planning report PDU/1304b/01 2 May 2012 Former Hospital Site, Lower Richmond Road

in the London Borough of planning application no.2012/0758

Strategic planning application stage 1 referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008

The proposal Redevelopment of site to provide 24 apartments and a new primary school together with new access road, parking and associated works.

The applicant The applicant is Wandsworth Council Children’s Service, and the architect is Devereux Architects.

Strategic issues The proposed housing will part fund the proposed new school. Metropolitan Open Land, education, affordable housing, children’s play space, urban design and landscaping, inclusive design, sustainable development, biodiversity, employment and training, transport and parking are the key strategic issues that are relevant to this planning application.

Recommendation That Wandsworth Council be advised that the application does not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 92 of this report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 93 of this report could address these deficiencies. The application does not need to be referred back to the Mayor if the Council resolve to refuse permission, but it must be referred back if the Council resolve to grant permission.

Context

1 On 3 April 2012 the Mayor of London received documents from Wandsworth Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 14 May 2012 to provide the Council with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under Category 3D of the Schedule to the Order 2008: ”Development – (a) on land allocated as Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land in the development

page 1 plan, in proposals for such a plan, or in proposals for the alteration or replacement of such a plan; and (b) which would involve the construction of a building with a floor space of more than 1000 square metres or a material change in the use of such building.”

3 Once the Council has resolved to determine the application, it is required to refer it back to the Mayor for his decision, as to whether to direct refusal or allow the Council to determine it itself, unless otherwise advised. In this instance if the Council resolves to refuse permission it need not refer the application back to the Mayor.

4 The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Site description

5 The former Putney Hospital site, which has an area of 1.23 hectares, is located about 1.5km to the north-west of Putney town centre and it is situated to the north of Lower Richmond Road, opposite the junction with Queen’s Ride. It is surrounded on three sides by Putney Lower Common. Commondale, which is predominantly lined on the eastern side with two-storey terraced houses and flats, is located to the east of the site, separated by a strip of Common land. The Putney Town Bowling and Social Club, accessed from Commondale, are located to the north of the site with flats fronting onto Home Way beyond.

6 The existing buildings on the site comprise the predominantly 3-4 storey former hospital buildings and the 3-storey nurses accommodation, much of which has encroached over the years onto Common land. The hospital had an accident and emergency department until the 1980s and the site has been vacant since 1999.

Figure 1: The application site as existing: Source – applicant’s doc

7 As shown in Figure 1, the existing site has three points of vehicular access, two of which are obtained from Lower Richmond Road and one from Commondale. Since the closure of the hospital, these have been fenced off. An area of car parking and hardstanding is provided to the front of the site, from the frontage of Lower Richmond Road and wrapping around the east of the building.

8 The main site is not located within the designated Metropolitan Open Land (MOL), but the site is surrounded by MOL and the land between the site and the Lower Richmond Road (over which the proposed access road is located) is included within MOL.

page 2 9 The site is not located within a conservation area, but Commondale, to the east of the site, is located within the designated Putney Lower Common Conservation Area. There are no statutorily listed buildings within, or adjacent to the site.

10 The development site is located at the junction of the B306, Lower Richmond Road with Commondale, which are both borough roads. The nearest section of the Transport for London Road Network is the A205, Upper Richmond Road, 600m to the south. The nearest section of the Strategic Road Network is the A219, Putney High Street, 1km to the east.

11 The site records a poor public transport accessibility level of 2, (where 1 is very low and 6 is the highest, most accessible).

Details of the proposal

12 The current proposal is for demolition of existing buildings and erection of a 2-form entry (420 pupils) primary school, and 24 flats along with associated access road, 24 basement car parking spaces and landscaping.

13 A new access road is proposed, which will provide access from Lower Richmond Road to the school and its associated parking and drop-off/pick-up area and the proposed apartments. The access road also includes a turning circle. Although the proposed new buildings are located outside the designated Metropolitan Open Land (MOL), the proposed access road is located in the MOL.

14 The proposed residential accommodation will be broadly in line with the previously approved scheme with a four storey apartment block proposed on the northern part of the site with basement car parking.

15 The 24 apartments will comprise the following mix of units:

 4 x 1-bed apartments

 16 x 2-bed apartments

 4 x 3-bed apartments Case history

16 On 25 January 2012 a pre-planning application meeting was held at City Hall comprising officers from the GLA, the applicant and the Council. The scheme was broadly supported.

17 Planning permission was granted in July 2010 for the redevelopment of the site comprising: “Demolition of all existing buildings. Erection of a Primary Care Centre (with caretakers flat) and a residential block comprising 24 flats. Formation of a new vehicular access off Lower Richmond Road, associated car parking and landscaping, and relocation of electricity sub station.” Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

18 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 MOL London Plan;  Education London Plan;  Housing London Plan; Housing SPG; Interim Housing SPG; draft Housing SPG; Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy; Providing

page 3 for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG; draft Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG;  Affordable housing London Plan; Housing SPG; Interim Housing SPG; draft Housing SPG; draft Affordable Housing SPG; Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy; draft Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan  Urban design London Plan;  Access London Plan; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM)  Biodiversity/Geodiversity London Plan; the Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy; draft Tree and Woodland Strategies; London’s Foundations (Geodiversity) SPG  Sustainable development London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy  Employment London Plan;  CIL/Crossrail London Plan; Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy; Crossrail SPG  Transport/Parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; Land for Transport Functions SPG, draft Land for Industry and Transport SPG

19 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the 2010 Wandsworth Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the 2011 London Plan.

20 The following are material planning considerations:

 The National Planning Policy Framework (DCLG, March 2012).

 The draft Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan.

 Wandsworth Management Policies DPD and the Site Specific Allocations DPD. Principle of use – education and residential uses on MOL

21 The existing buildings and the proposed ones are outside the Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) designation but the existing hospital access and service roads and frontage car park are within it and the proposed provision of the access road over MOL makes the proposal referable as detailed above.

22 London Plan Policy 7.17 ‘Metropolitan Open Land’ states that the “The strongest protection should be given to London’s Metropolitan Open Land and inappropriate development refused, except in very special circumstances, giving the same level of protection as in the Green Belt. Essential ancillary facilities for appropriate uses will only be acceptable where they maintain the openness of MOL.” The access road is an inappropriate development in the MOL.

23 However, the access road, crossing the MOL and predominately running across an existing hardstanding, is essential to allow the development to proceed. Additionally, it is recognised that the development would reduce the overall amount of built environment on the site and the road is constructed sympathetically. Further, the return of, and landscaping of much of the hard surfacing surrounding the existing buildings to the Common and the frontage area, would enhance its

page 4 appearance and visual amenity. The development would also not detract from the character and appearance of the surrounding MOL. These arguements demonstrate the very special circumstances to justify the inappropriate development and the proposal is acceptable.

Education

24 In relation to the provision of educational facilities, Policy 3.18 'Education facilities' of the London Plan states that “Development proposals which enhance education and skills provision will be supported, including new build, expansion of existing facilities or change of use to educational purposes”.

25 In addition the National Planning Policy Framework in section 8 'promoting healthy communities' states that 'The Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. Local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education.'

26 Although the site is allocated within the Site Specific Allocations DPD (SSAD) for a Primary Care Centre, residential development and the retention of community facilities, it is understood that the Council is very supportive of replacing the Primary Care Centre (PCT) element of the consented scheme with the school proposal, as a new PCT has already been built at Putney High Street in close proximity to the site. Further, it is acknowledged that there is a need for additional school places in Wandsworth. Therefore, the school element of the proposal is supported.

Affordable housing

27 London Plan Policy 3.12 requires borough councils to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on individual private residential and mixed-use schemes. In doing so each council should have regard to its own overall target for the amount of affordable housing provision. This target should take account of the requirements of London Plan Policy 3.11, which include the strategic target that 60% of new affordable housing should be for social rent and 40% for intermediate rent or sale. The Mayor has published an early minor alteration to the London Plan to address the introduction of affordable rent, with further guidance set out in a draft Affordable Rent SPG. With regard to tenure split the Mayor’s position is that both social rent and affordable rent should be included within the 60%.

28 While the Mayor has set a strategic investment benchmark that across the affordable rent programme as a whole rents should average 65% of market rents, this is an average investment output benchmark for this spending round and not a planning policy target to be applied to negotiations on individual schemes.

29 Policy 3.12 is supported by paragraph 3.71, which urges borough councils to take account of economic viability when estimating the appropriate amount of affordable provision. The ‘Three Dragons’ development control toolkit or other recognised appraisal methodology is recommended for this purpose. The results of a toolkit appraisal might need to be independently verified. Paragraph 3.75 highlights the potential need for re-appraising the viability of schemes prior to implementation.

30 The Council’s adopted Core Strategy, policy IS5, sets a borough wide target of 3,725 affordable homes up to 2016/17 and that on individual sites the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing will be sought with a minimum target of 33%. The policy also requires that a viability appraisal should be submitted where less than 50% affordable housing is proposed.

page 5 31 The applicant has stated that as per the previously approved scheme, the proposed housing will part fund the proposed community element, in this case, a new school. A financial viability report has been submitted demonstrating that it would not be viable to provide an element of affordable housing within the residential element. The report demonstrates that the costs and profits related to the scheme are reasonable and are comparable to other recent schemes. As such this approach is acceptable. Housing choice

32 London Plan Policy 3.8 and the associated supplementary planning guidance promote housing choice and seek a balanced mix of unit sizes in new developments. The London Housing Strategy sets out strategic housing requirements and Policy 1.1C of the Strategy includes a target for 42% of social rented homes to have three or more bedrooms.

33 As previously indicated, no affordable housing is provided within the proposed development. Nonetheless, a significant proportion (almost 17%) are three-bedroom units as shown in the table below, and this is acceptable.

unit type number % of total one-bedroom flats 4 16.7% two-bedroom flats 16 66.6% three-bedroom flats 4 16.7% total 24 100

Housing quality & space standards

34 Policy 3.5 of the London Plan introduces a new policy on the quality and design of housing developments. Part A of the policy states that housing developments should be of the highest quality internally, externally and in relation to the wider environment. Part C of the policy states that new dwellings should generally conform with the dwelling space standards set out in Table 3.3, have adequately sized rooms and convenient and efficient room layouts. Part E of the policy states that the Mayor will provide guidance on implementation of this policy including on housing design for all tenures.

35 All the dwellings meet the space standards set out in the London Plan. Amenity and children’s play space

36 Policy 3.6 of the London Plan sets out that “development proposals that include housing should make provision for play and informal recreation, based on the expected child population generated by the scheme and an assessment of future needs.” Using the methodology within the Mayor’s supplementary planning guidance ‘Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation’ it is anticipated that there will be approximately 5 children within the development. The guidance sets a benchmark of 10 sq.m. of useable child playspace to be provided per child, with under-5 child playspace provided on-site. As such the development should make provision for 50 sq.m. of playspace.

37 This development will provide 35 sq.m. of children’s play space for the residential element. This exceeds the requirement for young children (under-5), based on a total child yield of 5

page 6 children. Given that the site is located adjacent to the Common and older children will have direct access to the Common for informal recreation, the proposal is acceptable.

38 It is also noted that each residential unit will have access to a private balcony comprising at least 5.7 sq.m. in area, but with over 70% of the units having private balconies of between 10 sq.m. and 27.5 sq.m, and the 3-bed units having generous private terraces of 68 sq.m. In addition, all flats will have access to the communal terraces and landscaped ground floor gardens.

39 The scheme has roof top play space and multi-use games area (MUGA) for the school, enclosed by a wall, giving the impression of a three storey building. It is likely to be orientated on a north-south axis, with play space/amenity space also provided at ground level to the west and north of the proposed school.

Urban design

40 Good design is central to all objectives of the London Plan, in particular the objective to create a city of diverse, strong, secure and accessible neighbourhoods to which Londoners feel attached whatever their origin, background, age or status. Policies contained within chapter seven specifically look to promote development that reinforces or enhances the character, legibility, permeability and accessibility of neighbourhoods. It sets out a series of overarching principles and specific design policies related to site layout, scale, height and massing, internal layout and visual impact as ways of achieving this.

41 The development has been commented on at pre-application stage, where it was outlined that the scheme presented no strategic design concerns. The proposed development consists of a separate residential and primary school building surrounded by open space on all sides. The layout of buildings on the site is driven by the extant planning permission, the constrained site, and the location of existing development. Both buildings are served by a single soft surfaced road that terminates on a turning head.

The School Element

Figure 2: Proposed school visualisation – Source: applicant’s design and access statement

42 The design of the school is well thought out. The innovative provision of play space on the roof overcomes the restricted area of the site and has the potential to provide good quality play

page 7 space which is welcomed. The applicant has provided a range of convincing examples of where this has been done before which give assurance of its potential usability.

The Residential Element

Figure 3: Existing nursing home vs proposed apartment elevations – Source: Applicant’s doc

43 The design of the residential building has only changed from the previous application with regards to its elevation and materials. The modifications to this make it more in keeping with the rural nature of the site and help relate it to the school, which is welcomed.

Visual impact

44 Views of the development have been provided. These illustrate how the development is not visible from the MOL because of the thick and tall line of trees enclosing the site. This ensures it will have no significant visual impact over it, which is also welcomed.

Conclusion

45 The scheme is in line with design related policies of the London Plan and officers are satisfied that the proposed development does not present any strategic design concerns. Access

46 London Plan Policy 7.2 seeks to ensure all future development meets the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion, and requires design and access statements submitted with planning applications to explain how the principles of inclusive design, including the specific needs of disabled people, have been integrated into the proposed development. London Plan Policy 3.8 expects 10% of all new housing to be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for wheelchair users.

47 The applicant has set out its approach to access and inclusion within the design and access statement, and has provided drawings demonstrating that all the residential units meet the Lifetime Home standards and that the apartments are designed to allow lift access from either the undercroft car park or ‘street’ level. Level thresholds are provided throughout and 10% of apartments will be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for wheelchair users. (Two of the apartments, a two-bedroom apartment on the Ground Floor and a 3-bedroom apartment on the First Floor have been designed as ‘wheelchair accessible housing’, and 3no. three-bedroom units could also be easily adapted for wheelchair users if required at a later date.)

page 8

Figure 4 : Samples of wheelchair accessible units – Source: applicant’s design and access statement

48 The drawings demonstrate that inclusive design is incorporated within the scheme; internal layouts and circulation spaces including wheelchair accessible routes of the public realm, Blue Badge parking (at least 10% of all parking spaces will be reserved for disabled badge holders designed to BS8300 standards, wheelchair accessible WCs, means of escape and refuge spaces. Biodiversity

49 Although the site is not a designated nature conservation, an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (EP1) of Putney Hospital was undertaken. Using desk based data in conjunction with field based surveying, the potential for the site to provide protected species habitat was assessed. The EP1 identified that the site contains potential habitat for bat, reptile and badger species. These protected species surveys were subsequently undertaken.

50 The protected species surveys identified that the site is not currently considered to support a bat roost. However, bats are active in the area, and foraging activity was identified on the western and northern perimeters of the site.

51 The reptile survey did not identify presence of any reptile species on/next to site. The badger surveys identified that the site is not used by badgers. However, fox activity was identified in the northern courtyard, with access to and from site gained via holes underneath the hoarding in the north and west of the site. The survey also identified that trees/shrubs/buildings have the potential to provide nesting bird habitat, and therefore, standard due diligence in respect of nesting birds has been advised.

52 There are 3 trees covered by Tree Protection Orders within the development site. Of these, one has been identified as being affected by the proposed development, and is proposed to be felled. The remainder of the trees are to be protected. Approximately 30 new trees will be planted which will provide screening and add to biodiversity. This approach is acceptable and the provision of the 30 new trees should be secured via condition.

53 The report on the ecological survey concluded that any proposed redevelopment presents an opportunity to enhance an ecologically poor site through enhancement initiatives. It is recommended that additional ecological enhancements should be included as part of the landscaping scheme. This can be through utilisation of native species of tree and shrub in planting, and additional habitat creation through inclusion of bird and bat boxes as appropriate. These recommendations should be secured through conditions.

page 9 Sustainable development

54 London Plan policies 5.2, 5.6 and 5.7 focus on mitigation of climate change and require a reduction in a development’s carbon dioxide emissions through the use of passive design, energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. The London Plan requires developments to make the fullest contribution to tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions, adopting sustainable design and construction measures and prioritising decentralised energy, including renewables.

Overview of proposals

55 The applicant has broadly followed the energy hierarchy. Sufficient information has been provided to understand the proposals as a whole. The proposals are broadly acceptable; however, further information is required before the carbon savings can be verified.

Climate change mitigation

Energy efficiency standards

56 A range of passive design features and demand reduction measures are proposed to reduce the carbon emissions of the proposed development. Both air permeability and heat loss parameters will be improved beyond the minimum backstop values required by building regulations. Other features include energy efficient lighting. The demand for cooling will be minimised through the use of high performance glazing and by maximising natural ventilation.

57 Based on the information provided, the proposed development does not appear to achieve any carbon savings from energy efficiency alone compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development. Further discussion is needed around the potential for further energy efficiency savings given that other recent school applications have met this requirement.

BE CLEAN

District heating

58 The applicant has carried out an investigation and there are no existing or planned district heating networks within the vicinity of the proposed development.

59 The applicant has provided a commitment to ensuring that the development is designed to allow future connection to a district heating network should one become available in the longer term. The applicant is proposing to install a site heat network linking all the apartments. The applicant has however discounted connection to the school although it has made a commitment to ensuring the network is capable of connecting to the school at a later date.

60 The requirement to future proof the development both for district heating connection and connection to the school at a later date should be secured via condition.

Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

61 The applicant has investigated the feasibility of CHP. However, due the intermittent nature of the heat load, CHP is not proposed. This is accepted in this instance.

page 10 BE GREEN

Renewable energy technologies

62 The applicant has investigated the feasibility of a range of renewable energy technologies and is proposing to install 11.25kWp photovoltaic panel (PV) on the roof of the school and (4.5kWp) on the roof of the residences. The applicant should confirm the area of PV to be provided in sqm.

63 Drawings showing potential PV locations have been provided. A reduction in regulated carbon dioxide emissions of 7 tonnes per annum (6%) will be achieved through this third element of the energy hierarchy.

OVERALL CARBON SAVINGS

64 The estimated regulated carbon emissions of the development are 114 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year after the cumulative effect of energy efficiency measures, CHP and renewable energy has been taken into account. This equates to a reduction of 9% per annum of carbon dioxide per year in regulated emissions compared to a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development.

65 The on-site carbon dioxide savings fall short of the targets within Policy 5.2 of the London Plan. If this remains the case after further discussions on energy savings the applicant should ensure the short fall in carbon dioxide reductions is met off site.

66 The applicant, in liaison with the Council, will need to arrange for a cash in lieu contribution to be paid towards off-site carbon dioxide reduction projects in the borough. This would typically be based on the working assumption of £46/tonne/carbon dioxide over 30 years applied to the shortfall expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide per annum. Based on the information submitted with the application GLA officers estimate that the contribution would be approximately £33,672. Discussions will be needed with the Council on what this contribution will be spent on.

Climate change adaptation

67 London Plan policy 5.3 Sustainable Design and Construction seeks to ensure future developments meet the highest standards of sustainable design and construction. Specific policies relate to overheating (5.9), green roofs (5.11), urban greening (5.10), flood risk (5.12) and sustainable drainage (5.13), water (5.14 and 5.15) and waste (5.17). Further guidance is provided in the London Plan Sustainable Design and Construction SPG.

68 The sustainability statement confirms that living roofs to mitigate run-off and enhance biodiversity is incorporated in the scheme. The accompanied flood risk report demonstrates that the development will make use of the latest SUDS designs which will help reduce overall flood risk. These measures are welcomed. Employment and training

69 Continued investment in the skills of London's current workforce will ensure that skills and training provision is tailored to meet current employer demand. The GLA is committed to develop the skills that London needs to sustain economic growth, improving individual's employability skills in order to create a positive impact on the skills levels within all of London's communities.

70 Consequently, and in accordance with London Plan 2011 Policy 4.12 ‘Improving opportunities for all‘, the applicant should confirm that the proposals will deliver a number of

page 11 employment opportunities for local residents as required by the London Plan policy. The proposed scheme should incorporate construction training.

Transport for London’s comments

71 Bus routes 22, 485 and 265 operate within a 400m walking distance of the site. The closest London Underground station is , which is served by the District Line. The closest Overground rail station is Putney, which serves Junction, Waterloo and other suburban stations.

Car Parking

72 Twenty five car parking spaces are proposed, one per unit and a further visitor space. Three of the car parking spaces (including the visitor space) will be designed for disabled users. Although a lower level of parking would be preferred this level is in line with London Plan policy.

73 For any car parking that is ultimately provided, 20% (5 spaces) of all spaces must be for electric vehicles with an additional 20% (5 spaces) passive provision for electric vehicles in the future.

74 For school use, five staff parking spaces and a further space for disabled users will be provided, which is acceptable. For the residential use, at least 10% of all parking spaces will be reserved for disabled badge holders designed to BS8300 standards.

Highway Access

75 Access to the school and residential units will be taken from the newly created joint access road off Lower Richmond Road, a borough road. This access road will also be used for refuse and servicing vehicles and by coaches when needed to collect pupils.

76 A pupil pick-up/ drop-off area will be provided within the site from an informal lay-by located adjacent to the school building.

Cycling

77 Cycle parking for the residential development will be provided in the basement car park and will be provided in accordance with the London Plan standards.

78 For the school use, only 21 cycle spaces are proposed for the pupils and only 8 for staff and visitors, which is a significant under provision. Table 6.3 of the London Plan contains ‘Cycle parking standards’, which indicates 1 space per 10 staff or students. Therefore, for 420 pupils, 42 spaces must be provided. It is important that cycling facilities are provided for pupils to encourage travel by this sustainable and healthy mode of transport. In addition, it is important to encourage pupils at this young age to cycle, so that they are more likely to cycle as they get older. Further monitoring should be undertaken which recommends further increases should demand dictate.

79 It is estimated 75 staff will be working at the school; therefore 8 spaces are needed for staff and a further allocation for visitors. In addition, cycle parking for staff should not be in the form of a Sheffield stand. Cycle parking for staff should be in a sheltered, secure and accessible location. In addition, shower facilities and locker rooms should be provided. Spaces for visitors should be provided in addition to the 8 spaces for staff. Funding should be made available through the school travel plan to assist staff to purchase and maintain cycles to promote sustainable transport modes.

page 12 Pedestrians

80 A new pedestrian crossing is proposed over Lower Richmond Road between the new site access and the priority junction with Putney Common. It is not clear what type of crossing facility is proposed. Nevertheless, in accordance with the London Plan policy 6.11 ‘Smoothing Traffic Flow and Congestion’, any new signalised crossing point will need to satisfy TfL’s approval procedure and will be considered against the need to balance different modes of transport.

81 Pupil entrances are proposed at the north and south of the building. Pedestrian footways will be provided from Lower Richmond Road into the site and will link to both pupil entrances via a covered walkway adjacent to the main school building.

Buses

82 TfL is satisfied that the trip generation for buses will not have a significant impact on the capacity for services in the local area.

Travel Plan

83 The travel plan has been reviewed and is considered generally acceptable. The travel plan and any funding measures should be secured via condition.

Freight

84 TfL welcomes the proposed submission of a construction logistics plan. The CLP should be submitted and approved by the Council via a planning condition, which should seek to minimise highway and traffic impact to the highway network during the course of construction.

85 TfL welcomes the proposed submission of a delivery and servicing plan. The DSP should also be submitted and approved by the Council via a section 106 agreement, which should demonstrate how to reduce the number of trips, particularly during peak hours and identify where safe and legal loading can take place.

Traffic Management Act

86 Should this application be granted planning permission, the developer and their representatives are reminded that this does not discharge the requirements under the Traffic Management Act 2004. Formal notifications and approval may be needed for both the permanent highway scheme and any temporary highway works required during the construction phase of the development.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

87 In accordance with London Plan policy 8.3, ‘Community Infrastructure Levy’, and following consultation on both a Preliminary Draft, and then a Draft Charging Schedule, the Mayor‘s CIL came into effect on 1st April 2012. The proposed development is within the London Borough of Wandsworth where the proposed Mayoral charge is £50 per square metre.

Summary

88 In order to ensure that the proposed development complies with the transport policies in the London Plan, contributions towards the Mayoral CIL are required. In addition, cycle parking for the school must meet the minimum requirements outlined in the London Plan. The school travel

page 13 plan and delivery and servicing plan should be secured via a section 106 agreement. Electric vehicle charging points and a construction logistics plan should be secured by condition. Local planning authority’s position

89 Wandsworth officers have yet to confirm their position. Legal considerations

90 Under the arrangements set out in Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor is required to provide the local planning authority with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. Unless notified otherwise by the Mayor, the Council must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order if it subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the application, in order that the Mayor may decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged or direct the Council under Article 6 of the Order to refuse the application. There is no obligation at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions regarding a possible direction, and no such decision should be inferred from the Mayor’s statement and comments. Financial considerations

91 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

92 London Plan policies on Metropolitan Open Land, education, housing/affordable housing, children’s play space, biodiversity, urban design and landscaping, inclusive design, sustainable development, employment and training, transport and parking. The application complies with some of these policies but not with others, for the following reasons:  Metropolitan Open Land: The applicant has demonstrated that very special circumstances exist that justify the development.  Education: The proposed school element of the scheme is supported.  Affordable housing: No affordable housing is proposed this has been justified by the viability assessment which was submitted with the application.  Housing quality/space standards: All residential units meet the requirements of the London Plan.  Children’s play space: The proposal provides sufficient play space.  Biodiversity: The recommended measures should be secured through conditions.  Urban design: There are no strategic concerns; the scheme meets design policies of the London Plan.  Inclusive design: The proposal meets the requirements of the London Plan.  Sustainable development: The proposal does not currently comply with the London Plan. Further discussions and commitments are needed.

 Employment and training: Employment and training strategy is required.  Transport and parking: Contributions towards the Mayoral CIL are required. Cycle parking for the school must meet the minimum requirements outlined in the London Plan.

page 14 The school travel plan and delivery and servicing plan, electric vehicle charging points and a construction logistics plan should be secured by condition.

93 Whilst the application is broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, the following changes might, however, remedy the above-mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan:  Sustainable development: Further measures to increase the energy efficiency of the building should be investigated and committed to. If this is not possible the applicant, in liaison with the Council, will need to arrange for cash in lieu contribution to be paid towards off-site carbon dioxide reduction projects in the borough. The requirement for futureproofing the development both for district heating connection and connection to the school at a later date should be secured via condition. The applicant should confirm the area of PV’s proposed in sq.m.

 Employment and training: Agree to provide the strategy.  Transport and parking: Address the concerns detailed above.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Colin Wilson, Senior Manager - Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Tefera Tibebe, Case Officer 020 7983 4312 email [email protected]

page 15