Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Appendices
Appendix 1
YOURWORKSPACE
In bed withMr & Mrs Smith
Barley Mow Centre, Chiswick
Under the skin of Bulldog
Pall Mall Deposit, Notting Hill
ENABLING BUSINESSES TO GROW FASTER
Feature customer interviews:
FULL PROPERTY
LISTINGS INSIDE
workspace.co.uk
Cool spaceWhat’s on
Up & coming
WELCOME TOWORKSPACEWHERE BUSINESSES GROW FASTER
Workspace aims to be the first choice for new and growing businesses seeking a base in London. We create unique environments that enable businesses to have the freedom and opportunity to thrive. We host the capital’s leading business communities, we help connect them, understand what drives them and use our expertise to champion their cause. Our customers are at the heart of London’s real economy and we provide them with the right space and services to help them grow.
020 7247 7614 workspace.co.uk
PROPERTY LISTINGS
OFFICES AND STUDIOS39
39 Central London
47 North London
53 East London
57 South East London
63 South West London
71 West London
77 North West London
83 Outer London
SERVICED OFFICES87
88 Central London
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL & WORKSHOPS93
94 North London
96 East London
99 South East London
101 South West London
103 Outer London
Cover image: Westbourne Studios W10
01
CONTENTS
MOVING IN?Tips for taking space.
ABOUT WORKSPACEWhere ideas, enterprise and businesses come together.
02
FEATURE
IN BED WITH MR & MRS SMITH…A day-in-the-life interview with husband -and-wife team, founders of the boutique hotel booking specialist Mr & Mrs Smith, based at the Barley Mow Centre.
06
UNDER THE SKIN OF BULLDOGA day-in-the-life interview with Bulldog, the UK’s first and largest natural skincare brand for men, based at Pall Mall Deposit in Notting Hill.
20
COOL SPACESee how creative some of our customers have been with their work space…
12
EVENTS AT WORKSPACETake a look at some of the events we host as part of our packed events diary.
CLUB WORKSPACEA network of creative, co-working business clubs across London.
14
16
OUR WIDER UNDERSTANDINGNew leases of life for historic buildings, developing and managing properties that support work-led regeneration…
32
SHOPITIZE GROWS WITH WORKSPACERead about one of our customer success stories; how Shopitize started at Club Workspace and have now taken permanent space at The Leathermarket.
18
FEATURES SERVICES
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS24– Metal Box Factory SE1 – The Pillbox E2– ScreenWorks N5– Wandsworth Business
Village SW18
– Grand Union Centre W10– Westminster Business Square SE11– The Biscuit Factory SE16– The Faircharm SE8– Bow Enterprise Park E3
OUR SERVICES– Telephony and Connectivity – net.workspace.co.uk
36
106
IN THE COMMUNITYThe Mayor of London and the London Academies Enterprise Trust (LAET) joined forces with Workspace in support of ‘Inspiresme Week’ .
34
FEATURE
?
100 BUSINESS CENTRES THROUGHOUT LONDON
4,000BUSINESSES BASED IN OUR CENTRES30,000
PEOPLE WORKING IN OUR CENTRES 5.2m
SQFT OF BUSINESS SPACE
WORKSPACE:WHERE IDEAS, ENTERPRISE AND BUSINESSES COME TOGETHER
Being a Workspace customer means being part of a community of ambitious businesses all over London.
02
WIMBLEDON
CROYDON
BROMLEY
STREATHAM
MITCHAM
WOOLWICH
GREENWICH
LEWISHAM
CAMBERWELL
ELTHAM
KINGSTON
KENSINGTON WESTMINSTER
BOW
HAMPSTEAD
ACTON
HAYES
WEMBLEY
HARROW
HIGH BARNET SOUTHGATE
WOOD GREEN
HORNSEY
HEATHROW AIRPORT
CITY AIRPORT
HENDONWANSTEAD
ILFORD
EAST HAM
03
WORKSPACE:HOW WE ENABLE BUSINESSES TO GROW FASTER
The right spaces for our customers and the right services to help their businesses grow.
86%OF OUR CUSTOMERS WOULDRECOMMENDWORKSPACE04
THE RIGHT SPACESWe provide the right types of business space tailored to our customers’ needs and offer flexible terms.
EVENTSWe offer networking events in many of our business centres that provide opportunities for meeting like-minded businesses, swapping ideas and generating new contacts.
CLUB WORKSPACEWe are expanding our Club Workspace network of creative, co-working business clubs which are based in our business centres across London.
WORKSPACE NETWORKWe help connect customers to each other, resulting in high levels of inter-trading. Workspace Network enables customers to network, promote their business and seek business advice.
TELECOMSOur partnership with Excell provides customers with an unrivalled business grade telephony and connectivity service, designed specifically for new and growing businesses.
Main photo: Matchbox | Barley Mow Centre W4
05
Cherry Bomb | The Biscuit Factory SE16
06
IN BED WITH MR & MRS SMITH…
CUSTOMER FEATURE
07
MR & MRS SMITH
A DAY-IN-THE-LIFE INTERVIEW
Boutique hotel booking specialist Mr & Mrs Smith is based at the Barley Mow Centre in Chiswick.
Founded in 2003 by husband-and-wife team James Lohan and Tamara Heber-Percy, the company represents a hand-picked selection of around 1,000 of the most stylish and individual hotels around the world and now has offices in Melbourne, New York and Hong Kong.
James, Tamara & family
Every hotel featured is personally visited by the Smith team and then anonymously reviewed by a tastemaker to ensure it makes the grade – reviewers have included the likes of Dita von Teese, Stella McCartney and Raymond Blanc. In the last decade,
Smith has published nine coffee-table guides, released four compilation CDs and, late last year, launched new brand Smith & Family, exclusively dedicated to child-friendly hotels (smithandfamily.co.uk).
As CEO, James takes charge of the business’s strategy and development and takes a leading role in determining the look and feel of the Smith brands. Across the office from him, Tamara is the CTO, responsible for the company’s in-house development team and driving innovation in Smith’s complex booking technology. Here’s how they each spend their day…
BUSINESS TYPE:
BOUTIQUE TRAVEL
BASED AT:
BARLEY MOW CENTRE
CHISWICK
smith
and
family.co
.uk
08
08:3
0
Smith’s CEO and co-founder James Lohan is a serial entrepreneur, starting his business career by founding Atomic, which organised
London parties and events and has continued working in industries he is passionate about ever since. He co-founded restaurant and members’ club the White House and then turned his attentions to boutique hotels.
Since Mr & Mrs Smith’s first guidebook was published under the Spy Publishing imprint in 2003, Smith has grown from a labour of love to a multi-faced boutique travel provider, developing an online booking service, a 24 hour in-house reservations team and a three-tiered membership programme that includes a full travel concierge service.
Smith has been a Workspace customer since 2011 and has expanded its space to accommodate the company’s growing business.
11:0
0
10:0
0
Hotelier meetingWe have hoteliers visiting us almost daily from all over the world; it gives our Travel team a fantastic opportunity to hear about the latest developments first-hand and gives our Hotel Relations team the chance to have face-to-face time with the people they’re used to dealing with by phone and email every day. It’s also important for me to keep on top of what’s happening with our hotel collection. We’re often asked to comment on travel trends – from hotel design to restaurant offerings – so it’s vital that I know what I’m talking about!
Ray’s bacon rolls
Grab a coffee from the Barley CaféI’ll pick up a coffee from Ray’s (incidentally, his bacon rolls are a key part of the Smith editorial department’s incentivisation programme!) and spend some time working with our designers and editorial team on whatever projects we have on the go. It could be planning a booklet we’re producing for a tourist board, brainstorming branding for a new product or redesigning aspects of the websites, mrandmrssmith.com or smithandfamily.co.uk.
CUSTOMER FEATURE
JAMES
Breakfast meetingWe live just 10 minutes from our office in the Barley Mow Centre, so I tend to get in early for a chance to catch up over Skype with one of our regional directors. We discuss their region’s performance, upcoming projects and concerns and I update them on global developments from HQ here in London.
09
15:0
0Operations meetingOur COO and I regularly meet in Sam’s Brasserie next door to discuss what’s happening as we continually evolve the company’s structure or fine-tune its output and priorities. This could be anything from agreeing our global marketing spend to focusing on a single department’s efficiency. It’s also a great time to talk about the team and who might need more help or direction.
Event at Lime WoodMy evenings often entail a launch party for something (maybe a new hotel,
bar or restaurant), an awards ceremony (where hopefully we win something!) or some other event at which I think I might make new contacts to work with. These events are a great source of inspiration and often it will spark new ideas that I think we can work into the fabric of Smith. If there are no events or dinner engagements with investors or interesting people afterwards,
I head home for bedtime stories with the kids at 7.30pm, something simple to eat and a bit of trash TV to switch off from the day – Britain’s Got Talent is my current guilty pleasure.
Sam’s Brasserieis just next
door and has a great, relaxed
atmosphere
12:4
5
18:0
0
Cowley ManorThe CotswoldsBack at the office
I normally have heaps to catch up on by this point in the day. We communicate frequently with our members by email, so I might be signing off one of our newsletters or offer promotions. If I’ve just got back from a hotel visit, I could be writing a blog post about our recent stay at, say, Finca Cortesin in Marbella, or penning a review of Cowley Manor in the Cotswolds for Smith & Family.
16:3
0
Lunch meetingHigh Road House is just five minutes down the road, so I might meet up with a potential business partner there to talk about the possibilities for co-operation. It could be the owner of Brompton Bikes, the marketing director of Audi or the entrepreneurs behind an exciting new start-up. At Smith we work with an array of like-minded brands in many different ways but essentially we ‘trade’ audiences through engaging promotional ideas.
MR & MRS SMITH
10
06
:30
09
:30
08:3
0The school runAfter being woken up by our kids, the start of my day is marked by the arrival of my daily stats email – it tells me instantly what the company did the day before and whether we had any server issues. Then it’s straight into the morning routine: dropping my eldest at school; calling in at Laveli Bakery on South Parade with my daughter for a croissant and hot chocolate and leaving my, by then, chocolate-covered daughter with the nursery staff at Caterpillar.
Co-founder and CTO Tamara Heber-Percy grew up between Ibiza and Shropshire, graduating from Oxford with a degree in
languages. She has worked in marketing on both agency and client-side for brands such as Ericsson, Honda, Unilever and Swissair. In 2002, she left to head up her own company, the County Register – an exclusive introductions agency – and to launch Mr & Mrs Smith.
Combining travel expertise with technological knowledge, Tamara has been the architect behind the development of Mr & Mrs Smith’s e-commerce websites. As CTO, Tamara heads up the international development team and is responsible for the technology behind the website and the booking engine, as well as e-commerce innovations and consumer integration.
Along with the help of her specialists, she has masterminded an array of technological innovations at Mr & Mrs Smith, including creating proprietary systems to enable rates and availability management, travel-agent interfaces, SEO strategies, introducing consumer-generated content and co-ordinating the launches of Smith Travel Blog, smithandkids.com, smithandfamily.co.uk and Smith’s ‘Plan and Play’ iPhone app.
TAMARA
Morning catch-upAt the office, I organise a Google Hangout with the development team in Australia. The time difference obviously makes communication tricky, so if we can talk before they leave the office it really helps. Then I’ll catch up with our team here to make sure everything’s on track and iron out any issues. At any one time, we have at least two big projects on the go (most recently, these have been building smithandfamily.co.uk, completely redesigning the Mr & Mrs Smith website and planning a new members’ hub for our customers).
smithandfamily.co.uk
CUSTOMER FEATURE
Photoshoot at the AmpersandPhotoshoots are pretty frequent these days – it could be for a campaign we’re running ourselves or to accompany pieces about us in the press. Today, I’m having my picture taken for a feature in Marie Claire about entrepreneurship and my mentoring a fashion start-up..
11
MR & MRS SMITH
13:3
0
16:0
0
18:0
0
14:4
0
11:4
5
15:0
0
17:0
0
Press interviewI hop on the phone for a media interview: this morning it’s a women’s magazine who want to know what my tips are for long-haul packing, what luggage we use, which gadgets I find essential – and, inevitably, how I find working in the same office as my husband.
Wireframe meetingWe have a new project that is at the very start of its life – before it comes into the development department for coding, we need to put it through a wireframing process. This meeting is to get the key stakeholders, designers, content creators and project managers together to determine the architecture of what my team will ultimately be building.
AnalysisI catch up with Hiten, my e-commerce analyst, to make sure he’s got all the data he needs for the reports he’s working on. We look at them together and see if there’s anything interesting coming out that’s actionable. It’s also my last chance to go over things with Toby, my tech director, make sure we know of any issues, what the team are working on and whether we need to let our Australian developers know of anything urgent overnight.
I love Gail’s aubergine and quinoa mix
I’M NOT AFRAID OF BEING LABELLED A GEEK: I LOVE THE DATA SIDE OF MY JOB!
Lunch in ChiswickI’ll head to Gail’s for a coffee and a salad. I’ll often catch up with one of the team – it’s a good chance to get out of the office, discuss how things are going and see what’s on track or what needs attention.
Development stand-up meetingMy whole department gathers in a corner of the office to assess how each team member is getting on. These meetings are critical as they ensure each developer knows which part of the site’s code others are working on, so they don’t tread on each other’s toes.
New businessI’ve got a couple of big partnerships I’m working on and these take up quite a bit of my time; meeting partners to discuss how we can work together; formulating contracts, agreements and letters of intent.
Networking event at Soho HotelThese days, I find myself invited to take part in more and more panel discussions or to speak about the tech side of travel at industry events. Today, I’ve been asked to do a Q&A session at the Soho Hotel, speaking to women in business for Management Today. I much prefer these more conversational events – it’s a great opportunity for me to meet and speak to some really interesting people.
12
Send us images of your space…If you have a unique space which inspires you, let us know. Tweet an image to @workspace #coolspace and it could feature in our next publication.
Spaces to be creative in.COOLSPACE
CUSTOMER SPACES
Think an office has to be just four walls and some desks? Think again. We spend an average 30% of our waking week in the office; potentially more time than at home.
It’s no wonder many businesses are now trying to improve their staff’s working environment by creating exciting office spaces.
Match
box | B
arley Mow
Centre
W4
Staffan TollgardWestbourne Studios W10
Free SpeedThe LightBox W4
13
White Stuff | Kennington Park SW9 Arch Climbing Wall | The Biscuit Factory SE16
Moonpig | Great Guildford SE1
Floral Symphonies | The Biscuit Factory SE16
Payment Sense | Westbourne Studios W10 Studio 301 | The Biscuit Factory SE16
How will you be creative with your space?
Find your space to be creative in, visit workspace.co.uk
14
We have a pretty packed events diary here at Workspace. Get involved in workshops, seminars and networking events that are tailored for an audience of small businesses, entrepreneurs and start-ups.
WHAT’SON
Hosted by DigitalBinx at Club Workspace Kennington
Part of an ongoing series, this #gagldn focused on hashtag marketing and campaigns and featured case studies from Morgans Hotel Group, UNICEF UK and Museum of London. Big thanks to our panellists Nick Bain, Gemma Phelan and Laila Takeh for their presentations.
Hosted by Ubinow at Club Workspace Clerkenwell
The good people of Ubinow brought their ‘Mobile Creatives’ event into our Clerkenwell venue. The format was simple: two expert speakers take the stage and chat about what they’re doing with mobile tech. Featuring Patrick Bergel and Dimitris Doukous.
01
02
03
Mobile Creatives#gagldn
Pho
to co
urte
sy of B
en Jo
sep
h
In the mix...Hosted by Workspace & Club Workspace Bankside
After a successful debut two months ago, the Workspace / Club Mixer made its triumphant return. Our mixer nights are an opportunity for Club Workspace members to connect with established Workspace customers after a hard day’s work. The event was hosted at Club Workspace Bankside and was the brainchild of Leon Marshall, Club Workspace host with the most. As the bottles were shared around, the venue began to hum with the sound of new and growing business conversation. Then came the main event. The networking is an amuse-bouche for the piece-de-resistance: the Member Presentations. At every Workspace /Club Mixer a couple of businesses take to the stage to share their start-up and growing business stories…
02
For what’s on visit club.workspacegroup.co.uk/community/
Looking for event,
meeting, conference
or seminar space in
London?
Visit workspace.co.uk/london-
meeting-events-space to find space
available by the hour, day or week
ready for use throughout London.
What’s with the prawns, I hear you say? Peter Mandeno, founder of Wok+Wine and also a Club Workspace member, organises events all around the world.
The concept is simple: combine some interesting wine, several woks full of sizzling jumbo prawns and add a room buzzing with people who are keen to mingle. The result of this tasty equation is a Club Workspace full of satisfied customers, who spent a good proportion of the night glugging chilled wine and sucking out the meat from a jumbo prawn’s head.
With key players from politics, press, entrepreneurship and property at our Club Workspace Kennington, we threw a party that was all about our customers. But that doesn’t mean we merely invited our members – even though there were quite a few of them at the event! We collaborated with them to build an event that was designed to show them off. We teamed up with DigitalBinx, a social media agency and Club Workspace member, to make our launch event ‘go social’. They organised an excellent Instagram competition and loads of attendees got snap happy and shared their pics of our new Club using the #CWNewClub tag.
15
Netwoking at Club Workspace Kennington
To officially cut the ribbon at Club Workspace’s third co-working venue, our innovative launch event was a little slicker than your average long speeches and canapés affair.
16
Join a thriving network of creative, co-working business clubs across London.
Designed for both collaborative and drop-in working, all our clubs host workshops, seminars and networking events that are tailored for an audience of small businesses, entrepreneurs and start-ups.
We have three simple membership packages:
• Three Days, One Club
• Everyday, Everywhere
• Your Desk at Club
Or if you want to work in a different way, let us know. We also have a great range of supporting services from printing and lockers to mailboxes and meeting rooms.
For more information or to join Club Workspace visit the website, call us on 020 3176 4006 or email [email protected]
clubworkspace.co.uk
Coming soonPlans are afoot for expansion to 10 locations in the next 12 months including clubs at: ScreenWorks, Highbury; The Pillbox, Bethnal Green; Metal Box Factory, London Bridge and Westbourne Studios, Notting Hill.
@clubworkspace for news and events
17
Our network
ClubWorkspace Chiswick6 mins to Turnham Green tube
ClubWorkspace Kennington4 mins to Oval tube
ClubWorkspace Bankside6 mins to Waterloo tube & mainline
ClubWorkspaceLondon Bridge8 mins to London Bridge tube & mainline
ClubWorkspace Clerkenwell7 mins to Farringdon tube & mainline
18
HI SHOPITIZE! FOR THOSE WHO DON’T KNOW, WHAT DO YOU DO?Shopitize is a London start-up whose mission is to create a world where all shoppers effortlessly receive personalised recommendations and offers on products that they need and love.
Our platform directly connects people with the brands they love and rewards them for sharing information about how they spend. The concept is based on four R’s – Receipts, Reports, Reminders and Rewards; it’s set to revolutionise shopping in the UK and the world over. The more people that join Shopitize, the more the system will learn and the more sophisticated the rewards will become, saving both time and money for consumers and the brands.
In short, Shopitize is set to change the nature of how people shop and how brands can use promotion to connect with their consumers.
WHY DO YOU THINK IT’S GONE SO WELL FOR YOUR BUSINESS?As we developed the business idea we conducted a lot of research on the concept. We also recruited very experienced advisors and mentors in the relevant industries to confirm the scalability and potential of our business model. Listening carefully and having the flexibility to adjust quickly have been very important.
BACK TO YOUR ROOTS: WHEN AND WHERE WERE YOU FOUNDED?It was a sunny day in summer 2010, and the three would-be co-founders were brainstorming ideas at a Belgian
café. We were all looking to start something new and were inspired by how today’s youngsters have made smartphones such an integral part of their lives.
We evaluated a lot of different concepts, but kept coming back to a core idea that people should be rewarded differently, based on their loyalty to specific products and brands. It was a couple of days later while shopping that we looked at a receipt and thought: “That’s it – the receipt contained all the key information to make our system work.” And that was when Shopitize was born. From there, it didn’t take long for us to realise that our idea and business model could apply to all sectors, age groups and geographies. It had real potential to cause significant market disruption!
Alexey Andriyanenko and Irina Pafomova, co-founders, Shopitize
Shopitize started at Club Workspace in 2011 and have since gone on to great things in the world of smart shopping apps! They are currently based in a Workspace studio at The Leathermarket, SE1.
SUCCESS STORYSHOPITIZE GROWS WITH WORKSPACE
CUSTOMER PROFILE
19
WHEN DID SHOPITIZE MOVE INTO CLUB WORKSPACE?We were a little less than a year old when we moved into Club Workspace. We had outgrown the borrowed conference room at one of our advisors and were looking for a space that would give us flexibility to collaborate as we grew.
WHY WAS CLUB WORKSPACE THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR YOU?Club Workspace is a great place for entrepreneurs with big ideas and helps them start up their business! It provided us with the flexibility that we needed at the early stage of our development.
We also met many people who have helped us grow along the way – several of whom have since become part of our team.
HOW MUCH DID THE SHOPITIZE TEAM GROW SINCE YOU MOVED INTO CLUB WORKSPACE?We grew from a full time team of four to an extended team of more than eight before we took our own office through the Club Workspace network.
WHERE ARE YOU BASED NOW?Although we have graduated from Club Workspace, we haven’t moved far away! We currently have our own office space in the Leathermarket which is part of Workspace Group; this enables us to maintain a very close relationship with our network at Club Workspace.
WHAT ARE YOUR FUTURE PLANS?We are very focused on the end user experience. Since we released our iPhone and Android apps to public beta,
we have received a lot of support and valuable feedback which has helped us refine our experience.
Once we finish our beta, personalised offers will be our key focus. We’ve had great conversations with brands who are very interested in our vision and are excited about the potential to directly engage with their power users. So this year, building these partnerships and delivering offers to shoppers are the most important focus points for us.
Our mission to revolutionise shopping is not a simple one, but we will continue to innovate! We have just won the honour to be the top 20 innovators at the Cisco British Innovation Gateway Awards, which is really encouraging for us to move forward in our quest! shopitize.com
Club Workspace is a great place for entrepreneurs with big ideas to start! Juliet ChenMarketing Manager, Shopitize
SHOPITIZE AT THE LEATHERMARKET
20
GETTING UNDER THE SKIN OF BULLDOG
CUSTOMER FEATURE
A DAY-IN-THE-LIFE INTERVIEW
“ The bulldog is tenacious, loyal, honest, protective, and hard-working; all of the positive attributes of men…”Simon Duffy, co-founder
21
BULLDOG
06
:30
11:0
0
09
:00
Pete’s fitness sessions are probably the hardest workouts I’ve ever known!
Wake upI am normally woken up bright and early by my daughter, Olive, who’s 2 3⁄4. A couple of days a week I might go to an early boxing session at 7am – I train with Pete Liggins at Box Clever Sports, who used to have an office at Pall Mall.
My bathroom at home is full of Bulldog products and lab samples for possible new ones. Often I spend my mornings at home trying out new moisturisers, deodorants, shower gels, or face scrubs. There’s nothing better than starting off the day with a refreshing shave with our Original Shave Gel.
Bulldog is the UK’s first and largest natural skincare brand for men and is based at Pall Mall Deposit in Notting Hill.
10:0
0
CoffeeIf I’m having an ‘office day’, I will pop down to The Gallery Café at Pall Mall Deposit for a mid-morning coffee – I have become good friends with the staff there, probably because Edith makes the best coffee in West London!
Get to the officeI live just a 15 minute walk from work and I love my commute along the canal. I try to get into work for 9am and will catch up with team members.
Reception area at Pall Mall Deposit
We’re a small team – just four of us in the office, so it’s vital we all know what each other is doing. I am mainly responsible for the outward-facing elements of Bulldog, so this could involve attending award ceremonies, doing press interviews and meeting with buyers and suppliers.
Product development meetingWe spend a lot of time developing and creating new products. For this we work in collaboration with a couple of other individuals and companies. Bulldog’s requirements to use natural, ethical, sustainably sourced ingredients mean that we have strict formulation guidelines. We never use ingredients that have been tested on animals or that come from animal sources. We work with experts to help us formulate the products and to work on new blends of essential oils.
22
The largest UK retail partners for Bulldog are Boots, Sainsbury’s, Waitrose and Tesco
Best pizzas around at Pizza East
Probably around 25% of my time is spent travelling overseas
Making travel plansI love meeting new people and talking to them about Bulldog and award ceremonies can often give me great opportunities to meet new retailers and journalists.
Meeting with a UK retailer I tend to do a bit of everything in the company, but one of my major focuses is developing our UK sales. This may mean travelling to meetings with our retail partners. Last week I spent a day in Nottingham talking with some of the buyers from Boots. These might involve promoting new plans, discussing product development and keeping them up-to-date on our marketing plans.
Lunch on Portobello RoadPall Mall Deposit is close to the Portobello Road, so there are loads of great options for lunch. If it’s a special occasion, Pizza East on Portobello Road is a firm favourite!
IN GENERAL I HAVE THREE TYPES OF DAY: OFFICE-BASED IN LONDON, TRAVELLING AROUND THE UK, OR AWAY ON AN OVERSEAS TRIP. FOR ME, AN IDEAL WEEK WOULD HAVE A BIT OF ALL THREE!
11:3
0
I scream, you scream, we all scream for eye cream. New product released
CUSTOMER FEATURE
13:0
0
14:1
5
23
BULLDOG
Simon and Rhodri initially got Bulldog off the ground by combining their life savings and
maxing-out credit cards to scrape together just under £37,000. Today, the range is listed in over 10,000 stores worldwide and successfully competes with leading multi-national brands, despite working with a fraction of their resources.
Catch up with paperworkWhen I’m back in the office, there is always lots of day-to-day admin to keep up with. I like to stay on top of marketing, social media activity and customer feedback emails – it’s always good to keep plugged-in with our customers and I really enjoy this part of my day. We’re a small team at Bulldog but we work well together and always have lots of fun! Rhodri, who co-founded the company with me, takes charge of the financial side of the business, including operations and forecasting. We also have Ben and Angela who work on press and marketing and oversee communications, social media and our rapidly growing Christmas gift programme – yes, we’re already planning ahead!
Bulldog’s Original Moisturiser is the company’s best seller and is out-performing every single Gillette skincare product and most of the L’Oreal and Nivea skincare products in the UK. Bulldog is currently the fastest growing major men’s skincare brand in the UK. All Bulldog products are body friendly and don’t contain controversial man-made chemicals such as parabens, sodium laureth sulfate, artificial colours or synthetic fragrances. Instead, Bulldog products are loaded with essential oils and other amazing natural actives to deliver superb skincare results. The products are not tested on animals and never contain ingredients derived from animal sources. The BUAV certify the range as “cruelty free”.
Following Bulldog’s nationwide launch with Sainsbury’s in July 2007, the brand experienced fast growth in the UK with further launches in Boots, Tesco, Waitrose, Superdrug, Ocado, Whole Foods Market and Planet Organic. Since Bulldog’s Swedish launch in 2010 the brand has also been expanding quickly overseas and can now also be found in Norway, Denmark, Spain, Germany, Austria, South Korea, USA, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.
The Bulldog range has won numerous important product awards worldwide, including “Men’s Brand of the Year” (2010) in Sweden’s Café Magazine, Shave Gel of the year in America’s Men’s Health 2012 Grooming Awards (the world’s largest men’s magazine) and Best Face Wash in ShortList’s 2012 Grooming Awards. The company has also won the HSBC Start Up Star Award for 2008 and the RSPCA Good Business Award 2008. The Good Shopping Guide from the Ethical Company Association has placed Bulldog at the top of their male and female skincare reports for 2011 and 2012. Simon was placed first in the “Who’s Who in Natural Beauty Top 20” in 2011 and 2012.
We don’t just do facial products!16
:30
18:0
0
Home time!I try to leave the office around 6pm, so I can pick my daughter up from her nanny on the way home. Sometimes there can be late nights, but I try to get away from my desk and switch off from work so I can spend some quality time with my wife and daughter.
24
A redevelopment that will create a landmark destination for more than 150 new and growing businesses, complete with a 20,000 sqft rooftop extension. The building will maintain its historical industrial features which will be complemented
by a central atrium and enclosed garden. The new studios will offer plenty of natural light and many will have their own rooftop balconies.
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
By adapting our buildings in response to customers’ needs, Workspace creates unique environments that new and growing businesses aspire to become part of.
UP & COMING
METAL BOX FACTORY Bankside SE1
THE CENTRAL ATRIUM
25
FORMERLYGREAT GUILDFORD BUSINESS SQUARE
1889The Grove, as it was originally known, was acquired by Messrs Barclay & Fry. The site was home to their stationery and tin printing business and the factory produced ornately decorated tins for tobacco, biscuits, tea, coffee and cocoa.
1894The business prospered and extensions were built in 1894 and 1904, by which time the building reached the size it is today, over 1.25 acres. Whilst stationery remained the mainstay of the business, the contribution of the tin side rose to 49 per cent of turnover between 1905 and 1911.
1921Four of the leading tin box manufacturers formed The Metal Box & Printing Industries Ltd, later to be known as The Metal Box Company to combat American competition.
1930sThe company invested in the fast-expanding canned food industry and were a virtual monopoly in Britain, although tin boxes were in decline.
1939–45Success was short-lived as German bombers destroyed 70 per cent of the factory during WW2 air raids and tin box printing ceased production in 1941.
1950sThe factory was re-opened and production re-started, but on a much smaller scale, printing mainly cheques.
1980sSite sold following a decline in business.
1999The site was acquired by Workspace. Proximity to the City and West End and the opening of Tate Modern attracted an eclectic mix of businesses. Today, SE1 is one of the most vibrant areas of Central London.
COMINGSOON
26
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
THE PILLBOXBethnal Green E2
Greenheath is undergoing a significant redevelopment programme. In its former life the building was home to pharmaceutical manufacturer, Allen & Hanburys. The building will maintain many of its historical features including lab tile floor, blue engineering brick columns
and water tower (which will become a two storey office). The new reception will be akin to a modern apothecary and will include a Club Workspace co-working area, café and central light well. Upon completion the centre will become a landmark destination for 120 new and growing businesses.
27
DUE FORCOMPLETION
END OF 2013
PROPOSEDEXTERIOR
FORMERLYGREENHEATHBUSINESSCENTRE
Pho
to co
urte
sy of G
ord
on Jo
ly
1874Allen & Hanburys, a pharmaceutical manufacturer, moved onto the site. They were pioneers in their field, introducing Britons to the joys of cough pastilles and cod liver oil. In the new premises, the firm diversified into producing surgeons’ instruments and built operating tables for Barts Hospital. 1918The company were almost bombed out of business on the night of the Whitsun bank holiday. A flight of 34 German Gotha bombers had taken off from Belgium with the East End its target. In World War I this part of London was the main target of the enemy. The Gotha that hit Bethnal Green dropped its first bomb at Poplar at 1 1.07pm, then flew onto Bethnal Green, flattening a number of houses and destroying the south west corner of the Allen & Hanburys works, killing three civilians and injuring 17 more.
1922The firm re-built, bigger and better, and though the building was hit again in World War II, the company survived.
1958The company was swallowed by chemical giant Glaxo, and today, the brand of Allen & Hanburys still remains as a small part of the GSK portfolio, although its only legacy in the East End is the crumbling sign on a factory wall.
28
This centre has long been host to an array of Highbury’s creative and business-related industries. Formerly manufacturing some of the earliest radios and televisions, the centre is due to be transformed into brand new offices complete with on-site café and Club Workspace co-working lounge. The reception area will feature some of the earliest models of
televisions and radios, set against the backdrop of modern Scandinavian furniture. With its close proximity to Highbury & Islington station and the shops of Upper Street the centre is set to be a destination for new and growing business.
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
29
SCREENWORKSHighbury Grove N5
FORMERLYABERDEENCENTRE
DUE FORCOMPLETION
AUTUMN 2013
1918Behind the townhouses that fronted Highbury Grove, a factory was built for A. C. Cossor, a company responsible for some of the important technological advances of the 20th century in radio, television and radar.
1927The business capitalised on the growing radio market and brought out its self-assembly ‘Melody Maker’.
1936The first-ever TV programmes were broadcast and Cossor was ready to meet demand with two different receivers. As war approached the company played a crucial role in the development of radar which was later to prove a key factor in the Allied victory.
1945According to an official Ministry of Information report the utmost secrecy was enforced with staff only told about the transmitter or receiver: never both. By the end of the war almost every combat aircraft operated by the RAF carried at least one item of equipment made by Cossor.
1958Cossor moved to new premises and Hilger & Watts, producers of precision analytical instruments, moved into Aberdeen Works where they remained until 1972.
1980sFollowing a number of other occupants the Works began to be used as a business centre in the late 1980s.
1995The site was acquired by Workspace Group and renamed Aberdeen Centre.
30
WANDSWORTH BUSINESS VILLAGEWandsworth SW18This former Gas Works site will be transformed with purpose-built creative studios in Wandsworth Town Centre. This is part of The Filaments residential development, creating a new £120 million town centre quarter which will include restaurants, homes, courtyards and pocket parks adjacent to Southside Shopping Centre and St. George’s Park. There will be 120 new business studios ranging in size from 100–5,000 sqft. The development is due for completion December 2014.
WESTMINSTER BUSINESS SQUAREVauxhall SE11Phase 1 of the redevelopment is now complete with an additional 4,750 sqft of new space at the centre. Future phases will see a new landscaped piazza with café. Studio sizes will range from 300–5,000 sqft and is due for completion Autumn 2015.
PROPOSED SCHEME
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
Here’s a selection of other exciting redevelopments coming soon…
31
THE FAIRCHARMGreenwich SE8The Faircharm will have a range of housing and live/work space with an on-site café and gallery space. There will be 75 business units ranging in size from 180–4,000 sqft. The site is due for completion Summer 2015.
GRAND UNION CENTRELadbroke Grove W10Part of an £80 million development of homes, restaurant/café, shops, creative studios and work space on Ladbroke Grove. The scheme consists of 150 business studios arranged around a central garden with sizes from 200–5,000 sqft. The development is due for completion Quarter 2 2015.
BISCUIT FACTORYBermondsey SE16The former Peek Frean biscuit factory is at the heart of a new £250 million development which will provide a community of 800 homes, shops, a new one acre park and space for creative businesses, all within five minutes of Bermondsey station (Jubilee line). The redevelopment will create 120 new business studios ranging in size from 150–5,000 sqft.
BOW ENTERPRISE PARKBromley-by-Bow E3Part of a £100 million development of homes, shops, creative studios and light industrial workshops, surrounding communal gardens and a new public square on Devon’s Road, Bow. Ten new light industrial units will be available, ranging in size from 1,000–2,500 sqft. The property is well connected by public transport with the DLR station only three stops from Stratford and five stops from Canary Wharf.
PROPOSED SCHEME
Appendix 2
Marshgate Marshgate Lane, London, E15 2NH
For Workspace 14 Limited
October 2014
The redevelopment of the Marshgate Lane Site is an important part of the regeneration of the Pudding Mill area, creating a sustainable mix of uses including employment and residential as well as providing a variety of high quality buildings and well designed landscaped spaces.
The proposals have taken account of the existing context but also the emerging context, evolving from the Legacy Community Scheme, which is beginning to be brought forward in the local area. The proposals also take account of the requirement for future transport links requiring a bus route through the site.
The development will provide 268 dwellings of which 32% are proposed as family units. It is expected the scheme could deliver up to 32% affordable housing, subject to viability. The development will also provide nearly 3000 sq m of employment use which is flexible but may be studios or office, with some elements of retail.
The layout of the buildings respond to the courtyards and streets indicated in the adjacent LCS masterpaln with buildings of a range of heights from two to twelve storeys. The buildings draw on the industrial and earlier heritage of the site in their use of brick and the patterned reconstituted stone.
The spaces created between the buildings offer a wide variety of landscaped spaces most of which are public with others being for residents use only. All parking is at basement level.
The development aims to achieve high standards of sustainability with ecological improvements to the site, extensive use of renewable energy and achieving Level 4 in the Code for Sustainable Homes standards.
The development is welcomed by the local residents who recognise that it will regenerate an unattractive site and bring activity and public space to the area.
Marshgate Business Centre
Summary of proposals
Scheme details
1.
Existing Use • B1 (business): 1,400sqm
• B2 (general industrial): 100sqm
• B8 (storage/ distribution): 7,110sqm
• Total existing = 8,610sqm Gross Internal Area (GIA)
• Existing floorspace is 50% vacant
2. Proposed Use/ Unit
Numbers/ Floorspace
(Gross Internal Area)
• 32,752sqm GIA comprising:
- 268 residential units (29,824sqm GIA) including 7 townhouses
- 2,928sqm GIA of Business (B1) floorspace, of which 120sqm to be
used as ancillary café
- Floorspace distributed over 8 main buildings
- Financial viability appraisal is still being discussed
3. Jobs and Employment • Existing: 26
• Proposed: Estimated net increase of 208 FTE jobs subject to agreeing
level of employment floorspace
4. Proposed/ approved
building heights
(comparison)
• Building 1- maximum height of 12 storeys
• Buildings 2, 3 and 7 – eight storeys
• Buildings 4, 6 and 8 – six storeys
• Building 5 – three storey townhouses
•
5. Sustainability • BREEAM: Very good
• Sustainable Homes Level 4
• Energy savings: 35% over Part L 2013
• Renewable energy: On site CHP will provide 65% of site’s thermal
demand
• SUDS: Sustainable Water Drainage Plan- discharged at Greenfield
run-off rate
6. S106/ CIL/ Infrastructure • S106 payments subject to viability
• Safeguarding of land for bridge link
Appendix 3
;§LEGACY = DEVELOPMENJ !! GDRPORAJ~ON
Miss Laura Jenkinson GVA 1 0 Stratton Street London W1J 8JR
Dear Laura,
Level 10, 1 Stratford Place Montfichet Road London E20 1 EJ
Tel : +44 (0) 20 3288 1800 Fax: +44 (0) 20 3288 1851
29/01/2015
POST SUBMISSION COMMENTS - PROPOSED MIXED USE REDEVELOPMENT@ MARSHGATE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, STRATFORD- 14/00422/FUL
I am writing further to your submission of the above mentioned planning application and your meeting with colleagues on the 9th December 2014.
This letter is intended to provide a framework for you to decide how best to proceed with the planning application. I would like to reiterate that PPDT and LLDC Officers continue to be committed to working with you in order to achieve a scheme which meets the housing and employment priorities for the area whilst demonstrating the highest design and environmental quality that is required of this strategically important site as supported by London Plan Policy 2.4 (The Games and their Legacy).
There have been a series of pre-application meetings to discuss the possible redevelopment of the site; I am attaching copies of the correspondence following those meetings which sets out LLDC's consistent advice.
Relevant Policies: The key policies in relation to the issues that are being raised are contained within the NPPF, the London Plan, the OLSPG, Newham's Core Strategy, and LLDC's emerging Local Plan. The LLDC Local Plan has been published and public examination is scheduled for early March and is material to the consideration of the application in addition to Newham's existing Core Strategy. LLDC has published the Pudding Mill Masterplan, a detailed Land Use and Design Framework published as part of the Local Plan evidence base principally to facilitate a comprehensive approach to the Pudding Mill Area, in which your site falls, and cover issues where there was an identified need for an updated position.
Policy Issues: As has been stated at various meetings given the location of the site, a proposal founded upon residential principles would not have an in principle conflict with Policy as long as the environmental impact of the overall proposal is demonstrated to be acceptable, and the employment aspect of the proposals meets Policy objectives.
Land Use Mix- Employment: We have repeatedly stressed that one of the Corporation 's key objectives for this development is that a significantly higher employment floorspace than proposed is achieved on this site. It is therefore disappointing to see that the employment element in the application appears to be only provide 8. 7% of the total floors pace proposed and particularly so coming from an affordable workspace provider.
PROTECT- LLDC CHANGE
Achieving 25% non residential floorspace is clearly specified within the LLDC Local Plan (see site allocation text SA4.3 Pudding Mill). It has also been explored in detail within the Pudding Mill Land Use and Design Framework. To be clear, the site allocation requirement is 25% nonresidential floorspace across the site allocation area as a whole, which is also equivalent to the LCS permission requirement in this location. Providing 25% employment is considered fundamental in terms of achieving the Convergence objectives set out in the OLSPG which seeks deliver fundamental economic, social and environmental change within east London and close the deprivation gap between the Olympic Growth Boroughs and rest of London. Policy J1 of the Core Strategy identifies the area as a preferred location for B 1 a office uses, stating that managed workspace may be a favourable end use as part of any employment land uses on this site given its SIL designation.
With the recent National Infrastructure Plan publication and related confirmation that significant public and private sector investment is being committed to enable the delivery of a new teaching and research based campus for UCL as part of the broader cultural and university quarter around the aquatic centre within QEOP, the Legacy Corporation is committed to playing its part in enabling the delivery of land uses which will generate substantial employment and economic benefit. Pudding Mill as the nearest substantial development area to Olympicopolis, should in the Corporation's view (as reflected in both the publication Local Plan and the PML Masterplan) be playing its part in seeking to meet the existing and future economic activity to ensure a genuinely sustainable form of regeneration.
We have explained that we want to see a scheme that works from an employment space offer and would be prepared to consider this against other elements of the proposal and find it disappointing that this advice has been largely ignored and the quantum of employment space offered has remained unchanged.
Blocks 01 and 02 should be at least 50% employment. When other comments are also incorporated into the scheme, such as heights of blocks as discussed below, this would result in a non-residential floors pace much closer to the required 25% (our calculations put it at approximately 23% ).
Affordable Housing and Family Housing: The affordable and family housing provision is also below the requirements of Policies H1 and H2 in the Core Strategy. Your proposal equates to 31% affordable and 32% family housing based upon scheme viability. As you know, PPDT's advisors are currently reviewing the submitted viability report and this will form the basis of discussion at our next meeting. You will note that this issue has also been raised by LB Newham.
Policy- Heights and Massing: Whilst we appreciate there has been a reduction in the general heights of the development from the pre-application stage, the scale of the development is still considered to be excessive.
You have consistently referred to the height of the towers on Stratford High Street and the proposed LCS PDZ8 development as justification for the heights and massing proposed within your own development. We have advised that the scale of your development should step down in relation to Stratford High Street and this is reflected in policy and guidance (OLSPG and Core Strategy and the LLDC publication Local Plan), which makes it clear in requiring heights of 4-6 storeys. In addition the Pudding Mill Land Use and Design Framework sets out development heights of 4-6 storeys and for developments to be street based with building height to street width ratio being 1:1. We have also advised you that the LCS scheme is a parameter based outline permission the detail design of which is dependent on consideration of other matters including densities, Design Codes (building types, layout, sunlight daylight etc.) and Zonal Masterplans (not yet been submitted).
You will also note that the GLA's Stage 1 response also refers to the OLSPG which promotes development of generally 4-6 storeys in this area.
PROTECT- LLDC CHANGE
CIL I Section 106- Heads of Terms: On the basis that a decision is made before the 61h April
the permission will be subject to a Section 106 legal agreement and in those circumstances we would need to set up a meeting fairly shortly to discuss the Heads of Terms. Should the decision be made after the 61
h April then the development will be subject to LLDC's GIL (see table below) as well as the Mayoral GIL. However there would still be a requirement for a Section 106 agreement for scheme specific mitigation and affordable housing etc.
Exclusive of Mayoral CIL
Development Type Proposed Legacy Corporation CIL Charge (£/m2)
All residential development £60
Convenience supermarkets and £100 superstores and retail warehouses (over 1000 sq m).
Hotels £100
Student Accommodation £100
Comparison and all other retail £100 (A1-A5) in 'Stratford Retail Area'.
Comparison and all other retail (A1- Nil A5) outside 'Stratford Retail Area'.
All other uses except education and Nil health care
Education and Healthcare Nil
Planning Performance Agreement: It is noted that there is a PPA in place, however, a revised timetable is likely to be needed to be agreed dependent on when revised information is received.
Summary: Whilst LLDC is supportive of the principle of a mixed use redevelopment within the site, and it is acknowledged that the application submission has been amended following preapplication discussion, further amendments are considered necessary in order for the proposal to be favourably recommended to the Corporations Planning Decisions Committee as set out above. We have a meeting scheduled for the 1 01
h February which would be a good opportunity to discuss your intended action in light of my comments, including the programme consequences of making amendments to your planning application
I enclose a Schedule of Consultation responses for your information please respond as appropriate. Please contact Anne Ogundiya as case officer to discuss any of the matters identified in this letter.
Yours sincerely,
1Jr~~11 Anthony Hollingsworth Director of Planning Policy and Decisions
PROTECT- LLDC CHANGE
Density: On the question of the density of the site further clarification is required to justify the proposed density as also raised by the GLA. The density should be in accordance with London Plan policy 3.4. That said density is only one of the parameters used in assessing the acceptability or otherwise of a scheme. While exceeding the density ranges will not in itself be reason to refuse an application, it may indicate that the quality of development has suffered from unsustainable overdevelopment of the site.
Amenity Space I Public Realm I Play Space: I am concerned that the layout and provision of the open space is minimal. I would ask that you demonstrate that what is being provided provides a reasonable quantity and quality space for prospective residents in respect of the Mayor's Housing SPD. It is also not clear how the play space proportion has been calculated and how this component relates to the Mayor's Shaping Neighbourhood: Play and Informal Recreation SPG.
Please see my comment below on the impact of servicing and delivery to the children's playspace area.
The play areas should have a more natural style (for example Wild Kingdom at Three Mills and Tumbling Bay in Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park) and there is an opportunity for the play areas to be linked into a continuous playable route.
The proposed sculpture on the bend of Marshgate Lane should be removed- this is not part of the site and would be more convincing as a tree to match the rest of the public realm.
The street/boulevard between Block 04 and 06 is more of a square and should be recognised as such. There is an opportunity to create a more varied and flexible landscape.
Servicing and Delivery: It is unclear how the whole development will be serviced for example by delivery and service vehicles. The DAS states that vehicle access for maintenance or emergency purposes will be controlled by the site management in the concierge office. Please demonstrate for example how the townhouses in Building 5 can be accessed without impacting on the children's playspace.
Towpath: Presumably the riverside route is intended to be fully publicly accessible for all and connect with the future development to the north. Please confirm.
Lifts: It is considered that the layouts can be better configured such that bedrooms are not immediately adjacent to lifts.
Internal circulation seems excessive in places in both employment and residential layouts. Corridors could be decreased to a width of 1.2m which would allow for additional usable floor space. This is particularly an issue in employment spaces due to a large proportion of the GEA calculated as flexible employment space is actually unusable circulation space.
Parking: It is unclear how the parking is to be allocated and managed between the residential and employment users.
LLDC Environmental and Transport Consultants: Please respond to the comments provided to you, please note that matters relating to remediation are still outstanding.
Sustainability: We would expect you to aim for Code for Sustainable Homes Code 4, with a minimum overall credit level score of 75 for each residential unit. I would be happy to discuss with you further how we consider you can achieve that target in respect of the relevant categories. We would also expect the development to achieve BREEAM Excellent.
Quality Review Panel: Once the scheme has been amended I think it prudent that you prepare for a post-submission desk top QRP review.
PROTECT- LLDC CHANGE
Building 6: As designed, the 6th floor has a balcony in this eastern elevation which would oversail the back gardens of the adjoining townhouses (Building 5), which are approximately 7.5m in length. Your section drawing GG does not show this relationship. In any event we are not convinced that this relationship is acceptable particularly as this is a dual aspect unit for which a side balcony is not essential.
The entrances should be off the 'boulevard' to mirror Block 4 which would create a more convincing public space of the boulevard.
Building 7: Please confirm that Newham's Refuse Department (LBN contact- Jon Hastings) have agreed the layout and arrangements for refuse collection for the development. Can you also confirm that refuse collection for the town houses is also via Building 7. The refuse collection is taking up important active frontage- could it be partially relocated into the basement to allow for more small employment uses on the ground floor. It appears that the concierge space has been included in the flexible employment space quota which is not correct- please confirm.
Building 8: The rationale for the 1.8m separation between the northern elevation of Building 8 (proposed at 6 storeys) and the adjoining site boundary needs to be further justified in relationship to future development to the north. There is also the potential concern of two blocks being too close together. There is also minimal cycle/pedestrian access along this northern edge and with the prospect of boundary fencing could result in an oppressive environment. The design needs refinement to ensure that the north facade is not treated as a rear elevation and should relate convincingly to the consented LCS scheme. To that end you should explore whether delivering some public realm or street interface to the LCS scheme. It is also regrettable to note that the majority of the wheelchair accessible/convertible units are single aspect. The relationship between the wheelchair accessible/convertible unit closest to the primary sub-station should also be looked at.
As with Building 6 the 61h floor has a balcony in this eastern elevation which would oversail the
back gardens of the adjoining townhouses (Building 5). Again your section drawing FF does not show this relationship. In any event we are not convinced that this relationship is acceptable particularly as this is a dual aspect unit for which a side balcony is not essential.
General Comments:
Design: The overall masterplan of the site is convincing and makes good use of the relationship with the canal. However the general design does not yet create a strong sense of identity. It will require careful detailed .design to ensure its success
Materials: We consider the proposed palette of materials to be good; the use of brick reflects the industrial heritage of the site and is compatible with the character of the local streetscene and surrounding area. However, I would ask that you revisit the bronze anodized material which appears to be excessively used across the development, alternative finishes should be considered.
We would also consider it helpful to give examples of other developments where the patterned concrete cladding has been used. It would also be helpful for you to submit the brick samples for inspection.
We are also pleased to see that the residential units are tenure blind. There seems to be excessive amounts of non-active frontages which would require careful detailed design to ensure that the vented/louvered doors do not harm to aesthetics of the buildings. It may be easier to move some of the spaces, e.g. bike storage and sub-station, into the basement to allow for more active frontages on the ground floor.
Building 1, the 12 storey tower, should be significantly reduced, it is considered to be of excessive bulk and mass detrimental to visual amenity. Any proposed additional height beyond the maximum stated policy height of 6 storeys should be justified and be on the basis of there being no adverse impact on its setting and on neighbouring properties. The link building could however increase in height, and essentially accommodate some of the excess height lost from Block 01, whilst remaining subordinate in height to the principal buildings (Building 1 and 2).We may be prepared for blocks B2 and B3 to be 6 storeys but with additional 2 storeys that are set back, which will address the issues of the perceived overbearing bulk and massing. Reducing the heights thereby reducing the number of units will also increase the proportion of the development given over to employment floors pace as well as meeting the objectives of creating a quality townscape. Buildings 4, 6 and 8 should be reduced to no more than 5 storeys.
Specific Design Matters: All policies in the Core Strategy are underpinned by the requirement that development proposals must satisfy the environmental policies set out in the Plan. Policy SP3 of the Plan is an all-encompassing policy through which seeks to ensure that all new developments are satisfactorily located and are of a high standard of design and layout by taking into account various identified factors. It has been suggested to you that any proposal would need to convincingly demonstrate that the provisions of the environmental policies would be satisfied. To this end you should address the following concerns:
Building 1: unacceptable conflict between pedestrians and vehicles: The reception entrance with a loading area directly opposite is poorly designed and should be revisited. The loading bay could be relocated onto the street, reducing issues with layout of pavement and dropped curbs and would allow for a more inviting entrance into the employment building. The entrance to this building and 'Character Area' is considered to be underwhelming and more should be made of it as a focal entrance to the core employment area.
We remain to be convinced that Building 1 with its link to building 2 is a separate 'Character Area' or that a landmark building is necessary in this location. There needs to be a more visually cohesive link between building 1 and 2.
Blocks 01 and 02 and link section should not read as three different buildings but should have consistency in architectural expression. The link building should have more presence, and could be the same height as the other two blocks to create a U-shaped block as discussed in previous feedback.
Building 2: Please provide a ground floor plan for this building. Given the orientation of this block close to other building there is concern at the number of single aspect units in this block.
Building 3: Floor-to-ceiling heights on the ground floor employment level seem low, especially towards the canal.
The three blocks along the street (02, 03 and 07) do not need to be identical in terms of architectural expression (think more of a typical street where buildings would have common datum lines and perhaps some commonality of materials but not be expressed identically) -Block 02 should relate to Block 01 rather than Block 03
Building 4: The western flanks of Buildings 4, 6 and 8 could do with some relief in the form of windows, which could for example be narrow and obscure glazed. Please advise why they are blank, if it is for reasons of overlooking which calls into question the reasons for introducing windows on the opposite ends of those buildings.
Building 5: There appears to be no provision for cycle storage for these properties. There is a lack of architectural refinement and there is nothing gained by having different colour bricks in a random pattern. It is suggested that the garden wall could be of a consistent brick specification to unify the row of terraces.
Anne Ogundiya
GREATER 0 DO AUTHORITY Development, Enterprise and Environment
Head of Development Management London Legacy Development Corporation Level 10 1 Stratford Place Montfichet Road London E20 1EJ
Our ref: D&P/3347 /01 Your ref: 14/00422/FUL Date: 1 3 January 2015
London Legacy Developme~t Corporation
2 1 JAN 2015
Dear Anne Ogundiya, Rece1ved
Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 Land at Marshgate Lane, Pudding Mill Lane, E15 LPA reference 14/00422/FUL
I refer to the copy of the above planning application, which was received from you, on behalf of the London Legacy Development Corporation, on the 17 November 2014. On the 13 January 2015, Sir Edward Lister, Deputy Mayor and Chief of Staff, acting under delegated authority, considered a report on this proposal; reference D&P /3347/01. A copy of the report is attached, in full. This letter comprises the statement that the Mayor is required to provide under Article 4(2) of the Order.
The Deputy Mayor considers that the application does not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 84 of the above-mentioned report; but that the possible remedies set out in the paragraph could address these deficiencies.
If the London Legacy Development Corporation subsequently resolves to grant permission on the application, it must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order and allow him fourteen days to decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, or direct the Council under Article 6 to refuse the application. You should therefore send me a copy of any representations made in respect of the application, and a copy of any officer's report, together with a statement of the decision your authority proposes to make, a statement of any conditions the authority proposes to impose and (if applicable) a draft of any planning obligation it proposes to enter into and details of any proposed planning contribution.
City H a ll, London, SE1 2AA • london.gov.uk • 020 7983 4000
If the London Legacy Development Corporation resolves to refuse permission it need not consult the Mayor again (pursuant to Article 5(2) of the Order), and the Corporation may therefore proceed to determine the application without further reference to the GLA. However, the Corporation should still send a copy of the decision notice to the Mayor, pursuant to Article 5 (3) of the Order.
Please note that the Transport for London case officer for this application is Timothy Neale ([email protected]), telephone 020 3054 7036.
Yours sincerely,
Colin Wilson Senior Manager - Development & Projects
cc John Biggs, London Assembly Constituency Member Nicky Gavron, Chair of London Assembly Planning Committee National Planning Casework Unit, DCLG Alex Williams, TfL Laura Jenkinson, GVA, 10 Stratton Street, London, WlJ BJR
-2-
London Legacy Deve lopment Corporation
GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY 2 1 JAN 2015
planni ~g repo~-W3347 /Q1
13 January 2015
Land at Marshgate Lane, Pudding Mill Lane, Stratford, ElS
In the London Borough of Newham. (London Legacy Development Corporation)
planning application no. 14/00422/FUL
Strategic planning application Stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008.
The proposal Demolition of existing buildings and primarily residential development comprising 268 residential units and 3,363 sq.m. of new 81 employment floorspace.
The applicant The applicant is Workspace and the architect is Squire and Partners.
Strategic issues The application raises strategic planning issues in respect of proposed uses, the 2012 Games and their Legacy, housing and affordable housing, urban design, inclusive design, sustainable developmentr energy and transport.
Recommendation That the London Legacy Development Corporation be advised that the application does not comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 84 of this report; but that the possible remedies set out in this paragraph could address these deficiencies. The application does not need to be referred back to the Mayor if the Corporation resolves to refuse permission, but it must be referred back if the Corporation resolves to grant permission.
Context 1 On the 17 November 2014 the Mayor of London received documents from the London Legacy Development Corporation 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 is required to provide the London Legacy Development Corporation with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan and his reasons for taking that view.
page 1
2 This report sets out information for the Mayor's use in deciding what decision to make.
3 The application is referable under Categories 1 A. 1 (Development which comprises or includes the provision of more than 150 houses, flats, or houses and flats) and 1 C. 1.3 (A building more than 30 metres high outside the City of London), of the Schedule to the Order 2008.
4 Once the London Legacy Development Corporation 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 or allow the Corporation to determine it itself, unless otherwise advised. In this instance if the Corporation resolves to refuse permission it need not refer the application back to the Mayor.
5 The Mayor of London's statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk.
Site description 6 The site is located to the north of Bow Back River and to the west of City Mill River and is approximately 1.33 hectare in size. It is situated within the London Borough of Newham, though the local planning authority is the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC). Vehicle access to Stratford High Street is provided via Marshgate Lane and the site faces a four storey residential building across Bow Back River, cleared sites used for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and the two storey City Mill lock keepers cottage and lock.
7 The site currently comprises a number of predominately two storey industrial buildings and open yard space managed by Workspace (the applicant) for a range of light industrial, office, studio and workshop uses. Workspace itself is a private company specialising in managing, renting and developing business premises.
8 The site is located approximately 150 metres from A 118 Stratford High Street, (which forms part of the Strategic Road Network - SRN) and 400 metres from the A 11 I A 12 Bow Roundabout, part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN).
9 Pudding Mill Lane is the nearest station on the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) which is approximately 250m away. There are other stations all approximately 1 km from the site (which are not included in the PTAL walking assessment), at Bromley-by-Bow and Bow Road (District line) Stratford High Street (DLR), Bow Church (DLR) and Stratford Regional Station (Underground, National Rail, DLR and Overground). Five daytime bus services operate on Stratford High Street. The nearest eastbound stop is 200m from the site, whereas the nearest westbound bus stop, which is opposite Cooks Road, requires a detour to cross the High Street. The newly opened Cycle Superhighway 2 (C52) runs along the High Street, providing a fully segregated route between Bow Roundabout and Stratford town centre.
10 The applicant's PTAL assessment records a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) between 3 (average) and 4 (good) at points across the site on a scale of 1-6, where 6 is the highest.
Details of the proposal 11 Demolition of existing buildings and their replacement by a primarily residential development comprising 261 flats and 3,363 sq.m. (2,928 sq.m. gross internal) of employment floorspace in 7 mixed use buildings varying In height between 6 and 12 stories, together with an eight block containing seven, three storey town houses.
page2
Planning history 12 A pre-planning application meeting was held at City Hall on the 20 February 2014 where advice given on the matters set out below. TfL has also provided separate detailed transport advice to the applicant and the LLDC.
Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance 13 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:
• Proposed uses • The 2012 Games & Legacy • Urban design • Housing
• Inclusive design • Sustainable development
• Transport • Crossrail
London Plan; London Plan; London Plan; London Plan; Housing SPG; Housing Strategy; draft Revised Housing Strategy; Shaping Neighbourhoods: Providing for Children and Young People's Play and Informal Recreation SPG: London Plan; Accessible London SPG; London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor's Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor's Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor's Water Strategy. London Plan; the Mayor's Transport Strategy; London Plan; Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy; Crossrail SPG.
14 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 2012 London Borough of Newham Core Strategy, the saved policies from Newham's Unitary Development Plan and the 2011 London Plan (with 2013 Alterations).
15 The following are also relevant material considerations:
• The National Planning Policy Framework and associated Technical Guide.
• The Mayor's Olympic Legacy Supplementary Planning Guidance, (OLSPG), 2012.
• The draft Further Alterations to the London Plan, (Intend to Publish version, December 2014).
• The LLDC's Publication Draft Local Plan, (August 2014)- with minor amendments and corrections.
Planning context
16 The site currently forms part of wider Strategic Industrial Location as defined in the London Plan. This designation is confirmed by Newham Council's Core Strategy which sets out the following description and policy approach for the wider area:
page3
• The site will be de-designated from a Strategic Industrial Location in order to realise its regeneration potential and ensure good relationship with surrounding new and rejuvenated areas in line with Policy J2. Bearing in mind levels of accessibility and availability of planned and existing supporting facilities the site is to be developed for mixed use comprising employment uses (including the retention of an employment buffer zone adjacent to the A 12 and Crossrail portal), residential and community uses with a new local centre focused around Pudding Mill Lane DLR station, and improved links north -south through the site to Stratford High Street. Primary education and health facilities are likely to be provided. Indicative residential typology- medium density, high family.
Page 49 (S09 Pudding Mill lane)
17 The Mayor's 2012 Olympic Legacy Supplementary planning Guidance promotes the following approach to change in the area in which the site is located:
• Pudding Mill Lane is currently identified by the Mayor as a strategic industrial location (SIL) and is partially safeguarded for Crossrail construction. However, it is surrounded by waterways on three sides, and has significant post-Games regeneration potential, which could see it transformed from a predominantly industrial area into a new mixed use neighbourhood.
• The Mayor believes the parts of Pudding Mill Lane should be developed at a lower scale than much of its surroundings, (generally four to six storeys), to provide a mix of uses including family housing, employment and social and community uses that maximise the amenity value of the waterside environments provided by the City Mill and Bow Back rivers.
• A new 'hub' could be created around Pudding Mill Lane station providing local shops and services together with additional employment and residential uses. Alternatively such a hub could be provided closer to Stratford High Street, providing a direct connection to the DLR station is achieved.
• Buildings between Bow Back River and Stratford High Street could be significantly higher so as to respond to the higher scale of recent developments along the High Street and to again provide a barrier against traffic impact, though care should be · taken to ensure that the more family focussed parts of the area have adequate sunlight and amenity.
Page 81 (Southern Olympic Fringe - Urban form)
• In all cases the aim should be to provide a mix of new uses that will complement each other, bring new jobs and homes into the area,(particularly for families), and maximise access to and appreciation of the area's waterways. This change will need to be carefully managed as not all parts of the sub-area are equally suitable for residential or employment use, and new local open spaces, community facilities and connections must also be planned for and provided. The balance between demolition, sensitive infill and restoration will also require careful urban design analysis.
Page 75 (Southern Olympic Fringe - Context)
18 The LLDC's draft Local plan proposes the following site allocation for Pudding Mill within which the application site is located:
page4
• A new medium-density, mixed-use area, including a significant and diverse element of new and replacement business floorspace, including spaces suitable for small and medium-sized businesses; a new Local Centre adjacent to Pudding Mill Lane DLR Station and Pudding Mill Lane; new homes including a significant element of family housing; new Local Open Space, play space and public realm. Cumulatively across the Pudding Mill Site Allocation, 25 per cent non-residential floorspace should be achieved, with a predominantly industrial floorspace use mix in the area to the west of Cooks Road and around the Crossrail portal.
Page 21 8 (Site Allocation SA4 3: Pudding Mill)
19 It also puts forward the following requirements and guidance for new development within the area which included:
• Open Space/playspace needs to be provided alongside development and located within pockets across the site.
• Non-residential uses should be focused along a new central east-west street.
• The form of development should allow for improved east-west connections through the site.
• A significant proportion of family homes should be provided.
20 There is therefore a high degree of consensus between the strategic and local planning authorities on how the area within which the site is located should evolve. Namely that:
• Whilst the application site is currently protected industrial land, it has the potential for release to form part of a new mixed use neighbourhood.
• This mix of uses should include significant levels of family housing, employment and social and community uses, including new local open spaces, and provide connections into and across the area.
• Whilst the wider area is suitable for medium density housing (typically 4 to 6 storeys) that secured high levels of family housing, it should also continue to provide a significant range of employment floorspace that includes premises suitable for small and medium-sized businesses as well as managed and supported workspace.
• New development should maximise the amenity value of the waterside environment of City Mill and Bow Back rivers and a balance should be struck between demolition, infill and restoration.
Principle of development
Loss of employment use
21 As set out above, the site is currently within a designated Strategic Industrial Location (SIL) where residential uses are normally resisted. However, in this particular case the SIL the site is within has been identified for release in the Mayor's OLSPG and in Newham's Core Strategy. The introduction of residential uses into this area and onto the application site is therefore acceptable in strategic planning terms.
New commercial uses
pageS
22 The inclusion of commercial floorspace as part of a mixed use scheme is strongly supported and would help achieve the mix of uses that strategic and local policy and guidance requires. The applicant was advised at the pre-application stage that this should take the form of premises suitable for small and medium-sized businesses and include managed and supported workspace, particularly as such uses already exist on the site and contribute to the local economy. This should be verified and robustly secured in any planning permission.
The 2012 Games & their legacy 23 The London Plan sets out the Mayor's vision for the sustainable development of the capital and paragraph 1.54 and policies 1.1 and 2.4 confirm that he will apply the Plan's objectives and principles to the new and existing neighbourhoods in the Lea Valley associated with the 2012 Games and reinforce his objective to promote social and economic convergence between east London and other parts of the city.
24 The application site is within the area covered by the Mayor's OLSPG, which provides advice on how he wishes his strategic planning priorities to be applied to the area it covers. The OLSPG sets out an overall vision for the area, which includes making it one of the best places to live and work in London, improving connectivity across and into the new Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, and creating new family housing and schools. It then includes a series of development principles that are expected to be applied to planning applications and includes more detailed guidance for each of its 5 sub areas.
25 The OLSPG's Core development principle addresses convergence and states that planning applications in the OLSPG area should demonstrate how they will help close the deprivation gap between the Olympic host boroughs and the rest of London and that one way this can done is for planning applications in the OLSPG area that propose more than 100 residential units or 1,000 sq.m. of new floorspace or uses to include a statement setting out how they will help achieve convergence outcomes. The appli~ant has prepared such a statement that sets out how this might be achieved. These objectives and outcomes should be clearly embedded within any planning approval, specifically to ensure that local people will have access to the employment opportunities the scheme would deliver.
Housing 26 The applicant was advised at pre-application stage that new housing on this site was welcomed and would help achieve local and strategic housing targets. It was also advised that its proposals would be expected to deliver a mix of housing sizes and tenures that accorded with local and strategic policy, that it would need to maximise affordable housing output, that it should hold early discussions with registered providers, demonstrate that its planning application would deliver the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing, and prepare and submit a viability report that GLA officers would expect would be independently assessed by the LLDC.
Housing mix
27 The applicant is proposing the following housing mix "subject to viability":
Studio 1 bed 2bed 3bed 4bed Total Social rented/affordable 0 26 7 7 0 40 Intermediate 0 14 0 31 0 45 Mark.t 0 78 58 44 3 183 Total 0 118 65 82 3 268
page6
28 This equates to 31% affordable housing and 32% family (3 or 4 bedroom) housing. Forty five percent (38) of the 85 affordable units would be family sized units.
Affordable housing
29 London Plan policy 3.12 requires local planning authorities to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on individual private residential and mixed- use schemes and to have regard to local targets and London Plan policy 3.11 which looks for 60% of new affordable housing to be for social rent and 40% for intermediate rent or sale. The Mayor's Early Minor Alterations to the London Plan address the introduction of affordable rent.
30 Policy 3.12 is supported by paragraph 3.71, which urges local planning authorities to take account of economic viability when estimating the appropriate amount of affordable provision. The lhree Dragons' development control toolkit or other recognised appraisal methodologies are recommended for this purpose.
31 Pre-application discussions relating to affordable housing were limited and the applicant is now proposing that 85 of its proposed units would be affordable (subject to viability) which would be 31% of the total units, though this is not assured at this stage.
32 The applicant is understood to have submitted a viability assessment to the LLDC which it is currently assessing. The LLDC should therefore continue to assess the scheme's viability to ensure that it would provide the maximum reasonable level of affordable housing it can. All assessments should then be shared with the GLA before the scheme is referred back to the Mayor at Stage 2.
Housing choice
33 London Plan policy 3.11 stresses the importance of family housing and policy 3.8 confirms that affordable family housing is also a strategic priority. As set out above, the applicant is proposing that 85 (32%) of the units would be family sized units, with 45% (38) of the affordable units family sized. Whilst the focus on family sized affordable housing is welcomed and supported, as recommended to the applicant at pre-application stage, it is suggested that it (and the LLDC) look to increase the total number of family sized units the scheme would provide given its characteristics and riverside location.
Density
34 London Plan policy 3.4 requires development to optimise housing output for different locations taking into account local context and character, design principles set out in London Plan Chapter 7 and the public transport capacity; Table 3.2 provides density guidelines in support of this. The applicant anticipates that a developed and more accessible site would have a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of between 3 and 4. Within an urban setting, the London Plan would suggest a density range of between 170-260 u/ha or 200-700 hr/ha, with an expectation that the density would be in the middle of these ranges.
35 The applicant contends that the proposed development would have a residential density of 582 habitable rooms per hectare. The GLA's preferred methodology would however indicate a density of 625 habitable rooms per hectare or 222 units per hectare if the density methodology set out in paragraph 1.3.47 of the Mayors Housing SPG is used.
36 The proposed density could be acceptable from a strategic planning perspective should a PTAL of 4 be achievable across the majority of the site. As set out below, this should be discussed further with TfL officers and its concerns clarified and addressed.
page7
Residential standards and quality
37 The applicant has submitted an assessment of its proposed residential units against the standards set out in the Mayor's Housing SPG which is welcomed with floor to ceiling heights, units per core and units sizes either meet or exceeded adopted standards. However, the overall number of single aspect units has not been confirmed by the applicant but it has stated that "'less than 13% of the proposed units would be single aspect north facing units" - all of which would be one bedroom units. This could hqwever mean that 34 units would be single aspect and north facing which is relatively high for a scheme of this nature. The applicant should therefore clarify the total number of single aspect units it is proposing and look to reduce the number of single aspect north facing units the scheme would contain.
Children's play space
38 The applicant was advised at pre-application stage to take account of London Plan policy 3.6, which seeks to ensure that development proposals include suitable provision for play and recreation and ensure that sufficient space is provided in accordance with the estimated expected child population of the completed development. The GLA's child yield calculator suggests that the completed scheme would be likely to result in 81 children, and hence 810 sq.m. of play space should be provided.
Number of children 96
Under 5 33 5496
5 to 11 18 3096
12+ 9 1596
Total 61 10096
39 The applicant has indicated that it will provide 265 sq.m. of formal playspace, 109 sq.m. of formal courtyard play space, and 332 sq.m. of informal play space. This would provide a total of 696 sq.m. which is below the Mayor's adopted standard. Furthermore, the applicant has not produced a robust play strategy. These matters should be addressed before the scheme is referred back to the Mayor at Stage 2 to demonstrate full compliance with the London Plan. It could also usefully liaise with the LLDC to identify opportunities to provide or enhance existing or proposed play facilities in the immediate area.
Urban design 40 The site is bounded by Legacy Community Scheme development sites to its northern, eastern and western boundaries which have shaped and informed its design. It has also evolved significantly and positively since the pre-application stage and now proposes seven mixed use buildings varying in height between 6 and 12 stories, together with an eighth building containing seven, 3 storey town houses. The scheme would be predominately brick faced with an attractive combination of recessed and external balconies. A new public connection would be provided along the northern edge of Bow Back River and the scheme has also been designed to accommodate a new bridge that would allow for bus connection and between Pudding Mill Lane and Stratford High Street.
41 The height of the proposed scheme varies with the taller twelve storey element marking the crossing of Marshgate Lane and Bow Back River. These heights are significantly higher than those envisaged within the OLSPG and Newham's Core Strategy, though are reduced from those shown at pre application stage. The residential quality of the scheme is high with care taken to generally provide an attractive, safe and animated public realm across the site which would provide prominent and well located cores and entrances accessed from within the public realm.
pageS
42 However, the differentiation and separation of public and private space across the site is not totally clear in a number of areas, for example fronting Bow Back Rivers and within the proposed courtyard. A number of frontages also appear dominated by refuse and cycle storage, though most do not.
43 These matters have been discussed with the applicant who has acknowledged the need to further develop these aspects of its proposals to ensure the scheme and its public and private spaces would be safe, well used and legible.
44 Detailed landscape proposals should also reflect the future role of Marshgate Lane and the design and impact of the proposed new bridge and cycle connection. Care is therefore needed to manage the interaction between pedestrians, cyclists and buses in this location, especially around the proposed 'Marshgate Square' which is treated partially as a shared surface. The use of a SOmm upstand kerb to differentiate between pedestrian and vehicular areas will help to reduce issues of conflict between users, but in all areas clear separation and demarcation between areas where vehicles can and can't access is needed.
45 Whilst the proposed temporary surface treatment could work well for a pedestrian space, it would be helpful to better understand the aspiration for treatment of this surface in the event that the bridge link is implemented, which should also be secured by a 5106 clause or condition. Similarly, where tree planting is shown between Buildings 2 and 3 it should not impact on the area safeguarded for construction of the bridge.
46 Finally, the applicant should also clarify which connections would be public and which would be private and not accessible either for all or parts of the day. This has been discussed with the applicant who has agreed to consider these matters further and provide a consolidated annotated landscaping plan to clarify its proposed approach to this and other urban design, transport and inclusive design matters.
Inclusive design
47 The applicant was advised at pre-application that the following issues should be addressed and clearly confirmed in any planning application:
• 10% of all units should be wheelchair accessible and the applicant should provide a detailed plan of these units, which in turn should be mixed across unit sizes and tenures.
• Drop off points should be provided as close as possible to principal entrances.
48 It was also advised that disabled persons parking should be provided within the site, designed to the guidance found in BS8300:2009 + A 1 :2010 and adequate parking spaces for disabled people must be provided, preferably onsite and as set out in the Mayor's November 2012 Housing SPG, each wheelchair accessible dwelling should have an associated accessible parking space, and that all of the above should be detailed within any submitted design and access statement which would also show how inclusive design principles had influenced and shaped the scheme.
page9
49 The applicant has confirmed that all residential units will be designed to the Lifetime Homes standards and that 10% will be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable homes. This is welcomed in line with London Plan Policy 3.8 Housing Choice. The design and access statement should however demonstrate that the design of the residential units meets the sixteen Lifetime Home standards and that the wheelchair accessible homes meet the standards set out in the Housing SPG. It should also be clear on the submitted plans where the wheelchair accessible homes are located and how many there are of each tenure, which should be distributed across sizes and tenures to give disabled and older people similar choices to non-disabled people.
50 These matters should be fully addressed to demonstrate full compliance with all relevant London Plan policies and guidance, ideally by consolidating its approach into an Inclusive Access Strategy in line with London Plan policy and standards that would also show how inclusive design principles have influenced and shaped the scheme.
Sustainable development
51 The applicant has prepared and submitted detailed environmental documentation including energy, sustainability, water resources and flood risk, wind, noise and vibration, air quality, ecology and contamination. This is welcomed and subject to resolution of the energy matters set out below, are satisfactory from a strategic planning perspective.
Energy
Overview
52 The applicant has broadly followed the energy hierarchy and sufficient information has been provided to understand the proposals as a whole. Further revisions and information are however required before the proposals can be considered acceptable and its carbon dioxide savings verified.
Energy efficiency standards
53 A range of passive design features and demand reduction measures are proposed to reduce the carbon emissions of the proposed development. Both air permeability and heat loss parameters will be improved beyond the minimum backstop values required by building regulations. Other features include low energy lighting and controls, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, the use of accredited construction details to reduce thermal bridging, and triple glazed windows for the domestic component of the development.
54 The applicant has stated that the dwellings will not be provided with active cooling which is welcome. Given the high fabric efficiency of the dwellings the applicant should provide enough evidence to demonstrate that the dwellings are not at risk of overheating and that the design has developed in compliance with policy 5.9 on minimising overheating risk.
55 The development is estimated to achieve a reduction of 53 tonnes per annum (13%) in regulated C02 emissions compared to a 2013 Building Regulations compliant development. Sample SAP outputs and BRUKL sheets have been provided to support the savings claimed. The savings claimed, while welcome, are considered very high and the applicant should note that high attention to detail will be required throughout the detailed design and build process to ensure that the proposed specification is met.
page 10
District beating
56 The applicant bas identified that the Olympic Park district beating network is within the vicinity of the development and is proposing to connect to the network. Evidence of correspondence with the network operator bas been provided confirming that the site is too far from the existing network to allow viable connection at this time.
57 The applicant bas however provided a commitment to ensuring that the development is designed to allow future connection to the district beating network should one become available. The applicant bas further confirmed that the Olympic network operator will be consulted during the detailed design to ensure that the plant room design facilitates a future connection, which is welcome.
58 The applicant is proposing to install a site beat network. However, the applicant should confirm that all apartments and non-domestic building uses will be connected to the site beat network. The site beat network will be supplied from a single energy centre. This will be approximately 150 sq.m. in size and located in the basement of block 3.
Combined Heat and Power
59 The applicant if proposing to install a 11 0 kWe gas fired CHP unit as the lead beat source for the site beat network. The CHP is sized to provide the domestic bot water load, as well as a proportion of the space beating (approximately 65% of the total). A reduction in regulated C02 emissions of 79 tonnes per annum (22%) will be achieved through this second part of the energy hierarchy.
60 Load profiles have been provided for the proposed system. Further details should be provided on the process used for sizing and estimating the running hours for the system as the engine size appears excessive relative to the carbon savings claimed.
61 The applicant bas stated that the Olympic Park network operator bas expressed an interest in managing the proposed CHP with a view to eventually integrating the site with their beat network as this extends in the future. These discussions are welcome and should be progressed as the development progresses. This would also help identify at an early stage a successful long term management arrangement for the CHP.
Renewable energy technologies
62 The applicant bas investigated the feasibility of a range of renewable energy technologies and is proposing to install 50 kWp (400 sq.m.) of solar PV on the roofs of the buildings. A roof plan showing the proposed installation bas been provided.
63 A reduction in regulated C02 emissions of 18 tonnes per annum (6%) will be achieved through this third element of the energy hierarchy.
Conclusion
64 Based on the energy assessment submitted at stage I, a reduction of 150 tonnes of C02 per year in regulated emissions compared to a 2013 Building Regulations compliant development is expected, equivalent to an overall saving of 36%. The carbon dioxide savings would therefore exceed the target set within policy 5.2 of the London Plan. However the comments above should be addressed before compliance with London Plan policy can be verified and appropriate conditions should be included within any approval requiring further information be submitted to show that the scheme will meet Part L 2013 by efficiency alone and a further condition requiring the overall 35% target to be met.
page 11
Transport
Car and cycle parking
65 The commercial element provides 2 accessible spaces. For the residential element 67 spaces are provided including 27 accessible spaces. This would mean that each wheelchair accessible unit would have an associated wheelchair sized space and result in an overall ratio of 0.25 spaces per unit, which is below London Plan standards and is welcomed. The applicant should also demonstrate how the spaces would be managed and a Car Parking Management Plan should be secured by condition to allocate, manage and monitor parking for residential and commercial uses. The Electrical vehicle charging points (EVCPs), which meet London Plan standards, should also be secured by condition.
66 No car club spaces are currently proposed on the site, and the developer should provide this and contribute towards car club membership for each residential unit and the non-residential uses. This should be secured within the section 106 agreement. This site lies within the Residents Parking Zone (RPZ), and residents and workers at the site should be restricted from applying for on-street parking permits through the section 106 agreement.
67 Cycle parking for residents and non-residential users meets the Further Alterations to the London Plan, but it needs to be confirmed that all staff employed on site will have access to shower and changing facilities.
68 The nearest Mayo(s Cycle Hire docking station is approximately 400m away to the west of the A 12 and TfL and the GLA have recently announced that the scheme will be extended from its current boundary to the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, through the area which includes this site.
69 To serve residents, visitors and staff TfL requests that a contribution (£1 00,000) and space for one Cycle Hire docking station (with a minimum of 27 docking points) should be secured from this development.
Trip generation and mitigation
70 There are some minor errors in the Transport Assessment about public transport services, although even assuming a larger share of trips being directed to Pudding Mill Lane station, the proposal is not expected to have an adverse impact on the DLR as an upgraded station was recently delivered or on the wider rail or bus network. In addition, TfL does not consider that this proposal will have a significant impact on the strategic highway network, although the cumulative impact of this and other developments is expected to add to local demand at junctions in the Bow area which will need to be mitigated.
71 There are ongoing initiatives to improve connectivity and local walking and cycling routes in the vicinity of the site, as set out in the OLSPG, LLDC publication version Local Plan, and raised in pre-application discussions, namely a new bus/cycle/pedestrian connection between Stratford High Street and Marshgate Lane over the Bow Back River, and the Bow Vision Programme.
page 12
72 The application creates an intermediate landscaped space between Building 2 and Building 3, which would beneficially form part of the route to the north of a new bus/cycle/pedestrian bridge. A similar piece of land has been kept free from development on the south side of the Bow Back River at the 68-70 Stratford High Street consented development. The applicant should facilitate the future construction of a bus/cycle/pedestrian bridge over the Bow Back River by providing the necessary footings and structures within the application area. Future access for construction should also be secured by condition.
73 Tfl are investigating short and long term options which would address local connection improvements (which are also identified in the PERS audit) as part of the Bow Vision Programme, to reduce the pedestrian severance of the A 12 and A 11 I A 118/Bow flyover and support the regeneration of the area. Subject to the removal of the west-east flyover this would include revised junctions at the Stratford High Street junctions with Cooks Road and Marshgate Lane.
74 In line with London Plan policy 6.10, the OLSPG and LLDC draft Local Plan, Tfl considers that a contribution towards local connectivity and permeability improvements e.g. a new bus/cycle/pedestrian connection between Stratford High Street and Marshgate Lane and the Bow Vision Programme is justified and should be secured through the section 106, to be pooled with contributions from other development in the area.
75 Finally, the applicant's Planning Statement states that the PTAL "'will be further improved with the provision of a bus, pedestrian and cycle bridge link". This however has not been demonstrated and should be discussed with Tfl officer and to inform the acceptability of the proposed density as set out above.
Travel, construction, and delivery and servicing plans
76 Tfl welcomes the submission of framework Travel Plans, which have passed the ATirBuTE assessment. The travel plan should be secured, enforced, monitored and reviewed as part of the 5106 agreement. A Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP) (or inclusion in the Travel Plan) and a Construction and Logistics Plan (CLP) have been prepared, and updated versions will need to be secured via condition. The CLP will need to take into account any potential works which may take place as part of the Bow Vision Programme during the construction programme.
Other matters
77 The submitted drawings show an area to be used as carriageway which is approximately 7 metres wide. This width is welcomed, which would allow two buses to pass or wait in this area, should two-way bus working be required once a bridge is delivered (however wide the bridge will be), and this area should also be designed for ease of use by cyclists travelling in both directions across the bridge regardless of the operation of buses.
78 The precise details of bus routeings and frequencies would be subject to further work, budget constraints and public consultation, but would not be expected to be excessive nor impact on the public realm proposals of the site, subject to clarifying the future surface treatment. If the part of the site forming the carriageway is to remain as private highway rather than being adopted, Ttl would need to secure rights of access through the site via a lease.
Summary
79 In order to comply with the transport policies of the London Plan the following is sought:
• Confirmation that cycle facilities will comply with relevant standards
• Car Parking Management Plan, Blue Badge and EVCP provision, Delivery and Servicing Plan and Construction Logistics Plan should be secured via condition
page 13
• Full Travel Plan secured by section 106 agreement
• Financial contributions towards a cycle hire docking station (and a safeguarded site), local connectivity and permeability improvements in the Pudding Mill Lane area towards a bus I pedestrian I cycle bridge and the Bow Vision Programme.
• Payment of the Mayors Community Infrastructure Levy.
80 These matters should be fully addressed before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage 2.
Local planning authority's position
81 This is not known at this stage.
Legal considerations
82 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 London Legacy Development Corporation 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 London Legacy Development Corporation under Article 6 of the Order to refuse 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
83 There are no financial considerations at this stage.
Conclusion
84 London Plan policies on proposed mix of uses, the 2012 Games and their Legacy, housing and affordable housing, urban design, inclusive design, sustainable development, energy and transport are relevant to this application. On balance, the application does not comply with the London Plan, but the suggested changes might remedy these deficiencies, and could possibly lead to it becoming compliant with the London Plan:
• Mix of uses- The proposed mix of uses is supported.
• The 2012 Games and their Legacy- The application complies with the London Plan.
• Housing - The principle of introducing residential is supported in strategic planning terms and complies with the London Plan. However, evidence is needed to demonstrate that the maximum reasonable level of affordable housing would be provided, additional efforts made to increase the proposed level of family housing, the proportion of north facing single aspect units reduced, and the proposed approach to children's play space clarified.
• Urban design -The approach to urban design is supported in strategic planning terms but the maters set out above should be fully addressed.
• Inclusive design - The Inclusive design concerns identified In this report should be fully addressed before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage 2 to demonstrate full compliance with the London Plan.
page 14
• Sustainable development and energy -The detailed energy issues identified in this report should be fully addressed before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage 2 to demonstrate full compliance with the London Plan.
• Transport - The transport concerns identified in this report should be fully addressed before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage 2 to demonstrate full compliance with the London Plan.
for further information, contact GLA Planning Unit (Development and Projects) Colin Wilson. Senior Manager - Development and Projects 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr. Strategic Planning Manager (Development Dedsions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Lyndon Fothergill. Prindpal Strategic Planner (Case Officer) 020 7983 4512 [email protected]~n,gn.ll..uk
page 15
Dear Mr Hollingsworth, Application No: 14/00422/FUL
Location: Land at Marshgate Lane, Pudding Mill, Stratford, London E15
2NH
Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 7 No. three storey townhouses and 7 No. mixed use buildings ranging from 2 to 12 storeys in height, comprising 2,928m2 Gross Internal Area (GIA) of B1 (business) floorspace and 268 flats, together with basement, access, servicing, car parking, cycle storage, plant, open space and landscaping.
Thank you for consulting the London Borough of Newham. On behalf of the Council, I am writing to support the abovementioned application and request that the following comments are taken into account in the determination of the application: Principle of Development The principle of mixed use with the allocation of approximately 3000 sq. m. of commercial floorspace is supported and aligns with the Council’s vision of providing jobs and homes. Therefore there are no principle policy objections to the proposed use of the site. The Council is however concerned in respect of the proposed mix of units within the scheme and specifically the level of three bedroom family units proposed (31% provision) which is less than the 39% required by Policy H1 of the Council’s Core Strategy. Newham restates
Deirdra Armsby Head of Planning and Development Commissioning Development Control 1
st Floor, West Wing
Newham Dockside 1000 Dockside Road London E16 2QU Ask for: Deirdra Armsby Tel: 0208 430 2000 Date: 11 December 2014
Anthony Hollingsworth Director of Planning Policy & Decisions London Legacy Development Corporation Level 10 1 Stratford Place Montfichet Road London E20 1EJ
that a review mechanism may be necessary to address this shortfall and would wish that any monies raised via a review mechanism be directed to the provision of family social rented accommodation. Design / External Appearance / Scale & Massing It is proposed that Building 1 shall be 12 storeys in height. Development Plan policy requires the highest standards of architecture and materials, including sustainable design and construction practices (Policy 7.7 of the London Plan refers). Policy 7.7(c) states that tall buildings should relate well to the form, proportion, composition, scale and character of surrounding buildings, urban grain and public realm. In terms of the design and external appearance of the proposed development, the Council considers that this scheme has benefited from the rigorous design review process, which comprised two meetings of the Quality Review Panel and welcomes the way in which the applicant and architect have positively responded to the comments raised. It is considered that the proposed development represents a considerable improvement to the early design proposals for this scheme that represented a much more bulky and overbearing form in terms its height and massing. The design response to lower Building 1 from 16 storeys to 12 storeys is welcomed but it is a concern for the Council that this building should be lower in height. Previous Council advice was to lower the built form and as it steps away from Stratford High Street. It is considered that the proposed elevational treatment is particularly successful, and the Council welcome the large balconies and terraces which punctuate and help enliven the facades of the residential buildings. However, notwithstanding this, the quality of the detailing and the materiality of the development will be critical to the overall success of the scheme but the precedent images do inspire confidence as to the proposed materiality and treatments. Should the LLDC be minded to grant planning permission for the proposal, robust conditions will be necessary to ensure the design quality shown within the application submission is followed through to the build-out of the development. Similarly, the Council would also recommend a clause within the Section 106 Agreement to retain the services of the Architect (Squire and Partners) to deal with the approval of details and oversee the build out of the development on site. The internal arrangement of the proposed accommodation is considered to be well considered, and will result in the majority of the units having a dual aspect. It would appear that all of the units would meet minimum space standards, but would request that the LLDC ensure the application proposals are compliant in this regard. Taking into account the high quality design and internal layout of the proposed development, it is considered that the overall height and massing of Buildings
2-7 is acceptable in townscape terms. I hope the above response is of assistance. Affordable Housing / S106 This level of affordable housing is below the level set out in Newham’s Core Strategy in Paragraph 6.126, that we aim to achieve 35%-50% affordable housing onsite. This target is subject to viability and site specific circumstances. On this site we see no compelling reason why 35%-50% can not be delivered. We would expect the LLDC to carry out a robust review of the scheme’s viability and if justified to ensure that the level of onsite affordable housing is delivered. If there is uncertainty around some of the elements of the scheme’s viability, that may make the lower offer acceptable, we would insist that a review mechanism is put in place that captures the reality of rising residential values in this area. Newham would wish that any monies raised via a review mechanism be directed to the provision of family social rented accommodation. Yours sincerely, Deirdra Armsby Head of Planning and Development Commissioning
Appendix 4
Squire and Partners
Marshgate Response to LLDC Local Plan 10th February 2015
Squire and Partners
- An award winning architects’ practice founded in 1976
- Have designed numerous buildings on key sites in London and abroad
- Approach to architecture is based on a commitment to contemporary design and detailing within
a traditional framework of street patterns, scale and proportions.
- Emphasis is focused on responding to context; sourcing the finest building materials and delivering a
meticulously detailed product.
- Previous residential projects that have been completed include the following:
Creekside Village
Berwick Street
Royal Victoria Docks
Introduction
2.1 Site Location and Context
2.1.1 The site is located within the London Borough of Newham (LBN)
between Marshgate Lane and the Bow Back River, however
the application lies within the jurasdiction of London Legacy
Development Corporation (LLDC) who is therefore the determining
authority for the application. The site is immediately adjacent to
Marshgate Lane to its west, Bow Back River to the south and City
Mill River to the east. It is approximately 390m southeast of the
Olympic Park and 50m north of Stratford High Street (A118). The
location of the site means that it forms a gateway between the
Olympic Park and the regeneration area of Sugar House Lane.
2.1.2 The site lies within the Pudding Mill area of Stratford, previously
allocated as industrial land but has since been re-designated for
mixed uses including housing.
2.1.3 The site is not in a Conservation Area. The existing site
is composed of a series of industrial buildings that are
approximately 50% vacant.
2.1.4 The site lies between several proposed developments which have
either gained planning consent or are in the process of applying
for Planning Consent. These include the following:
68 - 70 High Street Stratford
Legacy Communities Scheme, of which includes a parcel of land
falling within the Pudding Mill area, known as PDZ8
Cook’s Road
These adjacent sites within the Pudding Mill ‘Island’ are largely
unoccupied by existing buildings and uses.
2.1.5 The context that currently exists consists of existing buildings
that line the opposite side of the Bow Back River to the North and
East of the site. These buildings are primarily residential, with
smaller elements of commercial oorspace use lining the ground
oor level along Stratford High Street.
OLYMPIC
STADIUM
BOW
INTERCHANGE
BROMLEY-BY-BOW
WESTFIELD
SHOPPING
CENTREVICTORIA
PARK STRATFORD
CENTRE
STRATF
ORD HIG
H STR
EET
BOW ROAD
GREENWAY
Aerial photograph of the site and its’ relationship with the wider context
Wider Pudding Mill Site Context
The site is immediately adjacent to Marshgate Lane to its west, Bow Back River to the south and City Mill River to the east. It is approximately 390m southeast of the Olympic Park and 50m north of Stratford High Street (A118). The location of the site means that it forms a gateway between the Olympic Park and the regeneration area of Sugar House Lane. The site lies within the Pudding Mill area of Stratford, previously allocated as industrial land but has since been re-designated for mixed uses including housing. The site is not in a Conservation Area. The existing site is composed of a series of industrial buildings that are approximately 50% vacant. The site lies between several proposed developments which have either gained planning consent or are in the process of applying for Planning Consent. These include the following: 68 - 70 High Street Stratford Legacy Communities Scheme, of which includes a parcel of land falling within the Pudding Mill area, known as PDZ8 Cook’s Road These adjacent sites within the Pudding Mill ‘Island’ are largely unoccupied by existing buildings and uses. The context that currently exists consists of existing buildings that line the opposite side of the Bow Back River to the North and East of the site. These buildings are primarily residential, with smaller elements of commercial floorspace use lining the ground floor level along Stratford High Street.
The Marshgate Site - Context
PDZ8 development zone, approved as part of Legacy Communities Scheme outline planning permission Ref 11/90621/OUTODA, approved 28/09/2012LCS consented areas
MARSHGATE
SITE
Marshgate in the context of outline Approval PDZ8, The Legacy Communities Scheme
2.8 Scale, Character and Materials of Emerging Context
In order to respond to the adjacent consented proposals, Squire and
Partners have undertaken detailed analysis of those proposals. A
summary of the outcome of that analysis is following:
2.8.1 PDZ8 Outline Planning Consent
The emerging context within the PDZ8 consent and along Stratford
High Street is likely to provide up to 1,660 new residential units and
up to 39,013m2 of Flexible Employment space. Densities within the
context vary from 450-650 HR/Ha within the least dense part of the
PDZ8 proposal to 1217 HR/Ha within the proposal for 68-70 High
Street Stratford. While the consent is for Outline Permission only, the
accompanying Design Code for PDZ8 clearly describes the design
aspirations for the neightbourhood:
Use and Amount
Uses in PDZ8 will be a mix of residential, employment, retail and
social infrastructure, with retail located along Marshgate Lane.
Layout
Parcels within the existing street network will be further subdivided
to increase the permeability through the neighbourhood and
introduce open spaces between between the buildings. Building
frontages to streets should be parallel to one another.
Scale and Massing
Streets will follow a maximum 1:1 proportion of corridor width to
height and maximum heights range from 16m to 37m above ground
level. Neighbourhood open space shall be to a maximum of 2:1
width:height of adjacent buildings.
Landscape
Doorstep play space will be well-defined by a fence and/or
vegetation. Marshgate Lane should be between 15 and 18m wide and
tertiary streets should be between 12 and 16m wide.
Appearance
River fronts shall have facades with generous openings that address
the waterfront. Buildings along Marshgate and Pudding Mill
Lanes shall be urban in character with openings and ground floor
entrances that overlook the public realm.
Squire and Partners interpretation of the proposed densities within the consented PDZ8 Masterplan
Lower Density Towards North
Development Parcel 8.2:
Medium Density
68-70
High Street Stratford
(Consented proposal)
Central House
Lock Building
Otter Close
Development Parcel 8.1:
Low Density
Development Parcel 8.3.2:
High Density
Bow Beck RIver
Stratford High Stre
et
Pudding M
ill Lane Marshgate Lane MARSHGATE
SITE
Marshgate in the context of outline approval PDZ8, the Legacy Communities Scheme (2)
Marshgate in the context of outline approval PDZ8, the Legacy Communities Scheme (3)
Adjoining the Marshgate Business Centre Site, Pudding Mill Lane and Marshgate Lane is identified for a “marker building”.
Squire and Partners interpretations of the maximum building envelopes of the consented PDZ8 Land Parcel
18 Storeys
10 Storeys9 Storeys
6 Storeys
11 Storeys
8 Storeys
8 Storeys
4 Storeys
3 Storeys
11 Storeys
8 Storeys
8 Storeys
Bow Beck RIver
Stratford High Stre
et
Pudding M
ill Lane
Marshgate Lane MARSHGATE
SITE
Marshgate in the context of approved adjoining schemes
Existing height diagram
1 Storey
68 - 70 HIGH STREET
STRATFORD HIGH STREET
STRATFORD HIGH STREET
MARSHGATE
PU
DD
ING
MIL
L L
AN
E
PU
DD
ING
MIL
L L
AN
E
MARSHGATE
LA
NE
LA
NE
BL
AK
ER
RO
AD
BL
AK
ER
RO
AD
BOW BACK RIVER
BOW BACK RIVER
WATERWORKS
WATERWORKS
CENTRAL HOUSEONE STRATFORD
ONE STRATFORDCENTRAL HOUSE 68 - 70
HIGH STREET
MARSHGATE BUSINESS CENTRE
STRATFORD HALO
RICK ROBERTSSITE
RICK ROBERTSSITE
PROPOSEDCOMBINED
MARSHGATE SITE
OTTERCLOSE
OTTERCLOSE
BOWSUB-STATION
BOWSUB-STATION
2 Storeys
4 Storeys
6 Storeys
8 Storeys
10 Storeys +
3 Storeys
5 Storeys
7 Storeys
9 Storeys
Site Boundary
Proposed height diagram (including consented maximum heights of emerging context
BULLMAN SITE
Existing and proposed height diagrams
2.9.2 Character
The buildings in the surrounding area have no recognisable group
characteristics. Buildings have been built over a wide time range
and therefore the style of buildings is very varied. The few industrial
buildings that remain are primarily 20th Century industrial buildings
that line Cooks Road.
2.9.3 Materials
Buildings along Stratford High Street are particularly varied in
materiality and consist of a range of brick, metal and glass clad
buildings.
A post-industrial theme may be the only shared theme within the
area, since the majority of buildings that have been developed
in recent years have been on former industrial sites. A variety of
bricks have been used in the neighbouring buildings and this may
be considered reminiscent of the historic warehouses that once
dominated the area. Brick was a durable and robust material
appropriate to the heavy industries that were contained within the
buildings.
Otter Close Lock Keeper’s Cottage
Central House One Stratford
Surrounding scale, character and materials (1)
2.9 Surrounding Scale, Character and Materials
2.9.1 Scale
Since a large area of context remains entirely vacant, the majority of
the existing context consists of the buildings that line Stratford High
Street.
Prior to the development of new larger scale buildings along
Stratford High Street in the last decade, the High Street followed a
pattern of smaller scale development that was largely composed of
two to three storey terraced developments, a few estates with 3 – 4
storey apartment buildings and a number of 20 storey tower blocks.
The area was largely occupied by industrial uses.
In the last decade a number of new buildings have been introduced
along Stratford High Street. These buildings have been built under
the planning guidance of the Stratford Metropolitan Masterplan
which sets a benchmark height of 8 storeys and suggests a series
of local and district ‘landmark buildings’ of between 16 and 24
storeys high. These new towers have been strategically located
at prominent intersections of roads and river in order to visually
emphasize significant routes. Examples of these ‘local landmark
buildings’ include the Stratford Halo which is 43 storeys high and at
the intersection of the ‘Greenway’ and Stratford High Street and One
Stratford High Street which is 27 storeys high and at the intersection
of Cooks Road and Stratford High Street.
Another ‘local landmark buildings’ that is consented very close to
the site is 68-70 High Street Stratford (currently the Porsche Garage)
which will incorporate an 18 storey tower that marks the proposed
junction of the Marshgate Lane Link Route with Stratford High
Street. This building will sit directly opposite the proposed site and
will be read in conjunction with the proposal for the Marshgate site
on approach from Stratford High Street. It is understood that this
permission is due to be implemented shortly.
68 - 70 High Street Stratford
Rick Roberts SiteStratford Halo
Surrounding scale, character and materials (2)
Lock Building - view across river lockLock Building - view East along Stratford High Street
Cluster of buildings overlooking Three Mills River and the site
(including Stratford Halo)
Existing Marshgate Business Centre Buildings
Surrounding scale, character and materials (3)
Marshgate Site – Design Approach
Marshgate Site – Design Approach
Townscape Significance A strategic bus link route has been safeguarded within the proposal – ‘Marshgate Link Route’. This will
facilitate greater permeability through the site by both vehicles and pedestrians. Permeability will be
increased further by the provision of a public towpath route along the meander of the Bow Back River and a
diagonal route that connects the ‘Marshgate Link Route’ to a new public Play Park on the waters edge. A
hierarchy of streets and landscapes have been provided with a clear division of public and private space.
Emerging Context Building heights within the proposal have been developed to respect the various existing and emerging
context. This has resulted in a diversity of building types of varied footprint and height. The scale of each
building relates to the scale of streetscape/ landscape at which it is located.
Existing Character The proposal takes its’ cue from the industrial heritage of the site and incorporates a high quality palette of
brick, metal and glass.
The Marshgate Site – Design Approach
Appendix 5
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
Appendix 5: Schedule of suggested Local Plan amendments
Matter 1: Legal and Procedural
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
Para 1.2, Page 5
As the Local Planning Authority for its area, the Legacy Corporation is required to prepare a Local Plan. The Local Plan sets out the Legacy Corporation’s strategy for the sustainable development of its area as a whole, including the general amount, type and location of new development it considers could take place and the policies to which applications for planning permission should generally conform in order to meet these objectives, demonstrated through a robust evidence base. Its planning powers, including preparing and implementing the Local Plan, represent one part of the Legacy Corporation’s role as a development corporation. Alongside the development of its own land and working with its partners, including the local communities, the four Boroughs, landowners and developers, it will use its wide-ranging powers to implement projects and bring about change that will meet the established purpose of creating a lasting legacy from the 2012 Games and supporting and promoting the aims of convergence.
We have previously provided comments on the Local Plan, and the importance of demonstrating a robust evidence base that meet the Tests of Soundness (Para. 182 of the NPPF), to ensure the plan is: (1) Positively prepared and based on objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements; (2) Justified and the most appropriate strategy considering reasonable alternatives; (3) Effective and deliverable over the plan period; and (4) consistent with national policy. We recommend the wording in para. 1.2 is revised and updated to reflect this to allow for changing circumstances and appropriate flexibility over the plan period.
Yes Yes Suggest amended wording to recognise required flexibility (Test 3)
Figure 2, Page 11
We suggest 24,000 new homes target is updated in line with the relevant evidence base for housing allocations, to ensure compliancy with the London Plan. The figure should also be updated to address any discrepancies across the Plan.
This is to ensure the plan is consistent with regional policy in line with Test of Soundness 4.
Yes Yes Update housing target in line to meet Tests 1 to 4.
Objective 2, Page 41
Objective 2: Establish and maintain locally distinctive neighbourhoods which meet housing needs, while providing excellent and easily accessible social infrastructure. This will mean: • Delivering approximately at least 24,000 new homes within a range of sizes and tenures that meet local and market demands • Ensuring homes are accessible to and affordable for a broad spectrum of the community, and meet specialist accommodation requirements • The delivery of at least four new primary schools and one new secondary school • The delivery and maintenance of sufficient new health and general community meeting places, including space suitable for faith use.
We previously commented on the draft of the Local Plan in December 2013, stating that the Marshgate Business Centre had not been included within the list of allocated within Appendix 8 of the Mayor’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (the draft housing target of 14,711 from 2015 to 2025, or 1,471 homes per year), nor the estimates of housing delivery within the Draft Local Plan (December 2013) appendix table. We stated that the additional capacity for our site should be included within the pipeline supply in line with our timescales for delivery, within the housing delivery appendix table in your draft plan, for 250 – 350 homes from 2015. We note in LLDC’s Consultation Report, it agreed to include our allocation within the tabled housing delivery appendix. However, ‘Table 13 - Remaining Capacity’ on Page 236 has not been updated to reflect the timescales for delivery for Marshgate Business Centre, and in fact includes a reduction in housing numbers without planning permission over the plan period, from 1,502 homes in the December 2013 version of the Local Plan, to 1,206 homes within the revised draft. This is not in line with the timescales for delivery within Site Allocation SA4.3. We would re-iterate that the Housing Allocation should be checked for accuracy prior to submission, and our site should be included as being
Yes Yes Suggest amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
delivered from 2015/2016 to 2019/2020 with a capacity of 250-350 new homes. We would also set out that it is important the evidence base and target is accurate to meet Tests of Soundness 1 (based on objectively assessed development) and 2 (justified and the most appropriate strategy). This is particularly important as the plan is struggling to meet its five per cent buffer on a rolling five-year basis beyond the first five years of the plan, as set out in Para. 5.3 of the Draft Plan. Test 4 requires compliancy with the London Plan and national policy. In this respect, the LLDC Local Plan should reflect the new priority focus of housing in the Further Alterations to the London Plan., within Table 13 “Remaining Capacity” of Appendix 2. The text and housing allocations should be updated where relevant including revisions to the evidence base, to ensure the plan is: (1) Positively prepared and based on objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements; (2) Justified and the most appropriate strategy considering reasonable alternatives; (3) Effective and deliverable over the plan period; and (4) consistent with national policy.
Site Allocation SA4.2, Page 218
Site Allocation SA4.3: Pudding Mill A new medium-density, mixed-use area, including a significant and diverse element of new and replacement business floorspace, including spaces suitable for small- and medium-sized businesses; a new Local Centre adjacent to Pudding Mill Lane DLR Station and Pudding Mill Lane; new homes including a significant element of family housing; new Local Open Space, Play space and public realm. Cumulatively across the Pudding Mill Site Allocation, 25 per cent non-residential floorspace should be achieved optimised where demonstrated to be viable and where there is an identified need, with a predominantly industrial floorspace use mix in the area to the west of Cooks Road and around the Crossrail portal. Development principles • Proposals for tall buildings development above 21 metres above ground level will only be acceptable subject to the provisions of Policy BN.10, with some taller elements in the Local Centre • Non-residential uses should be focused along a new central east-west street • The form of development should allow for improved east-west connections through the site • Provision should be made for safeguarding key connections, including new bus/cycle/pedestrian connection from Stratford High Street to Marshgate Lane and a new pedestrian/cycle connection from Wrexham Road over the A12 and River Lea • Land should be safeguarded Safeguarding of land for DLR North Route Double Tracking phase 2. • Regard will need to be had to not prejudicing the operation of the safeguarded rail freight site to the west (for example by ensuring that noise sensitive uses are located away from the site). Supporting Development principles •Landowners will need to work together to bring forward comprehensive schemes that are capable of achieving the ambitions for development of
The Plan fails to meet Tests of Soundness 2, 3 and 4 as it is too stringent to be applied over the plan period; fails to comply with national and regional policy and Borough policy; fails to be underpinned by an appropriate evidence base.
No, as the plan has not been revised in accordance with our previous comments.
No, as the plan has not been revised in accordance with our previous comments.
Suggested amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
the site allocation and delivering identified infrastructure needed for the site as a whole. • Open Space/playspace needs to be provided alongside development and located within pockets across the site • A new Local Centre should be brought forward adjacent to Pudding Mill DLR Station • A significant proportion of family homes should be provided • It would be appropriate to re-align Barbers Road to provide a dual fronted street and screening to the Crossrail site • Other Industrial Location designation maintained along the western edge to form a buffer to A12 (see Policy B.1) Phasing and implementation • Delivery on site from 2015 onwards • Lack of existing residential uses, amenity and limited connectivity will require early phases to consider carefully the provision of amenity and access • Consideration of the transition to residential use is required to avoid poor adjacencies between retained industrial uses and residential redevelopment • Strategic requirement to enhance the north-south connections between the Local Centre adjacent to Pudding Mill DLR Station, across to Sugar House Lane and south-west to Bromley-by-Bow District Centre. An additional crossing is identified to allow an enhanced bus, pedestrian and cycle route • The non-residential employment uses are concentrated on the east-west street and special-use sites to allow the incremental growth of employment space with each development parcel.
Policy B.1 and supporting text, Page 23
Policy B.1: Location and maintenance of employment uses B Use Classes shall be focussed according to type within the Employment Clusters shown in Table 2 and where identified within the Centres within Table 3. The employment function for each cluster and employment land outside the clusters shall be protected and developed through:
1. Office uses should be located within the centres and an impacts assessment required where B1a office accommodation over 2,500 sqm is proposed outside Stratford Metropolitan Centre Boundary.
2. Ensuring new provision is flexible and viable, meeting the needs of a wide range of end users, contains adequate access and servicing and has no conflict with immediate uses
3. Safeguarding land and buildings within Strategic Industrial Locations (SIL) for the balance of B Use Classes identified within Table 2 in density and floorspace
4. Only allowing proposals providing equivalent use, in either job densities or and floorspace, which maintain the existing balance of uses identified within Table 2 and meeting needs of small- and medium-sized businesses within the Locally Significant Industrial Sites (LSIS) and Other Industrial Locations (OIL)
5. Proposals on employment land outside the clusters and where new uses are proposed within the OILs shall:
a) Maintain or re-provide equivalent industrial floorspace or job numbers within B2/B8 Use Classes subject to location; or
b) Maintain or re-provide equivalent employment floorspace or job numbers within B1 Use Classes or significantly increase job densities within
We re-iterate that this policy should recognise that each of the existing employment sites within the LLDC varies in quality and number of people employed and should recognise changing viability considerations over the plan period, to meet test of soundness 3 set within paragraph 182 of the NPPF and in line with J2 of Newham’s Core Strategy. From reviewing planning approvals across the Stratford City and LLDC area it is understood that specific site viability circumstances have been taken into account for the re-provision of employment uses and where more stringent policy may have prevented sites coming forward, many of these sites have now been delivered. LBN’s Core Strategy Policy J2 has allowed for this level of flexibility without resulting in an adverse impact on the provision of employment floorspace and in particular, allowing development to come forward where there is a loss of floorspace but improvement on the quality of jobs, and/ or job numbers alongside other benefits such as housing, an increasing priority within the Further Alterations to the London Plan (2014). These amendments are required to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
No, as the wording has not been amended in line with our comments.
No, as the wording has not been amended in line with our comments.
Suggest amended wording to allow for increased flexibility to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
B Use Classes Proposals, including conversions, shall also be considered against:
c) Proximity of incompatible uses to the existing and proposed use;
d) The potential reuse of buildings of value for employment;
e) Re-location strategies showing how existing businesses can be suitably accommodated;
f) Viability appraisal demonstrating suitability of maintaining or re-providing industrial or employment within the location;
g) Marketing strategies for two immediately preceding years showing attempts to market the property for employment uses; and
h) Other overriding factors potentially inhibiting the continuation of employment use. 4.7 The diversity of the economic offer and its ability to transform and grow is a key feature of and a major factor in the potential of the area. The range of employment sectors operating across the area is remarkable, providing the key conditions for cultural and creative uses, makers and other manufacturers to flourish while heavier industries, office, retail and leisure uses provide for broader employment needs. 4.8 Strengthening the foundations of creative and cultural industries together with new economic uses at Hackney Wick and Fish Island will provide a crucial environment for the stimulation of growth, while heavier industries and transportation uses largely towards the south of the area and within the employment clusters provide for more established employment requirements. The economic profile in and around Stratford will be diverse, where office development will form much of the B Use Class development. Opportunities for research and development, such as in particular around Pudding Mill, will seek to embrace technologies to complete the economic profile of the area where viable. This transformation depends on seizing these opportunities. The need to promote the area as a new economic hub for east London while maintaining its current economic base, and enabling each of these sectors to build on their own strengths, has driven the economic strategy set out within this section and the Local Plan as a whole. This strategy will preserve the economic character which makes the area unique, while building on opportunities for new business types to be introduced and expand. Policy application 4.12 For the purposes of this policy, employment is defined as the B Use Classes, but in some cases, within the Centres, where employment density is greater than B Use Classes and contributes towards the wider role and function of the area, uses within A and D Use Classes may be considered to be providing an employment function. The applicability of this shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and should be read in conjunction with Policy B.2. This policy specifically includes yardspace within the definition of industrial floorspace. Clusters 4.13 The boundaries of each of the employment cluster designations are shown on the Proposals Map. Table 2 makes clear what balance of uses and form of development will be suitable within each location. The
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
existing balance of floorspace and density will be maintained. Distinctions between the LSIS and OILs follow the London Plan Land for Industry and Transport SPG terminology whereby the Other Industrial Locations are most susceptible to change. Where acceptable change identified within the OILs is proposed, Bullet points 5 (c) and (d) will be applied. The Legacy Corporation will support and promote measures to improve employment clusters through Section 106 Agreements.10 Where identified within Table 2, residential will be appropriate when the employment-generating potential and industrial capacity are not compromised and amenity and servicing issues have been addressed. Outside Clusters 4.14 The intention of the policy is to maintain or where relevant rationalise and improve the quality and function of employment outside the clusters as it plays a pivotal role in the economic performance of the area. Use Classes and, in some cases, locational circumstances will determine whether 5 (a) or (b) applies. Bullet points (c) and (d) are other considerations which shall be taken into account, including how the existing and the proposed use integrates or conflicts with the surrounding area or the development proposed within this Local Plan, and where the reuse of buildings of value shall be considered positively. Bullet points (e) to (h) apply where a loss of employment, including through conversion, is proposed. Where a job density approach is applied, densities should either be above average for the B Use Classes where existing job density is low, or significantly increase densities from existing levels, whichever is the greater. Where density is applicable, the Any additional jobs created should meet local requirements 4.15 Under Bullet 5 (a), where the premises are within, or most recent permanent use is within, B2/B8 industrial uses, equivalent floorspace or job numbers shall be maintained or re-provided. The only exceptions shall be where the current use is clearly and demonstrably in direct conflict with its immediate surroundings, or where the current use is clearly incompatible with mixed-use development proposed within this Local Plan for the specific site, including at Hackney Wick/Fish Island. In these circumstances the equivalent employment floorspace or job numbers to be re-provided should be in the form of workshops which are compatible with mixed-use development, including within B2 Use Classes, in the first instance; or proposals should significantly increase job density within B Use Classes, appropriate to location, with proven ability to let. This will ensure redevelopment proposals enable existing businesses which contribute to the economic variety of the area to remain. In the case of Hackney Wick Neighbourhood Centre, for example, reconfiguration of floorspace for employment uses (B1 and B2 Use Classes) compatible with the mixed-use development proposed will be acceptable. Sub Area 1 policies also provide additional guidance on where a floorspace or job density approach will be applied. 4.16 Bullet point 5 (b) will apply for proposals relating to current B1 Use Class employment. As B1 Use Classes are generally compatible with mixed-use development, any re-development proposals of B1 floorspace should maintain equivalent B Use Class employment floorspace or job numbers significantly increase job density within the B Use Classes. A job density approach will also be applied for proposals at Leyton Road North and the site at Eastway, Osbourne Road, which have been released from designation. 4.17 Only where a convincing case for a loss of employment floorspace
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
or density, or job numbers, including through conversion, is made through Bullet points (c) to (h) of this policy shall an exception be made. This should include: • Re-location strategies demonstrating no negative financial implications for existing businesses and potential for relocation to suitable premises nearby at similar rates • Marketing strategy evidence demonstrating a lack of demand for all appropriate forms of employment uses and site configurations through marketing at a reasonable rate for the area, within appropriate forums, for at least two years prior to the submission of the proposal • Viability appraisals assessing the suitability of location, quality, condition, character and function, and ability of a business to thrive under such circumstances; suitability of the premises for conversion to any employment use; the potential costs and configurations for improvements; and the ability to attract market rates for the area • The existence of other overriding factors which could potentially inhibit the ability to provide equivalent employment on the site in the future, such as building configuration or conversely the presence of premature lease-termination issues. Design 4.18 New employment floorspace should be designed flexibly to maximise potential uses and take-up, including the way the units are accessed and managed. Mixed-use developments should be designed to maximise the forms and types of employment uses which can be incorporated into the development, including how B1 and some forms of B2 Use Classes can be compatible with mixed-use development through good design, including vertical and horizontal integration. Where existing businesses are capable of taking up the space proposed through mixed-use redevelopment, temporary re-location strategies shall be sought as described in paragraph 4.17 to enable these businesses to remain within the area for the long term. On a case-by-case basis proposals requiring planning permission involving a change of use to B1 will be protected from future change to residential through conditions.
Matter 2: Business Growth, Jobs & Lifelong Learning
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
Section 4, Objective 1
Objective 1: Increase the prosperity of east London through growth in business, employment generating uses and quality jobs with an emphasis on cultural and creative sectors, promotion as a visitor and tourist destination and high-quality lifelong learning opportunities. This will mean:
- An internationally focused office and business quarter established around the Metropolitan Centre at Stratford and a technology- and media-focused business hub at Here East
- A centre of cultural and sporting excellence based around the retained Games venues and at Stratford Waterfront
- Established centres for town centre and business uses at Stratford,
We generally support the thrust of Objective 1 in its general ambitions to create jobs, business and promote the area as a visitor and tourist destination across the LLDC area as a whole. However, it is important that an evidence based approach is taken for the retention/ release of employment land (Test of Soundness 2) that takes account of flexibility over the plan period and its changing viability circumstances (Test of Soundness 3) (NPPF, para. 182) and is based on objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements (Test 1). The LLDC Employment Land Review (ELR) (May 2014), undertaken by URS, sets out that based on demand growth, it would be appropriate to release between 0.4 and 6.2 ha of industrial land and to promote the provision of between 17,100 sqm and 59,500 sqm of office type
No, as the wording has not been amended in line with our comments.
No, as the wording has not been amended in line with our comments.
Suggest amended wording to allow for increased flexibility to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
Hackney Wick, Bromley-by-Bow, East Village and Pudding Mill - Diversity of employment provision within business clusters, focused
around Fish Island and Sugar House Lane, and expansion in where viable the establishment of research and development activity focused at Pudding Mill
- New established university campuses, including at Here East - Excellent access for local people and businesses to a range of
skills and training opportunities that meet their needs. - Recognising that such opportunities can come forward from a
range of sources and not simply through traditional employment floorspace.
employment space (including allowance for frictional vacancy), either in mixed-use areas and/or as part of mixed-use developments given that demand for industrial is falling over the plan period. The ELR calculates the demand forecasts for office as a whole rather than broken down to the sub-area level. Overall, the ELR forecasts of 17,100sqm and 59,500sqm ‘local office’ floorspace required to 2031 is defined as space to meet local business needs. It excludes requirements generated/accommodated by Stratford International Quarter and Here East, and instead places this demand within the Central London office market. This contradicts the approach taken within London Borough of Newham’s Employment Land Review (EPR) in 2011, which states that: "Newham’s close proximity to Canary Wharf and the City means its office market is overshadowed by higher quality office accommodation in a more preferable central London location for office occupiers”. The London Office Policy Review (LOPR), undertaken by the Mayor of London in 2012, identifies a potential supply of over 600,000sqm of new office floorspace within Newham, the majority of which is concentrated within Stratford, with employment forecasts prepared by the GLA estimate demand for approximately 55,000sqm, a potential oversupply of 1,200%. The LOPR also questions whether there is a “strong enough requirement for office stock given the wider pipeline supply of space across London for demand to shift so far out of the traditional core office markets”. When including these sites in local demand, it is unlikely that Pudding Mill can provide a competitive offer to occupiers compared to the Stratford office market given it will not benefit from such strong public transport services, fails to have the existing necessary infrastructure and will, in the future, have a less direct relationship to any supply chains or key clients. We suggest that this flexibility should allow for alternative uses to come forward depending on relevant demand over the plan period, in particular the new emphasis of the Draft London Plan Further Alterations (2014) to maximise housing delivery over the plan period, particularly within Opportunity Areas.
Policy B.1 and supporting text, Page 23
Policy B.1: Location and maintenance of employment uses B Use Classes shall be focussed according to type within the Employment Clusters shown in Table 2 and where identified within the Centres within Table 3. The employment function for each cluster and employment land outside the clusters shall be protected and developed through:
1. Office uses should be located within the centres and an impacts assessment required where B1a office accommodation over 2,500 sqm is proposed outside Stratford Metropolitan Centre Boundary.
2. Ensuring new provision is flexible and viable, meeting the needs of a wide range of end users, contains adequate access and servicing and has no conflict with immediate uses
3. Safeguarding land and buildings within Strategic Industrial Locations (SIL) for the balance of B Use Classes identified within Table 2 in density and floorspace
4. Only allowing proposals providing equivalent use, in either job densities or and floorspace, which maintain the existing balance of uses identified
We re-iterate that this policy should recognise that each of the existing employment sites within the LLDC varies in quality and number of people employed and should recognise changing viability considerations over the plan period, to meet test of soundness 3 set within paragraph 182 of the NPPF and in line with J2 of Newham’s Core Strategy. From reviewing planning approvals across the Stratford City and LLDC area it is understood that specific site viability circumstances have been taken into account for the re-provision of employment uses and where more stringent policy may have prevented sites coming forward, many of these sites have now been delivered. LBN’s Core Strategy Policy J2 has allowed for this level of flexibility without resulting in an adverse impact on the provision of employment floorspace and in particular, allowing development to come forward where there is a loss of floorspace but improvement on the quality of jobs, and/ or job numbers alongside other benefits such as housing, an increasing priority within the Further Alterations to the London Plan (2014).
No, as the wording has not been amended in line with our comments.
No, as the wording has not been amended in line with our comments.
Suggest amended wording to allow for increased flexibility to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
within Table 2 and meeting needs of small- and medium-sized businesses within the Locally Significant Industrial Sites (LSIS) and Other Industrial Locations (OIL)
5. Proposals on employment land outside the clusters and where new uses are proposed within the OILs shall:
a) Maintain or re-provide equivalent industrial floorspace or job numbers within B2/B8 Use Classes subject to location; or
b) Maintain or re-provide equivalent employment floorspace or job numbers within B1 Use Classes or significantly increase job densities within B Use Classes Proposals, including conversions, shall also be considered against:
c) Proximity of incompatible uses to the existing and proposed use;
d) The potential reuse of buildings of value for employment;
e) Re-location strategies showing how existing businesses can be suitably accommodated;
f) Viability appraisal demonstrating suitability of maintaining or re-providing industrial or employment within the location;
g) Marketing strategies for two immediately preceding years showing attempts to market the property for employment uses; and
h) Other overriding factors potentially inhibiting the continuation of employment use. 4.7 The diversity of the economic offer and its ability to transform and grow is a key feature of and a major factor in the potential of the area. The range of employment sectors operating across the area is remarkable, providing the key conditions for cultural and creative uses, makers and other manufacturers to flourish while heavier industries, office, retail and leisure uses provide for broader employment needs. 4.8 Strengthening the foundations of creative and cultural industries together with new economic uses at Hackney Wick and Fish Island will provide a crucial environment for the stimulation of growth, while heavier industries and transportation uses largely towards the south of the area and within the employment clusters provide for more established employment requirements. The economic profile in and around Stratford will be diverse, where office development will form much of the B Use Class development. Opportunities for research and development, such as in particular around Pudding Mill, will seek to embrace technologies to complete the economic profile of the area where viable. This transformation depends on seizing these opportunities. The need to promote the area as a new economic hub for east London while maintaining its current economic base, and enabling each of these sectors to build on their own strengths, has driven the economic strategy set out within this section and the Local Plan as a whole. This strategy will preserve the economic character which makes the area unique, while building on opportunities for new business types to be introduced and expand. Policy application 4.12 For the purposes of this policy, employment is defined as the B Use Classes, but in some cases, within the Centres, where employment density is greater than B Use Classes and contributes towards the wider role and
These amendments are required to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
function of the area, uses within A and D Use Classes may be considered to be providing an employment function. The applicability of this shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and should be read in conjunction with Policy B.2. This policy specifically includes yardspace within the definition of industrial floorspace. Clusters 4.13 The boundaries of each of the employment cluster designations are shown on the Proposals Map. Table 2 makes clear what balance of uses and form of development will be suitable within each location. The existing balance of floorspace and density will be maintained. Distinctions between the LSIS and OILs follow the London Plan Land for Industry and Transport SPG terminology whereby the Other Industrial Locations are most susceptible to change. Where acceptable change identified within the OILs is proposed, Bullet points 5 (c) and (d) will be applied. The Legacy Corporation will support and promote measures to improve employment clusters through Section 106 Agreements.10 Where identified within Table 2, residential will be appropriate when the employment-generating potential and industrial capacity are not compromised and amenity and servicing issues have been addressed. Outside Clusters 4.14 The intention of the policy is to maintain or where relevant rationalise and improve the quality and function of employment outside the clusters as it plays a pivotal role in the economic performance of the area. Use Classes and, in some cases, locational circumstances will determine whether 5 (a) or (b) applies. Bullet points (c) and (d) are other considerations which shall be taken into account, including how the existing and the proposed use integrates or conflicts with the surrounding area or the development proposed within this Local Plan, and where the reuse of buildings of value shall be considered positively. Bullet points (e) to (h) apply where a loss of employment, including through conversion, is proposed. Where a job density approach is applied, densities should either be above average for the B Use Classes where existing job density is low, or significantly increase densities from existing levels, whichever is the greater. Where density is applicable, the Any additional jobs created should meet local requirements 4.15 Under Bullet 5 (a), where the premises are within, or most recent permanent use is within, B2/B8 industrial uses, equivalent floorspace or job numbers shall be maintained or re-provided. The only exceptions shall be where the current use is clearly and demonstrably in direct conflict with its immediate surroundings, or where the current use is clearly incompatible with mixed-use development proposed within this Local Plan for the specific site, including at Hackney Wick/Fish Island. In these circumstances the equivalent employment floorspace or job numbers to be re-provided should be in the form of workshops which are compatible with mixed-use development, including within B2 Use Classes, in the first instance; or proposals should significantly increase job density within B Use Classes, appropriate to location, with proven ability to let. This will ensure redevelopment proposals enable existing businesses which contribute to the economic variety of the area to remain. In the case of Hackney Wick Neighbourhood Centre, for example, reconfiguration of floorspace for employment uses (B1 and B2 Use Classes) compatible with the mixed-use development proposed will be acceptable. Sub Area 1 policies also provide additional guidance on where a floorspace or job density approach will be applied.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
4.16 Bullet point 5 (b) will apply for proposals relating to current B1 Use Class employment. As B1 Use Classes are generally compatible with mixed-use development, any re-development proposals of B1 floorspace should maintain equivalent B Use Class employment floorspace or job numbers significantly increase job density within the B Use Classes. A job density approach will also be applied for proposals at Leyton Road North and the site at Eastway, Osbourne Road, which have been released from designation. 4.17 Only where a convincing case for a loss of employment floorspace or density, or job numbers, including through conversion, is made through Bullet points (c) to (h) of this policy shall an exception be made. This should include: • Re-location strategies demonstrating no negative financial implications for existing businesses and potential for relocation to suitable premises nearby at similar rates • Marketing strategy evidence demonstrating a lack of demand for all appropriate forms of employment uses and site configurations through marketing at a reasonable rate for the area, within appropriate forums, for at least two years prior to the submission of the proposal • Viability appraisals assessing the suitability of location, quality, condition, character and function, and ability of a business to thrive under such circumstances; suitability of the premises for conversion to any employment use; the potential costs and configurations for improvements; and the ability to attract market rates for the area • The existence of other overriding factors which could potentially inhibit the ability to provide equivalent employment on the site in the future, such as building configuration or conversely the presence of premature lease-termination issues. Design 4.18 New employment floorspace should be designed flexibly to maximise potential uses and take-up, including the way the units are accessed and managed. Mixed-use developments should be designed to maximise the forms and types of employment uses which can be incorporated into the development, including how B1 and some forms of B2 Use Classes can be compatible with mixed-use development through good design, including vertical and horizontal integration. Where existing businesses are capable of taking up the space proposed through mixed-use redevelopment, temporary re-location strategies shall be sought as described in paragraph 4.17 to enable these businesses to remain within the area for the long term. On a case-by-case basis proposals requiring planning permission involving a change of use to B1 will be protected from future change to residential through conditions.
Policy B.4 and supporting text, page 34-35
Policy B.4: Providing low-cost and managed workspace Existing managed and low-cost workspace shall be retained where viable and where it complements wider plans for the area. New managed workspace and/or low-cost workspace will be acceptable where it: 1. Is flexible and able to meet the needs of various end users within B Use Classes; 2. Includes an appropriate management scheme secured through Section 106 Agreements; and 3. Does not result in a net loss of employment. Low-cost provision will be supported and secured through Section 106 where:
This policy should be updated in line with the proposed changes adjacent to reflect the amendments to the evidence base as set out in comments provided for Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19, which should allow for further flexibility over the plan period. The inclusion of this policy is supported in so far as It recognises the economic impacts and benefits that managed workspace can bring, including the reference to demonstrating viability. However, relating valuable workspace to rent is only one way of looking at the value of the site, and where sites are cleared and employment re-
Yes Yes Suggest amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
4. Rents are up to 75 per cent of historic market rent for the previous year for the equivalent floorspace in the same area for an equivalent B Class Use; 5. It is secured at the current market rate for cultural or creative purposes; 6. It is subsidised to reduce the cost to the user for charitable purposes; or 7. It establishes robust management links with a registered workspace provider. Reasoned justification 4.28 Parts of the Legacy Corporation area have a reputation for the provision of affordable, low-cost workspace. Managed workspace adds to this mix by playing a key start-up function, enabling businesses to remain for a longer period. This form of accommodation plays a crucial role in the economic profile and expansion of the area and so it is supported. Policy application 4.29 Managed workspace would normally comprise a number of business units or workspaces for independent individuals or small businesses, which together are communally managed and provided with a range of shared support services and facilities. Low-cost workspace can be managed workspace, studio or unsupported independent business space that is made available to tenants below the prevailing market rent for that type of space, the current rate for the cultural or creative use or subsidised at a lower user-cost. The Legacy Corporation will support the maintenance of such workspaces where possible, and in accordance with relevant Sub Area policies. 4.30 In locations where a clear demand exists and a degree of flexibility of uses is secured, proposals for new and redeveloped managed or low-cost workspace will be considered favourably, particularly as part of mixed-use development and where the quality of existing floorspace is enhanced. Provision should be clustered into small groups to ensure agglomeration benefits and potential for lettings are maximised. Scheme viability should be based upon a viable proportion being delivered of delivery within each phase the initial phases of larger schemes. Links with registered workspace providers will also be supported. In order to ensure that new space is appropriately managed for the long term, proposals should be accompanied by a Management Scheme. Proposals replacing existing employment floorspace with managed or low-cost workspace should re-provide equivalent floorspace or job density, subject to Policy B.1 and be secured for the future through Section 106. 4.31 The quantum, mix of unit sizes and scheme of rent levels for low-cost workspace will be assessed in the light of overall scheme viability with other relevant contributions such as infrastructure and affordable housing. Use of sliding scales will be supported where it can ensure a transition to market level as the business matures and overall scheme viability changes.
provided, it would be unrealistic to think that rents could be benchmarked against previous uses.
Policy B.6, Page 38
Policy B.6: Higher education, research and development The Legacy Corporation will encourage the provision of facilities for higher education, postgraduate study and research, and wider research and development activity. Proposals for facilities within areas of mixed-use development will be required to demonstrate that they achieve a high level of amenity for those living and working in that location. These facilities should generally be located:
This policy should be updated in line with the proposed changes adjacent to reflect the amendments to the evidence base as set out in comments provided for Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19, to ensure the plan is: (1) Positively prepared and based on objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements; (2) Justified and the most appropriate strategy considering reasonable alternatives; (3) Effective and deliverable over the plan period; and (4) consistent with national
Yes Yes Suggest amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
1. Within or at the edge of the Metropolitan Centre and such as in Pudding Mill, or at edge of Sugar House Lane or Here East employment clusters; 2. Within easy access to public transport hubs; and 3. Where uses are compatible and no unacceptable adverse amenity issues arise. Reasoned justification 4.35 The Legacy Corporation area is host to a range of further and higher education establishments and a distinct graduate and postgraduate sector is emerging within the wider local economy. The enhancement of higher education, research and development activity can contribute towards the aims of the convergence agenda, so will be pursued. The scale of development proposed within the area presents an opportunity to focus postgraduate study and research activity alongside the existing and planned institutions to complement the developing range of new industry and business activity. Policy application 4.36 Proposals for new higher education, postgraduate research and wider research and development should be located where viable such as on or adjacent to Stratford Metropolitan Centre or as part of the employment offer within Pudding Mill. These uses will also be acceptable on the edge of the Sugar House Lane or Here East employment clusters.
policy.
Matter 3: Housing
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
Figure 2, Page 11
We suggest 24,000 new homes target is updated in line with the relevant evidence base for housing allocations, to ensure compliancy with the London Plan. The figure should also be updated to address any discrepancies across the Plan.
This is to ensure the plan is consistent with regional policy in line with Test of Soundness 4.
Yes Yes Update housing target in line to meet Tests 1 to 4.
Objective 2, Page 41
Objective 2: Establish and maintain locally distinctive neighbourhoods which meet housing needs, while providing excellent and easily accessible social infrastructure. This will mean: • Delivering approximately at least 24,000 new homes within a range of sizes and tenures that meet local and market demands • Ensuring homes are accessible to and affordable for a broad spectrum of the community, and meet specialist accommodation requirements • The delivery of at least four new primary schools and one new secondary school • The delivery and maintenance of sufficient new health and general community meeting places, including space suitable for faith use.
We previously commented on the draft of the Local Plan in December 2013, stating that the Marshgate Business Centre had not been included within the list of allocated within Appendix 8 of the Mayor’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (the draft housing target of 14,711 from 2015 to 2025, or 1,471 homes per year), nor the estimates of housing delivery within the Draft Local Plan (December 2013) appendix table. We stated that the additional capacity for our site should be included within the pipeline supply in line with our timescales for delivery, within the housing delivery appendix table in your draft plan, for 250 – 350 homes from 2015. We note in LLDC’s Consultation Report, it agreed to include our allocation within the tabled housing delivery appendix. However, ‘Table 13 - Remaining Capacity’ on Page 236 has not been updated to reflect the timescales for delivery for Marshgate Business Centre, and in fact includes a reduction in housing numbers without planning permission over the plan period, from 1,502 homes in the December 2013 version of the Local Plan, to 1,206 homes within the revised draft. This is not in line with the timescales for delivery within Site Allocation SA4.3.
Yes Yes Suggest amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
We would re-iterate that the Housing Allocation should be checked for accuracy prior to submission, and our site should be included as being delivered from 2015/2016 to 2019/2020 with a capacity of 250-350 new homes. We would also set out that it is important the evidence base and target is accurate to meet Tests of Soundness 1 (based on objectively assessed development) and 2 (justified and the most appropriate strategy). This is particularly important as the plan is struggling to meet its five per cent buffer on a rolling five-year basis beyond the first five years of the plan, as set out in Para. 5.3 of the Draft Plan. Test 4 requires compliancy with the London Plan and national policy. In this respect, the LLDC Local Plan should reflect the new priority focus of housing in the Further Alterations to the London Plan., within Table 13 “Remaining Capacity” of Appendix 2. The text and housing allocations should be updated where relevant including revisions to the evidence base, to ensure the plan is: (1) Positively prepared and based on objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements; (2) Justified and the most appropriate strategy considering reasonable alternatives; (3) Effective and deliverable over the plan period; and (4) consistent with national policy.
Strategic Policy SP.2, Page 42
Strategic Policy SP.2: Maximising housing and infrastructure provision within new neighbourhoods The Legacy Corporation will work with its partners to maximise opportunities for delivering high-quality, sustainable and affordable homes and provision of supporting infrastructure through: 1. Delivering in excess of the London Plan target of 1,471 housing units per annum, of which a minimum of 455 will be affordable subject to viability 2. Providing for identified size and tenure requirements, particularly family housing in affordable all tenures and market housing where there is demand, and where the site lends itself to family housing 3. Providing specialist housing and specific housing products which contribute towards the overall housing mix and meet identified requirements 4. Safeguarding existing residential units and land 5. Retaining existing community infrastructure and requiring the provision of new community infrastructure alongside new development. Reasoned justification 5.2 The Legacy Corporation has an annual housing delivery target, set out within the London Plan. This has been developed by the Greater London Authority (GLA), on the basis of its Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, 2013, and robust assessment of housing needs. The Legacy Corporation fully supports this housing delivery target and will seek to achieve and exceed this through the application of this policy. Policy application 5.3 This target will be achieved through a range of sources, including large identified sites, non-self-contained accommodation (including hostels and student accommodation), an annualised small site potential
Test of soundness 3 of paragraph 182 of the NPPF sets out that plans should be effective and capable of being delivered over the plan period. Test of Soundness 4 requires Local Plans to be in conformity with national policy and London’s Sustainable Development Strategy (the London Plan). Test of Soundness 1 sets out that plans should be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to objectively meet assessed development requirements. Given that recession(s) will occur over the plan period, it is reasonable to assume that affordable housing delivery will fluctuate over the plan period, depending on viability. Strategic Policy SP.2 should reflect this. In respect of providing family housing , demand for private residential is led by the market and where residential units meet this need, development will be more viable and able to provide a higher provision of affordable housing, including the relevant mix, as set out in policy. Policy SP.2 should be updated to allow for this flexibility. As we have previously set out, the requirement for larger family homes should be flexible and considered on a site by site basis. Paragraph 5.3 of the supporting text to the policy states that within the last five years of the plan, delivery is less certain and that the five per cent buffer will be met for the first five years, but may not be possible on a rolling five-year basis beyond this. Given the emphasis of the London Plan Further Alterations (2014) on housing, and in particular higher densities and delivery of housing within Opportunity Areas, the supporting text should reflect that other sources for housing could include the re-designation of employment land, for which a large proportion falls within the Opportunity Areas.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 3 and 4.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
of 33 units and reuse of long-term vacant properties. Where appropriate, self-build opportunities shall also contribute towards the housing supply alongside the re-designation of other land uses, such as employment land, dependent on economic factors of supply and demand. Figure 9, the housing trajectory, shows the ability to deliver housing against the housing target over the Plan period. It shows that within the last five years delivery is less certain; however, London Plan targets will be reviewed by 2019/2020. The five per cent buffer will be met for the first five years, but it may not be possible on a rolling five-year basis. The London Plan recognises the difficulty of this approach. Nonetheless, the cumulative housing target is expected to be exceeded, with more than 24,000 homes delivered over the Plan period through the creation of additional capacity and greater delivery on small sites than anticipated. The quantum and timescale of development are subject to change. The trajectory and the list of key sites available in Appendix 2 will be kept under review within the Authority Monitoring Report (AMR).
Policy H1, Page 41
H.1: Providing a mix of housing types Residential proposals should: 1. Meet identified local, and strategic and market requirements, containing a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom units and larger, with units of two bedrooms and more constituting more than half the total. The appropriate mix for individual sites should be determined on a site by site basis, depending on their suitability to provide family housing. 2. Integrate a mix of unit types including flatted developments, maisonettes and family houses into the design 3. Have no unacceptable adverse impacts on the mix and balance of the proposed area 4. Meet London Plan and Housing SPG design considerations. Reasoned justification 5.7 Providing for a range of different dwelling sizes and types is essential to create sustainable new neighbourhoods and to avoid problems which may arise from over-concentration of certain size and types of accommodation. For this reason, a range of sizes to meet identified requirements and different configurations of accommodation will be sought including any relevant changes to the required mix over the plan period. The principal aim is to achieve mixed and balanced communities. Policy application 5.8 Evidence suggests that there is a particularly high requirement for the following types of housing size: • One-bedroom properties within market and affordable/social rented • Two-bedroom properties in market housing • Larger units (of three bedrooms or more) particularly within affordable/social rented and low-cost home ownership sectors. 5.9 All proposals should reflect these identified size, form and tenure requirements, providing an appropriate balanced mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom units, including within affordable tenures. All proposals should contain more two-bedroom-plus units than one-bedroom units, and should not avoid the provision of any single size or tenure. When considering the detailed mix of dwelling sizes, the Legacy Corporation will consider individual site circumstances, including location, viability and the maintenance of mixed and balanced communities alongside changing demands over the plan period. Proposals which cluster units of a particular size and tenure and do not reflect these requirements will not be permitted. In all cases, proposals should show how the provision of
As we have previously set out, the requirement for larger family homes should be flexible and considered on a site by site basis, and should reflect any perceived changing demand over the plan period to meet Test of Soundness 3. We note a reference has been added within the policy application section, and this should also be included within the reasoned justification section. The Mayor’s draft Housing Strategy emphasises the point of ensuring delivery of overall housing supply (para. 4.11): “The GLA will concentrate its planning efforts and housing investment in the Opportunity Areas, alongside investment from Transport for London and the London Enterprise Panel. Many of these sites will need additional support to unlock development, particularly to ensure that the capacity to deliver homes is maximised. It would be a hugely wasted opportunity to bring these sites forward at less than optimal capacity due to a lack of collective foresight and upfront investment.”
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
family housing has been maximised. 5.10 Where appropriate and viable, units intended for family housing should be within a mix of flatted development and traditional houses or maisonettes where sites are deemed appropriate. Consideration should also be given to how developments can be designed to suit the lifestyles of large family groups, including layouts with kitchens separate from other living space where there is an existing demonstrated need.
Paragraph 5.12, Page 46
5.12 The Legacy Corporation is directed by the London Plan on a range of housing policies which will be applied: design and access, play space, residential amenity, daylight and sunlight, accessibility and space standards, many of which are detailed within the Mayor’s Housing SPG, including safety design principles. The London Plan’s density matrix is a useful tool, referencing Public Transport Accessibility Levels (PTAL) for determining densities; however, when considering the appropriate density, the Legacy Corporation will consider individual site circumstances including: location, constraints, transport accessibility, connectivity and capacity; management, occupancy and tenure of the development; and contribution of the site to the Legacy Corporation’s convergence aims. This Plan will seek to optimise land to reflect the desperate housing need and comply with the Draft Further Alterations to the London Plan (2015).
Test of Soundness 4 requires Local Plans to be in conformity with national policy and London’s Sustainable Development Strategy, the London Plan. Test of Soundness 1 sets out that plans should be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to objectively meet assessed development requirements. Adjoining Paragraph 5.12 sets out that “The London Plan’s density matrix is a useful tool, referencing Public Transport Accessibility Levels (PTAL) for determining densities; however, when considering the appropriate density, the Legacy Corporation will consider individual site circumstances.” Whilst we agree with this approach, it should be noted that development densities should support the general thrust of the Draft Further Alterations of the London Plan (2014), which provides further focus on optimising housing delivery, particularly in Opportunity Areas. This is particularly important in the context of Paragraph 5.3 of the Draft LLDC Local Plan, which states that for housing supply within the last five years of the plan, delivery is less certain and that the five per cent buffer will be met for the first five years, but may not be possible on a rolling five-year basis beyond this. As such, optimising housing delivery will be important to exceed the LLDC’s housing target over the plan period.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 1 and 4.
Policy H.2, page 49
H.2: Delivering affordable housing
Affordable housing will be maximised on sites capable of providing ten units or more, broken down as 60 per cent Affordable Rent and Social Rent, and 40 per cent intermediate. The following shall be considerations for maximising provision:
1. Identified needs and tenure requirements
2. Affordable housing targets and delivery rates
3. The need to facilitate development
4. Viability including phased viability re-appraisal
5. Balancing any other relevant contributions provided through development Affordable housing should be delivered on site in the first instance. Off-site provision will only be considered where it:
5. Provides equivalent number and type of affordable units across all sites related to the proposal;
6. Does not prejudice the delivery of affordable housing;
7. Is delivered at no financial advantage to developer;
Test of soundness 3 of paragraph 182 of the NPPF sets out that plans should be effective and capable of being delivered over the plan period. As such, an additional reference should be provided within Policy H.2 to recognise that any financial and other contributions should be balanced against overall scheme viability. The supporting text should be updated at paragraph 5.14 to allow for flexibility for providing larger, family-type housing where appropriate and viable.
Yes Yes Suggested
amended
wording to meet
Test of
Soundness 3.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
8. Is linked to the completion of the market housing elements of the scheme
9. Is located where able to provide for local housing needs; and
10. Would be beneficial to achieve and maintain mixed and balanced communities.
Financial contributions will only be acceptable when on-site provision and all potential off-site options have been fully explored and discounted, and linked to a particular site or proposal. Reasoned justification 5.13 Providing for housing needs including through different affordable tenures is crucial to achieving mixed and balanced communities. For this reason, a proportion of total housing delivery will be within affordable tenures. This has been set as a minimum target of 35 per cent of affordable homes across the whole of the Legacy Corporation area. This has been determined according to evidence and subject to rigorous viability testing to determine viability across the whole of the area. This should be used as a minimum and will be used to commence discussions on individual schemes. Policy application 5.14 Affordable rent is a relatively new product, where eligibility is based upon local incomes and local house prices rather than local authority lists alone. Affordable rent is intended to address similar types of need to that within traditional social housing. Half of the affordable rented product will include rental rates capped to ensure the requirements of those most in need are met (similar to those within local authority nomination lists). For the remainder within the ‘discounted’ level, this should have typical rents of no more than 80 per cent of market value, including service charge. This level is broadly achievable across the area. In practice, the Legacy Corporation is not setting specific local rental caps, but will expect developers and registered providers to agree the proposed rental levels, maintained as low as possible, based on meeting local Borough needs, benefit caps and maximising output. Developers will be expected to demonstrate that they have engaged with a registered provider and secured a commitment for provision. Subject to the availability of appropriate funding, delivery of social rented accommodation within the area will be supported. Affordable housing should maximise larger, family-type housing where appropriate and viable. Affordable accommodation should be indistinguishable externally from other tenures.
Appendix 2: Key Housing Allocations Table 6.1: Estimates of housing delivery 2013/14-2030/31, page 69
Recommendations: We re-iterate that additional capacities for Marshgate Business Centre and 14 Marshgate Lane should be included within the Draft Plan, including addressing discrepancies and providing accurate phasing for the Marshgate site including projected housing delivery figures (250-350 new homes scheduled for delivery 2015/2016 to 2019/2020) across all areas of the plan
In line with our comments on Objective 2, Page 41, we recommend that the discrepancy in housing numbers across the plan is updated.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
Matter 4: Natural and Built Environment
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
Policy BN,2, Page 74
Policy BN.2: Creating distinctive waterway environments The Legacy Corporation will work with its partners to optimise the functions and enhance the local distinctiveness of waterway environments, expecting development proposals that affect the waterway environment to: 1. Improve the ecological potential, drainage and flood resilience capacity of the waterway 2. Support the aims of the Thames River Basin Management Plan 3. Create opportunities for recreational activities along the waterway 4. Introduce recreational, visitor and residential moorings and improve existing moorings where suitable, and deliverable 5. Support commercial activity 6. Improve access to and along the waterway as appropriate 7. Prevent disruption to the movement of passengers and freight.
We support the policy’s emphasis on enhancing and opening up waterways for public use. In respect of moorings, these should be applicable in line with the relevant tests within the NPPF for Planning Obligations, and be secured only where relevant.
Yes Yes Yes
Policy BN.4, Page 78
Policy BN.4: Designing residential schemes Proposals will be considered acceptable where residential elements are in broad accordance with meet the ‘Baseline’ Quality and Design Standards outlined within Annex 1 of the Mayor of London’s Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (November 2012), including any future revisions or superseding guidance. Proposals for residential development must also: 1. Contribute towards the creation of distinctive, integrated, legible, connected and sustainable places 2. Exhibit the principles of good design, by incorporating high-quality landscape and architectural design, including high-quality materials, finishes and details 3. Minimise impact upon existing surrounding development and not result in an unacceptable loss of privacy or an unreasonable degree of overlooking towards habitable rooms and private amenity spaces within or around existing development 4. Demonstrate that the scheme will receive adequate levels of daylight and sunlight, and that existing surrounding development will not experience an unacceptable loss of sunlight and daylight when measured against the guidance provided in accordance within Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight
We support the policy’s emphasis on providing high quality residential development for the longevity of the supply of good quality housing. The policy should be appropriately flexible to reflect individual site circumstances where greater benefits to development exist, and whereby minimal impact will occur, in line with Test 3 of the NPPF. The Marshgate Business Centre site is located within an area of convergence between guideline building heights of between 4–6 storeys and 11 storeys plus as set out within the OLSPG. It also falls within a corridor considered generally appropriate for 8 storey buildings with landmark buildings of 16 – 24 storeys. Given this context, it is important that the emerging Local Plan policy does not preclude a site such as this from acting as a suitable transitional location in scale terms between areas to the south where building heights of 11 plus storeys are proposed, and areas to the north and west where a lower scale of development away from the taller buildings proposed along Stratford High Street is identified as being more appropriate. Enabling sites like this to fulfil such a role would represent a sensible approach in townscape terms which would avoid abrupt changes in the scale of development across the
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
(Building Research Establishment, 2011), including any future revisions or superseding guidance 5. Ensure surrounding open spaces receive adequate levels of daylight and sunlight.
Local Plan area from arising, particularly where development contributes to improvements to its waterside setting & connectivity. As set out within the CABE/ English Heritage guidance, where it is demonstrated that no harm arises that cannot be mitigated in terms of townscape, environmental impacts and infrastructure capacity, development of significant height and scale should be considered acceptable. Many planning approvals within the vicinity of the site already exceed the London Plan Density Matrix based on their existing Public Transport Accessibility Levels including parts of the Strand East Development (Ref: 12/00336/LTGOUT) and more notably the approval at 68-70 High Street, Stratford (Ref: 11/90619/FUMODA) which has a PTAL of 4, comparative with the Marshgate Site. Of particular relevance is the planning approval of 68-70 Stratford High Street, adjoining the Marshgate site to its south beyond the Bow Back River, which has approval for a development of up to 18 storeys (Ref: 11/90619/FUMODA). Site PDZ8, also incorporating the “Pudding Mill” area of Sub Area 4, also allows for taller buildings of up to 42m (14 storeys) in height (Ref: 11/90621/OUTODA). Optimising land for housing is also a principle supported, particularly within Opportunity Areas, as set out within the Draft Further Alterations to the London Plan (2014).
Policy BN.10, Page 89
Policy BN.10: Proposals for tall buildings Proposals for tall buildings will be considered acceptable where they: 1. Exhibit outstanding architecture and incorporate high-quality materials, finishes and details 2. Respect the scale and grain of their context 3. Relate well to street widths and make a positive contribution to the streetscape 4. Generate an active street frontage 5. Provide accessible public space within their curtilage 6. Incorporate sufficient communal space 7. Contribute to defining public routes and spaces 8. Promote legibility 9. Create new or enhance existing views, vistas and sightlines 10. Preserve or enhance heritage assets and the views to/from these, and contribute positively to the setting of heritage assets, including conservation areas. Proposals for tall buildings that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on one or more of the following will be will be considered unacceptable unless they provide appropriate mitigation measures: 11. Micro-climatic conditions (specifically down-draughts and lateral winds over public spaces) 12. Amenity: impacts to the surrounding area (including open spaces, other buildings and waterways) that relate to: • Overlooking • Daylight • Overshadowing
We support the revisions to this policy, however it has been revised to be more stringent. No definition is given to “wider amenity” and therefore this reference should be removed. An additional sentence has been included too state “buildings are defined by the Legacy Corporation as those that are higher than a Sub Area’s prevailing height as set out in this Plan” – this last part of the sentence which has been added in should be removed, as the townscape context will change over time and the plan needs to be flexible to reflect the area’s changing context As set out within the CABE/ English Heritage guidance, where it is demonstrated that no harm arises that cannot be mitigated in terms of townscape, environmental impacts and infrastructure capacity, development of significant height and scale should be considered acceptable. Amended wording to reflect this is suggested and to allow for appropriate flexibility (Test of Soundness), in line with the Further Alterations to the London Plan (2014) Tall Buildings policy and general thrust to provide more housing within Opportunity Areas, to meet housing targets (Test of Soundness 4).
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 3 and 4.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
• Light spill/reflection • Wider amenity 13. Existing views of landmarks, parkland, heritage assets, waterways, and views along street corridors (in accordance with the policy on Protecting Key Views). Tall buildings should be located within the Centre boundaries outlined within this Local Plan. In order of hierarchy, these are: • Stratford Town Centre Extension • Bromley-by-Bow District Centre • Hackney Wick Neighbourhood Centre • Pudding Mill Local Centre • East Village Local Centre. Tall buildings are defined by the Legacy Corporation as those that are higher than a Sub Area’s prevailing height as set out in this Plan Where it is demonstrated that no harm arises that cannot be mitigated in terms of townscape, environmental impacts and infrastructure capacity, development of significant height and scale may be considered acceptable on a site by site basis.
Matter 5: Infrastructure
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
Objective 4, Page 101
Objective 4: Secure the infrastructure required to support growth and convergence. This will mean: • Working with partners to secure the infrastructure identified within the Local Plan and Infrastructure Delivery Plan • Reviewing regularly infrastructure need to ensure identified requirements remain up to date • Use Section 106 Agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy to contribute towards infrastructure delivery • Delivering new development • Managing the effects of new development • Improving local connectivity, including delivery of new bridges and routes to maximise walking and cycling.
Test of soundness 1 and 3 sets out a duty for Local Plans to be deliverable, and therefore a reference to highlight this emphasis should be included within Objective 4.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 4.
Policy SP.4, Page 102
Strategic Policy SP.4: Planning for and securing infrastructure to support growth and convergence The Legacy Corporation will work with its partners to promote and deliver the infrastructure necessary to support the growth and development identified within this Local Plan and its Infrastructure Delivery Plan. In particular, the Legacy Corporation will support provision of the following types of infrastructure: 1. The expansion of electronic communication networks, including telecommunications and high-speed broadband 2. Public transport infrastructure and services that will help to deliver the growth objectives set out within this Local Plan, including those that will improve international, national, regional and local connectivity The Legacy Corporation will safeguard land for the provision of the following infrastructure: 3. DLR double tracking at Stratford 4. Crossrail 1 5. Crossrail 2 (existing safeguarded corridor and any update route)
Test of soundness 1 and 3 sets out a duty for Local Plans to be deliverable, and accordingly a reference to viability in respect of the whole package of contributions should be included within the policy.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 3.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
The Legacy Corporation will require the retention of: 6. Existing waste management facilities (subject to the provisions of Policy IN.2) 7. Existing public transport infrastructure. The Legacy Corporation will use its Community Infrastructure Levy funding to help deliver the infrastructure on the CIL Infrastructure list. Where appropriate and lawful, infrastructure or contributions toward its delivery will also be secured through the use of Planning Obligations, dependent on scheme viability in the context of the total planning obligations package for development.
Matter 7: Sub Area Policies
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
Vision, Page 205
Vision This will become an area of new business and residential communities that find a focus at a new District Centre at Bromley-by-Bow and a new Local Centre at Pudding Mill, with a secondary hub of employment and leisure uses in the north part of Sugar House Lane. The District Centre at Bromley-by-Bow will provide a new primary school, community facilities and public open spaces. A new DLR station at Pudding Mill and an enhanced Bromley-by-Bow Station will provide excellent public transport links to nearby work and leisure opportunities and good access to the rest of London. New and improved local foot and cycle paths will provide accessible and safe routes to the stations and local shops and services. The many new homes in Bromley-by-Bow, Sugar House Lane and Pudding Mill will meet a wide range of housing needs, while the new homes, business and other premises will have been sensitively and excellently designed, taking account of the historic waterside settings and the heritage assets within and around the Conservation Areas. By 2031, the Sub Area will have become a distinct series of new urban communities, well connected to their surroundings.
We support the vision for Sub Area Four. It provides a balanced approach to the needs of the area and allows for appropriate flexibility of uses, however this is not reflected within the Site Allocation itself.
Yes Yes Yes
Policy 4.2, Page 210
Policy 4.2: Bringing forward new connections to serve new development Development proposals within Sub Area 4 should not prejudice and, where relevant, should contribute towards the improvement of existing and the delivery of new connections necessary to serve the anticipated needs of development within the Sub Area, where viable and considered within the wider planning obligations package for development. The improvements to existing and new connections considered necessary for the delivery of the development anticipated within this Sub Area are: 1. Accessibility improvements including a new junction on the A12 at Bromley-by-Bow that serves the potential new District Centre by improving access for pedestrians, cyclists, buses and general traffic
In accordance with Tests of Soundness 1 and 3, the wider package of benefits secured for any planning application should be considered, including any impact on viability.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
2. Improving the pedestrian underpass adjacent to Bromley-by-Bow Station to allow access to the new District Centre and beyond 3. New and improved vehicle, pedestrian and cycle bridges across the River Lea; a new all-movements junction on the A11 to improve access to and from Sugar House Lane for pedestrians, cyclists, buses and general traffic 4. A new bridge across the Bow Back River linking to the all-movements junction and connecting with Marshgate Lane 5. Delivery of a cycle superhighway route along Stratford High Street 6. Delivery of a west-east pedestrian and cycle route, parallel with Stratford High Street, through Pudding Mill, across the Greenway and through the Greater Carpenters area parallel to Stratford Town Centre 7. Pedestrian and cycle improvements at Bow Interchange 8. New and improved pedestrian and cycle links from Pudding Mill Lane DLR Station to Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park via the Greenway and Southern Loop Road.
Site Allocation SA4.2, Page 218
Site Allocation SA4.3: Pudding Mill A new medium-density, mixed-use area, including a significant and diverse element of new and replacement business floorspace, including spaces suitable for small- and medium-sized businesses; a new Local Centre adjacent to Pudding Mill Lane DLR Station and Pudding Mill Lane; new homes including a significant element of family housing; new Local Open Space, Playspace and public realm. Cumulatively across the Pudding Mill Site Allocation, 25 per cent non-residential floorspace should be achieved optimised where demonstrated to be viable and where there is an identified need, with a predominantly industrial floorspace use mix in the area to the west of Cooks Road and around the Crossrail portal. Development principles • Proposals for tall buildings development above 21 metres above ground level will only be acceptable subject to the provisions of Policy BN.10, with some taller elements in the Local Centre • Non-residential uses should be focused along a new central east-west street • The form of development should allow for improved east-west connections through the site • Provision should be made for safeguarding key connections, including new bus/cycle/pedestrian connection from Stratford High Street to Marshgate Lane and a new pedestrian/cycle connection from Wrexham Road over the A12 and River Lea • Land should be safeguarded Safeguarding of land for DLR North Route Double Tracking phase 2. • Regard will need to be had to not prejudicing the operation of the safeguarded rail freight site to the west (for example by ensuring that noise sensitive uses are located away from the site). Supporting Development principles •Landowners will need to work together to bring forward comprehensive schemes that are capable of achieving the ambitions for development of the site allocation and delivering identified infrastructure needed for the site as a whole. • Open Space/playspace needs to be provided alongside development and located within pockets across the site • A new Local Centre should be brought forward adjacent to Pudding Mill DLR Station
The Plan fails to meet Tests of Soundness 2, 3 and 4 as it is too stringent to be applied over the plan period; fails to comply with national and regional policy and Borough policy; fails to be underpinned by an appropriate evidence base.
No, as the plan has not been revised in accordance with our previous comments.
No, as the plan has not been revised in accordance with our previous comments.
Suggested amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
• A significant proportion of family homes should be provided • It would be appropriate to re-align Barbers Road to provide a dual fronted street and screening to the Crossrail site • Other Industrial Location designation maintained along the western edge to form a buffer to A12 (see Policy B.1) Phasing and implementation • Delivery on site from 2015 onwards • Lack of existing residential uses, amenity and limited connectivity will require early phases to consider carefully the provision of amenity and access • Consideration of the transition to residential use is required to avoid poor adjacencies between retained industrial uses and residential redevelopment • Strategic requirement to enhance the north-south connections between the Local Centre adjacent to Pudding Mill DLR Station, across to Sugar House Lane and south-west to Bromley-by-Bow District Centre. An additional crossing is identified to allow an enhanced bus, pedestrian and cycle route • The non-residential employment uses are concentrated on the east-west street and special-use sites to allow the incremental growth of employment space with each development parcel.
Site Allocation SA4.3, Page 218 and Proposals Map
We would suggest the boundary of the Local Centre is revised to be consistent across the whole Local Plan, as it is not currently clear
The proposals map shows a different boundary for the Local Centre of Pudding Mill compared to that which is shown within Site SA4.3. This discrepancy should be addressed in order to be accurate.
Yes Yes n/a – point on accuracy of Pudding Mill Local Centre Allocation
Pudding Mill Land Use and Design Framework
Policy/ Paragraph
Suggested amendment (where relevant) Comment Legally Compliant?
Complies with the Duty to Cooperate?
Sound?
General Comment
General comment The status of the Pudding Mill Land Use and Design Framework is not set out anywhere across any of the LLDC Local Plan documents, and therefore it is assumed the document is background evidence only.
n/a n/a n/a
References to Viability – “Purpose of this document”; Page 54, Page 55, Page 56
See relevant sections for context There are several references that set out the document has texted the commercial viability of options as well as understanding how they are affected by existing land ownership and the current development context. Notwithstanding this approach, each scheme should be considered at the stage that it is delivered. To take our site as an example, the Build Costs and Development Values have proved to be high resulting from a
Yes Yes Yes
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
number of different site specific variables. Page 10, What is Pudding Mill?
Pudding Mill is a place with potential in the midst of a rapidly changing area. It is located in Stratford and lies to the south of N new developments within the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park including HereEast, Chobham Manor, East Wick, Sweetwater, Westfield and potential UCL and Olympicopolis schemes., all demonstrate the demand to invest in the area. As has been shown in developments like HereEast, There is potential a need to provide space that caters for increasing demand in emerging employment trends.
This is a generalised assumption that assumes a link between the HereEast and other schemes, where our own research has shown that there is no connection to spin-off benefits at Pudding Mill at the present time. It should be revised to meet Tests of Soundness 1 to 4. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for further justification for the amendments.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Page 12, Land Ownership and Consultation
This masterplan approach has been made possible by the relatively few landowner parcels that make up Pudding Mill, with various sites already or becoming vacant in the post-Olympic/Crossrail stages. This offers a unique opportunity to formulate a strong vision for the site that can capture the common interests of all the stakeholders. With a masterplan approach agreed, we have set to consult all the key stakeholders at multiple stages during the masterplan process with individual ‘fact finding’ and follow-up meetings to share the emerging proposals. LB Newham also attended application discussions.
Whilst we have engaged in the process of developing the masterplan, we are not fully aligned with its content and would therefore seek the removal of part of this sentence.
Yes Yes n/a
Page 23, Site History
Pudding Mill currently consists of a some longstanding employment uses, some of which are low quality, vacant and underused, with the remainder of the site temporarily vacant from Olympics Games and Crossrail construction activities.
We would suggest this sentence is included to accurately reflect the Marshgate Business Centre’s existing context, as it counts for approximately a third of privately owned land within Pudding Mill. We also seek a correction within the Business Survey evidence base report, which sets out that Pudding Mill includes “an interesting mix of businesses; the internationally-renowned Three Mills Studio, for example, hosts 12 businesses with close links to the film industry. In the northern part of the sub-area, buildings such as the Marshgate Business Centre are partially vacant, but offer a mix of light-industrial and workshop space.” Three Mills Studio is not included within Pudding Mill and lies within Sugar House Lane.
Yes Yes n/a
Page 28 A long history of employment and industry on the site - Low density or temporarily vacated sites from Crossrail and Olympic construction - Improved connectivity and infrastructure to and through the site improves its potential as a mixed use community - New trends in employment and industry provide potential for the mixing of employment uses alongside residential uses
There are no “new trends” in employment in respect of emerging new uses Pudding Mill, nor is there evidence that there are other uses or developments that provide spin off benefits. It is recommended this sentence is removed in order to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 2. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for further justification for the amendments.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 2.
Let the Dough Rise, Page 28
It is proposed that the remaining area of the site can provide space for a range of employment types, with demand to be demonstrated on a case by case basis. across 25% of the buildings. The redevelopment and reoccupation of vacant sites on this basis should provide around 17,500 sq m of additional B1 and B2 (suitable for residential adjacency) uses. A further 3000 sq m of current B2 floorspace has also been identified as suitable for residential adjacency.
The evidence for the provision of a blanket 25% employment use across Pudding Mill is unfounded, and there is no evidence that such a level of B1 and B2 uses can be sustained within Pudding Mill for employment uses, nor is the source of the data within this section referenced. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for the main justification for the removal of this reference. Furthermore, in respect of whether B2/ B8 uses are acceptable in principle adjoining residential, referring to the Use Class Order (as amended) B1 Uses are defined as “B1 Business - Offices (other than those that fall within A2), research and development of products and processes, light industry appropriate in a residential area” whereas B2 uses are defined as “B2 General industrial - Use for industrial process other than one falling within class B1 (excluding incineration purposes, chemical treatment or landfill or hazardous waste)”. B8 uses are defined as “Use for storage or as an distribution centre (including open storage)”. It is not clear how B2/ B8 uses can be promoted in residential areas given
Yes
Yes Suggested amended wording to meet all of the Tests of Soundness.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
their potential impact on such uses and the curtailment of the functionality of such industrial uses from residential, particularly on a speculative basis. This approach also contradicts the assumptions set out within the LLDC’s Employment Land Review (URS, May 2014) which states that B2/ B8 uses require a higher amount of parking, are located within areas of lower public transport accessibility, can have negative impacts on adjoining uses including residential (a third of the land reviewed were considered to be “bad neighbour” uses). As such, it states there is limited potential for industrial provision to be included as part of mixed-use development and only where incorporated with typologies compatible with other uses including retail and leisure. In respect of demand for B2/ B8 uses, our Commercial Market Review shows that demand is declining but where it still exists, Pudding Mill is not a preferred location. Places such as Beckton, which have the benefit of good highways connections and agglomeration advantages, are much more desirable. This is in line with the allocations strategy set out within policies J1 and J2 of LBN’s Core Strategy. It is therefore considered the blanket 25% reference should be removed in order to comply with Policy Tests 1-4. It is further noted that within the Consultation Report (2014), our previous comments on the proposed 25% allocation have not been included, and would request these further representations are taken into account.
Page 30, The Masterplan
The Land Use and Design Framework provides overall guidance for the site, considering the existing consented LCS scheme (PDZ 8) alongside current and future development sites. It recognises the new Pudding Mill Lane DLR Station as the driver for a new Local Centre connected along Marshgate Lane to additional retail provision and ultimately the District Centre at Bow along Sugar House Lane. This street forms the main community focus for the neighbourhood and connects to the Marshgate Lane waterfront site at the historic site of the Pudding Mill. Extending east-west from Marshgate Lane is the main ‘employment’ street forming a seam along adjoining development plots and concentrating the standalone employment buildings along one mixed-use route, but still distributing the provision between every plot.
It is not the role of this document to contain detail about the use of separate buildings, which should be done on a scheme by scheme basis to allow for appropriate flexibility to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Page 32 Delivery of potential Olympicopolis and the UCL campus will provide a new centre of world class research and culture within the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, and may in the future serve as a major new catalyst for innovation for adjacent sites including at Pudding Mill. is well located to provide valuable support space for many of these research and innovation activities, as well as uses such as an urban bioscience park.
There are no new trends in employment and history at Pudding Mill, nor is there evidence that there are other uses or developments that provide spin off benefits. It is recommended this sentence is removed. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for further justification for the amendments. The relevant amendments are required to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 2.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 2.
Page 32, “Ingredients”
As part of the LLDC Local Economy Study, the LLDC commissioned We Made That to undertake qualitative research into the area. The report documented the nature of places of employment, recognising the positive contribution that varied sectors make to the local economy and provides examples and recommendations to secure a successful and vibrant future for employment in the Legacy Corporation area. The report identifies the following emerging employment trends within the area: 1 Small to Medium Scale Food and Drink Manufacturing 2 ‘Industrial Crafts’ and Small Scale Manufacturing
This section of the report implies that these uses fall within Pudding Mill area. However none of the case The Qualitative Research Study undertaken by We Made That were within Pudding Mill. This section should be either removed or re-worded to clarify this, or the references to these uses should be removed. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for further justification for the amendments.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 2.
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
3 Tech and Digital Enterprise 4 Role of Large Institutions and Universities 5 Stratford / QEOP ‘Halo’ 6 Open Access Specialist Fabrication 7 Bio-Science Facilities
The relevant amendment is required to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 2.
“Employment”, Page 36 and adjoining diagram
Pudding Mill has always been an area of employment. The masterplan retains this vital economic contribution to the area. Employment uses are contained and expressed within standalone buildings, avoiding the ‘dead’ ground floor frontages seen along Stratford High Street. This form will be important in encouraging new employment uses such as those mentioned on page 32.
It is not the role of this document to contain detail about the use of separate buildings, which should be done on a scheme by scheme basis. Our client, Workspace, is London’s leading provider of SMEs and is best placed to suggest a layout, which should be flexible and led by market demand and to allow for flexibility in line with Test of Soundness 3.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Page 40 All streets should achieve a width to height ratio of between a minimum of 0.6 to 1 and a maximum of 1 to 1.
Whilst the Masterplan contains general design and layout principles which are generally supported, parts of the document go beyond the role that should normally be taken as part of a planning application, and as such these references should be removed to allow for flexibility in line with Test of Soundness 3.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Page 42, “Employment”
Employment uses are contained and expressed within standalone buildings, avoiding the ‘dead’ ground floor frontages seen along Stratford High Street. The form, character and use of these buildings takes cues from historical precedent within Pudding Mill and from modern examples elsewhere. They should be distinct, outward looking buildings that express their function as centres for innovation and new technologies such as bio science facilities. The moderate scale of employment building proposed offers considerable flexibility: from commercial offices, to incubators for multiple companies and startups, to creative economy users or light industrial manufacture. Employment should not just be included as a single floor pancake with residential above, but instead be fully integrated as a standalone building or vertical slice within a cluster of uses. This way it contributes to a variety of street facades and flexible uses. This avoids the impact of large areas of blank facade along the ground floor, or a monoculture of employment types suited to ground floor only.
It is not the role of this document to contain detail about the use of separate buildings, which should be done on a scheme by scheme basis. Our client, Workspace, is London’s leading provider of SMEs and is best placed to suggest a layout, which should be flexible and led by market demand. Commercial and Market Strategies would instead demonstrate the viability of an employment use and allow for flexibility in line with Test of Soundness 3.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Page 43 1. Significant Employment Mixed Use Building At the gateway sites identified at Barbers Road and on the historic ‘pudding mill’ site, between the Marshgate Lane bridges there is scope for a mixed use building containing an appropriate and viable proportion of uses. high quality special employment building, representative of the wider Pudding Mill area as a industrial neighbourhood, suitable for specialist research, or with a civic expressive quality that fits the prominence of the site. It should have a vibrant ground floor, a community or collegiate feel and could include a range of uses, cafes or restaurants amongst employment areas
There are no “new trends” in employment in respect of emerging new uses Pudding Mill, nor is there evidence that there are other uses or developments that provide spin off benefits. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for further justification for the amendments. Development should not be curtailed given the potential benefits to the site particularly as there is no evidence to suggest that such uses are viable. It is not the role of this document to contain this level of detail about the Marshgate Business Centre site, which should be done on a scheme by scheme basis at planning application stage. Our client, Workspace, is London’s leading provider of SMEs and is best placed to suggest a layout for its site as an expert of the market, which should be flexible and led by market demand in line with Test of Soundness 3.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Test of Soundness 3.
Page 49 Playspace Diagram Playspace provision should be measured against the criteria set out within the Mayor’s Playspace SPG, 2012.
Yes Yes n/a
Page 54, “What
Through an iterative process, the masterplan has established a scale of development that accounts for design, policy, viability, daylighting and
The evidence for the provision of a blanket 25% employment use across Pudding Mill is unfounded and should be removed to meet Tests of
Yes Yes Suggested amended
Workspace 14 LLDC Local Plan EiP
Temperature?”
massing considerations for the site. In line with the LLDC Local Plan and permitted development within the LCS scheme, development sites at Pudding Mill should provide a viable quantum of minimum of 25% employment floorspace, with a predominantly industrial floorspace mix in the area to the west of Cooks Road. As outlined by LBN’s Core Strategy, development proposals should seek a minimum of 39% of new homes to be for families depending on site specific and scheme considerations. The London Plan and LBN’s Core Strategy considers the range of appropriate densities for the Pudding Mill area to be 300-650 habitable rooms per hectare. Stratford Regional Masterplan and the OLSPG state that 4-6 storeys is appropriate for the site unless demonstrated otherwise.
Soundness 1 - 4. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for the main justification for the removal of this reference alongside further comments on Page 28, “Let the Dough Rise”
wording to meet all Tests of Soundness.
Page 72, “Marshgate Lane”
Marshgate Lane Prominent mixed-use site at the north east corner of Pudding Mill. The special employment use site is formed by the twin routes and bridges that cross Bow Back Creek and connect to Stratford High Street and Sugarhouse Lane and helps announce the arrival onto Pudding Mill island. Ingredients Minimum 25% of floorspace for employment use to be optimised depending on market demand and scheme viability- to be located predominantly within ‘hub’ site, defined by the two bridges - Minimum 39% of housing for families targeted - Raised towpath between the new bus bridge and Marshgate Lane bridge, provide ideal setting for restaurant or commercial animation. - Ideal site for prominent civic and employment building - Balconies should be predominantly recessed to reinforce the simple massing - Outboard balconies are acceptable in locations where they do not create issues of privacy and overlooking - Stepped back upper floors should be articulated to maintain the visual coherence of the six storey datum line subject to townscape impact - Development should seek to maximise accessible roofspace for both residents and workers - Employment and retail frontages should be ‘active’
The evidence for the provision of a blanket 25% employment use across Pudding Mill is unfounded and should be removed to meet Tests of Soundness 1 - 4. See our comments on Section 4, Objective 1, Page 19 for the main justification for the removal of this reference alongside further comments on Page 28, “Let the Dough Rise”
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet all Tests of Soundness.
Figure 15.1, page 203
14.7 The infrastructure that is necessary to support the development in this Local Plan is identified in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP). The policies and Site Allocations in this Local Plan, alongside the mechanisms set out in this section, will help to secure the delivery of that infrastructure, taking into consideration the full package of any benefits provided from development.
Test of soundness 1 and 3 sets out a duty for Local Plans to be deliverable, and accordingly a reference to viability in respect of the whole package of contributions should be included within the policy. This text should be updated to recognise this approach.
Yes Yes Suggested amended wording to meet Tests of Soundness 1 and 3.
