DOCSLIB.ORG

Richard Leigh, Committee Co-Ordinator, Committee Team, Room 203,HTH, Tel: 8753 2076 Fax: 8753 2138 E-Mail: [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Richard Leigh, Committee Co-Ordinator, Committee Team, Room 203,HTH, Tel: 8753 2076 Fax: 8753 2138 E-Mail: Richard.Leigh@Lbhf.Gov.Uk PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE TUESDAY 27 JANUARY 2004 AT 7.00PM HAMMERSMITH TOWN HALL, KING STREET, HAMMERSMITH, LONDON W6 9JU. MEMBERSHIP: Administration: Opposition: Cllr Wesley Harcourt (Chair) Cllr Frances Stainton Cllr Charlie Treloggan (Vice Chair) Cllr Will Bethell Cllr Colin Aherne Cllr Caroline Donald Cllr Michael Cartwright Cllr Greg Hands Cllr Jafar Khaled Cllr Dame Sally Powell OTHER COUNCILLORS' REQUESTS Councillors Chris Allen, Brendan Bird, Huw Davies, Ivan Gibbons Alex Karmel, Antony Lillis, Emile Al-Uzaizi CONTACT OFFICER: Richard Leigh, Committee Co-ordinator, Committee Team, Room 203,HTH, Tel: 8753 2076 Fax: 8753 2138 e-mail: [email protected] Members of the public are welcome to attend. A loop system for hearing impairment is provided, along with disabled access to the building. For queries concerning a specific planning application, please call the case officer. PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE ITEM PAGE 1. MINUTES OF THE PAC MEETING ON 16 DECEMBER 2003 Circulated separately To agree and sign the above minutes as accurate. 2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST If a councillor has any prejudicial or personal interest in a particular report they should declare an interest. A councillor should not take part in the discussion or vote on a matter in which they have a prejudicial interest. They should withdraw from the meeting whilst the matter is under consideration unless the disability to participate has been removed by the Standards Committee or unless a relevant exemption applies under the Council’s Code of Conduct. 4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 1 5. TREE PRESERVATION ORDER 79 ****************************** London Borough Of Hammersmith & Fulham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Planning Applications Committee Agenda for 27th January 2004 Index of Applications, Enforcement Actions, Advertisements etc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WARD: SITE ADDRESS: PAGE REG NO: Avonmore And 120 Edith Road London W14 9AP 2 Brook Green 2003/03001/FUL Fulham Reach Brandenburgh House 116 Fulham Palace 8 2003/02071/FUL Road London W6 9HH Fulham Reach Brandenburgh House 116 Fulham Palace 17 2003/02108/LBC Road London W6 9HH Addison 45 Batoum Gardens London W6 7QB 20 2003/02940/FUL College Park And 9-127 Heathstan Road London W12 0RB 25 Old Oak 2003/03176/FUL College Park And 9-127 Heathstan Road London W12 0RB 42 Old Oak 2003/03180/CAC Ravenscourt Park 15 Ravenscourt Square London W6 0TW 45 2003/02481/FUL Shepherds Bush Mecca Bingo Hall 58 Shepherd's Bush Green 52 Green London W12 8QE 2002/02875/FUL Shepherds Bush Mecca Bingo Hall 58 Shepherd's Bush Green 71 Green London W12 8QE 2002/02959/LBC Palace Riverside 58 Inglethorpe Street London SW6 6NX 74 2003/02192/FUL Page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ward: Avonmore And Brook Green Site Address: 120 Edith Road London W14 9AP © Crown Copyright. All Rights Reserved. London Borough Hammersmith and Fulham LA086398 For identification purposes only - do not scale.. Reg. No: Case Officer; 2003/03001/FUL Mr Laurence O'Keeffe Date valid: 10.11.2003 Conservation Area: Gunter Estate Committee Date: 27.01.2004 Page 2 Applicant: Zylann Properties Ltd C/o Fenchurch Trust PO Box 61 19 Seaton Place St Helier Jersey JE4 8PZ Description: Continued use of property as two self contained two bedroom flats and one self contained four bedroomed maisonette; erection of two glass screens and a railing to the flat roof at rear, first floor level in connection with the formation of a roof terrace ; retention of a door providing access to the flat roof. Drg Nos: ER.TP5 202; ER.TP5 203 Application type Full Detailed Planning Application Officer’s Recommendation That the application be approved subject to the condition(s) set out below 1 The development hereby permitted shall not commence later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date of this planning permission. Condition required to be imposed by section 91(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2 The building development shall not be erected otherwise than in accordance with the detailed drawings which have been approved unless any material alteration to these approved details has first been submitted and approved in writing by the Council. In order to ensure full compliance with the planning application hereby approved and to prevent harm arising through deviations from the approved plans, in accordance with policies EN2 and EN8 of the Unitary Development Plan. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS All Background Papers held by Nada Jocic (Ext.3340). Application form received: 10th November 2003 Drawing Nos: see above Page 3 Policy documents: Adopted Unitary Development Plan 2003. Consultation Comments Comments from: Dated: Neighbour Comments: Letters from: Dated: Flat A Basement 122 Edith Road London W14 9AP 09.12.03 Flat 1 124 Edith Road London W14 9AP 03.12.03 LETTERS FROM APPLICANT/AGENT 03.11.03, 23.12.03, 29.12.03 OTHER POLICY DOCUMENTS OTHER DOCUMENTS OFFICER'S REPORT 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Three storey property with lower ground floor on the south side of Edith Road, the property is in a mid terrace position and constructed of London stock brickwork with a slate roof. The property retains its original sash windows. It is located in the Gunter Estate Conservation Area. 1.2 Permission was granted for the use of 120 as four self-contained flats together with a rear roof extension in September 2001 (RN:2000/024123/FUL). A Certificate of Lawfulness was granted in the same month for the use of the ground floor of 118 Edith Road with the ground, first and second floor maisonette at 120 Edith Road (RN:2000/02415/FUL). In addition, permission was granted for the use of the property as two maisonettes (RN:2001/02415/FUL). 1.3 On 1st September 2003, Committee deferred a report recommending approval for the retention of a rear roof extension; installation of three rooflights on the front roofslope; alteration of the roof of the studio building to the rear of the property between upper ground and first floor levels, in Page 4 connection with the formation of a roof terrace; installation of two rooflights to roof of back addition; replacement of roof covering of studio building to rear of site with zinc roof covering (2003/01419/FUL). 1.4 Members were concerned with the inclusion of a roof terrace to the rear of the property between upper ground and first floor level. The concern was on the basis of potential noise and disturbance to neighbouring residential users of their properties as a result of its use. Matters relating to loss of privacy have been addressed with the inclusion of glazed screens to either side of the terrace and were not cited as a reason for the deferral. 1.5 Officers looked at planning appeals against refusals of permission for roof terraces over the 12 months period October 2002 to October 2003 where noise and disturbance has been cited as a reason for refusal. 11 appeals have been made during this period of which 6 (54%) have been dismissed and 5 (46%) have been allowed. All the terraces concerned were significantly larger than that proposed, several involving the entire roof of a two or three storey rear addition. The majority of those involving the whole of the roof were dismissed. 1.6 Inspectors have taken different views on some issues raised by terraces. For example, at 39 Brookville Road (appeal dismissed) the Inspector concluded that the suggested fence and trellis screen would do little in the way of suppressing noise, while at 98 Burnthwaite Road (appeal allowed) and 39A Wardo Avenue (appeal allowed), the Inspectors took the view that a fence or other screen would limit any spread of noise from people on the terrace. At 239 Munster Road (appeal allowed), the Inspector attached a condition to the granting of permission to prevent the use of the terrace after 10 p.m., to avoid noise disturbance. 1.7 However, size seems to have been the most important consideration for Inspectors in many of the decisions. At 39A Wardo Road (appeal allowed) and 17 Kinnoul Road (appeal allowed) the Inspector concluded that limiting the extent of the terrace by barriers would limit the number of people able to use it and thus the potential for noise disturbance. Of those appeals allowed, terrace size ranged from 4.8 square metres to approximately 17 square metres. For this largest terrace, at Flat 3, 91 Bishops Road, the Inspector concluded that ".... Because of the fairly restricted capacity of the terrace, its use would be unlikely to cause an unacceptably greater level of noise and disturbance than that which would come from within the property when windows were open." 1.8 The terrace under consideration at 120 Edith Road was significantly smaller (approximately 2.8 square metres) than all those considered by the Inspectors above and could only accommodate up to 3 people. In view of the various Inspectors' comments, officers considered that there must be an element of doubt as to whether the refusal of permission for a terrace of the size proposed would be upheld at appeal on grounds of noise and disturbance. Page 5 1.9 However, the applicant indicated that he was not prepared to risk putting an application to Planning Applications Committee, which could be refused. At the applicants request, the item was deferred from 3rd November 2003 PAC and the file returned to the case officer. The application was altered to delete the roof terrace from the proposals and replace the door at first floor level with a sash window. All other elements of the proposal were considered to be acceptable. The application was approved under delegated powers on 20th November 2003 (RN: 2003/01419/FUL). 1.10 Subsequently, the applicant has decided to reapply for the erection of two glass screens and a railing to the flat roof at rear first floor level in connection with the formation of a roof terrace together with the retention of the door providing access to the flat roof.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DOWNLOAD London.PDF • 5 MB
    GORDON HILL HIGHLANDS 3.61 BRIMSDOWN ELSTREE & BOREHAMWOOD ENFIELD CHASE ENFIELD TOWN HIGH BARNET COCKFOSTERS NEW BARNET OAKWOOD SOUTHBURY SOUTHBURY DEBDEN 9.38 GRANGE PARK PONDERS END LOUGHTON GRANGE BUSH HILL PARK COCKFOSTERS PONDERS END 6.83 4.96 3.41 OAKLEIGH PARK EAST BARNET SOUTHGATE 4.03 4.01 JUBILEE CHINGFORD WINCHMORE HILL BUSH HILL PARK 6.06 SOUTHGATE 4.24 CHINGFORD GREEN TOTTERIDGE & WHETSTONE WINCHMORE HILL BRUNSWICK 2.84 6.03 4.21 ENDLEBURY 2.89 TOTTERIDGE OAKLEIGH EDMONTON GREEN LOWER EDMONTON 3.10 4.11 3.57 STANMORE PALMERS GREEN HASELBURY SOUTHGATE GREEN 5.94 CHIGWELL WOODSIDE PARK PALMERS GREEN 5.23 EDMONTON GREEN 3.77 ARNOS GROVE 10.64 LARKSWOOD RODING VALLEY EDGWARE SILVER STREET MILL HILL BROADWAY 4.76 MONKHAMS GRANGE HILL NEW SOUTHGATE VALLEY HATCH LANE UPPER EDMONTON ANGEL ROAD 8.04 4.16 4.41 MILL WOODHOUSE COPPETTS BOWES HATCH END 5.68 9.50 HILL MILL HILL EAST WEST FINCHLEY 5.12 4.41 HIGHAMS PARK CANONS PARK 6.07 WEST WOODFORD BRIDGE FINCHLEY BOUNOS BOWES PARK 3.69 5.14 GREENBOUNDS GREEN WHITE HART LANE NORTHUMBERLAND PARK HEADSTONE LANE BURNT OAK WOODSIDE WHITE HART LANE HAINAULT 8.01 9.77 HALE END FAIRLOP 4.59 7.72 7.74 NORTHUMBERLAND PARK AND BURNT OAK FINCHLEY CENTRAL HIGHAMS PARK 5.93 ALEXANDRA WOOD GREEN CHURCH END RODING HIGHAM HILL 4.58 FINCHLEY 4.75 ALEXANDRA PALACE CHAPEL END 3.13 4.40 COLINDALE EAST 5.38 FULLWELL CHURCH 5.25 FAIRLOP FINCHLEY BRUCE 5.11 4.01 NOEL PARK BRUCE GROVE HARROW & WEALDSTONE FORTIS GREEN GROVE TOTTENHAM HALE QUEENSBURY COLINDALE 4.48 19.66 PINNER 3.61 SOUTH WOODFORD HENDON WEST
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment for Hammersmith & Fulham
    θωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβν µθωε ρτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνPharmaceutical Needsµθωερτ ψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνAssessment forµθωερτψυι οπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπ ασδφΠΠΠΗγηϕκλζξχϖβνHammersmithµ &θωερτψυ ιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνFulhamµ θωερτψυιοπ ασδφγηϕκτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβν µθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβν2018 - 2021 µθ Compiled by Healthy Dialogues Ltd Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................. 3 Chapter 1 – Introduction ....................................................................... 7 Role of Pharmacies ....................................................................................... 7 Purpose of the Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment ........................................... 7 Policy Background Relating to the PNA ........................................................... 8 Chapter 2 - Local Health and Wellbeing Priorities ................................ 10 Chapter 3 - The Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment Process .............. 12 Methodological considerations ...................................................................... 12 Governance and steering group .................................................................... 14 Regulatory consultation process and outcomes .............................................. 14 Additional Considerations regarding pharmacy funding .................................... 14 Chapter 4 - Health Needs and Population Changes .............................. 16 Population Characteristics and Projections ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • London Tenants Federation Analysis of Affordability of London Living Rent
    LONDON TENANTS FEDERATION ANALYSIS OF AFFORDABILITY OF LONDON LIVING RENT Borough name Ward name One bedroomTwo bedroomsThree bedroomsFour bedroomsFive bedroomsSix bedrooms Barking and Dagenham Parsloes 598 665 731 798 864 930 Barking and Dagenham Village 611 679 747 815 883 951 Barking and Dagenham Heath 653 726 799 871 944 1016 Barking and Dagenham River 683 758 834 910 986 1062 Barking and Dagenham Alibon 686 762 838 915 991 1067 Barking and Dagenham Goresbrook 715 795 874 954 1033 1112 Barking and Dagenham Mayesbrook 715 795 874 954 1033 1112 Barking and Dagenham Thames 715 795 874 954 1033 1112 Barking and Dagenham Chadwell Heath 748 831 914 997 1080 1163 Barking and Dagenham Eastbrook 753 836 920 1004 1087 1171 Barking and Dagenham Abbey 770 856 941 1027 1112 1198 Barking and Dagenham Whalebone 783 870 956 1043 1130 1217 Barking and Dagenham Eastbury 815 906 996 1087 1177 1268 Barking and Dagenham Valence 847 941 1036 1130 1224 1318 Barking and Dagenham Becontree 847 941 1036 1130 1224 1318 Barking and Dagenham Gascoigne 877 975 1072 1170 1267 1365 Barking and Dagenham Longbridge 897 997 1097 1196 1296 1396 Barnet Burnt Oak 660 733 806 880 953 1026 Barnet Underhill 701 778 856 934 1012 1090 Barnet East Barnet 734 815 897 978 1060 1141 Barnet High Barnet 762 847 932 1016 1101 1186 Barnet Coppetts 773 859 944 1030 1116 1202 Barnet Brunswick Park 781 868 955 1042 1129 1215 Barnet Colindale 790 878 966 1053 1141 1229 Barnet Oakleigh 790 878 966 1053 1141 1229 Barnet West Hendon 799 887 976 1065 1154 1242 Barnet Edgware 799 887 976 1065
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transport Accessibility & Deprivation
    Tackling Poverty: One Bus Ride Away A report by London Assembly Member Val Shawcross into Public Transport Accessibility Levels & the Effect on Deprivation Foreword In March 2014, I published a report on the cost of living crisis in London entitled, Cost of Living: Fair Fares, which found that 84% of Londoners think that public transport fares are too high. The report also highlighted how it is the poorest in our community who have been disproportionately hit by fare rises. I therefore wanted to see what practical steps the Mayor of London could take to help the poorest Londoners and I struck upon the idea of looking at what level each of the 4,835 neighbourhoods in London had access to the transport public network. I started by evaluating the Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) scores for every neighbourhood in London. I then matched that to the index of deprivation to see if there was any link between how deprived a neighbourhood is and how much, or little, access it has to the public transport network. There appears to be a strong link between highly dense neighbourhoods with a low access to the transport network and deprivation. In the following report, I ask what the Mayor is doing about this; what he should be doing about this; and I offer some suggested changes to the transport network to help reduce poverty in a number of neighbourhoods across London. In turn, this would allow lower income families easier access to jobs, educational opportunities and community services and resources. I hope that this report will start a debate about how we can use the public transport network to tackle deprivation in our city.
    [Show full text]
  • Low Income Housing Estates: a Report to Hammersmith
    Low income housing estates Low income housing estates: a report to Hammersmith United Charities on supporting communities, preventing by Laura Laneby andAnne Power social exclusion and tackling need in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Laura Lane and Anne Power, LSE Housing and Communities September 2009 Funding provided by HUC and the Parish of St Pauls, Hammersmith; Notting Hill Laura Lane Housing Group; and the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham LSE Housing and Communities tel 020 7955 7472 email [email protected] CASEreport 59 Housing HUC Report Cover.indd 1 22/10/09 13:48:39 Acknowledgements We are heavily indebted to the work of Dr Caroline Paskell who carried out the field interviews on the estates and prepared data information and vignettes. Olga Gora and Nicola Serle were responsible for some data analysis. We owe a great deal of thanks to residents and front line workers within the estates and local areas for taking time to respond to our questions. Without the willingness of residents within the estates to speak to us and share their experiences we would not have been able to access such detailed information. This project has been funded by Hammersmith United Charities and the Parish of St Pauls, Hammersmith; Notting Hill Housing Group and the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. There are many individuals within those organisations who have helped with the project but special recognition is owed to Stuart Sessions, Heather David and Sue Spiller. Special thanks also to Chris Hughes from the Estate Wardens team; Jo Rice from SPEAR; Gaye Rose of HAFFTRA; Lorraine Gilbert and Meghan Doyle of Notting Hill Housing Group; Diana Hodson, Shaun Dunleavy and Milan Ognjenovic of Hammersmith and Fulham Homes; Michael Pyner of the Shoreditch Trust; Iain Tuckett of Coin Street; Steve Wyler of the Development Trusts Association; Kristina Glenn of the Cripplegate Foundation 1 Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019
    ANNUAL REPORT 2019 //////////////// Funding Charities Realising Dreams CONTENTS KEY /////////////////////////////////////////////////// STATISTICS 2019 //////////////// Key Statistics 1 It has been a significant year for John Lyon’s Charity, with £13.5 Chair of Governors Foreword 2 million in grants being approved within the year. This represents Chair of the Grants Committee Foreword 3 259 individual grant requests from organisations based Chief Executive Officer’s Foreword 4 throughout the nine boroughs in the Charity’s Beneficial Area. Introduction: Funding Charities, Realising Dreams 6 The largest number of grants were approved under the Main Ensuring Access for All: the Charity’s approach to SEND 17 Grants Fund. The School Holiday Activity Fund, that provides Youth Work Works 23 small grants of up to £4,000 for activities during school holidays, 2019 Facts and Figures 27 is also very popular, with 85 grants awarded during the year. SHAF: tackling ‘Activity Hunger’ 31 Sport: from grassroots to performance pathways 37 Financial Summary 38 Grants Approved 42 Grants awarded Members and Advisers 46 2017/18 2018/19 About John Lyon’s Charity 47 Total number of grants requested 459 394 Total number of grants approved 260 259 Thank You 48 Total number of ongoing grants (more than one year) 87 114 Total grants approved £9,195,209 £13,499,141 Breakdown of approved grants Main Grants 110 £8,058,600 Capacity Building 8 £2,026,800 BARNET The Charity’s Beneficial Area consists of nine boroughs Bursaries 10 £1,884,994 HARROW in North and West London: Barnet, Brent, Camden, Schools in Partnership 10 £1,052,000 Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and the Cities of School Holiday Activity 85 £326,922 BRENT CAMDEN London and Westminster.
    [Show full text]
  • Adult Training Network
    ADULT TRAINING NETWORK ATN REPORT FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 2010 – JULY 2011 CEW-Adult Training Network Annual Report August 2010 – July 2011 Page 1 Contents Page Organisational Details 3 Mission Statement 3 Aims & Objectives 3 Company Structure 4 Training Centres 5 Business Plan 6 - 11 Local Employer Needs 11 Hounslow Borough Analysis 11 - 20 West London Demographic Information from DWP 20 - 24 East London Demographic Information from DWP 24 - 27 Company Accounts 27 Staffing Establishment 27 Staff Development & Training 28 Partnership Agreements 28 Accreditation 29 Activities 2010 – 2011 29 - 32 Richmond upon Thames College 29 - 30 Waltham Forest College 30 - 31 A4e - JCP Support Contract 31 - 32 Future Work Programme Contracts 32 Matrix Re-Accreditation 32 - 33 External Verification & Inspection Reports 33 - 34 Extension Activities 35 - 40 Success Stories & Case Studies 41 - 45 Future Developments & Priorities 46 Conclusion 46 Appendices Page Appendix A Richmond upon Thames - Self Assessment Report 47 - 67 Appendix B Waltham Forest College - Self Assessment Report 68 - 76 Appendix C A4e – JCP Support Contract – Quarterly Reports 77 - 118 Appendix D Local Employers’ Survey 119 - 132 Appendix E Ingeus - West London Sustained Employment Programme 133 - 144 CEW-Adult Training Network Annual Report August 2010 – July 2011 Page 2 ORGANISATIONAL DETAILS The Adult Training Network is a Registered Charity Number 1093609, established in July 1999, and a Company Limited by Guarantee number 42866151. The Head Office is at the King’s Hall Methodist Church, South Road, Southall, UB1 1RB. The Adult Training Network has a Board of Trustees and a Managing Director, who is the main contact person for the organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Gentriflcation and Displacement in Greater London: an Empirical and Theoretical Analysis
    Gentriflcation and Displacement in Greater London: An empirical and theoretical analysis Rowland Graham Atkinson A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Greenwich for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 1997 Abstract The thesis involves an inquiry into the little explored nature of the relationship between the processes of gentrification and displacement in the context of the Greater London area. Scant work has been previously undertaken in this country on these processes compared to the wealth of work conducted already on gentrification. Displacement has barely been acknowledged as a component of the British gentrification experience except through anecdotal evidence and acknowledgement of basic causal association. Three separate but related methodologies were used to piece together evidence to test whether gentrification was a displacing force. First, the 1981 and 1991 censuses were used to examine broad social changes in London at a ward level, second, the Longitudinal Study (LS) was used to examine the linkages between identifiably gentrified areas and the migratory trajectories of gentrifiers and displacees. Finally the use of grounded research was undertaken to look at examples of these processes in situ through interviews with tenant's representatives and local authority officers. The cumulative weight stemming from the use of the three research methods and the view that displacement is a necessary corollary to gentrification is evaluated along with the implications of findings on the need for the retention of affordable housing and the potential costs of urban social restructuring. The evidence suggests a need for a wider set of social and economic costs to be considered in view of the damage that may be done by gentrification.
    [Show full text]
  • SNT Boroughname NPT Name SNT Name Barking And
    SNT_BoroughName NPT_Name SNT_Name Barking and Dagenham Barking Abbey Eastbury Gascoigne Goresbrook Longbridge Thames Dagenham Alibon Eastbrook Mayesbrook Parsloes River Village Whalebone Becontree Chadwell Heath Heath Valence Whalebone Barnet Barnet East Barnet High Barnet Oakleigh Totteridge Underhill Colindale Burnt Oak Colindale Edgware Hale Mill Hill Golders Green Childs Hill Garden Suburb Golders Green Hendon West Hendon Whetstone Brunswick Park Coppetts East Finchley Finchley Church End West Finchley Woodhouse Bexley Central Barnehurst Brampton Christchurch Danson Park East Wickham Falconwood and Welling St Michael's North Belvedere Colyers Erith Lesnes Abbey North End Northumberland Heath Thamesmead East South Blackfen and Lamorbey Blendon and Penhill Cray Meadows Crayford Longlands Sidcup St Mary's Brent Harlsden Barnhill Dudden Hill Fryent Harlesden Kensal Green Stonebridge Welsh Harp Kilburn Brondesbury Park Dollis Hill Kilburn Mapesbury Queens Park Willesden Green Wembley Alperton Kenton Northwick Park Preston Queensbury Sudbury Tokyngton Wembley Central Bromley North-East Bickley Bromley Town Chislehurst Mottingham and Chislehurst North Plaistow and Sundridge North-West Clock House Copers Cope Crystal Palace Kelsey and Eden Park Penge and Cator Shortlands South-East Chelsfield and Pratts Bottom Cray Valley East Cray Valley West Farnborough and Crofton Orpington Petts Wood and Knoll South-West Biggin Hill Bromley Common and Keston Darwin Hayes and Coney Hall West Wickham Camden Central Belsize Camden Town with Primrose Hill
    [Show full text]
  • EIA Scoping Report Northfields FINAL (Inc. APPENDICES) Part5.Pdf
    N:\21000-21999\21793 - Northfields Industrial Estate\Figures\Mapping\CAD\Heritage Statement Maps v2.dwg KP / 27.06.17 Not to Scale: Illustrative Only N Site Boundary Figure 15: 2008 Aerial View CO N S ULTIN G Planning ƔHeritage www.cgms.co.uk 2UGQDQFH6XUYH\PDSVUHSURGXFHGZLWKWKHVDQFWLRQRIWKHFRQWUROOHURI+06WDWLRQHU\2IILFH/LFHQFH1R$/ &RQWDLQV26GDWD&URZQFRS\ULJKW>DQGGDWDEDVHULJKW@ N:\21000-21999\21793 - Northfields Industrial Estate\Figures\Mapping\CAD\Heritage Statement Maps v2.dwg KP / 27.06.17 Not to Scale: Illustrative Only N Site Boundary Figure 16: 2010 Aerial View CO N S ULTIN G Planning ƔHeritage www.cgms.co.uk 2UGQDQFH6XUYH\PDSVUHSURGXFHGZLWKWKHVDQFWLRQRIWKHFRQWUROOHURI+06WDWLRQHU\2IILFH/LFHQFH1R$/ &RQWDLQV26GDWD&URZQFRS\ULJKW>DQGGDWDEDVHULJKW@ N:\21000-21999\21793 - Northfields Industrial Estate\Figures\Mapping\CAD\Heritage Statement Maps v2.dwg KP / 27.06.17 Not to Scale: Illustrative Only N Site Boundary Figure 17: 2015 Aerial View CO N S ULTIN G Planning ƔHeritage www.cgms.co.uk 2UGQDQFH6XUYH\PDSVUHSURGXFHGZLWKWKHVDQFWLRQRIWKHFRQWUROOHURI+06WDWLRQHU\2IILFH/LFHQFH1R$/ &RQWDLQV26GDWD&URZQFRS\ULJKW>DQGGDWDEDVHULJKW@ N:\21000-21999\21793 - Northfields Industrial Estate\Figures\Mapping\CAD\Heritage Statement Maps v2.dwg KP / 11.08.17 Not to Scale: Illustrative Only N Site Boundary Figure 18: Indicative Masterplan C O N S ULTIN G Planning ƔHeritage www.cgms.co.uk 2UGQDQFH6XUYH\PDSVUHSURGXFHGZLWKWKHVDQFWLRQRIWKHFRQWUROOHURI+06WDWLRQHU\2IILFH/LFHQFH1R$/ &RQWDLQV26GDWD&URZQFRS\ULJKW>DQGGDWDEDVHULJKW@ N:\21000-21999\21793 - Northfields
    [Show full text]
  • Old Oak and Wormholt Conservation Area
    ` OLD OAK AND WORMHOLT CONSERVATION AREA DRAFT CHARACTER PROFILE URBAN DESIGN AND CONSERVATION TEAM FORWARD The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham is fortunate to have 44 conservation areas covering almost half of the Borough. These have been designated in recognition of the importance of the architectural and historic interest of our Borough. As Deputy for Environment, Transport and Residents Services, I am committed to the preservation and enhancement of these areas with the help of residents and local groups, so that they continue to enhance the quality of life in the Borough and so that they survive as good examples of our heritage for future generations. This Character Profile describes the special character of the Old Oak and Wormholt Conservation Area, identifying interesting historical facts, identifying notable structures, the special importance of its townscape value, and showing how buildings, open spaces and the public realm can work together to create an environment worthy of protection. I would like to thank all local groups and individuals who have helped to prepare this profile. Through the consultation process the documents have evolved to represent not only Officers’ assessment of the conservation area, but those of the local amenity societies and residents’ groups active in the area. I hope these profiles will now provide extra assistance in the stewardship and preservation of what is best in the Borough. Cllr Wesley Harcourt Deputy for Environment, Transport & Residents Services Draft Old Oak and Wormholt CACP January 2017 1 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3 2.0 DESIGNATION..................................................................................................... 5 3.0 CONSERVATION AREA BOUNDARY ................................................................. 5 4.0 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CONSERVATION AREA ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan Police Service - Neighbourhood Groupings Geographical Alignment June 2014
    Metropolitan Police Service - Neighbourhood groupings Geographical alignment June 2014 Geographical alignment The geographies of the 109 MPS Neighbourhoods are aggregated from Neighbourhood Team (NT) areas, which are themselves mainly based on aggregations of Ordnance Survey (OS) electoral wards. For this project, the intention was clearly to obtain and use grouping variables at this same OS ward level which could then be aggregated to ‘neighbourhood level’. Using NT mapping layers supplied by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and comparing with OS ward layers held by the GLA Intelligence Unit, it was discovered that there were an additional 28 NT areas not present in the OS ward layer. These ‘extra’ areas include defined areas for policing such as town centres, and areas of interest requiring smaller geographic areas (e.g. Westminster and Airports). These extra areas are shown in red in Figure 1 below. Figure 1 – Comparison of OS wards (blue) with MPS NT areas (red) 1 Metropolitan Police Service - Neighbourhood clusteringgrouping Geographical Alignment Where the OS wards in London (excluding the City) total 629 (following the electoral ward updates of May 2014), the number of NT areas total 657. Whilst 90 of the neighbourhoods can be broken down directly into existing OS wards (making it easy for alignment with other grouping variables available at this level), the remaining 19 neighbourhoods all contain at least 1 extra MPS NT area, totalling 28. In order to align the NT areas (and therefore the neighbourhoods) with the other variable data, analysis needs to be carried out on how the boundaries of these extra NT areas relate geographically to existing boundaries, with an ideal outcome of direct alignment with the 629 OS wards.
    [Show full text]