section 1 – site location map - lambeth...one bed, two person unit 18 43% 7 affordable rent 2...

Section 1 – Site Location Map

Site address Land on the corner of Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road

Ward Thurlow Park

Proposal Demolition of all existing structures on site and the erection of a part three, part four, part five storey development comprising 42 no. market and affordable residential units and 175 square metres of B1 floorspace, with associated refuse and cycle storage and landscaping.

Application type

Full Planning Application

Application ref(s) 14/00129/FUL

Validation date 9 January 2014

Case officer details Name: Faye Tomlinson Tel: 020 7926 1271 Email: [email protected]

Applicant Mayfair 500 (Tulse Hill) Limited

Agent Iceni Projects

Considerations/constraints Major Development Opportunity (MDO47) Smoke Control Area

Approved plans 27946-PD500, 27946-PD111, 27946-PD560, D2012, 27946-PD501B, 27946-PD502C, 27946-PD503A, 27946-PD504C, 27946-PD505C, 27946-PD506B, 27946-PD507, 27946-PD550C, 27946-PD551B, 27946-PD552B, 27946-PD553A, 27946-PD570, 27946-PD571, 27946-PD572, 27946-PD508, L(MP)4591/01G, L(MP)4591/02A, L(MP)4591/03B, L4591/01E, L4591/03A, L4591/04A, View 01 from Thurlow Park Road rec 24 Feb 2014, View 02 along Avenue Park Road rec 24 Feb 2014, BS5837 Tree Survey by ECUS Environmental Consultants (April 2013), Ecological Assessment by ECUS Environmental Consultants (January 2014), Ecology Report Template Rev00 (January 2014), Preliminary Geo-Environmental and Geotechnical Assessment by Reflect Contractors Ltd (April 2013), Statement of Community Involvement by Iceni Projects (January 2014), Utility Summary by URS Resource Services Ltd (January 2013), Affordable Housing Statement by Iceni Projects (rec 15

January 2014), Code for Sustainable Homes Pre Assessment Report by RUND Partnership (January 2014), Energy Assessment by RUND Partnership (February 2014, Daylight Assessment by S P Planning (January 2014), Transport Statement by ECUS Environmental Consultants (January 2014), Design and Access Statement by PDP Architects llp (December 2013), Planning Statement by Iceni Projects (January 2014).

Recommendation(s)

Grant conditional planning permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Agreement.

Consultation

Department(s) or Organisation(s) Consulted? (y/n)

Date response received

Comments summarised in report? (y/n)

Internal

Highways & Transport Y 29.01.2014 Y

Conservation & Urban Design Y 11.02.2014 Y

Arboricultural Officer Y 30.01.2014 Y

Crime Prevention Design Advisor Y 17.10.2013* Y

Housing Y N/A N/A

Streetcare Y N/A N/A

Regulatory Services – Noise Pollution Y 29.01.2014 Y

Parks and Open Spaces Y 29.01.2014 Y

External

Transport for London Y 03.02.2014 Y

Network Rail Y 07.02.2014 Y

Thames Water Y N/A N/A

Brixton Business Forum Y N/A N/A

Brixton Society Y N/A N/A

Dulwich Residents Association Y N/A N/A

Dulwich Society Y N/A N/A

Lancaster Avenue Residents Association

Y N/A N/A

Lovelace Road Residents Association Y N/A N/A

Maley Avenue Residents Association Y N/A N/A

Streatham Society Y N/A N/A

Streatham Action Y N/A N/A

Friends of Tivoli Gardens Y N/A N/A

Norwood Society Y N/A N/A

Norwood Action Group Y 17.02.2014 Y

Friends of Norwood Cemetery Y N/A N/A

* Crime Prevention comments received at pre-application stage and remains applicable to this application. Background documents Case File (this can be accessed via the Planning Advice Desk, Telephone 020 7926 1180)

1 Summary of Main Issues

1.1 The main issues involved in this application are:

• Land use - whether the site is appropriate for a residential led mixed-use development.

• Urban Design and Conservation - whether the design of the development is appropriate in terms of the visual appearance of the site, the streetscene and the surroundings.

• Quality of residential accommodation - whether the development is acceptable in terms of the mix of residential units proposed and the standard of residential accommodation to be provided.

• Neighbouring Amenity - the impact of the development upon the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

• Highways and Transport - the implications of the development for the function of the surrounding road network, conditions of on-street parking, highway safety and public transport capacity.

• Sustainability - the sustainability of the development.

• Community Safety - whether the development would include suitable measures to minimise opportunities for crime.

2 Site Description

2.1 The site is approx 0.23 hectares and is currently vacant. The site was previously used for open and enclosed storage uses. There is a vacant part one, part two storey office building (B1 use) located on the north-eastern corner of the site. There are a number of trees and shrubs located along the site boundaries; however, there are no Tree Preservation Orders (TPO’s) that relate to the site. The site boundary comprises a retaining wall along the Avenue Park Road frontage and palisade fencing along the Thurlow Park Road frontage. There is currently no footpath along the Avenue Park Road frontage of the site

2.2 The site is bounded by Thurlow Park Road to the north, Avenue Park Road to the east, a Network Rail maintenance depot to the south and Tulse Hill railway station to the west. The railway station platform runs along the majority of the western boundary of the site. The site level rises from north to south by approx. 3 metres and the ground level of the site is approx 2.4m lower than the ground level of the station platform. Access to the site is currently provided via a vehicular entranceway off Avenue Park Road that is shared with, and part of, the neighbouring Network Rail maintenance depot.

2.3 Two residential properties, of two and three storeys respectively, are located directly opposite the site on the north side of Thurlow Park Road. Both properties are approx. the same height due to a rise in the land level from east to west. Immediately to the east of these properties is the junction between

Thurlow Park Road and Birkbeck Hill, a residential road comprising two and three storey properties. On the east side of Birkbeck Hill the properties fronting Thurlow Park Road are four-storey terraces.

2.4 Two, two-storey residential properties (semi-detached) are located directly opposite the site on the east side of Avenue Park Road. These two properties are flanked, to the north, by the rear gardens and elevations of two-storey terraced properties that front onto Thurlow Park Road, and to the south, by the rear gardens and elevations of four-storey (including basement) semi-detached properties that front onto Maley Avenue. Further along Avenue Park Road to the south is a terrace of four-storey properties (including basements).

2.5 The junction between Avenue Park Road and Maley Avenue is located adjacent to the south-east corner of the site. A secondary entrance to Tulse Hill Station is located at this junction on the eastern side of Avenue Park Road and southern side of Maley Avenue. This entrance is accessed via steps and a ramp that lead down to a pedestrian tunnel that passes under Avenue Park Road, under the northern boundary of the Network Rail maintenance depot and under the railway line to connect to the main station building and platforms. To the south west of the site, a pedestrian footbridge, connecting the railway station platforms, rises above the railway tracks.

2.6 Avenue Park Road is a one-way street, running south to north, linking Norwood Road, a London Distributor Road, in the south to Thurlow Park Road, part of the South Circular Transport for London Road Network, in the north. A railway bridge is located immediately adjacent to the north-west corner of the site and carries the railway line over Thurlow Park Road.

2.7 The site is located within the Tulse Hill ‘H’ Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ). Thurlow Park Road forms the Boundary of this CPZ. Therefore, streets on the northern side of Thurlow Park Road, including Birkbeck Hill, Birkbeck Place, Thurlow Hill and Lovelace Road, are not located within a CPZ. A map of the Tulse Hill ‘H’ CPZ is provided in the Transport and Highways section of this report (Figure XX)

2.8 The wider surrounding area comprises a mix of residential development to the north and east and more commercial development to the south and west. The West Norwood/Tulse Hill District Centre lies to the south and west of the site, on the western side of the railway line and southern side of Norwood Road. The site forms the northern half of a larger linear site that is designated as a Major Development Opportunity (MDO47) in the Lambeth Unitary development Plan Saved Policies.

3 Relevant Planning History

3.1 The relevant planning history for the site is as follows:

3.2 A planning application was submitted on the 6 June 2013 for the ‘Demolition of all existing structures on site and the erection of a part three, part four, part five, part six storey development comprising 47 no. market and affordable residential

units and 203 sq/m of retail/office (A1/A2/B1) uses, with associated refuse and cycle stores and landscaping’ (ref: 13/02310/FUL). The applicant withdrew this application in August 2013 following advice from planning officers that the application would be refused.

3.3 The applicant entered into a Planning Performance Agreement with the council in October 2013 to develop a revised scheme for the site.

3.4 An application for a Certificate of Lawfulness (Existing) for six portacabins situated in the south-west corner of the site was REFUSED on 30 March 2006 (ref: 05/03655/LDCE).

3.5 Planning permission GRANTED on 15 April 1996 for the continued use of the site for storage (B8 use) and the erection of four portacabins (ref: DC/95/3437/DMC/24269).

4

Proposal

4.1 The application proposes the redevelopment of the site to provide 42 residential units and 175sq/m of office space (B1 use). The existing part one, part two storey office building on the north–eastern corner of the site would be demolished.

4.2 The development would comprise five blocks, linked by stair/lift cores. The development would have a linear arrangement on the site and would step from five storeys, fronting onto Thurlow Park Road, to four storeys at the northern end of Avenue Park Road, reducing in height to three storeys at the centre of the site and then rising to four storeys on the southern end of the site (see Figure 2).

4.3 The application proposes 42 residential units. 40% (17 units) would be provided as affordable housing, with a split of 70% (12 units) for affordable rent and 30% (5 units) for shared ownership. The proposed unit mix and tenure is detailed below:

Unit Size No. of units % of units Tenure

One bed, two person unit

18 43% 7 affordable rent

2 shared ownership

9 private sale

Two bed, three person unit

7 17% 2 shared ownership

5 private sale

Two bed, four person unit


1 shared ownership

9 private sale

Three bed, five person unit


2 private sale

4.4 The development includes the provision of two office units at the northern end of the site. One unit, with a floorspace of 100sq/m, would front onto the corner of Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road. The second unit, with a

floorspace of 75sq/m would solely front onto Thurlow Park Road. The office units would be located at ground floor level fronting Thurlow Park Road, however, due to the site levels these units are identified as being at lower ground floor level on the submitted plans.

4.5 The development would not include any on-site car parking. The existing on-street parking bays on the west side of Avenue Park Road would be re-designed to provide nine on-street parking bays, with one bay being designated for disabled persons. Parking for 70 cycles would be provided within the development in three cycle stores at ground and lower ground floor level, accessed off Avenue Park Road. Stores for refuse and recycling, including storage for bulky items, would also be provided at ground and lower ground floor level for the residential and commercial uses.

4.6 The development would safeguard space for a new pedestrian access route to Tulse Hill station across the southern end of the site to be delivered in the future. A resident’s garden would be provided alongside this safeguarded route.

4.7 The residential part of the development would be constructed to meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 and the office units would be constructed to meet BREEAM ‘excellent’.

4.8 A site plan, elevations and visualisations of the proposed development are provided below.

Figure 1 – Site Plan Showing Upper Ground Floor.

Figure 2 – Avenue Park Road Elevation

Figure 3 – Thurlow Park Road Elevation

Figure 4 – South-west elevation overlooking the railway line

Figure 5 – Visualisation from Thurlow Park Road

Figure 6 – Visualisation from Avenue Park Road

5.0 Consultations and Responses

5.1 Letters were sent to 1746 neighbouring addresses. The following local societies and amenity groups were also consulted:

• Brixton Business Forum • Brixton Society • Dulwich Residents Association • Dulwich Society • Friends of Tivoli Gardens • Friends of West Norwood Cemetery • Lancaster Avenue Residents Association • Lovelace Road Residents Association • Maley Avenue Residents Association • Norwood Action Group • Norwood Society • Streatham Action • Streatham Society

5.2 Four site notices were erected at the site on the 30 January 2014 and an advert

placed in the Lambeth Weekender on the 7 February 2014.

Internal Consultation

5.3 Conservation – no objections subject to conditions.

5.4 Arboriculture – no objections.

5.5 Transport Planning – no objections subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

5.6 Crime Prevention – no objections subject to conditions.

5.7 Regulatory Services Noise Pollution – no objections subject to conditions.

5.8 Parks and Open Spaces – no objections subject to conditions.

5.9 Comments from internal consultees are incorporated within the report below.

External Consultation

5.10

Transport for London – no objection subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

5.11 Network Rail – no objection, informatives suggested.

5.12 103 objections have been received from local residents, including objections from the Birkbeck Place Residents Association (signed by residents from 49 addresses), the Norwood Action Group and Norwood Forum.

5.13 Five letters of support have been received. The letters of support are summarised as follows:

• The development would provide much needed affordable housing.

• The development would improve the visual appearance of the site.

• This is a sensible compromise between the needs of the local community to limit the amount of new dwellings, whilst ensuring new affordable housing is built, and the need of the developer to ensure the development is financially viable.

• Concern that attempts to block developments in the area will push developers away with the consequent loss of new housing and job opportunities.

• Issues with local infrastructure will need to be addressed regardless of whether this development happens and may be given higher priority in light of the additional development.

5.14 The issues raised in the letter of objections are summarised below with an

officer response.

No. of letters sent: No. of objections: No. of support: No. of comments:

1746 103 5 0

Issues raised by Objector Officer Response

Land Use

• The development should be solely residential. Business premises should not be included given the shortage of housing.

• There are already several empty retail/business units in the area. Investment should be made in the high street. Residents do not want any more empty units that have a negative impact on the attractiveness of the area.

• The site is currently an employment site and therefore Saved UDP Policy 23 is applicable. This policy requires replacement employment floorspace to be provided on the site as part of the development. The council shares residents concerns that the units should not remain empty after the development is complete. To ensure the best opportunity for the office units to be let quickly, the units should be fully fitted out to turnkey standard prior to marketing and this shall be required via a planning condition and Section 106 agreement should planning permission be granted.

• The scheme is an overdevelopment of the site. The site is too small for the number of residential units proposed.

• Lambeth takes a ‘design-led’ approach when assessing whether an appropriate number of residential units are proposed on a site in accordance with Saved UDP Policy 33(c). The council considers that the scheme would be of an appropriate scale, massing and height, would provide a good standard of accommodation for future residents and would not adversely impact upon the amenity of existing neighbouring residents. It is therefore considered that the scheme would not result in an over-development of the site. Further explanation and assessment of density and the design of the development is provided in Sections 7 and 8 of this report.

• In relation to the London Plan density matrix the area is ‘suburban’ and not ‘urban’ as stated by the applicants. The ‘suburban’ definition appears to have been applied in the West Norwood Town Centre (WNTC) Masterplan and should be used in this development

• It is acknowledged that there are references in the Core Strategy, Saved UDP and WNTC Masterplan to the area having a suburban character. However, it is considered that the Tulse Hill area has the characteristics of an ‘urban’ area as defined in the notes to the London Density Matrix. Therefore the ‘urban’ setting is applicable to this site. It should be noted that the London Plan density matrix is not a policy but is meant as a general guide to development in different parts of London.

• The WNTC Masterplan Development Schedule indicates that 65 dwellings could be accommodated on the MDO47 site. Concern that the proposed density will be replicated at the southern end of MDO47 resulting in more units on MDO47 than originally indicated in the masterplan

• The Development Schedule provides guidance about the amount of development that could be accommodated in the Tulse Hill area and is not meant to be prescriptive. The introductory paragraph to the schedule states that the ‘masterplan development schedule sets out potential development that could be achieved as part of this masterplan and planning requirements for each of the sites’. Any future redevelopment of the southern half of the MDO site would be assessed on its own merits.

Height, Scale, Massing and Design

• The height, scale and mass is excessive and out of scale in relation to neighbouring buildings. The WNTC Masterplan requires development to be a similar scale and massing to buildings on the south side of Avenue Park Road.

• It is considered that the development, whilst taller than neighbouring properties, would be appropriate on this site and would relate well to the height and scale of properties on neighbouring streets. The scheme, standing between three and five storeys would not overbear on surrounding streets or appear dominant in its setting.

• The development will create a canyon effect along Avenue Park Road. Five storeys fronting Thurlow Park Road will feel threatening.

• The breaks between the blocks and the setbacks on the upper storeys of the two bookend blocks would break up the visual mass of the development when perceived from the street and would therefore not result in a canyon effect. In addition, the Thurlow Park Road frontage would be set back from the highway and therefore would not overbear on the pedestrian footpath.

• The footprint of the development is too large in comparison with the size of the site. The development is too tight to the site boundary.

• The linear footprint of the development is appropriate to the site and would relate well to the existing urban grain of surrounding streets. It is considered that the development would not be too tight to the site boundary. The development would be close enough to the Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road boundaries to create an active frontage along these streets whilst providing some defensible space between the street and the residential/office units and would provide sufficient space between the development and the railway line.

• The ramps and steps along Avenue Park Road would be out of keeping with the neighbourhood and would not contribute to the streetscene.

• The use of ramps and steps to access the development has been kept, as far as possible, to a minimum. However, ramps are needed to provide level access to the development given the sloping nature of the site. A variety of different front boundary treatments can be seen in the area, including front lightwells, steps, off-street parking forecourts and planted front gardens. It is therefore considered that the proposed front boundary treatment is in-keeping with the character of the area and would not be detrimental to the visual appearance of the streetscene.

• The architecture falls below the standard required for new development and is unsuited to the neighbourhood. Cheap materials are proposed which will not age well and will be detrimental to heritage of the area. We do not want another Ira Court.

• It is considered that the architectural design of the development is of good quality and appropriate to the neighbourhood. The development would be constructed from good quality materials, including London stock brick to match neighbouring properties. A condition would be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the submission of material samples so the council can be assured that the materials used in construction match the quality of the materials currently proposed.

• Balconies are not part of the character of the area

• It is acknowledged that balconies are not characteristic of properties in the area. However, this does not mean that balconies would not be appropriate as part of a new development. In this case the balconies form an integrated part of the design and would add visual interest to the elevations and are therefore considered to be appropriate in the development.

Trees and Landscape

• The resident’s communal gardens are unsuited for their purpose, shall receive no sunlight and will not be used. The private gardens fronting Avenue Park Road would not be good amenity spaces.

• Due to the linear nature of the resident’s communal garden it is acknowledged that the total extent of this space would not provide full amenity value and some areas would only have visual amenity value. Therefore, officers have assessed the amount of space that would be realistically usable by residents. This equates to approx.162sq/m which complies with the council’s requirements for amenity space. The applicants have submitted a sun study for the communal garden which demonstrates that the space would receive sufficient levels of sunlight during the day and throughout the year.

• The private gardens fronting Avenue Park Road would not be good amenity spaces.

• Front garden amenity spaces would be provided for three units fronting onto Avenue Park Road. These spaces would measure 11sq/m; 14sq/m and 25sq/m respectively. Residents of these units would also have access to the communal gardens. It is considered that the front garden amenity spaces, alongside the communal gardens would provide sufficient amenity space for residents of these units.

• The development will result in a loss of landscape, visual amenity and wildlife habitat on the site. Insufficient replacement trees are proposed. The existing trees are of good quality and an existing amenity that will not be replaced.

• It is acknowledged that the existing trees do provide a green edge to the site and provide visual amenity to what is otherwise an unattractive site. However, given that the trees are not of high value arboriculturally the council cannot insist on their retention. The development would include seven new street trees, alongside landscaping to the front boundary along Avenue Park Road and a residents garden on the southern and western parts of the site. The applicants have demonstrated via the submission of an Ecological Assessment that the site has low ecological value and contains limited wildlife habitats. The proposed landscape scheme would include habitats for wildlife and features of ecological value. It is considered that the landscape scheme would provide a good level of visual amenity that would enhance the street scene.

• Insufficient green space is proposed. The space proposed is out of character with properties in the area, which have front and rear gardens.

• The development would provide two communal garden amenity spaces, plus front garden areas for three units fronting onto Avenue Park Road. The amount of space proposed meets the requirements of the Lambeth SPD for new flatted developments. The SPD requires communal amenity space of at least 50sq/m, plus a further 10sq/m per flat provided either as a balcony, terrace or private garden or consolidated within the communal space. Properties in the area have both front and rear gardens as well as communal gardens as part of flatted developments. It is considered that the amenity space proposed would complement the character of the area.

• The trees proposed on Avenue Park Road would have to be maintained by the council.

• The trees along Avenue Park Road would be maintained by the council. The applicant has agreed to fund the first three years maintenance of the trees and this would be secured via a Section 106 agreement if planning permission is granted.

• The planting proposal does not include any plants indigenous to this country. The proposed green roofs are of low biodiversity value.

• An indicative planting scheme was submitted with the application and is considered to be appropriate to the site and the development. Further details of the planting and landscape scheme, including the green roofs, are to be secured via condition, if planning permission is granted. The council would expect the detailed scheme to have high amenity and biodiversity value, including the use of Indigenous species, if considered appropriate to the site and location.

Standard of Proposed Residential Accommodation

• There is inadequate provision for the disabled. 10% of the units should be wheelchair accessible and disabled parking should be provided

• Six of the residential units, which equates to 14%, would be wheelchair accessible. In addition a disabled parking bay would be provided on Avenue Park Road. If additional disabled parking bays are required, residents could apply to the council for other on-street bays to be converted.

• The development would offer a poor quality environment for future residents, badly designed cramped flats with no outside amenities, next to a railway line. The ground floor flats would have poor outlook onto the railway embankment.

• The size of the residential units and individual rooms would meet and in some cases exceed the minimum size requirements in both the London Plan and Lambeth Council SPD. In addition all units would have their own private amenity space, plus access to communal amenity spaces. The majority of the flats are dual aspect with outlook over both the railway line and the street. The ground floor flats would look out onto the communal garden and/or Avenue Park Road and would therefore have a good outlook. It is considered that the development would provide good quality accommodation for residents.

• Residents of the new flats will suffer excess noise and lack of privacy due to being so close together and will suffer noise and light pollution from Tulse Hill station and noise from the South Circular road

• The proposed flats have been stacked according to use to minimise noise disturbance between residents. Noise insulation would also be addressed via building control regulations. There would be no overlooking between windows of flats within the development. Bedrooms, as far as possible have been located away from the railway line and Thurlow Park Road to reduce noise disturbance to residents whilst sleeping. In addition, the development would incorporate a sound insulation scheme with noise attenuated ventilation to reduce the environmental impacts of these noise sources.

• Inadequate provision for children’s play and young people. The location of the playspace is unsuitable, separated from the development by a public footpath. This area will attract anti-social behaviour. The area lacks play facilities

• The council raised concerns with the applicant about the location of the play space adjacent to the safeguarded entrance to the station. Subsequently the scheme has been amended to provide the play space within the resident’s communal garden on the west side of the site. An indicative design for the play features has been provided. However, it is recommended that full details should be required via condition if planning permission is granted. In addition, the applicant would provide a financial contribution to assist in improving play facilities in the area.

• Resident’s balconies are most likely to be used for storage

• All the residential units would be provided with internal storage areas. In addition, dedicated bicycle storage would be provided at lower ground floor level. It is therefore considered that sufficient storage would be provided for residents. It should be noted that it is not possible to control how residents use their balconies and private amenity spaces. The possibility of residents using their balconies for storage would not be reasonable grounds to require the balconies to be removed from the scheme.

Neighbouring residents amenity

• The development would block daylight and sunlight, would be overbearing and create a sense of enclosure and would overshadow and overlook existing neighbouring properties and their gardens.

• The impact of the development upon the amenity of neighbouring properties has been assessed. It is considered that the development would not result in a loss of daylight and sunlight to neighbouring properties, would not create a sense of enclosure or be overbearing or overshadow properties and would not overlook neighbouring properties to a detrimental level. A full assessment of the amenity impacts is provided in section 11 of this report.

• The development will result in a loss of view of the sky and trees from neighbouring resident’s properties.

• The site is currently vacant and therefore the view form neighbouring properties would change as a result of the development. It is considered that the change to resident’s outlook as a result of the development would not be to a level detrimental to their amenity. It should be noted that there are no protected views across the site.

• The increased number of residents would result in increased noise, cooking smells and light pollution in the area.

• The development would not result in an increase in noise, cooking smells or light pollution over and above that which would be expected in any residential area.

Transport and Highways

• Insufficient parking to be provided. There is already significant parking problems in the area, the development will make this worse, especially outside the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) and at weekends. New residents should not be eligible for parking permits

• No car parking would be provided on the site and the applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 106 agreement to ensure that residents of the one and two bed units would not be eligible to park within the CPZ. The council’s Transport Planning Officer has assessed the application and raises no objections given the high PTAL rating for the site being adjacent to Tulse Hill Station and subject to the three bed units being eligible for on-street parking permits.

• The developer should pay for the extension to the CPZ to make up for the increase in cars from the development.

• It is vital that people can continue to park outside the CPZ. The proposals should not lead to the extension of the CPZ.

• There are currently no proposals to extend the CPZ in the area.

• The cycle parking would not be convenient for many residents.

• There should be more cycle parking on site.

• Good to see lots of cycle parking but large cycle stores will not work as no one will use them.

• The development would include three cycle stores that would accommodate a combined total of 70 cycles. This level of cycle parking exceeds London Plan requirements. The council’s transport planner has assessed the application and has raised no objection to the number of stores proposed subject to the submission of the detailed design of the stores via condition if planning permission is granted. This could include the subdivision of the stores to provided smaller bike store areas.

• If permission is granted effective controls should be placed upon the timing and routing of construction vehicles so they do not enter Elmcourt Road and Maley Avenue at school start and finish times. Access along Avenue Park Road during construction will be disrupted and difficult.

• A condition to require the submission of a Method of Construction Statement would be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to ensure that the construction of the development would not cause unnecessary disruption to traffic movement or result in a threat to highway and pedestrian safety.

• Traffic levels, congestion, noise and pollution will increase. More traffic would increase danger to children walking and cycling to school.

• It is considered that the development would not result in increased traffic levels in the area that would be detrimental to highway safety or result in increased congestion. The pedestrian environment would be improved along Avenue Park Road as part of the development.

• There is no provision for parking or servicing for delivery vehicles. •

• It is considered that the servicing and delivery requirements for 42 flats and two commercial units would not require the provision of a designated bay and could be accommodated on street. However, it is recommended that a Delivery and Servicing Strategy be submitted to the council for approval prior to occupation.

• The development will result in increased pedestrian activity. No pedestrian crossing is provided across Maley Avenue from the end of the new footpath, this will have an adverse impact on pedestrian and highway safety. The pavements along Avenue Park Road are already narrow.

• The development would include the construction of a raised table at the junction of Maley Avenue and Avenue Park Road to provide a raised pedestrian crossing and to slow traffic. A new pedestrian footway would also be provided along the western side of Avenue Park Road. In addition, the on-street parking spaces on the west side of Avenue Park Road would be raised off the roadway slightly to provide increased space for pedestrians when cars are not parked. It is therefore considered that the development would improve the pedestrian environment.

• Crossing Avenue Park Road at its junction with Norwood Road is hazardous due to the lack of pavement and poor sight lines; increasing footfall will make this worse.

• This application does not include the southern half of the MDO site and therefore, as part of this application, a pavement cannot be provided along the whole length of Avenue Park Road or improvements to the junction of Avenue Park Road and Norwood Road for pedestrians. The council could seek these improvements if/when the southern part of the MDO site is brought forward for development.

• Avenue Park Road is a rat run and dangerous. The development would result in more pressure on the already crowded and dangerous junction between Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road. The development will exacerbate tailbacks on Avenue Park Road.

• It is considered that the proposed raised table at the junction of Avenue Park Road and Maley Avenue, alongside the new on street parking layout on the western side of Avenue Park Road would help to reduce traffic speeds along this street and improve highway safety. The development is not expected to lead to a significant increase in traffic along Avenue Park Road to the detriment of highway safety.

• No improved access to the train station. The development would prevent the future introduction of easier access to the station platforms for disabled passengers from Avenue Park Road.

• The development would safeguard space on the southern part of the site to allow for improved access to the station from Avenue Park Road to be brought forward in the future.

• The development will disrupt vehicle ‘drop offs’ to the station from Avenue Park Road.

• Following the development sufficient space would remain along Avenue Park Road following the development for vehicles to drop off passengers at the station.

Refuse & Recycling

• Avenue Park Road frequently suffers fly tipping. The inadequate and inconvenient refuse storage proposed for the development will exacerbate this problem.

• Sufficient and easily accessible storage for refuse and recycling would be provided within the development for both the residential and office uses. The site is currently vacant and its redevelopment is likely to see fly-tipping on the site stop given that the site would be occupied.

Community Safety

• Concerned the businesses that occupy the ground floor units may create anti-social behaviour from late night opening hours.

• Office uses do not usually open late at night or attract high numbers of visitors and therefore it is unlikely that the office units would create anti-social behaviour.

• The new station access could create areas where pedestrians feel venerable and result in anti-social activity, particularly if lighting and other security is inadequate and poorly maintained.

• Space would be safeguarded as part of this development to provide new, improved access to the station in the future. When this new access is implemented, planning permission is likely to be required for the associated works and the council would be able to secure appropriate levels of lighting and management as part of this future application.

Infrastructure

• The development will have a detrimental Impact on local amenities, such as schools, nurseries, doctors, utilities, water and sewerage, and public transport.

• If planning permission is granted, the developer would provide a financial contribution towards the provision of school places, libraries, health, sport and leisure facilities and parks and open spaces in the area. The provision of public transport is the responsibility of the train/bus operators and therefore cannot be addressed as part of the assessment of this planning application. The applicants have submitted a utilities summary which indicates that existing utilities in the area would be able to accommodate the new development, with the exception of electricity. A new electricity sub station would be required to serve the development and would be located on the Thurlow Park Road elevation.

Other Matters

• The proposals have hardly changed since the last submission. There is little difference despite significant objections from the community.

• It is considered that the proposals have changed since the previous submission and the council considers that the changes address the concerns previously raised by officers.

• Existing empty properties in the area should be refurbished rather than permit this development.

• This is not a relevant planning objection. The council has to assess the application as submitted.

• The flats are aimed at the rental market and would not be owned by people who live in the area. This would have a negative impact on the local area as residents will not take pride in the area they live.

• The future occupancy of the residential units for private sale, whether owner occupied of privately rented, is not a relevant planning objection and therefore cannot be considered in the assessment of this application.

• The development will undermine the value of adjacent houses.

• This is not a valid planning objection and therefore cannot be considered in the assessment of the application.

• No meaningful pre-application public consultation, only an exhibition for comment with very little notice given. The Statement of

• The amount of pre-application consultation undertaken by the applicant cannot be considered in the assessment of the application. The council encouraged the applicant to engage with residents at pre-application stage, however, the council cannot force the applicant to

community involvement recorded low levels of attendance at the exhibition. This has been used to imply disinterest in the proposals, which is not the case.

undertake a specific level of pre-application consultation with residents.

• The development does not meet the requirements of the Lambeth Local Plan 2013 in terms of quality and empathy. The development should meet the higher standards to be introduced via the Local Plan in 2015.

• The Lambeth Local Plan is currently in draft form and carries no weight in the assessment of current planning applications. Therefore this application cannot be assessed on policies within the draft Local Plan.

6 Planning Policy Considerations

National Guidance

6.1 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.

6.2 The NPPF reinforces the Development Plan led system. The NPPF takes precedence where the local plan is ‘absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date’. The NPPF must now be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans and, is a material consideration in planning decisions.

6.3 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 2011

6.4 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. All Borough plan policies are required to e in general conformity with the London Plan policies.

6.5 The following policies of the London Plan are considered relevant to this application: Policy 3.4 Optimising Housing Potential Policy 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing Developments Policy 3.6 Children and young people’s play and informal recreation

facilities Policy 3.8 Housing Choice Policy 3.12 Negotiating Affordable Housing on Individual Private residential

and Mixed Use Schemes Policy 3.13 Affordable Housing Thresholds Policy 5.2 Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions Policy 5.3 Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 5.7 Renewable Energy Policy 5.9 Overheating and Cooling Policy 5.10 Urban Greening Policy 5.11 Green Roofs and Development Site Environs Policy 5.12 Flood Risk Management Policy 5.13 Sustainable Drainage Policy 5.14 Water Quality and Wastewater Infrastructure Policy 5.15 Water Use and Supplies Policy 5.17 Waste Capacity 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 6.9 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 7.19 Biodiversity and Access to Nature Policy 7.21 Trees and Woodland Policy 8.2 Planning Obligations

6.6 The following London Plan Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) and Guidance (SPG) are considered relevant to this application:

• Housing SPG (2012).

• Sustainable Design and Construction SPG (2006).

• Delivering London's Energy Future: the Mayor's climate change mitigation and energy strategy (2011).

• Accessible London: Achieving an Inclusive Environment SPG (2004).

• Play and Informal Recreation SPG (2012).

Lambeth Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy January 2011

6.7 The following policies in the Lambeth LDF Core Strategy are considered relevant to 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 Policy PN8 West Norwood / Tulse Hill

Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010

6.8 The following policies within the Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5 August 2010 and not superseded by the LDF Core Strategy January 2011, are considered relevant to 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 39 Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design Policy 50 Open Space and Sports Facilities MDO 47 Avenue Park Road (railway sidings on north side of road)

Lambeth Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance

6.9 The following Lambeth Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance are considered relevant to this application:

•••• Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions SPD (July 2008).

•••• S106 Planning Obligations SPD (updated April 2012).

•••• Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (July 2008).

•••• Safer Built Environments SPD (April 2008)

•••• Waste and Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements Guidance for Architects and Developers (May 2006).

•••• Refuse and Recycling Storage Design Guide (July 2013).

6.10 The West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan (March 2009) is considered relevant to this application. This masterplan forms part of the evidence base for the Core Strategy Places and Neighbourhoods policy, but does not form part of the adopted development plan.

7 Land Use

Principle of residential led mixed use development

7.1 The principle of the redevelopment of the application site is supported in the

council’s planning policies. Tulse Hill is identified in the Lambeth Core Strategy as an area of significant growth or change. Core Strategy S1(b) refers to Tulse Hill as an area of the borough where sustainable development that enhances local distinctiveness and delivers regeneration objectives will be encouraged and supported.

7.2 The council’s specific planning aspirations for West Norwood and Tulse Hill are set out in Core Strategy Policy PN8. This policy seeks to deliver significant development through the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan. The aspiration of the policy is to deliver a net increase of approx. 560 dwellings; 7,000sq/m of retail (A1, A2, A3); 45,500sq/m of employment (B1) and 13,000sq/m of community uses (D2), phased over a fifteen year period up to 2025.

7.3 Core Strategy Policy PN8(d) specifically relates to Tulse Hill. This part of the policy seeks to improve the role of Tulse Hill as a gateway to the area and provide a better sense of arrival to West Norwood. The policy refers to specific proposals for Tulse Hill, including the refurbishment of the railway station, with improved access and intensification of uses around the station interchange, taller landmark buildings around the station, supporting residential led growth with mixed use retail and food and drink uses; encouraging improved active frontages along either side of the railway line; and supporting improvements to the public realm to enhance connectively and circulation.

7.4 The application site is identified in the Lambeth Core Strategy as part of a Major Development Opportunity site (MDO47). MDO47 covers the application site plus land immediately to the south which is currently occupied by Network Rail as a maintenance depot. MDO47 does not specifically address land use but seeks the creation of a street frontage for the site and a new pedestrian link through to Tulse Hill Station.

7.5 Tulse Hill is identified as an ‘Opportunity Area’ in the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan. The masterplan proposals seek to intensify the uses around Tulse Hill station interchange and provide an improved gateway to the area with better access and sense of arrival. The masterplan identifies an aspiration to deliver 116 residential units, 2,696sq/m retail space and 458sq/m employment space within the Tulse Hill area. The Tulse Hill Opportunity Area comprises four sites which could be brought forward for development. This includes MDO47 which is identified in the masterplan as opportunity site TH4.

7.6 The application site is currently vacant, however, the established land use is B8 storage and distribution and B1 office. The application proposes the redevelopment of the site to provide 42 residential units and 175sq/m of office space (B1 use). Core Strategy Policy S3(b) seeks to maintain a stock of sites and premises outside Key Industrial Business Areas (KIBA’s) in commercial (employment) use across the borough, subject to the suitability of the site and location.

7.7 Saved UDP Policy 23 supports the implementation of the strategic policies in the Core Strategy. This policy states that, outside KIBA’s, where land is or has last been in employment use, loss of floorspace, and in particular B1 floorspace for small businesses, to non-employment use will not be permitted unless one of the exceptions set out in the policy are met. The only exception applicable to this application is where a scheme has substantial other planning benefits and the redevelopment scheme would provide modern small business units (ref. Policy 23(b)(iii)).

7.8 The proposed development would provide 175sq/m of B1 office use, replacing the existing office floorspace on the site with two modern office units. The remainder of the site would be redeveloped for residential use. When assessing the application against Saved UDP Policy 23, it is considered that the aspirations of Core Strategy Policy PN8, the MDO designation and the land use aspirations of the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan should be considered. As outlined above, Policy PN8 supports residential led growth in Tulse Hill and the masterplan identifies MDO47 for residential led development. Therefore, when assessed in the context of the wider planning aspirations for the Tulse Hill area, it is considered that the residential led redevelopment of the site alongside the provision of two modern office units would meet the requirements of the exception to Policy 23(b)(iii).

7.9 As outlined above, Core Strategy Policies S1(b) and PN8(d), Major Development Opportunity site MDO47 and the West Norwoood Town Centre Masterplan all promote the principle of new development in Tulse Hill and, specifically, the redevelopment of the application site. Therefore, the principle of the redevelopment of the application site is considered acceptable in terms of land use. However, this is subject to an assessment of the proposed development against other relevant Core Strategy and Saved UDP Policies, as discussed below.

Proposed Residential Development

7.10 Core Strategy Policy S2(a) seeks the provision of at least 7,700 net additional dwellings across the borough between 2010/11 and 2016/17 in line with London Plan targets, and a further 8,800 more homes by 2024/25 subject to London Plan targets for this period. The proposed development would provide new homes; contributing to meeting the council’s housing targets for the borough.

7.11 Lambeth takes a design led approach when assessing residential density. Core Strategy Policy S2(g) seeks levels of residential density consistent with

London Plan guidelines, having regard to the provision of other uses on the site, availability of local services, access to and capacity of public transport, urban design context, quality of design and impact on existing and future residents.

7.12 In addition, Saved UDP Policy 33(c) states that ‘the primary consideration in determining the appropriate density and scale of new residential development will be achieving an appropriate urban design which makes efficient use of land and meet the amenity needs of existing and potential residents. Buildings should be of a scale, massing and height that are appropriate to their site characteristics, setting, civic function and/or importance and location in the townscape’.

7.13 The London Plan guidelines in relation to density are set out within London Plan Policy 3.4 (Optimising Housing Potential). This policy states that ‘taking into account local context and character, design principles and public transport capacity, development should optimise housing output for different types of location within the relevant density range shown in Table 3.2’ (London Plan density matrix).

7.14 It is important to note that the London Plan density matrix is not a policy but is meant as a general guide to development in different parts of London. Table 3.2 of the London Plan shows appropriate density ranges related to setting in terms of location, existing building form and massing and the index of public transport accessibility. However, as para 3.28 of the London Plan (2011) states ‘It is not appropriate to apply Table 3.2 mechanistically. Its density ranges for particular types of location are broad, enabling account to be taken of other factors, relevant to optimising potential – local context, design and transport capacity are particularly important as well as social infrastructure, open space and play. These broad ranges also provide the framework within which boroughs can refine local approaches’. A copy of London Plan Table 3.2 is provided below.

Table 3.2 Sustainable residential quality (SRQ) density matrix (habitable rooms and dwellings per hectare)

Setting Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) 0 to 1 2 to 3 4 to 6 Suburban 150–200 hr/ha 150–250 hr/ha 200–350 hr/ha 3.8–4.6 hr/unit 35–55 u/ha 35–65 u/ha 45–90 u/ha 3.1–3.7 hr/unit 40–65 u/ha 40–80 u/ha 55–115 u/ha 2.7–3.0 hr/unit 50–75 u/ha 50–95 u/ha 70–130 u/ha Urban 150–250 hr/ha 200–450 hr/ha 200–700 hr/ha 3.8 –4.6 hr/unit 35–65 u/ha 45–120 u/ha 45–185 u/ha 3.1–3.7 hr/unit 40–80 u/ha 55–145 u/ha 55–225 u/ha 2.7–3.0 hr/unit 50–95 u/ha 70–170 u/ha 70–260 u/ha Central 150-300 hr/ha 300–650 hr/ha 650–1100 hr/ha 3.8–4.6 hr/unit 35–80 u/ha 65–170 u/ha 140–290 u/ha 3.1–3.7 hr/unit 40–100 u/ha 80–210 u/ha 175–355 u/ha 2.7–3.0 hr/unit 50–110 u/hr 100–240 u/ha 215–405 u/ha

Notes to Table 3.2

Appropriate density ranges are related to setting in terms of location, existing building form and massing, and the index of public transport accessibility (PTAL). The setting can be defined as:

• central – areas with very dense development, a mix of different uses, large building footprints and typically buildings of four to six storeys, located within 800 metres walking distance of an International, Metropolitan or Major town centre.

• urban – areas with predominantly dense development such as, for example, terraced houses, mansion blocks, a mix of different uses, medium building footprints and typically buildings of two to four storeys, located within 800 metres walking distance of a District centre or, along main arterial routes

• suburban – areas with predominantly lower density development such as, for example, detached and semi-detached houses, predominantly residential, small building footprints and typically buildings of two to three storeys.

7.15

Tulse Hill comprises a mix of terraced and semi-detached properties of between two and four storeys, with the predominant height being three storeys. The area comprises a mix of land uses with retail and office/commercial uses focused around the rail station and along Norwood Road, surrounded by a mix of residential flats and houses. Tulse Hill is designated as a district centre and, whilst the application site is not located within the district centre, it is within 200m walking distant of the district centre to the south (Norwood Road) and within 150m of the district centre to the west (Thurlow Park Road). In addition, part of the site fronts onto the A305 South Circular road which is main arterial route. It is therefore considered that the application site is located within an area with ‘urban’ characteristics for the purposes of the London Plan density matrix.

7.16 The development would comprise 42 units or 120 habitable rooms, which equates to 2.8 habitable rooms per unit and 182.6 units per hectare. The development therefore complies with the London Plan density matrix for an ‘urban’ area, falling within the category of 2.7-3.0 habitable rooms per unit which proposes 70-260 units per hectare for sites with a PTAL of 4 to 6 (The site has a PTAL of 6a).

7.17 A number of objections from local residents question the characterisation of Tulse Hill as ‘urban’ and assert that instead Tulse Hill is a ‘suburban’ area. As such, residents state that the density of the development would not comply with the density requirements for a ‘suburban’ area in the London Plan density matrix. Residents have highlighted references made to West Norwood and Tulse Hill being ‘suburban’ in the Saved Lambeth UDP (Table 9, para 4), Lambeth Core Strategy (para 2.4) and West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan (p 38 & p100). Reference is also made to West Norwood benefitting from the Mayor’s Outer London Fund and a survey of building heights on streets surrounding the site has been submitted concluding that the predominant height is two or three storeys.

7.18 The residents’ arguments have been considered. It is acknowledged that there are references in the Core Strategy, Saved UDP and Masterplan to the area having a suburban character. It is also noted that there are references in the Masterplan to the area being ‘urban’ (p17 and p83). However, it is considered that the character of the Tulse Hill area does meet the requirements, and has more of the characteristics, of an ‘urban’ area set out in the notes to the London Plan Density Matrix. Therefore the ‘urban’ setting is applicable to this site. In response to the other arguments made, it is noted that the Mayor’s Outer London Fund does not differentiate between ‘urban’ and ‘suburban’ areas. In addition, the survey of building heights submitted by a resident indicates that there are a number of four storey buildings on streets surrounding the site. As stated above, three storey buildings are predominant in the area; however, there are a number of buildings of both two and four storeys, which fits the setting criteria for an ‘urban’ location.

7.19 Residents have also commented that the development schedule in the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan indicates that the MDO47 site should provide 65 residential units and that a development of 42 residential units on part of the MDO site is overdevelopment. Residents comment that the development schedule appears to be based on the assumption that Tulse Hill is a ‘suburban’ area in accordance with the London Plan density matrix. It should be noted that the development schedule provides guidance about the amount of development that could be accommodated in the Tulse Hill area and is not meant to be prescriptive. The introductory paragraph to the development schedule states that the ‘masterplan development schedule sets out potential development that could be achieved as part of this masterplan and planning requirements for each of the sites’. Therefore it should not be used mechanistically to determine the appropriate density and number of residential units appropriate to a development site in the area.

7.20 As outlined above, Lambeth takes a ‘design led’ approach when assessing whether the density of a proposed development is appropriate to a site and its surroundings. A design led approach considers the impact of a development upon the quality of life of existing and future residents, the capacity of social and physical infrastructure and other amenities, and the local context and setting. These issues will be considered later in this report. However, when assessing the principle of the amount of development that is proposed on the site, subject to an assessment of the other factors that influence the quality of a development, it is considered that the proposed development complies with Core Strategy Policy S2 and Saved UDP Policy 33 and Policy 3.4 of the London Plan.

Dwelling and Tenure Mix

7.21 Core Strategy Policy S2(d) seeks a mix of housing sizes and types to meet the needs of different sections of the community. Saved UDP Policy 16 states that a range of unit sizes of affordable housing should be provided, having regard to local circumstances, site characteristics, and the aims of the borough’s annual Housing Strategy.

7.22 The application proposes the following dwelling mix:

Unit Size No. of units % of units Tenure

One bed, two person unit


2 shared ownership

9 private sale

Two bed, three person unit

7 17% 2 shared ownership

5 private sale

Two bed, four person unit


1 shared ownership

9 private sale

Three bed, five person unit


2 private sale

7.23 Lambeth’s Housing Needs Survey (updated 2007) highlights a need for family sized accommodation in the borough. The development would provide six three-bed units which equates to 14% of the total number of units and four of these units would be affordable units. The development would also provide 11 two-bed, four person units which would also be suitable for families. It is considered that this proportion of family sized units would assist in meeting the housing needs of the borough. In conclusion, a development of one, two and three bed units would be appropriate for this site and complies with the requirements of Core Strategy Policy S2 and Saved UDP Policy 16.

7.24 London Plan Policy 3.12 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.

7.25 The development would provide 12 units for affordable rent and five shared ownership units. This equates to a provision of 40% affordable housing on site with a tenure split of 70% affordable rent and 30% shared ownership. This level of provision is welcomed by the council and would assist in meeting the demand for affordable housing within the borough. The affordable housing would be secured via a S106 legal agreement. The development therefore complies with Policy S2(c) of the Core Strategy.

Employment Floorspace

7.26 Saved UDP Policy 21 promotes new small scale office space as part of mixed use development. New employment floorspace should be in a form that meets local market demand. In Tulse Hill this is likely to be smaller, affordable business units. The development includes the provision of two office units at the northern end of the site. One unit, with a floorspace of 100sq/m, would front onto the corner of Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road. The second unit, with a floorspace of 75sq/m would solely front onto Thurlow Park Road. Concerns have been raised by residents that these office units are likely to remain vacant and boarded up given that there are already a number of vacant retail and commercial units in the area, in particular, in the Ira Court development to the south of the site on Norwood Road.

7.27 To ensure the best possible opportunity for the office units to be let quickly, it is considered that the units should be fully fitted out to turnkey standard prior to marketing, i.e. the units should be fitted out so that occupants can move in and start working without further works being required. The submitted floor plans do not show the units fully fitted out; for example, there are no kitchens or toilets indicated and no storage space. It is therefore recommended that the planning permission, if granted, be subject to a condition and section 106 agreement to ensure that the employment use is fitted out to turnkey standard prior to marketing and made available at the same time as the residential units. Subject to this condition and Section 106 agreement, it is considered that the provision of office units on the site complies with the aspirations of Saved UDP Policy 21.

MDO Designation and Improved Access to Tulse Hill Station

7.28 Saved UDP designation MDO47 requires the redevelopment of the MDO site to safeguard a new pedestrian link through the site to Tulse Hill station. This is also an aspiration of the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan which identifies that a new public space could be provided on the MDO site to create a station square. It is understood that there are currently no firm proposals to create a new eastern access to the station. This would be co-ordinated by Network Rail and the train operators. However, in order to ensure that the future provision of a new entrance to the station is not prejudiced by the proposed development the council required the developer to safeguard part of

the site to provide an access in the future. A pedestrian route is to be safeguarded across the southern end of the site and space alongside this route to be laid out as a resident’s garden. The application therefore complies with Policy MDO47 designation in this respect.

7.29 Given that only part of the MDO site has come forward for development as part of the application, it is important to ensure that the future redevelopment of remainder of the MDO site is not prejudiced. The proposed new building would not be built right up to the southern boundary of the application site leaving space for a future new entrance to the station and to ensure the future redevelopment of the southern part of the MDO site is not prejudiced.

Land use – Conclusion

7.30 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development meets the requirements of Core Strategy Policies S2, S3 and PN8, Saved UDP Policies 21, 23 and 33, designation MDO47 and the aspirations of the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan in relation to land use and is therefore considered to be acceptable in this regard.

8 Design

8.1 Core Strategy Policy S9 seeks the highest quality of design in all new buildings and the public realm. Innovation in design will be supported and encouraged, particularly where this contributes to local distinctiveness, enhances the existing built environment and heritage, reflects the cultural diversity of the borough and creates new high quality areas of public realm. Saved UDP Policy 33 states that ‘all development should be of a high quality design and contribute positively to its surrounding area’.

Site Layout

8.2 Saved UDP Policy 33 states that major development should improve sense of place and legibility, and define edges by retaining appropriate building lines. In addition, Core Strategy Policy PN8 which relates to the Tulse Hill area, seeks development that provides active frontages along the railway line.

8.3 The development would take a linear form extending north/south across the site. The central part of the development would have a ‘terrace’ form ‘bookended’ by two blocks at the northern and southern ends that would be larger in footprint and height. The development would provide a new active frontage onto Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road with residential front doors and windows, in addition to windows and entrances to serve the office units.

8.4 The development would have four residential entrance cores. These vertical circulation cores would take the form of links set back from the main elevation, with glazed elevations and zinc canopies over the entrances. These entrance cores would provide visual breaks in the linear form of the development. The provision of residential entrances along the Avenue Park Road frontage of the

site is welcomed. These entrances would increase activity and natural surveillance along the northern part of Avenue Park Road improving the quality of the pedestrian environment. These residential entrances would also be complemented by the proposed office entrances fronting Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road.

8.5 The development would also provide a new 2.0m wide footpath along the eastern boundary of the site where currently there is no footpath. The central ‘terrace’ part of the development would be set back from the new footpath by between 2.5 and 3.0 metres, with the ‘bookend’ block to the south being set back by approx 0.7 metres and the bookend block to the north being set back 2.0 metres. These setbacks would provide defensible space between the footpath and the residential units. Access to the two central terrace blocks would be via ramps and steps to take account of the rise of the street from north to south. Access to the cores in the north and south would be level off the footpath.

8.6 It is considered that the linear footprint of the development would be appropriate to the site and would relate well to the existing urban grain, with small breaks between the five blocks and regular and prominent entrances. It is also considered that the layout and form of the development and the provision of a new pedestrian footpath along Avenue Park Road would improve legibility and natural surveillance along the street and would meet the aspiration of Policy PN8 to create an active frontage along the railway line. The application therefore complies with Core Strategy Policy PN8 and Saved UDP Policy 33 in relation to the proposed site layout.

Scale, Height and Massing

8.7 Saved UDP Policy 33 states that all major development should relate satisfactory to adjacent townscape taking into account its scale and character. Core Strategy Policy PN8 states that development in West Norwood/Tulse Hill should ‘be of a scale and form related and appropriate to its context’.

8.8 The development would comprise part three, part four and part five storeys. The central ‘terrace’ part of the development would comprise part three, part four storeys with the top storey set back in the form of a mansard roof. This central part of the development would be ‘bookended’ by two taller blocks. Fronting onto Thurlow Park Road a five storey block, with the top storey set back, and at the southern end of the site adjacent to the junction of Avenue Park Road and Maley Avenue, a four storey block, with the top storey set back.

8.9 The neighbouring streets comprise buildings of between two and four storeys. The proposed development would, in part, be taller when compared to neighbouring properties. It is considered that a development taller than the neighbouring properties would be appropriate on this site and relate well to its context if it provides a high quality built form and design.

8.10 The tallest part of the development, at five storeys, would front onto Thurlow Park Road. Thurlow Park Road is a busy and relatively wide street (approx 20 metres wide) and is fronted by buildings set back from the highway by approx. 5.0 – 8.0 metres. The properties adjacent to the site and fronting Thurlow Park Road comprise two and three storeys. However, due to the land levels these properties sit higher than road level with steps or ramps leading up from the road to their front doors. The five storey part of the development fronting Thurlow Park Road would be approx 3.8m above the roof ridge of the properties to the east of the site (No 12 Thurlow Park Road) and approx. 4.8m above the roof ridge of the properties to the north of the site (No 23 Thurlow Park Road). When viewed from the street, the scale of this part of the development would appear as a four storeys, due to the set back fifth floor, thereby reducing the perceived height of the development. Given the sloping nature of the land levels adjacent to the site and that the development would not immediately abut existing buildings, it is considered that a five storey development would be appropriate in this location and would not be detrimental to character of the area.

8.11 There exists a pair of semi-detached two storey properties located directly opposite the site on the east side of Avenue Park Road (No’s 16 & 17). In addition, the flank elevation of No. 1 Maley Avenue is located adjacent to the southern end of the site. The proposed development would be between three and four storeys adjacent to these properties. It is considered that the design and form of the development opposite No’s 16 and 17 Avenue Park Road would be appropriate; the development would be approx. 2.0m taller than the roof ridge of these properties. In addition, the development would be slightly lower than the roof ridge of No. 1 Maley Avenue. Again, when viewed from street level, the development would be perceived as being lower due to the set back top storeys. It is considered that the height of the development, whilst taller than the neighbouring development would be appropriate to the site and its surroundings and would not be detrimental to the context and the character of the area. The relationship between the height of the development and the neighbouring properties is illustrated in the section drawings below.

Figure 7 - Section through the five-storey part of the development in relation to No’s 12 and 23 Thurlow Park Road looking north.

No 12 Thurlow Park Road


Proposed Development

Figure 8 - Section through the development in relation to No 1 Maley Avenue and No’s 16 & 17 Avenue Park Road looking south.

8.12 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed scale and mass of the development would be appropriate to the neighbouring streets. The scheme, standing between three and five storeys, would not overbear on surrounding streets or appear dominant in its setting. The small breaks between the blocks and the setbacks on the upper storeys of the two bookend blocks would relate well to the existing urban grain and would provide visual breaks in the liner form of the development.

Detailed Design and Materials

8.13 Saved UDP Policy 33(e) states that ‘buildings should employ materials of high quality and durability that are of compatible or complementary colour and texture to each other’.

8.14 The applicants state that the elevational treatment for the development has ‘been influenced by the architectural language and materials of the neighbouring properties. The concept of linked blocks to form a larger terrace takes reference from the Victorian terraces further south along Avenue Park Road and the semi-detached villas of Maley Avenue. Projecting bays reflect the bays on the Victorian terraces, but are articulated in a contemporary style’.

8.15 The development would be constructed from London stock brick to match the brickwork of neighbouring properties. The mansard roof would have a slate finish and the upper storeys of the bookend blocks would be finished in bronze metal cladding. The bronze cladding is also repeated on side panels to some of the windows on the lower storeys. The projecting bays, entrance canopies and corner balconies would be finished in a grey zinc cladding and the recessed circulation cores would be glazed. The balconies would have structural glazed balustrading and the windows would be grey aluminium. The flat roofs would partly house Photovoltaic solar panels and a green roof system, although the roof would not be visible from ground level.

No 1 Maley Avenue

Proposed Development

No’s 16 & 17 Avenue Park Road

8.16 It is considered that the elevations; loosely based on the architectural principles of the neighbouring properties, such as being of brick construction, having defined roofs as well as a repetitive arrangement and hierarchy to the fenestration would relate well to the context and would deliver a development of high design quality. It is therefore considered that the detailed design of the development would comply with Saved UDP Policy 33(e). In order to ensure that the development is delivered to the high quality of design indicated in the planning application, it is considered that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the submission of material samples and detailed drawings of the windows, entrances, roof and boundary treatment for approval by the council prior to the commencement of the development.

9 Public Realm and Landscape

9.1 Saved UDP Policy 39(c) states that ‘developments should include landscape design that enhances the area’. A successful landscape design should reflect the way in which the area will be used and the character of the locality and surroundings, should have a landscaped frontage (including trees and shrubs), new planting of appropriate specification in relation to the size and scale of the development and boundary treatments which complement the development and enhance the street scene. Policy 39(g) also states that ‘the planting of new street trees and shrubs will be promoted and encouraged. This policy also seeks to secure improvements to the public realm, where appropriate through planning obligations.

9.2 The development would include three landscaped areas, the street frontage, and two residents’ gardens, one on the western side of the site (rear of the development) and one on the southern part of the site. The landscape design for the street frontage includes the provision of a new pedestrian footpath. This footpath would include ‘build outs’ to accommodate five new street trees. The parking bays along this part of the site would be raised slightly to provide additional wider pavement space when the parking spaces are not in use. A raised table would also be constructed at the junction of Maley Avenue and Avenue Park Road to provide a raised pedestrian crossing and to slow traffic along Avenue Park Road. Shrub and low hedge planting would be provided within the ground floor amenity spaces at the front of the development to provide a landscaped edge to the front of the development. Two street trees would also be provided within the site boundary on the Thurlow Park Road frontage.

9.3 A resident’s communal garden would be created at the rear of the site. This would have a linear form comprising a series of landscaped spaces and amenity areas with trees, shrubs, hard landscaping, seating and areas for play. The resident’s garden on the southern part of the site would provide areas for food growing. Decorative steel railings would provide a secure boundary to this garden, and lockable gates would be installed at the entrance so that the space is only accessible to residents. Low planting would be provided around the perimeter of the garden to permit natural surveillance from the street. This garden has been designed to allow for the introduction of a pedestrian link to Tulse Hill Station. Network Rail has been consulted on the

application and raise no objections to the landscape scheme in relation to the operation of the railway line.

9.4 It is considered that the proposed landscape plan, including improvements to the pedestrian environment along Avenue Park Road, would enhance the street scene and provide attractive and useable amenity spaces for future residents. In order to ensure that the high quality landscape scheme indicated in the application is delivered, it is recommended that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require further details of the landscape scheme to be submitted to the council for approval.

Trees

9.5 Saved UDP Policy 39(d) seeks to ensure that trees of high amenity value are protected, including during construction, through the use of planning conditions and Tree Preservation Orders.

9.6 The site largely consists of hardstanding, however, there are a number of trees located primarily along the eastern and western boundaries of the site. These trees are clearly visible from Avenue Park Road and currently provide a green ‘edge’ to the site. The application proposes the removal of all existing trees on the site to facilitate the development. The applicants have submitted a tree survey to provide information about the condition of the trees. The tree survey identifies two tree groups and 25 individual trees on the site. They are mainly mature sycamores and a small number of ash and willow. The report concludes that the majority of the trees (19) are of low quality and value, with three sycamore trees located on the northern end of the site being of moderate value and the remainder (5) being in an unsafe condition or needing extensive management.

9.7 It is noted that none of the trees on the site are protected by Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) and the site is not within a Conservation Area. In addition, the trees are not considered to be of the quality that would justify such protection. Therefore the trees could be removed by the applicant without needing permission from the council. The council’s arboricultural officer has considered the plans and supporting information and comments that the tree survey provides a fair assessment of the quality and subsequent amenity value of the trees on the site. Subsequently, the officer raises no objection to the removal of the trees to facilitate the development. The application is considered to comply with Saved UPD Policy 39(d) in this respect.

9.8 Local residents have objected to the removal of the trees, asserting that they provide a high level of amenity and greenery to Avenue Park Road and are an asset to the area. It is acknowledged that the existing trees do provide a green edge to the site and provide visual amenity to what is otherwise an unattractive site. However, given that that trees are not of high value arboriculturally the council cannot insist on their retention. Therefore, officers have assessed the application in relation to whether the landscape scheme to be implemented would be of sufficient quality and would provide visual amenity to the area. As described above, the development would include the provision of seven new

street trees, five along Avenue Park Road and two along Thurlow Park Road. It is considered that the provision of new street trees alongside the proposed landscaping to the front boundary of the site and the residents garden would provide a good level of visual amenity as part of the development that would enhance the street scene.

Ecology and Biodiversity

9.9 Saved UDP Policy 39(c(ix)) seeks to ensure the protection of valuable existing habitats and to maximise opportunities to create or add to wildlife habitats. The applicant has submitted an ecological assessment of the site.

9.10 The ecological assessment indicates that the site has relatively low ecological value and recommends that the developers follow national guidance and protocols when the site is developed to mitigate for any potential disturbance or harm, for example, the removal of all vegetation to be undertaken outside the bird breeding season. The application has been assessed by the council’s parks and recreation officer in respect of ecology and biodiversity. The officer comments that the ecological assessment is to an acceptable standard and provided that recommendations in the ecological assessment to mitigate for potential bat foraging habitat or disturbance of nesting birds are implemented during demolition/construction phases no objection is raised to the application. If planning permission is granted, a condition would be included to ensure this is followed

9.11 The proposed landscape plan has also been assessed in relation to ecology and biodiversity. It is considered that the development should include features that have high ecological and landscaping value. The applicant proposes to install features such as bat and bird boxes, in addition to green roofs and landscaping that provides ecological benefit. As detailed above, if planning permission is granted it is recommended that a condition be attached to require the submission of further details of the proposed landscape plan including final details of species, planting, programmes and schedules of management and maintenance and future details of the design and construction, establishment and sustainable management of the areas of green roof.

9.12 It is considered that the development would not result in a loss of biodiversity and wildlife on the site detrimental to the local area. In addition, the landscape scheme would secure biodiversity and habitats for wildlife as part of the development. The application therefore complies with Saved UDP Policy 39(c(ix)) in this regard.

10 Standard of Residential Accommodation

10.1 Core Strategy Policy S2(h) requires ‘high standards of residential amenity in new housing development, having regard to council space standards and including the provision of outside space for children’s play in private and communal gardens. In addition, Saved UDP Policy 33(d) seeks to ensure that new development includes sufficient outdoor amenity space.

Residential Space Standards

10.2 The council’s unit and room size standards for residential development are set out in the SPD ‘Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions’ (2008). The council’s SPD also seeks to ensure that all rooms have sufficient floor to ceiling heights and that circulation space and sufficient storage space is provided.

10.3 All the units and rooms would meet, and in some cases exceed the minimum requirements of the Lambeth SPD and would provide sufficient floor to ceiling heights, circulation and storage space. Rooms would also be stacked according to their use to reduce the likelihood of noise disturbance between residents. It is therefore considered that the development would provide a good standard of residential accommodation for future occupiers.

Outlook, Daylight and Sunlight.

10.4 Saved UDP Policy 33(d) and Section 3 of the SPD Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions (July 2008) seek to ensure the provision of acceptable levels outlook, daylight and sunlight for future residents in proposed new development.

10.5 The application proposes 42 new residential units, 30 units would have dual aspect, and 9 units would have partial dual aspect whereby small secondary windows are provided within the second elevation of the unit with the primary windows having outlook in one direction only. These units would either face south-east or north-west. Three one bed units at lower ground level would be solely single aspect facing south-east. Therefore a high proportion (71%) of the units would be dual aspect with a smaller element (21%) being partially dual aspect (21%) and single aspect (7%). It is considered that the proposed development would provide a good outlook for all future residents and therefore complies with Saved UDP Policy 33 and the council’s SPD in this respect.

10.6 The application has been considered in accordance with the BRE guidance ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2011) to assess the levels of daylight and sunlight that would be received by the new residential units. Given the distances between the proposed development and the neighbouring properties fronting Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road the rooms fronting onto these roads would afford good levels of daylight and sunlight. In addition, an assessment of the rooms facing towards the railway line concludes that all these windows would receive sufficient daylight and sunlight.

10.7

However, officer’s raised concerns with the applicant about the quality of daylight and sunlight to the three single aspect units at lower ground floor level fronting onto Avenue Park Road. The applicant subsequently submitted an assessment of the quality of these units in accordance with the BRE guidance looking at the vertical sky component and average daylight factor. The three units would have 7.4m deep kitchen/living/dining spaces, with the living space fronting onto Avenue Park Road serviced by a floor to ceiling height

window/door and the kitchen to the rear of the room receiving additional natural daylight via a sun pipe. It is also considered that these units would have sufficient outlook, being orientated south-east and with front garden areas looking out onto Avenue Park Road. The assessment demonstrates that the three units would comply with the BRE guidance and would receive sufficient levels of daylight and sunlight for living rooms and kitchens.

Privacy and Space Between Dwellings

10.8 Saved UDP Policy 33(d) and Section 4 of the SPD Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions (July 2008) seek to ensure that the layout of new residential development provides adequate privacy for residents.

10.9 All windows within the development would be orientated outwards from the site and there are no inner courtyards or light wells proposed that could lead to overlooking between the new residential units. In addition, given the distances between the proposed development and the existing neighbouring properties fronting both Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road, it is considered that the proposed residential units would not be overlooked by any existing neighbouring properties to a level detrimental to amenity. The impact of the development with regard to overlooking towards existing neighbouring properties is assessed in section 11 below.

Amenity Space

10.10 The Lambeth SPD states that ‘for new flatted developments, shared amenity space of at least 50sq/m should be provided and a further 10sq/m per flat should also be provided, either as a balcony/terrace/private garden or consolidated within the communal space’.

10.11 All the proposed residential units would be provided with their own private outside amenity space in the form of a garden, balcony or terrace. It is noted that the majority of the private amenity spaces would fall short of the 10sq/m requirement of the Lambeth SPD. The majority of balconies and terraces would be between 6.0sq/m and 8.0sq/m. The SPD allows a shortfall in private amenity space to be provided as part of the communal amenity space. This would mean that, in addition to 50sq/m of communal amenity space required by the SPD, a further 107sq/m of communal amenity space should be provide to make up for the shortfall of private amenity space.

10.12 The development would include an area of communal amenity space on the western side of the site in-between the new building and the railway line. Due to the linear nature of this amenity space it is considered that the total extent of this space would not provide full amenity value for residents. Therefore, officers have assessed the amount of space that would be realistically usable by residents. This equates to an area of approx. 162sq/m which comprises the widest part of the communal garden at its centre. The requirement for 50sq/m of communal amenity space plus the shortfall in private space results in a requirement of 157sq/m of communal amenity space. Therefore the amount of

amenity space provided that is assessed as being of the highest amenity value would meet the requirements of the SPD. It should also be noted that the assessment of amenity space has not included the residents growing garden of 175sq/m which would provide additional amenity for residents. This was not included due to the potential in the future for the station access to pass through this space.

10.13 The communal garden would be located to the rear of the development, adjacent to a railway line. Officers raised concerns with the applicant about whether this space would be overshadowed for large parts of the day and year which could limit its use by residents. The applicants have submitted a sun shadow study which demonstrates that sufficient sunlight would reach this space. Therefore it is considered that the development would provide sufficient useable amenity space for residents. The applicants have confirmed that Network Rail do not have any easements over the site that could reduce the size of the resident’s amenity space in the future. Network Rail was consulted on the application and have raised no objections to the proposed development.

Children’s Play Space

10.14 The London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Shaping Neighbourhoods Play and Informal Recreation’ (2012) sets out guidance on how development should make provision for play and informal recreation, based on the expected child population generated by the scheme and an assessment of future needs. Para 4.25 of the SPG states that ‘all developments with an estimated child occupancy of ten children or more should seek to make appropriate play provision to meet the needs arising from the development’.

10.15 Saved UDP Policy 50(i) seeks the provision of suitable play areas for pre- school and junior children, where appropriate, in residential developments of 10 or more units. The council’s SPD for Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions (2008) states that ‘Children and young people’s play space should be considered as part of the overall open space provision rather than ‘over and above’ the requirements of private or shared amenity space set out above. Where provision is not feasible on site, contributions to provision elsewhere may be acceptable’. The SPD states that Play areas should be easily accessible, overlooked by habitable rooms and enclosed either through fencing, railings or other safety features. Appropriate play equipment that complies with current safety standards should be installed.

10.16 The anticipated child yield for the development is 13 children (calculated using the Lambeth S106 toolkit) this equates to 130.50sq/m play space when considered against the London Plan requirement for 10sq/m per child. As outlined above, 162sq/m of communal amenity space would be provided as part of the development and therefore the application would provide sufficient amount of space for children’s play to meet the needs of the occupants of the development.

10.17 The applicants initially proposed to provide children’s play space on the southern part of the site adjacent to the safeguarded access to Tulse Hill Station. Officers raised concerns with the applicant about whether this was an appropriate location for the play space and questioned how secure and overlooked this space would be.

10.18 In response to these concerns the applicant has revised their play strategy and play space would now be provided within the resident’s communal garden on the west side of the site. The strategy is to provide a playful space comprising opportunities for creative play. Indicative design details of the play features have been provided. However, it is considered that full details should be submitted for approval by the council and that this should be required via condition should planning permission be granted.

Impact of the Railway Line and South Circular Road

10.19 Saved UDP Policy 7 states that the ‘right of people to the quiet enjoyment of their homes will be respected’. The development would be located adjacent to Tulse Hill Station and railway line and the noisy South Circular highway and therefore the impact of the railway and road on the amenity of future residents of the development in relation to noise and disturbance has been considered.

10.20 The council’s noise and pollution team have assessed the application and raise no objections to the development subject to a condition to safeguard the amenities of future occupants in relation to rail and traffic noise. This condition would require the building to be constructed to reduce the environmental impacts of these noise sources in the form of a sound insulation scheme with noise attenuated ventilation.

10.21 The impact of the railway line and station platform upon the amenity of future residents in terms of overlooking has also been assessed. There currently exists a fence/wall approx. 1.8m – 3.0m high along the rear of the station platform which would restrict views from the station into the communal amenity space and residents windows. It is noted that Network Rail will require the applicant to provide a new boundary fence, at least 1.8m high on the development side of the existing boundary fence/wall. It is considered that a condition should be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the submission of details of all boundary treatments on the site, so that officers can be assured that all boundary treatment would be of an appropriate design and would ensure the privacy of residents is maintained.

Accessible Housing

10.22

Core Strategy Policy S2(d) seeks the provision of new housing to Lifetime Homes’ standard and the provision of wheelchair accessible housing in new developments. In addition, Section 7 of the Adopted SPD ‘Guidance and standards for housing development and house conversions’ (2008) seeks to ensure that all new housing is built to Lifetime Homes’ standards and that 10% of homes within a new development should be designed to be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users.

10.23 The development would include six wheelchair accessible units, which equates to 14% of the total number of units and therefore complies with Core Strategy Policy S3(d) and the SPD. The wheelchair accessible units would be located at lower ground floor level (2 x 1-bed units) and upper ground floor level 2 x 1-bed and 2 x 2-bed units). The provision of these wheelchair units would be required via condition, if planning permission is granted. In addition a condition would be attached to ensure that all the units would be built to lifetime homes standard.

11 Impact on Neighbouring Residents Amenity

11.1 Saved UDP Policy 33 (c & d) seeks to ensure that new buildings do not unacceptably overbear on surrounding development or unacceptably harm the amenities (privacy, outlook, sunlight and daylight) of adjoining residents or create an unacceptable sense of enclosure.

11.2 The nearest neighbouring residential properties to the application site are as follows:

• No. 23 Thurlow Park Road – located to the north on the opposite site of Thurlow Park Road from the application site. The front elevation of the property faces towards the application site. This is a two-storey property, separated into flats, which due to the site levels is higher than the highway.

• No. 12 Thurlow Park Road – located to the east of the application site on the southern side of Thurlow Park Road and eastern side of Avenue Park Road. This is a two-storey end of terrace property. The flank elevation of this property and rear garden face towards the application site

• No’s. 16 & 17 Avenue Park Road – located to the east of the application site on the opposite side of Avenue Park Road. These are a pair of semi-detached, two-storey single family dwelling houses. The front elevation of these properties face towards the application site.

• No. 1 Maley Avenue – located to the east of the application site on the opposite side of Avenue Park Road, fronting onto Maley Avenue. This is a three storey plus basement property that is converted into flats. The flank elevation and rear garden of this property face towards the application site.

11.3 A number of residents, including some of the residents of the properties

identified above, have raised objections to the development on the grounds of loss of daylight, sunlight and privacy. An assessment of the potential impact of the development on these properties is provided below.


11.4 The Thurlow Park Road elevation of the proposed development would be located approx. 31.75m away from the front elevation of No.23 Thurlow Park Road. This distance reflects the distances between properties fronting onto

Thurlow Park Road as it continues east away from the application site and therefore reflects the pattern of development in the area. The proposed development would be five storeys in this location, with the fifth storey set back. In addition, to the new windows within the development, there would be four balconies fully orientated towards Thurlow Park Road and four balconies partially orientated onto Thurlow Park Road. The edge of these balconies would be located 29m away from No 23 Thurlow Park Road.

11.5 As the application site is vacant, the residents of No 23 Thurlow Park Road currently benefit from an open outlook across the application site. It is acknowledged that the view from their property would change as a result of the development. In addition, it is acknowledged that balconies do not feature on the frontage of properties on this part of Thurlow Park Road. However, given the separation distance between the existing properties and the proposed development, which reflects the pattern of development in the area, and this separation being across a main road, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in a loss of privacy or result in overlooking at a level that would be detrimental to the amenity of the residents of No 23. In addition to overlooking from windows and balconies, residents have raised concerns about additional light pollution from the new properties. In response, it is considered that any light emanating from the new properties is unlikely to be at a level over and above what is normally to be expected in a residential area and therefore would not be detrimental to resident’s amenity.

11.6 With regard to daylight and sunlight, the submitted section drawings demonstrate that the proposed development would not subtend an angle to the horizontal when measured 2.0m above floor level with No 27 greater than 25 degrees and therefore the BRE guidelines would be met. This is due to the distance between No 27 and the proposed development and because No 27 is raised approx. 2.7m above the highway. The development therefore would not result in a loss of daylight or sunlight to the residents of this neighbouring property detrimental to their amenity.

No.12 Thurlow Park Road

11.7 The development would be located 15.0m from the flank elevation and rear garden of No.12 Thurlow Park Road. The flank elevation of No. 12 contains two windows at ground and first floor respectively. In addition to windows within the new development, there would be six balconies facing towards the flank elevation and rear garden of No 12. It is understood that the windows within the flank elevation of No, 12 do not serve habitable rooms and therefore the development would not result in a loss of privacy or daylight and sunlight to residents within their homes detrimental to their amenity. However, the location of three of the balconies would mean that they would have views into the rear garden of No 12. The distance between the edge of these balconies and the rear garden boundary would be approx. 15.0m. In order to lessen the impact of any overlooking from these balconies, the obscured glazed balcony screens would be approx. 1.7m high. With the increased height of the screens it is considered that the development would not result in a loss of privacy to No 12 to a level detrimental to the resident’s amenity.

11.8 The applicant has submitted a sun shadow study to demonstrate whether the development would result overshadowing of neighbouring properties or their gardens at different times of the year. The sun shadow study indicates that the proposed development is likely to result in some additional overshadowing to the rear garden of No 12 and neighbouring properties in this terrace to the east in the evening during the summer months. This would be over and above the levels of overshadowing already caused by existing buildings. It is considered that some additional overshadowing to the rear gardens in this terrace of properties, whilst not ideal from the residents point of view, would not be at a level detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring residents that should prevent the development, which in all other respects is considered acceptable, from proceeding.

Figure 9 – Scheme Contextual Analysis Diagrams in relation to No’s 12 & 23 Thurlow Park Road

No’s. 16 & 17 Avenue Park Road

11.9 The distance between the Avenue Park Road elevation of the development

and No’s 16 and 17 Avenue Park Road would be 23.0 metres. Bedroom windows within the proposed development, with the exception of the kitchen/living/dining space for units 2 and 3 at lower ground floor level, would face onto Avenue Park Road opposite these two neighbouring properties. It is considered that a separation distance of 23.0 metres across a road is typical of a residential area and is similar to the separation distances between properties in other nearby streets. It is therefore considered that the proposed development would not result in a loss of privacy to a level detrimental to the amenity of the residents of No’s 16 and 17 Avenue Park Road.

11.10 With regard to daylight and sunlight, the submitted section drawings demonstrate that the proposed development would not subtend an angle to the horizontal when measured 2.0m above ground floor level within No’s 16 and 17 greater than 25 degrees and therefore the BRE guidelines would be

met. This is due to the distance between No’s 16 and 17 and the proposed development and height of the development at this point, being three storeys with a set back fourth mansard storey. The development therefore would not result in a loss of daylight or sunlight to the residents of these neighbouring properties detrimental to their amenity.

No. 1 Maley Avenue

11.11 The proposed development would be located 14.0m away from the flank

elevation and rear garden of No.1 Maley Avenue. The flank elevation of No. 1 contains no windows. Therefore the proposed development would not result in a loss of privacy or daylight and sunlight to residents within this property. Bedroom windows within the development would be orientated towards the rear garden of No 1 Maley Avenue and other properties further east along Maley Avenue. The distance between these windows and the rear garden boundary of No 1 Maley Avenue would be approx. 12.4 metres at its nearest point and the development would be part two, part three storeys in this location. This relationship between bedroom windows and neighbouring residential rear gardens across a road is not uncommon within residential areas. Therefore it is considered that the proposed development would not result in a loss of privacy to neighbouring gardens to a level than would be unacceptable in a residential area or to a level detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring residents.

11.12 The submitted sun shadow study indicates that the proposed development is likely to result in some additional overshadowing to the rear garden of No 1 Maley Avenue and neighbouring properties along Maley Avenue to the east in the evening during the summer months. This would be over and above the levels of overshadowing already caused by existing buildings. It is considered that some additional overshadowing to the rear gardens in this row of properties, whilst not ideal from the residents point of view, would not be at a level detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring residents that should prevent the development, which in all other respects is considered acceptable, from proceeding.

Figure 10 – Scheme Contextual Analysis Diagrams in relation to No’s 16/17 Avenue Park Road and No 1 Maley Avenue.

11.13 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development would not result

in a loss of privacy, loss of daylight, sunlight, or overshadowing to neighbouring properties and their gardens to a level detrimental to residents amenity and therefore the development would comply Saved UDP Policy 33.

12 Transport and Highways

12.1 Core Strategy Policy S4 (f) requires developments to comply with the maximum car parking standards in the London Plan and to include provision for cycle parking. Saved UDP Policy 9 states that ‘planning applications will be assessed for their transport impact, including cumulative impacts on highway safety; on the environment and the road network; and on all transport modes, including public transport’. In addition, Saved UDP Policy 14(g) states that ‘car-free developments are encouraged in areas of good, very good and exceptional public transport accessibility’.

12.2 The site has a PTAL rating of 6a which indicates that it has exceptional access

to public transport. This is largely due to its proximity to Tulse Hill Station. From a transport accessibility perspective, the site is within an area where high density development is generally encouraged. The site is located off Avenue Park Road, with the A215 Norwood Road to the south and the South Circular A205 Thurlow Park Road to the north. The A205 forms part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) and is a red route. Avenue Park Road is a one way northbound residential street, approx. 7.0m wide immediately outside the site, with parking bays available on both sides of the road, reducing the usable width of the carriageway to around in 3.0 m in some places. No vehicular access would be provided as part of the development.

12.3 Saved UDP Designation MDO 47 and the Tulse Hill Opportunity Area within the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan both outline aspirations for a new eastern entrance to the station through the site, and improved drop off and station facilities to be brought forward as part of a new residential development. A safeguarded access route is shown on the southern part of the site. This is welcomed so that the development would not preclude the provision of improved access in the future.

Highway Works

12.4 Currently there is no footway along the frontage of the site. The proposed plans show a 2.0m wide footway within the red line site boundary, connecting into the existing Thurlow Park Road footway at the northern end, and running along the full frontage of the site. The footway terminates at the southern boundary of the site but connects to a proposed pedestrian crossing point allowing pedestrians to continue on the eastern footway. It is understood that the proposed footway is being offered for adoption, which would be secured via the appropriate legal agreement should planning permission be granted.

12.5 Three informal crossing points are shown on the plans, at the junction of Avenue Park Road and Maley Avenue, which is proposed to have a new raised table treatment. In addition, the radius of this junction would be tightened up to reduce the width of Maley Avenue which pedestrians will need to cross. It is considered that these proposals would significantly improve pedestrian accessibility at this junction, which currently involves crossing a wide carriageway with no pedestrian crossing facilities.

Car Parking & Traffic Impacts

12.6 No on-site car parking is proposed for the 42 dwellings and given the very high levels of public transport accessibility; the council would not support the provision of car parking on the site. Four build outs and nine inset parking bays are proposed along the Avenue Park Road frontage of the site. These are shown outside of the red line boundary on the carriageway, which would reduce the width of Avenue Park Road. Most of these proposed interventions would replace existing on-street parking bays (of which there are approximately 80m on the western side of the road outside the site, accommodating up to 16 cars). The existing parking bays on the eastern side of the road opposite the site (of which there are approximately 35m, accommodating up to 7 cars), would be retained. The proposals would therefore remove approx. 16 on-street parking bays, and provide nine bays, representing a net loss of 7 bays on Avenue Park Road.

12.7 The site is located within the Tulse Hill 'H' CPZ. Parking surveys have been submitted with the application, but these include unrestricted streets, as well as streets within the CPZ. The results of the survey suggest that parking stress on the unrestricted streets (Birkbeck Hill, Birkbeck Place, Thurlow Hill, and Lovelace Road) is at critical levels, averaging over 90% overnight. Overnight parking stress on streets within the CPZ is at much lower levels, averaging 41% on the streets closest to the site (Avenue Park Road, Maley Avenue and

Elmcourt Road).

Figure 11 – The Tulse Hill ‘H’ Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) boundary

12.8 According to 2011 Census data for this ward, the 42 dwellings could be

expected to generate some 27 cars requiring car parking. However, the applicant is proposing to designate the units as parking permit free, so the residents would not be eligible to park within nearby CPZ bays. This approach is welcomed, but given the site's proximity to areas of unrestricted parking where parking stress is known to be very high it is suggested that the largest family units (the six, three-bed units) should be eligible to apply for permits to park on-street within the CPZ, where levels of parking stress are significantly lower, rather than potentially exacerbating parking pressures on nearby unrestricted streets. This would be set out within a S106 agreement if planning permission is granted. Assuming that seven on-street parking bays on Avenue Park Road are lost as a result of the proposals, and that each of the six family sized units parks a car on-street, the development would increase the average parking stress on the streets closest to the site to a maximum of 46%. This is considered to be acceptable.

12.9 Several wheelchair accessible units are proposed within the development, which may generate demand for disabled parking spaces. It is considered that the on-street bay closest to the Core B entrance ramp should be designated as a disabled parking bay from first occupation of the development. The developer would pay the costs required to facilitate this. If additional disabled bays were required by residents within the development they would be able to apply to the council to have an on-street bay converted to a disabled bay on a needs-basis.

12.10 There are two existing car club bays opposite the site on the corner of Maley Avenue. The applicant has agreed to secure membership to this car club for all the residential units for two years and this would be secured via a Section 106 agreement if planning permission is granted. The developer would also fund the installation of an electric vehicle charging bay outside the site and an additional car club bay in the vicinity of the site if, in discussions with the car club operator, there is deemed to be additional need in the area as a result of the development.

12.11 The council’s transport planning team have raised no objections to the proposed development with regard to potential car parking and traffic impacts. It is therefore considered that the proposed development would comply with Core Strategy Policy S4(f) and Saved UDP Policies 9 and 14.

Cycle Parking

12.12 The development would include three cycle stores at ground floor and lower ground floor level that would accommodate 70 cycles. This level of cycle parking exceeds the London Plan requirement for one cycle parking space per one and two bed dwelling and two cycle parking spaces per three bed dwelling and is therefore welcomed. Residents of cores A, B and C would use internal cycle stores adjacent to cores A and B. Residents of core D would use 10 cycle lockers located to the rear of the development. An additional eight visitor cycle parking spaces would also be provided at the front of the development along Avenue Park Road adjacent to the commercial units. The council’s transport planning officer has recommended that further details of the detailed design of the residents and visitor cycle parking should be secured via condition, if planning permission is granted.

Construction and Servicing

12.13 The servicing requirements of the two office units are not expected to be

extensive. However, given the location on a red route where no stopping is allowed, further information on the proposed servicing strategy should be secured via a Delivery Management Strategy to be secured via condition if planning permission is granted.

Transport and Highways – Conclusion

12.14 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development would bring welcome improvements to the public realm along Avenue Park Road. In addition, subject to a section 106 agreement to prevent future residents of the one and two bed units from obtaining on-street parking permits, it is considered that the development would not result in an increase in on-street parking stress to a level that would be detrimental to the local area. The council’s transport planning team have raised no objections to the proposed development with regard to potential car parking and traffic impacts. It is therefore considered that the proposed development would comply with Core Strategy Policy S4 and Saved UDP Policies 9 and 14.

13 Sustainability and Renewable Energy

13.1 Core Strategy Policy S7 and Saved UDP Policy 35 seek to ensure that all development achieves the highest standards of sustainable design and construction. In accordance with the Lambeth SPD ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008) new build residential development should achieve Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3, with an aspiration to achieve Code Level 4 Schemes for office development should achieve BREEAM ‘Very Good’, with an aspiration to achieve BREEAM ‘Excellent’.

13.2 The applicant states that the residential element of the development would achieve Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 and the office units would achieve BREEAM ‘Excellent’. This meets the council’s aspirations and complies with Policy S7, Policy 35 and the SPD and is therefore considered to be acceptable. A Code for sustainable homes pre-assessment has been submitted with the application which outlines how Level 4 can be achieved and this has been reviewed by the council’s sustainability advisor and considered to be acceptable. A BREEAM pre-assessment has not been submitted. It is therefore considered that this should be required via condition prior to the commencement of the development should planning permission be granted.

13.3 The London Plan requirement for major developments is a 40% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. The applicants have submitted an Energy Statement to demonstrate how this would be achieved. This would include the provision of PV panels on the roof of the development and energy efficient measures within the building. The energy statement has been reviewed by the council’s sustainability advisor who has commented that the development would comply with the London Plan in this respect

13.4 The development would also include green roofs on top of the two ‘bookend’ blocks. This would accord with the requirement of the London Plan Policy 5.11 (Green Roofs and Development Site Environs). It is considered that further detail of the green roofs, with consideration given to the provision of green roof across the mansard roofs as well as the bookend blocks, should be submitted to the council prior to the commencement of the development and this should be secured via condition should planning permission be granted.

14 Refuse and Recycling

14.1 Core Strategy Policy S8 seeks provision for sustainable waste management and recycling within the borough. The council’s requirements for refuse and recycling storage in new developments is set our in ‘Waste and Recycling Storage and Collection Requirements Guidance for Architects and Developers (May 2006).

14.2 Storage for refuse and recycling for the residential units, including for storage

of bulky items, would be provided in two communal bin stores. In addition, the office units would have their own separate bin store. All the bins stores would be located at lower ground floor level within the development with access off Avenue Park Road. The proposed provision would meet the requirements of

the council’s guidance for waste and recycling storage and is therefore considered to be acceptable. However, no details have been submitted about the detailed design of the storage. It is therefore recommended that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require details of the design of the storage to be submitted to the council for approval.

15 Community Safety

15.1 Core Strategy Policy S9(f) seeks to create safe and secure environments that reduce the scope for crime, fear of crime, anti-social behaviour, having regard to secure by design standards. Saved UDP Policy 32 states that ‘development should enhance community safety’ and ‘development will not be permitted where opportunities for crime are created or where it results in an increased risk of public disorder’.

15.2 The council’s Crime Prevention advisor was consulted on the scheme at pre-application stage. The Officer raised no objection to the principle to the development. However, the officer commented that the development should meet Secure by Design Standards for New Homes and this should be sought via condition if planning permission is granted. On this basis the development is considered to accord with saved Policy 32 of the UDP.

16 Planning Obligations and Mayoral CIL

16.1 Core Strategy Policy S1(d) seeks the improvement of physical, green and social infrastructure, working in partnership with service providers to ensure the delivery of the additional infrastructure required to meet community needs and support development. In addition Core Strategy Policy S10 states that planning obligations will be sought to mitigate the direct impact of development and to secure and contribute to the delivery of infrastructure. The council’s SPD S106 Planning Obligations (2012) sets out the type and form of planning obligations that will be sought for new developments. Core Strategy Policy PN8, which relates to Tulse Hill, seeks to secure improvements to infrastructure in the area, for example to the public realm and community premises, as part of new development proposals.

16.2 The application proposes 40% affordable housing which would be secured via the Section 106 agreement. In addition, financial contributions towards education, health, libraries, sport and leisure, parks and open spaces, children’s play, public realm and public art and local labour in construction would also be secured via the Section 106 agreement to mitigate against the impact of the development. The details of these financial contributions will be reported to planning committee via an addendum.

16.3 The Section 106 agreement would also provide for the following measures:

• Parking Permit cap for the one and two bed units.

• The designation of a new car club bay within the vicinity of the site (if there is additional demand as a result of the development).

• Provision of membership to a car club for all of the residential units for a

minimum period of 2 years.

• To require the B1 office units to be fitted out and ready for occupation without further modification at the same time as the residential units.

• To safeguard the provision of a new pedestrian link to Tulse Hill Station across the southern part of the site.

• The provision and maintenance, for a period of three years, of five street trees to be planting along Avenue Park Road.

• Highway improvements to include kerb changes, build outs, raised table, crossing points along Avenue Park Road and at the junction with Maley Avenue, and the repaving of the section of Thurlow Park Road in front of the site, with the delineation of the highway boundary with the use of studs, to also be secured via Section 278 Agreement.

• The provision of a disabled parking bay and electric vehicle charging bay on Avenue Park Road.

16.4 It is considered that the scheme may also be liable for Mayoral Community

Infrastructure Levy payment towards Crossrail implementation. The final amount will need to be discussed with the council’s CIL team due to the possibility of social housing exemption for some of the development. This contribution does not form part of the Lambeth development plan policy obligations and, is to be secured and monitored by the council on behalf of the Mayor.

16.5 It is considered that the above provisions, once secured under a Section 106 of the Act, would appropriately mitigate against any potentially harmful impacts of the development in Core Strategy Policies S1, S10 and PN8 and with the council’s associated SPD on Section 106 obligations.

17 Conclusion

17.1 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable and would accord with the Core Strategy and Saved UDP Policies relating to the site and the aspirations of the West Norwood Town Centre Masterplan. The development would be of an appropriate design, it would provide a good living environment and it would not prejudice the amenities of neighbouring residential properties. In addition, the development would not harm conditions of on-street parking or compromise highway safety or have an unacceptable impact upon local infrastructure.

17.2 The development shows a commitment to sustainable design and construction, the provision of renewable energy technologies, the achievement of Lifetime Homes and ‘Designing Out Crime’ Standards. Provisions are to be secured via a Section 106 to secure contributions towards, education health, libraries, parks, open spaces, children’s play and the public realm.

17.3 It is therefore considered that the development is compliant with the planning policies of the development plan and that no other material planning considerations of sufficient weight exist that would dictate that the application should nevertheless be refused.

18 Recommendation

18.1 Grant planning permission subject to the following conditions and the completion of a Section 106 agreement.

Summary of Reasons

18.2 In deciding to grant outline 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 were relevant: Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010

Policy 9 Transport Impact Policy 14 Parking and Traffic Restraint Policy 16 Affordable Housing 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 39 Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design MDO 47 Avenue Park Road (railway sidings on north side of road)

Local Development Framework: Core Strategy January 2011

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 Policy PN8 West Norwood / Tulse Hill

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.

3 The proposed buildings shall be built to the ground levels and heights as shown on the approved drawings or lower and if the indicated existing heights and levels of the neighbouring properties should prove to be erroneous, then the heights of the proposed building shall be no higher than the relative height difference(s) between the heights of the neighbouring properties and proposed buildings unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to ensure that the proposed development is built to the heights relative to adjoining properties as shown on the approved drawings in the interests of visual and residential amenity (Policies 7, 33, 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 Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011)

Land Use

4 The two office units (B1 use) hereby permitted shall be finished and serviced for immediate user-ready occupation at the same time as first occupation of any of the residential units hereby permitted. Reason: To safeguard the delivery and effective management of the proposed employment floorspace so that employment opportunities in the Borough are maximised and to support local economic development, in accordance with Policies 21 and 23 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S3 of the Core Strategy (2011).

Design

5 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (works above ground only) a schedule and samples of materials to be used in the elevations and roof, including a brick sample board to be viewed on site, shall be 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 safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the local area in accordance with Policies 31 and 33 of the Lambeth Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).

6 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (works above ground only) detailed sections and elevation drawings of the following

items shall be 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. Sections and elevations of all windows and door types, including details

of metal surrounds, reveals and method of fixing. ii. Sections and elevations of all entrances. iii. Sections and elevations of all balconies and terraces (including balcony

enclosure glazing). iv. Sections and elevations of the roof and parapet. v. Sections and elevations of all boundary treatments.

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the local area in accordance with Policies 31, 33 and 39 of the Lambeth Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).

7 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (works above ground only) detailed sections and elevation drawings of the elevations to the office units fronting onto Avenue Park Road and Thurlow Park Road, including details of the designated area for signage, shall be 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 safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the local area in accordance with Policies 31 and 33 of the Lambeth Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).

Landscape and Play Space

8 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (works above ground only) a hard and soft landscaping scheme for all communal external amenity areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping scheme shall thereafter be implemented solely in accordance with the approved details and shall be permanently retained for the enjoyment of occupiers of the scheme. The submitted details are expected to demonstrate the following:

i. The quantity, size, species, position and the proposed time of planting of all trees and shrubs to be planted.

ii. 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.

iii. Specification of which shrubs and hedges to be planted that are intended to achieve a significant size and presence in the landscape.

iv. Proposals for plant and tree management and maintenance

v. The type and location of paving materials. vi. Design and location of seating. vii. Lighting of all external areas

Reason: To ensure that the proposed landscaping areas are laid out in a satisfactory manner in accordance with Policies 33 and 39 of the Lambeth Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).

9 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 site, 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 in accordance with Policy 39 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011).

10 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (works above ground only) full details of the children’s play strategy for the development hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details and the children’s play provision shall be permanently retained for the enjoyment of occupiers of the scheme. Reason: To ensure that the proposed landscaping areas are laid out in a satisfactory manner in accordance with Policy 39 of the Lambeth Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and the Council's Adopted Supplementary Planning Document 'Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions' (2008)).

11 No development shall take place (above ground works only) until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority an up to date report regarding the outcomes of surveys for legally protected species or habitats which might be present on the site, with particular reference to bats (Chiroptera) and birds (Aves), The details of mitigation measures proposed or which will be implemented should protected habitats or species be found on site shall thereafter be implemented as part of the development, and if appropriate shall be retained thereafter for the duration of the permitted use of the site.

The survey should take the form of a desk and field based assessment based on existing good practice to identify the presence or absence of protected species or any roosts/nests or habitats used. Where such species are found or suspected the report should include proposals to minimise and avoid disturbance to or destruction of these species. The report should include details of: a) appropriate measures, such as building works undertaken outside the normal bird nesting season, unless otherwise agreed in writing; b) a watching brief during building works to response to any bat and bird activity, and; c) remedial actions and mitigation options which will be implemented should active bird nests, bats or bat roosts be found within the building. Reason: In order to ensure that the development minimises its impact with respect to protected wildlife species that may be present on site or on adjacent properties in accordance with Policy 7.19 of the London Plan (July 2011).

Residential Amenity

12 At least 10% of the residential units hereby permitted shall be designed so that they can be easily adaptable to meet the Wheelchair Housing standard. These residential units shall be permanently retained as such for the duration of the use. Reason: To ensure that an adequate proportion of units are wheelchair accessible or adaptable for wheelchair use in accordance with Policy 33 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010, Policy S2 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011), and the Council's Adopted Supplementary Planning Document 'Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions' (2008)).

13 All the residential units hereby permitted 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 first occupation of any of the units. 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 in accordance with Policy 33 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S2(d) of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and the related Supplementary Planning Document: Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions (2008).

14 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (above ground works only) details of the acoustic design of the residential properties hereby approved, incorporating measures to prevent environmental impact to residents from road and rail traffic noise, including noise testing, shall be 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 and thereafter permanently maintained and retained as such. Noise levels within habitable rooms shall not exceed the following levels:

(a) Living Rooms: 35dB(A) Leq 18 hour 07.00hrs to 23.00 hrs;

(b) Bedrooms: 30dB(A) Leq 8 hour + no individual noise event to exceed 45dB(A) max (measured with F time weighting) – 23.00hrs to 07.00hrs.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory living conditions for future occupiers of the development in accordance with Policy 7 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010, Policy S2 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011), and the Council's Adopted Supplementary Planning Document 'Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions' (2008)).

15 The flat roof areas of the development shall not be used as a balcony, roof terrace, sitting our area or amenity area unless otherwise indicated on the drawings hereby approved. Reason: To protect the privacy and living conditions of existing and future residential occupiers in accordance with Policies 7 and 33 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010, Policy S2 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011), and the Council's Adopted Supplementary Planning Document 'Guidance and Standards for Housing Development and House Conversions' (2008)).

Transport and Highways

16 Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted a full servicing management strategy, for the management of deliveries and servicing of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Deliveries and servicing shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To avoid hazard and obstruction being caused to users of the public highway in accordance with Policies 9 and 14 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S4 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011).

17 Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted full details of the provision to be made for cycle parking for residents and visitors, including elevation drawings at a scale of 1:20 of the new storage enclosures and details of manufacturer’s specifications, shall be submitted to and approved by in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle parking shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained solely for its designated use.

Reason: To ensure adequate cycle parking is available on site and to promote sustainable modes of transport in accordance with Policies 9 and 14 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S4 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2011).

18 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted full details of the proposed demolition and construction methodology, in the form of a Method of Demolition and Construction Statement, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 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. The Method of Demolition and Construction Statement shall include details and arrangements regarding:

• the notification of neighbours with regard to specific works; advance notification of road closures;

• details regarding parking, deliveries and storage (including details of the routing of delivery vehicles to and from the site and the accommodation of all site operatives’, visitors’ and construction vehicles loading, off-loading, parking and turning within the site during the demolition and construction period);

• details regarding dust mitigation;

• details of measures to prevent the deposit of mud and debris on the public highway;

• hours of demolition and construction;

• other measures to mitigate the impact of construction upon the operation of the highway and the amenity of the area.

Reason: To ensure minimal nuisance or disturbance is caused to the detriment of the amenities of adjoining occupiers and of the area generally, and to avoid hazard and obstruction to the public highway in accordance with Policies 7 and 9 of the London Borough of Lambeth UDP: Policies saved beyond 5th August 2010 and Policy S4 of the Lambeth Core Strategy (2011).

Sustainability and Renewable Energy

19 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (works above ground only) a BREEAM pre-assessment estimator (or such equivalent standard that replaces this) for each of the two commercial units shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating how an ‘Excellent’ rating will be achieved. Reason: In the interests of securing a more sustainable development in accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), London Plan Policy 5.7 (2011) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008).

20 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted (above ground works only) full details of the green roofs shall be 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 and thereafter permanently maintained and retained as such. The details should include the following information: i. Details of materials used in the design, construction and installation; ii. Details on substrate and plants to be used; iii. Details on additional features, such as areas of bare shingle, areas of

sand for burrowing invertebrates and individual logs or log piles. iv. An ecological management and maintenance plan including landscape

features and a cross section of the green roof. Reason: In the interests of securing a more sustainable development in accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), London Plan Policy 5.7 (2011) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008).

21 Prior to commencement of building works a Design Stage certificate and summary score sheet under the Code for Sustainable Homes (or such equivalent standard that replaces this) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to show that a Level 4 rating will be achieved. Reason: In the interests of securing a more sustainable development in accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), London Plan Policy 5.7 (2011) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008).

22 Prior to first occupation of the residential units hereby approved a Post Construction Review certificate and summary score sheet under the Code for Sustainable Homes (or such equivalent standard that replaces this) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to show that a Level 4 rating has been achieved. Reason: In the interests of securing a more sustainable development in accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), London Plan Policy 5.7 (2011) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008).

23 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Energy Strategy and building works shall not commence until full Design Stage

calculations under the Standard Assessment Procedure/ National Calculation Method) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority to show that the development will be constructed in accordance with the detail (energy efficiency, renewable energy proposals) of the approved energy statement (Energy Assessment, Rund Partnership Limited, 20th February 2014) to achieve a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions below the Part L 2010 baseline. Reason: To ensure that the development makes the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), London Plan Policy 5.2 (2011) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008).

24 Prior to first occupation of the building(s) evidence (e.g. photographs, installation contracts and as-built certificates under the Standard Assessment Procedure/National Calculation Method) should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing to show that the development has been constructed in accordance with the detail (energy efficiency, renewable energy proposals) of the approved energy statement (Energy Assessment, Rund Partnership Limited, 20th February 2014) to achieve a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions below the Part L 2010 baseline. Reason: To ensure that the development makes the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with accordance with Policy 35 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010, Policy S7 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011), London Plan Policy 5.2 (2011) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ (2008).

Waste Management

25

Prior to the occupation of the residential and commercial units hereby permitted full details of a waste management plan (including arrangements for the collection, storage and disposal of refuse and recyclables’) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All provision associated with the waste management plan shall be provided prior to the commencement of the relevant uses, and the use of the site shall not thereafter be operated other than in strict accordance with the details of the approved waste management plan, unless written approval is obtained from the Local Planning Authority for any variations. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the storage, disposal, and recycling of waste on the site in the interests of the amenities of the area, in the interests of the provision of sustainable waste management and in the interests of minimising the impact of the development upon the function of the highway network and conditions of highway and pedestrian safety in

accordance with Policies 9, 14, 33 and 39 of the Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S8 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).

Community Safety

26 The development shall be constructed and thereafter operated so as to achieve ‘Secured by Design; certification. Evidence of such shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within three months from first occupation of the development hereby permitted, or within any other timetable agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To reduce opportunities for crime in accordance with Policy 32 of the London Borough of Lambeth’s Unitary Development Plan: Policies as saved beyond the 5th August 2010 and Policy S9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2011).

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 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.

3 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.

4 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.

5 BS 8233:1999 provides guidance for internal noise levels in rooms for residential purposes from environmental noise to maintain appropriate resting and sleeping conditions. The publication provides noise levels for ‘good’ and ‘reasonable’ standards to be aimed for within dwellings. The ‘good’ standard being in compliance with the latest World Heath Organisation (WHO) Standards on Community Noise. WHO advise that as well as considering average noise levels (LAEQ metric) the individual single event LaMax level should be considered as well as the LaEQ where there are distinctive events.

Both WHO & BS 8233:1999 also recommended that any individual noise event at night should not normally exceed 45dB(A) max. This standard is designed to minimise sleep disturbance and, by necessity, precludes ventilation through open windows. These schemes often require some form of forced ventilation to allow for rapid ventilation.

6 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.

7 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

8 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.

9 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.

10 As the application site is adjacent to Network Rail’s operational railway infrastructure, Network Rail strongly recommends that the developer contacts Network Rail’s Asset Protection Sussex team at - [email protected], prior to any works commencing on site. Network Rail recommends the developer agrees a Basic Asset Protection Agreement BAPA with us to enable approval of detailed works. More information can also be obtained from our website at www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/1538.aspx.