!DOCTYPE html> The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea | Planning Search

Planning Search

Back to search results

Property details

Case reference: PP/17/07051
Address: 97-101 and 103 Wilsham Street, LONDON, W11 4AU
Ward: Notting Dale
Polling district: 12
Listed Building Grade:
Conservation area: N/A

Applicant details

Applicant's name: Reed
Applicant company name:
Contact address: 12 Salem Road London W2 4DL

Proposal details

Application type: PP (Planning permission)
Proposed development Construction of single-storey basement under footprint of both 97-101 and 103 Wilsham Street and part of front and rear gardens for creation of pavement lights. Installation of three skylights at roof level and a dormer window on rear elevation of St James Hall. Additional permeable landscaping and street front furniture refurbishment and proposed plant extract located within rear garden and at roof level
Date received: 13 Nov 2017
Registration date:
(Statutory start date)
20 Nov 2017
Public consultation ends: 15 Dec 2017
Application status: Appeal Decided
Target date for decision: 15 Jan 2018

Decision details

This case has not yet been decided.

Decision: Refuse Planning Permission/Consent
Decision date: 15 Jan 2018
Conditions and reasons:

1)

The application fails to demonstrate that proposals would not result in the damage or loss of trees of townscape or amenity value, namely the mature lime tree in the rear garden of 14 St James's Gardens, contrary to the Development Plan, in particular policy CR6 and the Trees and Development SPD.

Informatives:

1)

Policies of Particular Relevance
You are advised that this application was determined by the Local Planning authority with regard to Development Plan policies including relevant policies contained within the London Plan 2015 (Consolidated with Alterations since 2011); the Consolidated Local Plan 2015 and the 'Saved' policies of the Unitary Development Plan adopted 25 May 2002.

2)

Refused/No pre-app or discussion
To assist applicants in finding solutions to problems arising in relation to their development proposals the Local Planning Authority has produced planning policies, and provided written guidance, all of which are available on the Council's website. A pre-application advice service is also offered. In this case the proposal does not comply with guidance and policies. No pre-application discussions were entered into, but the Council is ready to enter into discussions with the applicants through the advice service to assist in the preparation of any new planning application.

3)

Unique text
The following amendments are required to make the CTMP acceptable: Q7 - Full details on neighbourhood consultation and any responses should be included. This should have been undertaken prior to the submission of a draft CTMP, so that responses could have been considered in the drafting of the CTMP. The applicant has stated that responses have been received and 'implemented where applicable' however no detail on the responses or how they have been implemented is given. Q8 - The routing in from the east shows vehicles turning from Holland Park Avenue onto Royal Crescent. This is not permitted; vehicles would have to travel around Holland Park Roundabout. Q24 - A commitment to returning the parking bays for use by residents outside of working hours should be included.

4)

Highways Technical Approval-Sep Approval
You are advised that Technical Approval in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges BD2/12 will be required for any structural works/alterations/repairs to structures over, under or adjacent to the public highway.ÿThe procedures only grant approval under the Highways Act. The granting of planning permission and building consent does not imply that such approval is given. Please contact the Directorate of Transportation and Highways for advice on 020 7341 5220 or email [email protected].

5)

Unique text
Thames Water has provided the following advice: WASTE COMMENT Thames Water requests that the Applicant should incorporate within their proposal, protection to the property by installing for example, a non-return valve or other suitable device to avoid the risk of backflow at a later date, on the assumption that the sewerage network may surcharge to ground level during storm conditions. Legal changes under The Water Industry (Scheme for the Adoption of private sewers) Regulations 2011 mean that the sections of pipes you share with your neighbours, or are situated outside of your property boundary which connect to a public sewer are likely to have transferred to Thames Water's ownership. Should your proposed building work fall within 3 metres of these pipes we recommend you email us a scaled ground floor plan of your property showing the proposed work and the complete sewer layout to [email protected] to determine if a building over / near to agreement is required. We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures he will undertake to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer. Groundwater discharges typically result from construction site dewatering, deep excavations, basement infiltration, borehole installation, testing and site remediation. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. A Groundwater Risk Management Permit from Thames Water will be required for discharging groundwater into a public sewer. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures he will undertake to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer. Permit enquiries should be directed to Thames Water's Risk Management Team by telephoning 02035779483 or by emailing [email protected]. Application forms should be completed on line via www.thameswater.co.uk/wastewaterquality." Thames Water would advise that with regard to sewerage infrastructure capacity, we would not have any objection to the above planning application. WATER COMMENT On the basis of information provided, Thames Water would advise that with regard to water infrastructure capacity, we would not have any objection to the above planning application.

6)

Unique text
The Council's Environmental Quality Officer has commented on the proposals as follows: The proposed use would be particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination. No information with regard to land contamination has been submitted with application PP/17/07051. In accordance with policy CE7 and the NPPF, information is required with regard to potential contamination, when introducing a sensitive use. The proposed use would be particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination. Question 14 on contamination has been completed incorrectly. No desk study and preliminary risk assessment information on contamination has been submitted with the application, as required. A review of available historical information based on Ordnance Survey (OS) mapping in relation to PP/17/07051 indicated terraced properties on site on St. Catherine's Road with out-buildings to the south, and the surrounding area is partly developed based on the 1869 OS mapping, which shows some streets with few or no properties. A Brick Field in indicated approximately 120 metres away to the north of the site. The 1896 OS mapping indicates a change in the layout of the property, with access being provided under a terraced building from St. Katherine's Road to the yard and out buildings to the south of the site. The site use is not indicated, and the surrounding area appears to be fully developed. The 1915 OS mapping indicates no apparent change on site. The 1955 OS mapping indicates a Parish Hall on most of the site at 97 Wilsham Street, with a different building layout to what was there previously. A number of rows of terraced properties to the north of the site are no longer indicated, and have been replaced with residential flats covering a large area. It is possible these buildings may have been redeveloped following bomb damage during WWII. The 1970-1996 OS mapping indicates no apparent change on site. There could be potential contamination issues associated with made ground/fill. Historical and trade directory information in EQU indicates deep fill in Avondale Park approximately 120 metres away to the north east of the site. The Brick Field to the north of the site may also have been filled. A Laundress is indicated approximately 15 metres away to the west of the site based on the 1890 trade directory. A Manufacturer of an unspecified product is indicated approximately 25 metres away to the west of the site based on the 1890 trade directory. A Dairy is indicated approximately 5 metres away to the south east of the site based on the 1890 trade directory. Planning records also indicate there were change of use applications at the application site. It is recommended a detailed desk study and preliminary risk assessment (PRA) is undertaken in the first instance, reviewing relevant data sources including information available to the local authority. Soil investigation for contamination needs to include round gas/vapour monitoring, based on ground conditions for a basement development, following good practice guidance. Groundwater monitoring for contamination is recommended, as a precaution. Suitable remedial measures need to be proposed based on the investigation findings. A contamination watching brief/discovery strategy needs to be maintained when undertaking development works. This information needs to be provided prior to development works commencing on site. The contamination criteria for 'clean' landscaping soils and any specification for the investigation and landscaping works would need to be agreed with the Environmental Quality Unit (EQU) prior to implementation. Prior to the development being brought into use verification information to demonstrate any remedial works have been carried out as required, landscaping works were carried out as agreed and the soils are suitable for use will need to be provided. This should also include information on any unsuitable material on site that was retained and/or removed along with the relevant duty of care.

Committee details

Decision by: This case is currently due to be decided under delegated powers.

Appeal details

This case has not been appealed.

Planning Inspectorate reference number: D/18/3203218
Appeal received: 21 May 2018
Appeal type: HSE
Appeal procedure: W
Appeal start date: 01 Oct 2018
Deadline for comments to be received by the Planning Inspectorate: 05 Nov 2018
Appeal decision: DIS
Appeal decision date: 13 Dec 2018

Contact details

Planning case officer: Cheryl Saverus
Planning team: North
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: 020 7361 3012

Comment on this application

The consultation period for this application has ended.

Documents related to case PP/17/07051