Planning Applications PDF 1 MB - Meetings, agendas and minutes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Policy documents: The London Plan 2011 Core Strategy 2011 Development Management Local Plan July 2013 Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document July 2013 Consultation Comments: Comments from: Environment Agency - Planning Liaison Fulham Society Dated: 05.07.13 03.07.13 Neighbour Comments: Letters from: Dated: 1.0 SITE CONTEXT 1.1 The Site covers an area of approximately 0.48 hectares and accommodates Watermeadow Court which is owned by the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (LBHF). Watermeadow Court originally comprised 80 flats with 61 tenants and 19 leaseholders. The Site was determined by LBHF's Cabinet in 2008 to be `surplus to Community Services Department requirements'. Following the Council's decision in 2008, the building has been decanted of all but one tenant. Full vacancy of Watermeadow Court is expected Autumn 2013. 1.2 Watermeadow Court is arranged within two blocks of three and four stories in height. The buildings are located around a central amenity and parking area. The properties, constructed in the 1980s are constructed of brick and have pitched tiled roofs. The buildings have little architectural merit and now appear dated having become an unsightly feature in the local townscape. 1.3 The Site is located within the Thames Policy Area, and Zone 3 flood risk area (high flood risk). The Site is not located within an Archaeological Priority Area or within a strategic viewing corridor, and none of the buildings are statutory or locally listed. There are a number of trees and shrubs on the Site which are considered to have little amenity value. The Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) rating for the Site is PTAL 3, representing a medium public transport accessibility level. 1.4 Watermeadow Court site is located within the Sands End Conservation Area, which was designated in March 1991. A profile of the Conservation Area, produced in 1999, after the construction of Watermeadow Court, noted that there are `no buildings or structures of merit on site'. No buildings on site are listed or included on the Local Register of Buildings of Merit. SURROUNDING AREA 1.5 The Site is bound by Townmead Road, Watermeadow Lane and Potters Road. Charlow Close is the main pedestrian and vehicular access into the Site. The Site is located within the South Fulham Riverside Area near the southern edge of Imperial Wharf and is within a short walking distance of the River Thames and approximately 20
minutes walk to Fulham Town Centre. The closest public transport nodes are Imperial Wharf rail and overground station and Fulham Broadway underground station. 1.6 The opposite side of Townmead Road is characterised by two storey Victorian Terrace dwellings. To the south across Watermeadow Lane is the Chelsea Harbour Club, comprising outdoor tennis courts and a four storey building with a warehouse type appearance. To the east of the site between Potters Road and William Morris Way is Quayside Lodge, a three storey office building. The Imperial Wharf development adjoins the site to the north east and contains four storey terrace dwellings, plus mansard roof accommodation. 2.0 PLANNING HISTORY 2.1 There is no relevant planning history for the Site. 3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 In 2008, Watermeadow Court was declared surplus to requirements by the Council and was identified as a site suitable for disposal. This was because the building provided sub-standard living accommodation particularly in relation to the size of the properties and the internal circulation space. Furthermore, the Council is aware of potential ground contamination issues on site. Having a cleared site would enable the Council to carry out further below ground investigative work. Following the Council's decision in 2008, the building has been decanted of all but one resident leaseholder. The Council is currently negotiating with this leaseholder and full vacancy is expected in Autumn 2013. 3.2 Demolition of Watermeadow Court was agreed in principle by the Council at a Cabinet meeting on 12th November 2012. The main reasons for this are outlined below: • Stop repeat incidents of squatting and fly tipping • Allow for more detailed intrusive site surveys to be undertaken in terms of ground contamination • Accelerate the development programme following the establishment of the Housing and Regeneration Joint Venture (JV) vehicle • Reduce the ongoing management and security costs 3.3 In November 2012, Cabinet also agreed to market the Site as one of the first Opportunity Sites for the Housing and Regeneration Joint Venture vehicle. It is anticipated that the Council will identify a preferred private sector partner for the Joint Venture in September 2013 and appoint one in January 2014. As part of the private sector partner procurement process, the Bidders are developing proposals for redevelopment of the Site for residential purposes and a planning application is expected to be submitted in Spring 2014. The current programme for the demolition is completion during December 2013. It is anticipated that the residential redevelopment proposal will commence early 2015 with completions in late 2016 (subject to planning permissions).
Page 1 and 2: London Borough Of Hammersmith & Ful
Page 3 and 4: Applicant: LBHF Mr Neil Kirby 3rd F
Page 5 and 6: with Borough Wide Strategic Policy
Page 7: 14) To submit details of a permanen
Page 11 and 12: • Raised a number of queries rela
Page 13 and 14: 5.12 Although most applications for
Page 15 and 16: western boundary will be retained a
Page 17 and 18: Applicant: LBHF Mr Neil Kirby 3rd F
Page 19 and 20: Consultation Comments: Comments fro
Page 21 and 22: Applicant: Westfield Shoppingtowns
Page 23 and 24: Policies DM G1, DM G3 and DM H10 of
Page 25 and 26: egeneration of the White City area
Page 27 and 28: 1.3 Ariel Way and the White City In
Page 29 and 30: 2.3 The proposed extension will mir
Page 31 and 32: Sustainability and Energy Access No
Page 33 and 34: viability. The expansion of Net-a-P
Page 35 and 36: 4.28 The appearance of the scheme h
Page 37 and 38: combined with the retail and leisur
Page 39 and 40: Car Parking 4.57 A total of 4,500 c
Page 41 and 42: that developments which are located
Page 43 and 44: contribute to the wider Opportunity
Page 45 and 46: Applicant: The Governing Body Pope
Page 47 and 48: In order that the Council may be sa
Page 49 and 50: hours of use; the number and times
Page 51 and 52: To ensure that the amenity of occup
Page 53 and 54: Management of Land Contamination (D
Page 55 and 56: 39) The use of the replacement Fati
Page 57 and 58: 6. Access and Crime Prevention: Sub
Page 59 and 60:
part of an informal consultation pr
Page 61 and 62:
ii) The design and impact of the pr
Page 63 and 64:
dioceses to discourage free use of
Page 65 and 66:
structures that make a positive con
Page 67 and 68:
at first floor level, with the majo
Page 69 and 70:
HIGHWAYS and PARKING 3.33 The NPPF
Page 71 and 72:
document that should be annually re
Page 73 and 74:
levy is set at £0 per square metre
Page 75 and 76:
Applicant: Mr S Bennett C/o The Spo
Page 77 and 78:
of any proposed storage enclosure,
Page 79 and 80:
17) Prior to commencement of the de
Page 81 and 82:
25) No development shall commence u
Page 83 and 84:
30) The sports pitches/courts hereb
Page 85 and 86:
Consultation Comments: Comments fro
Page 87 and 88:
2.3 The Football Association (FA) h
Page 89 and 90:
- Large facility surrounded by 3m f
Page 91 and 92:
applicants state that small-sided f
Page 93 and 94:
3.12 It is noted that the existing
Page 95 and 96:
it is appropriate for the intended
Page 97 and 98:
was proposed by the applicant that
Page 99 and 100:
collection arrangements, including
Page 101 and 102:
4.0 CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATION
Page 103 and 104:
Applicant: Mr S Bennett C/o The Spo
Page 105 and 106:
4 Wolfe House Australia Road White
Page 107 and 108:
Applicant: Fruition Properties C/O
Page 109 and 110:
to occupation of the development he
Page 111 and 112:
17) Prior to commencement of the de
Page 113 and 114:
Contamination (Defra 2004) or the c
Page 115 and 116:
At least one of the proposed spaces
Page 117 and 118:
unacceptable noise and disturbance
Page 119 and 120:
2.0 PUBLICITY AND CONSULTATIONS 2.1
Page 121 and 122:
3.5 In this instance, the Class B8
Page 123 and 124:
ack from the frontage. In relation
Page 125 and 126:
additional loss of privacy to Court
Page 127 and 128:
which is in accordance with the Cou
Page 129 and 130:
on its merits and reach a decision
Page 131 and 132:
Applicant: Mr Eric Holroyd Housing
Page 133 and 134:
8) The development shall not commen
Page 135 and 136:
To ensure a satisfactory external a
Page 137 and 138:
are caused to humans, controlled wa
Page 139 and 140:
the council. The approved details s
Page 141 and 142:
Neighbour Comments: Letters from: D
Page 143 and 144:
3.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 3.1 The
Page 145 and 146:
3.10 and 3.11; b) affordable housin
Page 147 and 148:
of the desirability of sustaining a
Page 149 and 150:
3.33 All units would be built to Li
Page 151 and 152:
HIGHWAYS MATTERS Car parking and tr
Page 153 and 154:
including the incorporation of sust
Page 155 and 156:
3.70 The scheme has been assessed f
Page 157 and 158:
Applicant: Mr Eric Holroyd Housing
show all

Planning Applications PDF 1 MB - Meetings, agendas and minutes

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?