Committee STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE Item
Report Title BLOCK B, THAMES WATER SITE, DEAL’S GATEWAY SE8
Contributors Louise Holland
Class PART 1 Date 8 APRIL 2003
Reg. Nos. DC/02/52441 and DC/03/53010 (Duplicate Applications)
Applications dated 10.12.02
Applicant Sellwood Planning on behalf of St James Homes Ltd
Proposal The construction of a part seven, part ten storey building
comprising 38, one bedroom and 2, two bedroom
live/work units, 47, one bedroom and 12 studio self-
contained flats, 960 m2 of ‘Life Lab’ B1 office space and
114 car parking spaces on two basement levels;
comprising revised proposals to Block B and the
basement and podium levels to Block A, together with
the provision of a vehicular access through the
basement of Block B to serve 6-42 Blackheath Road,
in connection with the planning permission dated 23
February 2001 (DC/00/46436 & 46436C) for the
redevelopment of the Thames Water Site, Deal's
Gateway SE8 to provide a mixed use scheme.
Applicant's Plan Nos. 517_1001, 1002A, 1003A, 1004A, 1005A, 1010A and
1020A; Design Statement, Town Planning Statement,
Transport Statement, Life Lab Brochure (for
Background Papers (1) Case File DE/121/A/TP
(2) Unitary Development Plan
(3) Revised Deposit Draft Unitary Development Plan
(4) Planning and Design Brief May 2000
(5) PPG 1: General Policy and Principles
(6) PPG 3: Housing
(7) PPG 13: Transport
Zoning Adopted UDP – Area of Archaeological Priority
Revised Deposit Draft UDP – Sustainable Living Area;
Area of Archaeological Priority; Mix of Housing and
Employment Uses including Live/Work
CONSULTATIONS AND REPLIES ON BOTH APPLICATIONS
Appropriate planning conditions previously suggested in order to safeguard archaeological
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) -4-
London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority
Comments made in relation to access for fire appliances.
Highways Agency Any response to be reported verbally.
London Transport Planning No reply
Transport for London Street Response to be reported verbally.
London Electricity Group Plc
Advised of cable close to site boundary. Raise no objection subject to cable and associated
rights not being affected.
Environment Agency No reply
Transport for London Docklands Light Railway
Attention is drawn to a DLR proposal to upgrade present system to increase passenger
capacity. As part of this scheme Deptford Bridge Station is to be extended, which will require
temporary work sites during the construction phase within the Deal’s Gateway location.
Advice provided in relation to construction activity in the vicinity of the DLR. It is possible
that DLR’s noise targets may be exceeded on some floors of the proposed building.
London Borough of Greenwich Raise no objection
Deptford Discovery Team No reply
Neighbours & Local Amenity Societies
Brockley Society for Planning
St John’s Society
Telegraph Hill Society
Lewisham Environment Trust
6-80, 7-41 Blackheath Road
1-24 Sylva Cottages, 27-35 Brookmill Road
1-36 Crosslet Vale
2-52 Deptford Bridge
Flats 101-112, 201-212, 301-312, 401-412, 501-508, 601-604 Indiana Building
Flats 1-4, 101-109, 201-210, 301-310, 401-410, 501-510, 601-605 Dakota Building
Flats 1-15, 101-116, 201-216, 301-316, 401-416, 501-510 Montana Building
Flats 1-7, 101-108, 201-208, 301-308, 401-408, 501-508, 601-604 Idaho Building Deal’s
Notice on Site and Press Notice
Two letters have been received from residents of Indiana Building (Block C). One letter from
the occupier of No. 301 expresses thanks for the consultation and notes that a further
response will be sent if any objections are to be raised.
The other response, from the occupier of Flat 502 objects to the proposal on the following
(1) Additional four storeys would dramatically decrease privacy on my terrace.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) -5-
(2) Reduce light to terrace and lounge.
(3) Reduce view to Canary Wharf and Cutty Sark.
(4) Thus reducing the value of my property.
(Letters are available to Members)
Design & Conservation Panel The Panel had no further comment to make.
Highways & Transportation To be reported verbally
Environmental Health Residential - No objections
Pollution Control No comments in addition to any previously made
relating to this scheme.
District Surveyor No additional response.
Conservation/Urban Design No objection.
OBSERVATIONS ON BOTH APPLICATIONS
Planning permission was originally granted in February 2001 for the redevelopment of the
Deal’s Gateway site with a mixed-use development comprising 457 flats, 40 live/work units,
B1, and A1/A2 and A3 floorspace. Construction of the development is now well advanced.
The applications, which are the subject of this report, relate to the northern part of the Deals
Gateway site close to the entrance to the development. The Deal’s Gateway site overall has
an area of 2.91 hectares (7.2 acres), and lies to the south of Deptford Bridge, close to the
junction with Blackheath Road and Greenwich High Road. The DLR railway station and an
adjacent vacant site in the borough of Greenwich separate the site from Deptford Bridge.
Access into the site is via Deal’s Gateway.
Some three-quarters of the site previously formed part of the Thames Water pumping
station, which became surplus to Thames Water requirements, and the remainder formerly
comprised part of a public open space known as Broadway Fields. This part of the site was
used as a site compound during construction of the DLR.
The western boundary of the site is mainly formed by the DLR viaduct beyond which is the
eastern part of Broadway Fields which has been landscaped, taking advantage of a number
of existing trees; beyond is the Ravensbourne River.
The level of the DLR along the western boundary rises significantly at this point from
almost site level in the south to high level above the A2 at the station itself. Pedestrian
and cycle routes run beside and under the DLR railway and a new bridge links the station
and park to Brookmill Road.
Also to the west of the site, an older bridge provides access into a fenced open space on
the western side of the river, and to the north of that site are 4-storey buildings forming
part of the Seager site.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) -6-
The northern boundary adjoins the rear of industrial/commercial buildings fronting
Blackheath Road. Beyond the commercial properties to the east is Greenwich Academy, a
Grade II listed building formerly in education use but now converted into apartments. The
eastern boundary adjoins the rear gardens of residential development fronting Crosslet Vale
(a cul-de-sac leading off Blackheath Road), Beck Close and Franklin Close both of which
are cul-de-sacs leading off Coldbath Street and John Penn Street in the London Borough of
Greenwich. To the south the site is bounded by Thames Water operational land.
Apart from trees and shrubs along the boundary there are relatively few trees within the
site itself, the most significant trees are a strong band running diagonally across the
northern part of the site and consisting of mature Lombardy poplars.
The junction of Deal’s Gateway with the A2 is light controlled and divided into three lanes,
one of which turns left only to London, another, straight ahead and the third for traffic
entering the site. The borough boundary runs along the northern and eastern parts of the
Various planning permissions have been granted over the years in connection with the
Thames Water pumping station.
As part of the DLR proposals a land exchange has taken place involving the Council
exchanging the part of Broadway Fields to the east of the DLR alignment for Thames
Water land in Brookmill Road.
Following completion of a Section 106 Agreement, planning permission was granted on 23
February 2001 for the redevelopment of the site with a mixed use scheme comprising
residential development (170 one bedroom and 287 two bedroom units), B1 offices, 40
live/work units, A1, A2 and A3 units, an ancillary gym/fitness centre, together with
associated car parking and landscaping.
The approved development comprised 15 blocks ranging in height from 2 to 8 floors with the
tallest building (Block K) being close to the western boundary of the site. The main access to
the development would remain from the north via Deal’s Gateway and the approved scheme
also includes the extension of Beck Close to provide access to the southern area of the site.
It is not intended to provide a vehicular through route from Deal’s Gateway to Beck Close.
The non-residential uses are largely concentrated in the northern part of the site closest to
Deptford Bridge. The approved development includes a total of 3,798 m2 of B1 commercial
floorspace to be accommodated mainly in the seven storey Block A at the apex of the site,
and also on the ground floor of Block B.
Subsequently a number of submissions have been made to the Council for approval of
various reserved matters, and approvals have been issued in respect of the majority of
In August 2001 planning permission was granted for four separate applications in respect
of revised proposals for Blocks C, D, E and F. The revised proposals involved revisions to
the proposed mix of units, a reduction in storey heights together with the provision of an
additional floor to Blocks C, D and E, and up to two additional floors to Block F.
Cumulatively the revised proposals provided for up to 69 additional units and up to 89
additional habitable rooms.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) -7-
In March 2002 the Planning Committee approved applications in respect of revised
proposals for Blocks G, H, J and K comprising the provision of 39 studio flats, 128 one
bedroom, 93 two bedroom and 1 three bedroom flats. The revised proposals provided for
85 additional units.
In November 2001 planning permission was granted to the Stephen Lawrence Trust for an
education centre with business space, incubator offices, exhibition space and support
facilities, including offices for the Trust. This would provide an alternative development for
the site identified on the plans of the originally approved scheme as Block A, which is the
main B1 element of the scheme.
An application was submitted to the Council in April 2001 for the construction of a
vehicular access from the rear of 6-42 Blackheath Road to the A2/Deal’s Gateway
junction. This is in connection with the proposed redevelopment of land and premises
within Greenwich between the site and Blackheath Road for a mixed use development;
and the application shows that the Greenwich site would be accessed off Deal’s Gateway
between Blocks A and B. The application to Greenwich was refused and a subsequent
appeal dismissed. The reasons for refusal related to lack of employment floorspace,
design and bulk of part of the development and concerns about achievement of a
satisfactory residential environment in relation to part of the development fronting on to
A further application by St James Homes for the development of 6-42 Blackheath Road
with a mixed use scheme was submitted to the London Borough of Greenwich in February
2003. The proposed development comprises a mixed scheme of residential, live-work
and a mix of commercial uses including A1, B1 and B8 floorspace fronting Blackheath
Road. The development would step up from five storeys adjacent to the listed school
building to 7 storeys at the corner of Deal’s Gateway. This scheme envisages that the
residential and B1/B8 car parking will be provided at basement level and would be
accessed via Deal’s’ Gateway. The scheme includes provision to relocate within the
development the Kwik Fit tyre and exhaust-fitting unit that currently occupies part of the
site and this element of the proposed development would continue to be serviced from the
existing access off Blackheath Road.
The current duplicate applications relate to Block B. The consented scheme for this block
was for a six storey building comprising 40 live/work units and 617m2 of B1 floorspace.
The current scheme is for a building ranging in height from seven to ten storeys comprising
40 live/work units and 59 apartments. The ground floor of the building would be occupied by
960m2 of B1 floorspace, which is intended to operate as a serviced office facility and flexible
workspace linked to both the live/work units and the apartments. The application is
accompanied by a supporting town planning statement, a transport statement and by a
brochure explaining how the ground floor ‘life lab’ is intended to operate. The application
site includes the site of Block A and includes 114 car parking spaces on two levels extending
under both blocks.
The scheme also includes vehicular access at basement level to the adjoining site in
Greenwich for which an application has been concurrently submitted to Greenwich Council.
The building generally occupies the site of the consented Block B and is also in an ‘L’ form.
The ‘leg’ of the ‘L’ fronting the ‘pocket’ park now is proposed to be angled back to enable a
more open link through to the proposed Greenwich site to be provided. There would be a
first floor podium level above the basement car park to the rear of Blocks A and B.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) -8-
Each of the live/work units has a separate workspace; these are of varying sizes, and the
live/work units are distributed throughout the building. Two units have two bedrooms and
the remainder are one bedroom units.
Of the 59 apartments, 12 are studio flats and the remainder are one-bedroom units.
The ten storey element is proposed at the south west corner of the block, and the building
steps down to 7 storeys along the frontage to the ‘pocket park’ towards the boundary with
Greenwich, and to 8 storeys towards the Block A site.
The elevation treatment reflects the design of the first phases of the development, featuring
elevations mainly of coloured render.
The application site also includes the part of the ‘pocket park’ closest to the proposed new
Approved Development Brief
On 11 May 2000 the Planning and Highways Committee - Lewisham Deptford considered
and approved a Planning and Design Brief for the site. That Brief was adopted as
Supplementary Planning Policy Guidance following consultation with the public and other
Accordingly, for formal planning purposes, the Brief would carry considerable weight. The
Brief sets out a number of objectives for the site including regeneration, high quality design,
sustainable development and a sustainable quality living environment, a balance of mixed
uses, local employment and enhancement of the local economy.
The Brief sets out the relevant UDP policies.
The Brief also drew attention to the fact that the London Borough of Greenwich is the traffic
authority for the A2 and advised that Blackheath Road is a priority red route and that
controls extended into Deal’s Gateway. It also mentioned that any site access
arrangements affecting the operation of Blackheath Road would require a variation of the
Local Road Local Plan which was prepared by the Traffic Section of Greenwich Strategic
Planning. Alterations to that Plan would require the approval of Transport for London.
The Brief places emphasis on the potential of the site to illustrate the benefits of a design led
approach to urban regeneration and sets out a number of general principles and site specific
issues; in relation to height and massing, the Brief states that a distinct visual presence
adjacent to the DLR station would be appropriate.
Government policy statements of particular relevance to these proposals are contained in
Planning Policy Guidance 1, 3 and 13.
In outlining the Government’s approach to planning, PPG 1 indicates three key strands:
sustainable development, mixed use and design. Government guidance in relation to
securing sustainable development advocates concentrating development of uses which,
generate a large number of trips, in locations well served by public transport.
PPG 3: Housing, in setting out the Government’s objectives, states that local planning
authorities should, among other things:-
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) -9-
plan to meet the housing requirements of the whole community, including those in
create more sustainable patterns of development by building in ways that exploit
and deliver accessibility by public transport to jobs, shopping, leisure, education
and other facilities;
place the needs of people before ease of traffic movement in designing the layout
of residential developments;
seek to reduce car dependence by facilitating more walking and cycling, by
improving linkages by public transport between housing, jobs, local services and
amenities and by planning for mixed use;
promote good design in new housing developments in order to create high quality
living environments in which people will choose to live.
The focus of Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport is to integrate land use and
transport planning, to reduce the need to travel and to contribute to sustainable
Adopted Unitary Development Plan
As mentioned above the approved development brief for the site would carry considerable
weight in the context of the current proposals. The Brief took account of the main policies in
the adopted Unitary Development Plan and the application must be considered in the
context of those adopted policies.
The main policies referred to in the Brief were EMP 10 Location of Small Office
Developments; EMP 17 New Industrial and Commercial Development; EMP 20 New
Development Infrastructure Requirements; SPAN 15 Industrial Development; HSG 11
Dwelling Mix – New Residential Development; HSG 23 Private Gardens in New Residential
Development; HSG 25 Child Density and Play Space, HSG 24 Amenity Space in New
Residential Development; BLT.ENV 1 Urban Design; BLT.ENV 3 Landscape; BLT.ENV 4
Trees; HSG 14 Housing for People with Disabilities; HSG 19 Layout and Design of New
Residential Development; LSR 5 Art in Public Places; ENV.PRO 4 Development of
Contaminated Land; ENV.PRO 11 Waste Recycling; BLT.ENV 20 Archaeology; and HSG
29 Affordable Housing.
The Council’s policies with regard to residential development are set out in Chapter 6 of the
UDP. The policies require that new development is constructed to a high standard of
design, is well laid out to ensure safety and privacy, is accessible, and is compatible with the
scale and appearance of the surrounding area, and which does not adversely affect the
amenities of adjoining residents by reason of overlooking, loss of light, noise and general
Policy HSG 20 relates to the density of new residential development and states that the
Council will expect new residential development to be built within a density range of 70-80
habitable rooms per acre. The policy sets out a number of exceptions to the policy where
higher densities can be acceptable in certain cases.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 10 -
Policy HSG 19 relates to the layout and design of new residential development and states
that the Council will only permit new residential development which complies with the
general design and layout criteria in policies BLT.ENV 1 and 3; meets the specific housing
design and layout criteria in policies HSG 11, 20 to 24 and 36; meets the parking standards
as outlined in policy TRN 18 and, has regard to the amenities and security of any existing
community to which it may be attached.
Revised Deposit Draft Review of Unitary Development Plan
The Revised Deposit Draft UDP started its second deposit stage in August 2001 and the
policies within the Revised Deposit Draft have now been adopted as Council policy. The
Revised Deposit Draft is currently awaiting the Inspector’s report.
Policy HSG 4A Dwelling Mix states:
“The Council will seek a mixture of dwelling sizes in the case of residential
developments of 15 units or more. The mix will be determined by reference to the
housing needs of the area, the nature of the development and its proposed
relationship to the surrounding area.”
The reasoned justification to the policy continues:
“According to PPG 3 local authorities should 'adopt policies which take full account
of changes in housing needs in their areas and which will widen the range of
housing opportunities to allow these to be met’. In order to create communities that
are balanced and sustainable it is essential that greater choice in the range of
housing types, styles and tenures is promoted within the Borough. The provision of
a mix of dwelling sizes (including family houses, single person units; and retirement
homes) will provide opportunities for existing residents to stay within the Borough as
they move along the housing ladder.
Just over two thirds of Lewisham households consist of no more than two persons.
The number of single person households in Lewisham is projected to grow to
42,000 by 2,016 accounting for just over 1 in 3 households in the Borough. The
Council will encourage the development of housing particularly in the Sustainable
Living Areas to meet the needs of this group…..”
In the Revised Deposit Draft UDP the site is within one of the Sustainable Living Areas
(SLA) identified by the Council. In those areas, policies HSG 12 and 13 of the Revised
Deposit Draft would apply. Policy HSG 12 deals with density and other planning standards,
and states that new residential development should usually be built within a density range of
180 to 210 habitable rooms per hectare, the upper limit of which is equal to approximately
84 habitable rooms per acre except in certain circumstances. Those circumstances include
occupation by elderly or students (where a higher density may be appropriate where car
parking can be reduced accordingly, in a conservation area where design considerations will
have greater weight, where an approved planning brief indicates that a higher density may
be appropriate, where housing is a subsidiary use to another main use (such as commercial,
retail or industrial development) in a mixed use scheme. The policy states further that all
proposals for high density residential development will be expected to demonstrate a high
quality of design in keeping with the character of the area and a high level of public transport
Draft policy HSG 13 deals with sustainable living areas and states that, in such areas, the
Council may apply density, parking and other planning standards more flexibly.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 11 -
In the reasoned justification for those policies, the Revised Deposit Draft UDP recognises
the influence that density can have in reducing demand for travel and promoting economy in
the use of land. It recognises that higher density housing can have a beneficial impact
primarily in areas where people can walk to at least local facilities and public transport
connections. The draft recognises that, at such locations, greater density can increase the
number of people who can meet most of their daily needs without the need for a car. The
draft continues by stating that, through careful manipulation of density, car parking and
dwelling mix in SLAs, an increased density of housing redevelopment may be achievable
without detriment to the residential environment. The major and district centres in the
Borough have been designated as SLAs because they are considered to have real potential
for sustainable development and innovative forms of urban living on the basis of their
accessibility to town centre services and public transport links. When high quality schemes
are proposed in the SLAs the Council may apply planning standards more flexibly.
The approved Development Brief took account of the UDP deposit draft and mentions some
of the relevant policies, many of which are substantially similar to the adopted UDP.
The principle of a mixed-use high density scheme has already been established by the
previous permissions and the main issues involved in the current applications would be to
assess whether the proposed amendments to the approved scheme raise any issues that
would justify refusal of planning permission.
As Members will recall, when the previous applications for revised proposals for Blocks C,
D, E and F were made, Council officers took legal advice on whether a fresh application
for the entire site should be required.
The legal opinion was that those applications should be treated as free-standing
applications for planning permission for specific areas within the scheme and would
effectively be alternatives for the development of the areas affected. The current
applications raise similar issues and would, if permitted, exist as alternatives to the
existing permission for Block B; and in addition would introduce a basement element to
For that reason, the current revisions should be assessed mainly in the context of the
changed approach to Block B, the effect of increased residential densities and any related
impacts such as additional traffic impact, the effect of the increased height of the building
on existing dwellings within the development, and any design issues.
It is also necessary to assess the impact and acceptability of the proposed access to the
proposed development of the neighbouring site at 6-42 Blackheath Road.
In addition Members should also consider the impact of changes to the external
appearance of the block and the impact on neighbouring residents.
Live/Work - Life Lab
The revised approach to Block B essentially proposes a combination of the more
conventional live/work units originally approved, with the addition of a further 59 residential
units connected to serviced workspace.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 12 -
The concept is described by the applicants in a supporting letter as ‘Life Lab’. They state
that they continue to take the view that Block B should provide the opportunity for
residents to live and work within Deal’s Gateway and conclude that while traditional
live/work units suit some people and some types of business it is not suitable for
everyone. The letter states:
“It is proposed that all of Block B will be part of ‘Life Lab’. Critical to this is the
creation of the business hub on the ground floor. This area will be subdivided into
(a) the fully staffed reception area
(b) the semi private area containing meeting rooms, ‘touch down’ space and
(c) the private workstation areas.
The key element is that the opportunity to lease space in the ‘Life Lab’ will be
given to every residential occupier in Block B (including the 40 traditional live/work
units). The concept is inherently flexible since all units will be marketed with the
opportunity for the purchaser to lease between one and four workspaces in the
‘Life Lab’. Subject to space being available, it is also envisaged that the small
business occupier of the ‘Life Lab’ will gradually increase or decrease the number
of leased work spaces. It is proposed to put a ‘cap’ on the number of work spaces
leased by any one company, since we feel that it would be undesirable if the
workspaces became dominated by one or two companies and it would run
contrary to the concept of encouraging small and starter companies. It is also felt
that by the time a company has reached the point where it has four or five
employees that it will wish to set up its own office. Given that these successful
small companies will have been established in Deal’s Gateway for their formative
years, it is hoped that they would wish to retain their local contacts by relocating
elsewhere in the Deptford area. Thus the ‘Life Lab’ can act as a catalyst to the
wider regeneration of the area.
Since all units will be fully ‘wired’ into the ‘Life Lab’, the revised Block B will offer
the occupants of the apartments the following options,
(a) the use of one of the 40 live/work units as a traditional live/work with no
interface with the ‘Life Lab’ (although each unit will be fully ‘wired’ to enable
use of the Life Lab).
(b) The use of one of the 40 live/work units as traditional live/work but with the
ability to use the common facilities of the Life Lab (eg. Reception, IT,
meeting rooms) but no workspaces.
(c) The use of one of the 40 live/work units as traditional live/work but with full
additional participation in the Life Lab (one or more workspaces).
(d) The use of any of the 59 apartments in association with the Life Lab.
However the IT ‘wiring’ of each flat does additionally mean that the occupier
does have the ability to remote access the Life Lab from their apartment.
From preliminary market research, St James Homes is confident that demand
does exist for the Life Lab concept. The attached proposal for a building
containing 40 live /work units and 59 apartments is estimated to lead to a level of
demand which would fully take up the 960m of Life Lab on the ground floor. In
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 13 -
the event that all the Life Lab space is not taken up by the occupiers of Block B,
the space would then be offered to the occupants of the other 621 units at Deal’s
Gateway. It should also be noted that the larger ‘footprint’ of the revised Block B
allows the B1 element to be increased from 617m 2 to 960m2.”
The revised proposals offer a greater range of sizes of both live/work and residential
accommodation. It is considered that the ‘life lab’ concept of residential accommodation
combined with the opportunity to connect to a range of serviced workspaces would
facilitate a range of options for working from home and would be a suitable addition to the
As part of their submissions the applicants have submitted a further report by transport
consultants assessing the impact of the proposed additional dwellings. The report also
includes the impact of traffic on the local road network of the proposed development at 6-
42 Blackheath Road, since it will also use the access of the Deal’s Gateway junction.
As part of this application 114 parking spaces are proposed on two basement levels below
Blocks A and B. This is intended to maintain the parking level throughout the
development at 50%. The access would also serve a further 65 spaces proposed in
connection with the development of 6-42 Blackheath Road.
The report concludes that the additional units would increase traffic flows only marginally
at peak periods at the Deal’s Gateway junction, and that, even taking account of the
proposed redevelopment of 6-42 Blackheath Road, which is also the subject of a separate
Traffic Impact assessment, the additional traffic can still be accommodated utilising the
same signal settings on the Deal’s Gateway arm of the junction.
The Transport Statement also contains a brief comment on the sustainability/access to
public transport of the site and, finds that it is very highly accessible to public transport
being adjacent to the DLR station and close to the bus routes along the A2 and,
additionally, refers to the proximity of the strategic cycle route and the availability of the
Car Hire Club to be implemented as part of the permitted scheme.
At the time of preparation of this report the views of Transport for London had not been
received. Improvements to the Deal’s Gateway junction with the A2 were however agreed
with Transport for London in relation to a previous revision and will be carried out prior to
occupation of the 250th unit.
Changes to the Design and Appearance
The revisions to Block B would result in increases in the height of the block ranging from
3.7 metres where the block is seven storeys in height, to 8.8 metres at the south west
corner. The design statement which accompanies the application sets out that the 10
storey element of the proposed Block B would be equivalent to Block K at the southern
end of the main vehicular and pedestrian route through the site, and would consequently
act as a landmark element.
The elevation treatment has been further developed to reflect the partial commercial use
of the building. In particular the ten-storey element would have a different elevation
treatment; the balconies to the south and west in this part of the block are recessed and
those facing the ‘pocket’ park are proposed with metal perforated screens to create
shading and privacy. The design includes a glazed bay at ground floor level on the frontage
to the proposed park.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 14 -
The changes in height, design and building profile are significant. The main effect will be
noted from the DLR, the ‘pocket’ park and other public areas within the development and
from Blocks C and E within the first phase of the development. Officers consider that an
increased height of building at the northern end of the development would be generally
acceptable in urban design terms and would provide increased visual emphasis at the
entrance to the development.
It is also necessary to assess the impact on neighbouring residents, who in this instance
are mainly the new residents of the development, particularly those of Block C which is
located to the south west of Block B on the opposite side of the main pedestrian and
vehicle route through the development.
An objection has been received from a fifth floor resident at the northern end of Block C
on grounds of reduction in privacy, light and view. While the greatest increase in height of
the revised Block B is proposed to that part of the block opposite the northern part of
Block C, it is considered that the dwellings at the northern end of Block C would continue
to receive satisfactory levels of daylight. The relationship between the two blocks is
considered to be satisfactory and would not result in an unacceptable sense of enclosure.
In relation to privacy, the windows of the proposed Block B, where it is opposite Block C,
are mainly high level windows. The proposed balconies in this part of Block B are to be
recessed, and the balconies at the corner of the building fronting the park would have a
full height screen at the side. These features would limit overlooking and it is not
considered that the revised design would result in an unacceptable loss of privacy.
The introduction of 59 additional units would result in an increase in the number of units
from 621 to 680 (excluding the 40 live/work units). Based on the additional
accommodation proposed under the current proposals, i.e. 59 additional flats and 106
additional habitable rooms, the residential density would be 540 habitable rooms per
hectare compared with 503 habitable rooms per hectare as previously revised. These
figures include the live/work units.
The policies on residential density and unit mix in the Revised Deposit Draft of the UDP
are outlined earlier in this report.
A refusal of the applications would need to show that demonstrable harm would result
from the additional units. In that context, it would also be relevant to consider the
additional habitable rooms and the changed mix of units in relation to the UDP policies
and the Brief. The proportion of studio units would remain as 14% of the scheme overall.
Officers consider that although the density of the development has been further increased,
the overall effect of the additional accommodation would be unlikely to prejudice the
eventual environmental quality and residential amenity of the new development or the
Section 106 Agreement
As Members will recall, a Section 106 Agreement was completed in relation to the original
planning permission granted in 2001 to secure a package of community benefits. The
Section 106 Agreement consists of the following:
Provision of on site affordable shared ownership housing – 47 units.
A financial contribution to off site provision of affordable housing - £1.67m.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 15 -
Contribution to environmental improvements in the local area - £250,000.
Two pieces of public art – minimum £30,000 each.
Phasing of B1 element.
Green travel plan including provision of bicycles for residents use.
Deeds of variation to the Agreement were entered into following the two previous revisions
to the scheme to update the contributions on a pro rata basis; and the applicants have
confirmed their agreement to enter into a similar deed of variation in respect to the current
In respect of the off-site affordable housing contribution the sum would be adjusted to take
account of the commercial element of the proposed ‘life-lab’ units.
Members and local residents previously expressed concerns about further ad hoc
increases in height and density within the scheme. As part of the Deed of Variation
entered into in October 2001, the applicants undertook not to make any further planning
applications in respect of the blocks closest to Crosslet Vale, namely Blocks L, M, N, X,
and Y where the effect of the application would be to increase the height or mass of the
block. The current application for Block B accords with the requirements of this obligation.
The issues of loss of light and privacy raised by the objector have been dealt with in the
planning considerations section of the report. In addition, the objector also raises
concerns in relation to loss of view. The main windows and terrace of the flat in question
are north facing, and benefit in the main from the more open aspect to the west and north.
While there may be a loss of view of landmarks such as Canary Wharf, such views are not
protected in planning.
Members will be aware that property values are not a planning consideration.
This application represents a further modification of the approved scheme. With regard to
the residential density and mix of the scheme, one overriding consideration is that the site
is within one of the Sustainable Living Areas and is exceedingly well placed for public
transport. It is unlikely that the Council could successfully demonstrate that the site would
appear unduly over developed as a result of these further changes.
Accordingly, subject to agreement on a revised approach to the Section 106 Agreement to
reflect this further application, Members are recommended to grant permission for the
At the time of preparing this report, the appropriate application fee had not been received.
Upon receipt of the appropriate planning fee, authorise officers to negotiate a deed of
variation to the original Section 106 Agreement in respect of Application Nos.
DC/02/52441 and DC/02/53010 in relation to affordable housing, contribution to
environmental improvements in the local area, public art, phasing of B1 development,
local employment, a green travel plan and the provision of bicycles for residents use.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 16 -
Subject to the completion of a deed of variation to the original Section 106 Agreement,
authorise the Head of Planning to GRANT PERMISSION in respect of Application Nos.
DC/02/52441 and DC/02/53010 subject to the following conditions:-
(1) Detailed elevations of the building and facing materials (including their colour and
texture) in respect of Block B shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
local planning authority before any works are commenced to the relevant part of
(2) B09 Plumbing or Pipes
(3) N13 External Lighting – Residential (Substitute ‘the relevant part of the
development’ for ‘site’)
(4) L01 Planting, Paving, Walls Etc. (Substitute ‘the relevant part of the development’
(5) L02 Detailed Tree Layout (Substitute ‘the relevant part of the development’ for
(6) L05 Trees – 5 Year Replacement
(7) L07 Trees (Lopping or Felling)
(8) L08 Trees Protection During Works
(9) C11 Construction Hours
(10) N10 Dust Minimisation Scheme
(11) AR2 Archaeological Programme (Insert ‘on the previously undeveloped northern
part of the site’)
(12) The glazing and ventilation scheme proposed by the applicant for protecting each
residential habitable room from external noise, comprising double glazed units
with a specification of 4mm glass – 16mm air gap – 4mm glass with passive trickle
ventilators, shall be completed before each of the permitted dwellings is occupied.
(13) The proposed soil contamination remedial works shall be carried out in full on site
in accordance with approved methodology and best practice guidance. If during
any works contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified
then the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate
remediation scheme submitted to the local planning authority for approval in
writing. Upon completion of the works, a closure report shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority. The closure report shall
include details of the remediation works carried out, (including waste materials
removed from the site and certification of top soils tested to ICRCL standards) and
details of post-remediation sampling.
(14) The construction of the surface water drainage system, including source control
measures, shall be carried out in accordance with details submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 17 -
(15) No soakaways shall be constructed in contaminated ground.
(16) The method of foundation construction shall be submitted to and agreed in writing
by the local planning authority before the relevant part of the development
(17) No spoil or materials shall be permanently deposited or stored on that part of the
site lying within the area of land liable to flood.
(18) Any walls or fencing constructed within or around the site shall be designed to be
permeable to flood water, and retained as such thereafter.
(19) Details of access controls and car-parking management within the site shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All measures,
which form part of the scheme, shall be completed before the permitted dwellings
are occupied and shall be retained in perpetuity.
(20) No work on site shall take place until a detailed design and method statement for
the foundation design and all new ground works have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority and the works shall not be
constructed otherwise than in accordance with the approved details.
(21) LW1 Live/Work Units - No Subdivision
(22) LW2 Live/Work Units - No Use Detrimental to R A
(23) LW3 Live/Work Units - Work Element Tied to Residential
(24) LW4 Live/Work Units - Residential Tied to Work Element
(25) LW5 Live/Work Units - Work Element for B1 Use Only
(1) In order that the local planning authority may be satisfied as to the details of the
proposal and to ensure that the proposed development is not detrimental to the
appearance of the locality, and to comply with Policies BLT.ENV 1: Urban Design
in the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan and URB 2 Urban Design of
the Revised Deposit Draft Unitary Development Plan (August 2001).
(12) To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the proposed dwellings and to
comply with Policies TRN 32: Noise and Vibration From Rail Traffic in the
Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan and ENV.PRO 9 Noise Generating
Development in the Revised Deposit Draft Unitary Development Plan (August
(13) To ensure that the local planning authority may be satisfied that potential site
contamination is remedied in view of the historic use(s) of the site, which may
have included industrial processes, and to comply with Policies ENV.PRO 4:
Development of Contaminated Land in the Council’s adopted Unitary
Development Plan and ENV.PRO 8 Contaminated Land in the Revised Deposit
Draft Unitary Development Plan (August 2001).
(14) To prevent pollution of the water environment.
Reg.Nos. 02/52441 & 03/53010 (cont’d) - 18 -
(15) & To prevent pollution of the groundwater.
(17) To prevent the increased risk of flooding due to impedance of flood flows and
reduction of flood storage capacity.
(18) To prevent obstruction to the flow and storage of floodwater, with a consequent
increased risk of flooding.
(19) To prevent obstruction by parked vehicles on the streets and public areas and to
comply with Policies TRN 22: Parking Control – General in the Council’s adopted
Unitary Development Plan and TRN 27 Car Parking Standards in the Revised
Deposit Draft Unitary Development Plan (August 2001).
(1) Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, the prior written consent of the
Environment Agency is currently required for any discharge of sewage or trade
effluent onto or into ground and for surface runoff into groundwater. Such consent
may be withheld. If there is an existing discharge the applicant should ensure that
any increase in volume is permitted under the present conditions. Contact Alistair
Ray on 01276 454300 for further details.
(2) Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, the prior written consent of the
Environment Agency is required for any discharge of sewage or trade effluent into
controlled water (e.g watercourses and underground waters) and may be required
for any discharge of surface water to such controlled waters or for any discharge
of sewage or trade effluent from buildings or fixed plan into or onto ground or into
waters which are not controlled waters. Such consent may be withheld. Contact
David Decoster on 01276 454300 for further details.
(3) Construction Code of Practice.
(4) The local planning authority wishes to ensure that archaeological remains on this
site are preserved in situ. The detailed proposals should include appropriate
drawings, notes and method statements showing how the objectives of in situ
preservation are to be achieved. Particular attention should be paid to the design
of foundations and new ground works including any piling, underpinning, new slab
levels, slab construction, lift shafts or new service trenches. The applicant be
advised to contact the English Heritage’s Archaeological Advisor to discuss the
submission of details required to satisfy this condition. The applicant is also
advised to contact the Council’s Building Control department to ensure that all
Building Control regulations are met.