Location The Strand Centre Elm Park London SW2 2EH

Ward Tulse Hill Proposal Refurbishment of the main school building, including the erection of a single storey ground floor extension to the South elevation, alterations to elevation including replacement of windows and doors, enclosed fire escape to the North elevation, together with the demolition of 3 existing buildings at rear of the site and erection of a 2 storey building and a gymnasium to provide accommodation for a 100 place SEN (Special Educational Needs) school for children ages 11-16, and provision of 11 parking car spaces, cycle stands, multi use games area, landscaping and boundary treatment. (Reconsultation due to amendments to appearance of replacement windows and doors and enclosed fire escape, increased cycle parking and 1 additional car parking space) Application Type Approval under Reg 3 Council's own dev Application No 06/02778/RG3/DC_EMC/15017 Applicant Executive Director Of Children's & Young Peoples Services Agent Jmarchitects - Liz Smallman

Threeways House 40-44 Clipstone Street London W1W 5DW Date Valid 20 September 2006 Considerations

Conservation Area CA49 : Rush Common Brixton Hill Conservation Area

Approved Plans

P(0)001 (Rev A), P(0)006 (Rev A), P(0)007 (Rev A), P(0)009

(Rev A), P(0)010, P(0)011 (Rev B), P(0)012 (Rev A), P(0)013,

P(0)014 (Rev B), P(0)015 (Rev A), P(0)016 (Rev B), P(0)017

(Rev B), P(0)020, P(0)021, P(0)022, P(0)026, P(0)002,

Recommendation GRANT PERMISSION

Officer Report 06/02778/RG3 THE STRAND CENTRE, ELM PARK, SW2 1. Summary of Main Issues The main issues involved in this application are: -

� The impact on the amenities of neighbouring residential properties. � The transport implications for the site and surrounding roads. � The design and appearance of the alterations and extensions to the main school

building. � The design and appearance of the proposed new buildings. � The impact of the proposal on the Rush Common and Brixton Hill Conservation

Area 2. Site Description

2.1 The application site comprises disused school buildings and grounds located on the west side of Elm Park, Upper Tulse Hill. The site abuts the rear gardens of residential properties in Craster Road and Claverdale Road to the north and south and the Holy Trinity Primary School to the west. The front part of the site including the main school building lies within the Rush Common and Brixton Hill Conservation Area. The site area is 0.53 hectares (1.3 acres).

2.2 The existing main school building is an impressive (but unlisted) 3-storey Edwardian

building with basement and loft levels. To the rear are various outbuildings including an Edwardian gymnasium, a two storey work shop and single storey nursery plus school yard and rifle range. There is a two storey school-keeper’s house at the front of the site. Many of these buildings are in a poor state of repair. The land rises approximately 6m from front to rear. There are three access points off Elm Park – one pedestrian and two vehicular. A brick wall with railings, 2m in height, forms the street frontage. The site contains a number of mature trees, none of which are considered especially significant or protected by TPO.

2.3 The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character, comprising mainly two

storey Victorian terrace properties with some post-war residential development. The adjoining Holy Trinity Primary School to the west (rear) of the site appears to date from the 1970s.

3. Planning History 3.1 There is no specific planning history relating to this proposal. 4. Scheme Details 4.1 The proposal is for a special education needs, fully extended school (SEN FSE) with a

capacity of 100 pupils at Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4 (11-16 years). Up to 55 permanent teaching and administration staff would be employed.

4.2 This will be the Elm Court School, currently located on Elmcourt Road, SE27. The school is to relocate to allow the development of a new secondary school (the Elmgreen School) which has recently received outline planning permission.

4.3 The proposal involves a major refurbishment of the main school building, the construction

of two new blocks (a teaching block and sports hall) to the rear, the laying out a multi use games area (MUGA) and hard surface ball games court plus associated landscaping.

4.4 The design is based on the BB77 guidelines (Designing for Pupils with Special

Educational Needs: Special Schools). 4.5 It is anticipated that most pupils will arrive by MPV or on foot. A drop off area is included

within the site to limit the traffic impact on Elm Park. The school aims to encourage staff to use public transport, walk or cycle although some parking is necessary for visiting professionals. 10 on-site car parking spaces are proposed, including 2 disabled parking spaces. A Transport Study by Richard Jackson Plc has been submitted which provides further details.

4.6 The main school building (Block A) will be refurbished to provide classrooms, offices, a

cafeteria, assembly hall, ICT room, library, and staff rooms. A number of alterations to its external appearance are proposed, the most significant of which will be the replacement of all the original windows with contemporary double glazed units, and the replacement of an existing half-height stair tower at the front of the building with a modern, full height and fully glazed structure.

4.7 The two new blocks to the rear (Blocks B & C), both two storey in height, will be

contemporary in appearance. Block B, the sports block, will comprise a sports hall, changing rooms, equipment store and office area. Block C will comprise classrooms and a performance/community hall. Both will be finished in green oak cladding above red stock brickwork, with a light grey render and double glazed aluminium framed windows.

4.8 Block C is designed as a simple box featuring a lead grey metal seam roof and wind

catchers and roof lights designed to appear as interesting sculptural elements when viewed from the upper floors of the main building. A timber brise soleil will form the first floor elevation fronting the internal courtyard.

4.9 The internal courtyard (between Blocks B & C) will include a part covered amphitheatre.

A basketball/netball court will be provided between Block B and the main building and a multi-use games area (MUGA) to the rear of the site. Because of the change in ground levels, the MUGA will be at the equivalent of first floor level of Blocks B & C. It is proposed to provide floodlighting to the MUGA.

4.10 The school will have a single controlled pedestrian access point from Elm Park which will

lead pupils to the main entrance on the north side of the main building (Block A). This will be adjacent to the vehicle drop off and pick up point. The front entrance to the building will be used by staff and visitors only. Two controlled vehicular access points will be provided from Elm Park. The one to the north will be used by cars and MPVs to access the drop off/pick up area and to reach 7 of the parking spaces. The other will be used for delivery vehicles and to reach the remaining 3 parking spaces including the 2 disabled spaces. Storage for 10 bicycles is also proposed on the north side of Block A.

4.11 It is anticipated that the school will be open between the hours of 07.00 and 22.00

Monday to Friday in term time. This will allow the school to operate a breakfast club in the morning, homework clubs in the evening, plus other extra curricular activities, supplementary classes etc, with the opportunity for some community usage. Pupils will

generally arrive between 08.00 and 09.00 hours and leave between 15.30 and 18.00. Weekend hours will be flexible to accommodate community usage, probably from 09.00 to 21.00 on Saturdays and 10.00 to 17.00 on Sundays.

4.12 The MUGA will be used flexibly by the school and for community use. Floodlighting is

proposed to enable evening use. The intended hours of the MUGA are 08.00 to 21.00 Monday to Friday, 09.00 to 17.00 on Saturday and 09.00 to 12.00 on Sunday

5. Consultation Responses 5.1 The application was advertised in the local press on 29th September 2006 and 5 Site

Notices were displayed around the site. Approximately 380 local residents have been consulted in Upper Tulse Hill, Elm Park, Craster Road, Ostade Road, China Mews, Craignair Road, Claverdale Road, Weymouth Court, and Ascalon Court.

5.2 The following local groups have been consulted: Brixton Residents and Traders

Association, Brixton Society, Brixton Area Forum/Tulse Hill Working Group. 5.3 The following internal Council departments have been consulted: Conservation & Design,

Transport/Highways, Tree Applications, LBL Crime Prevention, Sports, Area Focus – Parks and Open Spaces, Performance Strategy & Regeneration, Regulatory Services – Noise/Pollution, Parks & Open Spaces.

5.4 The following statutory bodies have been consulted: Transport for London; Development

Control Deparment; the Environment Agency; Thames Water; L.F.C.D Authority. 5.5 5 letters of objection, 3 letters of support, and 1 observation have been received from

surrounding residents. The letters of objection are summarised as follows:

- Insufficient parking provided for school staff - Impact on traffic movements in the area - Block C would impact on daylight/sunlight of properties on Craster Road - Undue noise and fumes - Dust and pollution - 3m high boundary fence (2m high close boarded timber fence plus 1m high weld mesh)

would have a detrimental effect on visual amenity of adjoining residential properties 5.6 The letters of support are summarised as follows: a new school will benefit the community 5.7 The observation is summarised as follows: sustainable modes of transport should be

encouraged to ensure that the school does not adversely impact on the existing traffic situation.

5.8 A letter from the Brixton Society has been received, which supports the application in

principle but notes the following concern: the original window framing patterns should be replicated in the design, as these are an important and distinctive feature of the original faēade.

Planning Considerations

6. Relevant Policies 6.1 Adopted UDP (1998)

EDU4 – New Education Premises or Extensions EDU6 – Joint Use of School Facilities by the Community CD2 – Proposals for Development CD15 – Design of New Development CD18 - Extensions T5 – Highway Alterations T9 – Provision of Vehicular Access T12 – Parking Standards T17 – Transport Implications of Development Proposals T36 – Cycle Parking ENV7 – Retention of Existing Trees in Development ENV8 – Protection of Trees on Construction Sites ENV9 – New Planting and Landscaping on Development Sites ENV19 – Noise Control ENV23 – Energy Efficient Buildings ENV24 and ENV25 – Waste Management and Recycling

6.2 Replacement UDP (2006)

Policy 7 – Protection of Residential Amenity Policy 9 – Transport Impact Policy 10 – Walking and Cycling Policy 26 – Community Facilities Policy 14 – Parking and Traffic Restraint Policy 31 – Streets, Character and Layout Policy 31a – Community Safety/ Designing out Crime Policy 32 – Building Scale and Design Policy 32a – Renewable Energy in Major Development Policy 32b – Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 33 – Alterations and Extensions Policy 36 – Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design Policy 42 – Conservation Areas Policy 45 – Protection and Enhancement of Open Space and Sports Facilities Policy 46 – Protection and Enhancement of the Natural Environment Policy 48 – Pollution, Public Health and Safety

Policy 50 – Waste

6.3 The current up to date statement of the Council's planning policies is contained in the

Replacement UDP. The Council has now received the Inspector's report (17th February 2006) considered his recommendations and approved Proposed Modifications, which have been placed on deposit from 20th October - 1st December 2006. The Council's Cabinet, in approving the Proposed Modifications, also recommended that: "The Proposed Modifications, together with the unaltered parts of the Revised Deposit UDP, are approved for use for development control purposes". These can be seen in the document London Borough of Lambeth Replacement UDP Incorporating Proposed Modifications (October 2006). This is part of the final stage of procedures leading to adoption of the Replacement UDP (scheduled for February 2007) and as such considerable weight may be attached to policies in the Replacement UDP which the Inspector has supported.

6.4 However until the Replacement UDP is adopted regard also needs to be made of the

existing Adopted UDP (1998).

7.0 Land Use 7.1 The Council’s objectives for education relevant to the Adopted UDP are:

� To provide adequate sites and buildings for education use; � To provide an accessible distribution of education services; � To maximise community use of education land and buildings; � To help meet the education need of local communities.

7.2 Adopted UDP Policy ED4 (New education premises or extensions) states that the Council

will generally approve proposals for new education premises providing the following criteria are met: � It is an appropriate use for the site; � There is a shortage of education places in the Borough or within an accessible distance; � Internal and external space standards comply with the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1981; � The development will not have an adverse effect on the general amenity of the area, nor be located where noise and traffic will disturb learning; � The site is readily accessible by public transport, bicycle and on foot.

7.3 Policy 26 of the Replacement UDP supports and promotes the development and

improvement of facilities for the community. Proposals for large community facilities serving more than a neighbourhood or district function should be located either in town centres or in the Central London Policy Area; or where there are no town centre sites available, then other sites in accordance with the sequential approach (Policy 5). In addition, the Inspector’s Report included a modification to Policy 26 to include the following paragraph within the Policy:

“Proposals for new or improved education facilities will be permitted provided that the site or buildings are appropriate for their intended use, and that the nature and scale of the proposal including hours of operation do not unacceptably harm the amenities of the area through noise, disturbance or traffic generation.”

This modification has been accepted by the Council. 7.4 The Strand Centre was developed in 1913 as a Grammar School for boys, and was used

for this purpose until the 1970s when it became redundant due to the opening of the Tulse Hill Comprehensive. Since this time the site has been used as a temporary school for decant schools within the borough and more recently by the Albanian Youth Group and after-school club. Therefore, the use of the site for education purposes is considered acceptable in principle.

7.5 The proposal is considered to be a larger community facility serving more than a

neighbourhood or district function since pupils would be drawn from across the borough. The site’s location between the Brixton and Streatham Town Centres is considered appropriate in this instance given that there are no suitable sites within or immediately adjoining a town or local centre in the vicinity and the site’s long history of educational use. It is considered that the proposal, in principle, meets the requirements of ED4 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 26 of the Replacement UDP.

7.6 It is noted that there is a shortage of secondary school places within the borough as a

whole. In 2005, 41% of parents sent their children to schools outside the borough. Lambeth plans to offer 80% of all primary school pupils (i.e. 75% of all Lambeth children)

a place at a Lambeth secondary school. Lambeth Education conclude that currently there are 11 forms of entry too few to achieve this objective with the gap rising to 22 forms of entry too few by 2015 if no new provision for secondary school places is made.

8.0 Conservation and Design Issues 8.1 Policy CD2 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 42 of the Replacement UDP require that the

character and/or appearance of conservation areas is preserved or enhanced and that the setting of or views into a conservation area should not be harmed by development outside a conservation area. National Guidance contained at PPG15, which aims to protect conservation areas and the historic environment, is also of relevance.

8.2 Policies CD15 and CD18 of the Adopted UDP and Policies 32, 33 and 36 of the

Replacement UDP, which all contain general design principles (not specific to conservation areas) are also relevant to the assessment of this proposal.

8.3 The front half of the site, which contains the main school building, falls within the Rush

Common/Brixton Hill Conservation Area. The main building is an impressive neo-classical school building of circa 1913. All of the remaining school buildings to the rear are located outside the conservation area and do not make a significant contribution to its setting. The rear of the site is not visible from the public realm (Elm Park).

8.4 Proposed Block B (the gym block) will be positioned in a similar location to the original

gym/workshop building, which is the tallest of the existing outbuildings. It’s siting, scale and design is considered acceptable. It should be a high quality addition to the school site. The MUGA will occupy the site of the former sports field (adjacent to the neighbouring Holy Trinity Primary School) and will help maintain the open aspect of this part of the site.

8.5 Block C will be positioned close to the footprint of the existing nursery building. It will be

taller and longer than the existing building and has therefore been set back off the boundary by 3m. Again, the siting, scale and design of the building is considered acceptable. Block C should also make a positive contribution to the site as a whole.

8.6 The main school building is highly prominent within this part of the conservation area. The

CA Designation Report of 27th August 1997 states:

‘The inclusion of the former Strand Grammar School for Boys (1912) at the southern end of Elm Park is considered very important as this fine building is a splendid local landmark and is of significant historic and architectural interest in its own right.’ (p.5)

‘One of the finest secular building in terms of its architectural quality and character is the very grand Edwardian style former Strand Grammar School near the southern end of Elm Park, built by the London County Council (Chief Architect W.E. Riley) in 1912-1914. The building has a warm red brick frontage decorated with Portland stone dressings and enlivened by a magnificent central stone arched window incorporating a fine sculpture.’ (p.11)

8.7 The Council’s Team Leader for Conservation has assessed the proposal and comments

as follows: 8.9 Stylistically, the building is typically Edwardian: robust yet nuanced in expressing its

cultural identity, educational function and social status. Its composition and scale are unequivocally of late 19th/early 20th centuries, but its details are historical. It is dignified

but a little austere in its free interpretation of 17th century English classicism. It has Wren-ish Baroque details, typical of the predominant language of public buildings at the height of the Empire, but it owes as much to the Domestic revival styles of the three or four previous decades.

8.10 The elevations are expressed in two complementary scales: that of the whole of each

elevation pierced by regular fenestration and that of the small window panes and stone dressings (blocked surrounds to the window above the entrance, key-blocks over the second floor windows, string courses etc). The interiors (inspected early 2006) are unexceptional.

8.11 Local and national policies require that development should preserve or enhance the

character or appearance of the conservation area. There is a general presumption in favour of the preservation of buildings (such as this) that make a strong positive contribution to that character or appearance of the area.

8.12 The proposal is for two substantial but relatively low level new buildings to the rear of the

main block, and for a radical reconfiguration of the Edwardian school, to provide for a new specialist educational use. The new buildings to rear will have limited impact on the conservation area although it may be noted that the new Block C is partly within the conservation area and will be closer to the main school building block than the former lavatory block, which it replaces.

8.13 The design for the new buildings is relatively un-contentious. They are low, and are visible

mainly from within the school site. The junction between the new block and the old one is unclear on the application drawings. A glazed link is proposed but details of the junction have not been provided. These should be required by condition.

8.14 The refurbishment and re-use of the historic school building is warmly welcomed, and

does not raise any issues of principle. However it is felt that some matters of detail need to be clarified or reconsidered. Four particular aspects of the proposals will have a significant impact on the appearance of the main building and by extension the conservation area:

Replacement of windows 8.15 The present windows are small-paned white-painted timber sashes. They are one of the

most distinctive features of the elevations, and the choice of this design is significant in defining the building as being of the domestic realm rather than industrial or commercial. It is accepted that to meet current standards these need to be upgraded or renewed. However, the original drawings showing new aluminium composite tilt and turn design is considered so different to the original timber design that they fail to either preserve or enhance the building or conservation area. The revised drawings (dated November 2006) proposing small paned composite tilt and turn design is considered a poor imitation of the original windows, being so different from the original sashes and moulded frames that they too fail to either preserve or enhance the building or the conservation area. Furthermore, the proposed trickle vents to the head of each window are particularly unsatisfactory; they make the top rail of the window frame disproportionately wide, and cut across crudely below the key-blocks.

8.16 The architects have addressed the points made in the Conservation Officer’s

observations broadly as follows: Timber windows can meet the required thermal performance, but due to their size and the additional weight of the double glazing, and the fact that they must tilt and turn to meet health and safely requirements, they cannot be constructed to match the original sashes.

8.17 An alternative would be new single glazed sashes to match the existing ones as nearly as

possible, combined with secondary glazing. The architects state that only one supplier manufactures secondary glazing that would meet their brief, and it is only supplied. While casements might normally be acceptable the architects state that it cannot be used in this particular educational environment.

8.18 It was only after the details of the proposed "composite" windows had been submitted that

it was clear how much they would differ from the originals, and how little difference there was between the large- and small- paned options. Given that the architects proposed the small paned option on the front elevations only, this was not a compromise that the Conservation Officer felt made enough difference to justify its cost.

8.19 Officers do not have the resources to test the architects assertions about what products

are available and although it is surprising that there is so little choice, Officers have no reason to doubt the architects, who have now undertaken a good deal of work to support their proposal.

8.20 The only option that has apparently not been explored is the use of steel windows,

possibly set in timber sub-frames retaining or reproducing the original mouldings. These would not reproduce the original design, but could allow for a more sympathetic appearance.

8.21 Dealing with this matter by condition might allow further investigation of secondary glazing

suppliers; in particular the possibility that a slightly lower performance secondary system combined with new timber sashes would deliver the desired performance; and consideration of steel. It will not guarantee a better outcome than we have already. Both options may be prohibitively expensive.

8.22 For these reasons, it is recommended that a condition require an alternative proposal for

window replacement, which is more in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing building.

Replacement of external doors 8.23 The existing doors are of various designs, but the original designs, of which a number

appear to survive, including those to the main entrance, are of panelled timber, partially glazed. It is proposed to refurbish the central entrance doors but replace others with steel reinforced timber panel doors, to be painted black. A condition requiring full details of the new doors is recommended.

Roof alterations 8.24 It is proposed to replace the unusual gables to the rear (inner end) of the roof to the hall

range, to form hips. The gables are a distinctive and prominent feature of the building. In this instance no objection is raised to the removal of the gables subject to the submission of detailed drawings to include details of drainage and access etc. A condition is recommended to secure this.

New stair tower 8.25 It is proposed to replace the existing brick stair that rises from ground to first floor level

(characterised by its round window echoing that above the entrance). The drawings originally submitted showed a new part-brick, part-glazed, attached stair tower, but more recently drawings illustrating a free-standing full height "frameless glazed" tower have

been received. This is considered a more satisfactory option. However, the new stair will be a very prominent intervention in the principal elevations of the building and the view from Elm Park. Glazed structures generally have a solid appearance as a result of their reflective quality.

8.26 The design statement does not give details of the structural problems that inhibit the re-

use of the existing stair tower, why it cannot accommodate a sufficiently wide staircase, nor of why the new stair needs to be full height. The design of the existing brick stair tower is considered to be appropriate and in keeping. No compelling reason has been given why a partly or wholly new brick stair would be inappropriate or impractical here.

8.27 Consideration should be given to the retention or replication of the original stair tower,

and if necessary its extension upwards. The extension could be designed and constructed in a contemporary idiom, but it should at least reflect the proportions and storey heights of the existing elevations.

8.28 A condition is recommended to require amended plans to be submitted and approved by

Council, prior to commencement of construction. Alternatively, if members are minded to accept the principle of a fully glazed new stair tower, detailed drawings of the stair will need to be supplied for approval.

Other design matters

8.29 Details of the covered bin store in the forecourt have not been provided. It is not felt that a

new permanent structure should be constructed immediately outside the main entrance. As far as possible the forecourt should be kept clear. A condition can require details to be submitted to ensure this.

8.30 It is unclear whether it is proposed to replace or refurbish the gates and fencing. The

original gates should be re-used and adapted if necessary. Other boundary treatments will subject to approval by condition.

8.31 Details of all other materials facings and finishes, and external plumbing, metalwork and

planting should be subject to approval by condition. In addition, details of proposals for the appropriate display of the Roll of Honour will be required by condition to be submitted to and approved by the Council.

8.32 Therefore, subject to the alterations described above, it is considered that the scheme will

preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area, and is acceptable in the context of Policies CD2, CD15, CD18 of the Adopted UDP and Policies 32, 33, 36 and 42 of the Replacement UDP.

9.0 Amenity Impact

Loss of light and outlook arising from the new buildings 9.1 Policy CD15 of the Adopted UDP requires that the amenity of neighbours should be

safeguarded. Policy 32 of the Replacement UDP states that development should protect the residential amenity of existing and future residents by: i. Having an acceptable standard of privacy; ii. Having an acceptable impact on daylight and sunlight; iii. Not creating unacceptable overlooking; iv. Not creating an undue sense of enclosure; v. Where appropriate having sufficient outdoor amenity space.

9.3 Policy 33 of the Replacement UDP requires that extensions to buildings should not: i. Unacceptably harm the amenities (privacy, outlook, sunlight and daylight) of

adjoining residents (in respect of daylight having regard to Building Research Establishment Standards);

ii. Result in an undue loss of resuidential amenity space; iii. Create an unacceptable sense of enclosure.

9.4 Nos. 20-54 (even) Craster Road lie directly adjacent to the site’s northern side boundary.

Nos.40-54 are adjacent to the main school building, which is not to be extended, so will be largely unaffected by the proposal.

9.5 Nos.20-36 (even) Craster Road will be closest to proposed Block C. This is a two storey classroom block/hall with a wall height of 5m, increasing with the slope of the roof to approximately 8m in part. Currently, a single storey building abuts the boundary. The additional height of Block C will be counterbalanced by a 3m setback from the boundary and, in consequence, it is not considered that it will give rise to an undue sense of enclosure.

9.6 The rear windows of the houses in Craster Road are set back approximately 9.5m from

the shared boundary. No part of Block C will subtend to an angle of more than 25 degrees to the horizontal (approximately 2000mm above ground level of the rear of adjacent properties) in accordance with BRE (Building Research Establishment) guidelines. In consequence, it is considered that the Craster Road properties will experience no loss of daylight/sunlight. No windows are proposed at the upper level of Block C facing the Craster Road properties and therefore no loss of privacy should ensue.

9.7 Nos.21-49 Claverdale Road lie directly adjacent to the site’s southern side boundary. Nos.39-49 lie adjacent to the main school building to be retained and will be largely unaffected by the proposal. A small, single storey side extension is proposed at the southern side of building’s central section but will be set 16m from the boundary and will therefore have minimal impact on neighbouring properties.

9.8 Nos.27-33 Claverdale Road will be closest to proposed Block B. The southern elevation of the Block B will vary in height from 8m to 5m as the land rises to the west. It will be set between 2 and 2.5m from the site boundary. The rear windows of the houses in Claverdale Road are over 15m from the boundary and, whilst the existing outlook will change, it is not considered that the proposal would result in an undue sense of enclosure. Block B also meets the BRE standard for daylight/sunlight. It contains no windows on its southern elevation and therefore no overlooking will result.

9.9 A 2m high closed boarded timber fence with 1m mesh fence above is proposed along the

side and rear site boundaries. While residents have raised concern with regard to the impact of this fence on their outlook, this has been chosen for security and acoustic reasons. Although considered acceptable in principle, details of the boundary treatment are to be reserved by condition.

9.10 In summary, it is not considered that the proposal will have a detrimental impact on

neighbouring properties. The proposal is considered to comply with Policy CD15 and CD18 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 32 and 33 of the Replacement UDP.

Noise from the school use

9.11 Policy ENV19 of the Adopted UDP states that developments which are likely to generate

noise inappropriate to the local environment will be refused and that the Council will seek the reduction of of noise at source and will use conditions to limit the hours of operation of

noisy processes or activities. Policy 7 of the Replacement UDP recognises that people have the right to the quiet enjoyment of their own homes and states that in predominantly residential areas the establishment of new, or intensification of existing, incompatible non-residential use, likely to have a materially adverse environmental and/ or traffic impact, will not be permitted.

9.12 There would inevitably be some noise from children arriving at and departing from the

school, at break and lunch times and from the use of the MUGA both in and out of school time. However, the proposed number of students, at 100, is relatively small and is unlikely to result in noise over and above historic levels. No objections have been received from surrounding residents regarding potential noise and the Council’s Noise and Pollution Officer has also raised no objection. Nevertheless, it is proposed to limit the hours of use of the MUGA sports pitch to those listed in Section 4.12 above.

9.13 Subject to such conditions, it is considered that the proposal should not result in

unacceptable noise levels, in accordance with Policy ENV19 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 7 of the Replacement UDP.

10. Loss of Trees and Landscaping Proposals 10.1 Policies ENV7 of the Adopted UDP states that the Council will encourage layouts for new

developments that avoid, or minimise, the loss of trees and planning permission may be refused if a proposal is likely to result in the loss of a particularly important tree or group of trees. It also states that where it is impractical to retain trees, the Council will require their replacement with as many trees as are appropriate to the development, elsewhere on the site. In these cases, the Council will normally require their replacement with standard sized trees.

10.2 Policy 36 of the Replacement UDP states that trees of high amenity value will be

protected, including during construction, through the use of planning conditions and Tree Preservation Orders. The removal of, or major works to, trees of high amenity value will only be permitted where they are assessed as hazardous, or where it can be proven that a protected tree is unreasonably interfering with an individual’s enjoyment of his/ her property. If protected trees are removed, replacement trees should be planted of suitable maturity and protection, and of potentially equal value within and/ or outside the site.

10.3 The tree survey of the site identifies 19 trees across the site. The Council’s Aboricultural

Officer advises that there are just three trees of any significance on site (an Oak and two Sycamores), each of which will be retained. These will be protected during the course of building works in compliance with Policy ENV8 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 36 of the Replacement UDP. The trees to be removed (three Crab Apples) are all small ornamental species and their removal will have no harmful impact on amenity.

10.4 Overall, the proposal offers opportunities for new landscaping that will more than

compensate for the trees to be lost. Conceptual landscape proposals have been submitted to support the application in accordance with Policy ENV9 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 36 of the Replacement UDP. Full landscape proposals will be required by condition.

11.0 Highways and Transportation Issues 11.1 The site is an existing school and given the specialist nature of the proposed school it is

not envisaged that there will be a significant increase in traffic generation. Provided the number of pupils will not exceed 100, there is likely to be less traffic generation than for a

normal primary or secondary school. In order to ensure that the impact is no worse than expected, a condition is imposed to cap the number of pupils at 100.

11.2 The Transport Statement submitted in support of the application was deficient in a

number of respects and a supplementary report has been submitted. This uses traffic generation figures produced for the Elmgreen School planning application (using local primary schools in West Norwood and also the Clapham Academy) to estimate potential traffic generation if the school was re-used. This predicts that a total of 189 vehicles could be generated although no supporting information is supplied to verify this figure. It also states that trip generation will be the same as that at the existing site but given the distance between the 2 sites and the different PTALs this may not be the case. However, the School Travel Plan submitted by the school starts to deal with this issue and needs to be developed further.

11.3 Notwithstanding the inadequate transport assessment, it is officers conclusion that the

specialised nature of the proposed school, together with the recommended conditions, and the relatively low number of pupils means that the traffic impact would not be as great as if the site were to be re-used as a primary or secondary school.

11.4 11 parking spaces are proposed but it appears that 17 may be required. It is

recommended that a parking management statement be required by condition. This will need to include management of visitors to the site and visitor parking within the site. Visitor parking on surrounding streets would be likely to lead to an increase in daytime parking stress.

11.5 Parking stress in the vicinity of the site is generally high and is in close proximity to the

Brixton "Q" CPZ. Based on current modal split there will be a requirement for 6 members of staff to park on-street.

11.6 The applicants advise that the majority of pupils will be collected by bus by Lambeth’s

school transport contractor. No on-site parking is proposed for the mini-buses and any additional staff parking in the eastern car park would obstruct access and egress. It is assumed that the mini-buses will not be kept on-site other than at times when they are delivering children or picking them up. This should be confirmed by the applicant.

11.7 A condition is required to ensure that no parking, other than that related to drop-off and

pick-up of pupils, is to take place in the marked-up drop-off areas. A condition is required for means of operating and the location of the gates. The cycle parking is now acceptable.

11.8 No details are supplied regarding the number of vehicles that will visit the site over a day

as previously requested. There were discrepancies in the information supplied regarding this. It has been requested above that a parking management statement be required by condition. This is to include management of visitors to the site and visitor parking within the site. If this takes place on surrounding streets then it will lead to an increase in daytime parking stress. However, without definitive numbers and a profile of times of these trips officers are unable to predict what this impact would be. The condition must be worded such that the parking and visitor management plan is submitted to and approved by the Council prior to first occupation and that the development is occupied from first occupation fully in accordance with the approved document.

11.9 No details are supplied regarding community uses. These could generate additional car

trips in the evenings adding to existing high levels of parking stress. Further details of the community uses and means to control car trips should be supplied before they commence. This should be required by condition.

11.10 No substantiated information has been submitted regarding the catchment area, as previously requested, although based on current modal split information there is unlikely to be a significant traffic impact.

11.11 The proposal has been re-examined in light of further information that has been

submitted, as well as reviewing the outstanding information that has not been submitted. Although submission of the outstanding information would have been useful and assisted in making a recommendation it is concluded that the proposed development is acceptable subject to the conditions stated above.

12.0 Security / Designing out Crime 12.1 Policy 31a of the Replacement UDP requires that development should enhance

community safety and take into account ‘Secured by Design’ standards. Development will not be permitted where opportunities for crime are created or where it results in an increased risk of public disorder. Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act requires local authorities to take account of crime and disorder as part of all its functions.

12.2 The applicants state that they have designed the school to comply with ‘Secured by

Design for Schools’ standards (2004) and have been working with the Metropolitan Police Crime Prevention Design Officers to this end. However, it has not been possible to provide full details of proposed CCTV provision at this stage as the camera system will need to be integrated with the school’s ICT system. The Council’s Secured by Design officer has requested a condition requiring the submission of full details of the CCTV system prior to the school’s occupation.

12.3 A condition is recommended requiring a Designing Out Crime Statement having regard to

both ‘Secured by Design for Schools’ (2004) and Policies 31a and 36 of the Replacement UDP.

13.0 Sustainability 13.1 Policies ENV16 and ENV23 of the Adopted UDP seek to achieve high standards of

safety, security and environmentally acceptable design in all developments. The policies encourage the design and development of energy efficient buildings and the introduction of good energy management practices.

13.2 Policy 32a of the Replacement UDP states that all major developments (above a

threshold of 1000sqm) are required to incorporate equipment for renewable power generation so as to provide at least 10% of their predicted energy requirements.

13.3 The Sustainability Statement submitted by the applicants has identified micro wind

turbines, photovoltaics and solar thermal as physically viable renewable energy systems but acknowledges that the selection of one or more of these measures will be subject to the availability of grants and budget pressures on the project. They should only be considered as options therefore.

13.4 Nevertheless, the applicants envisage that the school will achieve a BREEAM ‘very good’

standard. The applicant’s propose to audit this throughout the design development process. Conditions are recommended to require the submission, prior to work commencing on site, of a full BREEAM assessment and details of the renewal energy systems to be employed.

13.6 The Council’s Environment Manager advises that the use of double-glazed composite

windows (to the main building) would be a reasonable environmental solution. With

regard to the new build, the application fails to confirm commitment to Lambeth’s timber policies; the 50% use of FSC timber indicated (which is very good) ought to be conformed in tender documents. The inclusion of a green roof (on Block B) is welcomed. Clarification is sought as to the methods to be employed to ensure construction will be energy efficient and waste minimized. In this regard, it is considered appropriate to impose conditions to require the submission of details of the construction strategy and operation management.

14.0 Drainage 14.1 Thames Water has no objection to the scheme with regard to water infrastructure. They

request no conditions to be imposed. 15.0 Waste 15.1 At the time of writing no response has been received from the Council’s Streetcare

Department. It is recommended that conditions be imposed to ensure that adequate facilities for the disposal of both general waste and hazardous waste (e.g. from chemistry, art departments etc) and recycling are provided on site in accordance with Policies ENV24 and ENV25 of the Adopted UDP and Policy 50 of the Replacement UDP.

16.0 Conclusion 16.2 The reuse of the site for educational purposes is considered acceptable in principle. The

proposed new buildings are well designed and should be welcome additions to the site. They should have no adverse effect on neighbouring properties. However, details of the proposed alterations to the main building need to be reserved by condition. Subject to such conditions, officers are satisfied that the proposed development will not have an adverse impact on the conservation area and street scene. Further, it is considered that a school of the size proposed can be accommodated satisfactorily on the site and by the surrounding highways network

17.0 Recommendation 17.1 It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

Summary of Reasons: In deciding to grant planning permission, the Council has had regard to the relevant policies of the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations. Having weighed the merits of the proposal in the context of these issues, it is considered that planning permission should be granted subject to the conditions listed below. In reaching this decision the following policies were relevant: Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) Policies: ED4 (New Education Premises or Extensions), Policy T12 (Parking Standards), T17 (Transport Implication of Development Proposals), CD2 (Proposals for Development), CD15 (Design of New Development), CD18 (Extensions), ENV7 (Retention of Existing Trees in New Development), ENV9 (New Planting and Landscaping on Development Sites), ENV16 (Environmental Aspects of Building Design), ENV18 (Water), ENV19 (Noise Control) ENV22 (Energy Efficient Buildings), ENV24 (Waste Management and Disposal) and ENV25 (Recycling and Reuse)Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006 - 2017) Policies: 7 (Protecting Residential Amenity), 9 (Transport Impact), 14 (Parking and Traffic Restraint), 26 (Community Facilities), 31 (Streets, Character and Layout), 31a (Community Safety/Designing Out Crime), 32 (Building Scale and Design), Policy 32b (Sustainable Design and Construction), 33 (Alterations and Extensions), 36 (Streetscape, Landscape and Public Realm Design), 42 (Conservation Areas), 46 (Protection and Enhancement of the Natural Environment), 48 (Pollution, Public Health and Safety), 50 (Waste). 1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning from the date of this decision notice.Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.) 2 Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, details of the following amendments to the scheme shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of any work on the existing main building (Block A):a) Alternative replacement window design to Block A that is more in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing building. The building shall be altered only in accordance with the details thus approved. Reason: To ensure that the alterations and extensions are of appropriate design and quality in the interests of maintaining the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the streetscene (Policy CD2 and CD18 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 33, 36 and 42 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer.) 3 Detailed scale drawings and specifications as appropriate of the following shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the use commences:a) Details of the junction between Block C and Block Ab) Details of the roof of Block A where it is proposed to remove the rear gables on the inner end of the roofc) Details of the glazed stair towerd) The retention, refurbishment or replacement of the existing external doors to Block Ae) Lighting of all external areas including any floodlighting of the all weather pitch and hard play areaf) The appropriate display of the existing Roll of Honourg) Covered cycle park and external sports store The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the details thus approved.Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the details of the proposal(s). 4 Samples and a schedule of all finishes and materials to be used in the development hereby permitted, and details of openings including depths of reveals, window cills and heads, window framing and glazing; rainwater goods, other pipe-work and external services; the roof garden and trellis, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority

before any building work commences and this condition shall apply notwithstanding any indications as to these matters which have been given in the application. The development shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard and enhance the visual amenities of the locality, and the adjacent character and appearance of the Conservation Area (Policies CD2, CD15 and G17 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 32, 36 and 42 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer). 5 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a specification and samples as appropriate of all finishing materials to be used in any hard surfacing of the application site, including the drop-off area and other parts not covered by buildings shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. All hardsurfacing on the site shall thereafter be carried out solely in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that such works do not detract from the development itself or from the appearance of the locality in general. (Policies CD2 and CD15 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 32, 36 and 42 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer). 6 No works or development shall take place until a specification of all proposed tree planting has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This specification will include details of the quantity, size, species, position and the proposed time of planting of all trees to be planted, together with an indication of how they integrate with the proposal in the long term with regard to their mature size and anticipated routine maintenance. All tree, shrub and hedge planting included within that specification shall be carried out in accordance with that specification and in accordance with BS 3936 (1992).Reason: To ensure satisfactory landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity. (Policies CD15,and ST31 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 36 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refers) 7 If within a period of 5 years from the date of planting of any tree that tree, or any tree planted in replacement for it, is removed, uprooted, destroyed or dies, (or becomes in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority seriously damaged or defective), another tree of the same species and size as originally planted shall be planted at the same place, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variations.Reason: To ensure a satisfactory and continuing standard of amenities are provided and maintained in connection with the development. (Policies CD2, CD15, ENV7, ENV9 and G10 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 32, 36 and 42 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer.) 8 No works or development shall take place until a scheme for the protection of the retained trees (Section 7, BS5837 (2005), Tree Protection Plan) has been agreed in writing by the LPA. This scheme shall include:a) A plan to a scale and level of accuracy appropriate to the proposal that shows the position, crown spread and Root Protection Area (para. 5.2.2 of BS 5837) of every retained tree on site and on neighbouring or nearby ground to the site in relation to the approved plans and particulars. The position of all trees to be removed shall be indicated on this plan.b) The details and position (shown on the plan at paragraph (a) above) of the Tree Protection Barriers (Section 9.2 of BS 5837), identified separately where required for different phases of construction works (e.g. demolition, construction, hardstanding). The Tree Protection Barriers must be erected prior to each construction phase commencing and remain in place and undamaged for the duration of that phase. No works shall take place on the next phase until the Tree Protection Barriers are repositioned for that phase.c) The details of the working methods to be employed for the installation of drives and paths within the RPAs of retained trees in accordance with the principles of 'No Dig' construction.d) A schedule of tree works for all the retained trees in paragraph (a) above, specifying pruning and other remedial or preventative work, whether for physiological, hazard abatement, aesthetic or operational reasons. All tree works shall be carried out in accordance with BS 3998 (1989) Recommendations for Tree

Work.Reason: To avoid damage to the existing trees, which represent an important visual amenity to the surrounding area (Policies G10, H10, ST7, ST31, CD15 and ENV7 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 36 of the Replacement Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer.) 9 No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be pruned in any manner, be it branches, stems, or roots, other than in accordance with plans and particulars, which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The existing trees on site represent an important amenity feature, which, if lost, would impair the character of the area. (Policies G10, H10, ST7, ST31, CD15 and ENV7 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 36 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer.) 10 Before development commences a Designing out Crime Statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented and retained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the safety and security of future and existing occupiers in accordance with Policy CD15 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 31a and 36 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 11 Before development commences, details for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency measures in the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include an assessment of how the inclusion of renewable energy technologies will contribute towards the reduction of carbon emissions from the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure the proposed development complies with Policies ENV16 and ENV23 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 32a of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 12 Prior to the commencement of development details of a BREEAM Assessment for the proposal is to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The assessment shall seek to achieve a 'Good' or 'Very Good' rating.Reason: To ensure the proposed development complies with Policies ENV16 and ENV23 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 32a of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 13 Prior to the commencement of development, full details of a waste management plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The waste management plan shall include full details regarding the proposed litter, refuse (general and hazardous), and recycling facilities. The waste storage area is to be located outside of the front forecourt area, in a location agreed by Council's Conservation Department. The litter, refuse, and recycling facilities shall be provided, and the development shall be operated, in strict accordance with the details of the approved waste management plan. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the storage, disposal, and recycling of waste on the site in the interests of the amenities of the area and the provision of sustainable waste management, in accordance with the principles of sustainability, in accordance with Policies ENV24 and CD15 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and Policies 9, 32, and 50 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan. 14 Before development commences, details of the means of enclosure of the site and proposed front boundary treatment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied that the details of the proposal are carried out in accordance with Policy CD15 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 31 and 32 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 15 No part of the building hereby permitted shall be occupied or used until the provision for

cycle parking shown on the application drawings has been implemented in full and the cycle parking shall thereafter be retained solely for its designated use.Reason: To ensure adequate cycle parking is available on site and to promote sustainable modes of transport. (Policies G39, G40, T36 and ST15 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policies 9, 10 and 14 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006) refer.) 16 Details of the swept paths for fire engines shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. These details should include siting of parking bays and landscaping.Reason: In order to ensure that Fire Brigade access is not obstructed. 17 The marked drop-off areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the drop off and pick up of pupils. 18 Details of the location and method of operation of the site entrance gates shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of development. The gates must be constructed and retained in accordance with the approved details for the duration of the use. Reason: To control vehicles that are able to enter the site, and to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway in complinace with Policies CD15, T18 and ST29 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policy 14 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 19 A parking management plan governing the use of the 11 parking spaces on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of development. These details are to include confirmation as to how the bays will be managed both by staff and community uses. From first occupation, the use must operate in accordance with the approved document. 20 The total number of pupils attending the school shall not exceed 100. Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the school are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements in compliance with Policy T17 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 9 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 21 Details of any community uses that are to use the school facilities, including time and duration of operation and means to control car trips to these uses shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of development.Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the school are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements in compliance with Policy T17 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 9 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 22 A parking and visitor management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of development. This shall include details of the number and nature of vehicles (including deliveries) that will visit the site over a day. From first occupation, the use must operate in accordance with the approved document. 23 Details of parking, manoeuvring and the loading and unloading of vehicles shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The parking and manoeuvring area shall be laid out and made available for use in accordance with the approved scheme before the development hereby permitted is occupied and that area shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose, or obstructed in any way. Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park and turn clear of the highway to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway in complinace with Policies CD15, T18 and ST29 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policy 14 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006).

24 No loading or unloading of goods, including fuel, by vehicles arriving at or departing from the premises shall be carried out other than within the curtilage of the premises/site.Reason: To avoid obstruction of the surrounding streets and to safeguard the amenities of adjoining properties in compliance with Policies T18 and CD15 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policy 14 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 25 A sign reading 'No Reversing Into Street' shall be erected in a prominent position adjoining the exits before the use commences and shall thereafter be retained in the approved position for the duration of the use, unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority is obtained to any variation.Reason: To avoid hazard and obstruction being caused to users of the public highway in compliance with Policies T18, T34 and T38 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policies 9 and 31 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 26 A draft School Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the use hereby permitted commencing. The applicant shall undertake a travel survey within 3 months of the use hereby permitted commencing to determine the forms of transport used by staff to reach the school. Following the survey, the School Travel Plan shall be amended to include the survey results and include targets for modal shift towards the use of more sustainable modes of transport. The final School Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 6 months of the use hereby permitted commencing.The measures approved in the Travel Plan shall be implemented and thereafter maintained for the duration of the use, unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority is obtained to any variation.Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the school are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements in compliance with Policy T17 of the adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 9 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 27 No plumbing or pipes, other than rainwater pipes, shall be fixed to the external faces of buildings. Reason: Such works would seriously detract from the appearance of the building and injure visual amenity, contrary to Policy CD15 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 32 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 28 Before development commences, details of all ventilation and filtration equipment, including details of all external plant and trunking, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All equipment shall be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the relevant use and shall be retained for the duration of the use. Reason: To protect the amenities of the area in accordance with policies G12 and S14 of the Adopted unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policies 1, 7, 29, 34, and 48 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 29 Noise from any extractors or flues shall not exceed the background noise level when measured outside the window of the nearest noise sensitive or residential premises. Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining properties and the surrounding area in accordance with Policies G12 and ENV19 of the Adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (1998), and Policies 1, 7, 29 and 48 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 30 Noise from any air conditioning units and any other plant, machinery, or equipment should not exceed a level of 5dB(A) above the existing background level (or 10dB(A) below if there is a particular tonal quality), when measured according to British Standards BS4142-1997, at a point one metre external to the nearest noise sensitive premises. Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining occupiers and the surrounding area (Policies G12, and ENV19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 1, 7, and 48 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006).

31 There shall be no amplified sound, speech, or music which is audible outside the premises, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining occupiers and the surrounding area (Policies G12, and ENV19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policies 1, 7, and 48 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006). 32 The two external sports pitches hereby approved shall not be used nor illuminated other than between the hours of 08.00 to 21.00 on Mondays-Fridays, 09.00 to 17.00 on Saturdays and 09.00 to 12.00 on Sundays.Reason: To safeguard the amenities of residential properties and of the area generally in accordance with Policy ENV19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (1998) and Policy 48 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (2006).

Notes to Applicants: 1 This decision letter does not convey an approval or consent which may be required under any enactment, by-law, order or regulation, other than Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2 Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Regulations, and related legislation which must be complied with to the satisfaction of the Council's Building Control Officer. 3 Your attention is drawn to the need to comply with the requirements of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 concerning construction site noise and in this respect you are advised to contact the Council's Environmental Health Division. 4 As soon as building work starts on the development, you must contact the Street Naming and Numbering Officer if you need to do the following: - name a new street - name a new or existing building - apply new street numbers to a new or existing building This will ensure that any changes are agreed with Lambeth Council before use, in accordance with the London Buildings Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 and the Local Government Act 1985. Although it is not essential, we also advise you to contact the Street Naming and Numbering Officer before applying new names or numbers to internal flats or units. Contact details are listed below: Rachel Harrison Street Naming and Numbering Officer e-mail: tkerrigan@lambeth.gov.uk tel: 020 7926 2283 fax: 020 7926 9131 5 You are advised that all temporary road works associated with the permitted development are at the developer's expense. 6 In deciding to grant planning permission, the Council has had regard to the relevant Policies of the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations. Having weighed the merits of the proposal in the context of these issues, it is considered that planning permission should be granted subject to the conditions attached to this decision. In reaching this decision the Council has had regard to the relevant policies in the London Plan, the Adopted Lambeth Unitary Development Plan and the Replacement Lambeth Unitary Development Plan as well as relevant national and regional planning guidance. 7 It is current policy for the Council's contractor to construct new vehicular accesses and to reinstate the footway across redundant accesses. The developer is to contact the Principal Highways Engineer the Council's Highways team on 020 7926 2620 or 079 0411 9517, prior to the commencement of construction, to arrange for any such work to be done. If the developer

wishes to undertake this work the Council will require a deposit and the developer will need to cover all the Council's costs (including supervision of the works). If the works are of a significant nature, a Section 278 Agreement (Highways Act 1980) will be required and the works must be carried out to the Council's specification. 8 You are advised of the necessity to consult the Principal Highways Engineer of the Highways team on 020 7926 2620 or 079 0411 9517 in order to obtain necessary prior approval and licences as appropriate for undertaking any works within the public highway including scaffold, temporary and permanent crossovers, over-sailing or under-sailing of the highway, drainage and sewer connections and repairs on the highway, hoarding, excavations, temporary road closures and cranes. 9 You are advised to contact the Council's Sustainability Officer regarding the BREEAM requirements and other renewable techniques. 10 You are advised to contact the Council's Conservation and Design Team Leader for all matters regarding conservation and design and in particular those required to discharge conditions 2 and 3.