Planning search

Back to search results

Property details

Case reference: PP/13/00060
Address: 3-5 Crowthorne Road, W10 6RP
Ward:
Polling district:
Listed Building Grade: N/A
Conservation area: Oxford Gardens

Applicant details

Applicant's name: c/o Jaswal Johnston LLP Crowthorne Road Investments Ltd
Applicant company name: Parritt Leng Architects
Contact address: 1 Thomas More Way London N2 0UL

Proposal details

Application type: PP (Planning permission)
Proposed development Mixed use development comprising 20 new apartments and new commercial space (including B1 and A2 uses). Erection of three new (three to seven storey) buildings with low level linking elements and provision of 22 car parking spaces.
Date received: 14 Jan 2013
Registration date:
(Statutory start date)
14 Jan 2013
Public consultation ends: 08 Feb 2013
Application status: Decided
Target date for decision: 15 Apr 2013

Decision details

This case has not yet been decided.

Decision: Refuse Planning Permission/Consent
Decision date: 05 Mar 2013
Conditions and reasons:

1)

The benefits of the proposal including the provision of 178 sqm of commercial floorspace would not outweigh the loss of 1235 sqm of general industrial floorspace. As such, the proposal would result in the loss of employment-generating floorspace and would be contrary to Development Plan policies, in particular 'saved' policy E8 of the UDP adopted 25 May 2002.

2)

The development by reason of its alignment, layout, scale, height, mass, bulk, design and materials would not be an attractive, functional or locally distinctive development. As a consequence it would not visually or physically integrate into the townscape and would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Development Plan policies, in particular CL1, CL2 and CL3 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010 and 'saved' policy CD63 of the UDP as well as having regard to the Oxford Conservation Area Proposals Statement adopted 9 July 1990.

3)

The development by reason of the amount of off-street car parking provision, a poor quality provision of cycle parking and the absence of a 'permit-free' planning obligation, would fail to encourage more sustainable travel choices, would increase vehicular traffic movements and exacerbate traffic congestion which in turn would harm the free flow and safety of highway users. This would be contrary to Development Plan policies, in particular policies 6.9 and 6.13 of the London Plan adopted July 2011 and policy CT1 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010 as well as the Transport Supplementary Planning Document adopted 10 December 2008.

4)

The development by reason of the loss of on-street car parking bays and in the absence of a 'permit-free' planning obligation, would increase on-street parking pressure in an area of already high on-street parking stress which would harm the free flow and safety of highway users. This would be contrary to Development Plan policies, in particular policy 6.13 of the London Plan adopted July 2011, policy CT1 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010 and 'saved' policy TR44 of the UDP adopted 25 May 2002 as well as the Transport Supplementary Planning Document adopted 10 December 2008.

5)

In the absence of a satisfactory planning obligation, the applicant has failed to demonstrate the proposed development would mitigate its impact on infrastructure including education facilities, health facilities, community facilities, landscaping, public realm and highways, contrary to policies of the development plan, in particular policies C1, CT1, CR4 and CR6 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010, the Planning Obligations SPD adopted 17 August 2010 and the Transport SPD adopted 10 December 2008.

6)

The applicant has failed to demonstrate the proposed development would make adequate provision for affordable housing, contrary to policies of the development plan, in particular policies 3.12 and 3.13 of the London Plan adopted July 2011, policies C1 and CH2 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010, the Planning Obligations SPD adopted 17 August 2010 and the Mayor of London's Housing SPG adopted November 2011.

7)

The development fails to make adequate provision for amenity space and open space for the residential occupiers of the development. This would be harmful to the amenity of future occupants and contrary to policies of the Development Plan, in particular policy 3.6 of the London Plan adopted July 2011, policies CH2 and CR5 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010, 'saved' policy LR15 of the UDP adopted 25 May 2002 and the Mayor of London's Play and Informal Recreation SPG adopted September 2012.

8)

The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not materially worsen existing amenity conditions for neighbouring occupants in terms of sunlight, daylight and overshadowing and has failed to demonstrate that the proposed dwellings would have a suitable standard of accommodation in terms of internal lighting conditions, contrary to policies of the Development Plan, in particular policies 3.5 and 7.6 of the London Plan adopted July 2011 and policy CL5 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010 as well as the Mayor of London's Housing SPG adopted November 2011.

9)

The proposal would result in unacceptable levels of overlooking to neighbouring gardens, in particular to 135 Oxford Gardens from the north elevation of the block at 3 Crowthorne Road and the west elevations of the blocks at 5 Crowthorne Road, contrary to Development Plan policies in particular policy 7.6 of the London Plan adopted July 2011 and policy CL5 of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010.

10)

By reason of the development's layout and stacking, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed flats would have an acceptable level of privacy and internal noise exposure. As a result the future occupants would have an unsatisfactory standard of residential accommodation, contrary to Development Plan policies in particular London Plan policy 3.5, Core Strategy policy CL5 and the Mayor of London's Housing SPG adopted November 2011 and the Royal Borough's Housing Standards SPG adopted 2002.

11)

In the absence of a satisfactory Construction Method Statement it has not been demonstrated that the stability of neighbouring buildings could be safeguarded, contrary to the Subterranean Development Supplementary Planning Document adopted 26 May 2009.

Informatives:

1)

Relevant Policies Used
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 Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London adopted July 2011; the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010 and the 'Saved' policies of the Unitary Development Plan adopted 25 May 2002. Regard was also had to the Mayor of London's SPG including the Housing SPG adopted November 2012 and the Play and Informal Recreation SPD adopted September 2012.

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.

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:
Appeal received:
Appeal type:
Appeal procedure:
Appeal start date:
Deadline for comments to be received by the Planning Inspectorate:
Appeal decision:
Appeal decision date:

Contact details

Planning case officer:
Planning team: North
Email: planning@rbkc.gov.uk
Telephone: 020 7361 3012

Comment on this application

The consultation period for this application has ended.

Documents related to case PP/13/00060

Date publishedDocument TypeViewDescription
15 Jan 2013  Site Notice  Site Notice-982641.pdf    
16 Jan 2013  Application Form  Application Form-983726.pdf
Application Form-983726 Thumbnails  
 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983727.pdf   APPLICATION COVERING LETTER 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983731.pdf
Other-983731 Thumbnails  
PART 1 SUSTAINABILITY STATEMENT REVISION A 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983733.pdf
Other-983733 Thumbnails  
PART 2 SUSTAINABILITY STATEMENT REVISION A 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983735.pdf
Other-983735 Thumbnails  
PART 3 SUSTAINABILITY STATEMENT REVISION A 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983738.pdf
Other-983738 Thumbnails  
PART 01 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983741.pdf
Other-983741 Thumbnails  
PART 02 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983743.pdf
Other-983743 Thumbnails  
PART 03 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983803.pdf
Other-983803 Thumbnails  
PLANNING SUBMISSION PART 1 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983810.pdf   SITE LOCATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983811.pdf   EXISTING ROOF FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983812.pdf   EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983814.pdf   EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983815.pdf   EXISTING EAST ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983816.pdf   EXISTING WEST ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983818.pdf   PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983821.pdf   PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983822.pdf   PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983824.pdf   PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983827.pdf   PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983828.pdf   PROPOSED FOURTH FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983829.pdf   PROPOSED FIFTH FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983830.pdf   PROPOSED SIXTH FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983831.pdf   PROPOSED ROOF FLOOR PLAN 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983832.pdf   PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983833.pdf   PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983834.pdf   PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983835.pdf   PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983836.pdf   PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Drawing  Drawing-983837.pdf   PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983841.pdf
Other-983841 Thumbnails  
PLANNING SUBMISSION PART 2 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983842.pdf
Other-983842 Thumbnails  
PLANNING SUBMISSION PART 3 
16 Jan 2013  Other  Other-983843.pdf
Other-983843 Thumbnails  
PLANNING SUBMISSION PART 4 
18 Jan 2013  Site Notice  Site Notice-985324.pdf   DATE: 18/01/2013 
21 Jan 2013  Other  Other-985671.pdf
Other-985671 Thumbnails  
DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT REPORT 
21 Jan 2013  Other  Other-985717.pdf   ADDITIONAL CONTENT COVERING LETTER 
08 Feb 2013  Other  Other-998460.pdf   VOA FEE PROPOSAL 
20 Feb 2013  Correspondence  Correspondence-1005179.pdf   CORRESPONDENCE WITH AGENT- STEPHEN READ TO RBKC 18/1/13 
05 Mar 2013  Decision  Decision-1013101.pdf   Decision Notice 
05 Mar 2013  Report  Report-1013108.pdf   Report (Officers) 
13 Mar 2013  Drawing - Refused  Drawing - Refused-1017505.pdf
Drawing - Refused-1017505 Thumbnails  
REFUSED DRAWINGS