For advice on how to make further written submissions or to register to speak on this item, please contact Governance & Democracy by emailing [email protected] or telephoning 020 7926 2170. Information is also available on the Lambeth website www.lambeth.gov.uk/democracy Site address Former Annie McCall Hospital and 37 to 39 Jeffrey’s Road, London, SW4 6QU Ward Stockwell Proposal Redevelopment of the former Annie McCall hospital site including extension at roof level and conversion of the existing building to create 13 residential units; conversion of 37-39 Jeffrey's Road to create 8 residential units; erection of a new 4 storey corner block to create 8 affordable housing units and erection of a part single, part two storey building to the rear of the site accommodating 350m2 of B1 space and a 2 storey dwelling with associated hard and soft landscaping cycle and refuse storage (Town Planning and Listed building Consent) Application type(s) Major Planning Application and Listed Building Consent Application ref(s) 12/04581/FUL and 12/04582/LB Validation date 7/12/2012 Case officer details Name: Kevin Tohill Tel: 020 7926 5021 Email: [email protected] Applicant Henley Homes Agent Mr Mark Pender: PPM Planning Limited Considerations/constraints Grade II Listed Building Recommendation(s) Grant planning permission subject to conditions and the signing of a s106 for developer contributions Report Review Department(s) or Organisation(s) Date consulted Governance & Democracy (legal) 13.02/2013 Date response Comments received summarised in para 14.02.2013 Yes For advice on how to make further written submissions or to register to speak on this item, please contact Governance & Democracy by emailing [email protected] or telephoning 020 7926 2170. Information is also available on the Lambeth website www.lambeth.gov.uk/democracy Consultation Department(s) or Organisation(s) Internal Crime Prevention Housing Housing & Investment Implementation s106 Parks and Open Space Conservation and Design Highways & Transport Trees Noise & Pollution Planning Policy Streetcare Policy, Equalities & Performance Consulted? (y/n) Date response Comments received summarised in report? (y/n) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 13.01.2013 12.02.2013 N/A Ongoing 07.01.2013 07.12.2012 04.01.2013 12.02.2013 N/A 12.02.2013 N/A N/A Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 06.01.2013 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 17.12.2012 N/A N/A See consultation responses for details N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A Yes External Fentiman Road, Richborne Terrace & Yes Dorset Road Residents Association Lansdowne Residents Association Yes Mursell Estate Group Yes Stockwell Park Residents Association Yes Council for British Archaeology Yes The Victorian Society Yes The Georgian Group Yes London Ecology Unit Yes Thames Water Yes Transport for London Yes Environment Agency Yes English Heritage Yes English Heritage (Archaeology) Yes Households Yes Background Documents Case File (this can be accessed via the Planning Advice Desk, Telephone 020 7926 1180) For advice on how to make further written submissions or to register to speak on this item, please contact Governance & Democracy by emailing [email protected] or telephoning 020 7926 2170. Information is also available on the Lambeth website www.lambeth.gov.uk/democracy 1 Summary of Main Issues 1.1 The main issues involved in this application are: • The impact of the proposed building on the heritage interest of the Grade II listed building; • The impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the townscape; • The impact of the proposal upon surrounding residential amenity in terms of visual intrusion, overbearing impact, a sense of enclosure, loss of light, privacy, noise and disturbance; • The acceptability of a residential use in this location; • The quality of the residential accommodation proposed; • The quantum and type of affordable housing provided; • The impact of the development upon the highway network, conditions of highway safety and levels of parking provision; • The ability of the proposal to reduce its energy demands through the use of renewable energy technologies and increased energy efficiency; • Whether the development would suitably minimise opportunities for crime; • Whether adequate refuse storage facilities would be provided for the development; and • Whether the development is inclusive of a sufficient package of s.106 mitigation to address otherwise unacceptable impacts upon the locality and upon local infrastructure. 2 Site Description 2.1 The application site is located on the corner of Jeffery’s Road and McCall Close on the site of the former Annie Mc Call hospital. The site includes a number of buildings which made up the Annie McCall maternity hospital and 37 - 39 Jeffery’s Road and surrounding gardens. The site is surrounded largely by residential properties to the north and west, sheltered housing to the southwest, industrial buildings to the south, and residential semi-detached and terraced properties to the east. 2.2 In the 1860's houses were built along Jeffery's Road, four of which became the Annie McCall Maternity Hospital. These were two pairs of semi-detached houses, No. 37-39 and No. 41-43 Jeffery’s Road. The hospital was extended along what is now McCall Close, with the demolition of two houses on the corner and the building of a specialist maternity wing on that corner and to the rear of the site, creating the main hospital building. The building was further extended in 1938 to create an outpatients ward on McCall Close. 2.3 The area experienced bombing during the Second World War, and the site experienced significant damage. The corner building was rendered uninhabitable and demolished in the 1950’s leaving the corner of the site vacant land to this day. 2.4 The area has the remnants of a Victorian street layout, which have been widely disrupted by bomb damage and post-war development. The south side of Jeffrey's Road, on either side of the site, retains the original layout of 4-storey villas set close together or terraced. The site is a significant gap in this pattern, where No. 41-43 was removed following war damage. 2.5 Facing this, No. 45 Jeffrey's Rd was replaced by a four storey block of flats built in the 1960's in an unsympathetic style. The post-war development significantly altered the urban character of the street, some larger building types have been introduced, notably the industrial estate to the south, also the church and flats to the north. 2.6 The buildings in the area are mostly brick with render details - sometimes with a base marked by render. The Victorian houses have a rendered base half-sunk into the ground, the Annie McCall wing has a fully rendered ground floor. 2.7 Brick colour varies, there are a variety of yellow bricks, mostly London Stock brick, but reds and browns as well, most importantly the red brick of the McCall wing. Roofs to the older buildings are mostly natural slate, newer buildings having concrete tiles of various sorts. 2.8 The main Annie McCall building which was recently listed in 2011 for its historic and Architectural value, has two clearly distinct aspects. The front to McCall Close is a formal Edwardian Baroque design, matched by a single-storey extension of 1938. By contrast, the rear of the building is a white-rendered protomodernist-design. All the main rooms of the original hospital are on this south-facing side, with only service rooms behind the Baroque facade to the north. 2.9 The Maternity Hospital vacated the Annie McCall wing about 25 years ago. Artists have used the empty rooms and have been able to maintain basic weatherproofing to the majority of the building. The fabric of the building is suffering from long neglect and is in need of renovation. The roof has collapsed in one part, and several rooms are too unsafe to enter. 2.10 The building has three tall storeys, with large, ward rooms lit by large windows. As well as a pitched roof over the entrance facade, there is an extensive flat roof designed to be used as a fourth floor; an open-air recreation area. Tall chimneys divide this space into sections. 2.11 To the south of the building, a large garden has been established since the 1950's by aggregating pieces of land behind other properties on Jeffrey's Road. This garden has been used and maintained creatively in recent years, but there has been little control of the trees which are beginning to dominate the space, and threatening the adjacent buildings. 3 Relevant Planning History 3.1 The main Annie McCall building which was listed in 2011 for its historic and Architectural value. 3.2 In July 2012 the applicant entered into a Planning Performance Agreement (PPA) with the council with a view to working with officers of the council in order to bring forward an acceptable redevelopment scheme for the site. This is a public document which set out an agreement between the developer and the council on how the pre-application process would be managed. The PPA has culminated in the submission of this current planning application for the local planning authority’s full consideration. 3.3 Whilst entering into a PPA by no way means that a subsequent application will be rubber stamped, PPAs are increasingly being used by Lambeth on schemes of this nature to proactively and positively engage with developers to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area; in accordance with the expectations conferred upon LPAs by the NPPF. It is advised that in this instance the applicant has responded positively and openly to all advice given. It must therefore be borne in mind that whilst this officer recommendation of approval is being presented having regard to the merits of the scheme currently before the LPA for consideration, those ‘merits’ have been largely and positively influenced by the extensive pre-application negotiations and discussions that preceded the application submission. 4 Proposal 4.1 Planning permission is sought for the redevelopment of the former Annie McCall hospital site. Town Planning and Listed Building Consent are sought. 4.2 The proposal falls into four parts: Block A: 37-39 Jeffrey’s Road - Conversion of the two existing four-storey, semidetached houses into 8 one bedroom flats; 7 for private sale and 1 shared ownership. Block B: Former Annie McCall Hospital – Roof top extension to and conversion of the listed building into 13 residential units including 7 x one-bed units and 6 x two bedroom units for private sale. Block C: Former 41-43 Jeffrey’s Road - Erection of a new four-storey affordable housing block on the currently vacant corner site. This would provide 8 units including: 1 x one-bed, 3 x two-bed and 4 x three bedroom units which would all be affordable social rent. Block D: Garden - A new part one, part two storey building for studio workspaces (350sqm of B1 floor space) with a 1 x one-bedroom lodge. 4.3 The development would provide 30% affordable housing (by unit) on a 89/11 split between Affordable Rent and Intermediate products. The dwelling size and tenure mix would be as follows: Market 1 bed units 2 bed units 3 bed units TOTALS 15 6 21 Affordable Rented Units 1 3 4 8 Intermediate Units 1 1 TOTALS 17 9 4 30 4.4 The proposal includes 350sqm of studio accommodation (falling within use class B1) to the rear of the site within the garden to allow the artists currently occupying the building space within the site to carry on their work at a significantly reduced rate of rent. The proposed studios would be split between 4 x 60 sqm studios, which can be further segregated into 15sqm spaces as per the users requirements. This block would also include a 20sqm office space located at ground floor level, between the 2 two-storey studio spaces. There would also be a further 75sqm, single-storey exhibition space to the north end of the studios. 4.5 The studio space would be located to the rear of the whole site, within the existing garden space and would have independent access to Jeffery’s Road via an existing lane running between Barrington Court and 33-35 Jeffery’s Road. The studios would also benefit from approximately 400sqm of surrounding external amenity space within the garden. 4.6 In terms of amenity space provision for the residential element, the majority of the ground floor units would have access to private garden space, block C would include balconies for all units, three of the units within the roof top extension on the existing Annie McCall Hospital would include roof terraces and all units would have access to a rear communal garden which would be approximately 445sqm. 4.7 In design terms the proposal would retain the external appearance of the existing buildings, reinstating the features which have been lost and completely renovating the buildings using traditional materials and features. 4.8 The proposal would include a roof extension on the listed Annie McCall building located between the existing chimney stacks which maintains the form of the existing building. On the south side it is set back from the roof edge and reflects the rational glazing below. On the north side, it repeats the existing pitched roof over the stair to make a mansard type of roof. The second extension is to the rear of 37-39 above the existing back additions. Both extensions would be finished in materials to match the existing. 4.9 The new corner block (block C) would continue the existing building line of the properties on Jeffery’s Road. The massing matches that of the pairs of houses along Jeffrey's Road. The height matches the parapet of the McCall wing, which in turn is set approximately at eaves level with the houses on Jeffrey's Road. 4.10 Refuse and recycling storage would be provided at ground floor level at various assessable locations surrounding the different blocks. Cycle stores would also be located in several locations, appropriate to the blocks which they are associated with. 5 Consultations and Responses 5.1 202 letters of consultation were sent out to neighbouring property addresses. 5.2 Four site notices were displayed on the 14th December 2012 and a press notice was published on 19th December 2012 in the Weekender. Internal Consultation Responses 5.3 Highways and Transportation - Supports the scheme subject to conditions of s.106 obligations. Welcomes the electric charging points, level of cycle parking provision and overall layout of the scheme and landscaping. 5.4 Planning Policy - Raises no objection. Supports the mix of units, quantum of affordable housing, and the re-provision of the B1 use within the rear gardens of the site. 5.5 Conservation and Design - Supports the development, subject to conditions. 5.6 Crime Prevention Design Advisor – Supports the scheme. Has met with the applicants throughout the design process and the various issues raised at that time have been addressed. 5.7 Housing - Supportive of the scheme, including the additional housing, the mix of units, provision of family sized affordable housing units, layout, large scale of the units and standard of accommodation proposed. 5.8 Arboricultural Officer - Raises no objection, subject to conditions relating to landscaping and the removal of trees. 5.9 Parks and Open Space – Supports the scheme, subject to conditions requiring them to check the site for protected species before commencement of development and to them providing compensatory new landscaping and ecological features. External Consultation Responses 5.10 Environment Agency - No objection has been raised. 5.11 English Heritage – Have not formally responded to the planning application consultation, but have been involved with the development throughout the preapplication process. It is understood by Lambeth officers that the concerns that EH officers raised at pre-application stage have been addressed. 5.12 Council for British Archaeology – No objection 5.13 London and Middlesex Archaelogical Society - Raise no objection to the conversion of 37-39 Jeffery’s Road, the Former Annie McCall Hospital building and no objection to the proposed studios and lodge in the rear garden but have raised objection to rooftop extension and internal layout and the impact these elements could have on the listed building. Concern is also raised to the corner block ‘C’ building as this could have an impact on the setting of the listed building. 5.14 Neighbour Consultation No. of Letters sent No. of Objections No. in support Comments 202 63 37 1 Comments: Officer’s Response: OBJECTIONS Loss of community use/building The proposal includes artist’s studios to the rear of the site within the garden, specifically for the existing groups currently using the site. Overlooking of neighbouring Officers consider that due to the distances between the residential properties and proposal and neighbouring properties and the design of associated loss of privacy the development to avoid loss of privacy there should be no significant impacts on neighbouring amenity. Further details are set out in section 8 of this report. Loss of security to neighbouring The site will be used mostly for residential dwellings properties therefore increasing the natural surveillance of the site and surrounding area. Furthermore the development will be conditioned to submit a crime prevention strategy to be approved by the Council to ensure the development and surrounding buildings are safe and secure. The artist group should maintained at the property be The proposal includes artist’s studios to the rear of the site within the garden, specifically for the existing groups currently using the site. The artists can use the proposed studios and not have to move from the site. The loss of the eco garden and associated flora and wildlife Retention of greenspaces is vital given all other development coming forward in the area. The Councils Parks and Open Space officer has assessed the submitted Habitat assessments and knowing the site commented on the development, stating that the site isn’t a current Local Wildlife Site (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation or SINC) for Lambeth and hasn’t been identified as such in any previous ecological surveys. As such there would be no automatic presumption against development or loss of the site through the existing Core Strategy or Local Plan policies. The site isn’t a public accessible greenspace and as the amount of available open space wasn’t identified in the Lambeth Open Spaces Strategy (OSS) as it’s less than the 0.2 ha threshold. As such there is no objections raised to the development of the site, and the proposals may result in the open areas being improved or better managed as a consequence. The area does not need houses as much as it needs community engagement facilities such as the existing studios. There are already a large number of empty homes in the area. Too much non-family housing The Councils 2012 Housing Needs Survey sets out the shortage for housing in the borough and the proposed development has been developed to address the needs of the borough. The housing Needs Survey shows an acute shortage in larger family sized housing. The residents in Stockwell Studios were promised a long lease in return for renovating and looking after the building, which they have done. This is not a planning matter, renovations have been undertaken to make the building safe for occupation, the listed building itself is in a state of disrepair and in desperate need for full renovation. See above. The council is more concerned with This is not a planning matter and no alternative scheme capital receipt than other matters has been brought forward to planning. By failing to consider Stockwell Studios not for profit scheme to deliver affordable housing and an art scheme, Lambeth Council is failing to be a ‘Co-operative Council’ The residential development would Lambeth officers consider this scheme well designed. be soulless. Harm to the listed building The roof extension undermine the original roof terrace designed for patients to take air. The conversion obscures the original layout. The development has been progressed through careful consideration for the heritage asset through work with the Council’s conservation officers, English Heritage, the developer’s heritage advisor and architects to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the listed building while bringing the building back into full use from its current dilapidated state. The building is not at risk as it is not The building is in a dilapidated state and has only been included on English Heritage’s ‘at renovated to the point of making it safe for occupation. risk’ register. The original character and appearance of the heritage asset is being loss through the lack of needed works to the fabric of the listed building. Conversion of 37/39 Jeffreys Road conflicts with core strategy policy S2 as Jeffreys Road is identified as a street under conversion stress. Jeffreys Road is identified within the development plan as a street under conversion stress. Within such streets Policy S2 generally affords protection to family sized housing from conversion so as "to ensure mixed and balanced communities with a choice of family sized housing". In this instance however the conversion of 3739 Jeffreys Road to provide 8 x 1 bed units needs to be considered in the context of the comprehensive redevelopment of the application site; inclusive of the planning benefits that would be derived. In particular the conversion of 37-39 Jeffreys Road contributes to the overall housing offer inclusive of a choice of units and a large number of affordable family housing units. Such would contribute considerably to Lambeth's Housing needs and demand. In the circumstances officers are satisfied that the conversion of 37-39 Jeffreys Road as part of the comprehensive redevelopment of the application site would not unduly prejudice the retention/provision of a mixed and balance community so as to conflict unacceptably with Core Strategy Policy S2. Increased parking stress in the area. The development will be car free. Shortfall in replacement employment floorspace – 1,125sqm to 350 sqm. The applicant has failed to provide marketing evidence to demonstrate that the existing B1 use/building is surplus. The current building is much larger than the proposed studio space however the existing building is substantially underused with entire floors being occupied by a very small number of people. The proposed artists studios would provide modern accommodation which officers consider appropriate in size to the level of occupancy within the building at its current levels. Block C will obscured public views The Councils conservation officers, English Heritage and of the listed building heritage experts do not consider that this would be the case. The existing building is currently surrounded by hoardings and badly neglected to the point that you would not notice the listed building. This development would reinstate the appearance of the listed building and substantially improve the whole site to enhance the appearance of the listed building. Block C is unsympathetic to the surroundings. There is no pitched roof or bay window and the inclusions of balconies would detract from the appearance of the street scene. The development of Block C has been subject to significant discussions with expects and officers and the modern appearance of the block is considered to reflect the appearance of surrounding buildings and the listed building, avoiding a modern poor copy of the features along Jeffery’s Road. Too high density The density is appropriate for a location with good transport links as this has. SUPPORTING COMMENTS The site is well redevelopment in need of Noted Developing part of the gardens for Noted the current artists is a community benefit. It addresses the issues of squatters Noted at the site. Provides new well designed homes Agreed Supports enterprise and business. Agreed Ensures artists can stay at the site Agreed and continue their community work Provides much needed affordable Agreed housing Restoration of the listed building Agreed Contributing to regeneration and Agreed investment in the area. Ecological features reintroduced. 5.15 could be The rear garden will largely be retained, as a whole garden. Councillor Imogen Walker has expressed concern about the planning application and has specifically requested that this planning application be brought before the Planning Applications Committee. 6 Planning Policy Considerations National Guidance 6.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires planning decisions to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan in Lambeth is the London Plan (‘consolidated with Alterations since 2004’ published in February 2008), the Lambeth Core Strategy (adopted 19 January 2011) and the remaining saved policies in the ‘Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011’. Material considerations include national planning policy statements and planning policy guidance. 6.2 On 27th March 2012, the Government published the National Planning Policy Framework. This document had the immediate effect of replacing various documents including, amongst other documents, PPS1, PPS3, PPS4, PPS5, PPS12, PPG13, PPG17 and Circular 05/2005: Planning Obligations. 6.3 The National Planning Policy Framework sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. It reinforces the Development Plan led system and does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. The NPPF sets out that the National Planning Policy Framework must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration in planning decisions. Moreover, it sets out that in assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The London Plan 2011 6.4 The London Plan was published in July 2011 and replaces the previous versions which were adopted in February 2004 and updated in February 2008. The London Plan is the Mayor’s development strategy for Greater London and provides strategic planning guidance for development and use of land and buildings within the London region. 6.5 The London Plan is the overall strategic plan for London, and it sets out a fully integrated economic, environmental, transport and social framework for the development of the capital over the next 20-25 years. It forms part of the development plan for Greater London. All Borough plan policies are required to be in general conformity with the London Plan policies 6.6 The key policies of the plan considered relevant in this case are: • • • • • • • • • Policy 1.1 - Delivering the strategic vision and objectives for London Policy 2.9 - Inner London Policy 3.3 - Increasing housing supply Policy 3.4 - Optimising housing potential Policy 3.5 - Quality and design of housing developments Policy 3.8 - Housing choice Policy 3.10 - Definition of affordable housing Policy 3.11 - Affordable housing targets Policy 3.12 - Negotiating affordable housing on individual private and mixed use schemes • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Policy 3.13 - Affordable housing thresholds Policy 4.1 - Developing London’s economy Policy 5.1 - Climate change mitigation Policy 5.2 - Minimising carbon dioxide emissions Policy 5.3 - Sustainable design and construction Policy 5.6 - Decentralised energy in development proposals Policy 5.7 - Renewable energy Policy 5.8 - Innovative energy technologies Policy 5.9 - Overheating and cooling Policy 5.10 - Urban Greening Policy 5.11 - Green roofs and development site environs Policy 5.13 - Sustainable drainage Policy 5.14 - Water quality and wastewater infrastructure Policy 5.15 - Water use and supplies Policy 5.16 - Waste self-sufficiency Policy 5.18 - Construction, excavation and demolition waste Policy 6.3 - Assessing effects of development on transport capacity Policy 6.5 - Funding crossrail and other statically important transport infrastructure Policy 6.7 - Better streets and surface transport Policy 6.9 - Cycling Policy 6.10 - Walking Policy 6.13 - Parking Policy 7.1 - Building London’s neighbourhoods and communities Policy 7.2 - An inclusive environment Policy 7.3 - Designing out crime Policy 7.4 - Local character Policy 7.5 - Public realm Policy 7.6 - Architecture Policy 7.14 - Improving air quality Policy 7.15 - Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes Policy 7.18 - Protecting local open space and addressing local deficiency Policy 8.2 - Planning obligations Policy 8.3 - Community Infrastructure Levy Lambeth LDF Core Strategy (2011) 6.7 The following policies are considered to be of relevance to the assessment of this application: • • • • • • • • • • Policy S1 - Delivering the Vision and Objectives Policy S2 - Housing Policy S3 - Economic Development Policy S4 - Transport Policy S5 – Open space Policy S6 – Flood Risk Policy S7 - Sustainable Design and Construction Policy S8 - Sustainable Waste Management Policy S9 - Quality of the Built Environment Policy S10 - Planning Obligations London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): ‘Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011’ 6.8 The following policies are considered to be of relevance to the assessment of this application: • • • • • • • • • • • • • Policy 7 - Protection of Residential Amenity Policy 9 - Transport Impact Policy 14 - Parking and Traffic Restraint Policy 16 - Affordable Housing Policy 17 – Flat Conversions Policy 23 – Protection and Location of other Employment Uses Policy 30 – Arts and Culture Policy 31 - Streets, Character and Layout Policy 32 - Community Safety/Designing Out Crime Policy 33 - Building Scale and Design Policy 35 - Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 39 - Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design Policy 45 Listed Buildings Local Guidance 6.9 The council has adopted the following Supplementary Planning Documents, which are relevant: • SPD: Housing Development and House Conversions • SPD: Safer Built Environments • SPD: Sustainable Design and Construction • SPD: S106 Planning Obligations 6.10 The Council’s ‘Waste & Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements: Guidance for Architects and Developers’ (2006) is also relevant. Regional Guidance 6.11 The following regional guidance is relevant to the application proposal: • • • • • • • • • Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (2012) SPG: Planning for Equality and Diversity in London (2007); SPG: Sustainable Design and Construction (2006); London Housing Design Guide Interim Addition (August 2010); London Housing Strategy (2010) and Revised Consultation Document (2011); Delivering London's Energy Future: the Mayor's climate change mitigation and energy strategy (2011); SPG: Accessible London: Achieving an Inclusive Environment (April 2004); BPG: Wheelchair Accessible Housing (September 2007); and Play and Informal Recreation SPG (2012) 7 Land Use 7.1 Housing 7.1.1 Core Strategy Policy S2 (housing) seeks the provision of at least 7,700 net additional dwellings across the borough between 2010/2011 and 2017/17 in line with the London Plan. The London Plan sets an annual monitoring target for Lambeth of 1,195 new homes. In addition, the London Plan seeks to maximise affordable housing provision and ensure an average of at least 13,200 more affordable homes per year in London over the term of the Plan. 7.1.2 The development would deliver 30 residential units, 9 of which would be affordable the level of affordable housing provision and the tenure mix is discussed in more detail below. It is therefore the case that the development would contribute significantly towards addressing Lambeth’s (and London’s) housing needs and demand. This is without doubt a substantial planning/public benefit that weighs heavily in favour of the development. 7.1.3 Jeffreys Road is identified within the development plan as a street under conversion stress. Within such streets Policy S2 generally affords protection to family sized housing from conversion so as "to ensure mixed and balanced communities with a choice of family sized housing". In this instance however the conversion of 37-39 Jeffreys Road to provide 8 x 1 bed units needs to be considered in the context of the comprehensive redevelopment of the application site; inclusive of the planning benefits that would be derived. In particular the conversion of 37-39 Jeffreys Road contributes to the overall housing offer inclusive of a choice of units and a large number of affordable family housing units. Such would contribute considerably to Lambeth's Housing needs and demand. In the circumstances officers are satisfied that the conversion of 37-39 Jeffreys Road as part of the comprehensive redevelopment of the application site would not unduly prejudice the retention/provision of a mixed and balance community so as to conflict unacceptably with Core Strategy Policy S2. 7.2 Employment 7.2.1 With regard to the site’s change of use, the majority of the site has been used for many years as commercial artists’ studios with a smaller part for residential. The 2011 Lambeth Core Strategy de-designated the site as outside of a Key Industrial Business Area (KIBA) where uses should be for industry, business and other similar uses associated with industrial areas. Core Strategy and saved Lambeth UDP policies for employment sites outside of KIBAs therefore apply. 7.2.2 Policy S3(b) states that the council will maintain a stock of sites and premises outside KIBAs in commercial use across the borough, subject to the suitability of the site and location and should be read alongside saved Lambeth UDP Policies 23 and 30. 7.2.3 UDP Policy 30 (Arts and Culture) sets out that the provision of additional accommodation for the creative industries is promoted and existing accommodation is protected by Policy 23. In addition, Policy 30 requires that premises for creative industries are protected for that use (except where these have been introduced as temporary uses pending redevelopment). In this latter regard, the proposed B1 space is intended to re-house the existing artist groups on site and such would be prioritised by way of the s106 agreement; albeit that should for any reason the artist groups not take occupation then the space would default to a general B1 use. 7.2.4 In terms of Policy 23 (Protection and Location of other Employment Uses) protects employment uses outside of KIBAs unless certain exception criteria are met. The development would include a net reduction in employment space at the site, but the existing building is currently under-utilised in terms of employment occupation densities. Exception criterion (iii) sets out that exceptionally, where a scheme has substantial other planning benefits and where development of part of the site is compensated by for example increasing the amount of employment on the remainder and/or providing modern small business units. In this instance the existing artist groups are to be re-housed on site so the redevelopment would not result in any loss of employment. If for any reason the artists do not take residence of the B1 space, a conventional B1 use of the space could generate in the region of 29 jobs (using the HCA Employment Densities Guide). Either way, these are planning benefits of the scheme which, when considered in conjunction with the other benefits of the development (the provision of new housing, the provision of affordable housing, the regeneration benefits for the locality, the sensitive restoration of listed building and the bringing back of a currently under utilised listed building into a sustainable long term use) are substantial such as to satisfy exception criteria (iii). 7.2.5 The site is an entirely suitable location for continued employment use. The existing artist groups have operated from the site for 25 years without undue conflict with neighbouring residential properties. Moreover, B1 uses are, by definition, uses which can operate in close proximity to residential properties without causing harm to amenity. 7.3 Residential Accommodation - Size Mix, Tenure and Quality 7.3.1 Policy S2 sets out that with a residential major development, at least 50 per cent of housing should be affordable where public subsidy is available, or 40 per cent without public subsidy, subject to housing priorities and, where relevant, to independently validated evidence of viability. Furthermore, there is an expectation that the mix of affordable housing should be 70 per cent social rented and 30 per cent intermediate. 7.3.2 London Plan Policies 3.9 to 3.12 assert the need for mixed and balanced communities and in this context seek to maximise affordable housing provision. In order to give impetus to a strong and diverse intermediate housing sector, the London Plan advises that 60% of the affordable housing provision should be for social rent and 40% for intermediate rent or sale and that priority should be accorded to provision of affordable family housing. 7.3.3 Whilst the current development plan does not make specific reference to Affordable Rent products, the Mayor’s Housing SPG clearly sets out that the new Affordable Rent product is intended to address the same housing needs as Social Rented housing. Affordable Housing Offer and Dwelling Mix 7.3.4 The development would provide 30% affordable housing (by unit) on a 89/11 split between Affordable Rent and Intermediate products. It has been assumed that no grant will be available for the development. The dwelling size and tenure mix would be as follows: Market 7.3.5 Affordable Intermediate TOTALS Rented Units Units 1 bed units 15 1 1 17 2 bed units 6 3 9 3 bed units 4 4 TOTALS 21 8 1 30 The affordable rented housing is provided in Block C, as this facilitates the preferred management arrangements of the Register Providers. 50% (by unit) of the Affordable Rent accommodation would be provided as family sized units (3+ bed); in excess of the draft revised London Housing Strategy, which sets out that 36 per cent of the new Affordable Rented homes will be family-sized. The need for Affordable Rent products to be skewed towards family sized units is also echoed in the council’s own Housing Needs Survey. By contrast, the market housing provision would be skewed towards 1 and 2 units; also in conjunction with the recommendations of Lambeth’s Housing Needs Survey. 7.3.6 Given the overall numbers of affordable housing units proposed, provision has been mainly constricted to Affordable Rented units. Whilst not a 60/40 or 70/30 split as generally required by the Development Plan policies, such is considered acceptable as the greater proportion of family sized affordable rented units than would otherwise be secured better addresses the Borough’s priority housing need. A Core Strategy policy compliant 40% affordable housing provision and 70/30 split could potentially be provided, but such would provide a lower number of affordable family homes. It should be noted that if measured by habitable room, the development would be providing 40% affordable housing. 7.3.7 The upper limit of the rent levels of the affordable rent units will be set within the s.106 agreement to appropriately ensure that they are affordable to prospect tenants, having regard to rent values that housing benefit caps would permit. 7.3.8 For the reasons set out above, the residential mix is considered acceptable. Quality of the Resident Units 7.3.9 All of the new dwellings have been designed to meet the Mayor’s London Housing Design Guide and the Council’s SPD (Housing Development and House Conversions) in terms of size and layout. In addition, all of the new build units would be designed and constructed to the Lifetime Homes Standards whilst the flats to be provided within the converted listed buildings will meet the criteria as far as is practicable. In addition, all units have been designed to maximise views and aspect which results in no units being single aspect and the vast majority being duel aspect. 7.3.10 In terms of daylighting, all rooms/units would achieve the BRE recommended guidelines for Average Daylight Factors (ADF). Amenity & Play Space 7.3.11 7.3.12 7.3.13 The scheme proposes amenity space throughout the site as follows: Private balconies/terraces/ground level 324 sqm gardens Shared gardens 445 sqm Total 769 sqm This provision is considerably over the minimum 350 sqm amenity space requirement (either as communal or as private space) which the council’s SPD (Housing Development and House Conversions) would dictate a residential development of this quantum should provide. It is considered to be a generous provision. Using the methodology within the Mayor’s Play and Informal Recreation SPG, the anticipated child yield of the development would be 13.6. The guidance sets a benchmark requirement of 10sqm of useable child playspace to be provided per child, with a presumption that under 5 child playspace is to be provided on site and that provision for over 4s may be provided via off-site contributions if there are suitable facilities in the locality. In this context the development would be expected to make provision for 136 sqm of playspace, with at least 40 sqm of under 5s provision on site. It should be noted that Lambeth’s SPD is explicit in that the delivery requirements for children’s play space provision should be considered as part and parcel of the overall amenity space provision for the site, and not over and above. 7.3.14 The scheme includes a sizable rear garden area which would be suitable for the location of the children’s play area while retaining sufficient additional space to accommodate the required communal amenity space for the residential units. The development has well in excess of this area allocated to External Amenity Space including Children’s Park Space, this is therefore considered acceptable subject to condition. 7.3.15 In addition to the on-site amenity and play space provision, the development would be inclusive of s.106 financial contributions of i) £40,678.70 and ii) £10,649.50 towards improvements to off-site i) parks and open spaces and ii) childrens’ playspace provision respectively. Such monies would be directed, via the council’s s.106 protocol, towards facilities within the vicinity of the site so as to mitigate the otherwise unacceptable impacts of the development. 7.3.16 The above provisions are considered appropriate to cater for the amenity space and play space needs that would likely arise from the development. 7.4 Land Use Conclusions 7.4.1 In summary the proposed mixed use development accords with the Council’s planning policies, and the NPPF’s presumption in favour of sustainable development (para 14) which recognises that housing development is a significant contributor to economic growth. As a result the proposal is acceptable in principle in terms of land use through its provision of housing and employment. 8 Impact on Neighbouring Amenity 8.1 Policy 7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan deals with the protection of residential amenity. It states that the right of people to the quiet enjoyment of their homes will be respected. It also states that in mixed use areas, the scale, design, layout, hours of use, intensity, concentration, and location of non-residential uses will be controlled in relation to residential uses in order to protect residential amenity. 8.2 Saved UDP Policy 9 relates to impacts during the construction period. 8.3 Adopted UDP Policy 36 (c) sets out criteria which new development should not unacceptably affect. These protected criteria are as follows: privacy; outlook and associated unacceptable sense of enclosure; and, sun/daylight. The above mentioned daylight and sunlight assessment confirms that there would be a minimal impact on neighbouring properties. 8.4 In the first instance the development would not be introducing any uses that would undue conflict with neighbouring residential uses of the site. This is an existing residential area and the artist groups have been operating on the site for some 25 years. Indeed, B1 use by definition is acceptable in residential areas. 8.5 In terms of the development works, the development largely includes the conversion of the existing Annie McCall hospital and 37-39 Jeffery’s Road, although new build development and extension is included. 8.6 The proposed new buildings include the four storey residential building on the corner of Jeffery’s Road and McCall Close, adjoining 37-39 Jeffery’s Road. This building is located within a currently vacant plot which historically housed a much larger building than was typical of the Street. The block would be located some 15m from the flank wall of No. 45 Jeffery’s Road and some 20m from the opposite buildings across Jeffery’s Road. At these distances it is considered that the proposal which is or comparable size to the surrounding buildings on Jeffery’s Road would have no impact on neighbouring properties and the distances would be sufficient to avoid any loss of privacy. 8.7 To the rear of the site the proposed artists studios would be located within the rear corner of the garden, bounded to the rear by the existing high walls of the industrial park to the south of the site. Due to this location adjoining the existing industrial buildings and at a distance of over 20m from the rear windows of Barrington Court it is considered that there would be no unacceptable impact upon residential amenity in terms of loss of daylight, sunlight, outlook or privacy. 8.8 The proposed extension on the roof of the former Annie McCall Hospital has been set back significantly from the rear boundary wall to avoid any impact on neighbouring properties in terms of over shadowing or loss of privacy. While the rear windows and small terrace near 33-35 Jeffery’s Road would be approximately 15m from the nearest rear windows, the set back from the boundary and the angles of the windows would prevent overlooking. Furthermore the roof terrace for this nearest proposed unit would intentionally serve the main bedroom and not the main living room to avoid more regular use of the space. 8.9 The proposed rear extensions to the rear of 37-39 Jeffery’s Road would be located within relatively close proximity to the rear of the adjacent property, No. 33-35 Jeffery’s Road. No windows are proposed on this elevation to avoid overlooking and loss of privacy. 8.10 The submitted daylight, sunlight and overshadowing report identifies that all neighbouring windows other than the lower ground floor level window set in the projecting rear range at the back of No. 35 Jeffrey’s Road will retain levels of daylight and sunlight in accordance with BRE guide levels. The window in question will experience only a marginal reduction in its VSC level as a result of the development and in any event appears to be a secondary window serving a room that also benefits from a west facing window, which itself will be unaffected by the development. 8.11 Overall, the submitted evidence demonstrates that the level of compliance with the BRE guide levels amongst neighbouring properties is very high for an urban environment in Inner London, particularly taking account of the flexibility of the BRE guidance and its basis on a suburban scale of development. 8.12 Noise, disturbance and inconvenience during the construction period can be appropriately minimised through good practice and the recommended conditions. 8.13 In terms of its impact upon neighbouring residential amenity, the development need not therefore fail against the relevant policies of the Development Plan; namely UDP Policies 7, 9 and 33. 9 Design 9.1 Policy S9 of the Lambeth LDF Core Strategy states that the Council will improve and maintain the quality of the built environment and its liveability by seeking the highest quality of design in all new buildings, alterations and extensions and, of the public realm. Impact on the Grade II Listed Building 9.2 The former Annie McCall hospital is a unique building of historic and architectural value which was Grade II listed in 2011. Its cultural significance lies in the pivotal role it plays in women’s history and their contribution to the medical and architectural professions. 9.3 Despite some inappropriate interventions, there are many historic features of note in this building; these have been identified and documented extensively in the applicant’s heritage statement and have been used to inform the development of the scheme. The historic floorplans would remain legible, the historic fabric would be left intact and, where appropriate, damaged or missing features of note have been proposed for reinstatement. 9.4 At present, the building is difficult to appreciate from the public realm. The applicant has worked closely with Council officers to design an entrance to the building which respects the traditional design whilst making the boundary treatment less defensive. Officers support the reinstatement of the traditional gates and the sensitive landscaping works proposed. The retention and minimal intervention to the rear garden space is welcomed and the landscaping proposals respect the desire to retain the garden largely as is, with the appearance that it has not been partitioned off through the use of low hedging and fences. 9.5 Officers have extensively discussed the proposed extensions to the listed building with English heritage and consider them to be appropriate to context; provided details are secured via condition. Officers consider the works likely to remain subordinate to the host building and unlikely to affect its historical significance. Overall, it is considered to be a sensitive scheme which will serve to bring a currently under-utilised building back into full use. Scale, Massing and Design 9.6 The new development on the site was developed in close consultation with the planning department at pre-application stage. Officers raised a number of issues with previous proposals and these concerns were considered and ultimately addressed by the applicant in a meaningful and evolving design process. The bulk, massing and height are appropriate for the context; serving to punctuate the corner without over dominating the listed building. The fenestration pattern, vertical hierarchy and boundary treatments provide a contemporary interpretation of the traditional character of the Victorian villas at 37-39 Jeffrey’s Road. Finer detailing, such as materials, shall be controlled by condition. 9.7 Refuse, recycling and cycle storage have been incorporated meaningfully into the development. 9.8 37 - 39 Jeffrey’s Road are a pair of semi detached Victorian villas which would largely remain unaltered on the front elevation. Extensions to the rear are considered appropriate in the context of the whole site redevelopment, maintaining the building lines of the existing back addition. 9.9 The proposed development to the rear of the site is in a discreet location along the existing site boundary and is subordinate in height and sensitive in its design. Officers consider the proposal appropriate in the context of the site given the use and modest scale, located to the rear of the garden, adjoining the KIBA industrial park, subject to details being secured via condition. 9.10 The proposed development is considered to provide a high quality and comprehensive solution to the development of this prominent location on the corner of Jeffery’s Road and McCall Close, enhancing views from the surrounding area to the Annie McCall grade II listed building. The development would fit in well within the context of the site in terms of scale and massing with regard to the adjoining buildings within the site and wider Jeffery’s Road. Officers consider the proposal appropriate and inline with Council policy. Design Conclusions 9.11 Overall, conservation and design officers are supportive of the proposed development. The layout, height and form of the building are acceptable and would not have a negative impact on nearby heritage assets. As such, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with London Plan and UDP policies relating to urban design. Overall the proposal is considered to be of a high quality design and subject to condition, would have a positive impact on the surrounding townscape, complying with Council and London Plan policies. (London Plan: policy 7.7 and LBL Policies: [CS] S9 and [UDP] 31, 32, 33, 39, 40, 41, 45 & 47) 10 Traffic and Parking 10.1 Policy 9 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that development will be assessed for their transport impacts, including cumulative impacts on highway safety, the environment and road network, and on all transport modes. 10.2 Policy S4 of the Lambeth LDF Core Strategy states that the Council will achieve transport objectives by requiring development to be appropriate to the level of public transport accessibility and capacity in the area. 10.3 The site has a PTAL score of 4, which is considered ‘good’. Increased housing density is encouraged within areas of good public transport accessibility, as are car free developments. The site is located within CPZ “Stockwell S”, where parking stress is known to be high. The Transport Statement states that the developer is willing to designate all the residential units as parking permit free, which would be secured via S106. There are also several Car Club bays within a 400m walk of the site. 10.4 The applicant has proposed that the development would be car free and transport offices welcome this proposal, as the site is well serviced by public transport including the Northern and Victoria line underground stations and numerous bus stops within walking distance. 10.5 The s.106 would ensure the delivery of a Travel Plan so as to reduce reliance on the private car and promote more sustainable modes of transport. 10.6 34 cycle parking spaces are proposed within the site, which meets London Plan standards. Several stores are positioned across the site to serve each of the blocks. No cycle parking is shown for the 16 x studios in Block D. A small number of cycle stands should also be provided for the artists studios, this would be secured by condition. 10.7 A Construction Method Statement and Construction Management Plan would be secured by condition as requested by the Councils Transport department. 10.8 Subject to the conditions and s.106 obligations, officers are of the opinion that the development will not impact unacceptably upon either the function or safety of the surrounding highway network. The development would be inclusive of a range of mitigation measures that would mitigate as far as is practicable the impacts of the development upon parking stress in the area. In addition, the development would be inclusive of cycle parking and a travel plan; each reducing reliance on the private car and/or promoting more sustainable modes of transport. It is therefore considered that the development complies with the relevant transport policies of the Development Plan. 11 Biodiversity and Ecology 11.1 The application submissions include assessments of the ecological impacts of the application, in the form of a desk based exercise and field investigations, including a field-based bat assessment. Lambeth officers have assessed the information provided and consider that these studies are acceptable and provide sufficient detail on existing habitats and species to inform decisions as to future use, development and management of the site to protect any ecological value. The assessment concludes that impacts of the development will be low in that the habitats and species found on site are not of high ecological status and no legally protected species or sensitive ecological receptors have been identified on the site. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that removal of existing habitat from the site would not have a significant ecological effect, in that this habitat exists in abundance elsewhere near to the site, can be recreated elsewhere with minimal effort, or that habitat or equal if not better value can be created as part of the development through appropriate mitigation measures. 11.2 It is however recommended that a final site survey is carried out by a competent surveyor to ensure no new habitats or species which have ecological value, or legally protected from disturbance or destruction have become present on site. If any such protected habitats/species are found then it may be necessary to take action to avoid disturbance or loss of protected species/habitats. 11.3 The landscaping proposals for the development would be inclusive of ecological enhancements as part of any soft landscaping, ensuring that tree and shrub plantings have a fair proportion of native species or those which have ecological benefit. Final landscaping plans and schedules for the development would be submitted for approval by the Council pursuant to the recommended condition. 11.4 The site currently provides no public open space and the surrounding landscaped areas of the building are of low quality. However, there are opportunities to enhance local areas of accessible open space, if public space cannot be offered within the development site. Nearby public open spaces such as Larkhall Park, have management plans or master plans which identify features and assets that can be improved or developed to serve a wider community of users. A s106 contribution of £40,678.70 would be secured specifically for investment in such sites to provide residents of the development with improved public open space for the site and surrounding residents. 11.5 Subject to the recommended conditions officers are accepting that the redevelopment of the site need not prove unacceptably harmful to any bio-diversity features of acknowledged value and that opportunities could be secured to improve the biodiversity value of the site and of the surrounding open spaces. It follows that the development need not fail against UDP Policy 39 and Core Strategy Policy S5 in these regards. 12 Other Matters 12.1 Crime Prevention 12.2 Policy 32 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that development should enhance community safety and will not be permitted where opportunities for crime are created or where it results in an increased risk of public disorder. 12.3 The Council’s Crime Prevention Officers comments were incorporated into the design of the scheme, however to ensure the entrances and access points are fully secure, a condition is proposed should permission be granted to ensure compliance with the Secured by Design standards. 12.4 Sustainability and Renewable Energy 12.5 Lambeth Core Strategy Policy S7 requires all major developments to achieve a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions in line with the London Plan targets through energy efficient design, decentralised heat, cooling and power systems, and on site renewable energy generation. 12.6 The London Plan requires developments to make the fullest contribution to tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions, adopting sustainable design and construction measures and prioritising decentralised energy, including renewables. Policy 5.2 sets out a minimum target reduction for carbon dioxide emissions in buildings of 25% over the Target Emission Rates outlined in the national Building Regulations. The London Plan sets out that development proposals should contribute to this by minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the “be lean, be clean, be green” hierarchy: • • • Be Lean: The reduction of energy demand and CO² emissions from using less energy, in particular by adopting sustainable and passive design and construction measures; Be Clean: Proposals for the reduction of energy demand and CO² emissions through supplying energy efficiently; Be Green: Renewable energy technologies to be incorporated. 12.7 Policy 5.7 of the London Plan seeks to increase the proportion of energy generated from renewable sources. There is a presumption that all major development proposals will seek to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by at least 20 per cent through the use of on-site renewable energy generation wherever feasible. 12.8 Be Lean: Energy efficiency measures will be applied to the development. The development will exceed the minimum requirements of Part L1A, L2A and L1B for building envelope and services performance. Measures proposed include improvement to the building fabric air permeability and the use of heat recovery systems, including flue gas heat recovery and waste water heat recovery. The proposed new elements of the development will also reduce the effects of thermal bridging through the use of Accredited Construction Details and benefit from the use of mechanical ventilation heat recovery. The proposed energy conservation measures will reduce the regulated carbon dioxide emissions in comparison to the 2010 Building Regulations compliant case by 4.75 per cent. 12.9 Be Clean: The opportunity for the proposed development to link into an existing or planned decentralised energy network has been explored using the London Heat Map tool. At present there are no existing or proposed energy networks located within a feasible connection distance of the Jeffrey’s Road development site. In the absence of an existing energy network within a reasonable distance of the proposed development site, the report assesses the feasibility of incorporating a CHP communal heating system within the new build elements of the development. The incorporation of a communal system has been assessed and is deemed unfeasible given the constraints of the site and the energy use profile of the operational development. 12.10 Be Green: A feasibility study has been undertaken to establish the most suitable renewable technology for integration at the proposed development. Photovoltaic panels are the recommended renewable technology, providing the most cost effective carbon dioxide emission saving for the proposed development. A 24.8kWp, 180m² photovoltaic system mounted horizontally on the flat roof areas of Blocks B and C, combined with the Be Lean: energy conservation measures will provide a 25.84 per cent reduction in the CO2 emissions over the base case Building Regulations compliant development thereby meeting the requirements of London Plan Policy 5.2 for a 25% and the minimum energy requirements of Code level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. 12.11 The combined Be Lean and Be Green measures will also achieve the mandatory energy efficiency rating of >65 required to achieve a BREEAM Refurbishment Very Good rating for the conversion of the Grade II listed hospital building to residential apartments. 12.12 The specified photovoltaic system will provide a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of 22.14%, over the lean case development and would therefore allow the development to meet the renewable energy requirements of London Plan Policy 5.7 Renewable Energy for a 20% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. This energy assessment concludes that all viable reductions in total carbon dioxide emissions from the development have been achieved within the framework of the energy hierarchy to satisfy the policy requirements of the London Plan and Lambeth’s Core Strategy Policy S7. Archaeology 12.13 English Heritage (Archaeology) have been consulted and recommended that no archaeology requirements are needed in this instance. Refuse and Recycling Considerations 12.14 Policy S8 of the Core Strategy sets out that the Council will contribute to the sustainable management of waste in Lambeth. The proposed refuse storage arrangements/facilities have been calculated in accordance with Lambeth’s document ‘Waste & Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements - Guidance for Architects & Developers’. The recommended condition would ensure suitable provision and management in accordance with Core Strategy Policy S8. S106 Heads of Terms & Mayoral CIL 12.15 The development would deliver the following s.106 obligations: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Affordable Housing – To be secured Workspace to be prioritised for the existing artist groups at below market rents, although with a cascade clause so that if the artists do not take residence then the space may be used for general B1 uses. Education Contribution - £58,582.78 Health Contribution - £24,234.00 Libraries Contribution - £4,585.72 Sport & Leisure Contribution - £17,102.69 Parks & Open Spaces Contribution - £40,678.70 Children & Young People Play Space Contribution - £10,649.50 Travel Plan Submission and Monitoring Contribution of £1,000.00 Local Labour in Construction Contribution - £10,500.00 A permit capping agreement to prevent residents being eligible for on-street residents parking permit Compliance with existing section 106 sustainability measures and also a Commitment to achieve Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4. Local Labour in Construction Commitments: Promotion of opportunities for local residents. S106 monitoring and programme costs contribution - £8,899.15 12.16 The above package is considered reasonable to mitigate the otherwise unacceptable impacts of the development upon local infrastructure. The package has been negotiated having regard to the expectations set out in policy (Core Strategy Policy S10 and the Council’s adopted SPD: S106 Obligations), to the details of the scheme and to the substantial planning/public benefits that the scheme would deliver. Each of the obligations above has also been negotiated having regard to the statutory tests set out in the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010; namely they are considered: (i) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (ii) directly related to the development; and (iii) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. 12.17 It is advised that the scheme will also be liable to a Mayoral CIL payment towards Crossrail implementation. This will amount to approximately £76,287.67 and is in addition to the s.106 package set out above. 13 Conclusion 13.1 The re-development of the Listed Annie McCall Hospital site provides the following planning benefits: • • • • • • 13.2 The provision of 30 new dwellings; The provision of 9 affordable dwellings, 4 of which would be family sized dwellings to target Lambeth’s priority housing needs; The sympathetic refurbishment of a listed building and the securing of a long term use for that building; Regeneration benefits for the locality; and The promotion of Opportunities for local people to work in the construction of the development; and The re-provision of workspace for the existing artist groups of the site which are well regarded by the local community. These are, without doubt, substantial public benefits. 13.3 The development scheme is subject to a Planning Performance Agreement. In this instance the applicant has responded positively and openly to all advice given. It must therefore be borne in mind that the ‘merits’ of the scheme have been largely and positively influenced by the extensive negotiations and discussions that preceded the application submission. 13.4 The development would provide a high quality residential environment for all future occupiers. All of the new dwellings have been designed to meet the Mayor’s London Housing Design Guide and the Council’s SPD (Housing Development and House Conversions) in terms of size and layout. In addition, all of the new units would be designed and constructed to the Lifetime Homes Standards as far as is practicable, whilst 15 (10%) of the units would be wheelchair accessible in accordance with the relevant London Plan target. In addition, the development is inclusive of generous onsite amenity and play space provision. 13.5 All necessary reductions in total carbon dioxide emissions from the development would be achieved within the framework of the Mayor’s energy hierarchy to satisfy the Development Plan policy requirements. In addition, the development has been designed in conjunction with advice offered by the council’s Crime Prevention Design Advisor so as to minimise the opportunity for crime as far as is practicable. Furthermore, the development would not impact unacceptably upon the amenity of any neighbouring residential properties or upon the function or safety of the surrounding highway network. 13.6 The proposal is well considered in design terms and responds sensitively to the constraints of the site including the surrounding area and listed building at the heart of the development. It optimises the development potential, in a manner that would not harm conditions of on-street parking or prejudice conditions of the free flow of traffic and highway safety. 13.7 The development would also be inclusive of a range of s.106 obligations that would reasonably mitigate the otherwise unacceptable impacts of the development upon local infrastructure. The package of s.106 contributions has been negotiated having full regard to the nature of the development, to the normal expectations conferred upon developers by the council’s s.106 Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), and to the statutory tests for s.106 obligations set out in the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010. 13.8 In conclusion, the proposal would provide a significant contribution to the regeneration of the site which has become run down over the years. It would provide significantly for social housing as well as much needed market accommodation; whilst facilitating the continued operations of the existing artist groups. The scheme is well thought out and of a high quality design and will enhance the visual appearance of the area generally. 13.9 This is a sustainable development that would deliver substantial public benefit. The development would be in general compliance with the Development Plan for the Borough and there are no material considerations of sufficient weight that would dictate that the application should nevertheless be refused. Officers are therefore recommending approval of the scheme in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development conferred upon Local Planning Authorities by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 14 Recommendation 14.1 Grant planning permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Obligation (Heads of Terms set out in this report) and the attached conditions. 15 Summary of the Reasons 15.1 In deciding to grant planning permission, the Council has had regard to the relevant policies of the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations. Having weighed the merits of the proposal in the context of these issues, it is considered that planning permission should be granted subject to the conditions listed below. In reaching this decision the following policies listed in this recommendation report were relevant. 16 Conditions 16.1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning from the date of this decision notice. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.) 16.2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed in this notice. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. 16.3 Prior to the commencement of development (including demolition), full details of the proposed construction methodology, in the form of a Method of Construction Statement, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Method of Construction Statement shall include details regarding: the notification of neighbours with regard to specific works; advance notification of road closures; details regarding parking, deliveries, and storage; details regarding dust mitigation, details of measures to prevent the deposit of mud and debris on the public highway, and other measures to mitigate the impact of construction on the amenity of the area. The details of the approved Method of Construction Statement must be implemented and complied with for the duration of the demolition and construction process. Reason: To ensure minimal nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of adjoining occupiers and of the area generally, and avoid hazard and obstruction to the public highway in compliance with Policies 9 and 31 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010. 16.4 Adequate precautions shall be taken during the construction period to prevent the deposit of mud and similar debris on the adjacent public highways in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. Reason: To minimise danger and inconvenience to highway users (Policies 9 and 31 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010) 16.5 Prior to the commencement of buildings works, details of the new blocks C and D as shown on plan 1120-05 rev.E which should include: samples and a schedule of materials to be used in the elevations including all walls, doors, roofs (including green roofs on block D), windows front entrances and balconies within the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any building work commences and this condition shall apply notwithstanding any indications as to these matters which have been given in the application. The development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the locality. (Policies 31, 33, 36, 39 and 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010) 16.6 Prior to the commencement of buildings works for the whole site, detailed drawings to a scale of 1:20 to confirm the detailed design and materials of the: a) Schedule and sample of materials used in all elevations; b) Details of balconies, railings, canopies and screens; c) Construction details of all external elements at 1:20 scale (including sections). This should include: entrances and exits, glazing, masonry, cladding weathering and flashings, balustrades and parapets, roof, plant and plant screening, health and safety systems and communal garden enclosures; d) Fenestration at 1:20, 1:5 and 1:1 where appropriate; e) New(extended) chimneys at 1:20, to exactly match the existing in terms of materials and detailing; f) Boundary treatments at 1:20, including new ball finial and replacement gates; g) Details and locations of rain water pipes; Shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development herby permitted. The development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the locality. (Policies 31, 33, 36, 39 and 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010) 16.7 Prior to the commencement of buildings works, full details of the proposed internal repair and reinstatement works including works to terrazzo and parquet flooring and areas of fallen plaster and balustrade to follow that set out in Appendix E of the submitted heritage statement ref: 037-SHG-st-2012-09-09-28; shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development herby permitted. The development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard and enhance the listed heritage asset. (Policies 45 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010) 16.8 Prior to the commencement of buildings works, full details of the proposed landscaping scheme including materials and planting to be used in the hard and soft landscaped areas of all internal and external amenity spaces (including winter gardens) and on the public highway, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be implemented and retained in accordance with the approved details. Landscaped areas shall be permanently retained for the enjoyment of occupiers of the scheme. Reason: To ensure that the proposed landscaping areas are of a high quality and for consistent treatment of the public realm. (Policies 33 and 39 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010.) 16.9 All planting, seeding and additional turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the development hereby permitted or the substantial completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees, hedgerows or shrubs forming part of the approved landscaping scheme which within a period of five years from the occupation or substantial completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory and continuing standard of amenities are provided and maintained in connection with the development. (Policy 39 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010. 16.10 Prior to occupation, a crime prevention strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Police. The strategy shall demonstrate how the development meets 'Secured by Design' standards and shall include full detailed specifications of the following: Means of enclosure, external lighting provision, electronic access control, specifications of all external doors, windows, glazing and cycle storage. The approved measures are to be carried out in full and retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory attention is given to security and community safety (Policy 32 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010. 16.11 Prior to occupation, full details of a lighting strategy, including details of the lighting of all public and private areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved lighting shall be installed before the commencement of the use and maintained thereafter. Development shall be implemented and retained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the local Planning Authority may be satisfied with the details of the proposal. (Policy 32 and 33 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010) 16.12 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in full accordance with measures indicated in the Create Consulting Engineers Ltd Energy Assessment ref: PS/RH/P12-414/01 rev.B and Sustainability Statement ref: LS/RH/P12-414/02 rev.B, accompanying the application, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of securing a sustainable development (Policy 35 of the Saved Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Core Strategy policy S7 refer and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document for Sustainable Design and Construction 2007) 16.13 The development hereby approved shall achieve a Code for Sustainable Homes minimum of Level 4 in accordance with the requirements of the relevant BREEAM scheme (Code for Sustainable Homes) or subsequent superseding equivalent BREEAM scheme and BREEAM ‘Very Good’ for all other buildings as set out in Sustainability Statement ref: LS/RH/P12-414/02 rev.B, accompanying the application. No development shall take place until a relevant BREEAM Certificate demonstrating the proposal’s achievement has been submitted to and approved by the Council. Within 4 months of the first occupation of any part of the development hereby approved, an issued Final BREEAM Certificate stating the BREEAM award achieved shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of securing a more sustainable development (Policy 35 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011, Policies S1 and S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011) and the Council’s associated Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008)). 16.14 There shall be no amplified sound, speech or music system fixed, used, or audible outside any of the studio premises, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that no nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. (Policy 7 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010.) 16.15 Prior to the commencement of buildings works above grade, full details of the soundproofing of premises and insulation of premises (including ventilation) for all party walls and the ceiling/floors, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and thereafter be retained for the duration of the use, to prevent fumes, smell and noise permeating into adjoining accommodation. Reason: To ensure that no nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. (Policy 7 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010.) 16.16 Noise from any mechanical equipment or building services plant shall not exceed the background noise level when measured outside the window of the nearest noise sensitive or residential premises, when measured as a L90 dB(A) 1 hour. Reason: To ensure that no nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. (Policy 7 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010.) 16.17 No pipes or vents (including gas mains and boiler flues) shall be constructed on the external elevations unless they have first been submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing. Any pipes and vents shall be installed as approved. Reason: Such works would detract from the appearance of the building and would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality (saved policies 33, 38 and 47 of the Saved Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Core Strategy Policy S9 (2011). 16.18 Notwithstanding the approved plans, no part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied or used until full details of the proposed cycle storage, including details of manufacturer’s specifications, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details as are approved shall be provided prior to first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained as such for the duration of the permitted use. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the cycle parking on the site, in the interests of the promotion of sustainable modes of transport (Policy 14 of the Adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 refer). 16.19 Notwithstanding the approved plans, no part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied or used until full details of the refuse and recycling storage, hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any building work commences and this condition shall apply notwithstanding any indications as to these matters which have been given in the application. The development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the storage of refuse and the provision of recycling facilities on the site, in the interests of the amenities of the area in accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010. 16.20 A Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the use hereby permitted commencing. The measures approved in the Travel Plan shall be implemented prior to the residential use hereby permitted commencing and shall be so maintained for the duration of the use, unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority is obtained to any variation. Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the residential development are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements. (Policy 9 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010) 16.21 All residential flats hereby permitted shall comply with the relevant Lifetime Homes standard. Reason: To secure appropriate access for disabled people, in accordance with Policy 33 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010. 16.22 No development shall take place until an up to date assessment for protected habitats and species has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure suitable protection to local ecology (Saved UDP Policy 39 and Core Strategy Policy S9). 16.23 No development shall take place other than in full conjunction with the measures of tree protection set out in the Arboricultural Method Statement hereby approved. Reason: To ensure the suitable protection of the existing trees on site in the long term interests of local amenity (Saved UDP Policy 39 and Core Strategy Policy S9). 17 Informatives 17.1 This decision letter does not convey an approval or consent which may be required under any enactment, by-law, order or regulation, other than Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 17.2 You are advised that this consent is without prejudice to any rights which may be enjoyed by any tenants/occupiers of the premises. 17.3 Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Regulations, and related legislation which must be complied with to the satisfaction of the Council's Building Control Officer. 17.4 You are advised to consult the Council's Environmental Health Division concerning compliance with any requirements under the Housing, Food, Safety and Public Health and Environmental Protection Acts and any by-laws or regulations made there under. 17.5 You are advised to consult the Council's Environmental Health Division with regard to the extraction of fumes from the premises. 17.6 Your attention is drawn to Sections 4 and 7 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 and the Code of Practice for Access for the Disabled to Buildings (B.S. 5810:1979) regarding the provision of means of access, parking facilities and sanitary conveniences for the needs of persons visiting, using or employed at the building or premises who are disabled. 17.7 You are advised of the necessity to consult the Transport and Highways team within the Transport Division of the Directorate of Environmental Services, with regard to any alterations affecting the public footway. 17.8 You are advised of the necessity to consult the Council's Streetcare team within the Public Protection Division with regard to the provision of refuse storage and collection facilities. 17.9 You are advised that this permission does not authorise the display of advertisements at the premises and separate consent may be required from the Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992. 17.10 In connection with the soundproofing condition, you should consult the Council's Building Control Section before carrying out any works. 17.11 As soon as building work starts on the development, you must contact the Street Naming and Numbering Officer if you need to do the following: - name a new street - name a new or existing building - apply new street numbers to a new or existing building This will ensure that any changes are agreed with Lambeth Council before use, in accordance with the London Buildings Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 and the Local Government Act 1985. Although it is not essential, we also advise you to contact the Street Naming and Numbering Officer before applying new names or numbers to internal flats or units. Contact details are listed below. Street Naming and Numbering Officer e-mail: [email protected] tel: 020 7926 2283 fax: 020 7926 9104 17.12 You are advised to contact Thames Water Utilities regarding mains/supply pipe connections for the development at Network Services Waterloo District, Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Waterworks Road, Brixton Hill, London SW2 1SB. Contact Mr D Kirk on 0645 200800 for details 17.13 It is the view of Lambeth Council that the proposed development has scope for the provision of recycling and/or composting facilities. For advice on incorporation of such facilities please contact: Jason Searles/ Dean Parry 3rd Floor, Blue Star House 234-244 Stockwell Rd London SW9 9SP 020 7926 2624 [email protected] 17.14 You are advised of the necessity to consult the Council’s Highways team prior to the commencement of construction on 020 7926 9000 in order to obtain necessary approvals and licences prior to undertaking any works within the Public Highway including Scaffolding, Temporary/Permanent Crossovers, Oversailing/Undersailing of the Highway, Drainage/Sewer Connections, Hoarding, Excavations (including adjacent to the highway such as basements, etc), Temporary Full/Part Road Closures, Craneage Licences etc. 17.15 It is current Council policy for the Council's contractor to construct new vehicular accesses and to reinstate the footway across redundant accesses. The developer is to contact the Council's Highways team on 020 7926 9000, prior to the commencement of construction, to arrange for any such work to be done. If the developer wishes to undertake this work the Council will require a deposit and the developer will need to cover all the Council's costs (including supervision of the works). If the works are of a significant nature, a Section 278 Agreement (Highways Act 1980) will be required and the works must be carried out to the Council's specification. 17.16 The Environment Agency strongly recommends that the applicant consults our Pollution Prevention Guidance notes (PPGs). These are aimed at a wide range of industries and activities that have the potential to cause pollution. They can be downloaded from our website www.environment-agency.gov.uk . 17.17 Landscaping schedules should endeavour to include, within reason, measures to promote biodiversity including use of native species typical of locality and ground conditions or naturalised areas. The applicant should act on good practice to maximise the site’s landscape, visual and horticultural quality, ease of maintenance and to provide long-term environmental benefit. The applicant should also endeavour to include, within reason, measures to encourage protected species to occupy the application site, such as installation of bat and bird boxes on trees and buildings, bat bricks within remodelled buildings, creation of stag beetle loggeries or wood piles, and the creation of naturalised areas within communal areas.
© Copyright 2018