-
Sustainable Development Committee 26th April 2012
[email protected]
References: P/2012/0089 00737/B/P3
Address: Market Place, Brentford
Ward: Syon
Proposal: Erection of five three-storey terraced townhouses with
associated access, parking and landscaping
Drawing numbers: Design and Access Statement, Planning
Statement, Land Contamination Statement, Archaeological Statement.
Pl-01,PL-02,PL-4 received 17/1/12
Amended Plans:PL-03,PL-05,PL-06,PL-07,PL-09,PL-10, Design and
Access Statement addendum received 12/4/12
Application received: 17/01/2012
1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
1.1 The site comprises of an area of 0.049ha at the south west
of Market Place with the River Brent bounding the site to the
north. It is dense with vegetation and was last used as a temporary
sales office for a nearby residential development. Previous to this
the site was used as a public convenience which continued until the
1990s. The site has also been used in the past for the storage of
unlicensed boats removed from the River Brent.
1.2 The site lies within The Butts Conservation Area, Brentford
Town Centre and an Archaeological Priority Area, adjacent to a
Nature Conservation Area and Flood Zone 2. It is also adjacent to
the Grand Union and Boston Manor Conservation Area
1.3 To the southwest of the site is Tallow Road and beyond that
Dorey House and Tanyard House, four storey residential buildings.
To the northwest and across the river is the Island, a series of
taller residential buildings. The nearest of those to the site is
over 32m away from the boundary with the subject site.
1.4 The site adjoins Bowman House to the north-east; a 1970’s
three-storey office building with undercroft parking and servicing
(and an extant permission for first and second floor extension to
the rear of the building).
-
1.5 To the southeast is Brentford Magistrates Court (Locally
Listed) and Thanet House, a three-storey office building, is
positioned to the south (separated by 10m from the edge of the
site).
1.6 The Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) is 3
(moderate) and the site is within a Controlled Parking Zone. Access
to the site from the west (from Tallow Road) is currently blocked
by railings.
1.7 A small area of the site (less than 10m2) adjacent to tallow
Road is within the ownership of the Council.
2.0 HISTORY
2.1 The relevant planning history for the property is as
follows:
2.2 00737/B/P2 Erection of single storey building for use as
sales centre
Approved: 2001
3.0 DETAILS
3.1 The proposal involves the site being cleared and a terrace
of five houses would then be erected on the site with front and
rear gardens.
3.2 The houses would be three storey town houses and would
comprise of:
• One two-bedroom house.
• Four three bedroom houses
3.3 The houses would be laid out in a terrace and would have a
‘staggered’ footprint (at both front and rear building lines) so
that the front face of House 5 will be level with the front face of
the adjacent Bowman House. The terrace then gently staggers
forwards westwards towards House 1 at the south-western end,
adjacent to Tallow Road.
3.4 House 1 will have pedestrian and vehicular access off the
existing access onto Tallow Road and Plots 2-5 will be accessed off
Market Place.
3.5 The houses would measure between 5.3 and 5.7m wide, between
9.8 and 7.8m deep and 8.4m high at eaves rising to 11.1m high at
ridge on the far western unit (Unit 1) and 11.8m high at the most
easterly (House 5). They would have GIA’s of between 149m2 and
121m2. Each end of terrace house would have a hipped roof. House 1
has a projecting bay element that extends from the first floor into
the roof space.
3.6 Each house would have an integral garage and a separate
family room at ground floor. Houses 2-5 would have a living room
and separate kitchen on the first floor and two bedrooms on the
second floor.
3.7 Each house would have a front and rear garden (overlooking
the river Brent).The rear gardens range in area from 32m2 to 46m2.
Each unit would also have the benefit of a first floor balcony.
-
3.8 The existing railings on the waters edge along the boundary
with the River Brent would be retained. Privacy screens with a
depth of 1m would project from the rear elevation of each of the
houses protecting the privacy of habitable rooms for future
residents.
3.9 Within the front elevation south facing windows would have a
‘saw-tooth’ design to prevent overlooking from the office building
immediately opposite.
3.10 The Design and Access Statement notes that the use of
traditional materials would be used in a modern context i.e. facing
brickwork, pitched roofs and zinc claddings and acknowledge the
general built form of the locality.
3.11 Outside the scope of this application it is also proposed
by the Council to improve the public realm in front of the site by
removing the fence at the end of Market Place and replacing it with
iron bollards to improve pedestrian/cycle flows to and from Tallow
Road.
3.12 The application comes in light of pre application
discussions with the Council and Local Residents Groups including
the BCC and The Butts Society. Amendments from the PRE-application
scheme include a reduction in units from seven to six and now to
five being proposed, as well as design changes including the
external materials, fenestration treatment and roof design.
3.13 During the assessment of the application the following
further design changes have been made:
• Changes to the rear elevation treatment (Specifically
balconies and fenestration)
• Alterations to the fenestration in the west facing
elevation
• Alterations to the fenestration of the front elevation.
4.0 CONSULTATIONS
4.1 90 neighbouring residents were consulted on the 19th January
2011. Press and site notices were posted. No responses have been
received from neighbours. Responses from Statutory bodies are
referred to elsewhere in this report as appropriate. Any further
representations received will be provided in an addendum.
4.2 The application was brought before the Isleworth and
Brentford Area Committee on the 15th March where members commented
that:
• Members were broadly supportive of the proposals.
• Officers were asked to ensure that representations from the
Brentford Community Council would be included in any report to
Sustainable Development Committee.
• It was acknowledged that the Environment Agency had been
satisfied with the proposals in relation to any flood risk.
• One member felt that the reduction in amenity space was offset
by the waterfront views.
-
• In view of the comparatively small scale of this scheme,
officers were asked to check Council policy before seeking S106
funding in relation to amenity space provision.
4.3 The Brentford Community Council and The Butts Society have
objected to the scheme commenting:
1.Appropriateness of the Design.
Even in October 2011. it was clear that the proposed design did
not suit the site. It relates badly with the design, height, scale
and character of the Island Site development to the north and lacks
the irregular, small scale quirky character of the Weir PH, the Old
Cinema and the very varied houses in Market Place. Further, it
offers residents no open views to the west, where these are
possible, but forces residents to endure the night lighting and out
door music from the adjacent Weir public house river side garden.
Officer response: See paragraphs 6.12-6.34 for design assessment.
It should be noted that further design changes, beyond the changes
made during the pre- application process have now been made and it
is considered that the design is appropriate for its context.
2.Planning Consent for extending the offices south of Market Place/
High Street.
The Council did grant a consent to raise the office block
opposite the site by two floors. It is not known whether that
application has lapsed or whether it could be revived. It may be
that a follow up application might be hard to resist on appeal,
given the Council’s previous decision.
Such an application would intensify traffic in Market Place and
extend the over-shadowing of the proposed housing on this site.
I do recall that the BCC objected at the time to that
application on the grounds that such a development would also be
prejudicial to the redevelopment of the High Street and to the
setting of the adjacent Magistrates Court, a locally listed
building. Officers response: It is not considered that the
extension to Thanet House would result in unacceptable harm to the
proposed residential units. This is based on the separation
distance between the two sites, the fact that the proposed houses
are dual aspect and that they have saw-tooth windows which will
ensure privacy and help gain additional light from either side of
the building opposite. Furthermore it is noted that there are no
habitable room windows within the ground floor of the proposed
houses.
3. The Magistrates Court.
This site is close to the locally listed Magistrates Court,
which is the major landmark in the town Centre area and is an issue
in the pre-application consultations on the currently emerging
designs for the South Side of the High Street.
-
Local concern lead to a current application, which has been
notified to the Council, to list this building. The BCC
commissioned a report, which has been submitted to English
Heritage. A decision is expected shortly.
If the building is listed the application site would be part of
the setting for a listed building”. In our view the quality of this
application is poor and would not enhance such a setting. Even if
the Court does not get formal listing the current design is not
adequate to its unique position nor its proximity to a locally
listed building.
Officer response: The subject application must be assessed based
on the current situation, where the Magistrates Court does not
benefit from a statutory listing. Notwithstanding this, the
Magistrates Court is Locally Listed and therefore benefits from
protection under UDP Policy ENV-B.2.6 (Identification and
protection of buildings of local townscape character) and London
Plan Polices. The proposed scheme has been assessed against these
policies as well as the impact upon the character and appearance of
the Conservation Area (as required by policy ENV-B.2.2) and is
considered appropriate (discussed below). Furthermore it should be
noted that the Design and Conservation Officer has been fully
involved in the design evolution and is satisfied that the design
is acceptable in this sensitive location. It is also not considered
therefore that the proposal would harm the regeneration of
Brentford High Street. 4. Design Evolution.
The BCC are pleased to note that the Magistrates Court has been
purchased by a developer to open a restaurant and residential
accommodation. The BCC and the Butts Society have written responses
to draft proposals for the Court building. On Wednesday March 21
there is to be a pre-application exhibition of the revised scheme
in the court building. This will show the proposal, which is
currently being developed in consultation with the Council and with
the BCC and the Butts Society. The BCC will be asked for further
comments at their meeting on March 22, which will be sent to
you
A copy of this letter has been sent to the developers of the
Court building.
The current scheme for the Court building proposes to remove
parking from the south side of the Magistrates Court and possibly
to close the road to the west of the Court buildings. Such a move
would greatly improve the town centre options, providing an
extensive public paved area suitable for markets, outdoor events
and for eating outdoors, linked up to the wide pavements which
continue to Half Acre. With the proposed supermarket and the main
route to the river directly opposite, this area will be central to
the town centre proposals
Such a proposal would have effects for Market Place, which would
then be the service road and where suitably controlled traffic and
parking would be
-
essential. If these changes were agreed the garages (and
reversing cars) proposed in this application would not be
suitable.
Market Place will also become a more important pedestrian route
as parking displaced from the High Street would be provided in the
Butts CPZ and as the Town Centre grows in importance. Officers
response: The comments in relation to Magistrates Court are noted.
However no planning application has been made and as neither site
(the subject site or the Magistrates Court) has the benefit of a
Site Planning Brief or are Proposal sites within the Brentford Area
Action Plan this cannot influence the assessment of the subject
application, which has to be treated on its own merits based on the
existing context.
Notwithstanding the above, if the closure of the road adjacent
to the Magistrates Court was brought forward and approved planning
permission the issue of access to the various units within Market
Place would need to be addressed, and could for example require the
re- introducing of the link from Market Place to Tallow Road. In
any case the subject proposal would not in itself prevent this
eventuality and the changes in road level required to make the
route accessible for vehicle could be achieved without compromising
the access to the proposed units. It should be further noted that
access to the subject site can be accessed from Lion Way in any
case.
5.0 POLICY
5.1 The Policy Framework is attached in appendix 1
6.0 PLANNING ISSUES
6.1 The main planning issues to consider are:
• The principle of the development
• Archaeology and Flood risk
• Appearance
• Housing Standards
• Neighbours’ living conditions
• Traffic and Parking
• Sustainability
Principle
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework states that housing
applications should be considered in the context of the presumption
in favour of sustainable development. It goes on (Paragraph 111) to
state that planning policies and decisions should encourage the
effective use of land by re-
-
using land that has been previously developed (brownfield land),
provided that it is not of high environmental value.
6.3 The last use of the site was for a temporary sales office
and the applicant has demonstrated that previous uses at the site
have included a car park and a public convenience and that the site
has been previously developed, despite its now green and relatively
open appearance. The site is therefore considered to be a brown
field site and the proposal meets the objective set in the NPPF by
re-suing previously developed land.
6.4 London Plan Policy 3.3 (Increasing Housing Supply) further
supports appropriate residential development, particularly on
previously developed sites like this one.
6.5 On this basis, it is considered that the principle of
residential development at this site would be acceptable.
Archaeology and Flood Risk
6.6 London Plan Policy 7.8 (Heritage Assets and Archaeology)
states that the significance of heritage assets should identified
and UDP Policy ENV-B.3.2 (Sites of Archaeological Importance)
states that the Council will promote the conservation, protection
and enhancement of the archaeological heritage of the Borough.
6.7 The applicant has submitted a Desk-Based Archaeological
Assessment to accompany this application. The Archaeological
Assessment concludes that the site has good archaeological
potential for evidence of prehistoric activity, particularly dating
to the Neolithic and Iron Age periods. Further field work and
recording of findings will be secured by a safeguarding
condition.
6.8 The Council for British Archaeology have commented that ‘The
Committee thought this a carefully considered design which should
preserve and enhance the Conservation area’.
6.9 The NPPF states, in respect of minimising floodrisk, that
Inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be
avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk,
but where development is necessary, making it safe without
increasing flood risk elsewhere. Policy ENV-W.2.1 (Tidal Defences)
states that there will be general presumption against development
which would adversely affect the integrity of the tidal
defences.
6.10 The site is located within Flood Zone 2 where residential
development (defined as a more vulnerable type of development) is
appropriate.
6.11 The applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment and the
Environment Agency are satisfied based on the site being protected
from flooding via a combination of Finished Floor Levels raised
600mm above the predicted climate change-corrected 100 year flood
level as well as all houses being set back a minimum distance of 5
metres from the edge of the river and open nature rear boundary
treatment. This finished floor level and surface treatment would be
secured by condition.
-
Appearance
6.12 The National Planning Policy Framework has a requirement
for development to achieve a good design and states that new
development should respond to local character and history, and
reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not
preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation.
6.13 It goes on to note (Paragraph 60) that planning decisions
should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular
tastes and they should not stifle innovation, originality or
initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to
certain development forms or styles. It is, however, proper to seek
to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness.
6.14 Policy ENV-B.1.1 of the UDP promotes high quality design
that enhances the overall environmental quality and townscape.
Section 1.0 of the UDP Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) states
that the design and layout of proposed developments must enable
them to be compatible with, and make a positive contribution to,
the character of the locality. New buildings must relate
satisfactorily to adjoining and neighbouring buildings and spaces.
The scale, massing, siting, size and height of these buildings
should be respected by new development, although this need not
exclude original, innovative design.
6.15 Policy BAAP3 states that assessment of development should
take account of the quality of design and the way in which the
development takes account of and enhances the variety of historic
and waterside contexts and assets within and surrounding the town
centre.
6.16 Policy ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas) states that
development should preserve or enhance the character and appearance
of the Conservation Area. In this case the site lies within The
Butts Conservation Area and adjacent to the Grand Union Canal and
Boston Manor Conservation Area.
6.17 The Butts Conservation Area appraisal notes that a pressure
on the area is the potential Infill on the Market Place site of The
Island’s marketing suite. This proposal seeks to develop this site
and therefore a key assessment is the impact the development would
have on the character of the Conservation Area.
6.18 London Plan Policy 7.4 (Local Character) sets out that
buildings should provide a high quality design response to the
urban grain, street pattern, natural features, human scale and the
historic environment and is supported by Policy 7.6 (Architecture)
which seeks to promote high architectural and design quality
appropriate to its context. Policy BAAP2 of the BAAP also promotes
high quality development that enriches areas of distinctive local
character, rejuvenates areas with no positive identity and improves
the overall quality of Brentford’s urban form.
6.19 The design has evolved during both the pre-application and
application process. It is now considered that the proposed design
is appropriate for its context and would result in a high quality
development.
-
6.20 The existing site is overgrown and unkept and does not
result in an attractive feature within the Conservation Area.
However it is currently not developed and does offer some views
across the site towards the River Brent and the Island development
opposite although these views are limited too when crossing Tallow
Road bridge from the south and from the south from Thanet House. It
should be noted that these views are currently devalued by the
blank elevation of Bowman House being a prominent feature.
6.21 It is considered that the narrow, three-storey units would
be acceptable in this location and that they would add to the
varied mix of design types in the area. The ‘staggered’ plan of the
units would serve to reduce scale and add visual breaks to the
buildings.
6.22 The staggered footprint and limited depth of the houses,
especially Unit 1 (adjacent to Tallow Road) allow views to remain
of the River from Tallow Road and reduces the massing of the
development. It also serves to screen the visually uninteresting
Bowman House west elevation. It is considered that the interrupted
view from Thanet House has limited value to the Conservation Area
and wider public realm.
6.23 The design has been amended to show a hipped roof and a
small break in building line between House 5 and Bowman House,
ensuring that the transition between the two sites is acceptable.
The variety in ridge lines and use of parapet walls within the
roofspace also help break up the massing and provide added interest
to the elevation and variety helping create a varied skyline. The
materials used in the parapet walls have been amended to better
reflect the design of the houses.
6.24 The material palette proposed is considered to represent a
careful and authentic choice of materials and detailing which would
add further interest to the appearance of the terrace and would
contain references to materials used within the surrounding
Conservation Area. The materials are considered appropriate in this
river side context and use a combination of modern elements with an
industrial/waterside feel such as zinc cladding with more
traditional materials such as the facing brick and roof slates.
Samples of materials would be required to be submitted prior to
development commencing by safeguarding condition
6.25 The design of the rear elevation has been amended to remove
the emphasis on the first floor balconies by containing it with a
frame that extends down from the roof eaves. This provides added
interest to the elevation as well making reference again to an
original wharf side structure.
-
Figure 1: Amended rear elevation
6.26 The fenestration of the front elevation has also been
altered to separate the saw tooth windows and the slot windows. The
saw tooth bays now add a sense of verticality to the elevation by
being in line with the front entrances. The facade now also has a
more traditional feel with the slot windows with brick soldier
course sills taking reference from properties within The Butts.
Figure 2: Amended Front elevation
6.27 The Tallow Road elevation has been designed with a
projecting bay element (finished in zinc cladding) that addresses
that street scene whilst reducing the mass of the development at
this end of the terrace as the building steps down in height. Again
the fenestration within this projecting element has been altered to
have a greater resonance with a wharf side building and provides
added design interest.
6.28 The site is located to the north east of the former
Magistrates Court, which is locally Listed and therefore Policy
ENV-B.2.6 (Identification and protection of buildings of local
townscape character) is relevant which states that the Council will
identify and seek to protect buildings of local townscape character
and their settings.
-
6.29 London Plan Policy 7.8 (Heritage Assets and Archaeology)
seeks to ensure that development affecting heritage assets should
conserve their significance and make provision for the protection
of archaeological resources.
6.30 It is considered that the proposed development, as a result
of its design and position would have an acceptable impact upon the
setting of the Magistrates Court and would not impact upon any of
the key views of this locally Listed Building, which are
predominantly from the south and the High Street and from the
western part of Market Place.
6.31 London Plan policy 7.3 (London’s Canals and Other Rivers
and Waterways) states that development proposals along London’s
rivers and water space should respect their local character.
6.32 In respect of the adjacent waterway it is considered that
the proposed development, as a result of its significant set back
from the river bank, ensures that it is not an overbearing addition
to the Riverside and would positively contribute to its riverside
setting with open garden design, retention of railings along the
boundary as well as providing active frontages, visual interest and
passive surveillance.
6.33 In addition the existing metal post and rail boundary
treatment at the rear of the site adjacent to the River Brent will
be retained to maintain an open riverside setting and will be
complemented by soft landscaping from the paved terraces at the
rear of the houses down to the water’s edge with low ‘open’
division fences between properties (details required by
condition.
6.34 Therefore it is considered that the proposal preserves the
appearance and character of both the Butts and the Grand Union and
Boston Manor Conservation Areas, safeguards the setting of the
locally listed building within the vicinity, adds interest to the
street scene and would result in an attractive addition to the
locality.
Housing Standards
6.35 Policy H.4.1 has standards and guidelines for new housing
to protect the amenity of the existing residential areas as well as
ensuring new housing is of a satisfactory standard. These are
reinforced by the Council’s 1997 Supplementary Planning
Guidance.
6.36 Policy 3.4 of the London Plan seeks to optimise housing
potential by making efficient use of land taking into account local
context and character, design principles and public transport
capacity. Table 3.2 sets out the relevant density from different
locations. The location of the site is considered as ‘Urban’ as
defined in the London Plan and has a Public Transport Accessibility
Level (PTAL) of 3. The density range identified in Table 3.2 for an
‘Urban’ location with a PTAL rating of 3 is 200-450 habitable rooms
per hectare (hr/ha).The proposal would have a density of 489 hr/ha.
Whilst this is marginally beyond the London Plan it should be noted
that density is not in itself a reason for refusal, any shortfall
in providing an acceptable standard of accommodation, such as in
terms of amenity provision, bulk and
-
mass of the building and internal rooms sizes, could be an
indicator of too great a density proposed on this site. Thee issues
are discussed further below.
6.37 Furthermore it is noted that the proposal creates five
family units for which there is an indentified need with the
borough as evidenced by the Hounslow Strategic Housing Market
Assessment (2009).
Minimum Floor Areas and outlook, sunlight and daylight
6.38 The Supplementary Planning Guidance provides minimum floor
areas for conversions. London Plan policy 3.5 states that boroughs
should require new development to incorporate minimum space
standards that generally conform with Table 3.3. The Mayor will,
and boroughs should, seek to ensure that new development reflects
these standards. The design of all new dwellings should also take
account of factors relating to ‘arrival’ at the building and the
‘home as a place of retreat’, have adequately sized rooms and
convenient and efficient room layouts, meet the changing needs of
Londoners over their lifetimes, address climate change adaptation
and mitigation and social inclusion objectives and should be
conceived and developed through an effective design process.
6.39 The proposed floor areas comply with both the SPG and the
London Plan Guidance. All of the houses would be dual aspect and
all rooms would meet the Council’s internal space standards
providing a good standard of accommodation.
Privacy
6.40 The south facing ‘saw-tooth’ windows, the distance between
the site and the Magistrate’s Court (16m) and the orientation of
that building would protect privacy for front (south) facing rooms.
The nearest rear (north) facing window would be over 35m away from
the nearest window at the Island, to the North West.
-
Outdoor Amenity Space
6.41 Section 10 of the 1997 Supplementary Planning Guidance
provides the minimum standard of private amenity space for new
residential units. Normally, family houses like those proposed
should have private, usable amenity space of at least 75m2 (for the
three bedroom houses) and 60m2 (for the two bedroom house). None of
the houses would meet the guidelines (gardens would be between 32m2
and 46m2).
6.42 However this is considered acceptable in this case as the
spaces that are provided are useable and benefit from an extremely
good outlook over the river and would be supplemented by small
front landscaped areas. Furthermore each unit has the benefit of a
first floor balcony. In addition the ‘family’ rooms within the rear
ground floor would benefit from large glazed windows which open up
onto the rear gardens creating a ‘winter garden’ feel.
6.43 The scheme would maintain a desirable openness on the
water’s edge, with the retention of an existing low railing and
lightweight, low boundary treatment would separate the gardens.
6.44 A safeguarding condition would restrict permitted
development rights ensuring the houses could not be extended into
the rear gardens without the benefit of planning permission.
Accessibility
6.45 The development has been designed to meet Part M of the
Building Regulations and related requirements. However, due to the
requirement to set the floor levels above the flood plane level
(one in 100 year probability)
-
steps would lead up to the four units accessed from Market
Place. The applicant notes that this has been discussed and agreed
in principle with the Council’s Building Control Team.
Notwithstanding the above, level threshold access to Unit 1 would
be provided from the Tallow Road entrance. Ground floor toilets are
also proposed for each unit and the design of the houses would be
required to comply with Lifetime Home standard where feasible.
6.46 It is considered the proposal complies where practical with
London Plan Policy 7.2 (An Inclusive environment).
Waste and recycling
6.47 Policies ENV-P.2 (Waste Management) and ENV-P.2.4
(Recycling Facilities in New Developments) seek to ensure that
facilities are in place to ensure that waste and recycling can be
properly stored and collected.
6.48 Each of the houses would have an integral bin store for the
storage of waste and recycling and the Council’s Waste and
Recycling Team have confirmed that kerb-side collections would be
appropriate in this location for this type of development.
Neighbours
6.49 Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development) seeks to ensure that new
development causes no harm to living conditions at neighbouring
properties.
6.50 The nearest neighbouring buildings to the east and south
are office buildings and in any case saw tooth windows within the
south elevation ensure privacy is maintained for the proposed units
and the offices.
6.51 In respect of the Dorey House to the west, this would be
located 15 from the western flank of the proposed houses but the
fenestration within the west elevation would not look directly
towards these windows and the proposed
-
second floor window would be obscure glazed ensuring that the
proposals would not harm neighbours’ living conditions.
6.52 Slimily the properties on the opposite side of the river
(Corsell House and Barnes Quarter) would be positioned well over
21m away ensuring adequate privacy and as a result of the position
between the sites no loss of daylight/sunlight would occur.
Traffic and parking
6.53 Policy T.1.4 (Traffic Implications of New Development) and
Appendix 3 of the Unitary Development Plan states that development
should provide parking in accordance with the Council’s standards,
which are maxima. The site has PTAL rating of 3 (which is
moderate).
6.54 The maximum standard for houses of this size is two
off-street parking spaces for the three bedroom houses and one off
street space for the two bedroom house (a maximum policy
requirement of nine spaces). One space for each house, within an
integral garage would be provided.
6.55 This is considered acceptable within this location, close
to public transport links and shops and survives.
6.56 The surrounding area is within a Controlled Parking Zone
and the Council’s transport team have recommended that a
restriction be placed on any approval to restrict residents
applying for permits. This will ensure that the development would
not result in overspill parking and therefore there would be an
acceptable impact on local highway conditions.
6.57 In addition secure cycle parking for each unit would be
provided within the internal garages.
Sustainability
6.58 London Plan Policy 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide
Emissions) states that major development proposals should make the
fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions and
that a 25% improvement against the 2010 Building Regulations should
be demonstrated.
6.59 Whilst not a major development the proposal still has the
potential to make a contribution to sustainable development in the
Borough and it is important that it recognises and adopts
sustainable development principles. The proposal constitutes the
redevelopment of a brownfield site in accordance with sustainable
development principles.
6.60 The applicant has indicated that passive solar gains and
air source heat pumps (renewable energy) would help to achieve the
Mayor’s sustainability objectives. The incorporation of these
measures would be secured by condition.
6.61 In addition the construction would also exceed current
Building Regulation and the air tightness of the dwellings would
exceed the minimum Building Regulation requirements. Again
safeguarding condition would require
-
details of sustainable construction and sustainable urban
drainage to be provided.
7.0 EQUALITIES DUTIES IMPLICATIONS
7.1 The Council has to have due regard to its Equalities Duties
and in particular with respect to its duties arising pursuant to
the Equality Act 2010, section 149. Following a relevance test,
which is available at:
http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/index/council_and_democracy/equality/eias/environment_eias.htm
it is considered that there will be no specific implications with
regard to the Council’s duty in respect of its equalities duties
and that if approving or refusing this proposal the Council will be
acting in compliance with its duties.
Relevant Section of Relevance Test
Minor developments
8.0 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
8.1 Some new developments granted planning permission on or
after 1st April 2012 will be liable to pay Community Infrastructure
Levy (CIL) to the Mayor of London with respect to the funding of
Crossrail. This is at the rate of £35 per m2 of new floor
space.
8.2 This proposal is liable to pay the Community Infrastructure
Levy on commencement of development.
9.0 RECOMMENDATION
Approval
With appropriate safeguarding conditions, it is considered that
the proposed development is acceptable and would preserve the
character and appearance of the surrounding Conservation Areas,
provide a high standard of family accommodation, whilst not harming
neighbours’ living conditions or local highway conditions. The
proposal therefore complies with the National Planning Policy
Framework, London Plan Polices 3.3 (Increasing housing supply), 3.5
(Quality and design of housing), 7.8 (Heritage Assets and
Archaeology) and 7.30 (London’s Canals and other Rivers and water
spaces) and Unitary Development Polices ENV-B.1.1 (New
Development), ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas) and H.4.1 (Housing
Standards and Guidelines) as well as Supplementary Planning
Guidance and the BAAP.
Draft Safeguarding Conditions
1 A1a Time Limit – full permission.
2 B5 The proposed development shall be carried out in all
respects in accordance with the proposals contained in the
application and the plans submitted therewith and approved by the
Planning Inspectorate, or as shall have been otherwise
-
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3 Non std No development shall take place until samples of the
materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces
have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance
with the approved details Reason: In order that the Council may be
satisfied as to the details of the development in the interests of
the visual amenity of the area and to satisfy the requirements of
Hounslow Unitary Development Plan Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New
Development) and ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas)
4 J12 Condition CONDITION: “Before the development hereby
permitted commences: a. Details of an intrusive site investigation
are required in addition to the phase 1 desk study previously
submitted. These details shall be submitted to, and approved in
writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The site shall be
investigated by a competent person to identify the extent and
nature of contamination. The report should include a tiered risk
assessment of the contamination based on the proposed end use of
the site. Additional investigation may be required where it is
deemed necessary. b. If required, a scheme for decontamination of
the site shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, for
written approval. The scheme shall account for any comments made by
the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby
permitted is first occupied. During the course of the development:
c. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately if
additional contamination is discovered during the course of the
development. A competent person shall assess the additional
contamination, and shall submit appropriate amendments to the
scheme for decontamination in writing to the Local Planning
Authority for approval before any work on that aspect of
development continues.
-
Before the development is first brought into use: d. The agreed
scheme for decontamination referred to in clauses b) and c) above,
including amendments, shall be fully implemented and a written
validation (closure) report submitted to the Local Planning
Authority for approval. Reason: contamination is known or suspected
on the site due to a former land use. The LPA therefore wishes to
ensure that the development can be implemented and occupied with
adequate regard for public and environmental safety.
5 No demolition or construction work shall take place on the
site except between the hours of 8:00am to 6:00pm on Mondays to
Friday and 9:00am to 1:00pm on Saturdays and none shall take place
on Sundays and Public Holidays without the prior agreement of the
Local Planning Authority.
Reasons: In order to safeguard the amenities of adjoining
residents and the amenities of the locality in accordance with
Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development), ENV-P.1.7 (Light pollution)
and ENV-P.1.5 (Noise pollution) of the Hounslow Unitary Development
Plan.
6 During construction works an appropriate wheel-washing system
shall be provided to remove mud, stones and any other extraneous
materials from the wheels and chassis’ of construction vehicles
exiting the site and all loads of construction materials,
excavation spoil or other such matter shall be fully covered in
order to ensure that no material leaves the site attached to the
vehicle which might subsequently be deposited on the highway. The
exit from the wheel washing system shall be constructed from a
hard, non-porous surfacing material and sited as far away from the
exit to the highway as is possible given the constraints of the
site and the surface shall be kept clean at all times. Waste water
discharged from the wheel washing system shall be stored and
disposed of on site and shall not be discharged into the public
sewerage system without prior removal of soil, stones and any other
suspended material. Suitable measures to minimise dust nuisance
caused by the operations and to ensure that no dust or other debris
is
-
carried on to the adjoining properties shall also be provided in
accordance with the Greater London Authority’s “Air Quality”
guidance, and site lighting shall be designed, positioned and
directed so as not to unnecessarily intrude on passing drivers on
public highways and so as not to direct light into any windows of
properties outside the site. Start of works on site shall be
notified to the Council’s Community Environment Team. Reason: In
order to safeguard the amenities of adjoining residential
properties, the amenities of the locality, and highway safety, and
to enable the Council to monitor works on site to ensure that it is
carried out in a safe and neighbourly fashion for the above reasons
in accordance with Polices ENV-B.1.1 (New Development), ENV-P.1.5
Noise Pollution, ENV-P.1.6 Air Pollution, and ENVP.1.7 (Light
Pollution).
7 Prior to any occupation of the development a scheme for the
storage and collection of waste and materials to be recycled
including a timetable for implementation shall have been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the
approved scheme shall then be managed as approved unless otherwise
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In
order that the Council may be satisfied as to the refuse and
recycling arrangements for the development to ensure that waste and
materials to be recycled can be properly stored and removed from
the site as soon as the residential accommodation is occupied in
accordance with Hounslow Unitary Development Plan Policies
ENV-B.1.1 (New development), ENV-P.2.1 (Waste management),
ENV-P.2.4. (Recycling facilities in new developments), H.4.1
(Housing standards and guidelines), T.2.2 (Pedestrian safety and
security) and T.4.4 (Road safety).
8 No development shall take place until full details of both
hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved
in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall
then be carried out as approved. Hard landscaping details shall
include (proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure;
car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and
circulation areas; hard surfacing material; minor artefacts and
structures; proposed and existing
-
functional services above and below ground; retained historic
landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant).
All hard landscape work shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved details prior to any occupation of the residential
development and retained and maintained thereafter. Soft
landscaping details shall include (planting plans; written
specifications (including cultivation and other operations
associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of
plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities
where appropriate; implementation programme). All soft landscape
works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details
within 12 months of occupation of any building and retained
thereafter. If within a period of five years from the date of
planting any tree or specimen shrub that tree or specimen shrub or
green roofing or any tree or specimen shrub or green roofing
planted in replacement for it is removed, uprooted or destroyed or
dies (or becomes, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority,
seriously damaged or defective), another tree or specimen shrub of
the same species and size as that originally planted shall be
planted at the same place, unless the Local Planning Authority
gives its written approval to any variation. Reason: To safeguard
the appearance of the site and Conservation Area in accordance with
Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development).
9 No development shall take place until there has been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan
indicating the position, design, materials and type of boundary
treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed
before the buildings are occupied. Development shall be carried out
in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation of any
building unless a timetable for implementation has otherwise been
submitted and approved in writing and retained and maintained
thereafter. Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may
be satisfied as to the details of the development
-
in the interests of road safety in accordance with policy
ENV.B.1.1 New development and ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas).
10 No development shall take place until details of a
Sustainable Urban Drainage Scheme, including measures for (i) the
harvesting of rainwater, (ii) the minimisation of water run-off
from the site, aiming for Greenfield levels, and (iii) the
conservation and reuse as appropriate of other water supplies in
the buildings have been submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority. These details shall be carried out as approved
prior to occupation of the buildings unless otherwise approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority and retained and maintained
thereafter. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and to
ensure the satisfactory management of surface water run-off from
the development hereby permitted, including by preventing increased
risk of flooding and pollution of the water environment, and in
accordance with Hounslow Unitary Development Plan Policies
ENV-B.1.1 (New development), ENV-P.1.2 (Water pollution and water
quality), ENV-P.1.3 (Surface water run off).
11 No development shall take place until a statement on the
sourcing of materials to be used in the building, involving reuse,
recycling and other sustainable sourcing of materials to be used in
the construction of extensions and fitting out of the building
wherever possible, has been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority. These details shall be carried out as
approved. Reason: To ensure the development can be implemented with
adequate regard to the environment in the interests of
sustainability in accordance with Hounslow Unitary Development Plan
Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development), London Plan Policy 5.3
(Sustainable design and construction).
12 On-site renewable energy
Reason: To minimise the impact of the development and to
contribute to meeting the renewable energy targets in the Mayor's
London Plan
13 All the residential units shall comply, where
-
feasible, with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation Lifetime Homes
Standards.
Reason: To ensure that the residential accommodation will be
built out to Lifetime Homes Standards in accordance with the
planning application allowed on appeal and Hounslow Unitary
Development Plan Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New Development) and H.4.1
(Housing standards and guidelines).
14 The proposed residential units shall incorporate acoustic
insulation measures to ensure that the maximum noise level to be
permitted within dwellings with windows shut and any other
necessary means of ventilation provided shall not exceed the
"reasonable" limits contained in BS8233:1999 A minimum level of
sound insulation for windows – these being double glazed or a
secondary/hybrid secondary glazed system.
Reason: To comply with the “reasonable” limits contained in
BS8233:1999 designed to provide a reasonable standard of living
conditions for future occupiers and to meet Hounslow Unitary
Development Plan Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New development) and ENV-P.1.5
(Noise pollution).
15 The windows shown on the herby approved plans to be obscure
glazed shall be obscure glazed, hinged to open inwards and shall
not be repaired or replaced otherwise than with obscured glazing.
Reason. To prevent overlooking of the nearby premises in accordance
with policy ENV.B.1.1 New development)
16 No additional flank windows or other glazed openings shall be
formed in any wall of the buildings hereby approved without the
prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason. To protect the amenities of the neighbouring residential
property against increased overlooking with resultant loss of
privacy in accordance with policy ENV.B.1.1 New development)
17 Restriction of permitted development rights
-
18 Restriction of parking permits
19 Archaeological investigation
20 EA1 Condition
The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the
approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) prepared by Environ (Ref:
UK14-17159 Issue 2, dated 16 December 2011), and the following
mitigation measures detailed therein: M Finished floor levels are
set no lower than 6.8 m above Ordnance Datum (AOD). M No new
buildings or other permanent structures are to be located within 5
metres of the top of the bank of the River Brent. M Any new fencing
within 5 metres of the top of bank of the River Brent shall be of
an open nature. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the
proposed development and future occupants, and to ensure future
access to flood defences for maintenance.
Informative 1) Any works whatsoever in, under, over or within 16
metres of the top of the bank of the River Brent will require the
prior consent of the Environment Agency under the Water Resources
Act 1991 and the Thames Land Drainage Byelaws. Any fencing within 8
metres of the top of the bank should be of an open nature and not
cause an obstruction to flood flows. 2) Waste Comments - There are
public sewers crossing or close to your development. In order to
protect public sewers and to ensure that Thames Water can gain
access to those sewers for future repair and maintenance, approval
should be sought from Thames Water where the erection of a building
or an extension to a building or underpinning work would be over
the line of, or would come within 3 metres of, a public sewer.
Thames Water will usually refuse such approval in respect of the
construction of new buildings, but approval may be granted in some
cases for extensions to existing buildings. The applicant is
advised to contact Thames Water Developer Services on 0845 850 2777
to discuss the options available at this site. 3) Surface Water
Drainage - With regard to surface water drainage it is the
responsibility of a developer to make proper provision for drainage
to ground, water courses or a suitable sewer. In respect of surface
water it is recommended that the applicant should ensure that storm
flows are attenuated or regulated into the receiving public network
through on or off site storage. When it is proposed to connect to a
combined public sewer, the site drainage should be separate and
combined at the final manhole nearest the boundary. Connections are
not
-
permitted for the removal of Ground Water. Where the developer
proposes to discharge to a public sewer, prior approval from Thames
Water Developer Services will be required. They can be contacted on
0845 850 2777. Reason - to ensure that the surface water discharge
from the site shall not be detrimental to the existing sewerage
system.
Background Papers: The contents of files referenced on the front
page of this report and save for exempt or confidential information
as defined in the Local Government Act 1972, Sch. 12A Parts 1 and
2