appendix a development control neighbourhood … · appendix a development control neighbourhood...

APPENDIX A

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMITTEE

THURSDAY 13 MARCH 2014 REPORT BY

HEAD OF PLANNING & TRANSPORT PLANNING APPLICATIONS

INDEX

ITEM NO

REGISTER NO

ADDRESS DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDATION PAGE NO

Report 308592

A1 13/12690 Kingsgate Business Centre 12-50 Kingsgate Road, Kingston upon Thames, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey, KT2 5AA

Demolition of existing office building and the erection of a new building to accommodate a mixed use scheme comprising 500 sq m A1/A3/B1(retail/restaurants & cafes/offices) at ground floor level and up to 210 student bedspaces on the upper floors (Outline application for access only)

PERMIT A4

A2 13/13058 Kings Oak Primary School, Dickerage Lane, New Malden, KT3 3RZ

Demolition of existing temporary classroom block and erection of 2no. 6-classroom blocks. Erection of new school hall and extension to existing kitchen area.

PERMIT A39

APPENDIX A


THURSDAY 13 MARCH 2014 REPORT BY

HEAD OF PLANNING & TRANSPORT PLANNING APPLICATIONS

INDEX

ITEM NO

REGISTER NO

ADDRESS DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDATION PAGE NO

Report 308592

A3 13/14358 171-173 KINGSTON ROAD, NEW MALDEN, Surrey, KT3 3SS

Demolition of existing office buildings and public house, and erection of four to six storey building with 328 bedspace student accommodation, incorporating 165 cycle parking spaces and new landscaping.

REFUSE A58

A4 14/16033 St Andrews And St Marks Primary School, Maple Road, Surbiton, KT6 4AL

Erection of 2 storey detached classroom block; erection of single storey extension to main building and covered walkway to proposed classroom block. Erection of multi use games area with astro turf play area. Siting of new cycle parking area. Removal of existing temporary classroom module.

PERMIT A85


13 MARCH 2014

REPORT BY THE

Head of Planning & Transport

PLANNING APPLICATIONS All recommendations for planning permission in this section are automatically subject to the condition limiting the duration of the permission required by Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act (as amended) 1990 unless permission is to be granted for a limited period or unless there is a specific recommendation that the period for such duration be other than the period referred to in the standard condition. All background papers are incorporated into Planning Application Reports. The policies listed are those from the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames the Local Development Framework Core Strategy, Adopted April 2012.

Development Control Committee

Date of Meeting: 13/03/2014

A1 Register No: 13/12690/OUT

Address: KINGSGATE BUSINESS CENTRE 12-50 KINGSGATE ROAD, KINGSTON UPON THAMES, KINGSTON UPON THAMES, SURREY, KT2 5AA

(c) Crown Copyright. All right reserved. Royal Borough of Kingston 2007. Licence number 100019285.

[Please note that this plan is intended to assist in locating the development it is not the site plan of the proposed development which may have different boundaries. Please refer to the application documents for the proposed site boundaries.]

Ward: Canbury Description of Proposal: Demolition of existing office building and the erection

of a new building to accommodate a mixed use scheme comprising 500 sq m A1/A3/B1(retail/restaurants & cafes/offices) at ground floor level and up to 210 student bedspaces on the upper floors (Outline application for access only)

Plan Type: Outline Application Expiry Date: 28/11/2013

Applicant's Plan Nos:

4477_D_107_-_Location Plan Received 14/08/2013

4477_D_108_-_Existing Plan Received 14/08/2013

4477_D_109_-_Existing Elevations Received 14/08/2013

4477_D_110RevA_Pre_Site Plan Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_111RevA_Pre_Ground Floor Plan Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_112RevA_Pre_Typical Upper Floor Plan Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_113RevA_Pre_Roof Plan Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_114RevA_Pre_Profile elevations Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_116RevA_Proposed Ground Floor Plan Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_117RevA_Typical Upper Floor Plan Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_118RevA_Long Profile (Front/South Elevation)

Received 23/12/2013

4477_D_200_202_ Construction Phasing Statement

Received 23/12/2013

4477_LP_01 Received 26/02/2014

Construction Phase Plan Received 23/12/2013

D and A Statement Received 14/08/2013

Final Tree Report Received 14/08/2013

Kingsgate Road TA Aug13 Received 14/08/2013

Kingston - Goldcrest - Student Market Report - 14th August 2013

Received 14/08/2013

Planning Statement - August 2013 FINAL Received 14/08/2013

BASIC INFORMATION

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012

Development Plan: London Plan July 2011 LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012

Policies

LONDON PLAN JULY 2012 LP 2.15 Town centres LP 3.18 Education facilities LP 3.9 Mixed and balanced communities LP 4.1 Developing London’s economy LP 4.2 Offices LP 4.3 Mixed use development and offices LP 7.4 Local character LP 7.5 Public realm LDF CORE STRATEGY CORE POLICIES CS 01 Climate Change Mitigation CS 02 Climate Change Adaptation CS 05 Reducing the Need to Travel CS 06 Sustainable Travel CS 07 Managing Vehicle Use CS 08 Character, Heritage and Design CS 11 Economy and Employment CS 12 Retail and Town Centres CS 15 Future Needs of Kingston University, Kin LDF CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DM01 Sustainable Design and Construction Stan DM03 Designing for Changing Climate DM04 Water Management and Flood Risk DM08 Sustainable Transport for new Development DM09 Managing Vehicle Use for New Development DM10 Design Requirements for New Developments DM11 Design Approach DM12 Development in Conservation Areas and Af DM17 Protecting Existing Employment Land and DM18 New Employment Uses Outside Designated A DM20 New Retail Development LDF CORE STRATEGY IMPLEMENT POLICIES IMP3 Securing Infrastructure K+20 AREA ACTION PLAN K+ K04 Employment Development within the Town C K+ K08 Higher and Further Education K+ K09 Design Quality in the Town Centre K+ K10 Town Centre Public Realm K+ K18 Cycling K+ K20 Town Centre Parking K+ K22 Town Centre Infrastructure K+ K23 S106 Planning Obligations and Developer K+ K24 Flood Risk Management K+ P19 Kingston College and adjoining sites, Ri

N/A

Previous Relevant History

03/12564/LDP Use of office (Room G11) as minicab office (LDC(P))

Refused 22/09/2003

92/0826/FUL Elevational alterations to existing building and rebuilding of southern tower.

Permit 5 Year Condition and Conditions 07/09/1992

97/3303/FUL Elevational alterations to the existing building involving the replacement of the existing external cladding, erection of balustrade on top of existing tower; installation of external lighting and erection of entrance porch


8037 New Factory offices and car parking Conditional permission 20/08/1971

33154 Change of use to Health Club with Associated leisure facilities including snooker and bowling

Refuse 30/07/1987

33837 Elevational alterations and creation of atrium in the roof in connection with Class B1 use

Conditional permission 30/06/1988

Consultations

1. Neighbouring Occupiers: 314 notification letters have been sent, and the proposal has been advertised in the press and by site notice. Following the submission of additional and revised information further neighbour notification has been undertaken and the consultation period had not expired at the time of compiling this report. Any additional responses received will be reported as late material.

2. To date 12 letters of objection have been received from local residents on the following grounds:

(1) The application should be considered as part of the North Kingston Development Brief - does not give serious consideration to impact on tall buildings in the area (traffic, environment, etc). Any decision should not be made until the development options have been finalised for the area.

(2) Trees: trees have been hastily removed before submission of application. More tree planting should be incorporated.

(3) Height of buildings will create massive shadowing, and impact on noise levels.

(4) Loss of property values. (5) Student Accommodation issues:

(i)Student accommodation does not create a safe and community based environment, being empty in summer.

(ii) Changing trends in education, falling student numbers etc (iii) A plan should be developed to keep noise levels down at

night. 3. Kingston Society: Objection raised on the following grounds:

(1) This is a key site in an area that is likely to undergo considerable change in the near future. Approval of this application in isolation, especially as the design and layout are not to be determined at this stage, would represent a lost opportunity to plan this area for the benefit of all of the site owners as well as local people. Options to secure the council's objectives for the North Kingston area, including the improvement of traffic circulation, the optimization of land use and the provision of a new primary school, would seem to be compromised should this proposal be approved.

(2) The proposal represents a density of more than 1000 habitable rooms per hectare, which seems too excessive to be considered as an outline application.

(3) No certainty as to the design of the scheme. (4) Also raised are issues of privacy, amenity and the loss of daylight

and sunlight to the detriment of the adjoining Gas Holders site. (5) The loss of employment would be regrettable as the existing use

currently employs 50 people. (6) The illustrative plans that show groups of bedrooms around a

common kitchen/living space, and could result in a different arrangement such as a building of self contained studio flats that could be let to "students" on the open market and potentially avoid the provision of social housing.

4. Scotia Gas Networks (SGN) as adjoining site owner - objection raised on prematurity grounds as the North Kingston Design Brief is in course of preparation and the scheme will need to be designed to comply with the agreed Design Framework. This application proposes a piecemeal approach and does not address the development of land parcel D in a comprehensive way. Also minimal information has been submitted to justify loss of employment use, and proposed commercial floorspace does not provide true employment uses. Lack of information about the linkage with students within the borough, particularly Kingston University and Kingston College - the SGN site is more suited to student accommodation. The 7 storey building will result in over shadowing of the SGN site and potentially compromise the redevelopment of the SGN site.

5. Kingston University: Not able to comment due to their procurement process. Notwithstanding, the University note that this particular development reflects their published requirements guidance for student residential accommodation.

6. Kingston College: Support the principle of redevelopment to provide the uses proposed. However in light of the North Development Brief, they note that the site does not include the adjacent print works, and would therefore undermine the comprehensive approach to development. Note that the proposal would overhang the proposed linear park, and further clarification is sought in this respect. Clarification sought on the S106 package to support the delivery of public realm and education improvements.

7. Environment Agency: No objection subject to conditions in respect of ground water and contaminated land, pollution prevention, flood risk surface water management and sustainable design and construction

8. English Heritage (Archaeology): No objection subject to safeguarding conditions.

9. London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority; Access for fire appliances

and adequate water supplies for fire fighting purposes should be provided. 10. Environmental Health Officer: There are concerns as to potentially

contaminative former uses of the site and potential for contaminants to have migrated beneath the existing structures from neighbouring properties, notably the gas works site.

11. Therefore, conditions are recommended requiring investigation of the land, risk assessment and, if appropriate, remediation so as to prevent harm to human health and pollution of the environment.

12. Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer: The applicant proposes a car park making use of the existing access from Kingsgate Road to provide parking for 10 vehicles, 9 of which would be for disabled parking. This provides one space for the proposed retail/offices on the ground floor and the remainder for disabled students and is considered acceptable.

13. The lack of off street parking would result in added pressure for residents parking provision in the area, and therefore the scheme should be designated as a 'car capped' scheme.

14. Tree and Landscape Officer: No objection subject to proviso of tree protection plan and Arboricultural Method Statement, and detailed landscaping scheme to be submitted for approval.

15. Sustainability Officer: no objection subject to conditions relating to BREEAM excellent certification and to ensure the development will achieve 40% CO2 emissions reduction beyond building regulations part L 2010.

16. Thames Water: No objection is raised. They note that appropriated approval should be sought from Thames Water in respect of public sewers crossing or close to the site, and provision should be made for surface water drainage.

17. Further consultation is currently being undertaken in respect to the additional information provided (as detailed in paragraph 11 above), and any further responses received will be reported as late material.

18. Southern Gas Networks: There are pressure gas mains in the proximity of the site. Hand dug trial trenches should confirm the position of the pipes with no mechanical excavation within set distances.

19. Health and Safety Executive: Refer to PADHI for advice on this planning application (Gas Holders site now decommissioned therefore no longer relevant).

Site and Surroundings

20. The site is located in the northern area of Kingston town centre on the northern side of Kingsgate Road. Immediately to the south is Canbury Place surface car park. To the east is Walter Street and the rear of the shops and flats that face Richmond Road, together with some small commercial units. Adjacent to the site to the north east is Kingston College, a Building of Townscape Merit (BTM). An extension to this building has recently been granted permission. The decommissioned gas works site with three gas holders is to the north. To the west is a small commercial site which includes 2 flats, beyond which is the late 1990's Royal Quarter flats development.

21. The site is roughly rectangular in shape with the north east side cut

diagonally. It is approximately 98m long, 24.5m wide and 0.2317 hectares in size.

22. The Kingsgate Business Centre currently occupies the application site. This is an office building of two storeys with elevations of cream cladding panels and white strip windows. It occupies almost the full depth of the site but is set away from each end to accommodate two car parks. There is also a metal ramp at the north east end of the site accessed from Kingsgate Road that leads to further car parking on the roof of the building. It is served by two vehicular crossovers.

23. The pavement in Kingsgate Road is relatively wide at approx.4.75m and is defined by road edge planters and mature street trees.

24. The existing building is in office use. The area is of mixed use character, generally commercial but with residential use in the vicinity, notably the Royal Quarter and Seven Kings Way to the north west of the site.

25. The site is within an area of excellent public transport linkages (PTAL rating of 6a).

26. The site is partially within flood zone 2 (medium probability). The site is also within an archaeological priority area.

27. The site is within the K+20 Action Area Plan area, and forms part of Proposal Site 19, as discussed below. The site is also partially within a Key View from the Thatchedhouse Lodge in Richmond Park to All Saints Church, as identified in the Core Strategy.

Proposal

28. The application is submitted in outline form, and is for the demolition of the existing office building and the erection of a new building with up to 500 sqm of commercial floorspace (A1/A3/B1) at ground floor with up to 210 student bedrooms above.

29. The outline planning application has all matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale), other than access. However, indicative drawings are included showing how the design could be developed. This illustrates a building of part four, five, six, seven and eight storeys in height, stepping down to the south west. The design and final form of the development are reserved for subsequent approval as "reserved matters".

30. The application has subsequently been amended to provide additional information to support this application, including a Daylight and Sunlight study, revised and additional drawings, and details to show how the site could be developed comprehensively with the adjacent site at No. 52 (as a future phase 2). The adjacent site is not within the same ownership.

31. The scheme includes 4 commercial units at ground floor level, together with a student common room facing the proposed linear park. The ground floor would incorporate an integral cycle store. 10 parking spaces are shown within a parking court area, which includes a turning circle sufficient for a fire engine. The upper floors are shown to be predominantly in a student cluster flat configuration, with a smaller element of studio flat provision. The flat roofs are indicated as landscaped terraces.

Assessment

The main considerations material to the determination of this application are:

• Principle of Proposed Development

• Impact on Character of Area

• Impact on Neighbour’s Residential Amenity

• Highways and Parking

• Trees

• Legal Agreements

• Sustainability

• Other Material Considerations

Principle of Proposed Development

32. The current use of the building is for offices (B1). As such, Policy DM17 of the LDF Core Strategy and Policy K4 of the K+20 Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan need to be satisfied. Policy DM 17 (Protecting Existing Employment Land and Premises) states that the Council will protect all employment land and premises in Kingston Town Centre to develop its role as a successful, sustainable Metropolitan Centre through the implementation of the Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan (K+20). Alternative uses will not be acceptable within Kingston Town Centre unless it has been demonstrated by sound evidence and rigorous marketing over a number of years (up to two years) that there is no quantitative or qualitative need for a range of employment uses. Policy K4 (Employment Development within the Town Centre) states that 'the Council will promote the town centre as an office and business centre and improve the quality and range of office and business accommodation by encouraging and supporting: (a) development proposals that incorporate high specification B1 office space, in a range of unit sizes, especially in the vicinity of Kingston Station (Proposal Site P10); (b) the redevelopment and improvement of the existing office stock; (c) the provision of workshop, studio, exhibition space and offices suited to the needs of the 'creative industries' sector. Development proposals resulting in a net loss of B1 office floorspace will only be acceptable if office floorspace is re-provided as part of mixed-use development of the site, or the loss of the office floorspace is outweighed by the achievement of other AAP objectives through the proposed development.

33. Policy K7 of the K+20 AAP states that provision is made for around 1000 new homes to be built in the town centre over the period 2006 - 2020 as part of mixed use development to meet a range of housing needs, including private and affordable housing with a range of flat sizes together with around 500 bedspaces in managed student accommodation. Policy P19 of the K+20 AAP ( relating to Proposal Site Kingston College (19a) and adjoining sites (19b and 19e), Kingsgate Business Centre and Printing Works (19c) and The Kingston Gas Holder Station (19d), outlines the preferred

development options for the sites listed. In relation to the application site, it states: "The Council will work with Kingston College and adjoining landowners to secure… The retention of the Kingsgate Business Centre and printing works 19c for employment use or their redevelopment for B1 business use or ground floor B1 use with managed student accommodation above."

34. The adopted North Kingston Development Brief, Stage One: Land Use and Spatial Parameters identifies appropriate uses for the site as "employment use on the lower levels, with residential or student accommodation on the upper levels". The application would result in the loss of the existing 2,030 sq m of office floorspace. The application would comprise of 210 student bedspaces on the upper floors and 500sq m of flexible employment floorspace covering use classes A1 (retail), A3 (restaurants and cafes) and B1a (offices) at ground floor level. The net loss of employment floor space would be 1,530 sq m. The NPPF is explicit about securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity. Paragraph 19 is clear that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system and the guidance goes on to say that local authorities should plan proactively to meet the development needs of business and support an economy fit for the 21st Century. Nevertheless, the guidance also states (paragraph 22) that planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose.

35. The existing office accommodation is occupied. However, as part of the application, a report by has been submitted by Levene Chartered Surveyors which details the condition of the existing office space and long term viability of the site as office accommodation. This report details that the existing office accommodation is in reasonable condition and comprises 46 small office rooms. The Business Centre's vacancy rate has always been in excess of 20% and historically up to 70% on occasions. The report also notes that as of 30th October 2013, there was approximately 171,811 sq ft of B1 (Business) accommodation available on the market to let in the KT1 & KT2 postcode areas. The report concludes that there continues to be a significant oversupply of B1 office accommodation in the Kingston area and the take up for these offices remains well below what is required for the equilibrium for supply and demand to be met. An additional consideration when assessing the loss of office accommodation is the recent Government changes to permitted development legislation. On 30th May 2013 Part 4, Class J of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) came into force which allows for the conversion of office accommodation into residential accommodation, subject to considerations on flood risk, highways and land contamination. This could potentially allow for the conversion of the existing office space into residential accommodation without the requirement of planning permission. The application would also result in the provision of 500 sq m of commercial activity at ground floor level, fronting the Kingsgate Road. In this respect, the applicant has agreed to offer discounted rents on the commercial space for three years - the ground floor commercial accommodation to be provided with a 50%

discount to the prevailing market rates for a period of three years for existing businesses or residents in the London Borough of Kingston, or those wishing to start up a business in Kingston.

36. The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) NPPF) states that planning policies (at the regional and local level) should be positive, promote competitive town centre environments and manage centres (including for growth) over the plan period (Para 23, p.7). Furthermore, local planning authorities are encouraged to provide consumer choice and a diverse retail offer that reflects the individuality of town centres. The London Plan supports this position and in Policy 2.15- Town Centres states that development proposals in town centres should conform with Policies 4.7 and 4.8 and: sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of the centre; accommodate economic growth through intensification and selective expansion in appropriate locations; support and enhance local competitiveness, quality and diversity of town centre retail, leisure, arts and cultural, other consumer services and public services; be in scale with the centre, contribute towards an enhanced environment and public realm, reduce delivery, servicing and road user conflict. At the local level, Core Strategy Policy CS12 - Retail and Town Centres aligns with the national and regional policy approach. It says that the "Council will maintain and enhance the attractive and distinctive character of Kingston Town Centre and its role as a sustainable Metropolitan Town Centre". Policy DM20 - New Retail Development goes on to say that "the Council will consider applications for new retail development in designated centres favourably, in order to meet identified future needs and ensure accessibility by public transport. However, this is provided that proposals are of an appropriate scale and have been planned positively in order to minimise any negative impacts on: climate change, pollution, transport accessibility, design and character, the amenity of surrounding residents, current regeneration projects, and local employment.

37. The provision of student accommodation is consistent with land use objectives and specific site location. Policy CS15 of the Core Strategy states that "The Council recognises the shortfall of managed student accommodation for Kingston University and the impact that this has on the local housing market. The Council will continue to work with the university to help deliver suitable managed student accommodation..." The Core Strategy states in para. 6.164 that "The Council and University have identified a need for an additional 2,500 managed student bedspaces. Provision has been made for around 500 bedspaces within Kingston Town Centre and for 300 bedspaces within the Hogsmill Valley adjoining the existing Clayhill Campus. There is a remaining need for 1700 bedspaces. Whilst the university's preference is for the future provision of sites with at least 200 bedspaces, smaller sites have a role to play and the potential to contribute towards meeting the needs for managed student accommodation. Sites should be suitably located, with good access to existing campus..." As discussed above, Policy P19 of the K+20 AAP specifies that managed student accommodation in the upper floors of the site is an appropriate use in any redevelopment of Kingston Business Centre. The London Plan also notes that the importance that London universities' potential growth is not compromised by

inadequate provision for new student accommodation. It notes also the uncertainties over future growth in the London student population and its accommodation needs, also that new provision may reduce pressure on other elements of the housing stock currently occupied by students, especially in the private rented sector.

38. Kingston University's accommodation strategy is subject to the EU Procurement Regulations (OJEU) process. The University have issued a Published Prior Information Notice of 23 November 2011 (PIN) advising that they are seeking approximately 1,250 additional bedspaces to serve as student halls of accommodation. Individual sites are expected to typically accommodate a minimum of 200 bedspaces, and completed development should be deliverable by or before August 2014. Bidders will be required to provide the site, accommodation and potentially property management services. On 28 June 2012 the University published a further Information Notice for Student Accommodation Provision. It confirms that the University Accommodation Strategy 2011-2014 is seeking an additional 2,500 units through direct provision and through agreement with private developers. It recognises that given the limited amount of available building space within the borough, that halls of residence may be built to all sizes and scales in various locations, categorised as small (up to 100 student rooms), medium (100 to 400 rooms) and large (more than 400 rooms). It specifies that for "Medium" scaled hall proposals such as currently proposed) the facilities should "ideally consist of cluster flats of between four and eight bedrooms with some studio provision also possible." Kingston University (KU) currently has around 2,700 'managed' student bedspaces. The overall University student population is in the region of 20,000. Since 2003/04, its aim is to provide a bedspace in managed student accommodation for all 1st year students (mainly undergraduates) who need one. In addition, KU leases around 150 houses (circa 600 bedspaces) for 2nd & 3rd year students from private landlords (Source: KU Student Residential Accommodation Strategy 2009/11). The University (Feb 2011) reviewed the number of bedspaces in the light of the proposed changes to higher education and confirmed that 2,500 was still a requirement. Additional background information on Kingston University Student Accommodation Strategy, as based on the Council's response to the LDF Hearing (2011) is set out below: · Of those students eligible to apply for halls accommodation and who have unconditional firm offers, demand exceeds supply by approx 40% i.e. in 2010 there were over 3,500 applications for around 2,500 halls places. · In 2010, there were over 400 students on the halls priority waiting list who qualified for a place, living over 10-15 miles away. · Over 2,200 students were refused halls places in 2010 because they lived within 10 miles of the University over half of which, given the choice, said they would take up a place if offered one to avoid lengthy and costly travel. · Home and EU postgraduates are not eligible for places - over half of the EU students alone (approx 250) said they would apply for halls given the choice. The figure sought only covers first year students but the reality is that many (approx 40%) 2nd and 3rd year students, given the choice, would opt to return to halls for the security and stability they offer. This has the potential to add a further 4,400. · Up to 150 non full year F/T students (student

abroad exchanges etc) each year have to be put up in lodgings, a number of which could be put up in halls if places were available. · Adding all these together, potential demand could be >6,000 but KU consider 2,500 is reasonable and realistic bearing in mind possible drop in demand arising from the funding changes. · KU remains near the bottom of the rankings tables in terms of the number of bedspaces/students it offers compared to other universities in the London area. It should be noted that some of the above figures date from 2010 and recent changes in legislation have resulted in changes in student numbers. The Planning Department is undertaking a review of student accommodation demand. Nevertheless, the University clearly have a demand for additional student accommodation. The application is accompanied by Student Accommodation Report, which estimates that there is a shortage of between 4,180 and 5,660 bedspaces for Kingston University and that there is strong demand for purpose built accommodation.

39. Policy K7 of the K+20 AAP seeks the provision of 500 additional student bedspaces in managed student accommodation by 2020 within Kingston Town Centre. At present, the following has been provided or is in the course of construction within the town centre: · 129 bedspaces have been provided through the development of Quebec House; 64 bedspaces through the change of use of Greencoat House; 87 bedspaces through the redevelopment of 3-5 Penrhyn Road; and 115 through the redevelopment of 1 Penrhyn Road TOTAL = 395 bedspaces. The application, if approved, would result in the total provision of student bedspaces in the town centre of 605.

40. On balance, it is considered that the principle of the re-development of the site for student accommodation with ground floor commercial activity is acceptable and consistent with policy objectives for this site. Whilst the loss of employment use is regrettable, the applicant has demonstrated that there is an oversupply of B1 office accommodation in the Kingston area. Being mindful of the recent government changes to permitted development legislation, it is considered that the significance placed on the long term protection of such accommodation is weakened. Additionally, the commercial floorspace on the ground floor frontage will provide some replacement employment opportunities in a better quality building. The provision of student accommodation on the upper floors with commercial use at ground floor level is consistent with Council policy as set out in K+20, which states that appropriate uses for this site are B1 use at ground floor with managed student accommodation above.

41. As such, it is considered that the principle of development is acceptable, subject to compliance with other development plan policies.

Impact on Character of Area

42. Loss of the existing building: The proposals seek the demolition of the existing building known as the Kingsgate Business Centre. The building is of little architectural merit and is not located within a Conservation Area nor is it statutorily or locally listed.

43. Plan 16 Town Centre Analysis: Built Fabric, from the K+20 AAP, notes that Kingsgate Business Centre and the building directly to its west are of 'poor quality'. This is the lowest designation awarded by this analysis. Plan 18 Town Centre Analysis: Frontage Quality also notes that the frontages on the building are 'unattractive'. This designation is characterised by large units with few or no doors, no visible variation of function, closed passive facades, monotonous facades, and no details with nothing to look at. Therefore there is no objection in principle to the loss of the existing building.

44. The application is submitted in outline only, and the design and massing are reserved for subsequent approval. In considering the quantum of development for the site, it is stated within the supporting statement "that regard has been had to the scale of the existing building to the west, the potential for the gasholders site to the north and the recent permission on the college site to the east. The proposal is therefore stepped on both sites and in particular to the west. It is also in the main set away from the northern boundary".

45. The Stage One North Kingston Development Brief (NKDB) identifies appropriate heights for this site ranging from "up to 6 storeys" to the south west of the site (and including the adjacent site at 52 Kingsgate Road) and centrally within the site, and up to 8 storeys at the north eastern end of the site. The indicative profile indicates that the profile would broadly follow this stratagem, rising from four storeys and stepping up to 8 storeys at the north eastern end of the site, with a 'dip' in the centre.

46. It is considered that the development is of appropriate modulation and scale. As an outline application it is appropriate to reserve full details by condition, and it is considered reasonable to require that the height should be restricted to 1 metre above or below the height profile indicated within this proposal.

47. The adjacent site at 52 Kingsgate Road is not within the applicant's ownership and therefore not subject of this application. Additional information has also been provided to show how the site could be developed comprehensively with the remainder of the island block. This illustrates the potential to develop the remainder of the site as a single development in a future phased approach, and also that the application would not prejudice the development of the complete frontage to Kingsgate Road, as envisioned within the NKDB.

48. The outline application demonstrates reasonable compliance with the visions for the area as set out in the North Kingston Brief. Conditions are recommended to reserve full details of height, scale, massing and detailed design for subsequent approval.

Impact on Neighbours’ Residential Amenity

49. Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy seeks to safeguard residential amenities in terms of privacy, outlook, sunlight/daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance.

50. The nearest residential development are the two flats within the mixed development adjacent at 52 Kingsgate Road, beyond which are the 7 storey flats in Alexander House within the Royal Quarter on Seven Kings Way. The gas holders site to the north (for which the hazardous

substance licence has been revoked) is likely to form the subject of a future application for redevelopment for residential use.

51. The proposed car park separates the development (4 storeys) from 52 Kingsgate Road, with a building to building separation of 17.5 metres. On the rear boundary, the ground floor is setback 1 metre from the boundary, whilst the upper floors are setback 8.5 metres, with two closer projecting wings which are shown set off the boundary by a distance of 3.4 metres (the existing two storey building is separated 2 metres from the rear boundary).

52. A Daylight and Sunlight Report has been prepared by GVA to accompany this application. The report has analysed the impact on existing residential accommodation at 52 Kingsgate Road, Regents Court and Alexander House. All the windows which have a direct outlook onto the application site will fully satisfy the BRE Daylight Standards and Sunlight Standards. The report has also considered the cumulative impact of the development in conjunction with the development of the Gas Holders site immediately to the north based on an indicative form of development prepared for that site and 3D modelling and indicative massing.

53. Additionally, the report has assessed the impact of the proposed development on the potential redevelopment at the Gas Holders site. The assessment is based on the impact of daylight levels to windows on the ground floor facing the application site (which will receive the lowest level of natural daylight and sunlight). The report has analysed the Average Daylight Factors (ADF) for the ground floor rooms within the potential development on this neighbouring site. The British Standard differentiates between different room uses and recommends the highest standard for family kitchens where the minimum target is 2%df; living rooms should achieve 1.5% df and bedrooms 1.0%df. Of the 19 modelled ground floor rooms within the Gas Works site one room would receive an ADF of less than 1%df (0.84%df), 9 rooms would achieve an ADF of between 1-1.5%df and 9 rooms would achieve an ADF of between 1.5-2.5%df. This illustrates that sufficient lighting levels would be achievable in the main for bedrooms and living rooms. The proposal raises some concerns in this respect but given the status of the gas holders site and the as yet undeveloped plans, it is not considered that it would be reasonable to refuse this application on grounds of the impact on the potential development of the neighbouring site. However, as this is an outline application the detailed plans and massing are reserved for subsequent approval, it is considered that it would be appropriate to require that these finalised details should be informed by an updated Daylighting and Sunlighting report.

54. Concern has also been raised with regards to the general noise, disturbance and possible anti-social behaviour generated by students. However, it is not within the remit of the planning system to control people's behaviour and there is other legislation to address any anti-social behaviour. Nevertheless, there are mitigation measures with good and proper management of the student accommodation which can reduce its impact. As part of this application, the applicants have demonstrated that they are willing to enter into a legal agreement securing a management plan.

55. If the application were approved, there would inevitably be days

where students arrive and leave the halls with their possessions. This would result in greater activity than normally experienced in the area. However, this is likely to only be for a handful of days a year and could be controlled through a management plan.

56. Overall, it is considered that the proposal as shown in outline form would not result in material harm upon the amenities of the existing nearby residential properties or the potential future residents within the adjacent Gas Holders site, to a degree that would substantiate a reason to refuse this outline planning application. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with Policy DM10 (k) of the Council's LDF Core Strategy.

Highways & Parking

57. The application site has a PTAL of 6a (Excellent). Kingston Railway Station is approximately 200m from the application site, and there are a number of bus routes and stops in the close vicinity.

58. Policy DM9 (Managing Vehicle Use for New Development) of the Council's LDF Core Strategy states that to ensure that new development does not contribute to congestion or compromise highway safety the Council will:

(a) require new development to comply with car parking standards and implement parking management schemes

(b) restrict eligibility for on-street parking permits for residents of new developments located in controlled parking zones

59. The application proposes a car park making use of the existing access from Kingsgate Road to provide parking for 10 vehicles, 9 of which would be for blue badge holders. This is to provide one space for the proposed retail / offices on the ground floor and the remainder for disabled students. This arrangement is considered acceptable.

60. However, the lack of off street parking would result in added pressure for residents parking provision in the area, and therefore it is appropriate to formally designate the development as 'car capped', to preclude students from eligibility to the resident parking permit scheme.

61. In terms of servicing, vehicles would enter the site from Kingsgate Road, drive into the site and reverse into the turning head next to unit 1. Vehicles would be able to unload or pick up the refuse form the adjoining bin stores and then leave the site in a forward gear. A tracking diagram on the plan shows this movement for a fire engine, which is a larger vehicle than the type of vehicle likely to service the units or the student accommodation. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has confirmed that these servicing arrangements are acceptable.

62. The proposal includes the provision of 109 cycle stands, which is appropriate and will cater for the student and commercial uses.

63. A Movement Study has been commissioned to review traffic movement within the town centre in order to inform the development of the North Kingston Development Brief. Stage One of the Brief identifies two main design framework options, both of these options include the establishment of new public square in Richmond Road. Option A is to provide for a north / south linear park located between

Sury Basin and Sopwith Road, and Option B involves the creation of a new "pocket" park on the junction of Kingsgate Road and Seven Kings Way, with a new access road to the east of the site.

64. The proposed access into the car park is located to the west of the site, and would still allow for Kingsgate Road to be made into an access only / shared surface route, option A, and would also allow the further development of option B. The eastern boundary of the building has been amended on the ground floor plan to allow for a possible north / south public path or road located between this building and Kingston College. The parcel of land on the eastern boundary (418m² representing 18% of the site area) is offered to the Council as a land transfer, which will facilitate the development of both the above options and would be secured by legal agreement.

65. Subject to a legal agreement and conditions securing cycle parking details; a preclusion from obtaining on-street parking permits; and the effective implementation of student management plan, and a student travel plan, it is considered that the proposal complies with Policies 6.9 & 6.13 of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policies CS5, CS7, DM8 & DM9 of the Councils LDF Core Strategy (Adopted April 2012).

Trees

66. There is a line of plane trees in the footpath to the south of the site and some self sown trees off site to the west. A Sycamore tree covered by Tree Protection Order is located on the Gas Holder Site on the boundary to the north-west corner of the site.

67. An Arboricultural Report has been submitted with this application, which states that there "will be no tree loss or significant impact on important trees as a result of the development and significant new tree planting is proposed".

68. It is indicated that new trees would be planted along the eastern boundary of the site and these would form part of the proposed linear park.

69. The Tree and Landscape Officer has recommended that a detailed landscape condition is reserved for subsequent approval, together with conditions relating to tree protection (including construction details for those parts of the development within close proximity to the protected and retained trees) and the specification for new tree planting and landscaping to enhance the development and the local area.

70. Is reported that trees have hastily been removed prior to submission of the application. This would appear to relate to the clearance of self sown trees and vegetation at the eastern end of the site. Any trees removed were not covered by Tree Protection Order and no consent would have been necessary for their removal. As noted above, it is proposed to transfer this eastern land parcel to the Council, which represents approximately 18% of the total site area.

71. An Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Landscape Plan is secured by condition to protect the existing street scene and to secure landscaping details. In this respect, the proposal is considered to comply with Policy DM10 of the Council's LDF Core Strategy.

Legal Agreements

72. In the event of an approval, in accordance with the Council's SPD 'Planning Obligations' the application would be subject to a legal agreement covering the following:

(i) A requirement precluding any residents and business operators of the accommodation from applying for on street parking permits;

(ii) A management plan for the student accommodation (iii) A restriction to ensure that the occupiers are all students; (iv) To give Kingston University priority in respect of

accommodation rights; (v) Any offer of student units comprised in the Development to

another accommodation operator shall be at a price per unit reasonably commensurate to student rooms of a similar standard in the vicinity of the land operated and/or occupied by Kingston University and/or their students;

(vi) To use best endeavours to ensure that a 100% of the accommodation is let to students who are enrolled at Kingston University or at an educational establishment within the borough, in accordance with a written strategy to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(vii) A car parking management plan, to include detailed arrangements for students arriving at the beginning and end of term; and servicing.

(viii) A health/social care contribution of £200 per student bedroom;

(ix) A Sustainable travel/sustainable place contribution of £500 per student bedroom

(x) Travel Plan Monitoring fee of £3,500; and (xi) A public realm improvement contribution of £337,500 (xii) Land transfer to the Council (418m²), with rights retained to

allow overhang and subsoil servicing etc. (xiii) To offer discounted rents on the commercial space for three

years - the ground floor commercial accommodation to be provided with a 50% discount to the prevailing market rates for a period of three years for existing businesses or residents in the London Borough of Kingston, or those wishing to start up a business in Kingston.

(xiv) To enter into a S278 agreement to ensure that works to the highway are carried out to the satisfaction of the Council.

73. The proposal would also be liable for a Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) contribution, based on the net increase in floor area (floor space not agreed at this stage).

Sustainability

74. The application is in outline and therefore detailed sustainability measures have not been detailed at this stage. Core Strategy Policy DM1 encourages development to achieve BREEAM Outstanding.

However, it is recognised that achieving BREEAM Outstanding is a very high requirement and may not be possible for a number of reasons. Therefore it is considered that a BREEAM Excellent would be a more appropriate score to target providing the development achieves the BREEAM Outstanding equivalent for energy/CO2 reduction i.e. 40% CO2 emissions reduction beyond building regulations part L 2010. Detailed conditions are recommended to ensure these standards are met.

75. As required by Core Strategy Policy DM2 and London Plan Policies 5.2 and 5.6, a detailed feasibility assessment into the establishment of a site wide CHP network, or connection to a wider District Heat Network should also be provided at the detailed application stage and reserved by condition.

76. On the basis that these sustainability standards are secured by condition, the proposal is considered to comply with Policies DM1 & DM2 of the Councils LDF Core Strategy and Policy 5.2 of the London Plan.

Other Material Considerations

77. Standard and Type of Accommodation 78. The Council's recently adopted Residential Design SPD provides

guidance on student accommodation. The key requirements are: (1) The provision of mainly cluster flats of between 4 and 8 en-

suite bedrooms. (2) Provision of accessible bedrooms. (3) Designed with good security, including 24 -hour security and

linked CCTV. (4) Communal outdoor space (5) Secure cycle parking.

79. For medium halls (100-400) and large sized halls (more than 400), additional facilities required are:

(6) A management suite facility. (7) Adequate communal facilities (e.g. television, pool tables,

etc) and amenity space. 80. The SPD also provides recommended minimum spaces standards,

which for an en-suite study bedroom is between 12-14 sqm, and for a studio room approximately 20 sqm.

81. The application is in outline form only. However, the supporting statement and outline plans confirm that the accommodation would be primarily cluster flats, with some studio provision. It also confirms that both the cluster flats and studio flats would be of a size exceeding the minimum standards set out within the Residential Design SPD. The proposal includes a student amenity area to the north-east of the building, directly accessible from a ground floor student lounge, together with a roof level terrace. Detailed plans are reserved by condition to confirm the layout and configuration of the student accommodation and associated communal facilities, and general compliance with the Residential Design SPD.

82. All student rooms would be accessible, and 10% would be wheelchair accessible.

83. Management: As part of the provisions of the legal agreement, it is

considered appropriate to secure details of a Student Management Plan to secure the provision of 24 hour onsite management, internal CCTV provision, arrangements for students arriving and departing at the start and end of term/academic year, and detailed organisational arrangements, etc.

84. Flood Risk The site lies within Flood Zone 2 "medium probability" with a 1 in 1000 annual probability of flooding in any given year. The proposed uses on the ground floor part of the development are classified as 'less vulnerable' within Table 2 of the NPPF Technical Guidance. The student accommodation is classified as 'more vulnerable'. Therefore, conditions are recommended to require the provision of a detailed flood risk assessment and flood evacuation plan.

85. Land Contamination: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 109 states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of water, soil, air and noise pollution. The NPPF also requires appropriate remediation and mitigation of contaminated land.

86. There has been no Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) submitted with this proposal. However, the planning history indicates that no previous use on the site indicates the likelihood of any significant contaminating activities since the 1950s. However, the adjacent land has been used as town gas works and therefore there is a likelihood of boundary contamination concerns which could impact on this proposal. It is essential that a full contamination assessment is carried out for the proposal site in conjunction with the gas holders site, in order to inform any required remediation actions that may be required on the application site.

87. Detailed conditions relating to contaminated land and groundwater, and appropriate remediation are included, in accordance with the recommendations of both the Environment Agency and the Environmental Health Officer.

88. Archaeology: The site is within an archaeological priority area. The National Planning Policy Framework (Section 12) and the London Plan (2011 Policy 7.8) emphasise that the conservation of archaeological interest is a material consideration in the planning process. Paragraph 141 of the NPPF says that applicants should be required to record and advance understanding of the significance of any heritage assets to be lost (wholly or in part) and to make this evidence publicly available.

89. English Heritage (Archaeology) advise that there is sufficient information to establish that the development is not likely to cause such harm as to justify refusal of planning permission provided that a condition is applied to require a two-stage process of archaeological investigation comprising firstly evaluation to clarify the nature and extent of surviving remains followed, if necessary, by a full investigation. These safeguarding measures are reserved by condition.

Recommendation:

Approve subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), as specified in the above legal agreements section, and the following condition(s):

1 Applications for approval of the matters hereby reserved must be made within two years from the date of this decision. The development to which the permission relates must begin not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:-

i) The expiration of three years from the date of this decision;

or

ii) The expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. (As amended)

2 The following matters shall be reserved for the approval of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting this Order):

(a) layout

(b) scale

(c) appearance

(d) landscaping

Reason: As the application is submitted in outline form only and in order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the details of the proposal.

3 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

4477_D_107_-_Location Plan 14/08/2013

4477_D_108_-_Existing Plan 14/08/2013

4477_D_109_-_Existing Elevations 14/08/2013

D and A Statement 14/08/2013

Final Tree Report 14/08/2013

Kingsgate Road TA Aug13 14/08/2013

Kingston - Goldcrest - Student Market Report - 14th August 2013

14/08/2013

Planning Statement - August 2013 FINAL 14/08/2013

4477_D_110RevA_Pre_Site Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_111RevA_Pre_Ground Floor Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_112RevA_Pre_Typical Upper Floor Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_113RevA_Pre_Roof Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_114RevA_Pre_Profile elevations 23/12/2013

4477_D_116RevA_Proposed Ground Floor Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_117RevA_Typical Upper Floor Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_118RevA_Long Profile (Front/South Elevation)

23/12/2013

Construction Phase Plan 23/12/2013

4477_D_200_202_ Construction Phasing Statement

23/12/2013

4477_LP_01 26/02/2014

Reason: For avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

4 A Car Park Management Plan demonstrating how the use of the car park will be controlled, including details of arrangements at the start and end of term/ academic year and detailing the signage necessary within the site to direct pedestrians and vehicles shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development commences. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to safeguard the amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and to safeguard highway safety and the free flow of traffic in accordance with Policies DM9 (Managing Vehicle Use for New Development) and Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

5 The car parking, servicing and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved drawing shall be provided with a hard, bound, dust-free surface, adequately drained before the development is occupied for the purpose hereby permitted. The respective areas shall be kept free from obstruction at all times, and shall not thereafter be used for any other purposes other than those shown on the approved drawing.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or conditions of general safety on adjoining highways and that adequate parking servicing and manoeuvring provision is made in accordance with Policies DM9 (Managing Vehicle Use for New Development) and Policy DM10

(Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

6 All works on site shall take place in accordance with the following details which shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work: (Specify as Appropriate)

(a) Provision for loading/unloading materials.

(b) Storage of plant, materials and operatives vehicles.

(c) Temporary site access.

(d) Signing system for works traffic.

(e) Measures for the laying of dust, suppression of noise and abatement of other nuisance arising from development works.

(f) Location of all ancillary site buildings.

(g) Measures to protect any tree, shrubbery and other landscape features to be retained on the site during the course of development.

(h) Means of enclosure of the site.

(i) Wheel washing equipment.

(j) The parking of vehicles of the site operatives and visitors

(k) The erection and maintenance of security hoarding.

(l) A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works (Major Applications).

Reason: In order to safeguard the amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and to safeguard highway safety and the free flow of traffic in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

7 The levels of buildings, roads, parking areas and pathways within the site shall only be in accordance with details which shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced.

Reason: To ensure that the appearance and functioning of the development is satisfactory and to safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012 and comply with Supplementary Planning Document ‘Access for All’ (July 2005).

8 By the time the development hereby permitted is substantially complete, pedestrian/vehicular intervisibility splays of 2.8m x 3.3m shall have been provided in each direction where the access meets

the back edge of footway, and shall be permanently retained free from any obstruction to visibility higher than 1.0m above ground level.

Reason: To maintain pedestrian/vehicular intervisibility in the interest of highway safety in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

9 Prior to commencement of any development on site, a Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to the planning authority for written agreement, which shall include the following details:

a) Where materials will be (un) loaded into the site;

b) The route to and away from site for muck away and vehicles with materials;

c) Whether any reversing manoeuvres are required onto or off the public highway into the site, and whether a banksman will be provided;

d) Protocol for managing deliveries to one vehicle at a time on sites with restricted access or space;

e) Protocol for managing vehicles that need to wait for access to the site; and

f) Whether it is anticipated that statutory undertaker connections will be required into the site.

The development shall only be implemented in accordance with the details and measures approved as part of the construction management plan, which shall be maintained throughout the entire construction period.


10 A Green Travel Plan, containing a package of measures for reducing the number of vehicle trips to the site by students and staff shall be implemented upon the development being brought into first use, and in accordance with details to be submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The Travel Plan shall include an action plan with timescales for the implementation of the proposed measures, details of an ongoing programme of monitoring and review and targets for reductions in car use. Monitoring and review shall include the submission of annual travel plan update report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority which contains the results of annually repeated staff travel surveys and demonstrates progress towards meeting targets.

Reason: To ensure that sustainable transport methods are encouraged and implemented in accordance with Policies CS5 (Reducing the Need to Travel) and CS6 (Sustainable Travel) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

11 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of the secure cycle parking facilities for the residents and visitors to the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory cycle storage facilities and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy DM8 (Sustainable Transport for New Developments) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

12 The overall height profile of the development hereby approved shall be no greater than 1 metre above the profile indicated with drawing 4477D/114 Rev A, in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works on site are commenced. The development shall then be built in accordance with approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

13 A sample of all facing materials including roofing material and fenestration, demonstrating the material, colour, texture, face bond and pointing to be utilised in the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works on site are commenced. The development shall then be built in accordance with these approved samples.


14 Detailed plans and elevations, to be informed by an updated Daylight and Sunlight Report taking into account the design and layout of the proposed development of the adjacent Gas Holders site (where possible), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in accordance with details to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of

the adjoining existing and future residential properties in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

15 Details of privacy screening to the flat roof terrace area to ensure the development does not result in loss of amenity to existing or future neighbouring residents, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be built in accordance with approved details.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining residential properties in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

16 Details of oriel windows and all fenestration on the rear elevation, and fenestration on the west elevation, to include measures to prevent overlooking of the adjacent sites, shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be built in accordance with approved details.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining residential properties in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

17 The development shall be completed in accordance with the following details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, before building operations commence.

(a) materials for all external finishes (including their colour and texture).

(b) boundary treatment, (including walls, fences and gates).

(c) treatment and layout of all parts of the site not covered by the approved buildings, including hard and soft landscaping.

(d) refuse storage facilities.

(e) street furniture and lighting.

(f) sewer and drainage runs.

(g) any external plant and equipment, and associated screening.


18 The site and building works required to implement the development shall be only carried out between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the adjoining residential occupiers in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

19 No development shall commence until a landscaping scheme including where applicable the retention of the existing trees shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within the first planting season following completion of the development and the tree planting and landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs which die during this period shall be replaced in the first available planting season, and the area shown to be landscaped shall be permanently retained for that purpose only.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and also that the Local Planning Authority shall be satisfied as to the details of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

20 Prior to commencement of the development, a detailed arboricultural method statement and tree protection plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This submission shall include:

(a) A plan to a scale and level of accuracy appropriate to the proposal, that shows the positions, crown spreads and root protection areas (RPA) of every retained tree on site, and on nearby ground or land adjacent to the site, in relation to the approved plans.

(b) A schedule of pre-construction tree works for the above-detailed trees, where appropriate.

(c) Details and positions of the tree root protection zones.

(d) Details and positions of tree protection barriers and ground protection where appropriate.

(e) Details and positions of the construction exclusion zones.

(f) Details and positions of the existing and proposed underground service runs, to be routed to avoid root protection zones where possible.

(g) Details and positions of any change in levels or the

positions of any excavations within 5m of the root protection area of retained trees.

(h) Details of any special engineering required to accommodate the protection of retained trees (e.g. in connection with foundations, service installation, bridging water features, surfacing).

(i) Details of the working methods to be employed for the installation of drives, paths within the RPA’s of retained trees in accordance with the principles of ‘No Dig’ construction. The details shall be in accordance with British Standard BS: 5837: 2005 sections 9.3, 9.2, 9, 11.7, 5.2.2 and 10 for requirements (c) to (h) inclusive.

The approved protection scheme shall be implemented prior to commencement of any work on site and maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority until the completion of the development.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenities and so that the Local Planning Authority shall be satisfied as to the details of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

21 No demolition, site clearance or building operations shall be commenced until tree protection to the standards set out in BS5837: 2005 "Protection of Trees on Construction Sites" (figures 4 and 5) has been erected around the trees shown on the approved drawings as being retained on the site. The fencing is to be not less than 1.5 metres in height and shall enclose either:-

(a) the area described by the limit set out in Table 1 or

(b) a radius as set out in Figure 2 of BS 5837: 2005, or alternatively

(c) such an area as may have previously been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Such tree protection shall be maintained during the course of development, and no storage, site structures, parking or any other operation shall be permitted within the area thereby protected. Within the protected area:

(a) levels shall not be raised or lowered in relation to the existing ground level,

(b) no roots shall be cut, trenches dug, or soil removed or drains and services laid,

(c) no buildings, site huts, roads or other engineering operations shall be constructed or carried out,

(d) no vehicles shall be driven over the area,

(e) no materials or equipment shall be stored.

and the destruction by burning of any materials shall not take place

on the site or adjoining land unless the fires are at a minimum distance from the protected area of 6.00 metres.

Reason: To prevent unnecessary damage occurring to the trees during building operations, thereby safeguarding the visual amenities of the site in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

22 i. No development shall take place until the applicant (or their heirs and successors in title) has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological evaluation in accordance with a written scheme which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the local planning authority in writing and a report on that evaluation has been submitted to the local planning authority.

ii. If heritage assets of archaeological interest are identified by the evaluation under Part A, then before development commences the applicant (or their heirs and successors in title) shall secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological investigation in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the local planning authority in writing.

iii. No development or demolition shall take place other that in accordance with the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under Part (B).

iv. The development shall not be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under Part (B), and the provision for analysis, publication and dissemination of the results and archive deposition has been secured.

Reason: Important archaeological remains may exist on this site. Accordingly the planning authority wishes to secure the provision of archaeological excavation and the subsequent recording of the remains prior to development, in accordance with the guidance and model condition set out in PPG16 in accordance with Policy DM 12 (Development in Conservation Areas and Affecting Heritage Assets) of the LDF Core Adopted April 2012.

23 No development approved by this planning permission shall take place until a scheme that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:

i. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified

a. all previous uses

b. potential contaminants associated with those uses

c. a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors

d. potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

ii. A site investigation scheme, based on (i) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.

iii. The results of the site investigation and detailed risk assessment referred to in (ii) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.

iv. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (iii) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: The site overlies a sensitive gravel aquifer and is adjacent to a site with potential for significant contamination.

24 No occupation of any part of the permitted development shall take place until a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a "long-term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved.


25 (a) Any development hereby approved shall not be implemented until such time as a contaminated land assessment and associated remediation strategy has been submitted to, and agreed in writing by the local Planning Authority.

(a) Any remediation works identified in this assessment shall be completed on site, in accordance with a quality assurance scheme agreed as part of the contaminated land assessment.

(b) On completion of the agreed remediation works, a closure report and certificate of compliance, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In accordance with Policy K24 of the K+20 Action Area Plan and Policies DM4 (Water Management and Flood Risk) and DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

26 No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the local planning authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approval details.

Reason: The site overlies a sensitive gravel aquifer and is adjacent to a site with potential for significant contamination. Drainage will have to ensure no infiltration area induces migration of contaminants from the adjacent site.

27 Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which will be given for those parts of the site only where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.


28 A detailed Flood Risk Assessment shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, which should inform the layout and location of the student accommodation.


29 Prior to commencement of development, a detailed Flood Evacuation Plan shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be built and managed in accordance with the approved details for the lifetime of the development.


30 The hard surface hereby approved shall be made of porous materials and retained thereafter or provision shall be made and retained thereafter to direct run-off water from the hard surface to a permeable or porous area or surface within the curtilage of the property.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and pollution and increase the level of sustainability of the development and to comply with Policy CS1 (Climate Change Mitigation) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

31 Prior to commencement of development, a BREEAM Design Stage

Assessment and accompanying Interim Certificate should be submitted and approved by the local planning authority in order to ensure the development is targeting an overall BREEAM Excellent score.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

32 Within 6 months of completion, a final BREEAM Excellent

certificate should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation as set out in Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

33 Prior to commencement, an Energy Statement that is structured

according to the Mayors Energy hierarchy and detailing how the development will achieve 40% CO2 emissions reduction beyond building regulations part L 2010 should be submitted and approved by the local planning authority. In reference to RBK Core Strategy Policy DM2 and London Plan Policies 5.2 and 5.6, this should provide a feasibility assessment of the establishment of a site wide CHP network, or connection to a wider District Heat Network.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation as set out in Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

34 The residential accommodation hereby approved shall be used

only as student accommodation only, and for no other form of residential use.

Reason: The size and configuration of the individual units would not be suitable as permanent long-stay accommodation; and the

provision of other forms of residential accommodation would require further assessment of affordable housing requirements, in accordance with Policies DM10, DM13 and DM15 of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012

35 Detailed plans to show the layout of the student accommodation and ancillary areas to show compliance with the standards set out in the Residential Design SPD shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be built and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure an appropriate layout and quality of student accommodation to protect the amenities future occupiers, in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

36 No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until surface water

drainage works have been implemented in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Before these details are submitted an assessment shall be carried out of the potential for disposing of surface water by means of a sustainable drainage system in accordance with the principles set out in Policy 5.13 of the London Plan July 2011 (or any subsequent version), and the results of the assessment provided to the local planning authority. The sustainable drainage scheme shall include the following information:

i. provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters;

ii. include a timetable for its implementation; and

iii. provide a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its lifetime.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and pollution and increase the level of sustainability of the development and to comply with Policy CS1 (Climate Change Mitigation) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012 and Policy 5.13 of the London Plan July 2011.

37 The ground floor commercial premises hereby approved shall not

be used for the purposes hereby permitted before 8.00 am or after 11 pm Monday to Sunday.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design

Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

38 The development shall be designed and maintained in accordance with Secured by Design principles, in accordance with a written scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the use.

Reason: In the interests of proper planning and to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the development and neighbouring properties, in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

39 The student accommodation shall be designed to appropriate access standards, as identified in the accompanying Design and Access Statement, and shall include the provision of 10% of the student rooms to be wheelchair accessible, in accordance with details to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be built and maintained in accordance with these details, and retained for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the wheelchair occupants in order to comply with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012, and Policies 7.2 (An Inclusive Environment) and Policy 4.5 (London's Visitor Infrastructure) of the London Plan July 2011 and comply with Supplementary Planning Document 'Access for All' (July 2005).

40 A detailed car park plan to provide 9 blue badge spaces for the use of students of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The blue badge spaces shall be provided in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained retained for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the wheelchair occupants in order to comply with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012, and Policies 7.2 (An Inclusive Environment) and Policy 4.5 (London's Visitor Infrastructure) of the London Plan July 2011 and comply with Supplementary Planning Document 'Access for All' (July 2005).

Informative(s)

1 In dealing with the application the Council has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive way. We have made

available detailed advice in the form or our statutory policies in the Core Strategy, Supplementary Planning Documents, Planning Briefs and other informal written guidance, as well as offering a full pre-application advice service, in order to ensure that the applicant has been given every opportunity to submit an application which is likely to be considered favourably.

2 Material Deliveries The works will result in substantial movement of heavy vehicles on Kingsgate Road. i) Deliveries to the site should avoid school arrival and pick up

times. This is due to existing congestion in the area which will be exacerbated with the proposals;

ii) Deliveries to the site should where possible avoid waiting on the highway as this could result in a reduction to road safety;

Advanced Notice of Works The proposals may lead to disruption to users of the highway network in the Borough. As a result the applicant should contact the Boroughs Street Works Team (0208 547 5002. This must take place at least one month prior to works commencing, and is required under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, and the Traffic Management Act 2004, in order to satisfy the licensing requirements of the Highways Act 1980. This is to ensure the amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and to safeguard highway safety and the free flow of traffic. Highway Cleaning Should this access into the site during construction not be paved spoil could be carried from the site onto the public highway. The access into the site should be paved to minimise the carry over of spoil onto Kingsgate Road. We would also require the applicant to sweep and wash down Kingsgate Road to ensure that the public highway is kept clear of debris. This is to ensure a satisfactory road surface for road safety reasons at all times.

3 In respect of the archaeological condition and requirements, the written schemes of investigation will need to be prepared and implemented by a suitably qualified archaeological practice in accordance with English Heritage Greater London Archaeology guidelines. They must be approved by the planning authority before any on-site development related activity occurs.

4 In respect of the land contamination condition, a site investigation should include relevant soil, gas, surface and groundwater sampling, carried out by a suitably qualified and accredited consultant/contractor in accordance with a Quality Assured sampling and analysis methodology. An investigation report shall be produced in accordance with BS 5930:1999 (Code of Practice for Site Investigations & BS10175: 2001 Code of Practice Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites) detailing all investigative works and sampling on site, together with the results

of analysis, risk assessment to any receptors and a proposed remediation strategy. The works undertaken in compliance with this condition shall be of such a nature so as to render harmless the identified contamination given the proposed end-use of the site and surrounding environment including any controlled waters.

5 In the event of further applications regarding this proposed development are made, it is likely that assurances will be required that consideration has been given to the impact of the development upon Air Quality, particularly if a Combined Heat and Power unit is proposed. In addition, measures to mitigate against traffic and other environmental noise, together with the potential for internal noise transfer between the habitable units and arising from any commercial use on the ground floor (particularly if A3/A4/A5 use is proposed) will also be required. The applicant is advised to consider these matters prior to submission of any detailed proposals, and recommended to liaise with colleagues in Environmental Health as appropriate.



A2 Register No: 13/13058/FUL

Address: KINGS OAK PRIMARY SCHOOL, DICKERAGE LANE, NEW MALDEN, KT3 3RZ



Ward: Norbiton Description of Proposal: Demolition of existing temporary classroom block

and erection of 2no. 6-classroom blocks. Erection of new school hall and extension to existing kitchen area.

Plan Type: Full Application Expiry Date: 08/05/2014


5123450/A/10007/A Proposed Elevations Received 29/01/2014

5123450/A/1001/A Existing Site Plan Received 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1002/A Existing Floor Plans Received 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1003/A Existing Elevations Received 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1004/A Proposed Site Plan Received 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1005/A Proposed Block Plan Received 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1006/A Proposed Floor Plans Received 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1008/A Proposed Dimensioned Site Layout

Received 29/01/2014

5123450/A/100x/x Proposed Elevations Received 06/12/2013

Arboricultural Impact Assessment Received 06/12/2013

Design and Access Statement Received 06/12/2013

Drainage Strategy Received 06/12/2013

Ecological Impact Assessment Received 06/12/2013

Energy Statement Received 29/01/2014

FNG-KO2001 Topographic & Utility Survey Received 06/12/2013

King`s Oak Primary School - Noise Impact Assess Received 06/12/2013

King`s Oak Primary School - Noise Survey Report Received 06/12/2013

Location Plan Received 29/01/2014

Mechanical and Electrical Survey Received 06/12/2013

Proposed Construction Phasing Received 24/01/2014

School Travel Plan Received 06/12/2013

Sustainability Statement Received 17/02/2014

Transport Assessment Received 06/12/2013

BASIC INFORMATION


Development Plan:

London Plan July 2011 LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012

Policies

LONDON PLAN JULY 2012 LP 2.8 Outer London: transport LP 3.18 Education facilities LP 5.13 Sustainable drainage LP 5.2 Minimising carbon dioxide emissions LDF CORE STRATEGY CORE POLICIES CS 01 Climate Change Mitigation CS 02 Climate Change Adaptation CS 03 The Natural and Green Environment CS 06 Sustainable Travel CS 07 Managing Vehicle Use CS 08 Character, Heritage and Design CS 15 Future Needs of Kingston University, Kin LDF CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DM01 Sustainable Design and Construction Stan DM04 Water Management and Flood Risk DM06 Biodiversity DM08 Sustainable Transport for new Development DM09 Managing Vehicle Use for New Development DM10 Design Requirements for New Developments DM11 Design Approach DM23 Schools


00/03434/FUL Erection of single storey classroom building with corridor link to main school building


01/03271/FUL Erection of a single storey classroom block linked to main building


01/03283/FUL Erection of single storey front extension


02/12123/FUL Erection of double temporary classroom block (Re-positioned)


07/12160/FUL Erection of a temporary single storey building on the playing field

Permit with expiry condition + condition

to the north of the school to provide nursery accommodation

11/09/2007

12/12150/FUL Erection of Replacement Modular Building comprising 2 no. Classrooms and ancillary facilities.

Permit with conditions 06/07/2012

13/12517/FUL Single storey extension to existing School Hall to create store room


92/1097/OUT Redevelopment of site for residential purposes at 65 habitable rooms per acre including details of access to Kingston Road.

Grant Outline Conditions with Conditions 09/12/1992

92/1463/FUL Refurbishment of existing school site involving part single/part two storey extension and external alterations to existing retained buildings and parking areas.


97/3058/FUL Erection of a prefabricated unit containing four classrooms and ancillary accommodation

Permit Conditions 09/07/1997

97/3448/FUL Retention of pre-fabricated unit containing four classrooms and ancillary accommodation and construction of a glazed link


9207 erect movable classroom Deemed permission 14/01/1972

9332 Erect caretakers house Deemed planning 28/03/1972

14501 Provide new nursery unit to infants school

Deemed permission 20/12/1974

Consultations

1. Neighbour notification: 133 neighbours were notified on 06 February 2014. Two site notices were displayed on 10 February 2014. No comments received as of 28 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

2. Sport England: No comments received as of 28 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

3. RBK Tree Officer: The willow tree is hollow and rotten and should be removed. The English Oak appears in good health and should be retained.

4. RBK Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer: No objections. Recommend conditions for a construction management plan, servicing plan, details of cycle and scooter parking, and an annual school travel plan update.

5. RBK Climate Change and Sustainability: Whilst BREEAM Outstanding is the Policy standard it is very difficult to achieve, especially given the mitigating circumstances submitted, i.e. site constraints, the building

structure, and cost constraints. It would achieve a BREEAM Very Good rating. 40% CO2 reduction is the Policy standard - the Energy Strategy indicates 25% CO2 reduction. 40% is unrealistic target given condition of existing school. Recommend standard conditions for BREEAM Very Good and 25% CO2 reduction.

6. Metropolitan Police: Some concern over use and management of the rear pedestrian entry. Recommend specifications for secure doors and windows. Avoid conflict of CCTV and walkway, avoid canopies offering climbing aid. Recommend cycle parking provided and secured and roofed and in view of school offices. Consider separate staff bicycle storage and scooter parking. Recommend full Secure by Design accreditation is sought.

7. Natural England: No objections to the proposals. 8. Environment Agency: No comments received as of 28 February 2014;

comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

9. RBK Green Spaces: No comments received as of 28 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

10. RBK Early Years Directorate: No comments received as of 28 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

11. RBK Early Years and Childcare Partnership: No comments received as of 28 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.


12. The application relates to King's Oak Primary School, which is presently a 2-form entry, primary school with a nursery and a children's centre incorporated on the site. Records show that there was a school on the site in 1911, which was expanded immediately after WWII to form Malden West County Primary and Malden West Secondary School, and has been altered and enlarged since. The site is designated as part of the Hogsmill Valley Key Area of Change in the LDF Core Strategy 2012. The school site is enclosed to the south by housing from 1913 and to the north by 1930's houses. The original school field which extended to the west was developed in the 1990's to form 1-69 Archdale Place. Dickerage Lane runs along the east boundary of the site and provides two separate accesses to the school; one for the nursery and reception and one for the remainder of the school. Staff park in two car-parks located adjacent to Dickerage Lane. As an RBK School site, trees have not been protected by preservation orders. Notable trees on the site include a mature English oak in the centre of the site and a mature willow tree in the south playground. The site has a public transport accessibility rating (PTAL) of 1b (very poor). The school has five entrances, two vehicle-only and two pedestrian-only located off Dickerage Lane and a pedestrian only entrance off Norbiton Common Road.

Proposal

13. The application is in connection with proposals to expand the present capacity of the school from 2-form entry, to 3-form entry, with the first additional intake commencing in September 2014. It seeks planning permission for the removal of a temporary, single storey hut containing 4no. classrooms the temporary consent for which expired in August 2005, and the erection of 2no, single storey buildings of 6 classrooms each, a hall, and an extension to the kitchens. The new classrooms, 12no. in total, would be located on one of the two KS1 playgrounds and on the school playing field, towards the west boundary of the site. The number of pupils would increase from 477 to 630 with an additional 10 members of staff.

Assessment






• Trees


• Sustainability



14. London Plan Policy 3.18 says that proposals which enhance education and skills provision will be supported, including new-build, and the expansion of existing facilities. Proposals which address the current projected shortage of primary school places will be particularly encouraged. Policy CS15 (Future needs of Kingston University, Kingston College, and Schools) of the LDF Core Strategy says that the Council will facilitate improvements to the school estate and make provision for a permanent increase in the number of school places to meet increasing demand through the expansion of existing schools and the provision of new schools.

15. The National Planning Policy Framework (para. 74) stipulates that "Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:

16. an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or

17. the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location;

18. or the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss".

19. The LDF Core Strategy recognises that school green space plays an important role in providing for play, sports, recreation and environmental activities and provides visual amenity within the locality. It sets out in Policy DM23 (Schools) that the Council will protect open space on school sites as shown on the Proposals Map and seek to ensure that school expansion proposals retain open space and that all options to re-organise/ expand schools within the existing built footprint are explored, with a presumption against a net reduction in open space. It provides criteria against which to assess proposals for school expansion, including:-

20. the size of the site, its location and suitability to accommodate expansion taking account of compatibility with surrounding uses and existing policy designations

21. the impact on green open space, games pitches, outdoor play and amenity space, taking account of the character of the area, whether the site is within an area of open space deficiency and whether the school has sufficient outdoor space for play and games

22. the location and accessibility of the site and 23. the extent to which the building design contributes towards the target

that schools should be zero carbon from 2016 24. Subject to the proposals complying with the detailed policies in the

Development Plan, there is no objection to the principle of development.


25. Policy DM11 of the LDF Core Strategy says that new developments will be expected to submit a character statement demonstrating how the development enhances the local character of the area. Where existing development lacks any cohesive character, the Council will seek a high quality development that creates its own distinctive character. The original school building contains a range of post-war detail and material including tile creasing in brick walls and clay tiles. It is limited in size and humble in stature. There is no distinctive style or building on the site, the more recent development having a melange of materials and styles.

26. In terms of character, the development as an entity lacks imagination and visual interest. Spatially, it is little more than a collection of three boxes containing two stands of classrooms, each classroom having one glazed wall to the outside and the opposite wall opening to the inside, to a corridor of toilets and stores. Three classrooms would open onto a 2.2m high hedge, 3m from the glazed wall, and a fourth would look onto a wall, 8m distant. Three of the classrooms would have a circulation route to and from 12no classrooms running 1m from their glazed wall.

27. In terms of appearance, the proposal is a scheme of linked rooms fitting into the gap between the existing school buildings and the south-west, boundary fence. The development would have little relationship to the more interesting, older school buildings. The proposed materials include areas of facing brick and render with aluminium windows and doors. The extent of render on the hall is considered insensitive in the context of finer grained surrounding brick buildings of the school.

Similarly, the hall proposes high level plastic panels which would be insensitive materials in the context of the school buildings. The roofs of the classrooms are proposed in felt, with no material specified for the hall roof or the roofs of the covered walkways. As the roofscape and walls will be prominent, both within the site and in the views from the surrounding houses, better quality materials such as; a standing seam roof material; the omission of plastic panels; a reduction in the amount of render; and the inclusion of detailing to the brick panels, would assist the appearance of the scheme and could be secured by condition.

28. The proposal is not an example of high quality design and will do little to lift the aspirations of pupils or enhance the character or appearance of the site or the wider area. However, the weight attached to this aspect of the development has to be considered against other material considerations set out in this report, not least the pressing need to provide teaching space for the intake of September 2014.


29. Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals will be expected to have regard to the amenities of occupants and neighbours, including in terms of privacy, outlook, sunlight/ daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance. The proposed classrooms and hall would be at least 18m from the rear walls of the houses 48-59 Archdale Place, and at least 31m from the houses on Kingston Road. The heights of the buildings are relatively modest with an eaves of 3.5m above ground and a ridge of 5.4m (6m including PV panels) above ground for the classrooms and 4.2m above ground to the flat roof of the proposed hall. The new buildings would not cause material loss of daylight or sunlight to surrounding neighbours. There is a boundary fence and boundary hedge approx. 2.2m high along the west boundary. The classrooms and hall would not therefore cause material overlooking to the surrounding neighbours. The classrooms and hall are enclosed spaces and unlikely to result in a material increase in noise towards neighbours above that expected of a school. The 2m deep extension to the kitchen would not cause a loss of residential amenity to the surrounding neighbours. In this respect, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

Highways & Parking

30. The Council has a range of Policies which manage car use to ensure sustainability, road safety and congestion reduction. Policy DM8 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012 encourages sustainable modes of transport and requires school development to develop and implement a Travel Plan. Policy DM9 requires major development to submit a Transport Assessment (TA).

31. Congestion: The TA suggests that in terms of traffic and congestion, the expansion is expected to generate 46 and 61 vehicular trips in the morning and afternoon school peak hours respectively. This would

result in a maximum increase of 33 and 22 vehicles along the Kingston Road during 08h00 - 09h00 and 15h00 - 16h00 hours respectively. The affected local roads (excluding the A2043 Kingston Road) are presently operating under capacity and would continue to do so as a result of the development.

32. School parking: In terms of parking provision on-site, the London Plan does not provide a car-parking standard for education use. There would be no expansion of the present car-park which provides a total of 28 spaces including one disabled, one for the school mini-bus and three dedicated for the Norbiton Children's Centre. There is no formal cycle or scooter parking for pupils or staff. The London Plan recommends that primary schools provide 1 cycle space per 10 staff or students, which would equate to 63 bicycle spaces.

33. Parent parking: There are limited parking restrictions in force on the majority of roads in close proximity to the school. There are around 300 legal parking spaces available around the school. In terms of parking impact, maximum demand is concentrated around a 45-minute period within the morning peak period (08h15 - 09h00) and a 15-minute period in the afternoon peak (15h00 to 15h15). With the additional trips the level of parking is unlikely to reach capacity. Impact could be significantly reduced following the implementation of the School Travel Plan which accompanies this application.

34. The majority of staff and pupils live within 1km of the site suggesting sustainable modes of travel are a realistic option. The applicant's School Travel Plan aims to:

• reduce the number of car journeys to the school

• increase the number of children who walk to school

• encourage cycling and

• promote the use of public transport

• It identifies numerous ways to meet the Plan objectives with key actions such as:

• Cycle parking

• Bling your bike

• Travel surveys

• Wheely Wednesday

• Investigate a walking bus

• Hold a walk to school week

• Investigate a parents' sheltered waiting area

• Promote the use of reflective clothing

• Book scooter training

• Investigate cycle and scooter parking on-site 35. Servicing: access for servicing will remain via the two vehicular only

accesses. It is anticipated that deliveries and servicing will take place outside peak hours with vehicles unloading from within the staff car-park. Given the increase in school roll, it is recommended that conditions be applied to secure the provision and details of cycle and scooter parking and for details of a delivery and servicing plan to be submitted before the completion of the new classrooms. A condition should be applied requiring the submission of an annual School Travel Plan Update on progress towards achieving its objectives. Subject to these conditions, the proposed development would not compromise highway safety, would not have an adverse impact on congestion, and

would contribute to the sustainable travel objectives of the Council, in accordance with Policies CS7, DM8 and DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

Trees

36. The impact of the development on trees would be limited. The English oak tree in the centre of the site which is considered a class 'A' specimen, would be retained. However, part of its root protection area would be under the proposed development. The willow tree in the south playground has been proposed for removal because it would impede construction access. However, an inspection by the RBK Tree Officer revealed that its health is poor and he recommends its removal. A group of 9no. cherry trees, and a horse chestnut tree which provide good visual amenity would be lost as a result of the development. The applicant has submitted a phasing plan indicating that construction traffic would cross under the canopy of the English oak. The existing mature hedge which is 2.2m high and on the west site boundary was proposed to be removed to enable construction access around the site. This hedge provides substantial screening to the houses to the west and would help to reduce the impact of the proposed buildings' proximity to this boundary. A condition is therefore recommended requiring its retention.

37. It is therefore recommended that conditions be applied requiring details of working methods and foundations for works in the vicinity of the English oak, as well as details of site protection during construction to protect the trees to be retained. In addition, a condition should be applied requiring mitigation planting for the group of cherry trees and horse chestnut tree which would be lost to the development, at a ratio of 2 (planted):1 (removed). It is also proposed that a condition be applied to secure the protection and retention of the west boundary hedge during construction. Subject to these conditions, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy.

Legal Agreements

38. There is no requirement for a legal agreement as a result of this development.

Sustainability

39. The London Plan 2011 in Policy 5.2 requires major development in the years 2013-2016 to meet the target of a 40% improvement on 2010 Building Regulations carbon dioxide emissions (the target from 2019 is zero carbon). In 2009, the Council adopted an Energy Strategy which aims to significantly reduce carbon emissions and energy use from Council operations. The Core Strategy confirms this commitment in Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design & Construction Standards), under which all new build developments over 500m2 are encouraged to

achieve a Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) rating of Outstanding. Outstanding is the most superior level of sustainable design, excellent falls below that, and very good below excellent.

40. The applicant has submitted a BREEAM pre-assessment which rates the development as 'Very Good'. Policy DM1 requires that where it is not possible to meet the standard, compelling reasons must demonstrate that achieving the standard would not be technically feasible or economically viable. No reasons justifying the departure from the policy have been submitted. The Energy Report submitted indicates that with a 27m2 array of PV cells, the development would achieve an overall reduction in CO2 of 25%, and the sustainability provisions in the application could be secured by appropriate conditions.

41. The proposed development falls short of the standards for sustainable design and reduction on carbon dioxide set out in regional and local policy. However, the weight attached to this aspect of the development has to be considered against other material considerations set out in this report, not least the pressing need to provide teaching space for the intake of September 2014.


42. Flood Risk: The site is in Flood Zone 1, so the primary flood risk comes from surface water flooding. The London Plan requires development to use sustainable urban drainage systems and suggests development should achieve greenfield run-off rates (typically 5l/s/ha) and ensure surface water run-off is managed as close to its source as possible. Policy DM4 (Water Management and Flood Risk) of the LDF Core Strategy requires development to include sustainable urban drainage systems and for development in flood zone 1 on sites greater than 1 hectare to submit a flood risk assessment addressing sources of flooding and climate change. The applicant has submitted a Drainage Strategy which shows that rainwater from the roofs and paved areas around the new buildings would be attenuated by an underground tank (200m3) to the south-east of the proposed buildings to hold the 1 in 100 year storm + climate change (30%) water. The surface water discharge is proposed to control to 6l/sec (the site has an area of 1.5ha). Surface water from the development would therefore not increase the rate of discharge into the public sewer, and this could be secured by condition. The proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM4 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

43. Ecological Impact: Policy DM6 of the LDF Core Strategy requires major development to provide an Ecological Assessment and to protect and promote bio diversity through sustainable drainage, tree planting, soft landscaping, habitat enhancement and green roofs and should include new or improved habitats. The development would result in the loss of an area of grassland, shrubs, vegetable beds, and a compost heap and areas of hardstanding. The applicant proposes a range of improvements to the School Wildlife Area and some bat boxes. Natural England raise no objection to the proposals. As a result of these mitigation measures there would be no significant negative impacts on

the conservation status of the habitats and populations of species associated with the site, in accordance with Policy DM6 of the LDF Core Strategy.

44. Security: Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy requires development to incorporate the principles of safe design to reduce the risk and fear of crime. The Metropolitan Police has offered suggestions on detailed aspects of the design which could be secured by condition. In this respect, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

45. Construction Management: There is likely to be some impact on the highway network and surrounding accesses and residential neighbours during demolition and the construction of the proposed development. It is recommended therefore to apply a condition requiring the submission of a Construction Management Plan, as well as a condition controlling the hours for site works. In this respect, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policies DM9 and DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

46. Loss of open space: The protection and disposal of school playing fields is covered by section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, and is outside the scope of this application. The matter in this application concerns general development and is governed by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Development Plan. The National Planning Policy Framework (para 74) stipulates that "Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:

47. an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or

48. the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or

49. the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss".

50. The LDF Core Strategy recognises that school green space plays an important role in providing for play, sports, recreation and environmental activities and provides visual amenity within the locality. It sets out in Policy DM23 (Schools) that the Council will protect open space on school sites as shown on the Proposals Map and seek to ensure that school expansion proposals retain open space and that all options to re-organise/ expand schools within the existing built footprint are explored, with a presumption against a net reduction in open space. It provides criteria against which to assess proposals for school expansion, including

51. the size of the site, its location and suitability to accommodate expansion taking account of compatibility with surrounding uses and existing policy designations

52. the impact on green open space, games pitches, outdoor play and amenity space, taking account of the character of the area, whether the site is within an area of open space deficiency and whether the school has sufficient outdoor space for play and games

53. the location and accessibility of the site and 54. the extent to which the building design contributes towards the target

that schools should be zero carbon from 2016 55. The site has an open area of playing field which includes a hard

surface area. The playing field has an expanse of approximately 70m x 60m, and an area of approximately 4000m2. It is not designated as school open space and the site is not in an area of open space deficiency. Nine houses to the north boundary of the site back directly onto the field, which provides them a degree of visual amenity. One of the two proposed classroom blocks would encroach into around one quarter of this playing field and truncate the remaining field into an L-shaped area. The other classroom block and the new hall would sit on land presently used for playground space. No assessment has been received justifying the loss of playing field land, open space and playground space or any mitigating factors in the arrangements for play and sport at the school as a result of the development. There is no confirmation that the school would retain sufficient open space for sport, recreation and play after the development. The applicant has been asked to provide the required assessments and justification. It was not available at the time of writing this report. Any submission will be reported as late material.

56. There would be no material loss of visual amenity to surrounding neighbours as a result of the development. The school is located centrally to its catchment and is accessible to its pupils and staff, and the design of the development goes some way to meeting sustainability targets. However,the amount of building footprint on the site after the proposed development would increase substantially. The amount of playing field, open space and playground space would be significantly reduced by the development. Considering the proximity of the surrounding houses, and the existing built footprint of the school and the proposed classrooms, the development would result in a school site with very marginal, open space and very limited playground space. No alternative layout options for the proposed accommodation have been submitted. Moreover, there has been no attempt demonstrated to develop a rational master plan for development at the school and the resulting character of the school after this development would tend towards one of overdevelopment.

57. Provision of school places: One of the principal material considerations in this application is the duty upon the Local Authority to provide school places for all children of compulsory school age. The proposed development is submitted to meet the projected, increased demand for primary school places in the area, by enlarging the school from 2 form entry to 3 form entry, with the first additional intake taking their places in September 2014, i.e. in six months. The weight accorded to the other material considerations identified in this report should be balanced against the pressing need for school places and the programme for the first intake of pupils who would be using the proposed classrooms, in six months time.

Recommendation:

Approve subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 3 years from the date of this decision.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country

Planning Act, 1990. (As amended)


5123450/A/1004/A Proposed Site Plan 06/12/2013

5123450/A/100x/x Proposed Elevations 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1006/A Proposed Floor Plans 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1005/A Proposed Block Plan 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1003/A Existing Elevations 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1001/A Existing Site Plan 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1002/A Existing Floor Plans 06/12/2013

FNG-KO2001 Topographic & Utility Survey 06/12/2013

Design and Access Statement 06/12/2013

Arboricultural Impact Assessment 06/12/2013

Mechanical and Electrical Survey 06/12/2013

Ecological Impact Assessment 06/12/2013

School Travel Plan 06/12/2013

Drainage Strategy 06/12/2013

Transport Assessment 06/12/2013

5123450/A/1008/A Proposed Dimensioned Site Layout

29/01/2014

Energy Statement 29/01/2014

Location Plan 29/01/2014

5123450/A/10007/A Proposed Elevations 29/01/2014

King`s Oak Primary School - Noise Survey Report 06/12/2013

King`s Oak Primary School - Noise Impact Assess 06/12/2013

Proposed Construction Phasing 24/01/2014

Sustainability Statement 17/02/2014


3 A sample of the facing materials, including windows, doors, roof coverings and walls to be utilised in the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works on site are commenced. The development shall then be built in accordance with these approved samples.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for

New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

4 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans additional detailed drawings of the masonry walling including decorative detailing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development is commenced on site.

Reason: In order that the special architectural and historic interest of this listed building is safeguarded in accordance with Policy CS8 (Character, Heritage and Design) and Policy DM 10 (Design Requirements for New Developments) of the LDF Core Adopted April 2012.


(a) A plan to a scale and level of accuracy appropriate to the proposal, that shows the positions, crown spreads and root protection areas (RPA) of the English oak tree, and on nearby ground or land adjacent to the site, in relation to the approved plans.






(g) Details and positions of any change in levels or the positions of any excavations within 5m of the root protection area of retained trees.


(i) Details of the working methods to be employed for the installation of drives, paths within the RPA's of retained trees in accordance with the principles of 'No Dig' construction. The details shall be in accordance with British Standard BS: 5837: 2005 sections 9.3, 9.2, 9, 11.7, 5.2.2 and 10 for requirements (c) to (h) inclusive.

The approved protection scheme shall be implemented prior to commencement of any work on site and maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority until the completion of the

development.


6 Before the end of the planting season immediately following completion of the development 18no. trees shall be planted within the curtilage of the site in accordance with details previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. If within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development that tree dies, is removed or becomes seriously damaged or diseased, it shall be replaced in the next planting season with another of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.


7 The 2.2m high hedge on the south-west boundary of the site and opposite 48-59 Archdale Place shall be retained and protected from damage during the construction works. If within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development the hedge dies, is removed or becomes seriously damaged or diseased, it shall be replaced in the next planting season with another of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.


8 The crime prevention design measures and specification set-out in the consultation response from the Metropolitan Police of 24 February 2014 and including:

(a) external doors and windows conforming to standard LPS1175 Issue 7 SR2, STS201, or STS202 BR2

(b) secure cycle parking, with separate facilities for staff, shall be provided within a roofed securable and lit building, secured during school hours and with stands which encourage locking of both wheels and cross-bar

shall be incorporated into the development and shall thereafter be retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local

Planning Authority.

Reason: To reduce the risk and fear of crime in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

9 The School Travel Plan submitted with the application shall be annually monitored and reviewed and an annual travel plan update report submitted to the Local Planning Authority for their approval. It shall contain the results of annually repeated staff and pupil travel surveys and demonstrate progress towards meeting the targets within the School Travel Plan.

Reason: To ensure that sustainable transport methods are promoted in accordance with Policy CS6 (Sustainable Travel) and Policy DM8 (Sustainable Transport for New Development) of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames LDF Core Strategy adopted April 2012.

10 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of secure cycle parking facilities for staff, students and visitors to, the school have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.


11 A Delivery and Servicing Plan demonstrating how servicing will be arranged and controlled shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development commences. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to safeguard the amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and to safeguard highway safety and the free flow of traffic in accordance with Policies DM9 (Managing Vehicle Use for New Development) and Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

12 All works on site shall take place in accordance with a Construction Management Plan which shall include, as a minimum, the following details which shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work:

(a) Provision for loading/unloading materials.


(c) Temporary site access.

(d) Signing system for works traffic.









13 The sustainable urban drainage system and surface water attenuation scheme submitted with the application shall be implemented as part of the development and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and pollution and increase the level of sustainability of the development and to comply with Policy CS1 (Climate Change Mitigation) and DM04 (Water Management and Flood Risk) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

14 The development shall be constructed in accordance with details as set out in the Energy Statement (January 2014) by Messrs. Atkins to ensure that the development meets BREEAM standard 'Very Good and the outlined sustainability measures including a 26.7% CO2 reduction from the Part L 2010 target emission rate.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation as set out in Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy.

15 Prior to construction of the development a BREEAM Very Good interim design-stage assessment certificate shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to confirm the targeted rating as set out in the pre-assessment report can be achieved and in the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and

Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

16 A final BREEAM Very Good post-construction report must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to occupancy of the development, and within 6 months of the completion of the development.

Reason: In order to confirm the targeted rating as set out in the pre-assessment report can be achieved and in the interests of sustainability and energy conservation in accordance with Policies 5.2 (Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions) and 5.3 (Sustainable Design & Construction) of the London Plan (July 2011) and Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

17 The site and building works required to implement the development shall be only carried out between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays.


Informative(s)

1 In dealing with the application the Council has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive way. We have made available detailed advice in the form or our statutory policies in the Core Strategy, Supplementary Planning Documents, Planning Briefs and other informal written guidance, as well as offering a full pre-application advice service, in order to ensure that the applicant has been given every opportunity to submit an application which is likely to be considered favourably.




Address: 171-173 KINGSTON ROAD, NEW MALDEN, SURREY, KT3 3SS



Ward: Beverley Description of Proposal: Demolition of existing office buildings and public

house, and erection of four to six storey building with 328 bedspace student accommodation, incorporating 165 cycle parking spaces and new landscaping.



13-S004-003 Energy Statementv3 Received 19/04/2013

Accommodation and Area Scheduled Report Received 17/12/2013

Arboricultural Constraints Report Received 15/05/2013

Archaeological Based Assessment Received 15/05/2013

D0-001 P1 Location plan Received 15/05/2013

D01-002 Site Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-100 P1 Proposed Ground Floor Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-101 P1 1st Floor Plan Received 11/02/2014

D01-102 P4 2nd Floor Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-103 P4 Proposed Plans 3rd Floor Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-104 P4 Fourth Floor Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-105 P4 5th Floor Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-106 P4 Proposed Roof Plan Received 17/02/2014

D01-200 Proposed elevations Received 11/02/2014

D01-201 P4 Proposed Elevations 01, 02 Received 17/02/2014

D01-202 P4 Proposed Elevations 03, 04 Received 17/02/2014

D01-203 P4 Proposed Section Elevation 05, 06 Received 17/02/2014

D01-204 P4 Elevation 07, 08 Received 17/02/2014

Daylight & Sunlight report Received 15/05/2013

Design & Access Statement Received 15/05/2013

Drawing Category Sheet Received 17/02/2014

Elevation Details Received 17/12/2013

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Received 15/05/2013

Final TA_19 04 13_Complete Received 19/04/2013

Noise Assessment Received 19/04/2013

Odour Assessment Received 15/05/2013

Office Marketing Report Received 19/04/2013

Planning Statement Received 19/04/2013

Property Marketing Report Received 17/12/2013

D01-200 P4 Proposed Context Elevations 01, 02 Received 17/02/2014

Elevation and Material Details Received 21/02/2014

Report on Daylight within development Received 15/05/2013

ROL_6892_01_105 Daylight Distribution Contours Proposed

Received 17/12/2013


Received 17/12/2013


Received 17/12/2013

S01-001 P1 Existing plans site plan Received 17/05/2013

Statement of Community Engagement Received 15/05/2013

The Wellington Agent Report Received 17/12/2013

Transport Note Received 17/12/2013

Tree Constraints Plan Received 15/05/2013

BASIC INFORMATION


Development Plan:


Policies

LONDON PLAN JULY 2012 LP 3.16 Protection and enhancement of social inf LP 4.1 Developing London’s economy LP 4.2 Offices LP 4.4 Managing industrial land and premises LP 5.1 Climate change mitigation LP 6.13 Parking LP 6.9 Cycling LP 7.3 Designing out crime LP 7.4 Local character LP 8.2 Planning obligations LDF CORE STRATEGY CORE POLICIES CS 01 Climate Change Mitigation CS 06 Sustainable Travel CS 08 Character, Heritage and Design CS 09 Waste Reduction and Management CS 10 Housing Delivery CS 11 Economy and Employment CS 15 Future Needs of Kingston University, Kin LDF CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DM01 Sustainable Design and Construction Stan DM06 Biodiversity

DM08 Sustainable Transport for new Development DM09 Managing Vehicle Use for New Development DM10 Design Requirements for New Developments DM11 Design Approach DM13 Housing Quality and Mix DM17 Protecting Existing Employment Land and DM24 Protection and Provision of Community Fa LDF CORE STRATEGY IMPLEMENT POLICIES IMP3 Securing Infrastructure


11/14154/FUL Erection of additional part one and part two floors and elevational alterations to include balconies to facilitate conversion of extended buildings into 39 flats (10 x 1 bedroom, 18 x 2 bedroom and 11 x 3 bedroom)

Refuse Full Application 30/12/2011

Consultations

1. Neighbour Notification - Site And press notices have been displayed and 197 neighbours have been notified - 8 individual objections have been received raising the following concerns:

• There is no need for student accommodation in the surrounding area.

• Overdevelopment of the site.

• Excessively high and bulky building.

• Lack of car parking leading to an increase in existing on-street car parking problems.

• Prejudicial to highway safety.

• Anti-social behaviour.

• Noise and disturbance.

• Increase in litter.

2. A petition of objection with 119 signatures has also been received raising the following concerns:

• Increase in existing on-street car parking problems.

• Prejudicial to highway safety.

• Increase in traffic and congestion.

3. Five individual responses of support have also been received raising the following points:

• The proposal will enhance the local area and start the regeneration of Kingston Road.

• Loss of a public house which is considered to cause a nuisance to some neighbours.

• The proposal will benefit local businesses.

4. Climate Change and Sustainability - no objection subject to conditions requiring a revised pre-assessment report detailing how BREEAM Outstanding will be targeted and an interim design stage certificate prior to commencement and a final BREEAM certificate prior to occupation being attached to any permission granted.

5. Designing Out Crime Officer - the gates to the escape route and the public footpath should be designed to prevent climbing, forced entry or the gate being removed from its hinges. The area should be lit, in view of habitable rooms and covered by the CCTV. To ensure the security in that area the gate to the alleyway should be constructed of steel and meet LPS 1175 security rating 2.

6. Environmental Health - Objection on the grounds that it has not currently been demonstrated satisfactorily that the proposal would provide adequate mitigation against noise and odours generated by the adjoining vehicle report workshop.

7. London Fire and Civil Defence Authority - no objection to the proposal.

8. Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer - no objection subject to a Section 278 relating to highway works and the inter-site student bus service being secured in perpetuity and being secured by way of a S106 legal agreement to mitigate against the lack of parking provision in the proposal and conditions relating to sustainable drainage, visibility, working scheme, Construction Management Plan and a Travel Plan and informative relating to crossover alterations and highway cleaning being attached to any permission granted.

9. Thames Water - no objection to the proposal.

10. Trees and Landscape - no objection subject to a landscaping condition being attached to any permission granted.


11. The application site lies to the north of Kingston Road within the St John's Industrial Area, classified by the Council's LDF Core Strategy as a Locally Significant Industrial Site (LSIS). It is currently occupied by two vacant 4 storey office blocks (constructed in the early 1980's), known as Charlton House and Clear House, located on the western part of the site and by a detached two-storey (with accommodation in the roofspace) public house, known as the Duke of Wellington, located on the eastern part of the site.

12. To the north of the site is a vehicle repair workshop and a Jewsons (builders yard/contractors), which both front Wellington Crescent. To the west lies 2 storey commercial units with residential dwellings beyond and to the east lies Crown House, a 6 storey residential block of affordable housing units. On the opposite side of Kingston Road to the south are a row of small shops with residential accommodation above (Nos. 180 to 186 and Nos. 188 to 196) within the Kingston Road W Local Centre, the Carpet Right and Furniture Village stores (Class A1) and two-storey residential

properties within Springfield Place, Dunbar Road, Beresford Road and South Lane West.

13. The application site has is an existing vehicular access onto Kingston Road with car parking for 33 vehicles at the rear of the site, part of which is undercroft, below Clear House. The existing public house also has a large car park to the rear accessed from Kingston Road.

14. The site is not listed and is not within a conservation area. There are also no protected trees on the site. Kingston Road itself is part of the Strategic Cycling and Walking Network.

Proposal

15. The application is for the demolition of existing office buildings and public house and the erection of a 4 to 6 storey building providing 328 bed spaces of student accommodation. The proposed new flat roofed building would extend the length of the site frontage, with a rear 'wing' extending northward into the site. It would be set back by 1.6 metres (at its nearest point) from both the eastern boundaries with Crown House and Nos. 175 to 181 Kingston Road and between 1.15 and 1.56 metres (at its nearest point) from the northern boundary with the vehicle repair workshop and would step down from east to west, such that the building would be 4 storeys in height (approximately 13 metres) at the western boundary and 6 storeys at the eastern boundary (approximately 15.4 metres).

16. The 4 to 6 storey building would be set back between approximately 1.4 and 8.2 metres from the front boundary facing Kingston Road and would measure between approximately 13 to 18.4 metres in height. It would have 3 elements constructed in Wienerberger 'Trinity Cream Multi Gilt Stock' and 'Smoked Yellow Multi Gilt Stock' brickwork with black aluminium double glazed windows and doors with colour glazed panels and a diamond and silver coloured polyester powder coated sheet/strip metal roof.

17. The building would be accessed from Kingston Road with a reception, ancillary offices, a gym, lounge and study areas provided at ground floor area and a mixture of 4 to 8 bedroom cluster rooms and studios on the ground and upper floors each being ensuite and having shared kitchen and lounge facilities. Lift access would be provided at both the eastern and western ends of the building.

18. Of the 328 units proposed, 26 are proposed to be 1-bedroom studio units (16.3 to 30sq. metres in floor area and 7.9% of the total), 17 are proposed to be 1-bedroom disabled student units (20.5 to 30sq. metres in floor area and 5.2% of the total) and 285 are proposed to be 1-bedroom ensuite bedrooms (12.8 to 15sq. metres in floor area and 86.9% of the total with all being disabled accessible).

19. To the rear of the building, 4 courtyard/common garden space areas would be provided together with a refuse storage area and a total of 165 cycle parking spaces, of which 112 would be secure storage within a building. No vehicle parking is proposed (other than dedicated parking to

serve some of the disabled units) with an access/drop off/turning area located centrally within the frontage and to the rear of the building accessed from Kingston Road.

20. Two student shuttle bus stops would be provided to the front of the site on Kingston Road. A shared escape route would also be retained to the rear of the building between it and the vehicle repair centre to the north enclosed by a 2.1 metre high fence on its southern side.

21. New tree planting is also proposed along the Kingston Road frontage and to the side and rear boundaries. Areas of soft landscaping would also be provided to the immediate rear of the proposed building.

Assessment

22. The main considerations material to the determination of this application are:





• Trees


• Sustainability



23. The application proposes the loss of a public house, defined as a community use within the Council's LDF Core Strategy, and nearly 2,120sq. metres of Class B1 office floorspace in the St John's Industrial Area, which is classified by the LDF Core Strategy as a LSIS.

24. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is very explicit about securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity. Paragraph 19 is clear that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system and the guidance goes on to say that local authorities should plan proactively to meet the development needs of business and support an economy fit for the 21st Century. Nevertheless, the guidance also says that planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose.

25. Policy 3.16 of the London Plan states that London requires additional and enhanced social infrastructure provision to meet the needs of its growing and diverse population. Where proposals result in a loss of facilities (such as public houses) in an identified area of need, with no realistic prospect of re-provision the policy advises boroughs to resist

them. Bullet point E of the policy goes on to say that boroughs should ensure that adequate social infrastructure is made to support new development and that reasonable steps to identify alternative community uses where the current use is no longer needed should be considered.

26. Policy 4.1 of the London Plan also encourages the promotion and development of a strong, sustainable and increasingly diverse economy across all parts of London. This should be done by ensuring the availability of sufficient and suitable workspaces in terms of type, size and cost. The policy also seeks to promote outer London areas such as Kingston as attractive office locations for national government as well as businesses.

27. Policy 4.2 of the London Plan also directs local authorities to enhance the environment and offer of London's office locations in terms of physical attractiveness, amenities, ancillary and supporting activities as well as services, accessibility, safety and security. It states that strategies should be put in place to manage long term, structural changes in the office market, focusing new capacity where there is strategic, as well as local evidence of demand, encouraging renewal and modernisation in viable locations and supporting changes of surplus office space to other uses.

28. Policy 4.4 of the London Plan defines Kingston as a Borough of “restricted transfer” which means that there are low levels of industrial and employment land relative to demand and that a more restrictive approach to use transfer is recommended. This position concurred with the findings of the Council's Employment Land Review, 2008.

29. The Employment Land Review forms part of the evidence base for the Core Strategy of the Local Development Framework. The study provides a clear evidence base for safeguarding the Council's existing industrial and other related employment sites, by identifying the low level of vacancy of employment/industrial land in the Borough and the existing demand for such space. The data further provides the necessary evidence that underpins the Council's policies ensuring that they are up to date and relevant to market conditions.

30. Accommodating current and future needs for such land is therefore an important consideration. Given Kingston has been classified as having low levels of employment/industrial land relative to demand it has been classified as a London borough that should restrict the transfer of industrial and employment land to other uses. Local evidence outlined in the Employment Land Review 2008 supports this policy stance (pages 5 and 6).

31. Policy DM17 of the LDF Core Strategy does, however, give an element of flexibility to change of use applications concerning industrial and employment land. But this flexibility is entirely dependent on sound and rigorous marketing that has been conducted over a period of up to 2 years (stating that there is no quantitative and qualitative need for a range of industrial/employment uses on that

site). Only if this marketing exercise is satisfactory will a change of use will be considered.

32. An additional consideration when assessing the loss of office accommodation is the recent Government changes to permitted development legislation. On 30th May 2013 Part 4, Class J of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) came into force which allows for the conversion of office accommodation into residential accommodation, subject to considerations on flood risk, highways and land contamination.

33. Policy DM24 of the LDF Core Strategy further states that the net loss of community will be resisted unless there is evidence to suggest the facility is no longer needed; where appropriate, it has been vacant or marketed for a community use without success, or it can be re-provided elsewhere or in a different way.

34. Evidence has been submitted with the application to show that the office buildings have been marketed, in a variety of ways, and on flexible terms, since 2004. This has not yielded any firm interest from potential owners or occupants.

35. Since 2004, four commercial property agents have undertaken an extensive marketing campaign to find tenants for the subject properties, Clear and Charlton House, without success. This marketing has included the following:

• Production of a marketing brochure.

• Agency board displayed on the parapet above the main entrance.

• Brochure details circulated to an extensive database of applicant enquiries plus local and West End commercial property agents.

• Mailing undertaken and targeting local occupiers.

• Advertising undertaken.

36. The properties were offered in varying sizes from 140 sq ft up to 22,824 sq ft and on flexible lease terms to suit occupational needs from prospective tenants. The properties were also offered on competitive rental terms providing a fully inclusive rental package if required. Despite this, no tenant was found during a period in excess of 8 years.

37. Feedback from the tenants that were approached suggests that the main obstacle for considering these properties was the limited specification; the properties do not provide sufficient DDA compliance; are unattractive and dated in appearance and that they are not situated in a recognised office location. It should also be noted that when the properties were constructed in the mid 1970's there may well have been some focus on the area as an office centre with a prominent construction group occupying a large office building close to the subject property.

38. However, the group subsequently relocated elsewhere and their former office building was permitted a change of use for total residential occupation. As pointed out in the marketing report, the group cited a number of issues for remaining these properties which included issues over staff recruitment, poor amenities, vandalism and that this was an unsuitable location for office occupation. The properties were also marketed to owner occupiers, but the only interest received was from potential developers for residential conversion. Other potential end users, such as educational or hotels, considered the location to be unsuitable for their requirements.

39. In conclusion, the marketing report concludes that the properties are redundant for office occupation with tenant office occupiers requiring space that offers a good range of communications and an infrastructure of retail, restaurants and leisure pursuits for their staff, all of which cannot be fulfilled in this location.

40. It is therefore considered that sound and rigorous marketing conducted over a period of up to 2 years (stating that there is no quantitative and qualitative need for an industrial/employment use on the application site) has been submitted to justify the loss of employment land within this designated LSIS.

41. Evidence has also been provided in the form of a marketing assessment and accompanying schedule to show that the financially viable operation of the public house ceased in June 2012 and the public house has been marketed without success since August 2012. The marketing has included the following:

• Agency board displayed.

• Marketing particulars circulated on a targeted mail shot basis (over 65 parties).

42. Merlin Inns Limited vacated the premises in June 2012 when their lease expired. They had been paying a rent of £69,000 per annum. Due to previous poor trading levels, a guide rent of £37,500 per annum was set but this failed to attract any serious interest.

43. Since August 2012, only two enquiries were received from interested parties. Neither of those enquiries resulted in firm interest. In March 2013, the freeholder of the public house was forced to let the premises at a concessionary rent of 20.8% (£7,800 per annum) of the guide rent and for a short lease term of six months (to avoid closed house costs). This arrangement is not, however, financially viable to the freeholder in the longer term and is simply a short term measure to reduce the cost burden of the premises.

44. It is considered that satisfactory marketing and financial evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that there is no demand for occupation of the public house at a realistic rental level. As further background information it is also noted New Malden is well served by 9 public houses, such as The Prince of Wales at No.279 Kingston Road, The Fountain at No.120 Malden Road, within 300 metres and 700 metres of the application site.

45. As such, the loss of the public house and employment land proposed is considered to be in accordance with the NPPF, Policies 3.16, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 of the London Plan and Policies DM17 and DM24 of the LDF Core Strategy.

46. The Council's Housing Strategy 2011 to 2015 'Providing a long-term strategic housing framework to plan and deliver improved housing for the people in Kingston' highlights that students represent an important component of the population in Kingston and make an important contribution to the local economy and the vibrancy of the Borough as a place. Many students are housed in the private rented sector but there is a requirement for additional purpose-built accommodation for students, which is important in providing a focus for engagement with the wider community and allows for the exercise of the duty of care to students.

47. The London Plan also notes that the importance that London universities potential growth is not compromised by inadequate provision for new student accommodation. It notes also the uncertainties over future growth in the London student population and its accommodation needs, also that new provision may reduce pressure on other elements of the housing stock currently occupied by students, especially in the private rented sector.

48. Kingston University's accommodation strategy is subject to the EU Procurement Regulations (OJEU) process. The University have issued a Published Prior Information Notice of 23 November 2011 (PIN) advising that they are seeking approximately 1,250 additional bed spaces to serve as student halls of accommodation. Individual sites are expected to typically accommodate a minimum of 200 bed spaces, and completed development should be deliverable by or before August 2014. Bidders will be required to provide the site, accommodation and potentially property management services.

49. On 28 June 2012 the University published a further Information Notice for Student Accommodation Provision. It confirms that the University Accommodation Strategy 2011-2014 is seeking an additional 2,500 units through direct provision and through agreement with private developers. It recognises that given the limited amount of available building space within the borough, that halls of residence may be built

to all sizes and scales in various locations, categorised as small (up to 100 student rooms), medium (100 to 400 rooms) and large (more than 400 rooms). It specifies that for "Medium" scaled hall proposals such as currently proposed the facilities should "ideally consist of cluster flats of between four and eight bedrooms with some studio provision also possible."

50. Kingston University (KU) currently has around 2,700 'managed' student bed spaces. The overall University student population is in the region of 20,000. Since 2003/04, its aim is to provide a bed space in managed student accommodation for all 1st year students (mainly undergraduates) who need one. In addition, KU leases around 150 houses (circa 600 bed spaces) for 2nd & 3rd year students from private landlords (Source: KU Student Residential Accommodation Strategy 2009/11).

51. The University (Feb 2011) reviewed the number of bed spaces in the light of the proposed changes to higher education and confirmed that 2,500 was still a requirement. Additional background information on Kingston University Student Accommodation Strategy, as based on the Council's response to the LDF Hearing (2011) is set out below:

(a) Of those students eligible to apply for halls accommodation and who have unconditional firm offers, demand exceeds supply by approx 40% i.e. in 2010 there were over 3,500 applications for around 2,500 halls places.

(b) In 2010, there were over 400 students on the halls priority waiting list who qualified for a place, living over 10-15 miles away.

(c) Over 2,200 students were refused halls places in 2010 because they lived within 10 miles of the University over half of which, given the choice, said they would take up a place if offered one to avoid lengthy and costly travel.

(d) Home and EU postgraduates are not eligible for places - over half of the EU students alone (approx 250) said they would apply for halls given the choice.

(e) The figure sought only covers first year students but the reality is that many (approx 40%) 2nd and 3rd year students, given the choice, would opt to return to halls for the security and stability they offer. This has the potential to add a further 4,400.

(f) Up to 150 non full year F/T students (student abroad exchanges etc) each year have to be put up in lodgings, a number of which could be put up in halls if places were available.

(g) Adding all these together, potential demand could be >6,000 but KU consider 2,500 is reasonable and realistic bearing in mind possible drop in demand arising from the funding changes.

(h) KU remains near the bottom of the rankings tables in terms of the number of bed spaces/students it offers compared to other universities in the London area.

52. It should be noted that some of the above figures date from 2010 and recent changes in legislation have resulted in changes in student

numbers. The Planning Department is currently undertaking a review of student accommodation demand. Nevertheless, the University clearly have a demand for additional student accommodation.

53. Paragraph 6.163 of the LDF Core Strategy reiterates the above by stating that the Council and University have identified a need for an additional 2,500 managed student bed spaces. Provision has been made for around 500 bed spaces within Kingston Town Centre and for 300 bed spaces within the Hogsmill Valley adjoining the existing Clayhill Campus. There is a remaining need for 1,700 bed spaces.

54. An assessment of recent student housing completions, approvals, current undetermined applications and pre-applications shows that the need for 1,700 bed spaces has not been met and therefore this proposal for 328 units will assist with meeting the needs of the University. Whilst the University's preference is for future provision to be on sites with at least 200 bed spaces, smaller sites also have a role to play and the potential to contribute towards meeting the needs for managed student accommodation. Sites should be suitably located, with good access to the existing campus.

55. Policy CS15 of the LDF Core Strategy recognises this shortfall of managed student accommodation for Kingston University and the impact that this has on the local housing market. As such, it advises that the Council will continue to work with the University to help deliver suitable managed student accommodation within appropriate sustainable locations such as Kingston Town Centre.

56. The application site is within a location which has a PTAL rating of 2 -

Poor and is approximately 1 mile from Kingston Town Centre and Kingston University. It has easy access to the local bus network and the proposal would extend the University student bus shuttle service to the site. The principle of the demolition of the existing office and public house buildings and provision of student accommodation on the site is considered to be in accordance with Policy CS15 and would not in itself conflict with any policies within the LDF Core Strategy subject to it complying with other relevant policies in the Strategy.


57. Policies CS8 and DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy further advise that proposals should relate well to their surroundings and be of a high standard of design to achieve a more attractive, sustainable and accessible environment.

58. This part of Kingston Road is characterised by a variety of design styles and forms with a mixture of buildings ranging in storey height from two to six storeys. The commercial/industrial buildings located to

the rear of the site in Wellington Crescent are predominantly 2 storeys in height. Charlton House and Clear House are currently both 4 storeys and the Wellington Public House is 2 storey with accommodation within its roofspace.

59. The application is for the demolition of the existing office buildings and public house and the erection of a 4 to 6 storey building providing 328 bed spaces of student accommodation. The proposed new flat roofed building would extend the length of the site frontage, with a rear 'wing' extending northward into the site. It would be set back by 1.6 metres (at its nearest point) from both the eastern boundaries with Crown House and Nos. 175 to 181 Kingston Road and between 1.15 and 1.56 metres (at its nearest point) from the northern boundary with the vehicle repair workshop and would step down from east to west, such that the building would be 4 storeys in height (approximately 13 metres) at the western boundary and 6 storeys at the eastern boundary (approximately 15.4 metres).

60. The 4 to 6 storey building would respect the prevailing building line on the northern side of Kingston Road being set back between approximately 1.4 and 8.2 metres from the front boundary facing Kingston Road and measuring between approximately 13 to 18.4 metres in height. It would have 3 elements constructed in Wienerberger 'Trinity Cream Multi Gilt Stock' and 'Smoked Yellow Multi Gilt Stock' brickwork to break up its mass with black aluminium double glazed windows and doors with colour glazed panels and a diamond and silver coloured polyester powder coated sheet/strip metal roof.

61. The proposed building would be similar in height to Crown House to the east and would have a similar relationship as the existing office building to the 2 storey Nos. 175 to 181 Kingston Road to the west. The top floor would be set back from the main front elevation and the building would have a strong vertical rhythm with a coherent rooftop form. The proposal would act as a transition between the more densely developed 6 storey Crown House, Kingston Road to the east and the 2 storey suburban houses of Kingston Road to the west. The design, scale and mass of the proposed development would sit comfortably with neighbouring properties and would not appear out of character within the context of Kingston Road which has a variety of design styles, forms and building heights.

62. As such, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policies CS8 and DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy.


63. Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy seeks to safeguard residential amenities in terms of privacy, outlook, sunlight/daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance.

64. The nearest residential properties are located in Crown House,

Kingston Road to the east, on the opposite side of Kingston Road, Nos. 180 – 196, to the south and beyond the commercial building, Nos. 175 to 181 Kingston Road, to the north west. The proposed building would be set back by 1.6 metres (at its nearest point) from the eastern boundary and would be located approximately 5.5 to 22.5 metres from Crown House building itself. At its closest point to the eastern boundary, the proposed building would not project beyond the front or rear elevations of Crown House. The nearest windows within Crown House to the eastern boundary serve bedrooms and kitchens/living rooms.

65. The houses located beyond the commercial building, No. 175 to 181 Kingston Road, to the northwest would be approximately 27 metres away from the proposed building, which would not project beyond either the front or rear elevation of the nearest house, No.183 Kingston Road. With respect to the residential accommodation above the shops to the south on the opposite side of Kingston Road, the proposed building would be set back by approximately 19 metres.

66. In terms of noise and general disturbance, a noise survey and assessment has been carried out and submitted with the application. The assessment identifies that the existing noise climate is largely dominated by road traffic, particularly from Kingston Road and the Kingston Bypass. There is also intermittent noise emanating from the adjoining vehicle workshop and its extraction fans to the north of the site. The assessment does not identify any potential noise and disturbance concerns for neighbouring residential properties from the development.

67. The proposed student residence would have 24 hour, on-site wardens and an entry system at all doors and gates. The buildings and grounds would be permanently monitored internally and externally by CCTV cameras to ensure both illegal activity and anti-social behaviour are kept under control. In order to address the concerns raised by local residents in relation to potential anti-social behaviour and noise and disturbance from students, the applicant has agreed to a condition being attached to any permission granted requiring the approval of a detailed Student Management Plan as part of any S106 legal agreement. This should include the following:

• Details of how the student accommodation will operate.

• Measures that will be taken to reduce the incidences of anti-social behaviour.

• Measures that will be taken to reprimand students who behave in an antisocial way.

• Arrangements for the management of traffic/parking at the beginning and end of term.

• Daily arrangements to control access and egress of pedestrians,

cyclists and vehicular traffic or measures to generally regulate the use of vehicles.

• Details of CCTV monitoring arrangements within the site (including monitoring of site entrances).

• Details of wardening/security presence.

• Arrangements for the creation of a 24 hour contact telephone number so that residents can contact the halls of residence if they have any matters they wish to be brought to the university's attention

• Increased signage in the locality - requesting that users of the street do not disrupt the peace of the neighbourhood.

• Details of what measures will be put in place to discourage those students, who may own a car, from parking on surrounding roads.

68. A Daylight and Sunlight Report has also been provided with the

application which considers the impact of the proposed development on the nearest residential properties at Nos. 192-196 Kingston Road, Nos.1-4 Springfield Place and Crown House, Kingston Road. The report advises that the impact on the windows of the neighbouring properties at Nos. 192-196 Kingston Road, Nos.1-4 Springfield Place would be acceptable and would adhere to the BRE Guidance.

69. Given the siting of the building on the site and the distances to the neighbouring residential properties at Nos. 175 to 181 and Nos. 192-196 Kingston Road and Nos.1-4 Springfield Place, it is considered that there would be no significant impact in terms of loss of daylight and sunlight to these neighbouring residential properties. The proposal does not breach either the '25 degree' or '45 degree' tests, as taken from the habitable room windows of these properties, in compliance with British Research Establishment (BRE) guidance.

70. Similarly, the proposal would not appear overly dominant or oppressive when viewed from the above neighbouring residential properties in Kingston Road and Springfield Place and is appropriately sited to ensure no adverse impact in terms of outlook or privacy.

71. With respect to the residential properties at Crown House, the Daylight and Sunlight Report confirms that there are 16 flats that have windows within the western flank elevation facing the application site. Of the 53 rooms assessed, 46 rooms adhere to the BRE Guidance with a total of 7 rooms retaining less than the recommended figure of 0.8 times the former daylight distribution value. Of these 7 rooms, 5 of the rooms are bedrooms and 2 are living room/diners.

72. The report states that the proposed development would have a noticeable impact on the daylight received to 2 out of the 16 flats (Flats 6 and 12) that have windows within the western flank elevation. Whilst one of these windows is a secondary window to a first floor living room/kitchen which receives a satisfactory level of daylight by way of a further window within the southern front elevation, the other

is the sole window of a ground floor bedroom to Flat 6. The daylight to this bedroom would be seriously diminished to the detriment of the occupiers of Flat 6.

73. Similarly, sited between 5.4 - 11 metres and being 6 storeys in height at its closest point to the eastern boundary, the proposal would appear overly dominant and oppressive when viewed from the nearest windows within the western flank elevation of Crown House closest to the boundary with the application site. This is considered to result in an oppressive and dominant feature to the detriment of the outlook of the habitable rooms within the western flank of Crown House.

74. As such, the proposed development, by reason of its scale, design and proximity to the boundary with Crown House, would result in a dominant and oppressive feature which would be detrimental to the outlook and daylight of these neighbouring residential occupiers. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy. Standard of Accommodation for Future Occupiers

75. The proposal has been designed to comply with Kingston University's 'Student Accommodation Provision' specifications. These specify that for medium scale student hall proposals (from 100 to 400 rooms) the proposed development should

76. The proposal has been designed to comply with Kingston University's ‘Student Accommodation Provision' specifications. These specify that for medium scale student hall proposals (from 100 to 400 rooms) the proposed development should ideally consist of cluster flats of between four and eight bedrooms with some studio provision also possible. Each flat should have adequate communal space to allow its residents to socialise and eat together. The proposed development should comprise largely of study bedrooms with ensuite bathrooms, however some consideration could be given to budget models with some sharing of facilities. The proposed development should include amenity and communal space.

77. The Council’s Residential Design SPD sets out general design principles and internal space, outdoor space, car and cycle parking standards for student housing. It advises in Policy Guidance 46 that for medium (100-400) halls, key requirements are:

• The provision of mainly cluster flats of typically between four and eight en-suite bedrooms.

• The provision of a proportion of accessible bedrooms and servicing facilities in accordance with appropriate standards and regulations.

• Each cluster flat should have adequate communal space to allow residents to socialise and eat together.

• Designed with good security and safety in mind, including 24-hour security and linked CCTV system and access controls.

• A management suite facility (both open, e.g. reception and private, e.g. office) for use by the hall management team.

• Adequate communal facilities (e.g. television, pool tables etc) and amenity space.

78. With respect to internal space standards, the Residential Design SPD

advises that cluster flats should include an ensuite study bedroom

with a minimum 12–14sq. metre gross internal area. Accessible study

bedrooms should meet all relevant Part M building regulations and

kitchen/diners must have natural light and ventilation and be built to

an approximate ratio of 4sq. metres per resident and be no smaller

than 20sq. metres. The minimum floor to ceiling height should be 2.5

metres between finished floor level, however, a finished ceiling level

of 2.6 metres is considered desirable with higher ceiling heights

encouraged at ground floor level and in communal areas.

79. Studio flats should have a minimum gross internal area of

approximately 20sq. metres. In general individual access cores

should serve no more than ten studio flats per floor and an access

control system should be provided at the main front door. Open,

informal recreation or amenity space for students to meet and

socialise, undertake group work activities in an informal setting or sit

in quiet contemplation must also be provided as an integral part of the

overall development from the outset and should be proportionate to

the size of development and the context of the site. The spaces

should be easily accessible to all residents and located to optimise

privacy, be orientated to benefit from natural sunlight, and be well

landscaped.

80. The proposal would provide a mix of 26 x 1-bedroom studio units

(16.3 to 30sq. metres in floor area), 17 x 1-bedroom disabled student

units (20.5 to 30sq. metres in floor area) and 285 x 1-bedroom

ensuite bedrooms (12.8 to 15sq. metres in floor area with all being

disabled accessible). The proposal would provide a reception,

ancillary offices, a gym, lounge and study areas at ground floor area

and a mixture of 4 to 8 bedroom cluster rooms and studios on the

ground and upper floors with each being ensuite and having shared

kitchen and lounge facilities. Lift access would be provided at both the

eastern and western ends of the building.

81. To the rear of the building, 4 courtyard/common garden space areas

would be provided together with a refuse storage area and a total of

165 cycle parking spaces, of which 112 would be secure storage

within a building. No vehicle parking is proposed (other than

dedicated parking to serve some of the disabled units) with an

access/drop off/turning area located centrally within the frontage and

to the rear of the building accessed from Kingston Road.

82. From the internal floor plans provided, each of the proposed units

would be of a satisfactory size and would receive an adequate level of

natural light and outlook. A BRE Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing

Assessment has been provided with the application to demonstrate

that the proposed units would receive a satisfactory level of light and

that the intended shared communal amenity space areas to the rear

of the building would not be unduly overshadowed.

83. The proposal has been designed so that the nearest ground and first

floor bedroom windows within the northern and western elevations

would be positioned between approximately 9.4 to 14.4 metres from

the northern boundary with the vehicle repair workshop. A shared

escape route, enclosed by a 2.1 metre high fence on its southern

side, would also provide separation between the proposed ground

floor courtyard/common garden space and the vehicle repair

workshop.

84. Noise and odour assessments have been submitted with the

application, which conclude that, subject to careful design, adequate

sound insulation measures can be readily incorporated within the

scheme to achieve acceptable noise levels in line with BS8233 at the

site. The principal method of noise and odour mitigation proposed

would be appropriately specified glazing and ventilation systems. It is

suggested that the windows sited nearest to the vehicle repair

workshop are non openable to prevent unreasonable levels of noise

and odour entering these properties.

85. It is further recommended that these rooms are mechanically

ventilated with the atmospheric air intake being located so that it does

not draw odorous air from the Coachworks or air with elevated

pollution levels from traffic on the Kingston Road into the

properties. The specification of the surrounding external building

fabric is not known at this stage, however, this could be conditioned to

provide a sufficient level of sound insulation to maintain the overall

performance of the façade through the use of a variety of standard

building materials and constructions were the application to be

granted.

86. The Council's Environmental Health Section is currently objecting to

the application on the grounds that it has not been demonstrated

satisfactorily that the proposal would provide adequate mitigation

against noise and odours generated by the adjoining vehicle report

workshop.

87. Although the submitted acoustic report provides a scheme to achieve

satisfactory internal noise levels (requiring some windows to remain

closed) it does not provide predicted noise levels at facade, so it is

difficult to know precisely how loud the extraction plant at the

Coachworks is and what noise reduction is required.

88. The odour report makes similar recommendations to that of the

acoustic report, that being, those windows indentified as Zone C

(closest to the northern boundary) in the acoustic report should have

non openable windows to prevent unreasonable levels of odour

entering these properties. It is further recommended that these rooms

are mechanically ventilated with the atmospheric air intake being

located so that it does not draw odorous air from the Coachworks or

air with elevated pollution levels from traffic on the Kingston Road into

the properties. The report indicates that the cause of this odour is

discharged air from the “Junair” spray booth located just 5 metres

from the nearest proposed property.

89. The acoustic report does not indicate how much each of the 3 extract

ducts at the Coachworks contribute to the overall measured noise

level, however, given it is the “Junair” duct that is the greatest

contributor, the Environmental Health Section have suggested that

the simplest resolution to address potential noise and odour concerns

would be to relocate the discharge point of this duct further away,

perhaps by the other 2 ducts. They have requested that the

applicant’s noise consultant provide advice on whether by relocation

alone, without the provision of acoustic attenuation, a satisfactory

noise reduction could be achieved. An update to the odour report has

also been requested seeking the opinion of the odour consultant as to

whether this relocation would also achieve a satisfactory reduction in

odour exposure.

90. Despite some works, such as the blocking up of entrances, being

shown on the drawings submitted, it is unclear whether any works

have been agreed with the owner of the vehicle repair workshop to

the north of the site to mitigate against potential nuisance from noise

and odour from its commercial operations. This would provide an

opportunity to re-design the extract ventilation plant to reduce noise

and odour at source.

91. The Council’s Environmental Health Section has, at present,

requested that these mitigation measures be agreed with the owners

of the workshop and secured by way of a legal agreement. Subject to

this and above additional information being provided, the

Environmental Health Team has confirmed that they would remove

their objection. If this were the case, it is requested that conditions

relating to traffic noise and noise from nearby commercial activities,

site working hours, plant noise, air quality and land contamination and

informatives relating to land contamination and environmental

nuisance be attached to any permission granted.

92. Officers are currently in negotiation with the applicant with a view to

addressing the above concerns. Subject to these being addressed,

the proposal would in this respect be in accordance with Policy DM10

of the LDF Core Strategy. Further details will be presented as late

material.

Highways & Parking

93. Policies DM9 and DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy seek to ensure that new development has regard to local traffic conditions and does not contribute to congestion or compromise highway safety.

94. The application site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level of 2 (Poor) and is not particularly well served by public transport. The existing waiting and loading restrictions on Kingston Road outside the site are ‘7am to 10am and 4pm to 7pm’ Monday to Saturday, on the western half, and ‘7am to 7pm’ Monday to Saturday on the eastern half.

95. The surrounding roads to the site are not within a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ), but both Dunbar Road and Beresford Road have a Resident Permit Parking scheme in place, which effectively manages the daytime parking. The remaining roads around the proposal site do have parking pressure of their own, but most of the roads closest to the site, i.e. Springfield Close, Georgia Close, Oregon Close and Nevada Close, all have areas of off-street parking with some on-street parking provision. Wellington Crescent, Apsley Road and Leigh Close, do not and for the most part they are of a very different nature with Industrial units.

96. California Road and Willow Road are also close to the development site, and there are pedestrian links through to Georgia Close, which would make those roads attractive to park in. Windrush and England Way are also within 500 metres of the site, which is considered to be close enough to park/walk to the site.

97. There are no specific parking standards with regard to student accommodation in the London Plan. The Residential Design SPD does, however, specify in paragraph 5.2 (Policy Guidance 46) that where student accommodation is located in an area that does not have a CPZ, that “a level of parking within the site should be provided so as not to create additional parking on nearby roads to the disadvantage of residents”.

98. There is also no specific car parking standard within the Council’s Sustainable Transport SPD, however, based on previous sites and surveys relating to Kingston University student accommodation, it appears to be 1 per 5 to 10 rooms. This would equate to a provision of between 33 and 66 car parking spaces for the proposal.

99. The Council’s Sustainable Transport SPD notes in Paragraph 5.58 that a reduced provision of parking spaces from the parking requirement will not normally be acceptable on sites with PTAL’s of between 1 and 3. This is because alternative means of travel are not as readily available as at sites with a higher PTAL. It is noted that Kingston University are, however, looking to promote developments that discourage the use of vehicles, and that primarily the Council’s Residential Design SPD and Sustainable Transport SPD both seek to promote car-free developments.

100. The proposal would provide no car parking (other than dedicated parking to serve some of the disabled units). No details of this provision has been provided with the application, however, the applicant has confirmed that this would be located close to the paved open amenity space/vehicular turning bay towards the centre of the site. Cycle parking for 165 bicycles would be provided to the rear of the building, of which 112 would be secure storage within a building. An access/drop off/turning area would be located centrally within the frontage and to the rear of the building accessed from Kingston Road. Two student shuttle bus stops would also be provided to the front of the site on Kingston Road.

101. A Transport Assessment has been submitted with the application which concludes that the potential amount of vehicles being parked on surrounding roads for the student accommodation would be less than that for the office accommodation as currently approved. Whilst this may be the case, it is considered that the office accommodation would operate predominantly during the daytime, whilst any parking by students would be similar to residential parking, and take place at all

times, including the evenings and at weekends. The Assessment concludes that the proposed development will not have a significant or detrimental impact upon the local transport network.

102. The application site is in an area that has very limited on street car parking provision for residents, and where on street parking is already heavily subscribed. The lack of off-street car parking for the proposal could result in added pressure for residents parking provision in the area, particularly during the evenings when existing demand from residential parking is at its highest.

103. In order to address concerns relating to the lack of car parking provision, the following mitigation measures are proposed:

• The Kingston University inter-site student shuttle bus service would be extended to the site.

• Students would be made aware that there is no parking available on the site and car parking on surrounding areas would be actively discouraged.

• A lay-by would be provided on Kingston Road for student arrivals/departures and other loading activity.

• A consultation would be undertaken with local residents with respect to the introduction of a CPZ and the applicant would enter into a S106 legal agreement with the Council to limit future occupants from obtaining a permit for any future CPZ that may be introduced.

104. The applicant has also indicated that any tenancy agreement with

the students will prevent them from bringing motor vehicles to the

application site, but this would need to be expanded to cover roads

within 1km of the site.

105. At present, the details associated with the shuttle bus service

provision is not clear, and it is considered essential that this facility

should be provided, and attached to this development in perpetuity to

serve the student facility. The timetabling, funding requirements,

operational support and infrastructure requirements to operate the

service would need to be agreed before any approval is sought. This

could be achieved as part of any Section 106 legal agreement

attached to any permission granted.

106. The proposal indicates that a bus lay-by would be constructed on the

north side of Kingston Road, outside the main entrance to the site.

There are a number of potential issues relating to this proposal, as set

out below:-

• The lay-by is on the public highway and would displace the footway in this section of Kingston Road, and as such the applicant will need to make provision for a new 2.0 metre footway behind the bus lay-by, which will be dedicated as public highway.

• The position of the lay-by would result in accommodation works to RBK and private infrastructure on the public highway, the costs of which will need to be established and borne by the applicant.

• These works would result in the loss of two mature street trees, re-positioning of street lighting column, alterations to statutory undertakers cabinets and chambers. It is also highlighted that the works may require diversions and lowering of statutory undertaker’s plant and equipment, and any costs associated with this element of the works are at the applicant’s expense.

• The positioning of the shuttle bus bays and the tapers may result in the need for the zebra crossing to be relocated and this would need to be assessed on receipt of detailed design layouts. If relocation is required the applicant would be responsible for all associated costs with the relocation.

• The applicant would need to demonstrate where students would be expected to wait for the bus. Given that there are 330 units, there could be large numbers of students obstructing the footway unless provision is made within the site for a waiting area at the eastern end of the site.

• All works associated with the provision and construction of the bus lay-by and new site entrance would require a separate Section 106 legal agreement.

107. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has no objection to the proposal subject to the above mitigation measures being put in place and by the above concerns being clarified by condition and within the S106 legal agreement to ensure that there would be no related parking, congestion and traffic issues associated with the development. The development site includes adequate space for refuse collection and service deliveries within the site, and it is accepted that this area would also be used for the students to load and unload at the start and end of term times.

108. To support a car free development, the applicant would provide £25,000 as part of the Section 106 agreement to fund consultations on Permit Parking Proposals for all the roads listed above. These consultations and implementation would need to be subject to local support and an approval from the Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committee. It recommends that an initial consultation is carried out prior to the commencement of the works on site, along with further consultations following completion of the site works.

109. On this basis, the Council’s Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer

considers that the applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated that no car parking provision, other than for some of the disabled units,

is appropriate for this location and would provide a safer and more manageable development.

110. The Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer has requested that conditions relating to the approval of a Student Accommodation Management Plan (including how students will be discouraged from having cars), a travel plan (to help encourage students, staff and visitors to the application site to travel to and from it by non car modes), Construction Management Plan, a working scheme, disabled car parking, visibility, a sustainable urban drainage system and informatives relating to vehicle crossover alterations and highway works being attached to any permission granted.

111. The Travel Plan should include a package of measures which supports a car free environment, and as a minimum this will include the provision of information on local bus services, and cycle routes, and provision of shower and storage facilities. The travel plan would also make it clear that students would not be able to bring their vehicles to the site or use the surrounding roads. Where Permit Parking schemes are in place they would never be eligible to apply for a permit. Monitoring and review shall include the submission of an annual travel plan update report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority, demonstrating progress towards meeting targets. The monitoring and targets set out within it would be secured as part of a Section 106 agreement.

112. Subject to the above conditions and a Section 106 agreement securing the matters set out below, the proposal would not have any significant adverse impact on the local highway network or result in pressure on existing on street parking to the detriment of the amenity of the surrounding area. As such, the proposal would in this respect be in accordance with Policy 6.13 of the London Plan and Policies CS7, DM9 and DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy.

Trees

113. Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy states that the Council will

expect new development to ensure that trees that are important to the character of the area or covered by Tree Preservation Orders are not adversely affected. Where trees are to be lost through development the Council will normally require the planting of two specimens for each tree lost.

114. The proposal would result in the loss of 2 street trees that would be removed as part of the proposal. The Council's Trees and Landscape Section have raised no objection to their removal subject to the trees being replaced and a condition requiring the approval of a landscaping scheme. Subject to this, the proposal in this respect would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy.

Legal Agreements

115. A S106 legal agreement would be required to secure contributions (totalling £233,100) towards health and social care facilities (£65,600) and sustainable travel/sustainable environment (£167,500) (this includes £3,500 for a Full Travel Plan) within the Borough in consultation with the Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer and in with accordance with the Council's adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (Planning Obligations SPD), which forms part of its Local Development Framework (LDF).

116. The agreement would also require that best endeavours be made for Kingston University Students to have exclusive rights on the accommodation; a stipulation that the University student shuttle bus service proposed be provided in perpetuity; a consultation as set out above being undertaken with local residents with respect to the introduction of a CPZ and should a positive response be shown a contribution towards its implementation (£25,000); and that the highway works required in connection with the proposed shuttle bus lay-by, including any relocation of services and pedestrian crossings, be secured by way of a Section 278 agreement. Subject to such an agreement being provided, the proposal would be in accordance with Policy IMP3 of the LDF Core Strategy.

Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

117. The proposal is liable for Mayoral CIL at a rate of £35 per sq.

metre on the net increase in gross floorspace proposed.

Sustainability

118. The proposed development would need to demonstrate compliance with the Mayor's Sustainability Strategy for reducing carbon emissions and the buildings energy demand through the use of sustainable design strategies. The development would normally be expected to achieve BREEAM 'Outstanding' for energy and BREEAM 'Excellent' overall in accordance with the requirements of Policy 5.2 of the London Plan and Policy DM1 of the LDF Core Strategy unless it could be demonstrated that this were not feasible in which case a financial contribution towards climate change mitigation may be considered appropriate.

119. No objection has been raised by the Council’s Climate Change and Sustainability Section to the proposal subject to conditions requiring a revised pre-assessment report detailing how BREEAM Outstanding will be targeted and an interim design stage certificate prior to commencement and a final BREEAM certificate prior to occupation being attached to any permission granted.

120. The Energy Statement submitted with the application states that the development has been design to achieve BREEAM 'Excellent'. Subject to the above conditions suggested by the Climate Change and Sustainability Section in accordance with the requirements of Policy 5.2 of the London Plan and Policy DM1 of the LDF Core Strategy.


121. There are no other material considerations in relation to this application.

Recommendation:

Refuse for the following reason:

1 The proposed development, by reason of its scale, design and proximity to the eastern boundary with Crown House, would result in a dominant and oppressive feature which would be detrimental to the outlook and daylight of the occupiers of the flats which have windows within the western flank wall of Crown House facing the application site. The application is therefore contrary to Policy DM10 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy, Adopted April 2012.

Informative





Address: ST ANDREWS AND ST MARKS PRIMARY SCHOOL, MAPLE ROAD, SURBITON, KT6 4AL



Ward: St Marks Description of Proposal: Erection of 2 storey detached classroom block;

erection of single storey extension to main building and covered walkway to proposed classroom block. Erection of multi use games area with astro turf play area. Siting of new cycle parking area. Removal of existing temporary classroom module.



1000/A Location plan Received 20/01/2014

1001/A Existing site plan Received 23/01/2014

1002/A Existing floor plans Received 23/01/2014

1003/A Existing elevations Received 20/01/2014

1004/C Proposed site plan Received 21/02/2014

1005/A Proposed floor plans Received 20/01/2014

1007/A Proposed elevations Received 20/01/2014

1008/A Proposed section Received 20/01/2014

10117-02 Elevations Received 20/01/2014

10117/01 Topographical survey Received 20/01/2014

Arboricultural Impact Assessment Received 20/01/2014

BRUKL Output document Received 20/01/2014

Cycle Shelter Received 23/01/2014

Design & Access Statement Received 20/01/2014

Drainage Statement Received 20/01/2014

Ecology Input to BREEAM Received 20/01/2014

Energy Study Received 20/01/2014

Geo-environmental desk top study Received 20/01/2014

Noise Survey Report Received 20/01/2014

School Travel & Accreditation plan Received 20/01/2014

Sustainability Statement Received 20/01/2014

Transport Statement Received 20/01/2014

BASIC INFORMATION


Development Plan:


Policies

LONDON PLAN JULY 2012 LP 2.8 Outer London: transport LP 3.18 Education facilities LP 5.13 Sustainable drainage LDF CORE STRATEGY CORE POLICIES CS 01 Climate Change Mitigation CS 02 Climate Change Adaptation CS 03 The Natural and Green Environment CS 06 Sustainable Travel CS 07 Managing Vehicle Use CS 08 Character, Heritage and Design CS 15 Future Needs of Kingston University, Kin LDF CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DM01 Sustainable Design and Construction Stan DM04 Water Management and Flood Risk DM06 Biodiversity DM08 Sustainable Transport for new Development DM09 Managing Vehicle Use for New Development DM10 Design Requirements for New Developments DM11 Design Approach DM12 Development in Conservation Areas and Af DM23 Schools


05/16383/FUL Erection of 2 x cycle storage shelters Permit 5 Year Condition 21/09/2005

11/16067/FUL Erection of 2no. single storey modular classrooms with covered walkway


12/16430/FUL Demolition of existing lean-to. Erection of canopy and replacement link walkway between main school and rear modular classroom

Not proceeded with 17/10/2012

12/16598/FUL Erection of walkway canopy and link to rear classrooms.


94/0005/FUL Erection of portable classroom and relocation of shed


96/7237/FUL Erection of single storey extension to provide reception area


99/07136/FUL Renewal of Permission 94/0005, for the retention of portable classroom and retention of shed.


1051 Use for purpose of C of E Primary School

Consent by Minister (Pl/4422/223/7) 28/09/1966

9189 Erect infants' school Deemed permission 14/01/1972

Consultations

1. Neighbour notification: 195 neighbours were notified on 30 January 2014. Two site notices were displayed on 06 February 2014 and a newspaper notice published on 14 February 2014.

2. 2no. objections have been received from neighbours complaining of loss of light and outlook to Maple School and loss of the Maple School playground during the construction works;

3. One letter of support has been received. 4. Additional comments received prior to Committee will be reported as

late material. 5. The applicant held a public consultation event in the early evening of

14 January 2013 and in the morning of 15 January 2013. The applicant reports that 25-30 residents visited the consultation event and there was a lot of support for the proposals. Concerns expressed included loss of play space, highways and parking impact, impact on Maple Infants' School as a result of the construction disruption and contractor access, impact on flats in Dolphin Close, and overshadowing of Maple Infants' School.

6. Sport England: Recommend the multi-use games area is designed in accordance with Sport England guidelines.

7. Natural England: Responded with no objections. 8. Environment Agency: See flood risk standing advice. 9. RBK Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer: No objections. Awaiting

outstanding survey data. Recommend provision of 1no. disabled parking space in existing car-park, conditions for a construction management plan, details of cycle and scooter parking, and an annual school travel plan update.

10. RBK Tree Officer: Request details of levels and surfacing materials in Astroturf area so as to reduce any impact on the health of the protected trees.

11. RBK Climate Change and Sustainability: While BREEAM Outstanding is the required performance level it may be difficult to achieve, so BREEAM Excellent is a more suitable standard. The development would achieve BREEAM Very Good. It should achieve a 40% reduction in CO2 but would actually achieve a 25% reduction. Recommend standard conditions for Very Good and 25% reduction.

12. Metropolitan Police: Recommend specifications for secure doors and

windows. Avoid conflict of CCTV and walkway, avoid canopies offering climbing aid. Request details of illumination of MUGA and MUGA gate design details. Recommend cycle parking provided and secured and roofed and in view of school offices. Consider separate staff bicycle storage and scooter parking. Recommend full Secure by Design accreditation is sought.

13. RBK Early Years and Childcare Partnership: No comments received as of 26 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

14. RBK Borough Environmental Health Officer: No comments received as of 26 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

15. RBK Sports, Education & Leisure: No comments received as of 26 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.

16. Surbiton Conservation Area Advisory Committee: No comments received as of 26 February 2014; comments received prior to Committee will be reported as late material.


17. The application site is on the east side of Maple Road, a site which is enclosed on 3 sides. Maple Infants School lies directly to the south. To the north, beyond a wall approx. 2m high, lies a block of flats with a car-park to the rear, as well as the existing house no.98 Maple Road. To the east, 10m distant, is a 6-storey block of flats, Crescent Court, and next to it, the car-park to the Surbiton Masonic Hall. To the south-east boundary lies a range of lock-up garages and two terraces of storey flats in Dolphin Close. The school grounds are largely hardscape with a limited amount of green space, and some mature trees. The buildings on site are not listed, however, the eastern boundary of the site adjoins the Claremont Road Conservation Area.

Proposal

18. The application is in connection with proposals to expand the present capacity of St.Andrew's and St.Mark's School from 2-form entry, to 3-form entry, with the first additional intake commencing in September 2014. It seeks planning permission for the erection of a 2-storey building to contain 8no. classrooms in the south-east corner of the site, the demolition of a temporary building containing 2no. classrooms whose temporary consent (11/16067/FUL) expires in June 2018, and the relocation of the multi-use games area to the north boundary, upon the site of the 2no. temporary classrooms. In addition, the existing hall would be extended 3m to the rear and a covered walkway would be erected to link the new classroom block to the school building. A cycle shed would be provided in the frontage of the School close to the north boundary. The capacity of St.Andrew's and St.Mark's would increase from 240 pupils to 360 pupils.

Assessment






• Trees


• Sustainability



19. London Plan Policy 3.18 says that proposals which enhance education and skills provision will be supported, including new-build, and the expansion of existing facilities. Proposals which address the current projected shortage of primary school places will be particularly encouraged. Policy CS15 (Future needs of Kingston University, Kingston College, and Schools) of the LDF Core Strategy says that the Council will facilitate improvements to the school estate and make provision for a permanent increase in the number of school places to meet increasing demand through the expansion of existing schools and the provision of new schools.

20. The National Planning Policy Framework (Para 74) stipulates that "Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:

1) an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or

2) the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or

3) the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss".

21. The LDF Core Strategy recognises that school open space plays an important role in providing for play, sports, recreation and environmental activities and provides visual amenity within the locality. It sets out in Policy DM23 (Schools) that the Council will protect open space on school sites as shown on the Proposals Map and seek to ensure that school expansion proposals retain open space and that all options to re-organise/ expand schools within the existing built footprint are explored, with a presumption against a net reduction in open space. It provides criteria against which to assess proposals for school expansion, including:

1) the size of the site, its location and suitability to accommodate expansion taking account of compatibility with surrounding uses and existing policy designations

2) the impact on green open space, games pitches, outdoor play

and amenity space, taking account of the character of the area, whether the site is within an area of open space deficiency and whether the school has sufficient outdoor space for play and games

3) the location and accessibility of the site and 4) the extent to which the building design contributes towards the

target that schools should be zero carbon from 2016 22. Subject to the proposals complying with the detailed policies in the

Development Plan, there is no objection to the principle of development.


23. Policy DM11 of the LDF Core Strategy says that new developments will be expected to submit a character statement demonstrating how the development enhances the local character of the area, and where existing development lacks any cohesive character, the Council will seek a high quality development that creates its own distinctive character.

24. In terms of scale the proposal would sit awkwardly in the context of the single storey Maple Infants' building which is single storey. Nothing save the omission of one storey in height, or the reconfiguration of the block would reduce the impact on Maple Infants' School. St.Andrew's & St.Mark's School is a 2-storey building with a flat roof, and whilst the number of storeys of the proposed block would not be out of place in relation to the St.Andrew's & St.Mark's School building, its displacement from the main building, combined with its height, would make it more 'the centre of attention' on the site than the main school building. This increases the importance of a high standard of design for the proposed block. The heights of the buildings on the surrounding sites vary, being generally at least 2 storeys high. The proposed block in this scale context would not be out of place.

25. In terms of character, the main school building has an understated, non-descript appearance of simple, red brick and glazing, typical of its era of construction. It is a neutral, background building, but it possesses an integrity and simplicity which makes it a building. The surrounding buildings are made from a variety of materials and exhibit varied architecture which stimulates interest and a degree of distinctiveness in the environment.

26. The proposed development uses a 'crude', modular system which restricts the use of imagination. The resulting block lacks imagination and visual interest - it is little more than an enclosure to the boxes within - there is little relationship between the classrooms and the surrounding landscape and the block form does not relate to the surrounding enclosure. Given the wide variety of materials surrounding the site and the block's displacement from the main building, there is no imperative to 'match' or to 'blend-in' in either form or materials. Indeed, the size and isolation of the proposed block prevent it from blending into the background. Despite this opportunity, the use of render and brick on the proposed block form makes for a dull, lifeless appearance and exacerbates the lack of interest in the form, fenestration and detail of the building. In terms of appearance, the

proposal is a box containing eight boxes which just fit into the gap at the south of the site between the boundary fences. Being remote from the school it would be 'linked' by an enclosed walkway which pronounces its disjointed location from the school building. The form of the block has no relationship to the site, its topography or its constraints and opportunities. The proposal is not an example of high quality design and will do little to lift the aspirations of pupils or enhance the character or appearance of the site or the wider area. However, officers have sought improvements to the proposals and as a result conditions to secure alternative, higher quality external finishes have been added and to include some planting to be trained up the walls of the block. The weight attached to the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area has to be considered against other material considerations set out in this report, not least the pressing need to provide teaching space for the intake of September 2014.


27. Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals will be expected to have regard to the amenities of occupants and neighbours, including in terms of privacy, outlook, sunlight/ daylight, avoidance of visual intrusion and noise and disturbance.

28. The Masonic Hall is between 50m and 60m distant from the proposed development and separated by a row of deciduous trees. It uses the ground adjoining the school boundary as car-park. It would not be affected by the proposed development.

29. The location of the new multi use games area (MUGA) would be almost adjacent the east boundary brick wall, and the flats in Crescent Court. There is no indication of any proposed enclosing fences or nets above this wall. There would therefore be no loss of privacy or light as a result of the relocated MUGA. As a result of the MUGA, part of the field closest to Crescent Court would become more intensely used, but the use would not be out of character with the day-to-day school use of the field, and would be retained in the control of the school. There would be no loss of residential amenity to these neighbours as a result of the development.

30. The recent development of flat blocks at 100-104 Maple Road would be similarly exposed to potential noise from the relocated MUGA adjacent to the north boundary of the site, after the removal of the temporary consented classrooms on that boundary. Despite the location of the MUGA close to the north boundary, the use of the school site for games and sport activities by school children would not cause these neighbours any adverse impact in terms of noise, or light. The MUGA could be conditioned to control its use by non-school users, and to control any floodlighting.

31. The closest flats in Dolphin Close are Nos. 13 and 14 (on the ground floor and first floor). They have kitchen, bathroom and bedroom windows on both ground and first floor facing the development, 16m from the proposed classroom block. The Building Research Establishment test for daylight impact confirms that the ground floor flat would not suffer adverse loss of daylight. As the proposed

development is north of Dolphin Close, it would not suffer loss of sunlight. There would be a change in the outlook from the windows in the front wall of these flats. It is noted that the windows facing the development are kitchen, bathroom and bedroom and therefore less sensitive than primary living space. The impact of the proposed building16m distant with a height to eaves of 7m and a height to ridge of 9m would reduce the outlook from the ground floor bedroom. However, as the affected space is not a principal living space, there would be insufficient harm caused by the development to residential amenity to warrant refusal of the application.

32. The elevation of the classroom block wall facing 13-14 Dolphin Close would contain first floor classroom windows with cills at low level, which would risk causing a loss of privacy to the bedrooms of Nos.13 and 14 Dolphin Close. It is noted that school use is less intense and more controlled than residential use may be, however, a separation distance of 16m at first floor level is significantly below the minimum distance recommended (21m) in the RBK Residential Design Guide Policy 16. There is thus the potential for the loss of privacy to flats 13 and 14 Dolphin Close. As the window design is understood to be intrinsic to the 'Connect' system of construction, a condition requiring the obscuring of windows in the elevation to Dolphin Close is considered to overcome the overlooking risk.

33. There is a high level window in the flank wall of the proposed classroom block facing Dolphin Close. A first floor plan is awaited in order to assess what lies behind this window, but because of the distance from Dolphin Close (approx. 25m) and the oblique relationship, its impact on surrounding neighbours would be insignificant.

34. The proposed block would be between 18.5m and 33m from the rear wall of Maple Infants' School, and as close as 1.2m to its playground. The playground to Maple Infants' School is concentrated at the back of the site, the side playground having been developed with 2no. temporary classrooms which expire in May 2015 and July 2015. This remaining open space is therefore a concentrated playground and all the more sensitive to development around it. The proposed classroom block has been assessed against the Building Research Establishment test for impact on existing windows and found not to cause material adverse impact on the daylight entering the east wall of Maple Infant's School. It would cause a reduction of morning sun into the east wall of Maple Infants' School and playground. It would have an impact on the outlook from the windows in Maple Infants' School and change the outlook from its playground from an open east aspect to a more enclosed aspect with a dominating form in the east horizon. However, mitigating against the impact on the outlook from Maple Infants' School windows and playground is the fact that the proposed classroom block would be for an educational use, and the playground is used only intermittently, and for the purposes of play. Whilst the proposed block would introduce a 2-storey form on a confined site in an urban area, its impact on the outlook from the playground of Maple Infants' School, and its impact on the outlook and privacy of Nos.13+14 Dolphin Close, are not beyond commonly accepted standards. Subject to the conditions identified, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

Highways & Parking

35. The Council has a range of policies which manage car use to ensure sustainability, road safety and congestion reduction. Policy DM8 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012 encourages sustainable modes of transport and requires school development to develop and implement a Travel Plan. Policy DM9 requires major development to submit a Transport Assessment (TA). The applicant has submitted an outline TA, with a supplementary paper to be added after parking surveys and other information is complete.

36. The Transport Statement refers to vehicle speeds and parking in the area but the survey data is not available, Section B.3.3 of the Transport Scoping report confirms that these surveys will be undertaken. These surveys are important to establish the current situation, especially where the 13% of pupils that are driven to school and the 12% that park and stride to school park. The traffic speed data will be helpful in determining if any additional measures are required within the vicinity of the school to reduce vehicle speeds.

37. School parking: In terms of parking provision on-site, the London Plan does not provide a car-parking standard for education use. Only one third of staff travel by car. There would be no expansion of the present car-park which provides a total of 14 spaces (for both St.Andrew's & St.Mark's and Maple Infants' School). There is cycle parking presently for 20 bikes. The London Plan recommends that primary schools provide 1 cycle space per 10 staff or students, which would equate to 40 bicycle spaces (360 pupils and 40 staff).

38. Congestion and parent parking: The TA reveals that most pupils live within half a mile of the site and over half of all pupils walk to school. The surrounding roads include controlled parking zones and the present number of car-trips and parking demand on the highway network in the immediate vicinity of the school is minimal. There would be an additional 11 car trips on roads in the immediate vicinity of the school as a result of the development (9 for pupils and 2 for staff). In addition there would be a further 7 car trips on the wider highway network associated with 'Park and Stride' journeys. The TA estimates that 41 cars park on the surrounding roads at the start and end of the school day. With the same mode, the proposed development would result in 49 cars parking on surrounding roads. Impact from parking and congestion could be significantly reduced following the implementation of the School Travel Plan which accompanies this application, which aims to:

• reduce car use from 27% to 20%

• increase walking from 54% to 62%

• and has initiatives planned for the current academic year including:

• school trip by sustainable transport

• walk to school week

• bike training

• junior road safety officers to be appointed 39. Servicing: Deliveries and servicing arrangements will remain

unchanged from the existing arrangements.

40. Given the increase in school roll, it is recommended that conditions be applied to secure the provision and details of cycle and scooter parking to be submitted before the completion of the new classrooms. A condition should be applied requiring the submission of an annual School Travel Plan Update on progress towards achieving its objectives. Subject to the conditions identified, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM8 and Policy DM9 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012

Trees

41. Ten sycamore trees on the east boundary and a tree on the site of the proposed classrooms would be lost as a result of the development. The proposed location for the MUGA and astroturf area would require the lime trees and sycamores and tree of heaven to have mitigation works in their root protection areas.

42. It is therefore recommended that conditions be applied requiring details of the construction of the MUGA and astroturf surfaces, as well as working methods and foundations for works in the vicinity of the trees in the area of the proposed MUGA and astroturf area, as well as details of site protection during construction to protect the trees to be retained. In addition, it is recommended that a condition be applied requiring mitigation planting for all trees which would be lost to the development, at a ratio of 2 (planted):1 (removed). Subject to the conditions identified, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

Legal Agreements

43. There is no requirement for a legal agreement as a result of this development.

Sustainability

44. The London Plan 2011 in Policy 5.2 requires major development in the years 2013-2016 to meet the target of a 40% improvement on 2010 Building Regulations carbon dioxide emissions (the target from 2019 is zero carbon). In 2009, the Council adopted an Energy Strategy which aims to significantly reduce carbon emissions and energy use from Council operations. The Core Strategy confirms this commitment in Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design & Construction Standards), under which all new build developments over 500m2 are encouraged to achieve a Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) rating of Outstanding. Outstanding is the most superior level of sustainable design, excellent falls below that, and very good below excellent.

45. The applicant has submitted a BREEAM pre-assessment which rates the proposed development as 'Very Good'. Policy DM1 requires that where it is not possible to meet the standard, compelling reasons must demonstrate that achieving the standard would not be technically

feasible or economically viable. No compelling reasons justifying the departure from the policy have been submitted, though it is understood that sharing the existing school services presents difficulties in achieving high scores. The Energy Report submitted indicates that with two options, the development would achieve an overall reduction of 25% of CO2. Conditions could be applied to secure the proposed standards.

46. The proposed development falls short of the standards for sustainable design and reduction of carbon dioxide set out in regional and local policy. However, the weight attached to this aspect of the development has to be considered against other material considerations set out in this report, not least the pressing need to provide teaching space for the intake of September 2014.


47. Flood Risk: The site is outside any fluvial flood risk zone, so the primary flood risk comes from surface water flooding. The London Plan requires development to use sustainable urban drainage systems, and Policy DM4 (Water Management and Flood Risk) of the LDF Core Strategy requires development to include sustainable urban drainage systems.

48. The applicant has submitted a Drainage Strategy which shows that the proposed sports pitches would result in the formation of 734m2 of impermeable area in place of 344m2 existing. The new block, hall extension and covered walkway would be built on existing paved areas. The design proposes surface water drainage by soak away, subject to ground conditions, or alternatively, via connecting to public sewers with 30% attenuation via a 32m3 water storage tank for the 1 in 100 year plus 30% climate change event, which could be secured by condition. Surface water from the development would therefore not increase the rate of discharge into the public sewer. Subject to the condition identified, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM4 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

49. Ecological Impact: Policy DM6 of the LDF Core Strategy requires major development to provide an ecological Assessment and to protect and promote biodiversity through sustainable drainage, tree planting, soft landscaping, habitat enhancement and green roofs and should include new or improved habitats. The existing site is assessed as having a low ecological value, with nesting birds being at risk from the development. The applicant proposes a range of ecological improvements to the School including Bury Buckets for Beetles, Butterfly Feeders, maintaining bird boxes and the environmental garden. As a result of these mitigation measures there would be no significant negative impacts on the conservation status of the habitats and populations of species associated with the site. The proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM6 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

50. Security: Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy requires development to incorporate the principles of safe design to reduce the risk and fear of crime. The Metropolitan Police has offered suggestions to improve the security of the proposal by ensuring a secure standard of doors and

windows, the covered walkway not to conflict with CCTV or promote climbing, and for the MUGA to provide a panic latch release to the MUGA gate (to open outwards) and with a closing mechanism, as well as a bolt hole from the MUGA to prevent bullying. The Police also advise that staff bike parking should be separate from pupils', and that bike stores should be secure and roofed. These aspects of the development could be conditioned to secure a reduction in the opportunity for crime as a result of the development. Subject to the conditions identified, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012.

51. Construction Management: There is potential for significant impact on the highway network and surrounding accesses and neighbours including Maple Infants' School, during demolition of the temporary block and the construction of the proposed development. It is recommended therefore to apply a condition requiring the submission of a construction management plan before any development is commenced on site. The Neighbourhood Transport Engineer suggests the following conditions:

1) The vehicular route to the site should be via St James Road and not Maple Road

2) All vehicles should reverse into the site 3) Periods of intensive deliveries should be pre-planned and

vehicles should be held off site in a safe location to avoid congestion in St James Road

4) Any parking suspensions/restrictions will incur a cost as it will involve taking out existing parking bays for a specified time.

52. Subject to the condition identified, the proposed development would be in accordance with Policy DM9 and Policy DM10 of the LDF Core Strategy 2012

53. Loss of open space to Maple Infants' School: Approximately 30m2 or less of playground space would be lost to the proposed classroom block. However, the area would be less than 10% of the playground area, and is therefore not considered to adversely impact the remaining open space in Maple Infants' School.

54. Loss of open space to St.Richard's & St.Andrew's School: The protection and disposal of school playing fields is covered by section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, and is outside the scope of this application. The matter in this application concerns general development and is governed by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Development Plan.

55. The National Planning Policy Framework (Para 74) stipulates that "Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:

1) an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or

2) the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or

3) the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss".

56. The LDF Core Strategy recognises that school open space plays an important role in providing for play, sports, recreation and

environmental activities and provides visual amenity within the locality. It sets out in Policy DM23 (Schools) that the Council will protect open space on school sites as shown on the Proposals Map and seek to ensure that school expansion proposals retain open space and that all options to re-organise/ expand schools within the existing built footprint are explored, with a presumption against a net reduction in open space. It provides criteria against which to assess proposals for school expansion, including:

1) the size of the site, its location and suitability to accommodate expansion taking account of compatibility with surrounding uses and existing policy designations

2) the impact on green open space, games pitches, outdoor play and amenity space, taking account of the character of the area, whether the site is within an area of open space deficiency and whether the school has sufficient outdoor space for play and games

3) the location and accessibility of the site and 4) the extent to which the building design contributes towards the

target that schools should be zero carbon from 2016

57. The site has an open area which includes various hard and soft surface areas and a MUGA. The existing open space beside and behind the school amounts to approximately 3,500m2. The applicant has confirmed that the school does not meet the standards of Building Bulletin 99 for open space (BB99 is a set of non-statutory area guidelines for mainstream school buildings and grounds published by the Department of Children, Schools and Families), so has staggered play times and lunch times to reduce impact on the open space. The proposed block and kitchen would reduce the area of open space by approximately 400m2, or approximately one tenth of the existing open space area.

58. The flats of Crescent Court overlook the site and would lose a marginal amount of visual amenity as a result of the developed area of open space, but not sufficient to warrant the refusal of the application. An assessment has been received justifying the loss of open space and playground space on the grounds that the existing school building could not be developed without significant expense and disruption to the school. It states that other locations for the proposed classroom block were considered, though none have been demonstrated.

59. There would be no material loss of visual amenity to surrounding neighbours as a result of the loss of open space. The school is located centrally to its catchment and is accessible to its pupils and staff, and the design of the development goes some way to meeting sustainability targets. The numerical impact on the open space from the proposed block would be to lose about one tenth of the present open space area, and the applicant confirms that the school activities for sport and recreation would not be affected by the loss of open space.

60. The impact on a setting with already constrained open space by a stand-alone building may be greater than the enlargement of the existing building following a master plan of re-utilisation. There is more impact on the open space from the truncated arrangement of having a displaced block 'dropped' into the open area, than the pure, nett loss of

area. The proposed block has significant 'space left over after planning' around its walls, and the covered walkway which would link it back to the school building further reduces the quality of open space because of its height and visual impact.

61. However, mitigating against this loss is the proposal for a high quality MUGA and Astroturf area to the other side of the open area at the back of the school, and the fact that the proposed block would be located in a 'dead-end' area between three boundaries (and presently used as a MUGA). The cost and disruption justification for not re-utilising the existing buildings has significant weight in justifying the loss of open space, however, it is noted that there is no strategic plan for re-utilisation/ redevelopment at the school - this proposal continues the past theme of incremental erection of boxes onto the site to meet increased demand rather than applying a rigorous exercise of internal space reorganisation and rationalisation within the school envelope. The resulting character of the school after this development would be one of a disjointed built form with the open space area reduced.

62. Provision of school places: One of the principal material considerations in this application is the duty upon the Local Authority to provide school places for all children of compulsory school age. The proposed development is submitted to meet the projected, increased demand for primary school places in the area, by enlarging the school from 2 form entry to 3 form entry, with the first additional intake taking their places in September 2014. The weight accorded to the other material considerations identified in this report should be balanced against the pressing need for school places and the programme for the first intake of pupils who would be using the proposed classrooms, in six months time.

Recommendation:

Approve subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 3 years from the date of this decision.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. (As amended)


Design & Access Statement 20/01/2014

Transport Statement 20/01/2014

School Travel & Accreditation plan 20/01/2014

Arboricultural Impact Assessment 20/01/2014

Ecology Input to BREEAM 20/01/2014

Sustainability Statement 20/01/2014

Drainage Statement 20/01/2014

Noise Survey Report 20/01/2014

BRUKL Output document 20/01/2014

Geo-environmental desk top study 20/01/2014

Energy Study 20/01/2014

1000/A Location plan 20/01/2014

1003/A Existing elevations 20/01/2014

1005/A Proposed floor plans 20/01/2014

1007/A Proposed elevations 20/01/2014

1008/A Proposed section 20/01/2014

10117/01 Topographical survey 20/01/2014

10117-02 Elevations 20/01/2014

1002/A Existing floor plans 23/01/2014

1001/A Existing site plan 23/01/2014

Cycle Shelter 23/01/2014

1004/C Proposed site plan 21/02/2014


3 A sample of the facing materials, including windows, doors, roof coverings and walls to be utilised in the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works on site are commenced. The development shall then be built in accordance with these approved samples.


4 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans additional detailed drawings of the masonry walling including decorative detailing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development is commenced on site.

Reason: In order that the special architectural and historic interest of this listed building is safeguarded in accordance with Policy CS8 (Character, Heritage and Design) and Policy DM 10 (Design Requirements for New Developments) of the LDF Core Adopted April 2012.

5 No development shall commence until a vertical landscaping scheme around the external walls of the proposed classroom block shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within the first

planting season following completion of the development and the planting and landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs which die during this period shall be replaced in the first available planting season, and the area shown to be landscaped shall be permanently retained for that purpose only.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and also that the Local Planning Authority shall be satisfied as to the details of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.


(a) A plan to a scale and level of accuracy appropriate to the proposal, that shows the positions, crown spreads and root protection areas (RPA) of the trees within the proposed areas of astroturf and MUGA and on nearby ground or land adjacent to the site, in relation to the approved plans.






(g) Details and positions of any change in levels or the positions of any excavations within 5m of the root protection area of retained trees.


(i) Details of the working methods to be employed for the installation of drives, paths within the RPA's of retained trees in accordance with the principles of 'No Dig' construction. The details shall be in accordance with British Standard BS: 5837: 2005 sections 9.3, 9.2, 9, 11.7, 5.2.2 and 10 for requirements (c) to (h) inclusive.

The approved protection scheme shall be implemented prior to commencement of any work on site and maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority until the completion of the

development.


7 Before the end of the planting season immediately following completion of the development 20no. trees shall be planted within the curtilage of the site in accordance with details previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. If within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development that tree dies, is removed or becomes seriously damaged or diseased, it shall be replaced in the next planting season with another of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.


8 The crime prevention design measures and specification set-out in the consultation response from the Metropolitan Police of 07 February 2014 and including:

(a) external doors and windows conforming to standard LPS1175 Issue 7 SR2, STS201, or STS202 BR2

(b) secure cycle parking, with separate facilities for staff, shall be provided within a roofed securable and lit building, secured during school hours and with stands which encourage locking of both wheels and cross-bar

(c) the gates to the multi use games area (MUGA) hereby approved shall open outwards and shall have a panic spring latch release lock operated from inside the MUGA with a closing mechanism (spring coil hinge restraint) to return the gate to the shut position. Their location shall be so as to avoid tight gathering or milling points.

(d) the MUGA shall contain a 'bolt-hole' to allow persons backed into a corner in bullying situations to escape from the MUGA

shall be incorporated into the development and shall thereafter be retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To reduce the risk and fear of crime in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

9 No external lighting shall be installed to the multi-use-games-area and astroturf area hereby approved without the prior written approval of the

Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order that the lighting shall not cause nuisance to nearby occupiers or be a source of danger to road users in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

10 The use of the multi-use-games-area hereby permitted shall be restricted solely to the members of the school community and shall not be used by the general public.


11 The School Travel Plan submitted with the application shall be annually monitored and reviewed and an annual travel plan update report submitted to the Local Planning Authority for their approval. It shall contain the results of annually repeated staff and pupil travel surveys and demonstrate progress towards meeting the targets within the School Travel Plan.

Reason: To ensure that sustainable transport methods are promoted in accordance with Policy CS6 (Sustainable Travel) and Policy DM8 (Sustainable Transport for New Development) of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames LDF Core Strategy adopted April 2012.

12 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of secure scooter parking and secure and separate cycle parking facilities for a total of 40 staff and students as well as visitors to the school have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.


13 One off-street, accessible car-parking space designated for Blue Badge holders shall be provided in the general car-park area on the site, with an additional width of 600mm along each side and with a 1200mm wide safety zone at the vehicle access end of the bay to provide boot access or for use of a rear hoist, and the space shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate accessible off-street parking for all and in accordance with Policy DM9 (Managing Vehicle Use for New Development) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012 and Policy 6.13 (Parking) of the London Plan 2011.

14 All works on site shall take place in accordance with a Construction Management Plan which shall include, as a minimum, the measures set out in Section 4.5 of the Transport Statement which accompanied the application, and the following details which shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work:

(a) Provision for loading/unloading materials with periods of intensive deliveries being pre-planned and vehicles being held off site in a safe location to avoid congestion in St James Road


(c) Temporary site access showing signage for vehicles reversing into the site rather than entering forwards

(d) Signing system for works traffic with the vehicular route to the site via St James Road and not Maple Road









15 The sustainable urban drainage system and surface water attenuation scheme submitted with the application shall be implemented as part of the development and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and pollution and increase the level of sustainability of the development and to comply with Policy CS1 (Climate Change Mitigation) and DM04 (Water Management and Flood Risk) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

16 The development shall be constructed in accordance with details as set out in the Energy Statement (January 2014) by Messrs. Atkins to ensure that the development meets BREEAM standard 'Very Good and the outlined sustainability measures including a 25% CO2 reduction from the Part L 2010 target emission rate.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability and energy conservation as set out in Policy DM1 (Sustainable Design and Construction Standards) of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy.

17 Prior to construction of the development a BREEAM Very Good interim design-stage assessment certificate shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.


18 A final BREEAM Very Good post-construction report must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to occupancy of the development, and within 6 months of the completion of the development.


19 The construction site, save for security or safety reasons, shall not be opened or occupied before 08.00 Mondays to Saturdays and building works required to implement the development shall be only carried out between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays and not at all on Bank Holidays and Sundays. The applicant shall ensure measures are taken to prevent gangs of workers and vehicles congregating at the entrance to the construction site before 08.00 Mondays to Saturdays.


20 Before any occupation of the proposed classroom block the windows in the south elevation and situated on the first floor of the building hereby permitted, shall be constructed so that no part of the framework less than 1.7m above finished floor level shall be openable. Any part below that level shall be fitted with, and retained in, obscure glazing of a patterned type only which shall thereafter be retained as such.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of the adjoining residential properties in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of

the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

Informative(s)


2 The applicant is advised to consult Sport England's Design Guidance Note 'Artificial Surfaces for Outdoor Sports' (December 2013)