1. home and garden

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
Hermes House
59 Josephine Avenue
London
SW2 2JZ
Ward
Tulse Hill
Proposal
Change of use and conversion of vacant office space to
provide a residential development (Class C3) comprising 5
house and 3 apartments incorporating the provision of
terraces and roof gardens along with 7 car parking spaces,
cycle and refuse storage and external alterations to the
building.
Application type
Full Planning Application
Application ref(s)
14/00481/FUL
Validation date
30.01.2014
Case officer details
Russell Butchers
Tel: 020 7926 2201
Email: [email protected]
Applicant
Giles Underhill
Agent
Jonathan Dransfield
Dransfield Owens de Silva
The Pyramid
31 Queen Elizabeth Street
London
SE1 2LP
Considerations/constraints
Rush Common Brixton Hill Conservation Area
Streets Under Conversion Stress
Rush Common Land
Approved plans
Design and Access Statement, Design and Access
Statement supplement received 29/04/2014, TTP
Consulting Draft Transport Statement November, 2013,
Flood Risk Assessment ref: JM/GL/P13-588, Hooper
Naylor Friend marketing report ref: PSF/ooht, JOS PL 01
01 Revision C, JOS PL 01 02 Revision C, JOS PL 01 03
Revision C, JOS PL 01 04 Revision C, JOS PL 01 05
Revision C, JOS PL 01 06 Revision A, JOS PL 01 07
Revision C, JOS PL 01 08 Revision B, JOS PL 01 09
Revision B, JOS PL 01 10 Revision B, JOS PL 01 11, JOS
PL 01 12 Revision C, JOS PL 01 13 Revision B, JOS PL
01 14, JOS PL 01 15 Revision A, EX(99) 701, EX(99) 702,
EX(99) 703, JDD/HHJ-E4, JDD/HHJ-E5
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
Recommendation:
(i) Grant conditional planning permission subject to Section
106 Agreement.
(ii) In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not
signed within six weeks of the Committee’s
decision, delegated authority is given to the Assistant
Director of Planning and Development to refuse the
application on the grounds of lack of mitigation against the
direct impact of the development and failure to make a
financial contribution to the delivery of infrastructure made
necessary by the development.
(iii) In the event that the committee resolves to refuse
planning permission and there is a subsequent appeal,
delegated authority is given to officers, having regard to
the heads of terms set out in the report, to negotiate and
complete a Section 106 agreement in order to meet the
requirements of the Planning Inspector.
Consultation:
Department(s) or Organisation(s)
Consulted? (y/n)
Date response
received
Comments
summarised in
report? (y/n)
Internal
Conservation & Design
Transport and Highways
Planning Policy
Streetcare
Housing
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
03.02.2014
11.02.2014
14.05.2014
NA
27.03.2013
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
External
Brixton Society
Josephine Avenue Group
Y
Y
NA
NA
N
N
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 planning issues raised by this application are:
§
The principle of a change of use from office (Class A2 Financial and
Professional Services) and conversion to provide 8 residential units (Use
Class C3);
§
Loss of employment floorspace;
§
Affordable housing and dwelling mix;
§
The standard of residential accommodation;
§
The impact of the development upon the character and appearance of
the host building and the Rush Common & Brixton Hill Conservation
Area;
§
The transport and highways implications of the development;
§
Refuse and recycling storage and collection;
§
Sustainability considerations;
§
The impact of the development on the amenity of surrounding residential
occupiers;
§
Crime prevention / designing out crime;
§
The planning obligations required to mitigate the impact of the
development and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
2
Site Description
2.1
This application relates to units 1 and 2 of Hermes House, a three storey office
building located on the southern side of Josephine Avenue close to the junction
with the A23 Brixton Hill. The building was formerly part of a gated purpose-built
Class B1 (Business) premises containing 24 studio workshop units that occupied
the land to rear of Brixton Hill between Josephine Avenue and Arodene Road.
The part of the original development fronting onto Arodene Road to the south was
truncated from the application site and the premises converted to residential use
on the upper floors, with the workshop units on ground floor retained. Prior
approval has recently been obtained for change of use of the ground floor to
residential (see section 3).
2.2
The application property is currently vacant but was previously used by the
Department of Work and Pensions as a Job Centre, which falls within Class A2
(Financial and Professional Services) of the Town and Country Planning (Use
Classes) Order 1987 (as amended). The building has a total floor area of
1297sqm, spread over the three floors. There are 10 designated car parking
spaces located in an open courtyard to side/rear of the site as shown in Figure 1
below. The main entrance into the building is on Josephine Avenue with a Oneway vehicular ingress onto the site being on Josephine Avenue and egress on
Arodene Road.
2.3
The building is constructed of red brick with metal framed windows. A steel
walkway/terrace wraps around the property to the west. Units 1 and 2 of Hermes
House are part of a larger street block in which the other units, all previously used
as offices, have gained prior approval for a change to residential use (see section
3 below).
N
Figure 1: Existing site plan.
2.4
The site is identified in the Local Development Framework Proposals Map as
falling within the Rush Common & Brixton Hill Conservation Area (CA 49) and, as
forming part of Rush Common Land. Josephine Avenue is designated as a
Conversion Stress Area and the properties on Brixton Hill, between Josephine
Avenue and Arodene Road form part of a designated Local Centre.
2.5
The surrounding area has an excellent level of public transport accessibility with a
Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 6a. The site is located within a
Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) – Brixton Hill East ‘Q’ and borders other areas of
parking restrictions including Brixton Hill, which is a designated Transport for
London (TfL) Red route.
Image 1: Front of property from Josephine Avenue
3
Relevant Planning History
3.1
19/10/1989: Outline planning permission was granted following appeal against the
failure of the Council to determine within the prescribed time period, an
application for planning permission to erect 24 workshops (Use Class B1) in a
part 2, part 3 storey building.
3.2
19/06/1991: Planning permission was granted for details pursuant to a condition
of the outline consent in respect of the facing materials to be used in the
construction of the approved development.
3.3
27/01/1992: Planning permission was granted for “Reserved Matters” in respect
of revised elevations; a traffic management scheme within the site including the
layout of means of ingress and egress and associated signage; access gates and
the means of enclosure to the eastern and western boundaries of the site.
3.4
15/03/1994: Planning permission was granted for change of use (of Hermes
House) from Class B1 (Business) and conversion to Class A2 (Financial &
Professional Services-Employment Services) with the erection of plant and air
handling units, the installation of louvered grilles in brickwork and the formation of
an access ramp with a handrail to the front entrance (ref. 94/02065/PLANAP).
3.5
29/01/2013: Planning permission for a change of use and conversion of the
existing office space to provide 43 student residential units (Sui Generis) involving
the installation of new doors and windows on the front and side elevations
together with the provision of 24 cycle parking spaces was refused by Planning
Applications Committee for the following reasons:
1. The proposal, by reason of its layout, detailed design and proposed method of
operation, would represent an unneighbourly form of development that would
result in undue noise and general disturbance and a loss of privacy to the
detriment of the residential amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. In
this respect the applicant has failed to demonstrate compliance with Saved
Policies 7 and 33 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 05
August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core
Strategy January 2011.
2. The applicant has failed to provide sufficient details regarding the operation
and management of the proposed student accommodation, including communal
area and outdoor spaces, in order for the Local Planning Authority to make a full
and comprehensive assessment of the effects of the development on surrounding
residential properties. In particular the submitted plans and supporting information
fails to make provision for on-site supervision of the facility and other measures to
mitigate identified harmful impacts on the amenity of adjoining residential
properties by reason of noise and general disturbance and loss of privacy. In this
respect the applicant has failed to demonstrate compliance with Saved Policies 7
and 33 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 05 August 2010
and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January
2011.
3.6
12/09/2013: Prior approval was refused for the change of use from office (Use
Class B1) to 7 self contained flats (Use Class C3). The application was refused
for the following reason:
The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the building was lawfully used for a
use falling within Class B1(a) (offices) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order
immediately before 30th May 2013 or, if the building was not in use immediately
before that date, when it was last in use.
Adjoining site (to the south)
3.7
01/06/1996: In June 1996, planning permission was granted for change of part of
the 1st and 2nd floors (nearest to Arodene Road) and the ground floor adjacent to
No. 1 Arodene Road from Class B1 (Business) use and conversion to provide 9
self-contained residential units together with associated elevational alterations
(ref. 96/02024/GOE/16725). The consent was
subject to a Section 106
agreement to retain the use of the remaining ground floorspace for Class B1
(Business) purposes. This permission was implemented and the mixed-use
development is now known as Hermes Court.
3.8
25/06/2013: Planning permission was refused for the change of use from office
(Use Class B1) to create 7 self contained residential dwellings at ground floor
level with associated refuse, bicycle storage, car parking and amenity spaces.
Reasons for refusal:
1.The development, by reason of the poor level of privacy and restricted outlook
and natural light afforded to future occupiers would result in a sub-standard form
of living accommodation consistent with an over intensive conversion scheme and
overdevelopment of the site to the detrimental to the amenity of future occupiers.
The development therefore is contrary to Policies 17 and 33 of the Unitary
Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S2 of
the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and the Supplementary
Planning Document entitled 'Guidance and Standards for Housing Development
and House Conversions' (2008).
2. In the absence of a BRE compliant daylight and sunlight assessment, the
applicant has failed to demonstrate that adequate level of daylight and sunlight
would be provided for future occupiers, therefore the proposed development fails
to comply with Policy S2 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy and
Policy 33 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th
August 2010.
3.9
19/09/2013: Prior approval was not required (i.e. approved) for the change of use
from office (Use Class B1) to 7 self contained units (Use Class C3).
3.10 25/03/2014: Prior approval was refused at the adjoining site for the change of use
from office (Use Class B1) to 7 self contained units (Use Class C3) due to a
failure to provide adequate supporting information in relation to the potential
impact on the local highway network.
4
Proposed Development
4.1
Permission is sought for the change of use and conversion of the existing office
space to provide eight self contained units, comprising five houses and three
apartments, incorporating the provision of terraces and roof gardens, cycle and
refuse storage and seven car parking spaces.
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Figure 2: Proposed site plan. Note that the ‘Communal Garden’ contains 7 car
parking spaces.
4.2
To facilitate the conversion of the existing office accommodation (Class A2) to
residential use the following external alterations to the building are proposed:
• Removal of the existing roof to allow the formation of third floor amenity
spaces for the houses, resulting in each house having its own individual
roof with outdoor terrace and garden room;
•
•
•
•
•
•
4.3
The roof pitched roof at the rear of the application site is to be replaced to
facilitate the conversion of the roof space to an apartment;
Alterations to fenestration including replacement of windows with modern
double glazed units;
Introduction of rainwater pipes to front elevation;
Provision of front gardens to Josephine Terrace, terraces and new
boundary treatments;
Reduction in size of existing balconies to western elevation;
External alterations to the building are proposed to ensure adequate
daylighting for the proposed habitable rooms.
The proposed eight units would consist of three x 4-bedroom houses, two x 3bedroom houses and three x 2-bedroom apartments. Each unit is proposed with
private outdoor amenity space, which in the case of the proposed houses are
located over several floors.
Figure 3: Proposed northern elevation facing Josephine Avenue.
4.4
At the request of planning officers amendments have been made to the scheme
during consideration including a reduction in the number of proposed units from
nine to eight, improved outdoor amenity spaces, improved daylighting to habitable
rooms and alterations to the internal layout.
4.5
Access to Houses 1 to 4 would be provided directly from the Josephine Avenue
frontage. House 5 and the three apartments are accessed from within the site
using the existing gated undercroft to the north-east corner of the site.
4.6
The number of car parking spaces is reduced from 10 to 7 and includes a
dedicated cycle storage area that can accommodate 18 bicycles. Details of the
proposed cycle parking area would be secured by condition.
4.7
Houses 1 to 4 are each provided with a dedicated refuse and recycling storage
area to the front garden, whereas house 5 and the three apartments share a
refuse and recycling storage area which is located to the front of House 5..
5
Figure 4: North-western axonometric drawing.
Consultations and Responses
Internal Consultation
5.1
The Urban Design Officer was consulted on the application. No objection was
raised subject to conditions relating to materials, details and landscaping.
5.2
The Transport and Highways Officer was consulted and had no objections
subject to conditions and Section 106 obligations which are outlined in Section 15
of this report.
5.3
The Planning Policy Officer was consulted on the application and highlighted
that the application should be assessed against UDP Policy 23 in relation to loss
of employment.
5.4
The Housing Officer was consulted on the application and raised no objection to
the proposal.
External Consultation
5.5
A total of 43 letters were sent to neighbouring occupants. Following receipt of
amendments to the scheme additional letters were sent out on 1st May 2014.
One response was received raising concern with the consultation process and
parking. The response received is addressed in the table below. A
comprehensive list of the neighbouring properties consulted on the application is
held on the planning file.
5.6
A site notice was erected on 21st February 2014. Following amendments to the
scheme a second site notice was erected on 2nd May 2014. Advertisements
were placed in the press on 21st February 2014 and 16th May 2014. The 21 day
period in association with the second press advert expires on 6th June 2014.
Any additional responses received that are not included within this report will be
reported to the Committee by way of a circulated addendum.
5.7
The Brixton Society was consulted on the application and no representation
was received.
5.8
The Josephine Avenue Group was consulted on the application and no
representation was received.
No. of Letters
sent
43
No. of Objections
No. in support
Comments
1
0
0
Objections
Consultation
Respondent
supported the
application
generally but
raised concerns
regarding the
consultation
process and noise
in relation to the
proposed parking.
The respondent resides within Hermes House and states that
those properties were not consulted. The Council’s records
indicate that properties within Hermes House were sent letters
during both the February and May consultation period.
Additionally, site and press notices were posted and the
Council’s statutory consultation requirements have been
satisfied.
With regards to car parking, the application sees a reduction in
the number of spaces from 10 to 7 and it is noted that the
Council’s Transport Planner has not objected to the proposal.
6
Planning Policy Considerations
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 (July 2011), the Lambeth Core Strategy (January 2011) and
the remaining saved, non-superseded policies in the Lambeth Unitary
Development Plan (UDP): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010. Material
considerations include national policies set out in the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF) (CLG March 2012).
6.2
Following publication of the NPPF, the council is updating parts of its planning
policy to provide a new up-to-date Local Plan. The new Lambeth Local Plan
involves a partial review of the Core Strategy and contains detailed
development management policies and site allocations. The emerging plan was
submitted for examination to the government n March 2014. Adoption is
anticipated in early 2015, at which time the local plan will replace the Core
Strategy and UDP policies. The content of the plan is still subject to change and
has no weight in decision making at present.
6.3
Other material considerations include national, regional and local planning
policy documents and guidance.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
6.4
Central Government guidance is contained in the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF), which was published on the 27th March 2012. This replaced
all Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) and Planning Policy Guidance Notes
(PPGs) that preceded it and, sets out the Government’s planning policies for
England and how these are expected to be applied.
6.5
The NPPF 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 must now be taken into account in the preparation of local
and neighbourhood plans and, is a material consideration in planning decisions.
6.6
It should be noted that the NPPF requires local planning authorities to apply the
presumption in favour of sustainable development when assessing and
determining development proposals.
The London Plan
6.7
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.
6.8
The Council’s Core Strategy was adopted in 2011 and the policies contained
therein and those remaining in the UDP are in general conformity with the
London Plan. Therefore, for the purposes of this report, reference to the London
Plan policies will only be made where there is conflict or where it is necessary
and/or appropriate to do so.
6.9
The following policies are considered to be of relevance to the assessment of
this application:
-
Policy 1.1 Delivering the Strategic Vision and Objectives for London
Policy 3.1 Ensuring Equal Life Chances for All
Policy 3.3 Increasing Housing Supply
Policy 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing developments
Policy 3.8 Housing Choice
Policy 4.1 Developing London’s Economy
Policy 4.2 Offices
Policy 4.12 Improving Opportunities for All
Policy 5.1 Climate Change Mitigation
Policy 5.2 Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions
Policy 5.3 Sustainable Design and Construction
Policy 5.4 Retrofitting
Policy 5.7 Renewable Energy
Policy 5.13 Sustainable Drainage
-
Policy 6.3 Assessing Effect of Development on Transport Capacity
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 7.6 Architecture
Policy 7.8 Heritage Assets and Archaeology
Policy 7.13 Safety, Security and Resilience to Emergency
Policy 7.14 Improving Air Quality
Policy 7.15 Reducing Noise and Enhancing Soundscapes
Policy 8.2 Planning Obligations
Policy 8.3 Community Infrastructure Levy
6.10
Lambeth LDF Core Strategy (2011)
6.11
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 S7 – Sustainable Design and Construction
Policy S8 – Sustainable Waste Management
Policy S9 – Quality of the Built Environment
Policy S10 – Planning Obligations
6.12
London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): ‘Policies saved
beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January
2011’
6.13
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 21 – Location and Loss of Offices
Policy 23 – Protection and Location of Other Employment Uses
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 36 – Alterations and Extensions
Policy 38 – Design in Existing Residential/Mixed Use Areas
Policy 39 – Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design
Policy 47 – Conservation Areas
6.14
Supplementary Planning Documents
-
S106 Planning Obligations (2009)
Sustainable Design and Construction (2009)
Safer Built Environments (2009)
Housing Development and House Conversions (2009)
6.15
The Council’s ‘Waste & Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements:
Guidance for Architects and Developers’ (2006) and Planning Guidance Note:
Marketing of Employment Sites and Premises (September 2008) are also
relevant.
7
Land Use and Principle of Change of Use
7.1
Loss of employment floor space
The proposal seeks planning permission for the change of use and conversion
of the existing building to provide eight self-contained dwellings. The proposed
development would result in the loss of Class A2 employment floor space.
Saved policy 21(b) of the UDP advises that the conversion to other uses of
surplus office space outside Key Industrial and Business Areas is permitted.
This policy provision is articulated in Saved Policy 23 (Protection and Location
of other Employment Uses), which states that outside KIBAs, where land is or
has last been in employment use, loss of floorspace (in particular B1 business
use floorspace for small businesses) to non employment use will not be
permitted unless the proposal accords with at least one of five cited criteria.
Criterion (ii) relates to vacant building/sites and requires marketing evidence to
demonstrate that there is no reasonable prospect in the medium term of re-use
or redevelopment to modern standards for an environmentally acceptable
employment use.
7.2
The applicant has submitted the same marketing details that were presented
with planning application 12/02822/FUL and it is noted that the marketing
information was accepted at the Planning Applications Committee on 29th
January 2013 and that the loss of employment floorspace did not form one of
the reasons for refusing planning permission. No further marketing information
has been provided for the period from 13 July 2012 up to the submission date of
the current application of 29 January 2014. Although an estate agent’s sign is
still displayed at the site the applicant has confirmed that they purchased the
property in August 2013 and that the site is no longer being advertised.
7.3
The marketing evidence submitted is contained in a report by commercial
property agents Hooper Naylor Friend dated 13 July 2012. The report states
that the building has been vacant since the Job Centre, which previously
occupied the site, relocated to another premises within Brixton in 2009. The
agents actively marketed the building for alternative commercial/business use
until January 2013 (i.e. up to the point of presentation to Planning Applications
Committee) without success. The property was offered for sale and let through
various marketing avenues including on-site marketing boards and the use of a
range of on-line marketing resources including the South London Business
website. It was also distributed via the Estate Agents Clearing House (EACH),
which deals with over 400 South and Central London Agents.
7.4
The report states that the initial reaction to the marketing was muted, particularly
because the property market in 2010 was extremely depressed. The first
viewing took place in April 2010 but was for non-office use (day nursery).
Thereafter various viewings, although sporadic in nature, took place up until
March 2012 with business firms including solicitors, a housing association, a
transport company, a recruitment company, a charity body and a television
production company.
7.5
The report reviews reasons for the failure to secure a replacement commercial
tenant and concludes that the property is too large for the average businesses
that operate in the Brixton area and, due to its layout and structure does not
lend its to conversion into smaller business units. The report has also
demonstrated that the applicant has sought to market the building for
employment use to a single tenant or for subdivision into smaller business units.
It is also argued that the recent squeeze on local and central Government
funding of social and other enterprises, which dominate the market for office
space in Brixton has diminished the demand for office accommodation. The
marketing agent further advises that the limited parking accommodation on site
for a property of this size , which is located in area where on-street parking is
restricted, has discouraged some potential tenants.
7.6
Although there is a gap in marketing information between January 2013 and
January 2014, it is considered that the loss of the employment floorspace is
justified for three reasons. Firstly, the building has been vacant since 2009 and
it is considered that sufficient evidence has been provided that the property was
subject to an active marketing campaign for which showed a persistent lack of
demand for continued employment generating use for the premises. Secondly,
the applicants have acquired the property on the basis that the loss of
employment space did not form a reason for refusing the 2012 application for
planning permission. It is considered that it would be unreasonable to now
refuse an application on this basis. Thirdly, the NPPF states that the conversion
of existing buildings should be encouraged in the transition to a low carbon
future and the NPPF requires local planning authorities to apply the presumption
in favour of sustainable development when assessing and determining
development proposals. For these reasons it is considered that on balance the
loss of employment floorspace in this instance is acceptable.
Change of use to residential
7.7
The proposed change of use and conversion of the building to provide eight
dwellings is consistent with Policy 3.8 of the London Plan (Housing Choice) and
Policy S2 (Housing) of the Lambeth Core Strategy. Policy S2 sets out that in
order to meet the borough’s housing needs to 2025 that provision should be
made for at least 7,700 additional dwellings across the borough between
2010/11 and 2016/17.
7.8
The site is located within a predominantly residential area and the principle of
residential use is therefore considered to be acceptable. It is noted that other
units within Hermes House have been successfully converted to residential use
either through having obtained planning permission or through prior approval. In
light of the above the proposed change of use to residential is considered to be
acceptable in principle in land use terms and accords with the London Plan and
Lambeth’s own policies.
8
Conservation and Design
8.1
The proposed external alterations to the building have been assessed having
regard to Saved Policies 33, 36 and 47 of the UDP and Policy S9 of the Core
Strategy, which seek to ensure that new developments and/or alterations to
existing buildings are of a high standard of design.
8.2
8.3
Site Context
The application site is located in Josephine Avenue, which forms part of the
eastern section of the Rush Common & Brixton Hill Conservation Area. This
Conservation Area includes much of Brixton Hill and the surrounding area and,
is characterised by layers of development from different historical periods –
especially the 19th century, with commercial properties and public buildings to
Brixton Hill and residential development in the adjoining side streets.
Josephine Avenue is one of the side streets and, is described in the
Conservation Area Statement as a broad tree lined avenue with communal
gardens lining the central avenue and properties fronting onto access roads. It is
characterised by terraces of large three storey houses with two storey bay
windows incorporating Corinthian capitals, which support recessed front
porches. Hermes House is a contemporary building which in officers’ opinion
makes only a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of this part of
the Conservation Area. Policy 33 of the UDP states that all development should
be of a high quality design and contribute positively to its surrounding area.
Proposed Alterations
8.4
Saved Policy 47 (d) of the UDP, states that alterations to elevations of buildings
in conservation areas, including window designs, should preserve or enhance
features of the original buildings having regard to the constraints of Policy 36.
Policy 36 (a) provides that alterations and extensions should be in keeping with
the design and materials of the original building so that a consistent architectural
composition appropriate to the character of the building is maintained. Policy 36
(f) states that roof level alterations and extension area only acceptable if they
create good roofscapes that are successfully integrated with their surroundings.
8.5
The main elements of the buildings will remain as existing. The principle
external alteration is the reconfiguration of the roof to the frontage block facing
Josephine Avenue. The main dual pitched roof form is to be removed and
replaced with five new pitched roofs with gable ends presenting onto the
Josephine Avenue street frontage. The roof extension is set back from the
northern and southern facades to facilitate the creation of roof level amenity
spaces, including north and south facing terraces and a garden room. This
alteration to the roof would see the maximum height of the building increase
from approximately 11.2m to 12.4m however this increase height is mitigated by
the fact that roof is made less bulky through the introduction of the five roof
pitches compared to the existing single roof slope that stretches across the
entire Josephine Avenue frontage (see Figure 4).
Figure 5: North-east axonometric drawing showing rear terraces
8.6
The rear roof of the application site (i.e. behind the Josephine Avenue frontage
block) is to be removed and replaced with a new roof configuration that will
facilitate the creation of the second floor apartment (see Figure 5 below). A gap
is introduced between the two blocks to allow for the creation of external
terraces and to allow additional light into habitable rooms to both the frontage
block and rear block. At roof level this block also features a green roof and
photovoltaic panels.
8.7
Front gardens are to be created at the frontage to Houses 1 to 4 and this space
will also contain the refuse and recycling store for each individual dwelling. A
plant room is contained to the front of House 5 facing onto Josephine Avenue;
directly to the front of this plant room is the refuse and recycling area that is to
be shared by the occupiers of the three apartments and House 5. New front
boundary treatments are also proposed.
8.8
The existing windows will be replaced with modern units, which will improve the
thermal efficiency of the building and give the dwellings a more modern feel.
Rainwater pipes to drain the front terraces have been introduced to further
articulate the individual houses.
8.9
The remaining significant alterations are within the body of the existing building
and involve the removal of staircases and central floors to bring light and air into
the centre of the site. The existing balconies on the western side of the building
are to be reduced in size in order to allow additional daylight into the habitable
rooms on the floors below.
8.10
The Conservation and Design Officer has commented that the width of the
proposed roof extension gable ends corresponds with the elevational bays
below and is a sound approach. Concern was raised regarding the use of both
red and yellow brick within the scheme and that a more subtle contrast between
the ground and upper floors would be more appropriate. Similarly, a change in
window colour from the proposed white to dark grey would complement the
contemporary appearance of the proposal. An informative containing the Design
Officer’s comments is proposed to guide the applicant when submitting details
for approval.
8.11
It is considered that the proposed external alterations will complement the
existing building and would not compromise its architectural integrity whilst
giving it a more modern appearance. Overall it is considered that the proposal
would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
9
Residential Amenity Impact
9.1
Saved Policies 7, 33 and 36 of the UDP and Policy S2 of the Core Strategy
state that development should not unacceptably harm residential amenity. The
policies seek to ensure that due consideration is given to protecting
neighbouring residents in terms of visual intrusion, overbearing impact, loss of
natural light, loss of privacy and noise and disturbance. It is noted that the
previous application for student accommodation was refused on the grounds of
residential amenity (see paragraph 3.5).
Daylight and sunlight, loss of outlook and sense of enclosure
9.2
The scale and massing of the building does not change significantly, apart from
the roof extension fronting Josephine Avenue which increases the height of the
building from approximately 11.2m to 12.4m. Although the height of the building
is increased, it is considered that the bulk of the building is reduced as the
existing roof slope that stretches the width of the Josephine Avenue frontage is
replaced with five gable ended pitched roofs that are set back on both the
northern and southern edges. The replacement of the roof to the rear frontage
does not significantly increase the bulk of the building.
9.3
It is considered that the alterations to the building would not adversely affect the
levels of natural light received at neighbouring residential properties in Hermes
Court, Josephine Avenue and Arodene Road. Neither would the proposal result
in a loss of outlook for these properties or create a sense of enclosure for
existing residents.
Privacy for adjoining residential properties
9.4
Given the proposed change of use to residential and the alterations to door and
window openings and provision of additional private outdoor amenity space
there is potential for impacts on residential amenity of adjoining properties as a
consequence of increased opportunities for overlooking and loss of privacy. This
is now assessed in the context of adjoining residential properties.
9.5
The north facing windows and amenity spaces would look across Josephine
Avenue and towards an empty section on Josephine Avenue and the rear
gardens of the terrace of properties forming 75 – 83 Brixton Hill. These
properties are located at least 22m, which is considered to be sufficiently far
away to not give rise to overlooking concerns. House 5 is located on the eastern
boundary with no. 57 Josephine Avenue however features no windows to its
eastern elevation. However, House 5 would have a wraparound terrace at roof
level with south and east facing views. This terrace would have views towards
the rear gardens of the adjoining properties to the east but would not have views
toward any habitable rooms. It is considered that the use of a privacy screen for
the east facing terraces of houses 1 to 5 would ensure that the privacy of
adjoining residents is maintained. Similarly, screening for the east facing
terraces of apartments 2 and 3 is considered appropriate to prevent overlooking.
9.6
The west facing windows and amenity spaces would look across the driveway
and parking area of Hermes Court towards the rear elevation of the buildings
that front on to Brixton Hill. None of these situations give rise to any significant
concern with regards to overlooking of neighbouring habitable rooms. Similarly,
the proposed amenity spaces are located sufficiently far away from
neighbouring properties that they do not give rise to concerns with regards to
overlooking. It is also noted that any levels of overlooking to neighbouring
properties would be to a similar degree to the existing residential properties
within Hermes Court. In these circumstances it is considered that neighbouring
residents would not suffer an unacceptable loss of privacy.
9.7
One of the reasons for refusing the 2012 planning application for the site was in
relation to an identified loss of privacy to the detriment of residential amenity.
This concern related to the large existing raised walkways and their potential
use as communal amenity spaces in association with the 43-unit student
accommodation scheme and the potential for overlooking to neighbouring
residential properties. It is noted that in this scheme the large west facing
balconies have been removed and replaced with smaller terraces. The east
facing terraces have also been reduced in size and a condition requiring that
they be screened is proposed and it is considered that this reason for refusing
the 2012 application has been overcome.
Noise and disturbance
9.8
In assessing development proposals, local planning authorities are required to
ensure that development does not cause unacceptable noise nuisance and/or
general disturbance to existing residents. Where subsequent intensification or
change of use may result in greater noise and/or general disturbance, planning
policy recommends seeking the use of appropriate conditions to mitigate the
impact of a development proposal, if possible.
9.9
Each of the dwellings is provided with private outdoor amenity spaces that are
located over various floors. Although these have the potential to generate noise,
such noise would be at a level that is expected in a residential area and would
not unduly harm the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Any noise or
disturbance associated with the proposed car and cycle parking areas would
also be to a level that is consistent with the site’s residential location.
9.10
Another reason refusing the 2012 planning application for the site included
noise and disturbance to the detriment of neighbouring occupiers. With regards
to noise and disturbance, it is noted that this was in relation to the proposed use
as student accommodation and a lack of details regarding the management and
operation of the proposal. The use of the property as dwellinghouses is not
considered to be a comparable noise generating activity. The proposed use as
dwellings in consistent with the surrounding nature of development.
9.11
It is considered that the proposed development would not harm the residential
amenity of the adjoining occupiers or the future occupiers in accordance with
Saved Policies 7, 33 and 36 of the UDP. The current proposal is considered to
overcome the previous reasons for refusal.
10
Dwelling Mix and Standard of Residential Accommodation Provided
10.1
The internal residential amenity of future occupants is governed by Policy S2 of
the Core Strategy, Policy 17, 33 and 50 of the UDP and the SPD for Housing
Development and House Conversions. A mix of housing sizes and types is
sought in order to meet the needs of different sections of the community,
including through the application of Lifetime Homes and Building for Life
standards. Levels of residential density consistent with the London Plan are
desired as well as high standards of residential amenity, including amenity
space and children’s play areas.
Dwelling mix
10.2
The proposal proposed accommodation would consist of 3 x 4 bedroom houses,
2 x 3 bedroom houses and 3 x 2 bedroom apartments. This mix of housing units
is in accordance with Policy S2 of the Core Strategy. The provision of five family
sized houses is welcomed and will serve an identified need for larger housing
within the borough.
Size and layout
10.3
Each of the units meets the minimum size requirements set out within the
London Plan. All of the individual room sizes within the residential units will also
be in excess of the minimum standards as set out within the SPD on Housing
Development. Furthermore, all of the relevant room uses would be stacked
accordingly. The floor to ceiling heights are maintained at the existing height of
2.6m and are acceptable.
Daylight, sunlight and outlook
10.4
Following concerns with the initial scheme with regards to daylighting of the
proposed units, the top floor of the apartment block to the rear has been
reduced in size to allow the flank wall to be repositioned further back from the
houses. Internally, rooms have been relocated to ensure that the bedrooms and
main living areas are well lit and that the TV rooms and studies are located in
the secondary areas where there is less natural light. The existing large
balconies on the upper floors have been reduced in size to allow additional light
penetration to the units below. It is officer consideration that all of the residential
units would have a dual aspect and would have adequate standards of outlook,
daylight and sunlight. The proposed floor plans for the development can be
found as Appendix 1 to this report.
Amenity space
10.5
The SPD for Housing Development and House Standards requires the provision
of private and communal amenity spaces in new residential development. New
dwelling houses should be allocated 30m2 of private amenity/garden space and
new flats should receive 10m2 of balcony, terrace or private garden. Each of the
units would have a private amenity space in excess of the recommended
minimum space standard as set out within the SPD. For the five houses this has
been achieved through the creation of several amenity spaces located over
different floors. Houses 2 and 3, for example, have a front garden at ground
floor level, a terrace at first floor, a balcony and terrace at second floor and a
roof garden at the third floor (see Figure 6 below). Each of the apartments is
provided with a terrace to both the front and rear elevation. The minimum
required amenity space for each of the houses is 30m2 and between 55m2 and
81m2 has been provided for each house. The minimum required amenity space
for each apartment is 10m2 and between 17m2 and 26m2 has been provided.
Although ideally amenity space would take the form of a ground floor garden,
there is no requirement in policy for this to be the case and given that the
proposal is for the conversion of an existing building the proposed arrangements
are considered acceptable. It is also noted that the application site is within
walking distance to both Rush Common (approximately 50m) and Brockwell
Park (approximately 500m) which would provide additional opportunity for
outdoor amenity space for occupants.
Figure 6: South facing third floor roof garden
10.6
The plans indicate a landscaped cobbled yard adjoining the car parking and
cycle parking area. Whilst this is welcomed, given the large amount of private
amenity space afforded to each of the units it is considered unlikely that this
would form a meaningful amenity space for occupiers.
10.7
It is noted that the application has agreed to make contribution towards the
provision and improvement of open space within the borough through a section
106 agreement.
10.8
In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed development would
provide an adequate standard of accommodation for future occupiers in
accordance with standards set out within the London Plan and the SPD on
Housing Development.
11
Sustainability Issues
11.1
The London Plan requires developments to make the fullest contribution to
tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions and adopting
sustainable design and construction measures. Saved Policy 35 of the UDP and
Policy S7 of the Core Strategy require all development proposals to show how
they incorporate sustainable design and construction principles into the design
of new or the refurbishment of existing buildings. The Council’s SPD on
Sustainable Design and Construction advises applicants to use the British
Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) system
to measure the environmental performance of new and existing buildings to
ensure that sustainable design and construction principles inform the design
and construction of the building.
11.2
Buildings are assessed and awarded credits according to the level of
performance within a range of 9 environmental categories, comprising
management, energy use, health and well being, pollution, transport, land use,
ecology, materials and water. The credits are then added together using a set
of environmental weightings to produce a single overall score. The building is
then rated on a scale of Pass, Good, Very Good, Excellent and Outstanding and
a certificate award.
11.3
The application has not been accompanied by a pre-assessment however on
the previous scheme it was established that the building could achieve a rating
of Very Good for the BREEAM Multi-Residential system. A condition is
proposed requiring the submission of BREEAM Domestic Refurbishment
estimator demonstrating how a ‘Very Good’ rating, aspiring to ‘Excellent’ will be
achieved in the building. A condition is also proposed requiring that a post
construction review certificate and score summary be submitted prior to first
occupation of the units.
11.4
In addition to the above, the main sustainability feature of the development is
considered to be the reuse of the building itself. Part 17 of the NPPF, Core
Planning Principles, states that developments should support the transition to a
low carbon future and that the reuse of existing resources, including the
conversion of buildings, should be encouraged. This proposal would see the
reuse of an existing building that may otherwise be demolished to make way for
development of the site. It should also be noted that the NPPF requires local
planning authorities to apply the presumption in favour of sustainable
development when assessing and determining development proposals.
11.5
Other sustainability features incorporated into the proposal include replacement
of windows with more thermally efficient units, provision of green roofs and
photovoltaic panels and the modest alterations to the building to improve natural
lighting and ventilation. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with
London Plan Policy 5.2, Policy S7 of the Core Strategy and Saved Policy 35 of
the UDP.
12
Traffic and Parking
12.1
Saved Policy 9 of the UDP states that planning applications will be assessed for
their transport impact, including cumulative impacts on highway safety, on the
environment and road network and on all transport modes.
12.2
As part of the application submission, a Transport Statement has been
submitted which has been assessed by Lambeth Transport and Highways
officers.
Site and Accessibility
12.3
The site is located on Josephine Avenue near to its junction with Brixton Hill; the
site’s primary frontage is on Josephine Avenue but extends through to Arodene
Road. The site has a PTAL score of 6a which indicates an excellent level of
accessibility to public transport. Increased housing density is encouraged within
areas of good public transport accessibility, as are car free developments.
Car Parking
12.4
The site is contained within CPZ ‘Q’ which operates Monday to Friday from 8am
to 6:30pm. The site currently has vehicle access from Josephine Avenue and
egress on to Arodene Road and it is proposed to retain this arrangement. The
provision of seven car parking spaces is in line with London Plan standards and
is considered acceptable as a maximum. To reflect the site’s PTAL rating and to
promote sustainable transport choices the dwellings are to be secured as Permit
Free through a planning obligation as part of a section 106 agreement.
Cycle Parking
12.5
London Plan Policy 6.9 states that cycle parking be provided at a rate of at least
two spaces per 3 bedroom or larger unit and one space for smaller dwellings.
Saved UDP Policy 17(c) states that ‘where practical, secure cycle storage
should be provided’. The drawings indicate that 18 cycle parking spaces are
proposed and this accords with the policies of the London Plan. A condition
requiring full details of the proposed cycle parking arrangements is proposed.
13
Refuse and Recycling
13.1
Policy S8 of the Core Strategy places a requirement on developments to
contribute to the sustainable management of waste. Specific guidance is set
out within the Council’s ‘Waste and Recycling Storage and Collection
Requirements’ guidance (2006). In addition, Policies 9 and 14 of the UDP and
Policy S4 of the Core Strategy (January 2011) seek to ensure that proposals
for waste collection and servicing strategies have a minimal impact on the
performance and safety of the highway network.
13.2
Houses 1 to 4 have a dedicated refuse and recycling storage area to the front
garden. A recycling store area is shown adjacent to Josephine Avenue that
serves House 5 and the three apartments. These indicative arrangements are
considered to be acceptable however a condition requiring full details of the
waste and recycling arrangements is proposed.
14
Crime Prevention
14.1
Saved Policy 32 of the UDP requires that development should enhance
community safety. Development will not be permitted where opportunities for
crime are created or where it results in an increased risk of public disorder.
Policy S9(f) of the Core Strategy requires the Council to improve and maintain
the quality of the built environment and its liveability by creating safe and
secure environments that reduce the opportunities for crime, the fear of crime,
anti-social behaviour, having regard to Secured by Design standards.
14.2
On the previous scheme the Designing Out Crime Officer considered that if the
scheme were to incorporate Secure By Design minimum standards with regards
to new windows, doors, lighting, refuse and cycle storage then this would
mitigate most potential crime risks. A condition requiring the development to
comply with Secure by Design minimum standards is proposed.
15
Planning Obligations and CIL
15.1
Policy S10 of the Core Strategy aims to secure planning obligations, which will
be sought to mitigate the direct impact of the development within the locality. A
planning obligation should be (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. The
Council’s Supplementary Planning Document for S106 Planning Obligations has
been used to facilitate the calculation of contributions for this application.
15.2
The following financial contributions could be secured by way of a Section 106
Agreement to mitigate against the impacts of the development:
•
•
•
Parks, open spaces and/or play space contributions: £13,878.80
Revenue contributions: £1,387.88
S106 monitoring fee: £763.33
15.3
In all the development could secure a total of £16,030.01 in contributions and
the applicant has informally agreed to this figure.
15.4
The development would also be secured as ‘permit free’ by an appropriately
worded clause in the s106 agreement, so that residents would not be eligible to
apply for residents’ car parking permits, which are in operation on surrounding
streets.
15.5
It is also advised that the scheme would be liable to the Mayoral Community
Infrastructure Levy and that this is in addition to the s106 package set out
above.
16
Affordable Housing
16.1
London Plan Policy 2.12 states that ‘the maximum reasonable amount of
affordable housing should be sought when negotiating private residential and
mixed use schemes’ In addition, Core Strategy Policy S2(c) seeks the provision
of affordable housing on sites of at least 0.1 hectares or on sites capable of
accommodating 10 or more homes. When affordable housing is required, at
least 40% of the new residential units should be affordable (50% with public
subsidy), with a tenure split of 70% social/affordable rented and 30%
intermediate housing.
16.2
The application site has a site area of approximately 0.087 hectares and
therefore does not exceed the threshold of 0.1 hectares. The application
proposes eight units and is therefore also below the threshold of 10 set out in
Policy S2(c).
16.3
Initially a nine unit scheme was proposed and as a result officers questioned
whether the application constituted an underdevelopment of the site in order to
avoid requirement for affordable housing provision. As a result of alterations to
the scheme requested by planning officers to improve daylighting and amenity
space, the number of units was reduced from nine to eight with the loss of one
apartment. It is also noted that the refused application for prior approval to
convert the building from offices to residential was on the basis of seven units.
16.4
The applicant has demonstrated that the provision of eight units is appropriate
for a site of this size and the proposal is consistent with the density
requirements found within the London Plan.
16.5
It is also considered that the provision of eight units within the site allows a
quality development that does not compromise amenity for future occupiers.
This is particularly the case due to the northern facing aspect of the site and it is
considered that the provision of 10 or more units may have resulted in a
cramped and poor quality development that would result in poor living conditions
for future occupiers.
16.6
Following these discussions with the applicant officers have therefore concluded
that the scheme has not been contrived in order to avoid a possible requirement
for affordable housing contributions and that eight units is appropriate in this
instance and that the proposal is not contrary to Core Strategy Policy S2(c).
17
Conclusions
17.1
The proposed change of use and conversion of the existing office building to
residential use is considered acceptable in land use terms and represents an
effective and efficient use of a vacant building.
17.2
The proposal is acceptable with regard to all other material planning
considerations as it would involve appropriate alterations to the external fabric of
the building and as such would preserve the character and appearance of the
host building and surrounding Conservation Area. The proposal would also not
prejudice the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties;
would not harm conditions of on-street parking or prejudice the free flow of traffic
and highway safety and would not increase risk of public disorder or give rise to
increased opportunities for crime.
17.3
Furthermore, provisions are to be secured under Section 106 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 to minimise the impact of the development on the
local environment and highway network.
17.4
It is therefore considered that the development is compliant with the relevant
policies of the development plan and that no other material planning
considerations exist that would dictate that the application should nevertheless
be refused.
18
Recommendation:
(i)
Grant conditional planning permission subject to Section 106 Agreement.
(ii)
In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not signed within six weeks of
the Committee’s decision, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director
of Planning and Development to refuse the application on the grounds of lack of
mitigation against the direct impact of the development and failure to make a
financial contribution to the delivery of infrastructure made necessary by the
development.
(iii)
In the event that the committee resolves to refuse planning permission and
there is a subsequent appeal, delegated authority is given to officers, having
regard to the heads of terms set out in the report, to negotiate and complete a
Section 106 agreement in order to meet the requirements of the Planning
Inspector.
19
Summary of the Reasons
19.1
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 conditions and a Section 106 Agreement. In reaching this decision the
following policies were relevant:
Lambeth Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011):
-
Policy S1 – Delivering the Vision and Objectives
Policy S2 – Housing
Policy S3 – Economic Development
19.2
London Borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2007): ‘Policies saved
beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January
2011’):
-
20
Policy S4 – Transport
Policy S7 – Sustainable Design and Construction
Policy S8 – Sustainable Waste Management
Policy S9 – Quality of the Built Environment
Policy S10 – Planning Obligations
Policy 7 – Protection of Residential Amenity
Policy 9 – Transport Impact
Policy 14 – Parking and Traffic Restraint
Policy 16 – Affordable Housing
Policy 21 – Location and Loss of Offices
Policy 23 – Protection and Location of Other Employment Uses
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 36 – Alterations and Extensions
Policy 38 – Design in Existing Residential/Mixed use Areas
Policy 39 – Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design
Policy 47 – Conservation Areas
Conditions
Standard Conditions
1
The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than
the expiration of three 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.)
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.
Design
3
No development shall commence until detailed drawings, samples and a
schedule of materials to be used in the elevations and roofs within the scheme
hereby permitted are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority 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 a high standard of design, to safeguard the visual amenities
of the locality and to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation
Area (Policies 31, 33, 38, 39 and 47 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies
saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Local Development
Framework Core Strategy January 2011 and Policies S1 and S9 of the Local
Development Framework Core
4
No development shall commence until detailed drawings to a scale of not less
than 1:20 and samples and/or manufacturer’s specifications of the design and
construction details listed below are submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. 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.
i) metal and/or wood work including railings, balustrades and balconies;
ii) window and door systems (including technical details, elevations, reveal
depths, plans and cross sections at a scale of 1:20);
iii) rain water pipes (including material and colour); and
iv) roofing details, including parapet and gable extensions (including sections);
Reason: To ensure a high quality standard of development and to safeguard
and enhance the visual amenities of the locality and to preserve or enhance the
character of the Conservation Area (Policies 31, 33, 38, 39 and 47 of the Unitary
Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded
by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011 and Policies
S1 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January
2011)).
5
No plumbing or pipes, other than rainwater pipes, shall be fixed to the external
faces of the buildings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
Reason: To ensure a high quality standard of development and to safeguard
and enhance the visual amenities of the locality and to preserve or enhance the
character of the Conservation Area (Policy 33 and 47 of the Lambeth Unitary
Development Plan 2007: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not
superseded by the Lambeth Core Strategy 2011 and Policy S9 of the Core
Strategy 2011).
6
Notwithstanding the approved drawings, no residential occupation of the
development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme for the siting and design of all
walls, fencing, gates, ramps and/or railings for the whole site (including details
of those existing which are to be retained and of those proposed). The
development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the approved
details and such walls, fencing, gates, ramps and/or railings as may be
approved shall be erected before the initial occupation of the development and
be permanently retained as such unless the prior written approval of the Local
Planning Authority has been obtained for any variation.
Reason: To ensure a high quality standard of development, to safeguard and
enhance the visual amenities of the locality and to ensure a satisfactory and
continuing standard of amenity is provided (Policies 31, 33, 38 and 39 of the
Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not
superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011
and Policies S2 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy
(January 2011)).
Transport and Highways
7
Notwithstanding the approved drawings, a plan of the car parking area showing
a maximum of seven car parking spaces and sufficient space for turning and
manoeuvring shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
Authority prior to first occupation of the development. All works shall be carried
out in accordance with the approved plans and the development shall thereafter
be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details and retained as
such for the duration of the use.
Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park and turn within the site so as to
minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the proposed
development and the adjoining highway (Policies 9 and 14 of the Lambeth
Unitary Development Plan 2007: Policies saved beyond the 5th August 2010
and not superseded by the Lambeth Core Strategy: January 2011 and Policy S4
of the Core Strategy 2011).
8
Notwithstanding the approved drawings, detailed drawings and material
samples of the cycle storage areas including elevational appearance, layout,
and manufacturer’s specification shall be submitted to and approved by the
Local Planning Authority before first occupation of the development. Sheltered
and secure provision shall be provided for a minimum of 18 bicycles. The
development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the
approved details and retained as such for the duration of the use.
Reason: To ensure adequate cycle parking is available on site and to promote
sustainable modes of transport (Policy 9 of the Unitary Development Plan 2007:
Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not superseded by the Lambeth
Core Strategy: January 2011 and Policy S4 of the Core Strategy 2011).
9
No development shall commence before full details of the proposed construction
methodology, in the form of a Method of Demolition and Construction statement,
is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
Method of Demolition and Construction Statement shall include details of
measures to prevent the deposit of mud and debris on the public highway, and
other measures including details of the phasing of construction, and details of
parking, deliveries and storage to mitigate the impact of construction on the
amenity of the area and the safe operation of the public highway. The details of
the approved Method of Demolition and 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. (Policies 7, 9, 31, and 33 of the
Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not
superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2011
and Policy S4 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January
2011).
Crime Prevention / Community Safety
10
The development hereby permitted shall meet 'Secured by Design Standards',
consistent with section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 2005 unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the safety and security of future occupiers and adjoining
properties and prevent crime and disorder occurring within and in the immediate
vicinity of the site, in the interest of public safety (Policy 32 of the Unitary
Development Plan Policies Saved Beyond 5th August 2010, Policy S9 of the
Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and the adopted
Supplementary Planning Document, Safer Built Environments).
Sustainability
11
No development shall take place until a BREEAM Domestic Refurbishment preassessment estimator (or such equivalent standard that replaces this) has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority
demonstrating how a 'very good' rating, aspiring to 'excellent' will be achieved
for each of the units.
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)).
12
Prior to first occupation of the proposed dwellings a BREEAM Domestic
Refurbishment Post Construction Review certificate and summary score sheet
(or such equivalent standard that replaces this) demonstrating a rating of ‘very
good’ or higher must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority to show that the agreed rating has been met in all residential
refurbishment units.
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)).
13
Prior to first occupation of the development a scheme showing the siting, size,
number and design of the photovoltaic array including cross sections of the roof
of each building showing the panels in-situ shall be submitted to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The equipment shall be sited so as to
minimise its visual impact upon the external appearance of the buildings. The
development shall thereafter be completed in strict accordance with the
approved details and permanently retained as such for the duration of use.
Reason: In the interests of securing a more sustainable development and in
order to control the overall design standard of the development (Policy 33 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, S7 and S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy
(January 2011) and the Council’s associated Supplementary Planning
Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008)).
14
All residential units hereby approved shall be constructed to Lifetime Homes
Standards, unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, details of
which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior
to commencement of works. The approved details shall be implemented prior to
first occupation and permanently retained.
Reason: In order that the development is made more accessible to all (Policy 33
of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and
not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy January
2011, Policy S2(d) of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy
(January 2011) and the related Supplementary Planning Document: Guidance
and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions (2008)).
Refuse and Recycling
15
Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, full details of the
refuse and recyclables storage provision for the development, including
elevation drawings at a scale of not less than 1:20 of the storage enclosures,
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the
approved details and thereafter these provisions shall be retained for the
duration of the permitted use.
Reason: To ensure the adequate provision is made for the storage of waste and
refuse on the site and its collection from the site and to safeguard the visual
amenities of the locality to preserve the character and appearance of the
Conservation Area (Policies 9, 33 and 47 of the Unitary Development Plan:
Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and Policies S1, S2, S4 and S9 of the
Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011).
Residential Amenity
16
Details of the provision of screening for the south and east facing terraces shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to
the commencement of the development. The development shall thereafter be
completed in accordance with the approved details and thereafter these
provisions shall be retained for the duration of the permitted use.
Reason: To protect the privacy and living conditions of neighbouring residential
occupiers (Policies 7, 33 and 36 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies
saved beyond 5th August 2010) and Policy S2 of the Local Development
Framework Core Strategy (January 2011).
17
Notwithstanding the provisions of Classes A & D of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or
any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order), no enlargement, improvement
or other alteration of, or to, any dwellinghouse the subject of this permission
shall be carried out without planning permission having first been obtained via
the submission of a planning application to the Local Planning Authority; nor
shall any building or enclosure required for a purpose incidental to the
enjoyment of any said dwellinghouse as such be constructed or placed on any
part of the land covered by this permission without such planning permission
having been obtained.
Reason: In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the nature and density of
the layout requires strict control over the form of any additional development
which may be proposed in the interests of maintaining a satisfactory residential
environment having regard to Policies 7, 33 and 38 of the Unitary Development
Plan Policies Saved Beyond 5th August 2010, Policy S9 of the Local
Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and Policy S2 of the Local
Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).
Landscaping
18
No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until a specification of all
proposed hard and soft landscaping and tree planting has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The specification shall
include details of the quantity, size, species, position and the proposed time of
planting of all trees and shrubs to be planted, together with an indication of how
they integrate with the proposal in the long term with regard to their mature size
and anticipated routine maintenance and protection. In addition all shrubs and
hedges to be planted that are intended to achieve a significant size and
presence in the landscape shall be similarly specified. All tree, shrub and hedge
planting included within the above specification shall accord with BS3936:1992,
BS4043:1989 and BS4428:1989 and current Arboricultural best practice.
Reason: In order to introduce high quality landscaping in and around the site in
the interests of the ecological value of the site and to ensure a satisfactory
landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity (Policy 39 of the Unitary
Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and not
superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and
Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and
Policy 5.3 of the London Plan (July 2011).
19
All planting, seeding or 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.
Reasons: In order to introduce high quality soft landscaping in and around the
site in the interests of the ecological value of the site and to ensure a
satisfactory landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity (Policy 39
of the Unitary Development Plan (2007): Policies saved beyond 5th August
2010 and not superseded by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy
(2011) and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy
(2011).
20
Informatives
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.
2
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.
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.
4
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
5
Your attention is drawn to the need to comply with the requirements for the
Control of Pollution Act 1974 concerning construction site noise and in this
respect you are advised to contact the Council’s Environmental Health Division.
6
You are advised that all conditions which require further details to be submitted
to and approved by the Local Planning Authority need to be accompanied by an
application form and a fee. The application form and fee schedule can be
viewed at www.lambeth.gov.uk/planning.
7
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. The London Borough of Lambeth’s Refuse & Recycling
Storage Design Guide’ (2013) is available on the planning pages of the
Council’s website: www.lambeth.gov.uk/planning
8
You are advised that the site is included within land affected by the Rush
Common Act 1806, and related legislation, and you should consult this Council
(via the case officer) in respect of any permissions which may be necessary
under the Acts.
9
You are advised that the Conservation and Design Officer has raised concern
with the use of red and yellow brick within the scheme and that a more subtle
contrast between the ground and upper floors is required. It is also considered
that a change in window colour from white to dark grey would complement the
contemporary appearance of the proposal.
Appendix 1: Proposed floor plans