Agenda item
2 Trafalgar Way, London
Decision:
On a vote of 0 for, 4 against and 2 abstentions the Committee indicated that it did not support the officers’ recommendation to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the site to provide a residential led, mixed use scheme including two towers of 29 and 35 storeys in height, use of the site as 397 residential units, a re-provided drive-through restaurant, retail/financial and professional service units, a crèche, gymnasium, associated amenity space including a children’s play area atop a podium level and car parking at 2 Trafalgar Way. On a vote of 4 for, 1 against and 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED that planning permission be REFUSED on the grounds that
a) The scale of the development is not suitable for the nature of the site; and
ii) The mitigation measures proposed were insufficient.
Minutes:
Mr Michael Kiely, Head of Development Decisions, introduced the site and proposal for the redevelopment of the site to provide a residential led, mixed use scheme including two towers of 29 and 35 storeys in height, use of the site as 397 residential units, a re-provided drive-through restaurant, retail/financial and professional service units, a crèche, gymnasium, associated amenity space including a children’s play area atop a podium level and car parking at 2 Trafalgar Way.
Mr Julian Carter spoke on behalf of the applicant, outlining the benefits of the scheme which included affordable housing, child play space, private amenity space and £3 million in S106 contributions for health, education and the improvement of Preston’s Road.
Councillor Tim Archer spoke on behalf of the residents. He felt that the design of the building was stunning. However, he was concerned about the impact of the development on the conservation area and the comments received from English Heritage. He also expressed concern about the density of the scheme and the noise which would be generated from the road and MacDonalds.
Mr Terry Natt, Strategic Development Committee, presented a detailed report on the application. He advised the Committee that the GLA was in support of the scheme. It was the view of officers that the proposal did not display any symptoms of overdevelopment and was appropriate in the location.
Members asked questions relating to the viability assessment undertaken, the cost of improvement to the roundabout and the provision of affordable housing. The Committee was in agreement that the design was of a superior quality; however concerns were expressed in respect of the density and the suitability of the site.
Mr Natt advised that work was being carried out on a Masterplan for the area to secure contributions from all developments in the area towards traffic improvements. No accurate costings had been provided by TfL. He advised that although the development did not meet the Council’s targets in relation to affordable housing, a balance needed to be sought between the provision of housing and improving an area or environment. The viability of the scheme also needed to be taken into consideration.
On a vote of 0 for, 4 against and 2 abstentions the Committee indicated that it did not support the officers’ recommendation to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the site to provide a residential led, mixed use scheme including two towers of 29 and 35 storeys in height, use of the site as 397 residential units, a re-provided drive-through restaurant, retail/financial and professional service units, a crèche, gymnasium, associated amenity space including a children’s play area atop a podium level and car parking at 2 Trafalgar Way. On a vote of 4 for, 1 against and 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED that planning permission be REFUSED on the grounds that
1) The development is located in close proximity to major arterial roads containing very high levels of traffic that result in poor air quality and high noise levels (Noise Category Level D as identified in PPG24). The design of the development, consisting of a high density pair of towers atop a podium, has not responded appropriately to the constraints of the site, will create a low level of residential amenity for future residents and does not enable well designed mitigation of the external noise and pollution impacts. The development in its current form is therefore considered to be poorly designed for residential development and does not comply with PPS 23 and PPG 24, policies 3A.3, 4B.1, 4B.9 and 4B.10 of the London Plan (Consolidated with Alterations since 2004); policies ST23, DEV1 and DEV2 of the Unitary Development Plan 1998 (as saved 2007) and policies CP1, CP3, CP4, CP20, CP48, DEV1, DEV2, DEV5, DEV10, DEV11, DEV27 and HSG1 of the Interim Planning Guidance 2007: Core Strategy and Development Control, which seek to ensure appropriate levels of environmental amenity for future residents.
Supporting documents: