Housing, including any mansard roof, should be no higher than 2 storeys 4) Excessive density compared to the 73 unit option 5) This location cannot sustain the higher density population. 6) Unnecessary additional affordable housing 7) The traffic impact would be higher than suggested and amelioration would be required including better pedestrian facilities in Latchmere Lane/Church Road and parking in Latchmere Lane 8) Latchmere Lane access not required, as existing road access at Church Road is adequate 9) Proposal takes a sizeable portion of green space adjacent to Latchmere Close for parking. This should be retained. 10) The development will put a strain on the access to Latchmere Close and will result in a detrimental impact on pedestrian safety, particularly for children. 11) Anti-social behaviour from proposed social-rented occupiers. 12) Overdevelopment that will have an impact on protected badgers, birds and bats dwelling on site and the adjacent common. 18. 4 comments have been received from local residents: 1) Mature trees should not be removed, particularly when there are nesting birds in the area. 2) Hopeful that street lighting in Latchmere Close can be restored and that progress can be made on adoption of Latchmere Close to manage maintenance of the road and lighting in the future. 3) Garth Road should not be used as a vehicular access, as currently proposed. 4) No vehicular access to Latchmere Close from Ann Boleyn Walk shall be created. 5) The end of Latchmere Close should be improved to deal with increased foot and bike traffic. 6) A second access should be provided from Latchmere Lane. 7) Clarification sought on road ownership. 19. Environment Agency : No objection subject to conditions regarding surface water run-off, potential contamination and surface water drainage. 20. Thames Water : No objection raised. Provision should be made for surface water drainage and the scheme shall be designed for Thames Water’s minimum water pressure. 21. Sport England : No comment. 22. Natural England : No objection. 23. London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority : No objection 24. Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer : A total of 141 parking spaces would be the maximum required by the London Plan. The applicant is providing 146 spaces which is acceptable for this scheme. 25. Vehicular access will be provided to the proposed houses in the Royal Borough of Kingston via a new access from Latchmere Lane. Based on other similar sites, it is anticipated to generate an additional 45 to 55 additional vehicle movements during peak hours, which is less than 1 vehicle per minute. According to the submitted report it is estimated that 63% will be using Latchmere lane / Tudor Drive junction. The existing survey for this junction shows that, this junction has potential capacity to deal with the additional traffic movements, although regular users of this junction will see some delay to their journey. A contribution from the applicant would allow for highway enhancement at the Tudor Drive / Latchmere Lane junction. 26. An off-street car club space has been suggested by the applicants, although this would have an impact on off-street parking in the area, which is under pressure. A car club space within the development could be a better solution. 27. Pedestrian routes are proposed that connect in with the surrounding roads, the nearby shopping parade in Tudor Drive and surrounding public transport. The potential to enhance cycle routes from the site into major destinations such as Kingston and Richmond Town centres should be fully explored. 28. This site is currently only accessed by the narrow Church Road and is likely therefore to create disruption during construction of this development. A Framework Demolition and Construction Management Plan has been submitted. It is recommended that a Construction Method Statement should be approved and implemented prior to commencement of development. 29. Designing out crime officer : Main concerns: 1) The alleyway from Ann Boleyn’s Walk/ Latchmere Close has two dog legs and should be redesigned to be as straight, wide, overlooked and as well lit as possible; 2) The rear boundaries of the units adjacent to Ham Common Conservation Area are exposed and would therefore require a more robust defensive barrier with additional deterrent features. 30. RBK Housing Services : The proposal is not policy compliant in terms of affordable housing provision although still awaiting the results of the independent viability assessment. The mix/split is acceptable and exceeds 70/30 affordable rent/intermediate. Size of the properties are acceptable. Query whether off-site parking is proposed for the affordable housing. 31. Environmental Control : No objection subject to informative regarding working hours; Contamination risk is low, however, a condition regarding stopping work and carrying out investigation regarding any unexpected contamination and subsequently implemented should be added; The Energy Centre of the CHP Plant shall be at least 5dBA lower than the existing background noise. 32. Tree and Landscape Officer : Tree choice well considered except outside No.20-23. An Arboricultural Method Statement should be provided to ensure protection of existing TPO trees. All hard surfacing, where possible, should be made fully permeable. 33. Sustainability Officer : New build houses: Code 4 Housing proposed. Further emissions reductions should be investigated with a full range of renewable technologies taken into account. Latchmere House refurbishment: commendable level of sustainability to be secured by conditions relating to BREEAM excellent certification and to ensure the development will achieve 40% CO2 emissions reduction beyond Building Regulations Part L 2010. No District Heating Network proposed or required.

ASSESSMENT

The main considerations material to the determination of this application are:

• Principle of Proposed Development • Impact on Character of Area • Impact on Neighbour’s Residential Amenity • Highways and Parking • Trees/landscaping/ biodiversity • Legal Agreements • Sustainability • Other Material Considerations

Principle of Proposed Development

34. The site was previously used as a Remand Centre (Use Class C2A Secure Residential Accommodation). There is no policy protection for the existing use and therefore in principle there is no objection to the loss of the existing use. 35. Policy CS10 seeks to take advantage of opportunities to deliver new housing with the current target to achieve 375 new units a year. The site is located within a residential area which consists of semi-detached, terraced and detached houses. The principle of residential accommodation is supported in principle by the Planning Brief on this site which states that the development should deliver a mix of uses including a range of high quality family housing and affordable homes. No community floorspace has been proposed as part of this development, although a contribution would be made as part of the Section 106 agreement on this site. 36. Policy DM13 states that housing developments should incorporate a mix of unit sizes and provide a minimum of 30% of dwellings as 3 or more bedroom units. This should be exceeded on sites particularly suited to larger family housing. Within the whole site across both boroughs, 63 out of 89 units are 3 bed units or more, which represents 71%. All of the 31 units in the Royal Borough of Kingston are 3 bed units or more. The proposed mix of units therefore complies with this policy. All of the proposed units will exceed the London Plan minimum standards for 3 and 4 bedroom houses. 37. Policy 3.4 of the London Plan, taking into account local context and character and public transport capacity, seeks to optimise housing output for different types of location within the relevant density range. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level of 1b (Very Poor) and is a suburban location. The London Plan’s density range for a site with these characteristics is 150- 200 habitable rooms per hectare and 35-55 units per hectare (for 3.8- 4.6 habitable rooms per unit). Based on the part of the development within the Royal Borough of Kingston, the proposed habitable rooms per hectare is calculated as 137 habitable rooms per hectare and 24 units per hectare (although the range of habitable rooms per unit is 6-8). The overall density for the combined scheme across both sites is 30 units per hectare (not including the open space parts of the site). The density of the scheme would therefore fall below the levels within the London Plan and according to the London Plan policy 3.4 should therefore be resisted. Policy Guidance 4 of the Council’s Residential Design SPD states that where residential development is proposed above or below the prevailing density, developers should demonstrate how the design of their development accords with the prevailing development typology. The density of the proposal is broadly similar to the surrounding area within the Royal Borough of Kingston, so although not in accordance with the density matrix, the development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding area. 38. Policy CS10 seeks to maximise the delivery of affordable housing. Policy DM15 requires 50% of the units to be provided as affordable housing and proposals departing from these requirements will be expected to justify any lower provision through the submission of a financial appraisal. The planning brief states that the site should be viewed as a whole to make the best use of land and to ensure that each borough is not disadvantaged in provision of these planning obligations. A total of 34 affordable housing units are proposed consisting of: 1) 28 affordable rent units consisting of: 8 No. 1 bedroom units; 7 No. 2 bedroom units; 10 No. 3 bedroom units; 3 No. 4 bedroom units; and 2) 6 No. 1 bedroom intermediate units. These would be provided within the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames, however, the nomination rights would be split between the two boroughs. At 38% across the two sites, the affordable housing would be below the level of 50% and therefore the Councils have commissioned a joint financial appraisal to assess whether the affordable housing has been maximised. The results of this have not yet been received. Policy DM15 seeks a tenure split of 70:30 between Social/Affordable Rent and Intermediate provision. The tenure split at 82:18 exceeds this figure and therefore complies with this part of the policy. 39. Policy CS3 states that appropriate elements of public open space should be incorporated into new developments. Policy DM13 states that appropriate amenity and play space shall be provided. London Plan policy seeks 10sqm of play space per child and it is estimated that 120 children would live in the new development generating a requirement for 1200sqm of play space. 1294sqm of formal and informal play provision will be provided on the green space adjacent to Latchmere Close. A significant area of public open space is proposed to the east of Latchmere House and a smaller space at the entrance to the development between Church Road and Latchmere Close. 40. Policy Guidance 13 of Council’s Residential Design SPD states that 50sqm of private garden should be provided per family house (+5sqm per extra bedroom over three). Rear gardens are provided for each house and in most cases meet and exceed the above standards. The terrace of 5 No. 3 bedroom houses have gardens of 45-48sqm, marginally below the 50sqm sought. 41. The site is within a low flood risk area (Flood Zone 1). Policy DM4 requires Flood Risk Assessment for major development proposals within Flood Zone 1 of one hectare or more. A number of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) features are proposed that will manage all surface water drainage on site. The site has no history of surface water flooding, and thus the SUDS measures are likely to more than adequately meet the need for floodrisk measures. The Environment Agency have no objection subject to conditions regarding surface water run-off, potential contamination and surface water drainage. 42. Policy DM1 states that development proposals for contaminated land should include remediation measures. Contamination on site is considered unlikely based on the submitted land contamination report. If contamination is encountered, development should be stopped until this is investigated and a solution found to resolve it. Impact on Character of Area

43. Policy DM10 states that development proposals will be required to incorporate principles of good design. These include respecting, maintaining or enhancing the prevailing development typology, including housing types, sizes and occupancy, the prevailing density of the area and scale, layout, height and form. The Planning Brief states that development should respond to the local character of the surrounding areas and should be of exceptional design quality respecting local character and provide for the viable reuse of Latchmere House and any other buildings identified as contributing to the character of the area and their setting should be enhanced. Latchmere House is retained, although the remaining buildings are proposed to be demolished. None of the buildings proposed to be demolished are considered to be of significant architectural merit such that they should be retained. The removal of the surrounding high security boundary will provide a significant visual benefit. The proposed new build housing consists of a mixture of terraced, semi- detached and detached houses with front and rear gardens which creates a new street incorporating a variety of hard and soft landscaping and house designs. 44. The Planning Brief states that the development should have a strong emphasis on overall open space and landscape strategy. It should enhance the existing green space network by creating a number of new high quality open spaces including formal play space, delivering strong green links and maintaining and enhancing biodiversity. The part of the proposal within the Royal Borough of Kingston would incorporate additional grassed garden areas and tree planting/ retention. Within the London Borough of Richmond open space and trees are retained and play areas incorporated.

Impact on Neighbours’ Residential Amenity

45. Policy DM10 states that development proposals should have regard to the amenities of occupants and neighbours, including in terms of privacy, outlook, sunlight/daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance. Policy Guidance 16 of the Council’s Residential Design SPD states that a separation distance of no less than 21m shall normally be maintained between facing windows of habitable rooms. The minimum distance between directly facing windows is 20.5m, although most exceed 21m. Most of the properties have gardens which back onto the existing gardens of surrounding properties. Where the side faces the end of adjoining gardens a distance of at least 4m is proposed to the end of the garden or in the case of properties at the end of Garth Road the proposed properties are to the side of the existing properties thereby limiting their impact on the amenities of surrounding occupiers in terms of sunlight, daylight and outlook.

Highways & Parking 46. Policy DM10 states that development proposals should have regard to local traffic conditions and highway safety and ensure that they are not adversely affected. Policy DM9 states that new development should not contribute to congestion or compromise highway safety. Policy CS7 states that car use should be managed to ensure sustainability, road safety and reduce congestion, including car club schemes and the provision of electric vehicle charging points and managing on and off-street parking provision to promote sustainability and residential amenity. Policy DM8 states that sustainable transport will be supported and promoted including implementation of a Travel Plan and prioritising the access needs of pedestrians and cyclists. Policy DM9 and the London Plan, as referenced in the Sustainable Transport SPD, maximum residential parking standards for 4+ bedroom units is 1.5 to 2 spaces and for 3 bedroom units is 1.5-1 per unit. All 5 bed units generally propose a garage parking space and one front garden parking space. Three of the four bedroom units would have 1 parking space and two of them would have 2 parking spaces. Two of the three bedroom houses would have two parking spaces and one would have one parking space. A total of 146 parking spaces would be the maximum required by the London Plan. The applicant is providing 141 spaces. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has confirmed that the parking and servicing arrangements are acceptable. 47. Vehicular access to the part of the site within the Royal Borough of Kingston will be provided via a new access to Latchmere Lane. Based on other similar sites, it is anticipated to generate an additional 45 to 55 additional vehicles movements during peak hours, which is less than an average of 1 vehicle per minute. According to the submitted report it is estimated that 63% of this figure will be using the Latchmere Lane / Tudor Drive junction. The existing survey for this junction shows that, this junction has potential capacity to deal with the additional traffic movements, although regular users of this junction will see some delay to their journey. A contribution from the applicant would allow for highway enhancement at the Tudor Drive/ Latchmere Lane junction, although this has not been agreed with the applicants. 48. An off-street car club space has been suggested by the applicants, although this would have an impact on off-street parking in the area, which is under pressure. A car club space within the development could be a better solution, although this has yet to be resolved. 49. Pedestrian routes are proposed that connect in with the surrounding roads, the nearby shopping parade in Tudor Drive and surrounding public transport, although some concern has been raised by the Designing Out Crime officer regarding the dog leg in the pedestrian route from the development to the end of Latchmere Close. Lighting would help improve safety and security. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has commented that the potential to enhance cycle routes from the site into major destinations such as Kingston and Richmond Town centres should be fully explored. 50. Cycle storage would be provided for the houses within cycle racks in garages or a secure cycle shed in the garden. 51. This site is currently only accessed by Church Road and may therefore create some disruption during construction of this development. A Framework Demolition and Construction Management Plan has been submitted and it is considered that a Construction Method Statement could be secured by condition and implemented prior to commencement of development.

Trees/landscaping/ biodiversity 52. Policy DM6 states that new developments should protect and promote biodiversity as part of sustainable design through the inclusion of sustainable drainage, tree planting, soft landscaping and habitat enhancement. The majority of the existing trees have been retained and new tree planting is proposed. An Arboricultural Method Statement should be provided to ensure protection of existing TPO trees during development. 53. An Ecological Assessment was submitted which has a number of conclusions. The bat emergence survey found the presence of one bat and a protected species license will be required prior to commencement of works and alternative roosting locations will need to be provided. There is some evidence that badgers may be use the site but no active Badger setts have been provided on site. There is the possibility that reptiles, newts and stag beetles may be present on site. Subject to appropriate mitigation and management the proposals would comply with council policy and relevant protected species legislation.

Legal Agreements

54. In the event of an approval, in accordance with the Council’s SPD ‘Planning Obligations’ the application would be subject to a legal agreement covering the following:

i. Affordable housing, the level of which will be subject to the outcome of the viability assessment; ii. An educational contribution of £6500 per 3 bedroom unit and £9100 per 4+ bedroom unit; iii. A health/social care contribution of £1500 per 3 bedroom unit and £2000 per 4+ bedroom unit; iv. A leisure/culture/community contribution of £650 per 3 bedroom unit and £850 per 4+ bedroom unit; v. A sustainable travel contribution of £1300 per 3 bedroom unit and £1600 per 4+ bedroom unit; vi. Travel Plan monitoring fee of £1000; vii. On-site car club provision, likely to be within London Borough of Richmond, including funding of £200 per unit to provide each unit with free car club membership for two years from first occupation (the costs would be subtracted from the sustainable transport calculations required as part of part iv); viii. On-site provision of public open space, including play provision (within London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames). If not maintained by applicant then a commuted sum to cover ten years of maintenance will be required; ix. Provision of pedestrian routes: x. Possible improvements to access road to development; xi. Submission of Construction Management Plan for approval and implementation prior to commencement of development. xii. Ensure that development is only carried out comprehensively across the boroughs of Richmond and Kingston.

Sustainability 55. Policy DM1 states that major developments should meet Code level 5 regarding energy/CO2. For the proposed new build houses Code level 4 is proposed. Further emissions reductions should be investigated with a full range of renewable technologies taken into account. Other code for Sustainable Homes categories (water, materials, surface water run-off and waste) are encouraged. 56. Policy DM2 seeks District Heating Networks in identified areas. No District Heating Network is proposed and the Sustainability Officer has confirmed that one is not required in this location.

Other Material Considerations

57. Policy DM13 states that new residential development will be expected to be designed and built to Lifetime Homes standards and ensure that at least 10% of units are wheelchair accessible or adaptable. All properties would be built to Lifetime Homes Standards and would be adaptable to wheelchair housing standards. This would be secured by condition. 58. Policy DM12 states that heritage assets should be preserved. The site is not located within an Archaeological Priority Area. On-site archaeological investigations have been carried out. No archaeological remains have been found on site and therefore no significant impact on archaeology is anticipated. 59. The majority of houses will have bin storage to the rear of the property. The mid-terrace units will have a hardwood bin store located within the front gardens integrated into the landscape design. This would be secured by condition.

BACKGROUND PAPERS held by Toby Feltham (author of this report) Tel. 020 8547 5332 Email [email protected]

Application file Relevant Committee reports and related papers/correspondence

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Ward : Tudor Description of Proposal : Erection of 31 dwellings 2/3 storeys high with access from Church Lane and Latchmere Lane, Ham as part of the creation of 89 dwelllings through the conversion and extension of Latchmere House to create 7 flats and the demolition of existing buildings and erection of 82 new dwellings in conjunction with application 14/0450/FUL in the London Borough of Richmond. Plan Type : Full Application Expiry Date : 09/05/2014

Previous Relevant History

Applicant's Plan Nos:

Arboricultural Development Report Received 07/02/2014 Aschaeological Assessment and Evaluation Received 07/02/2014 Biodiversity Report Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_001 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_002 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_011 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_012 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_013 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_014 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_016 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_017 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_018 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_019 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_021 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_023 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_024 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_025 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_101 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_102 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_104 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_111 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_112 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_113 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_114 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_115 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_116 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_117 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_118 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_201 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_202 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_203 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_204 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_205 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_206 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_207 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_208 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_209 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_210 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_211 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_212 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_213 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_214 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_215 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_216 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_217 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_218 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_231 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_232 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_234 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_235 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_236 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_237 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_238 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_239 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_240 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_301 Received 07/02/2014 BKH06_P_302 Received 07/02/2014 Consultation Statement Received 07/02/2014 Desisgn & Access Statement Received 07/02/2014 Flood Risk Assessment Received 07/02/2014 Framework Development & Construction Received 07/02/2014 Management Plan Heritage Statement Received 07/02/2014 Land Contamination & Ground Investigation Report Received 07/02/2014 Landscaping Scheme Received 07/02/2014 Noise Impact Statement Received 07/02/2014 Planning Statement Received 07/02/2014 Schedule of accommodation Received 07/02/2014 Schedule of Accommodation whole site Received 07/02/2014 Survey of outbuildings to be demolished Received 07/02/2014 Sustainability and energy statement Received 07/02/2014 Transport Assessment and Framework Travel Plan Received 07/02/2014 Utilities Assessment Received 07/02/2014

Development Plan : Mayor for London - The London Plan Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames - Unitary Development Plan First Alteration

UDP Policies

No policies

Basic Information: