References: P/2010/2133 00815/A/P22

Address: Thorcliffe Hotel, North Hyde Lane, Southall

Ward: Heston East

Proposal: Demolition of existing hotel and outbuildings. Erection of a four storey 317 room hotel with associated parking, coach and taxi bays, and cycle storage area.

Drawing numbers: A07.68.LP.01 Site Location Plan A07.68.LP.02 Location Plan A07.68.E1SP01: Existing Site Plan A07.68.E.P01: Existing Ground Floor Plan A07.68.E.P02: Existing First Floor Plan A07.68.E.P03: Existing Second Floor Plan A07.68.E.P04: Existing Third Floor Plan A07.68.E.P05: Existing Roof Plan A07.68.E.E01 Existing Elevations A07.68.E.S01 Existing Section A07.68.E.S02 Existing Section A07.68.E.S03 Existing Section A07.68.P.SP01.A: Proposed Site Plan A.07.68.P.SP02.A: Proposed Site Axonometric A07.68.P.P01.A: Proposed Ground Floor Plan A07.68.P.P02.A: Proposed First Floor Plan A07.68.P.P03.A: Proposed Second Floor Plan A07.68.P.P04.A: Proposed Third Floor Plan A07.68.P.P05.A: Proposed Roof Floor Plan A07.68.P.E01.A: Proposed Elevations – E & N A07.68.P.E02.A: Proposed Elevations – W & S A07.68.P.S01.B: Proposed Sections A-A, B-B A07.68.P.S02.B: Proposed Sections C-C, D-D A07.68.P.S03.B: Proposed Sections E-E, F-F A07.68.P.S04: Proposed Sections G-G, H-H Design & Access Statement - ADZ Architects Ltd Planning Statement – Knight Frank Transportation Report – Colin Buchanan Sustainability Report - Waterman Environmental Acoustic Report – Hann Tucker Associates

HESTON &

CRANFORD AREA COMMITTEE (PLANNING)

23rd September 2010 Tim Joll

e-mail: tim.joll@hounslow.gov.uk

Landscape Report – Waterman Environmental Ecology Report - Waterman Environmental Flood Risk Assessment – Ambiental Environmental Risk Assessment

Application received: 15 July 2010

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The application proposes the redevelopment of the former Thorncliffe Hotel site. The redevelopment would comprise the demolition of the existing hotel/hostel and outbuildings and the erection of a four storey 317 room hotel with associated parking, coach and taxi bays, and cycle storage area.

1.2 If an acceptable scheme can be negotiated the proposal will be

referred to Sustainable Development Committee. If not, the Committee is asked to note that the case will be refused under delegated powers.

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 The application site (3.104 hectares) is located within the Metropolitan

Green Belt with access off North Hyde Lane and is an out of town centre location. The Thorncliffe Hotel is located within the eastern half of the site. The hotel has most recently been used to provide temporary accommodation for people on Hounslow’s housing register and asylum seekers. This use has now ceased and the building has been boarded up.

2.2 The building is a late 1960s flat roofed structure with a complicated

footprint and internal courtyard areas. The four-storey building (10.4m height) is dated in appearance and does not contribute positively to the Green Belt. The site is located on a former landfill site and is subject to a group Tree Preservation Order.

2.3 The site is bounded to the north by the M4 motorway and to the east by

North Hyde Lane. The rear gardens of residential properties within The Vale adjoin the site to the south. The area of open land adjoining the site to the west/rear is separated by a post and wire fence and forms the Thorncliffe Nature Conservation Area.

2.4 The site is located in one of the Borough’s Green Chains whose

function is to provide nature conservation and amenity links between larger areas of open space. The site is identified within the Council’s Unitary Development Plan as part of Comprehensive Project Area 6 (CPA6) (Thorncliffe Hostel and adjacent Green Belt land, south of the M4, west of North Hyde). The proposal for CPA6 states that comprehensive treatment of this area is required to protect and enhance land which is of ecological significance, and to encourage

appropriate redevelopment of the Thorncliffe Hostel in a manner which enhances this important Green Belt Site.

3.0 HISTORY 3.1 The building now known as the Thorncliffe Hotel was erected in the late

1960s as a British Airways apprentices hostel. Numerous planning applications have been submitted to date. There have been several recent telecommunications applications at the site, some of which have been implemented. The most recent and relevant planning history to the current application is outlined below:

3.2 00815/A/P17 Use of premises as a hotel and hostel with associated facilities.

Approved 11th October 1983

3.3 00815/A/P18 Construction of two fire escape staircases on the north elevation.

Approved 13th March 1984

3.4 00815/A/P19 Erection of school comprising 10 classrooms, offices, staff room, sports hall and ancillary facilities and provision of 97 rooms in two-storey blocks linked to existing hotel.

Refused 29th July 1987

Reasons: Extent of built development and detrimental impact on the green belt. Loss of amenity to adjoining residents. Intensification of uses on the site and general disturbance to the area.

3.5 00815/A/P20 Erection of roof mounted stub mast with 3 No antenna at 17 metres with 3 No microwave dishes (1 x 0.3m x 2 x 0.6m) with associated meter cabinet.

Approved 8th January 2002

3.6 00815/A/P21 Extension and refurbishment of existing hotel and erection of a detached single-storey building to provide a gym with associated basement facilities

Approved 20th July 2006

4.0 DETAILS

4.1 The application proposes the redevelopment of the former Thorncliffe Hotel site. The redevelopment would comprise the demolition of the

existing hotel/hostel buildings and the erection of a 4 star, four-storey 317-room hotel with associated parking, coach and taxi bays, and cycle storage area. The level of accommodation would remain the same (317 guestrooms), and the gross external floorspace would be no greater than the existing consent dated 20 July 2006 (refer to paragraph 3.6 of this report). The table below sets out a comparison with the existing, approved and proposed development.

Existing Extant Permission

Proposed

Bedrooms 317 317) 317

Floorspace 10,974m2 15,497m2 15,495m2

Car parking 158 184 184

Lounge Area N/A 540m2 540m2

Conference Area/Lounge

Areas

N/A 168m2 135m2

Meeting Rooms/Lounge

Areas

N/A 176m2 135m2

Restaurant N/A 463m2 162m2

4.2 The proposed building has a maximum length of 112.5m and would be a maximum of 66.5m wide (55.6m wide excluding the staircase elements).

4.3 The proposed development has an overall ground floor footprint area of 4,050m2, which is a reduction in the footprint of the building of 1,616m2 when compared to the previous planning permission.

4.4 The guestrooms have increased from 16m2 per room to 25m2 per room. Other improved space standards include wider corridors (1.4m) and larger plant rooms.

4.5 The proposed building would be four storeys in height. The three upper floors are 2.8m floor to floor, being the minimum dimension to include structure and services, whilst the ground floor is 5.25m floor to floor. The proposed building would have a maximum height of 15.5m as measured at the top of the staircase elements. The main roof would be 14.5m in height.

4.6 The following is a schedule of proposed uses and floor space of the proposed development:

Ground Level:

• Foyer, Reception Area

• Administration Area

• Restaurant/Bar

• Fitness Centre, Toilets

• Lounge Area, Meeting Rooms, Conference Room,

• Kitchen, Stores, Cellarage

• Refuse Chamber

• Staff Facilities and Plant 4,050m2

First Floor:

• 106 guestrooms 3,815m2

Second Floor:

• 106 guestrooms 3,815m2

Third Floor:

• 105 guestrooms 3,815m2

4.7 The proposed development provides for 190 car parking spaces including 20 disabled bays, 2 coach bays, 4 taxi bays and 80 covered secure cycle spaces. To cater for peak parking needs to serve special functions, there is capacity for an additional 23 car spaces alongside the perimeter service route which would be laid with perforated paving with grass (Grasscrete).

4.8 A detailed landscape plan has been submitted in relation to the proposed development. The soft landscaping details include planting plans, schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers. These details also include the green roof and bio-membrane green walls.

4.9 A Tree Preservation Order covers the site. The proposal would not result in the removal of any protected trees.

4.10 The applicant has advised that the conference facilities could cater for a range of functions, such as Asian Food and Travel Shows, Indian Bridal Shows and Local Award Ceremonies.

5.0 CONSULTATION 5.1 A site notice advertising the application as a major application was

posted on 23 July 2010, and the application was advertised in the local press. Over 50 adjoining residents from The Vale, North Hyde Road, West Park Close and Heston Garage were consulted by letter.

5.2 Three responses have been received. A summary of the comments is

set out below:

Comment Response

Object if application involves temporary accommodation for immigrants

The applicant is for a 4-star hotel for visitors to the Borough,

The parking space indicated in the report does not seem adequate to the estimated numbers of guests. How will overflow be managed.

The 190 parking spaces proposed exceeds the Council’s maximum standards and is greater than that of the extant permission for a hotel of a similar size.

The privacy of local residents should be safeguarded

The separating distances provided would safeguard the privacy of neighbouring residents.

Will there be noise or glare issues associated with the proposal for residents?

It is not considered that the proposed development would adversely impact on the living conditions of neighbouring residents.

Will coaches be arriving in the middle of the night.

This question has been put to the applicant and any response will be presented by way of addendum.

5.3 Greater London Authority – No responses had been received at the

date this report was written. Any responses received will be reported in an addendum.

5.4 Transport for London – TfL have requested a detailed Delivery and

Service plan, which is being included in the Travel Plan. They consider that the level of parking provided is acceptable.

5.5 Environment Agency - No responses had been received at the date

this report was written. Any responses received will be reported in an addendum.

6.0 POLICY Central Government Guidance and Policy

6.1 Central Government Guidance to be applied is mainly set out in Planning Policy Guidance Notes, Planning Policy Statements and Government Circulars, with particular emphasis on:

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG2 Green Belts PPS4 Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth PPS13 Transport PPS 22 Renewable Energy

PPS 23 Planning and Pollution Control..................................... PPG 24 Noise

PPS 25 Development and Flood Risk

6.2 The Development Plan for the Borough comprises the saved policies in the Council’s Unitary Development Plan (‘UDP’), the Employment Development Plan Document, the Brentford Area Action Plan and the London Plan. The most relevant policies in the London Plan are considered to be:

The Mayor’s Objectives

Policy I.1 The Mayor's Objectives The Overall Strategy

Policy 2A.1 Sustainability criteria Working in London Policy 3B.9 Tourism industry Connecting London Policies – Improving Travel in London

Policy 3C.1 Integrating transport and development Policy 3C.2 Matching development to transport capacity Policy 3C.3 Sustainable transport in London Policy 3C.9 Increasing the capacity, quality and integration of public transport to meet London’s needs Policy 3C.22 Improving conditions for cycling Policy 3C.23 Parking strategy

Enjoying London Policy 3D.7 Visitor accommodation and facilities Policy 3D.9 Green belt

Climate Change and London’s Metabolism Policies

Policy 4A.1 Tackling climate change Policy 4A.2 Mitigating climate change

Policy 4A.3 Sustainable design and construction Policy 4A.7 Renewable Energy

Designs on London Policies

Policy 4B.1 Design principles for a compact city Policy 4B.5 Creating an inclusive environment Policy 4B.6 Sustainable design and construction Policy 4B.8 Respect local context and communities

Delivering the Vision Policies

Policy 6A.4 Priorities in planning obligations Policy 6A.5 Planning obligations

6.3 Some of the London Plan policies listed above at Paragraph 6.7 are

summarised below.

6.4 All policies in the London Plan promote sustainable development (p. 39). Policy 2A.1 sets out the criteria that guide the approach to development. Development should:

-optimise the use of previously developed land and vacant or underused buildings;

-use a design-led approach to optimise the potential of sites;

-occur in locations that are currently, or planned to be, accessible by public transport, walking and cycling and that are accessible to town centres, employment, housing, shops and services;

-take account of the capacity of existing or planned infrastructure including public transport, utilities and community infrastructure;

-take account of the physical constraints on the development of land, including, for example, flood risk, and ensures no significant harmful impacts occur, or that such impacts are acceptability mitigated;

-take account of the impact upon natural resources, environmental and cultural assets and the health of local people;

-prevent major accidents;

-take account of the suitability of the site for mixed-use development and potential contribution to strengthening local communities.

6.5 Policy 3C.22 seeks to ensure that on-site car parking at new developments is the minimum necessary and that there is no over-provision that could undermine the use of more sustainable non-car modes. It states that the only exception to this approach will be to ensure that developments are accessible for disabled people.

6.6 Principles of design for a compact city set out at Policy 4B.1 aim to ensure that developments maximise the potential of the site; are accessible, usable and permeable for all users; are safe for occupants and passers-by; and respect local context, character and sense of

communities.

6.7 Policy 4B.5 requires that all future development meet the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion and Policy 4A.3 that the highest standards of sustainable design and construction are met. It states, for example, that sustainable design and construction will include measures to conserve energy, materials, water and other resources.

6.8 The UDP was adopted in December 2003 and was amended and

saved as of 28 September 2007 by Direction from the Secretary of State. The relevant UDP policies are considered to be:

Implementation Policies

Policy IMP 1.2 The re-use and recycling of urban land and buildings

Policy IMP 5.3 Comprehensive project areas Policy IMP 6.1 Planning Obligations

Built Environment Policies

Policy ENV-B.1.1 New Development Policy ENV-B.1.9 Safety and security

Environmental Protection Policies

Policy ENV-P.1.3 Surface water run off Policy ENV-P.1.5 Noise pollution Policy ENV-P.1.6 Air pollution Policy ENV-P.2.1 Waste management Policy ENV-P.2.4 Recycling facilities in new developments

Natural Environment Policy Policy ENV-N.1.2 Acceptable Development in the Green Belt

Transport Policies

Policy T.1.2 The movement implications of development Policy T.1.4 Car and cycle parking and servicing facilities for

developments Policy T.2.1 Pedestrian access Policy T.2.2 Pedestrian safety and security Policy T.4.3 Traffic implications of new development Policy T.4.4 Road safety

Proposal Map Designations 6.9 The Employment Development Plan Document was adopted on 25

November 2008 and has superseded the Employment Policies contained in UDP Chapter 7 and the following Implementation Policies contained in UDP Chapter 2: IMP.4.1, IMP.4.2, IMP.4.3, and IMP.4.4.

The most relevant policies of the Employment Development Plan Document are considered to be: EP10 Location of visitor accommodation and conference

facilities 6.11 The Brentford Area Action Plan was adopted on 27 January 2009 and

has superseded the following Implementation Policies contained in UDP Chapter 2: IMP.2.1 and IMP.3.1.

Supplementary Planning Documents - Planning Obligations - Air Quality

6.12 These SPDs were adopted on 11/03/08, following public consultation in

July and August 2007. The documents form part of the Local Development Framework.

6.13 1997 Supplementary Planning Guidance- The guidance contained

within the Supplementary Guidance was subject to formal public consultation and unlike normal SPG were subject to an inquiry process and consideration by a government inspector. The Inspectors report recommended the appendices be removed from the plan, as they added to its bulk, cost and complexity and may well have consumed further resources at the first review of the UDP. He also considered that they could stand alone away from the main plan as SPG. This was the course of action to be taken by the Council. During the consultation process, objections were received from individual house builders and the HBF. The guidance was amended as part of the process. The Council did not therefore consider it necessary to re-consult on this proposed guidance, but simply to use the guidance in light of the suggested amendments and the Inspector’s comments. The most relevant SPG chapters are considered to be:

1. Design and Layout

2. Safety and Security Guidelines

9. Form and Design

10. Roads, Footpaths, Parking and Servicing

6.14 London Plan Supplementary Guidance- Accessible London: Achieving an Inclusive Environment (April 2004) (London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance)

6.15 Sustainable design and construction (May 2006) (London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance)

6.16 Good Practise Guide for Planning for Tourism (May 2006)

7.0 ISSUES 7.1 The main planning issues to consider are:

• Issue 1: The location and acceptability of the development in the Green Belt

• Issue 2: Design and appearance

• Issue 3: Environmental impacts

• Issue 4: Impact on adjoining land uses and local residents

• Issue 5: Traffic, parking and access.

• Issue 6: Sustainability

Issue 1: The location and acceptability of the development in the Green Belt

7.2 Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 (Green Belts) states that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. Such development should not be approved except in very special circumstances. This is also reflected in UDP policy ENV-N.1.2 (Acceptable development within the Green Belt). PPG2 specifies that the construction of new buildings inside a Green Belt is inappropriate unless it is for the following purposes:

• agriculture and forestry

• essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation, for cemeteries, and for other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land in it

• limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings

• limited infilling in existing villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under development plan policies according with PPG3: or

• limited infilling or redevelopment of major existing developed sites identified in adopted local plans

7.3 These criteria for acceptable development in the Green Belt are also

reflected in UDP policy ENV-N.1.2. The proposed development does not meet any of the above criteria; therefore the proposal is a departure from the Council’s Development Plan.

7.4 The primary aim of the Green Belt in Hounslow is to prevent urban sprawl. ENV-N.1.2 states that the Council will not permit, except in very special circumstances, any development which is not compatible with the principle purposes of the Green Belt. In line with PPG2, UDP Policy ENV-N.1.1 states that the Council will safeguard the permanence and integrity of the Green Belt by ensuring it is kept permanently open. The appearance of the Green Belt should not be injured by proposals, by reason of siting, materials or design.

7.5 The existing hotel buildings are in poor condition and its design and appearance does not contribute positively to the Green Belt. The site is identified within the Council’s Unitary Development Plan as within Comprehensive Project Area 6 (CPA6) which states that the comprehensive treatment of this area is required to protect and enhance land which is of ecological significance, and to encourage appropriate redevelopment of the Thorncliffe Hostel in a manner which enhances this important Green Belt site.

7.6 The proposal consists of the replacement of the established hotel, which was established on the site in the 1980s. The proposal would reduce the ground floor footprint of the extant 317 bedroom hotel by 1,616m2. With the recent publication of PPS 4 Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth the requirement for a need assessment has been removed. It is also noted that the site is designated in the Council’s Unitary Development Plan (UDP) as within Comprehensive Project Area 6. As such, in accordance with PPS 6 a sequential test is not required as outlined in paragraph 3.13 which states:

‘The sequential approach to site selection should be applied to all development proposals for sites that are not in an existing centre nor allocated in an up-to-date development plan document’.

7.7 The site benefits from an extant approval for alterations and refurbishment to the existing hotel to provide for 317 bedrooms with extended multi-function areas. As such, whilst the principle of a new 317 bedroom hotel on the site does not fall into any of the above criteria or any other criteria within Section 3 ‘Control Over Development’ of PPG2, the principle of establishing a 317 bedroom hotel on the site has previously been established.

7.8 As discussed, the proposed development by reason of its scale and nature and the location of the land, would not significantly prejudice the implementation of the Council’s development plan’s policies and proposals. Subject to appropriate safeguarding conditions, the proposed development would not harm the openness, permanence and integrity of the Green Belt.

Issue 2: Design and appearance 7.9 Policy ENV-B.1.1 (New Development) requires new development to

make a positive contribution to overall environmental quality. In relation to the context, form and layout of the buildings and spaces, new development should relate well to its site and the scale, nature, height, massing and character of the adjacent townscape and respect the proportions of neighbouring buildings where there are strong uniform design characteristics. Section 1.0 of the UDP Supplementary Planning Guidance 1997 (SPG) gives guidance for the design and layout of developments to enable them to be compatible with, and make a positive contribution to the character of the locality.

7.10 The design and appearance of the existing building is oppressive and

utilitarian. It is considered that the proposal has the potential to improve the appearance of the site. This would accord with the UDP proposals schedule Comprehensive Project Area 6 (CPA6) which seeks to encourage appropriate redevelopment of the hotel in a manner that enhances the Green Belt site.

7.11 The siting of the proposed building is considered appropriate; it would

be positioned towards the front of the site behind a landscaped parking area. It is considered that the proposed building is well articulated and would add visual interest to the site when viewed from areas within the public domain and adjoining sites. The height of the proposed building is similar to that of the extant scheme and is not considered to be visually dominate within the local area.

7.12 The elevational treatment of the proposed building is currently being

assessed but initial impressions are that it would be of a high quality. 7.13 The site’s northern boundary is formed by several large established

trees (all of which would be retained with additional landscaping also proposed), which would also help to screen the site when viewed from the M4. The landscaped land separating the rear gardens of the adjacent properties on The Vale would be rationalized and enhanced, thereby helping to mitigate the impact of the proposal on the outlook from the nearest residential properties.

7.14 It is considered that the sitting, massing and layout of the proposed

building is acceptable in architectural and urban design terms. An assessment of the design and appearance of the proposed An assessment of the proposed signage has not been undertaken and would be the subject of a separate application.

Issue 3: Environmental impacts 7.15 Environmental impacts from the development with regard noise

pollution, air quality and flood risk, landscaping and water quality have been considered as follows.

Noise 7.16 Policy ENV-P.1.5 of the UDP states that the Council will not allow any

development that could result in unacceptable noise nuisance to nearby of future occupiers. The hotel has most recently been used to provide temporary accommodation for people on Hounslow’s housing register and asylum seekers. This use has now ceased and the building has been boarded up.

7.17 The residents of the houses adjacent to the south of the site are the

nearest noise sensitive receptors, the closest dwellings being in excess of 45m away from the new building. The extant permission allows for a hotel of a greater size to be located 5m closer to these neighbouring properties. A detailed noise assessment has been submitted as part of the application. Having reviewed the submitted documentation, to ensure potential noise from the development does not unacceptably affect neighbours, if the Council was seeking to approve the application, conditions would be recommended requiring the submission of details of measures to prevent noise disturbance during the construction phase and submission of details of the use of building materials with good noise containment properties and a restriction on the hours of operation for service vehicles. There are also additional statutory powers to control noise outside the planning system. The granting of planning permission does not remove the need to comply with these controls

Air Quality

7.18 The whole borough has been declared an Air Quality Management

Area (AQMA) as monitoring and modelling indicates that the national objectives for air qulaity are not likely to be met at present. However, whilst the designation of the AQMA is indicative of a certain level of air quality, this in itself does not prevent development. New development should not result in an increase in airborne pollutants without mitigation.

7.19 Air quality is also governed by other statutory controls such as the

Clean Air Act and further permissions would be necessary for any polluting processes, though given the nature of the use, it is not envisaged that this would occur. Previously no provision for cyclists was included. The proposed development would provide storage for 80 cycles spaces as well as maneuvering areas but also includes new landscaped areas, and storage facilities for cyclists. These measures would ensure any change to air quality is minimal.

Flood Risk and Water Quality 7.20 UDP policy ENV-P.1.3 states there is a general presumption against

new developments generating surface water run off likely to result in adverse impacts such as an increased risk of flooding. A Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted and is currently being reviewed by the Environment Agency.

7.21 With regard to water quality and efficiency, the proposed development

would result in decreased runoff due to the inclusion of new landscaping. The development would also be required to provide a sustainable drainage scheme that would minimise water runoff through a system of rainwater harvesting for reuse on the site to flush toilets, water landscaping and for general cleaning.

Contaminated land

7.22 Owing to the history of uses on the site, which includes industrial

works, there is potential for some contamination of the land. PPS 23 advises that for instances where there is suspicion that the site might be contaminated, or where evidence suggests that there may be some contamination, planning permission may be granted subject to conditions that development will not be permitted to start until a site investigation and assessment have been carried out and that the development itself will incorporate any remedial measures shown to be necessary. Therefore a condition requiring the findings of the site investigation in regards to monitoring and any necessary remedial work to be carried out could be included in any approval.

Landscaping 7.23 As part of the background and supporting information, the applicant

has submitted a landscape plan for the site. The proposal would not result in the loss of any existing protected trees and would introduce significantly more soft landscaping including additional trees. As well as providing additional screening for neighbouring residents and improving the amenity of the site, the additional landscaping would have ecological benefits. The rationale of retaining as many existing trees as possible and introducing additional planting to the site is supported.

Ecology

7.24 As part of the application, an Ecological Report has been submitted.

The report notes that the area of open land adjoining the site to the west/rear forms the Thorncliffe Nature Conservation Area. This area is not within the application site and development is not proposed for this area.

7.25 The report notes that habitats on site due to be lost are mainly of negligible ecological value. Habitats of value within the context of the site (such as grassland, shrubs and trees) are retained

7.26 Clearance of habitats would be timed to occur outside the nesting

season of breeding birds which takes place between 1st March and 31st August inclusive. If this is not possible, each area of habitat to be cleared would be searched for nesting birds by a suitably qualified ecologist prior to clearance.

7.27 Measures to avoid killing and injury of common reptiles would be

implemented where necessary to include the fencing of the area of rough grassland to prevent access during construction.

7.28 The introduction of increased soft landscaping also has the potential to

enhance retained habitats. Issue 4: Impacts adjoining occupiers 7.29 The use of the site as a hotel/hostel has already been established and

although this type of development would not normally be acceptable on Green Belt land, it is otherwise considered compatible with the area. The proposal would not create any additional bedrooms or increase the floor area of the extant hotel. In summary, the physical impact of the extensions and alterations would not affect neighbours. The proposed scale of the hotel would not result in harm to the living conditions of adjoining residents of The Vale to the south or on North Hyde Lane in terms of light, outlook and privacy. This is due to the relative position and significant distance of approximately 45m from neighbouring buildings.

Visual appearance and outlook

7.30 An assessment of the siting, design and appearance of the proposed building is set out earlier in this report, but in summary, the proposed building is considered to be acceptable in architectural and urban design terms and it would not adversely impact on the outlook from adjoining properties taking into account the level of screening provided and the scale of development that previously occupied the site.

Access to daylight and sunlight

7.31 The proposed building is located approximately 21m to the north of the nearest residential properties along The Vale. Given the relatively large separating distance relative to the height of the building (being 14.5m) and the level of planting present on the southern boundary of the site, which would be retained and is protected by a TPO, it is considered that the proposal would not result in a reduction in access to daylight or sunlight for any adjoining residents.

Privacy

7.32 The proposed hotel would be separated from the rear gardens and houses of the adjoining residential properties by a minimum distance of 21m and 45m respectively. Given the separating distances proposed, the privacy of neighbouring residents would be satisfactorily maintained.

Noise

7.33 With regards to plant noise, it is considered that this could be adequately mitigated through sufficient insulation. Similarly, it is considered that with appropriate insulation (which would be necessary for a 4 star hotel), neighbouring residents would not be adversely impacted as a result of noise breakout from the proposed building. In addition, the new contemporary building would replace the previously aged structures with a new building that has durable materials that would satisfy relevant standards for insulation. It is considered that this would provide benefits for the living conditions of neighbouring residents when compared to the scheme that has an extant planning permission.

7.34 Noise from vehicles manoeuvring in the parking area would have the

most potential for disturbance of neighbouring residents given the site is to function 24 hours a day due and its likely association with Heathrow airport. Based on existing back ground noise levels, and assuming 50 car movements in any given hour within the car park and a typical car speed within the car park of 15mph, it is considered that residences to the south of the site on the Vale may be exposed to an increase in noise levels of approximately 3dBA when compared to existing background noise levels. It is not considered that this increase in noise levels would adversely impact on the living conditions of neighbouring residents.

7.35 The residences currently exposed to the M4 road noise, located east of

the site, are unlikely to notice an increase in the current prevailing noise level from the car park activities, due to the M4 noise levels being significantly higher.

7.36 As noted earlier, a detailed noise assessment has been submitted as

part of the application, having reviewed the submitted documentation, to ensure potential noise from the development does not unacceptably affect neighbours, if the Council was seeking to approve the application, a condition would be recommended requiring the submission of details of measures to prevent noise disturbance during the construction phase and submission of details of the use of building materials with good noise containment properties. A further condition restricting the hours of servicing to normal working hours would also be recommended. There are also additional statutory powers to control

noise outside the planning system. The granting of planning permission does not remove the need to comply with these controls.

Issue 4: The implications for traffic and parking in the locality

7.37 Policy T.1.4 of the UDP states that all developments must provide

parking and servicing facilities in accordance with the Council’s standards with provision to be made for people with disabilities. Operational requirements such as space for deliveries and loading must also be met on site. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 1b, which is a ‘very poor’ rating. The PTAL is a measure of the extent and ease of access to a site by public transport, with a rating of 1 being very poor and 6 excellent.

7.38 The maximum desirable parking provision under Appendix 3 (parking

standards) of the UDP for a hotel with 317 bedrooms, is Minimum: 1 space per 5 bedrooms plus 1 space per 25m2 conference facilities plus 1 coach space per 200 bedrooms or part thereof. The Maximum parking standards are: 1 space per 2 bedrooms plus 1 space per 5m2 conference facilities plus 1 coach space per 200 bedrooms or part thereof. The existing arrangements at the site provide for 158 car parking spaces primarily at the front of the site. This is an area where the public transport accessibility is very poor and therefore the Council’s maximum parking standards may be justified. Based of 317 guestrooms and 270m2 of conference/meeting space, the proposal generates a maximum provision of 118 parking spaces.

7.39 The table below sets out a comparison with the existing, approved and

proposed development.

Existing Extant Permission

Proposed

Bedrooms 317 317) 317

Floorspace 10,974m2 15,497m2 15,495m2

Car parking 158 184 190

7.40 The proposed development provides for 190 car parking spaces

including 20 disabled bays, 2 coach bays, 4 taxi bays and 80 covered secure cycle spaces. To cater for peak parking needs to serve special functions, there is capacity for an additional 23 car spaces alongside the perimeter service route which would be laid with perforated paving with grass (Grasscrete).

7.41 The car parking area would be actively managed through the provision of barrier control on the car park’s exit.

7.42 The implications of the proposed development on the safety and efficiency of the highway network are currently being assessed.

However it is noted that TFL are satisfied with the parking and access arrangements.

Issue 5: Sustainable design

7.43 Sustainability underpins many of the UDP policies and the London

Plan. These require developments not only to be sustainable in transport terms; but also to include appropriate recycling facilities and to minimise waste; to include energy efficiency measures and promote the use of renewable energy; and not to significantly increase the requirement for water supply or surface water drainage.

7.44 Policies ENV-B.1.1, ENV-P.1.3, ENV-P.2.1, ENV-P.2.4 and ENV-P.2.5 require that all developments should include recycling facilities and minimise waste, include energy efficiency measures, be sustainable in transport terms, promote the use of renewable energy and not significantly increase the requirement for water supply or surface water drainage.

7.45 The re-development of the site is consistent with these aims, as the site has been previously developed and is 100% brownfield land. The new contemporary building would replace the previously aged structures with a new building that has durable materials that would satisfy relevant standards for insulation and energy efficiency and that also includes measures to utilise solar energy. Water runoff from the site would be significantly reduced with the development being required to incorporate a system of sustainable drainage that harvests rainwater for reuse.

7.46 The development would also be required to provide a scheme for the on-site generation of energy from renewable sources that would reduce carbon emissions from the total energy needs (heat, cooling and power) of the development by at least 20% if technically possible. No detailed Energy State,emt has been undertaken at this stage. However the Architects have confirmed that through the installation of either ground source heat pumps or a biofuel power boiler, a carbon reduction of approximately 20% is achievable.

8.0 PLANNING OBLIGATIONS 8.1 UDP policy IMP6.1 states that the Council will seek to ensure that a

developer enters into a planning obligation to secure planning benefits related to the proposed development. A payment or other benefit offered pursuant to a section 106 agreement is not material to a decision to grant planning permission and cannot be required unless it complies with the provisions of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (regulation 122), which provide that the planning obligation must be:

(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;

(b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the

development. 8.2 Accordingly, it is mandatory that each criterion be satisfactorily

addressed prior to granting planning permission subject to a section 106 agreement.

8.3 Government Circular 05/2005 provides guidance on the use of planning obligations, which may impose a restriction or requirement, or provide for payment of money from the developer to make acceptable development proposals that might otherwise be unacceptable in planning terms. The Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligations (which was adopted in March 2008) contains guidance on the imposition of planning obligations in compliance with Circular 05/2005. These obligations may offset shortfalls in the scheme or mitigate the impacts of the development.

8.4 If approval was to be considered, the items listed below, would be

included in a new legal deed.

(i) Construction training

Participation in a programme to provide employment training places during construction for local people.

(ii) Job Brokerage and Skills Training

Payment of a financial contribution to facilitate job brokerage and skills training to develop the career path and skills of local people.

(iii) Public Realm/ Green Belt Improvements

Payment of a financial contribution towards public realm improvements in the area

iv) Travel Plan. 9.0 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS 9.1 The proposed development has been designed to be in accordance

with Building Regulations Part M: Access to and use of buildings. Pedestrians will be able to gain access to the building at level entry and a dedicated pedestrian spinal route would be provided in the car park to facilitate pedestrian movement. In addition corridor widths to guestrooms in the proposed building are a minimum of 1.4m, being greater than the width required for disabled access to suit operational

needs. Lifts are provided which are of a sufficient size to accommodate wheelchair users.

10.0 RECOMMENDATION That Members’ comments on this proposal be referred to the

Sustainable Development Committee for decision if an acceptable scheme can be negotiated. If an acceptable scheme cannot be negotiated the application will be refused under delegated authority.