planning report PDU/0961b/01 16 April 2008 former Bishop Challoner School site, in the Borough of Tower Hamlets planning application no. PA/08/305

Strategic planning application stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Act 1999; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000

The proposal Demolition of the existing buildings and redevelopment to provide 214 residential units, in two buildings ranging between 4 and 14 storeys, together with the provision of a replacement community centre to include a new community cafe; public open space extending to 4,546 sq.m. incorporating a new public square, sports pitch provision, and an extension to Ropewalk Gardens; car parking; landscaping and associated infrastructure works.

The applicant The applicant is Bellway Thames Gateway North, and the architect is Stock Woolstencroft.

Strategic issues Associated issues of transport, design, energy, affordable housing, employment and training, provision of community facilities, dwelling mix and child play space are raised.

Recommendation That Tower Hamlets Council be advised that, whilst the scheme is supported for its contribution to the regeneration of the area, further information is needed principally on energy and affordable housing before the scheme can be supported in strategic planning policy terms.

Context

1 On 10 March 2008 Tower Hamlets Council consulted the Mayor of London on a proposal to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000 the Mayor has the same opportunity as other statutory consultees to comment on the proposal. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what comments to make

2 The application is referable under Category 1C of the Schedule of the Order 2000: ”1 (c) The building is more than 30 metres high and outside the City of London.”

page 1 3 The Mayor of London’s comments on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Site description

4 The site is located on the southern edge of , between Commercial Road and . Both of these are major arterial routes ( roads) into the City.

5 The site is bounded to the north partly by Ropewalk Gardens and partly by Ponler Street. To the south the site is bounded by a railway viaduct and to the west by Christian Street. Along the eastern boundary of the application site is a 5-storey residential block known as Walford House which is set back with amenity space provided on the western side of the block adjacent to the application site boundary.

6 The site has very good access to public transport, with a public transport accessibility level of 5 where 1 is poor and 6 is excellent. There are seven bus routes within 500 metres of the site including two night bus services. station and Shadwell underground station (temporarily closed) are situated 660 metres to the east of the site.

7 The site is 0.87 hectares and is roughly rectangular in shape. It is currently divided north/south into two parcels of land by Golding Street, which is a narrow single track road. The parcel of land to the east of Golding Street is currently a hard surfaced sports pitch, which is in poor condition. There is also a 2 storey community building in the north-eastern corner, fronting onto Ponler Street, which is used by the Berner Estates Tenants Association. The western parcel of land comprises a disused Victorian school building which was formerly occupied by the Bishop Challoner Roman Catholic Secondary School. To the north of the former school building is an area of enclosed open space with no public access. A 2-metre high brick wall surrounds the school site.

8 The wider area is predominantly residential in nature with some commercial uses along Burslem Street.

9 Golding Street currently provides the main access into the site. There is currently an access point into the site from Christian Street to the south of the site and this is proposed to become the principal access into the site. Both roads currently connect Commercial Road to Cable Street.

10 A draft development brief for the site was prepared by the Council in December 2000 but the document has not been formally adopted by the Council. The brief identified the site as suitable for redevelopment because it had become surplus to requirements following the consolidation of the former school on a new site elsewhere. The document set out that the land use objectives for the site were to introduce a mix of residential, community, open space and recreational uses that would complement the surrounding area.

Details of the proposal

11 The proposal involves the demolition of the existing school building and community centre and the comprehensive redevelopment of the site to provide 214 residential units in two separate buildings. It will also provide a new replacement community centre (344 sq.m.), public open space (0.45 hectares) and sports pitches.

12 The proposal comprises two separate buildings as follows:

page 2 Block A is located in the western part of the site and runs north to south immediately adjacent to Christian Street. The block varies in massing and height with the central area rising to four storeys and the northern end rising to seven storeys, whilst the southern end extends to fourteen storeys in height. Green roofs are provided on the 5th storey of the central section, the 8th storey of the southern section and a terrace on the 13th storey. This block will comprise 153 residential units, refuse storage and secure cycle parking. Block B is located on the eastern part of the site and runs north to south along the eastern boundary. The block extends from 6 to 8 storeys, with the taller element located to the south adjacent to the DLR line. This block will provide 61 units, a new community facility totalling 344 sq.m. over two floors fronting on to the sports facilities, refuse storage, plant rooms and secure cycle parking. The affordable housing is for the most part located in block B with 3 intermediate units in Block A.

13 The application proposes the closure of Golding Street so as to fully integrate the site and provide comprehensive redevelopment of the whole site. This section of the street will be enhanced and used by pedestrians and cyclists. In addition, the development will be car –free, except for parking spaces for blue badge holders and the car club.

14 The proposed development will provide 0.45 hectares of public open space. The provision of the public open space will run from west to east on the northern boundary of the site and will extend the existing Ropewalk Gardens currently located in the north-west corner of the site. It is proposed to provide two sports pitches in the north-east corner of the site, although final discussions on the use of the pitches will be held through consultation.

15 A new public square is proposed at the centre of the site which will be bounded to the east by Block B and to the west by Block A. This square will provide children’s playspace and hard and soft landscaping. Case history

16 In 2004 there was a referable application for redevelopment of the site for a new school. This was considered acceptable by the Mayor. In October 2007 a proposal similar to the current proposal was referred to the Mayor and was subsequently withdrawn. Following consideration of the Stage 1 report in November 2007 the Mayor concluded that:

‘The proposal is welcomed in London Plan policy terms, particularly given the replacement community centre and sports pitches that are proposed. Further justification is required of the housing mix, affordable housing levels and energy offer as well as further details of the community centre. The design is generally supported but there is some room for further improvement, as outlined in this report.

With regards to transport further discussion is required on contributions to DAISY boards, the travel plan and a further contribution towards improving walking links between the development and Shadwell DLR station.

Confirmation is sought from Tower Hamlets Council that the local education needs (at primary and secondary level, and including faith schools) can be fully met in the foreseeable future without this building or site.’

page 3 Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

17 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

• Housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG; Providing for Children and Young People’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG • Affordable housing London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG • Density London Plan; PPS3; Housing SPG • Urban design London Plan; PPS1 • Mix of uses London Plan • Education London Plan • Regeneration London Plan; the Mayor’s Economic Development Strategy • Parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; PPG13 • Access London Plan; PPS1; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Wheelchair Accessible Housing BPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM) • Equal opportunities London Plan; draft Planning for Equality and Diversity in Meeting the spatial needs of London’s diverse communities SPG; Diversity and Equality in Planning: A good practice guide (ODPM) • Sustainable development London Plan; PPS1, PPS3; PPG13; PPS22; the Mayor’s Energy Strategy; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG • Historic Environment London Plan; PPG15

18 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 Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan (1998) and the London Plan 2008 (consolidated with alterations since 2004).

19 The following are also relevant material considerations: • The Tower Hamlets Core Strategy and Development Control Plan that have been adopted as Interim Planning Guidance for the purposes of development control.

• The draft development brief for the site.

Energy

20 The previous application proposed a centralised gas fired heating system together with solar hot water collectors as the energy solution. The stage I report on the previous application concluded that modeling on the actual scheme, rather than benchmarks, should be provided and that the provision of a combined heat and power system (CHP) should be considered.

21 The current energy strategy has addressed many of the issues raised in the previous stage 1 report. The strategy is now based on modeling of the actual buildings, although values for Target Emissions Rate (TER) and Building Emissions Rate (BER) values should be specified and SAP and SBEM calculations should be provided for the communal component of each block.

22 A number of energy efficiency measures have been included in the design: improved insulation through enhanced u-values of the building fabric, balancing the ratio of glazing to solid wall, airtight construction and improved air permeability of the building envelope, low energy light fittings and controls, variable speed drives on all central pumps and boosters and a building management system to monitor central and high efficiency white goods. These measures are estimated to provide a 7.9% reduction in carbon emissions over the baseline.

page 4 Although no cooling requirements are indicated for the development information on measures to prevent solar gains and overheating should be provided.

23 A 70kWe CHP unit and a biomass boiler are proposed. It is estimated that the CHP plant will provide a 19.1% reduction, and the biomass boiler a 15.6% reduction, in carbon emissions over the enhanced baseline. Subject to the provision of the further information requested on the biomass boiler in the air quality section below this approach is considered acceptable in strategic planning policy terms.

24 An assessment of suitable renewable technologies for the building identified that the only suitable technologies would be solar thermal collectors, photovoltaic cells and a biomass boiler. The solar thermal collectors and photovoltaic cells cannot be included due to the provision of a brown roof under this revised proposal. This approach is considered acceptable in strategic planning policy terms.

25 In conclusion the energy strategy now proposed is considered to be in line with the Mayor’s energy hierarchy. However the following information, together with the information on the biomass boiler set out in the air quality section, should be provided before it can be considered that the proposal is fully in line with strategic planning policy:

• BER and TER values

• SAP and SBEM calculations for the communal component of each block

• Information on measures to prevent solar gains and overheating Housing

26 The following table sets out the housing mix for the development as a whole:

Housing mix Studio 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed Total

Block A (private) 21 51 39 39 152

--

Block A 1 2 3 (intermediate)

Block B 10 7 20 5 44 (social) --

Block B 6 8 5 19 (intermediate) -- --

Total 21 68 58 61 5 214

page 5 27 The family housing (3 bed plus) within the development is 32%, which is in line with the guidance set out in the Mayor’s Housing SPG. 57% of social rented units are 3 bed plus which is in excess of the target of 42% set out in the Mayor’s housing SPG. The number of studio and 1 bed units combined, however, make up 42% of the units. Ideally this proportion would be further reduced however given that the majority of these units are within the market sector and the relatively high proportion of 3 bed plus units in the social rented element the mix is now considered to be acceptable.

Affordable housing

28 The development contains 31% affordable housing on a unit basis and 35% based on total habitable rooms. This is split 70/30 social rented to intermediate housing in line with London Plan policy. This is an improvement on the previous scheme that was split 80/20.

29 The viability of the development has been assessed through a “Three Dragons” financial appraisal. The toolkit indicates that the proposed scheme is not viable principally due to the level of s106 contributions proposed and the costs of providing the community centre on-site. The level of social housing grant that has been applied to the scheme should be confirmed.

30 A breakdown of the s106 contributions and details of the level of grant applied for needs to be provided before a conclusion can be made on the acceptability of the level of affordable housing. Density

31 The proposed development will have a density of 1095 habitable rooms per hectare. The density accords with the density matrix set out in the London Plan for this location and is considered acceptable in strategic planning terms. Child Playspace

32 Using the GLA Data Management and Analysis Group (DMAG) calculations the child population of the development will be about 91. In accordance with the Mayor’s SPG “Providing for children and young people’s play and informal recreation” 10 sq.m. of play space should be provided per child. As such 910 sq.m. should be provided.

33 The application proposes 4,545 sq.m. of open space, which is in excess of the provision set out in the SPG. The proposed space will provide a range of hard and soft landscaping. The proposed public square will be located between Block A and Block B and will include an imaginative place for informal children’s play. The public square is designed to promote interaction between the soft play areas to the north of the site and the hard landscaped areas to the south. Further children’s play areas are provided in the landscaped area to the north of the site.

page 6

Image 1 – Reprovisioning of open space. (copyright Stock Woolstencroft)

34 The strategy with regards to open space is supported. The open space on the site would combine well with the existing open space to the north of the site and it is understood that the total amount of space of both together is the same as existing open space. The application includes a re-landscaping of this open space and this would benefit the usability of the space. The site includes two new sports pitches, one 5-a-side football pitch and one basketball court. An option to extend the neighbouring Ropewalk Gardens is included to the north-west of the site and may include additional soft landscaping and sports pitch facilities. Detailed landscaping is to be further developed during the development design stage. Education

35 The existing building was used by the Bishop Challoner Roman Catholic Girls Secondary School until 1999, when the school moved to a new building nearby. Since this time the buildings and grounds have been vacant as they are considered surplus to educational requirements in the area. Confirmation was sought from Tower Hamlets Council that the local education needs (at primary and secondary level, and including faith schools) could be fully met in the foreseeable future without this building or site. This has been received and is satisfactory confirmation that the site is surplus to local education needs. Urban design

36 The site is not adjacent to a public transport node or locally important junction but it is well within the City Fringe Opportunity Area, as defined in the East London Sub-Regional Development Framework, and only 700 metres from Aldgate and therefore suitable for an increase in building height and housing density.

37 The proposal contains a well-considered disposition of massing around a central plaza. The building typology is suitable for the site layout, with only a few north or south facing single aspect dwellings.

page 7 38 The architecture is varied but not fussy and is in line with policy 4B.1 of the London Plan.

39 The development contains a variety in type and size of dwellings, which is welcomed. Many dwellings, however, have small living rooms or bedrooms, which are not considered to be implementing best practice design principles. The London Plan, in paragraph 4.102, states “New building projects should ensure the highest possible space standards for users, in both public and private spaces inside and outside the building, creating spacious and usable private as well as public spaces. In particular, buildings should provide good storage and secondary space and maximise floor-ceiling heights where this is compatible with other urban design objectives.” Further consideration should be given to the size of the units. Some dwellings do not have a balcony because they are too close to other dwellings. An improved block layout should be able to prevent this.

40 The demolition of the old school building is regretted, as a renovated building would have made a positive contribution to this part of Stepney that sustained heavy structural damage in the Second World War and therefore has few pre-war buildings left. English Heritage has recently decided to decline to list the building and in the absence of statutory protection the application meets all relevant policy tests with regards to London’s heritage conservation. Noise

41 London Plan policy 4A.20 on reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes states that wherever practicable, noise sensitive development should be separated from major sources of noise. Those parts of the buildings that overlook the elevated railway to the south of the site will be exposed to significant levels of noise, especially at night. For these, it would be preferable to separate the noise sensitive elements from the noise source, in line with London Plan policy 4A.20. This could be done by placing habitable rooms on the quieter facades, as opposed to the proposed approach of relying on acoustic glazing, which will only achieve acceptable internal noise levels if windows are kept closed at all times. This option will also contribute to overheating, thus conflicting with London Plan policy 4A.10.

42 If it is unavoidable that some windows will need to be kept closed at all times to provide acceptable internal noise levels, alternative means of acoustically treated ventilation must be provided. This should be able to provide a positive flow of air (‘purge ventilation’) as opposed to trickle vents, for example. Ideally, systems able to provide this without incurring additional energy usage, such as a whole building ‘passive stack’, should be utilised. Failing this mechanical ventilation should be provided.

43 The noise assessment report states that from the measurements carried out to date, vibration from the railway viaduct may be sufficient to give rise to adverse comment from the future residents. The report recognizes that a further survey would be needed to confirm this and to determine what, if any, mitigation measures are required. This report and the provision of appropriate mitigation measures should be required by condition.

Air Quality

44 The proposed development does not appear to present a significant impact on local air quality, although there are some concerns with the methodology of the assessment on which this conclusion is based. In particular receptors should be included outside of the development site and the levels should then be compared to appropriate monitoring data local to the site where these exist. The modeling does not include the biomass boiler that is proposed and full details of the boiler, the fuel type, the fuel supply chain, the type, height and location of the

page 8 chimney and the arrangements that have been investigated to secure the fuel supply together with estimated emissions and impacts need to be provided. A breakdown of emissions factors for NOX and particulates from the biomass boiler and specifically dispersion modeling, provided on a map showing the level of both pollutants at ground level, need to be provided.

45 There are marginal increases in both nitrogen dioxide and PM10 but it is agreed that the impact of the traffic generated by the development is likely to be negligible. However, new exposure is being introduced into an area already exceeding both UK air quality objectives and predicted to exceed EU Limit Values for nitrogen dioxide in 2010.

46 Full details of the biomass boiler need to be provided together with the revised modeling before this application comes back to the Mayor at Stage II.

Transport for London comments

47 Transport for London (TfL) supports the car-free approach to development. Five car parking spaces have been provided in relation to disabled parking (two spaces) and the proposed car club (three spaces). TfL expects future residents to be barred from eligibility for on-street parking permits.

48 TfL welcomes the developer’s commitment to provide a travel plan for this development; however, there are a number of aspects that TfL needs to see addressed before it can be fully supported. These concerns centre around the marketing and delivery of the travel plan. In addition TfL suggests that new residents should be provided with a “welcome pack” including details of initiatives such as the car club scheme, information on local walking and cycling routes, time/distance maps to local amenities and transport interchanges. TfL expects the plan to be secured, enforced, monitored and reviewed as part of the Section 106 legal agreement. It is suggested that the developer liaises with TfL’s Travel Demand Management Team regarding its development.

49 TfL endorses the cycle parking provision of 244 spaces which includes 234 spaces for residential use and 10 spaces for community use. This is in line with TfL’s cycle parking standards in the London Plan (Annex 4, paragraph 37).

50 Given the close proximity of the site to Shadwell DLR station it is suggested that the developer should contribute towards the provision of real time DLR departure boards (known as DAISY boards – ‘Docklands Arrival Information System’) within the development. The contribution (circa £20,000) would cover the cost of installation of the boards. The developer should consult TfL to agree on suitable places in the development for the positioning of the DAISY boards. TfL considers that residents would benefit greatly from being able to time their journeys to the Shadwell DLR station, reducing unnecessary delays, waiting at the platform as well as improving personal safety, DAISY boards can also form a part of a travel plan for the development. The development will place a significant amount of additional demand on the DLR and will result in a significant increase in trips to and from the DLR station at Shadwell DLR Station. TfL would therefore expect a contribution of £75,000 towards the cost of the canopies. This contribution will provide a more hospitable station environment and improve the safety for the passengers from this development.

51 A further contribution is requested towards improving walking links between the development and Shadwell DLR station. TfL wishes to discuss this further with the developer.

52 TfL expects the developer to prepare and agree a construction management plan with TfL and the borough to ensure the safe and continued movement of pedestrians, buses and all

page 9 other vehicles on the Transport for London Road Network (of which Commercial Road and Cable Street are part of), the Strategic Road Network and borough roads throughout the construction phases of this development. London Development Agency comments

53 The London Development Agency (LDA) supports the principle of the proposed development, as contributing to the relevant objectives of the Economic Development Strategy (EDS) and policies of the London Plan, however the Agency would request further details on the proposed community facility to ensure its viability and that it delivers a real benefit to the local community.

54 London Plan Policy 3A.18 requires the protection and enhancement of social infrastructure and community facilities. As part of London's places and infrastructure, the EDS aims to deliver an improved and effective infrastructure to support London’s future growth and development. The Agency welcomes the provision of a community centre, however would seek additional details on its suitability to meet the needs of the community, in terms of its layout and siting. Concerns appear to have been raised at the community consultation over the siting and management of the community facility, and the viability of the cafe in this location, and it is not evident that these concerns have been addressed. The Agency would request evidence from the applicant that the effective use of the community centre would not be compromised as a result of splitting what is considered to be a small community space over two levels, and how the cafe intends to operate with limited street presence. The Agency would also request that the applicant clarify what is meant by a 'community' cafe, to ensure that this is a genuine community use. These intentions should also be safeguarded as part of a s106 Agreement between the applicant and Tower Hamlets Council. The Agency would also encourage the Council to clarify the management of the community centre as part of the s106 Agreement.

55 Policy 5C.1 of the London Plan requires the adequate provision of social infrastructure as part of the strategic priorities for North East London. As such, the Agency would encourage the Council to consider the scope for requesting a financial contribution to address community, education and healthcare needs, including the need for childcare facilities as a means of tackling barriers to employment.

56 Policy 3B.11 of the London Plan aims to improve the skills and employment opportunities for Londoners. Local residents and businesses should benefit from the creation of jobs resulting from the construction and operational phases of the development. Initiatives to create training and employment opportunities and to utilise the goods and services of small and medium enterprises and local businesses could be formalised through a s106 agreement between the applicant and Tower Hamlets Council. An employment and training strategy should cover the following elements: • Timing and arrangements for its implementation including funding arrangements. • A stakeholder charter to ensure initial and subsequent employers within the completed development participate in the implementation of the strategy. • Minimum local recruitment targets for employees and targets for the involvement of local businesses and measures to be undertaken by the applicant to meet with these targets. • Periodical workforce and business monitoring and reporting of the results to the Council and such other parties as may be set out in the approved strategy. • A programme for skills training for local residents and/or businesses, including the potential for the provision of suitably equipped training premises. • Local publicity, awareness raising proposals and methods for advertising employment

page 10 opportunities and impending contracts which includes: - Initiatives to promote the involvement of local businesses including sub- contracting and the supply of goods and services. - Initiatives to promote the employment of small and medium businesses. - Initiatives to promote the employment of black and ethnic minority owned businesses.

57 The delivery of such initiatives will assist in ensuring the regeneration benefits of the proposed development are maximised for local residents, and that the objective to tackle barriers to employment set out in the Economic Development Strategy is met. Legal considerations 58 Under the arrangements set out in article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000 the Mayor has an opportunity to make representations to Tower Hamlets Council at this stage. If the Council subsequently resolves to grant planning permission, it must allow the Mayor an opportunity to decide whether to direct it to refuse planning permission. 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 comments unless specifically stated. Financial considerations

59 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

60 The proposal is welcomed in London Plan policy terms, particularly given the replacement community centre and sports pitches that are proposed.

61 Further justification of the affordable housing levels and further energy, air quality and noise information needs to be provided.

62 The design is generally supported but there is some room for further improvement, as outlined in this report.

63 With regards to transport further discussion is required on contributions to DAISY boards, the travel plan and a further contribution towards canopies and improving walking links between the development and Shadwell DLR station.

64 Further details are required on the provision of the community centre and cafe and measures to secure local training and employment should be provided.

for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Giles Dolphin, Head of Planning Decisions 020 7983 4271 email [email protected] Colin Wilson, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Emma Williamson, Case Officer 020 7983 4310 email [email protected]

page 11