Hertsmere House, Columbus Tower

Transcription

1 planning report PDU/2350/01 25 February 2009 Hertsmere House, Columbus Tower in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets planning application no. PA/08/02709 & PA/08/02710 Strategic planning application stage 1 referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 The proposal This is a detailed planning application for the demolition of the existing Hertsmere House office building and the redevelopment of the site to provide a new 63-storey building consisting of 30,085 office space, 192 hotel rooms, 72 serviced apartments, a range of retail and leisure space, 74 car parking spaces, 158 cycle spaces along with a range of associated landscape and public realm improvements. The applicant The applicant is Commercial Estates, and the architect is Mark Weintraub Architecture. Strategic issues The principle of providing a new mixed-use building with a mix of office, hotel, serviced apartments, retail and leisure space on this site in the Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area is acceptable in strategic planning policy terms. However, at this stage there are a number of strategic planning issues that need to be addressed in greater detail. These include, a range of transport measures including the requirement for a Crossrail contribution, bus and DLR improvements, the level of car and cycle parking, the energy strategy, securing the proposed sustainable urban drainage techniques, the provision of off-site affordable housing and the quantum of wheelchair accessible hotel rooms and serviced apartments. Recommendation That Tower Hamlets be advised that the application does not fully comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 87 of this report; but that the possible remedies set out in paragraph 89 of this report could address these deficiencies. Context 1 On 19 January 2009 the Mayor of London received documents from Tower Hamlets Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor has until 2 March 2009 to provide the Council with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for page 1

2 taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor s use in deciding what decision to make. 2 The application is referable under Categories 1B and 1C of the Schedule to the Order 2008: Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings outside Central London and with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 square metres. Development which comprises of includes the erection of a building that is more than 30 metres high and outside the City of London. 3 Once Tower Hamlets Council has resolved to determine the application, it is required to refer it back to the Mayor for his decision as to whether to direct refusal; take it over for his own determination; or allow the Council to determine it itself. 4 The environmental information for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 has been taken into account in the consideration of this case. 5 The Mayor of London s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website Site description 6 The application site is hectares in size and is located at the western end of the West India Dock on the Isle of Dogs. The site is roughly rectangular in plan and is bounded to the east by the dock basin, to the west by Hertsmere Road, to the north by West India Quay, and to the south by Canary Wharf. The site is adjacent to the West India Quay Conservation Area. 7 The site is currently occupied by Hertsmere House, which is a four storey commercial building of brick construction and modest architectural quality. Hertsmere House currently provides office space for Barclays Bank and Morgan Stanley. 8 The site lies to the south of Aspen Way, which forms part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN). The nearest bus stops are 300 metres from the site providing services to a range of destinations. Docklands Light Railway (DLR) services are accessible within walking distance at Westferry, West India Quay and Canary Wharf stations. The Jubilee Line station at Canary Wharf is some 675 metres to the east. The site has a public transport accessibility level of 4 (in a range of 1 to 6 where 6 is excellent). The future Crossrail station at Canary Wharf will further enhance accessibility from Details of the proposal 9 The application proposes the demolition of the existing 4-storey office building and the redevelopment of the site to provide a 63-storey, mixed-use building at 242 metres in height. The proposed building is 93,423 sq.m in size and is comprised of the following mix of uses; page 2

3 Use Retail Office Leisure and fitness Pavilion amenity space Hotel rooms Serviced Apartments Basement Size / No. 2,264 sq.m. 30,085 sq.m. 2,737 sq.m. 1,281 sq.m. 192 rooms 74 rooms 6,992 sq.m. 10 The application also includes servicing and plant rooms, 74 car parking spaces, 5 coach parking spaces, 42 motorcycle spaces and 158 cycle parking spaces (public and private), along with a range of public realm and landscape improvement works. Case history 11 On 14 April 2004 the former Mayor reviewed a planning application for this site at Hertsmere House in Canary Wharf (known as Columbus Tower), which was subsequently granted planning permission by Tower Hamlets Council. 12 The existing planning permission is due to expire this year and consequently the applicant has resubmitted this application to extend the life of the current permission for a further seven years. 13 While the current application remains largely unchanged from the previous scheme, there have been some minor alterations, which include the loss of one car parking space, the provision of six additional cycle spaces and a new energy strategy. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance 14 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows: World city role Mix of uses Urban design Tall buildings/views Access Crossrail Transport Energy and climate change Noise London Plan London Plan London Plan; PPS1 London Plan; View Management Framework SPG London Plan; PPS1; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; draft London Plan Alteration; draft Crossrail SPG London Plan; the Mayor s Transport Strategy; PPG13; London Plan; PPS1, PPS Planning and Climate Change Supplement to PPS1; PPS3; PPG13; PPS22; the Mayor s Energy Strategy; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG London Plan; the Mayor s Ambient Noise Strategy; PPG24 15 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the Tower Hamlets 1998 Unitary Development Plan and the London Plan (Consolidated with Alterations since 2004). page 3

4 16 The following are also relevant material considerations: In October 2007 the Secretary of State directed Tower Hamlets Council to withdraw the submitted Tower Hamlets Core Strategy, Development Control and Leaside Area Action Plan development plan documents. Currently the Council is working on a renewed Issues and Options consultation for the Core Strategy. In the interim the Council has adopted these withdrawn documents as Interim planning guidance for the purposes of development control. However, as these documents are yet to be subject to public consultation, little weight can be afforded to them as development control documents World city role 17 The Tower Hamlets 1998 UDP identifies the site as falling within the Tower Hamlets Central Area Zone. Policy ST10 sets out the strategic objectives for Tower Hamlets Central Area Zone and includes the need for the area to contribute towards London s role as an international, national, and regional centre for commerce. This policy states that planning permission will normally be granted for Central London core activities of a scale and type compatible with fostering London s role as a financial, commercial, tourist, and cultural centre. 18 The site is located within the London Plan identified Isle of Dogs Opportunity Area. This area plays a key role in complementing the international offer presented by the London Plan identified Central Activities Zone, where planning policy promotes finance, specialist retail, tourist and cultural uses and activities, and should aim to accommodate at least 150,000 jobs by London Plan policy 2A.5 on Opportunity Areas requires development in this area to maximise transport accessibility, promote social and economic inclusion, take account of community, environmental and other distinctive local characteristics, while also ensuring the delivery of good design and a high quality public realm. 19 London Plan policy recognises and supports London s role as a world city and identifies the need to facilitate London s continued attractiveness to international business through the supply of appropriate floorspace in the northern part of the Isle of Dogs. 20 London Plan policies 3B.1 and 3B.2 support this aspect of London s world city role and offer continued support for London s economic development, by seeking the provision of a variety of type, size and cost of business premises to meet the needs of all business sectors. 21 In this regard, the provision of a significant amount of office space in a landmark building, combined with five star hotel accommodation, will help to meet the future demands of the business and financial sector and will enable London to maintain and expand it s world city role in accordance with national, strategic and local policies. Mix of uses Office 22 The existing office building is 6,913 sq.m. (Gross External Area). This application proposes the development of 30,085 sq.m. of office space, which represents an overall office uplift of 23,172 sq.m. London Plan policy 3B.3 states that where increases in office floorspace are proposed within the northern section of the Isles of Dogs, developments should provide for a mix of uses, including housing, unless such a mix would demonstrably conflict with other London Plan policies. 23 London Plan policy 5G.3 and paragraph identify Canary Wharf as an exception to this rule, where mixed-use development may compromise the importance of sustaining clusters of page 4

5 business activities. Consequently, a financial contribution should be provided either directly or through a planning obligation to provide off-site affordable housing. 24 Tower Hamlet Council s original section 106 legal agreement required the applicant to provide a financial contribution of 1 million towards off-site affordable housing, which the previous Mayor accepted as a reasonable contribution towards affordable housing in April Hotel 25 The application also includes a five star hotel with a 192-bedroom hotel and 74 associated serviced apartments. Policy 3D.7 of the London Plan relates to the provision of visitor accommodation and facilities. It sets a strategic target of 40,000 net additional hotel bedrooms by 2026, seeks to focus strategically important provision in town centres and Opportunity Areas with good public transport access to central London, and supports the provision of a range of tourist accommodation including apart-hotels and an increase in the quality and quantity of fully wheelchair accessible accommodation. 26 The provision of a hotel with serviced apartments on this site will complement Canary Wharf s role as a leading centre of business activity by serving business tourism, and in this respect will support London s world city status. The serviced apartments will provide short-term accommodation for the international business sector. In order to ensure that the intended planning function of the serviced apartments is maintained in perpetuity, the Council should impose a condition or a clause in the section 106 agreement which limits the length of stay by individual occupiers to no more than 90 consecutive days. Retail 27 London Plan policies 3D.1 and 3D.3 seek to encourage retail and related uses in town centres and to maintain and improve retail facilities. Map 5C.1 identifies the network of strategically designated town centres in the north east London sub-region, in which Canary Wharf is designated as a major centre. 28 In addition, to the identified hotel and office space, the scheme includes 5,001 sq.m. of new retail and leisure floorspace. In line with Canary Wharf s designation as a major centre, the expansion of retail provision in this highly accessible location is supported in strategic planning terms. The location of the new retail space will help to provide active frontage along West India dock edge and Hertsmere Road, which is welcomed. Summary 29 Subject to the requirement a contribution towards off-site affordable housing, the proposed mix of uses; including office, hotel, serviced apartments, retail and leisure on this site accords with strategic planning policy. Design 30 Good design is central to the objectives of the London Plan and is specifically promoted by the policies contained within Chapter 4B which encompass both general design principles and specific design issues. London Plan Policy 4B.1 sets out a series of overarching design principles for development in London. Other design polices in this chapter and elsewhere in the London Plan include specific design requirements relating to maximising the potential of sites, the quality of new housing provision, tall and large-scale buildings, built heritage, views, and the Blue Ribbon Network. page 5

6 31 The new building will comprise a tall, slender, east-west oriented tower of 63 stories. The tower tapers at both ends to create a wing or aerofoil form that helps create a discernable silhouette with a point tower rather than a simple slab. The tower is set upon a 2 to 3-storey base building that includes a large covered pavilion space at ground level that will be open to the general public. Fig 1: West Elevation Fig 2: North Elevation Fig 3: View of scheme from Wren s Landing (Images taken from submitted Design and Access Statement Mark Weintraub Architecture and Design Dec 08) 32 The building uses are vertically stacked, with retail space on both the ground and first floors, office space is located between floors 2 and 23, a gym on floors 24 and 25, and the hotel with serviced apartments and restaurant uses between floors 26 and The sculpted tower point will help to differentiate the tower from the typical block form of the majority of the Canary Wharf cluster and will form a striking addition to the London skyline. The proposal will visually blend in with the existing Canary Wharf cluster when viewed from the north, east, and south. When viewed from certain perspectives in the City or the Queens Walk area near Tower Bridge the building will appear somewhat separated from the existing cluster, however this visual separation is unlikely to remain indefinitely as future development at 1 Park Place, Newfoundland and Riverside South will fill in this gap. 34 The site is not within a conservation area, although the West India Dock Conservation Area lies immediately to the north and west of the site. There are a number of listed buildings in close proximity to the site, with a row of Grade 1 listed Napoleonic warehouses of particular significance. 35 The proposed building adjoins one end of the row of listed warehouses, with the existing West India Quay Tower at the other end of the row. The proposal will therefore bracket the row page 6

7 of warehouses between the two towers and will provide a high quality modern backdrop to the listed buildings. The 2-3 storey base element of the proposed building has been designed to respect the scale, height, and massing of the listed warehouses. Fig 4: View of the Pavilion base building from West India Quay (Image taken from submitted Design and Access Statement Mark Weintraub Architecture and Design Dec 08) 36 English Heritage has been consulted on the scheme and does not oppose the development, however a number of concerns have been expressed regarding the relationship of the tower to the adjacent conservation areas and listed buildings. However, it is considered that there is no strategic harm to the surrounding historic environment. 37 The scheme s potential micro-climatic effects, including shading, have been assessed as part of the Environmental Statement against established Building Research Establishment (BRE) standards. The proposed tower will create a shadow over a considerable area, however the tower s slender form means that the shadow will move quickly and as a consequence any effects will be short-lived. It should be noted that the proposal generates considerably less shadowing than a lower building with a larger footprint. While it is considered that the tower will not have an unacceptable shadowing effect, this is not a strategic matter and therefore the local planning authority should satisfy itself that the tower s effects on the conservation and residential areas to the north of the site are acceptable. Summary 38 In summary the design generally accords with the design polices of the London Plan and will introduce a well-designed and distinctive building to this prominent site in Canary Wharf. Strategic views 39 London Plan policies 4B.16 to 4B.18 along with table 4B.1 provide the policy framework for the management of strategically important views. The London View Management Framework (LVMF) Supplementary Planning Guidance provides further guidance on the implementation of these policies and assessment of the impact of new developments on designated views. 40 The proposed development does not fall within any of the strategic viewing corridors of St. Paul s Cathedral or the Palace of Westminster. The building does however affect the strategically important panoramic view from Greenwich Park (LVMF 5A.1), and will also be visible in the page 7

8 panoramic view from Primrose Hill (LVMF 4A.1) as well as the river prospect from Waterloo Bridge (LVMF 15B.1). 41 In accordance with the guidance contained in the LVMF, the applicant has undertaken a qualitative visual assessment for the impact of the proposed development on the view from Greenwich Park. From this location the proposed development would be seen as a slender addition to the existing cluster at Canary Wharf siting slightly to the west of Heron Quays, but clearly appreciated as being part of the existing cluster. While this applicant will result in a moderate change to the view, given the slim profile, the context of surrounding area along with the various consented scheme, this applications contribution to the cluster will be modest and complementary. Fig 5: LVMF view 5A.1 from Greenwich Park. (The proposed building is at the left end of the existing cluster) (Image taken from submitted Design and Access Statement Mark Weintraub Architecture and Design Dec 08) 42 In addition, the applicant has also considered the impact of this development on strategic views from Primrose Hill and Waterloo bridge, and while a detailed qualitative visual assessment from these vantage points have not been provided, it can be accepted that this scheme will have a very minor impact on these views and the proposed building will sit as part of, and be indistinguishable from, the existing and emerging Canary Wharf cluster of tall buildings. 43 The methodology and submitted visual assessment is broadly consistent with guidance contained in the LVMF and provides an adequate basis for assessment of the impact of the development. Access 44 London Plan policy 4B.5 requires all future development to meet the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion and requires design and access statements to explain how the principles of inclusive design, including the specific needs of disabled people, have been integrated into the page 8

9 proposed development and how inclusion will be maintained and managed. Further guidance to this policy is provided in the Mayor s Supplementary Planning Guidance Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment. 45 The applicant states that of the 266 hotel and serviced apartments, the scheme will include 13 wheelchair accessible rooms, which equates to a total of 4.9%. The applicant has not provided plans demonstrating how or where these rooms will be located, which must be provided. 46 In addition, Part M of the 2006 Building Regulations requires hotel schemes to provide a minimum of 5% wheelchair accessible rooms. Given the shortage of wheelchair accessible hotel rooms in London and the need for new provision in advance of the 2012 Olympic Games, it is disappointing that the applicant has only sought to try and achieve the minimum required by current building regulations. In line with London Plan policy 3D.7, consideration should be given to increasing this provision and illustrative layout plans of wheelchair accessible hotel rooms and apartments should be provided. The applicant is encouraged to undertake an assessment against the National Accessible Scheme developed by Visit Britain. 47 The applicant has indicated that the scheme will include seven dedicated blue badge accessible spaces, which equates to approximately 10% of total car parking provision and will be allocated as follows; 3 for office, 2 for hotel, 1 for retail and 1 for visitor. However, the submitted basement plans do not clearly mark out the sizes or the locations of these spaces, which must be provided. Transport Crossrail 48 The Crossrail route to Canary Wharf is set to pass under the application site at Hertsmere House with a new Crossrail station to be provided at West India Quay. The twin tunnels will pass directly underneath this building and this alignment has now been set and safeguarded. 49 The site lies within the main business area of the Isle of Dogs designated by Tower Hamlets Council as the Northern sub-area in their Isle of Dogs Area Action Plan and would therefore require a contribution to Crossrail. 50 Policy 3C.12A of the Proposed London Plan Alterations states that In view of the strategic regional importance of Crossrail to London s economic regeneration and development, developments which contribute to the transport needs that the project will wholly or partly address will be required to contribute towards its funding through the use of planning obligations, in accordance with relevant legislation and policy guidance. This is underpinned by London Plan Policy 6A.4 (and as amended in the Proposed London Plan Alterations), which establishes the strategic priorities for planning obligations. This states that affordable housing and transport should generally be given the highest importance. 51 Paragraph 4.9 of the draft Supplementary Planning Guidance Use of planning obligations in the funding of Crossrail states that contributions should be sought in respect of office development in the Central Activities Zone and the northern part of the Isle of Dogs which involves a net increase in office floorspace of more than 500 sq.m. The SPG does not set a specific tariff for the Isle of Dogs but advises that it should be higher than the central activities zone (CAZ). The acceptability in planning terms of further substantial development on the Isle of Dogs will be particularly dependent upon the additional public transport capacity provided by Crossrail, in terms of transporting additional employees into the area, and providing both further choice and ensuring greater resilience through provision of some redundancy should one of the existing rail services in page 9

10 the area (the Jubilee Line and the Docklands Light Railway) fail or have to run at reduced capacity. A contribution would therefore be required based on comparable schemes within the Isle of Dogs such as Wood Wharf, where the contribution was 291 per square metre based on net internal area. Applying this figure in this instance would result in a charge of around 5 million. The net internal area taking into account the office space lost as a result of the redevelopment should be confirmed by the applicant. The amount should be indexed at the Consumer Price Index (CPI) until the date of payment. 52 In addition, as the development site lies above the Crossrail alignment, there will be a need to attach conditions relating to co-ordination of works and the statutory safeguarding for Crossrail. It is understood that the Crossrail safeguarding team will be responding to the Council directly. DLR 53 Although Crossrail will provide additional capacity from 2017 the Transport Assessment acknowledges that in the short-term there will be a shortfall in capacity for journeys in the eastbound direction in the morning peak. 54 This is particularly acute on the Jubilee Line but the DLR will also be operating close to, or beyond, capacity on some routes. The introduction of 3 car operation on the DLR route from Bank to Lewisham will provide some relief and in recognition of this, an index linked sum of 3 million was secured as part of the previous application towards 3 car upgrade works at DLR stations at Westferry or West India Quay. These works are being taken forward and will be essential to provide capacity in the eastbound morning peak before Crossrail services commence in It is therefore appropriate to secure a similar index linked sum as part of the current application. 55 Although a comprehensive assessment of line capacity has been carried out, there has been no assessment of the impact on any stations. Data on this, should be provided, identifying any capacity constraints and if necessary proposing appropriate mitigation. Bus 56 In terms of bus demand, the Transport Assessment should follow TfL s best practice guidance and include person based trip generation analysis for bus services, by time and direction, with peak hour generation calculated separately. It is inaccurate to assume that passengers arrive at regular intervals and travel on different routes. The conclusion that there will only be 2 additional bus passenger trips in the peak hour, as proposed by the applicant is flawed. Bus services on the Isle of Dogs are already operating at capacity and the forecast generation of 60 additional bus passenger trips in the peak hour would equate to an extra bus. In this regard a contribution of 180,000 towards increased bus capacity is required. The need for additional bus capacity was identified at the time of the previous application and a contribution sought. Since that time demand has continued to grow and all developments in the Isle of Dogs area that generate additional trips on the bus network are now expected to contribute to the provision of additional capacity. The actual contribution is commensurate with other developments in the surrounding area. Trip generation 57 TfL considers the trip rate and modal split estimates for the office and retail elements to be acceptable. However, there are concerns about the methodology to estimate trip rate based on floor area for the hotel given that the sites used may not be comparable. As such a more robust assessment is required for the hotel use based on sites of a similar scale, with a similar public transport accessibility level, and number of rooms. The modal split for the hotel use should be derived with reference to the travel characteristics in the Docklands area taking account of the Isle page 10

11 of Dogs Cordon Survey and 2001 Census data. The modal split estimate for the serviced apartments has been derived from TEMPRO, which is not acceptable to TfL this should be reviewed with reference to other data sources. More detail is also required on the trip rate assumptions for the leisure/fitness centre. The methodology used for the trip distribution assessment is acceptable, although evidence needs to be provided that all models have been calibrated and validated in accordance with TfL DTO Modelling Guidance. 58 Although TfL has concerns about aspects of the methodology, on the basis of the figures presented, the estimated trip generation is not expected to have a significant impact on the operation of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) or Strategic Road Network (SRN). Car parking 59 A total of 74 parking spaces are proposed including 7 disabled spaces. Although this is consistent with the previous permission, the proposed level of car parking exceeds the borough s current maximum standards for the office and hotel use, which would allow a total of 36 spaces. TfL believes that given the nature of the serviced apartments this element of the development should be entirely car free along with the retail and leisure uses. The allocation of parking between the hotel and office uses should also be set out clearly and may need to be controlled by an appropropriate planning condition. TfL would like to see some of the area allocated to private car parking considered for alternative uses including additional cycle parking and dedicated spaces for a car club. The proposed amount of motorcycle parking also appears high. 60 A substantial reduction in car parking should be accompanied by the inclusion of a car club, which is linked to accredited schemes in the surrounding area and available to all occupiers of the development. The section 106 agreement should ensure that occupants of the serviced apartments are not eligible for local parking permits. Cycle parking 61 The site is well located for cycle routes and has the potential to attract a high share of cycle trips. The provision of 158 cycle parking spaces meets minimum requirements for the office, hotel, retail and leisure uses but makes no provision for the serviced apartments. TfL would want to see increased provision to meet potential demand from occupiers. This could be achieved by reallocating some of the spaces originally proposed for car parking. 62 Although the inclusion of walk and cycle catchments is useful, these are very general and should identify specific origins and destinations such as public transport facilities. TfL welcomes the comprehensive audit of walking routes carried out as part of the Transport Assessment. Measures to address the deficiencies identified outside the main Canary Wharf estate, particularly on Hertsmere Road and other locations where they form principal routes to public transport facilities should be implemented as part of the Travel Plan. Works to consider would include footway widening, removal of street clutter and guard railing, provision of dropped kerbs and tactile paving, pedestrian signage or lighting improvements. Travel plan 63 TfL notes the inclusion of an interim travel plan and commends the inclusion of modal split targets for employees. A comprehensive travel plan prepared in accordance with TfL guidance and covering all proposed uses including the serviced apartments should be secured through the section 106 agreement. 64 A detailed constructions logistics plan, delivery and servicing plan and construction workers travel plan should also be secured. These will need to take account of Crossrail page 11

12 construction impacts and timescales and should set ambitious targets for use of water transport during the construction phase. Autotrack diagrams should be provided to demonstrate that access to the basement for Heavy Goods Vehicle s can be achieved safely. TfL notes the provision of facilities for taxi and coach pick up and drop off. Although the borough does not require coach parking, space should be allowed for this, given that space will be released as a result of the reduction in car parking. Summary 65 In summary the analysis in the submitted Transport Assessment has demonstrated that there is a need for contributions towards Crossrail, DLR 3 car station works and increased bus capacity. The proposed level of car parking should be reduced which would free up space to increase cycle parking. Further submissions are required to clarify the methodology for trip rates and modal split and to provide further details of servicing and construction impacts. Energy 66 The London Plan climate change policies as set out in chapter 4A collectively require developments to make the fullest contribution to tackling climate change by minimising carbon dioxide emissions, adopting sustainable design and construction measures, prioritising decentralised energy supply, and incorporating renewable energy technologies with a target of 20% carbon reductions from on-site renewable energy. The policies set out ways in which developers must address mitigation of and adaptation to the effects of climate change. Policies 4A.2 to 4A.8 of the London Plan focus on how to mitigate climate change, and the carbon dioxide reduction targets that are necessary across London to achieve this. Modelling baseline carbon dioxide emissions (policy 4A.4 of London Plan) 67 The applicant has provided insufficient modelling information on energy use. The applicant should model the main building uses, including; office, hotel, retail and the serviced apartments using Building Regulations approved software. The applicant should also provide a breakdown of energy use on-site, compliant to Building Regulation 2006, as well as describe the non-regulated energy demand and associated carbon dioxide emissions. The applicant should provide a table of Building Emission Rates as well as Target Emission Rates for the main uses of the development. Energy efficiency standards (Policy 4A.3 of the London Plan). 68 In the submitted sustainability statement the applicant has provided a description of the proposed energy efficiency measures, which include lighting and cooling control, improved insulation and cladding, heat recovery systems etc, which is welcomed. However, the applicant must indicate the carbon saving that will be achieved as a result of these measures beyond Building Regulations 2006, which should also include non-regulated energy demand. The applicant should provide details of building fabrics specifications that will be adopted, such as air permeability and U-values. Heating infrastructure and plant space (policies 4A.6) 69 The applicant must confirm that the scheme will include one communal energy centre that will link all elements of the building. The applicant should describe the heating and cooling infrastructure and by what means the heating and cooling will be provided. 70 The applicant should also describe the plant room, and demonstrate (indicatively) that sufficient space has been allocated. page 12

13 Combined Heat and Power (Policy 4A.6) 71 The submitted application proposes two systems; dock water-cooling or a fuel cell combined heat and power plant. Post submission discussion has indicated that the applicant is now seeking to install the fuel cell combined heat and power plant and further information is to be provided. 72 The proposed fuel cell is 320 kilowatt in size. The applicant has sized the plant so as to achieve a 20% carbon reduction beyond baseline emissions, which is not a policy compliant approach. 73 The proposed fuel cell combined heat and power plant should be optimally sized based on the actual demand of the site. The applicant should provide both heating and cooling profiles for the development and should show what contribution each heating/cooling technology will provide to meet the development s energy demand. To aid in the sizing of the combined heat and power plant the electricity demand profile is also sought. Cooling infrastructure and Absorption cooling (Policies 4A.6) 74 No confirmed option has been proposed in relation to how cooling will be provided. However, one option is to install a dock-water cooling system. While this approach may be acceptable it may not be technically possible due to restrictions on how much the heat rejection the dock can absorb. The applicant should provide further information to demonstrate how cooling needs and will be supplied. The dock-water cooling option should be taken forward to the Environment Agency and await their response. Renewable energy technologies (policy 4A.7) 75 At this stage the applicant has not provided a firm commitment for the use of any renewable energy technologies. The applicant has indicated that a dock water-cooling system may be appropriate but, as set out in paragraph 73, further information is required. 76 The applicant must provide further details as to how much of a carbon saving could be achieved through the use of a full range of renewable technology s, which take account for specific site constraint. Climate change measures 77 Developments are required to be adaptable to the climate they will face over their lifetime and address the five principles set out in policy 4A.9 of the London Plan. Policies 4A.10 4A.18 cover strategic issues of the urban heat island effect and water use in particular and include development specific requirements to deal with these, including a water use target for residential development. Living roofs (Policy 4A.11) 78 The design approach to the tower, and base building, has significantly reduced the possibility to include green or living roofs into the design of the building, which given the design of the building is acceptable. page 13

14 Flood risk assessment (Policies 4A.12 and 13) 79 The site is within flood zone 3 and the applicant has provided a Flood Risk Assessment. The Flood Risk Assessment acknowledges that the site is located within zone 3a and that it is protected to a high degree by existing flood defences. It also states that dock walls will be replaced and strengthened. 80 However, the Flood Risk Assessment does not consider how the building would cope with the residual risk if it were subject to a flood. While it is noted that the basement area is being deepened, the Flood Risk Assessment should set out measures to mitigate and manage an extreme flood event including flood warning, evacuation (if appropriate) and recovery. Further consideration should also be given to the location of, and protection of, vital services such as electrical supplies and lift gear that are often found in such basement areas. Sustainable drainage (Policy 4A.14) 81 The applicant has provided flood risk and drainage information and has indicated that surface water will be routed into the docks. This proposal is welcomed as being in line with the sustainable drainage hierarchy set out in London Plan policy 4A.14. In particular it is beneficial as it reduces the loading on the combined sewer network. In addition, the applicant is proposing the use of rainwater harvesting and grey water recycling measures to reduce on-site water use. 82 These three drainage measures should be secured by appropriate planning conditions. Noise 83 There are no apparent strategic noise concerns arising from this proposal at present. However, as recognised in the submitted Environmental Statement, the detailed design will need to include mitigation to address the potential for perceptible vibration and structure-borne noise inside the building from the Crossrail tracks that will be built immediately below it in the future. 84 Tower Hamlets can set conditions or use its powers under the Control of Pollution Act, as appropriate, to address any other noise concerns. In particular - as suggested for the currently consented scheme, Tower Hamlets may wish to take account of the possibility of noise creep in the area due to the number of new buildings constructed in recent years, with each emitting noise from building services plant. This could be avoided by the use of (lower) absolute noise limits, rather than the proposed limits that are relative to current background noise levels that have been influenced by the other recent buildings. Local planning authority s position 85 The view of the local planning authority, in relation to this planning application, is not known at the time of writing this report. Legal considerations 86 Under the arrangements set out in Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor is required to provide the local planning authority with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. Unless notified otherwise by the Mayor, the Council must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order if it subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the application, in order that the Mayor may decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, or direct the Council under Article 6 of the Order to refuse the application, or issue a page 14

15 direction under Article 7 of the Order that he is to act as the local planning authority for the purpose of determining the application. There is no obligation at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions regarding a possible direction, and no such decision should be inferred from the Mayor s statement and comments. Financial considerations 87 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion 87 London Plan policies on world city role, mix of uses, design, strategic views, access, transport, noise, energy and climate change measures are relevant to this application. The application complies with some of these policies but not with others, for the following reasons: Energy: The applicant has provided insufficient detail on the; modelling work, energy efficiency measures, the communal energy strategy, the cooling strategy, the proposed fuel cell combined heat and power plant, or the renewable energy component. Climate change: The applicant has stated that the scheme will include a range sustainable urban drainage techniques but only limited detail has been provided at this stage. Affordable housing: The applicant has not set out a financial contribution towards the provision of off-site affordable housing. Transport: The scheme does not make provision for Crossrail, DLR improvements, Bus improvements. In addition, the scheme includes a high level of car parking and a low provision of cycle parking spaces. Access: The level of wheelchair accessible hotel rooms and serviced apartments at 4.9% is disappointing. In addition, further information is required in relation to the location of the wheelchair accessible rooms along with the location and the size of the proposed blue badge car parking. 88 On balance, the application does not comply with the London Plan. 89 The following changes might, however, remedy the above-mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan: Energy: The applicant must provide additional detail on the proposed energy strategy as set out in paragraphs 66 to 76 of this report. Climate change: The local planning authority should include appropriate planning conditions requiring the installation of the proposed sustainable urban drainage techniques as set out in the submitted sustainability report. Affordable housing: An appropriate financial contribution should be secured to deliver off-site affordable housing. Transport: The analysis in the submitted Transport Assessment has demonstrated that there is a need for contributions towards Crossrail, DLR 3 car station works and increased bus capacity. The proposed level of car parking should be reduced which would free up space to increase cycle parking. Further submissions are required to clarify the methodology for trip rates and modal split and to provide further details of servicing and construction impacts. page 15

16 Access: The applicant should seek to increase the overall level of wheelchair accessible hotel rooms and serviced apartments and should also provide detail as to the design and location of these rooms and the proposed blue badge accessible car parking spaces. for further information, contact Planning Decisions Unit: Giles Dolphin, Head of Planning Decisions Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) Colin Wilson, Strategic Planning Manager (Planning Frameworks) Michael Mulhern, Case Officer page 16