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 Council's Environmental Quality Officer has advised as follows:
The proposed use would be in part particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination. A Land Contamination Desk Study and Preliminary Risk Assessment by CARD dated December 2017 has been submitted with the application. The desk study is considered insufficient to meet the requirements of the preliminary risk assessment (PRA).
The desk study does identify some onsite and offsite historical contaminative uses, including the lorry park and depot which for some reason has only been listed as an onsite use, but should also be considered as an off-site use as well. The desk study and preliminary risk assessment needs to be updated by a competent person with a more complete review of the planning microfiche, and an inspection of the land to the west (Officers fail to understand why the use taking up part of the site hasn't been identified where planning microfiche or a site visit has been undertaken). The desk study has undertaken a review of the 2015 site investigation which Officers consider incomplete. The report refers to undertaking a supplementary site investigation, but if it is intended the 2015 investigation data is to be used as part of the site investigation submission in future, the laboratory report needs to be reviewed and updated by the laboratory to address irregularities to determine if the data is still usable. CARD have reviewed it as part of the desk study, which Officers don't object to, but they have not undertaken the necessary work to demonstrate data reliance by ensuring the laboratory report is in good order alongside any relevant QA/QC information. Reference to the 2015 data in the report without demonstrating data reliance will result in the rejection of the report. Following this the conceptual site model and preliminary risk assessment should be reviewed and updated.
An adequate site investigation needs to be undertaken at the site. The Proposed ground investigation in section 8.2.1 is insufficient to address the site investigation scheme. Please note the site investigation scheme condition should not allow for demolition. Soil investigation for contamination needs to include ground 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. The minimum requirement where no significant contamination is identified would be the maintenance of a contamination watching brief/discovery strategy 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 commencing or 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.
Conditions are advised to ensure a suitable contaminated land assessment is undertaken prior to development commencing and appropriate remedial measures are implemented if required to ensure the development is made suitable for use. This includes assessment of any site derived and imported soils used for planting and landscaping purposes. Any soils/materials reused or imported to site as part of the development should be uncontaminated.
The PRA and site investigation scheme condition should not allow for demolition. The Desk Study and Preliminary Risk Assessment by CARD dated December 2017 should not be submitted to discharge the PRA condition.
There is guidance available on the RBKC website for land contamination and planning at: https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/environment/landcontamination.aspx. If anything is unclear, you can contact the Environmental Quality team ([email protected], 0207 3613002) to discuss the work/steps required to discharge the conditions.
4)
Unique text
Thames Water has advised as follows:
Surface Water drainage
With regard to surface water drainage it is the responsibility of a developer to make proper provision for drainage to ground, water courses or a suitable sewer. In respect of surface water it is recommended that the applicant should ensure that storm flows are attenuated or regulated into the receiving public network through on or off site storage. When it is proposed to connect to a combined public sewer, the site drainage should be separate and combined at the final manhole nearest the boundary. Connections are not permitted for the removal of groundwater.
Groundwater
You are advised that the basement should be waterproofed to protect it from groundwater flooding.
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. Thames Water 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.
Sewer water
No objection is raised to the application with regard to sewer infrastructure capacity. However, given comments from Thames Water on application PP/17/06291 an PP/18/00333 you are advised to seek confirmation from Thames Water that the sewerage system is able to take the proposed surface and foul water flows.
Water pressure
Thames Water will aim to provide customers with a minimum pressure of 10m head (approx 1 bar) and a flow rate of 9 litres/minute at the point where it leaves Thames Waters pipes. The developer should take account of this minimum pressure in the design of the proposed development.
5)
Unique text
The Council's Air Quality Officer has advised as follows:
Modelling Study:
Meteorological Data
Met data for modelling has been taken from Northolt. Northolt is 14km distance away from the application area, therefore question its validity. It is recommended that the Air quality assessment (AQA) should be revised using a more local MET station, (Heathrow or City Airport data are commonly used).
When modelling point sources 3 consecutive years of MET data should be used to account for any seasonal variations to a specific year. Paragraphs A4.2 and A4.6 state that sequential metrological data has been used for the energy plant limited to 2016 data taken from Northolt.
Vehicle Emission
Vehicle emissions have been calculated using EFT (Version 7) with the CURED correction applied as stated in section A4.6. A new EFT (Version 8) was released middle November 2017 predating the date of the planning application.
Vehicle emissions are critical when predicting future emissions and previous versions of the EFT have underpredicted real world driving emissions therefore recommended that the report be revised considering the most recent guidance.
If the applicant can demonstrate that using EFT v7 with the CURED correction applied is a true worst-case scenario, rather than using EFT v8, the use of EFT v7 with CURED correction can be agreed.
CHP and Boiler Parameters
The Specific NOx emission rate modelled for the CHP and the boiler are less than the limit standard as set in the Mayors of London Sustainable design and construction SPG. The concern is that by modelling lower emissions then the limit value set in the SPG and if the applicant were to then change the plant with higher permitted emissions then impacts to local air quality may be increased.
Emission limits can be set through a planning condition based on the air quality assessment but this can restrict the developer into a specific piece of equipment. If the developer would like greater flexibility in their choses piece of equipment they may want to remodel impacts using emission limits as set in the Mayor's Sustainable design and construction SPG.
The air quality neutral calculation is based on the specific plant, any changes in the pant can influence the calculation although unlikely to fail the air quality neutral benchmark for building emissions.
Air Quality Neutral
CLP Policy CE5 requires all development to be as a minimum air quality neutral. An air quality neutral calculation has been submitted that confirms that the building meets both building and transport emission.
The calculation found in table 9 has taken vehicle trip data from the transport assessment. Paragraph 5.2.8 of the transport assessment states that:
'CEC recognises that the small commercial unit is also likely to generate a small number of servicing deliveries. It seems reasonable to assume that, in view of its size, a maximum of one delivery per day would occur (i.e. two trips, one arrival and one departure)'. The calculation in table 9 of the supporting air quality assessment. does not consider these additional trips and these and any other servicing and delivery trips should be included.
The Air Quality Assessment states that it has taken its data sources from the Cole and Easdon Transport consultant the applicant should confirm that the December 2017 Issue 3 report has been used in making this assessment.
Demolition and construction impacts
Impacts of demolition and construction have not been included within the report. A planning condition can be recommended to be included on the decision notice requiring the submission of a Demolition environmental management plan and a construction environmental management plan but it is recommended that the application that all risks are presented within the AQA. The risk assessment procedure as detailed within the Mayor of London Control of Dust and emission from Construction and Demolition should be followed and included.