LDF Development Management - Tower Hamlets · The following document is the Development Management...

Engagement DocumentMay 2011

Development Plan Document

DevelopmentManagement

LDF

TOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

2

ProductionContent, design and graphics by:Strategic Planning TeamDevelopment & Renewal Directorate London Borough of Tower Hamlets

t: 020 7364 5367e: [email protected]: www.towerhamlets.gov.uk


3

Engagement informationThe following document is the Development Management Development Plan Document (DPD) Engagement Document. It has been prepared specifically for the purpose of consultation and engagement with local communities, the findings of which will shape the preparation of the Development Management DPD for adoption to the Local Development Framework (LDF).

The Council’s LDF currently includes of the 2010 Adopted Core Strategy which sets out the spatial vision for development over the next 15 years and which will help shape the future of the borough. Along with the Development Management DPD, the Council is also consulting on two other engagement DPDs. Descriptions of all three DPDs are provided below:

Development Management DPD – this will set out policies to ensure individual development proposals will help to deliver the Core Strategy vision as well as respond appropriately to their local surroundings.

Sites and Placemaking DPD – this will allocate sites needed for new infrastructure (including schools, health facilities, leisure centres, and Idea Stores) and larger scale housing developments.

Fish Island Area Action Plan – this will shape the regeneration of Fish Island, providing new homes and jobs and connecting Tower Hamlets with the wider Olympic Park legacy.

The Development Management DPD Engagement Document provides some questions as a guide for you to respond to key issues. This is not an exhaustive list, so please feel free to comment on any other issues you feel are important or relevant or any other policy areas we should include.

Tower Hamlets Council will be carrying out consultation and engagement on the documents between:

9 May 2011 to 15 July 2011

During this period there will also be a series of public consultation and engagement events to ensure you have your say in helping to shape these documents and provide valuable information on how key issues are addressed within your local place.

These consultation and engagement events will take place at various locations around the borough during the 10 week consultation and engagement period. Please refer to the calendar on the next page for the date and time of an event taking place in your local area.

Please let us know if you would like to attend any of the events via:

e: [email protected]: 020 7364 5367

Any comments should be sent to the following address:

FREEPOST RRBK – TZER – UTAU LDF DPD Consultation D&R Strategic Planning London Borough of Tower Hamlets, PO BOX 55739 London E14 1BY

Electronic responses should be sent to [email protected]


4

Date Location Address Core Strategy ‘Place’ Wednesday May 116:00pm

Canary Wharf Idea Store

Churchill PlaceLondon E14 5RBCanary Wharf Idea Store

Canary Wharf

Thursday May 12 6:00pm

Mulberry Place 5 Clove Crescent, room 71 London E14 1BY

Blackwall/ Leamouth

Monday May 16

6:00pm

Forman’s Fish Island

Stour Road, London E3 2NT

Fish Island

Tuesday May 17 6:00pm

St Paul’s Church St. Stephen's Road Tower Hamlets London E3 5JL

Mile End


Haileybury Community Centre

Ben Johnson Road, E1 02077914830

Stepney

Tuesday May 24 6:00pm

Cheviot House Cheviot House 227-233 Commercial Road LondonE1 2BU

Shadwell


Docklands Sailing Centre

235a Westferry Road E14 3QS

Millwall

Monday June 6 6:00pm

Jack Dash House 2 Lawn House Close London E14 9YQ

Cubitt Town

Thursday June 9 6:00pm

Turks Head Community Café

1 Green Bank Wapping, E1W 2PA

Wapping/Tower Bridge

Tuesday June 14 6:00pm

Whitechapel Idea Store

321 Whitechapel Road London E1 1BU

Aldgate/Whitechapel

Wednesday June 156:00pm

St. Hilda’s East Community Centre

18 Club Row London E2 9AX

Shoreditch/ Spitalfields

Thursday June 16 6:00pm

Departure Café 649 Commercial Road Limehouse

Monday June 20 6:00pm

Chrisp Street Idea Store

1 Vesey Path East India Dock Road London E14 6BT

Poplar/Poplar Riverside


York Hall 1-15 Old Ford Road, London

Bethnal Green

Wednesday June 222pm – 8pm

Bow Idea Store Fish Island AAP Drop-in Session 1

1 Gladstone Place, Roman Road Bow, London E3 5ES

Fish Island

Wednesday June 226:00pm

Linc Centre 70 Fern Street, E3 3PR Bromley-By-Bow/BowCommon

Monday June 27 2pm – 8pm

Bow Idea Store Fish Island AAP Drop-in Session 2

1 Gladstone Place, Roman Road Bow, London E3 5ES

Fish Island


Bow Idea Store 1 Gladstone Place, Roman Road Bow, London E3 5ES

Bow/Victoria Park


5

ForewordWith the adopted Core Strategy in place, setting out the long-term spatial strategy for Tower Hamlets, the Council is now developing the next phase of planning documents to deliver this strategy.

By building on the Core Strategy’s policies and objectives, the three emerging Development Plan Documents will provide the necessary detail to support delivery of affordable and family housing, jobs, new parks, schools and other important services. They will also provide guidance on how the places within the borough will be shaped to accommodate this change while retaining and enhancing local identity.

Tower Hamlets needs to respond positively to the challenging economic climate but also take advantage of the once in a generation opportunity of the Olympic Games and its legacy. It is more important than ever to ensure the borough has a robust yet flexible local planning framework to support economic development and meet the needs of local people whether they live, work or visit Tower Hamlets.

These three engagement documents are part of an extensive engagement process which is an important step along the way to their adoption. You can get involved through calling in at one of the many workshops and meetings taking place around the borough. You can check East End Life and our web site for details. Whether it’s a detailed response or just a few lines, I hope you will be able to respond.

Councillor Rabina KhanCabinet Member for Housing


6

How to use this document

Why do we need additional policies?To achieve the Core Strategy vision and to supplement SP01 (4c) around supporting the growth and role of markets, it is important to have a policy to help ensure that our markets benefit from, and are not negatively impacted by, other town centre development proposals.

The borough has a wide range of markets many of which are famous within London. The role and function of each market varies greatly and they have a very important role in contributing to the character of the town centres in which they operate. Without a Development Management policy, there is a danger that other town centre development proposals could impact on their operation. Specifically development could impact on the facilities and infrastructure required by markets e.g. such as storage, loading bays and toilets, to function effectively.

How can we deal with these issues?We could introduce a policy to ensure that any development proposal will need to have consideration for the function and character of the particular market it is near.

Rather than have a separate market policy, there is the option to use other Development Management policies to deal with the impact of developments on street markets. For example, policy DM 24 – Streets, Places and Public Realm for People, could ensure that any new development does not have a negative impact on servicing for existing uses in the area, including the market. Similarly, DM1 – Development within the Town Centre hierarchy, could be expanded to include markets.

The Council’s Markets Strategy is also a key tool in helping the borough plan for our street markets in terms of their management and development.

Enabling prosperous communities

Strengthening neighbourhood well-being

Refocusing on our town centres

Designing a high-quality city

Issues addressed in the Development Management (DM) engagement draft document are arranged under the 4 spatial themes of the Adopted Core Strategy 2010.

Consultation questions1. Are there any other issues you think we need to take into account in protecting and enhancing the role and function of the street markets in the borough?

2. Do we need a separate policy for markets? Or,

3. Do you think we can protect the function of the borough’s markets through other


DM2 Markets

To have a hierarchy of interconnected, vibrant and inclusive town centres that are mixed use hubs for retail, commercial, leisure, civic and residential. The purpose of each town centre will differ according to its role and function.

Core Strategy ObjectiveSO4

Core Strategy spatial policy area and the DM issue(s) that needs to be ad-dressed.

Link to the relevant Core Strategy Stra-tegic Objective(s).

Reference to SP (Spatial Policy) provides a direct link with the Core Strategy.

Sets out the reasons why additional policies are required and the possible scenario if we do not not have any policies to address the issue(s).

Sets out what the Council can do to address the issue(s) raised.

Questions that will help the Council to better understand your views and opinions on the issue(s) and how best to address them.

The document is set out in three sections:1. Setting the scene: This section sets out what the Local Development Framework is and what work has been done to date on the Council’s Development Plan Documents (DPD). 2. Application and determination: This section covers the policy areas and specifically looks at the borough’s issues and opportunities and how policy can effectively address these. 3. Delivery and monitoring: This section highlights how we aim to monitor the policies as well as setting out the delivery tools for helping manage development.

Section 2 sets out the policy issues being considered by the DM engagement draft document. It details why we need additional policies and how we can deal with these issues. To help with un-derstanding the section, the diagram below shows the format of the section with explanatory text.


7

1. Setting the Scene 8

2. Application and Determination 15

Table of contents

2.1 Refocusing on our Town Centres 16DM1 Development within the town centre hierarchy 17DM2 Markets 19DM3 Protecting local shops 21

2.2 Strengthening Neighbourhood wellbeing 23Urban living for everyone 24

DM4 Delivering the borough’s housing requirements 24DM5 Housing standards and amenity space 26DM6 Supported housing 28DM7 Student accommodation 30DM8 Short stay accommodation 32

Creating healthy and liveable neighbourhoods 34DM9 Contributing to healthy and active lifestyle 34DM10 Improving the borough’s air quality 36

Creating a Blue and Green Grid 38DM11 Protecting existing public open space 38DM12 Biodiversity and living buildings 40DM13 Water spaces and flood prevention 42

Dealing with waste 44DM14 Minimising waste and maximising recycling 44DM15 Managing waste in the borough 46

2.3 Enabling Prosperous Communities 48Delivering successful employment hubs 49

DM16 Local job creation and investment 49DM17 Office locations 51DM18 Local industrial locations 53

Improving education and skills 55DM19 Delivering a network of schools and lifelong learning 55opportunities for the boroughDM20 Further and higher education in the borough 57

2.4 Designing a High Quality City 59Making connected places 60

DM21 Integrating development with a sustainable transport network 60DM22 Sustainable transport of freight 62DM23 Parking 64

Creating attractive and safe streets and places 66DM24 Streets, places and public realm for people 66


3. Delivery and monitoring 78

Creating distinct and durable places 68DM25 Tower of London World Heritage Site 68DM26 Heritage and the historic environment 70DM27 Sustainable neighbourhoods and place sensitive design 72DM28 Tall building 74

Working towards a zero-carbon borough 76DM29 A zero-carbon borough 76


8


9

TOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK TOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK


10


Setting the scene

The story so far...

This is the first consultation document for the Development Management Development Plan Docu-ment (DM DPD), which is one of the tools for delivering the vision of the Core Strategy in the borough. As a key document of the suite of documents comprising the Local Development Framework (LDF), it sets out guidance for the planning application process and consists of detailed policies used to inform the process of application assessment.

Aside from the Core Strategy and the London Plan, this document is to be read alongside the Sites and Placemaking Development Plan Document (SPM DPD) and relevant Area Action Plans (AAP) and any Council supplementary planning guidance (SPD).

What is the Local Development Framework?

Planning Policy Statement 12 (PPS12) is the Government’s national guidance setting out the form and content of Local Development Frameworks (LDF) which are prepared by local authorities.

The primary purpose of the LDF is to assist in the regeneration and sustainable development of Tower Hamlets by implementing the spatial aspects of the Community Plan. It is a suite of planning docu-ments which include Development Plan Documents (DPDs), Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs), Area Action Plans (AAPs), Proposals Map, Local Development Scheme (LDS), Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) and the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) . The Development Plan Documents and the London Plan together form the ‘Development Plan’ for the borough.

The Core Strategy was formally adopted by the Council in September 2010 and sets the long-term spatial vision for the borough until 2025. It sets broad areas and principles for development and gives guidance on where, how and when this should be delivered across the borough.

What Development Plan Documents are currently being consulted on?

The Council is required by legislation to produce this DPD. There is flexibility in the guidance of how these documents are developed which enables local authorities to develop DPDs to be tailored to their area. This means that DPDs will likely differ in each local authority. For this consultation period, the DPDs currently in development which need your input are:

• Development Management DPD. This sets out guidance for the planning application process and detailed policies to inform the process of assessing planning applications. In the consultation version of the document you will be asked for your views on the choices on how to manage devel-opment through policies and guidance.

• Sites and Placemaking DPD. This sets out site allocations for different uses, spatial policy areas, guidance for placemaking elements and how these will contribute to achieve the visions for each of the places. In the consultation version of the document you will be asked for your views on the choices for site allocations and Spatial Policy Areas.

• Fish Island Area Action Plan. This sets out specific guidance for development and land desig-nations in Fish Island where, given its location and current mix of uses, is of strategic importance to the Borough and the wider area. In this consultation version of the document you will be asked for your views on the choices for the vision, placemaking and policy guidance

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6



11


Fig 1: The Local Development Framework

What is the Development Management DPD? The Development Management Development Plan Document (DM DPD), as part of the Council’s Local Development Framework (LDF), will be instrumental to the sustainable development and regen-eration of the borough to 2025. The adopted Core Strategy – the principal document of the LDF suite – sets out the overall vision, strategic objectives, delivery strategy and Plan-Monitor-Manage (PMM) arrangements. The DM DPD will ensure individual development proposals contribute to delivering the Core Strategy vision as well as respond appropriately to their immediate surroundings.

The policies of the DM DPD will be prepared to reflect the spatial objectives of the Core Strategy by providing further detail on challenges and opportunities specific to the local requirements of Tower Hamlets. It will be structured to reflect the thematic sections of the Core Strategy.

Although there will be cross-referencing of other policies in the DPDs and the policy text may refer-ence other corporate strategies, all policies in the DM DPD will be interdependent and need to be considered together.

How does Development Management relate to Development Control?

Development management is the term used to “include the range of activities and interactions that together transform the ‘control of development and the use of land’ into a more positive and proac-tive process which fits better with the ethos of spatial planning and better supports local authorities in their role as place shapers.” (Planning Advisory Service) To achieve the transformation into a positive

DevelopmentManagement

DPD

Other DPDs

SPDs

LocalDevelopment

SchemeStatement

of CommunityInvolvement

AnnualMonitoring

Report

LondonPlan

Other plans / strategies /

programmes

LocalDevelopmentFramework

Area ActionPlans

Site &Place Making

DPD

ProposalsMap

National Guidance

CommunityPlan

CoreStrategy

1.7

1.8

1.9

1.10



12


and proactive role for planning, the Government has identified that there needs to be a change in the culture of planning from a level of reactive control to the management of challenges and opportunities.

The move from Development Control (DC) to Development Management (DM) is already happening in Tower Hamlets. We have already changed the way we approach the assessment of proposed de-velopment, focussing on resolving issues at the pre-application stage and through use of Masterplans and development briefs to guide future development.

What do we already know?

Alongside the national and regional planning policy framework, there are also a number of information sources which help to build the foundations of this document. These sources include previous plan-ning consultations, the Core Strategy assessments and technical studies. Further details are given below:

• Adopted Core Strategy (2010)The Adopted Core Strategy provides the strategic objectives and spatial policies to deliver the vi-sion of the Communtiy Plan. It is the basis from which more detailed development management policies are prepared.

• Interim Planning Guidance (2007) and Unitary Development Plan (1998)A number of the UDP saved policies remain valid until the adoption of the DM DPD. The policies within both documents have been reviewed alongside the Core Strategy in scoping the policy con-tent of this engagement document.

• Technical studiesTechnical studies include evidence base developed for the Core Strategy and related Council strat-egies including the Community Plan. Much of the evidence has highlighted what the priorities and challenges are for the borough. Forthcoming evidence will further help inform policy preparation for areas such as town centres and transport.

• Core Strategy assessmentsThe Core Strategy underwent a Sustainability Appraisal process and an Equalities Impact Assess-ment process. These assessments largely focused on assessing the strategic nature of the Core Strategy but also gave broad suggestions for policy area designations.

1.11

1.12



13


Previous LDF consultations Information from previous LDF consultations has been used to identify which policy areas received the most interest during the development of the Core Strategy for example housing.

Fig 2: Comments received on the Core Strategy Options and Alternatives for Places (consultation draft, Feb 2009)

1.13

.

Section Community Sector Individuals Private

SectorPublicSector Total Total % of

commentsUrban living for everyone 16 7 100 50 173 17% Supporting growth with infrastructure 15 5 29 38 87 9% Creating liveable and healthy neighbourhoods 10 4 20 18 52 6%

Creating a green grid 10 5 29 33 77 7% Creating a blue grid 1 3 29 39 72 7% Dealing with waste 7 2 18 30 57 6% Delivering successful employment hubs 22 11 63 35 131 12%

Encouraging tourism 6 1 21 11 39 4% Facilitating employment and improving education 1 1 16 10 28 3%

Making connected places 4 5 22 31 62 6% Creating attractive and safe streets and public places 8 4 19 17 48 5%

Creating distinct and durable places 16 8 33 18 75 7% Protecting and celebrating our history 12 2 13 13 40 4% Working towards a zero carbon borough 7 2 42 25 76 7%

Total comments 225 116 681 707 1729Total percentage of comments 13% 7% 39% 41% 100%

100%



14


What are the relationships between the DPDs and AAP?Core Strategy

Strategic high-level guidanceGuidance for a wide range of uses

Coordination and strategy for delivery of infrastructureIndicative site and place boundaries

Areas of search for usesSites and Placemaking DPD Development Management

DPDFish Island AAP

Site allocations for large-scale housing and infrastructure / services

The provision of detailed guid-ance to ensure the right type of development and uses pro-posed is delivered in the right place and to the highest stand-ards.

Setting detailed guidance spe-cific to the issues of the bor-ough and which is not included in other national/regional poli-cies.

Guidance will also ensure development delivered reflects infrastructure already in place or proposed.

The first section sets the scene for the document and provides a description of Fish Island today.

Identification of Spatial Policy Areas for the implementation for Core Strategy and Development Management policies

The AAP provides a vision for Fish Island and explains how it will deliver this vision.

Identification of Placemaking Elements

The AAP includes a series of thematic chapters including ob-jectives for the AAP relating to the vision, policies and propos-als to achieve these objectives, and why we are reccomending these.

How will consultation and engagement be carried out?

Consultation and engagement will be carried out in line with the promises set out in the Statement of Community Involvement (2009) and the wider principles stated in the Council’s Participation and Engagement Framework. Previous consultation and engagement was carried out in November 2010 to help to understand how local people prefer to be engaged.

Activities will be carried out to maximise the effectiveness of engagement, comprising this formal con-sultation period and continuing with informal engagement (such as meetings, workshops and targeted consultation for different topics).

This collection of different engagement and consultation activities aims to get as many local people as possible to help shape the Development Management DPD. Using the information generated by engagement will help to tell the story of how the document has been developed.

For further information about the formal periods of consultation please refer to the Council’s Local Development Scheme and the DPD - Consultation and Engagement Strategy.

1.14

1.15

1.16

1.17



15


Understanding the role of de-velopment management for the borough

Review of existing national, regional and local policy frame-work as well as evidence base

Refinement of potential policy list from broad thematic policy areas

Set out basic principles and parameters for the policies

Drafting of engagement docu-ment with input from relevant departments

Dev

elop

men

t of e

vide

nce

base

for c

onsu

ltatio

n

Sustainabil-ity Appraisal Scoping Report Consul-tation

Consultation

Sustainabil-ity Appraisal (SA)Scoping Report

Info

rmal

con

sulta

tion

and

enga

gem

ent

SA Con-sultation document

EqIA Con-sultation document

Local residentsinformal engagement on how to consult

Sum

mer

201

0

Aut

umn

Win

ter 2

010/

11S

prin

g 20

11

Internal consultation with rel-evant departments

How has this document been developed for this consultation?



16


17

TOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

18

TOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

Why do we need additional policies?

To achieve the Core Strategy vision and provide further guidance to SP01 parts (1) (2) and (4) to support the role and function of our town centres, we need policy to maintain an appropriate balance of shops and other town centre uses such as banks, offices, cafes and takeaways. This balance should reflect the role of each town centre and the needs of the community.

If we did not have a policy for this, there is a danger that the town centres which we have designated to serve the community, do not fulfil their individual function within the town centre hierarchy as defined in the Core Strategy. For example, our major, district and neighbourhood centres all have different roles and this is reflected in the range of shopping provision they offer, as well as their size, the catchment they serve etc. Most importantly, each town centre has shops and services which meet the specific needs of the community and support how people live in, work in and visit our borough. If we lose these shops and services to other uses and reduce the range of retail on offer in our town centres, they could become less attractive and successful as shopping destinations.

Without some management and careful monitoring of our town centres we might also see too many, or an ‘over-concentration’, of uses such as takeaways in one location, which may have impacts such as litter, noise and promotion of unhealthy lifestyles. These are concerns the local community raised during the previous Core Strategy Consultation.

How can we deal with these issues?

We could introduce a policy which reinforces the role and nature of our major, district and neighbourhood centres and sets out what would be acceptable in terms of appropriate development depending on their position in the hierarchy. We would also do this for Central Activity Zone (CAZ) and the two Activity Areas in the borough.

We could set a minimum percentage of certain town centre uses e.g. shop (use class A1) units to




DM1 Development within the town centre hierarchy

19


ensure that the essential shops and services required are protected. This would mean that any application for a change of use from a shop to another use, which would result in a fall below the minimum level, would be unacceptable. We will need to define the percentage level based on research into what makes a successful town centre in the context of our borough’s town centre hierarchy.

We could also include in the policy a limit on the number of consecutive non-retail units. We could do this for those uses that, in concentration, could cause some negative amenity impacts, for example the operation of hot food takeaways. This policy would also help to ensure that shops remain as the main uses within our town centres.

An alternative approach would be to look at each of our town centres separately to recognise their individual character. This could involve setting different levels of town centre uses in each of our town centres e.g. shops (A1), banks and betting agents (A2), restaurants (A3), pubs (A4) and takeaways (A5). This would allow us to be more flexible in town centres such as Brick Lane where uses such as restaurants (A3) are more prominent and serve as an essential part of the town centre, particularly in the evening. By doing this, we would be acknowledging that the evening economy is important in some of our centres and they can continue to operate successfully with careful management, so that there is no harm caused to surrounding areas.

In our major and district centres – such as Canary Wharf and Bethnal Green – we could also identify main or primary shopping areas where we would take a stronger approach to protecting A1 uses. This is another way we can provide guidance regarding the appropriate types and levels of shops within the centre.

The Sites & Placemaking DPD suggests boundaries for each of our Town Centres within which we would look to operate this policy.Consultation questions

1. Do you agree that we should define minimum levels of shops (use class A1) as a way of protecting the retail offer of our town centres?

2. Do you have a view on what this level should be and whether we should look to establish different levels for different centres based on their character and position in the retail hierarchy? OR, how else do you think we can protect the shopping function of our town centres to ensure the Core Strategy objective is achieved?

3. Do you think too many pubs, cafes and hot food takeaways grouped together in town centres can cause problems?

4. How else do you think we should protect our town centres from the negative effects of the over-concentration of such uses as pubs, restaurants, betting agents and hot food takeaways (use classes A2-A5) e.g. limiting opening hours?

20



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and to supplement SP01 (4c) around supporting the growth and role of markets, it is important to have a policy to help ensure that our markets benefit from, and are not negatively impacted by, other town centre development proposals.

The borough has a wide range of markets, many of which are famous within London. The role and function of each market varies greatly and they have a very important role in contributing to the character of the town centres in which they operate. Without a Development Management policy, there is a danger that other town centre development proposals could impact on their operation. Specifically development could impact on the facilities and infrastructure required by markets to function effectively e.g. such as storage, loading bays and toilets.


We could introduce a policy to ensure that any development proposal will need to have consideration for the function and character of the particular market it is near.

Rather than have a separate market policy, there is the option to use other Development Management policies to deal with the impact of developments on street markets. For example, policy DM 24 – Streets, Places and Public Realm for People, could ensure that any new development does not have a negative impact on servicing for existing uses in the area, including the market. Similarly, DM1 – Development within the Town Centre hierarchy, could be expanded to include markets.

The Council’s Markets Strategy is also a key tool in helping the borough plan for our street markets in terms of their management and development.

DM2 Markets



21


Consultation questions

1. Are there any other issues you think we need to take into account in protecting and enhancing the role and function of the street markets in the borough?

2. Do we need a separate policy for markets? Or,

3. Do you think we can protect the function of the borough’s markets through other Development Management policies such as the Town Centre policy?

22



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP01 (5) regarding local shop provision outside of town centres, we need a policy to protect existing local retail provision and ensure that any new provision is local in nature and scale.

Local parades or corner shops that serve a local retail need are an important part of our communities. If we do not have a policy to protect local shops, then they might be lost to other uses and residents’ basic shopping requirements would not be easily met without the need for longer journeys.

There is also a risk that larger retail developments could come forward outside of designated centres. This could have a negative impact on the vitality of our town centres and their ability to survive, as well as having a negative impact on those local shops (often local independent businesses) which are already successfully operating and serving the community. The introduction of larger shops could also be inappropriate to the local area in terms of size and the activity they may generate, for example with regards to congestion, parking and noise coming from servicing.


We could introduce a policy to ensure that local shops (A1 uses) are protected outside of town centres where they are important in meeting the basic local shopping needs of existing or future residents. In considering any planning application which would involve the loss of a local shop, we could take into account the availability of similar local shops within walking distance, as well as the location of the nearest town centre.

As part of considering an application for a local shop outside of a town centre, the policy could also provide guidance in respect of size and type of proposal coming forward. For example, it is important that the new proposal serves an existing or future un-met local need, is suitable in terms of local provision and would take into consideration matters of amenity, character, existing provision in the immediate area, as well as the impact on the area’s town centres.


DM3 Protecting local shops

To promote areas outside of town centres for primarily resi-dential and supporting uses that do not need the higher levels of accessibility that town centres require.


23



1. What do you expect your local shop to sell?

2. How far do you expect to walk to your local shop?

24


25



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP02 (1), (3) and (5) regarding new housing in the borough, we need a policy to confirm how affordable housing should come forward as part of private development schemes and how larger family homes should be provided.

If we do not have this policy, there is a danger we would not achieve our Core Strategy target of 43,000 homes by 2025 of which 50% are to be affordable and 30% suitable for families (including 45% of social rented housing to be suitable for families). This would mean we would not be meeting the needs of our community.

In trying to deliver all of this, particularly given the current economic climate, we recognise the task will be challenging, however we want to make the most of each opportunity to make Tower Hamlets a better place to live.


We could introduce a policy to make sure we secure affordable housing at every opportunity. This would include securing affordable housing on: sites that are capable of providing 10 or more homes;

DM4 Delivering the borough’s housing requirements

Deliver housing growth to meet general and specialised housing demand in line with London Plan housing targets.


Ensure housing contributes to the creation of socially balanced and inclusive communities by offering housing choice reflecting the Council’s priorities for affordable and family homes.


Ensure that all housing in Tower Hamlets is high quality, well designed, energy efficient, sustainable and durable.


Urban living for everyone

26


sites which are adjoining or part of a larger development; and applications which would result in an increase in existing housing numbers above the threshold of 10 units.

To ensure new housing contributes to creating socially balanced and inclusive communities, we could confirm that our preference is for affordable housing to be provided on site. We would also expect that affordable housing is built to the same standards and shares the same amenities as private housing. Off-site affordable housing would only be considered in exceptional circumstances where it could be demonstrated that it provided a better outcome for both of the sites, provided a minimum of 50% affordable housing overall and not result in too much of any type of housing in one local area. We could also require that the other site is located in the same locality to ensure that future residents living on both sites use and benefit from the same local services.

In applications proposing redevelopment of existing homes we need to make it clear that there must not be a loss of housing, and in particular no loss of family and affordable homes. Where there is an increase in the amount of housing, we will require any existing affordable housing to be replaced as well as requiring the appropriate level of additional affordable housing.

In terms of ensuring we secure the right amount of larger family homes, of 4 bed and above, we could introduce specific targets for private and affordable tenures which each development would need to comply with, based on the most up to date Housing Needs Assessment. The current Housing Needs Assessment (2009) states that 10% of private and 10% of social rented housing should be 4 bedroom or above.

An alternative approach would be to identify certain areas within the borough which are suitable for these larger family homes. This guidance could be included in the Sites & Placemaking DPD.

Note

The government has recently consulted on a change to the definition of affordable housing currently contained within Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing. This would introduce a new type of affordable housing known as ‘affordable rent’. ‘Affordable rent’, would be offered by registered providers of social housing. Properties let under ‘affordable rent’ could be offered at a rent up to 80 per cent of the local market rent and for a tenancy that can range from two years to lifetime.

It is important to be aware of these changes as it could impact upon the delivery of affordable housing. The Council is concerned that 80 per cent market rent would not be affordable for Tower Hamlets’ residents in housing need. We may therefore need to define what is affordable in Tower Hamlets and we would look to do this through this Development Managament policy.


1. Do you think there are any other ways in which we could increase the provision of afford-able housing in the borough?

2. Under what circumstances do you think it could be better to provide affordable housing off-site?

3. How can we best provide guidance to ensure we get the right amount of larger family homes in the right places?

27


DM5 Housing standards and amenity space


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP02 6 (a) (c) (d) and (e) regarding setting housing design standards and the provision of housing amenity space for new homes, we need policies to ensure that the provision for indoor and outdoor space is carefully planned for.

If we did not have these policies, we might be in danger of providing homes that are not suitable for our residents in terms of their specific needs. For example, from speaking to our residents, we know that those with families want to ensure there is sufficient space for their children to play, for drying clothes and for preparing meals. Another example will be wheelchair users who will need to be able to easily access their home and the rooms within it.

Through this policy we would also need to consider the provision of outdoor space which residents can enjoy for recreation. These spaces could also contribute to the creation and strengthening of the Blue and Green Grid within the borough (see DM 11, 12 and 13), which is especially important given the borough’s shortage of public open space. From consultation on recent housing regeneration schemes, we know that residents are concerned about pressure to build on areas of green space within housing estates and want to see them protected and improved.





Ensure that all housing in Tower Hamlets is high quality, well designed, energy efficient, sustainable and durable.


To deliver healthy and liveable neighbourhoods that promote active and healthy lifestyles and enhance peoples wider health and well-being.


To create a high-quality, well-connected and sustainable natural environment of green and blue spaces that are rich in biodiversity and promote active and healthy lifestyles.


28



We could have a policy that sets out that all new residential developments should provide a certain level and standard of internal space (including for wheelchair accessible and family housing), as well private amenity space, communal amenity space and child play space. With regard to communal space, it is important to remember that this does not include areas used for circulation space, cycle or car parking, or bin stores.

We could base these standards on what the Mayor of London has already produced or we could look to set Tower Hamlets specific standards.

Alternatively, we could have a policy that does not set blanket standards and each scheme could be negotiated on its own merits depending on the specific needs arising from the tenure and mix of housing provided.


1. If we set design standards for new housing, what elements should this cover? Are there any specific considerations for the design of family housing?

2. Do you think developments should always be required to provide formal play space on site or, if there is the opportunity, would it be better provided in the community parks within the local area?

3.What do you expect to see from communal amenity space?

29


DM6 Supported housing


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP02 (7c) regarding the provision of specialist and supported housing to cater for the homeless, disabled, vulnerable and the elderly, we need policies to protect existing accommodation and support new provision where necessary.

Specialist and supported housing provides accommodation for many different vulnerable groups within the borough in differing forms including hostels, sheltered housing and care homes. If we did not have these policies there would be a risk that the range of special housing needs, such as those of the homeless, disabled and the elderly of our community, would not be met.


We could introduce a policy to ensure we protect existing specialist and supported housing, including hostels, sheltered housing and care homes, where we know there is a need and subject to the strategies/programmes of providers of such accommodation. We could also include within the policy that we support the development of this type of housing where we know there is a need and there is no detrimental impact on the amenity of residents in the area.






1. Do you agree with the above approach to protect specialist and supported housing? 2. Is there anything else we need to consider as part of a policy on this matter?

30


DM7 Student accommodation


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP02 (7a) we need policies to ensure that there is an adequate and appropriate supply of student housing that meets an identified need.

The Council has noted that in recent years there has been an increase in the number of applications for the creation of purpose built student housing within the borough. Meeting the needs of students should not compromise the ability to provide housing for our local community, so we need a policy to enable us to balance everyone’s requirements. If we did not have a policy, we could be at risk of losing sites that are more appropriate for family and affordable homes, but if we are too restrictive we could lose out on the economic benefits of our leading position as a higher educational hub.

Without a policy, we might also be in danger of allowing student housing in areas which cannot appropriately serve the needs of students. This may give rise to adverse impacts for existing residents, with pressure being placed on local services, as well as amenity impacts such as noise and congestion.


To ensure we best manage the amount of dedicated student housing coming forward, we could introduce a policy which sets a borough target i.e. understanding the borough’s identified and justified need for students arising from Higher Education establishments located in Tower Hamlets. Once this





31


is reached, we would focus on delivering other land uses. Alternatively, we could consider working to a London or sub-regional target so that Tower Hamlets plays a part in meeting the strategic need of student accommodation.

As part of the policy we would seek to ensure that a student housing proposal will only be supported if we are meeting our housing delivery target, including for affordable housing. We could also explore whether such proposals themselves could make contributions towards affordable housing.

Student accommodation proposals would also need to take into account other Development Management policies, especially with regards to ensuring they are in the right locations in terms of the character of the area and access to public transport and local services.

The Site and Placemaking DPD could work to provide additional detail to the Core Strategy with regards to defining locations in the borough suitable for student housing. We would then not support any student housing outside of these locations.


1. Do you think we should set a borough target to manage purpose built student accommodation in the borough?

2. Or should we consider working with the Mayor of London and other boroughs to balance student accommodation over a wider area and therefore work to a strategic target?

3. Do you think we should accommodate purpose built student housing in particular areas? If so, what areas and why?

32


DM8 Short stay accommodation


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP06 (4) which relates to attracting visitors and supporting tourism, we need policies to ensure the appropriate type and location of facilities such as hotels and serviced apartments.

The Council has noted that in recent years there has been an increase in the number of applications for hotels and serviced apartments within the borough. We would not want to miss out on the opportunities that are presented from such uses in terms of the creation of jobs, supporting local businesses and encouraging tourism and related activity. However we need to ensure proposals are of a size that reflects the function of those centres identified as appropriate for hotels in the Core Strategy. For example a large scale hotel that is appropriate in Canary Wharf may not be suitable for a smaller district centre such as Crossharbour.

Given the preferred location of hotels and serviced apartments in areas suitable for retail and employment, we would always want to ensure that economic functions are incorporated in its use. In the event of future redevelopment, we would want any new use to also be employment based. If we did not have this policy, we might undermine the long term economic potential of our town centres and other employment areas in which hotels are supported.

To support the thriving and accessible global economic centres of Canary Wharf and the City Fringe which benefit the regional and local economies.


To support the growth of existing and future businesses in accessible and appropriate locations.


33



We could introduce a policy to manage the provision of visitor accommodation through ensuring they are in the right locations. For example large scale hotels and serviced apartments would be directed to the City Fringe, the borough’s Activity Areas and Canary Wharf whereas smaller hotels and serviced apartments would be encouraged in the borough’s district centres, such as Whitechapel and Crossharbour. These areas are considered suitable as they are already built up and they have the supporting infrastructure to facilitate movement and activity. They are also considered to be the best locations as they support the functions and activity of the borough’s key economic areas.

To maintain the long term economic potential of our employment areas, we could resist the loss of hotels and serviced apartments to non-employment uses. We could do so by trying to ensure that within the borough’s economic hubs of the CAZ and Canary Wharf, any change of use would be to an employment use.


1. Should we continue to support the provision of visitor accommodation to meet tourist/visitor needs?

2. Do you agree we should resist a change of use from hotels to non employment uses?

3. Are there any other issues we need to take into account in considering proposals for hotels and serviced apartments?

34



To achieve the Core Strategy vision of delivering healthy and liveable neighbourhoods and supplement SP03 (1) (3) (4) and (5), we need a policy that provides detail around how a development can promote healthy and active lives. A policy would help ensure that there are no negative impacts on our health, both physical and mental, arising from development.

If we did not have a policy, the borough’s health problems, which include obesity, could become worse. Without further guidance, there may be a risk that we lose our existing social infrastructure (including for health, community, leisure and recreation) and miss the opportunity to plan effectively for the appropriate provision of this infrastructure. If this happened we would not be able to adequately provide for the needs of the existing and future residents of the borough.

Without a policy we might also see the proliferation of unhealthy uses coming forward. From the Core Strategy consultation and responses to individual planning applications, we know that there are concerns regarding the number and location of fast food takeaways and the impact this may be having on the health of residents, in particular young people.

Through a specific policy, we could try and provide an opportunity for residents to be able to make the best choices about what they eat. For example, within a town centre there is a wide range of food on offer, including restaurants and takeaways. When such outlets are found in residential areas, this may be the only option available to local residents and would therefore restrict their eating options. If the resident’s choice is limited this would do little to change habits which the Government and the Council, through school education and the Borough’s Healthy Eating Programme, are seeking to do.

DM9 Contributing to healthy and active lifestyles

To deliver healthy and liveable neighbourhoods that promote active and healthy lifestyles and enhance peoples’ wider health and well-being.


To ensure the timely provision of social infrastructure to support housing and employment growth.


Creating healthy and liveable neighbourhoods

35



For social infrastructure provision (such as for health, community, leisure and recreation), we could introduce a policy which would prevent the loss of existing facilities and ensure new facilities proposed, including any rationalisation and consolidation of facilities, meet an identified need and are located in appropriate locations in terms of accessibility and amenity. The Sites and Placemaking DPD will identify sites for major new facilities.

We could also include a policy that guides the location of food outlets, such as restaurants and takeaways, to existing town centres which allows residents a wider choice of outlets to choose from. This also allows such uses to continue contributing to the role and function of our town centres in terms of providing a range of town centre related uses, subject to controls on over-concentration as set out in DM1. To reinforce this approach, we could include in the policy that we would not support any new hot food takeaway outside of designated town centres.

An alternative approach would be to restrict new takeaways in sensitive locations, for example, in close proximity to schools.

Consultation questions1. Are there specific social and community facilities you think we should be protecting and planning for?

2. Do you think that promoting healthy eating by focussing hot food takeaways in town centres would be helpful in promoting healthy and liveable neighbourhoods?

3. If the policy approach included not allowing hot food takeaways within a certain proximity of sensitive locations/uses, what do you think this should be? e.g. 200 metres or 400 metres

4. Do you think there are any other ways that we can promote healthy and liveable neighbourhoods through planning?

36


DM10 Improving the borough’s air quality


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP03 2(d) and (e) we need policies to ensure we improve and maintain good and healthy air quality. If we did not have these policies there is a danger that activities and development taking place in the borough would produce or contribute to poor air quality and impact adversely on the environment of our residents and how they live. An absence of such a policy could also mean non-compliance with National Air Quality Strategy objectives, and consequently European Union law.

Poor air quality can have detrimental effects on human health, our wildlife and vegetation. Severe air pollution is known to cause breathing and heart problems, as well as possible aggravation of asthmatic and other bronchial conditions. Children are particularly at risk, as their bodies are less resilient and the pollutants have a more concentrated effect. Older people and those who already have respiratory and cardiovascular disease are also more likely to suffer from the effects of air pollution. In addition, air pollution damages our environment, destroying the ecosystems in our green spaces and even corroding the bricks of our buildings. The health impacts of air pollution place a burden on local health services.

In the borough the current air quality breaches National Air Quality Objectives and EU Limit Values, and this is due to factors such as the historical and current land uses, traffic generation and the level and intensity of development. It is therefore considered an issue of real concern for the Council and local community.


We could introduce a policy which requires that a new development results in a reduction in harmful emissions (from existing levels on site) throughout the construction and lifetime of the building.

To deliver healthy and liveable neighbourhoods that promote active and healthy lifestyles and enhance peoples wider health and well-being.


37



1. Do you consider it appropriate to implement local air quality standards for different parts of the borough.

2. How else do you think we can protect residents of the borough from air quality associated health impacts?

Where the site is vacant, the developer could work with the Council to understand the general air quality in the area. The policy could also require that Air Quality Assessments are submitted as part of larger development proposals.

As transport is a significant contributor to poor air pollution through emissions from combustion engines, we could also include in the policy, or have a separate policy, requiring that the number of vehicle movements associated with the development is reduced, for example through the implementation a low emission strategy. Further to this, the policy could include requirements to encourage the use of vehicles that don’t emit, or emit less, harmful products, for example, electric

38


DM11 Protecting existing public open spaces


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP04 (1) regarding the delivery of a network of open spaces, we need a policy to ensure that development contributes to the protection, creation, enhancement of, and connection to, publicly accessible open space.

Open spaces consist of major and local parks as well as squares; playgrounds; ecological spaces; housing amenity land; outdoor sports facilities; allotments; and burial grounds. The borough is fortunate to also have significant access to water, or ‘blue space’, with Thames frontage, the River Lee and its canals offering riverside and canal-side walks with their own distinctive ambience. Distribution of open space across the borough varies widely, however, large parts of the borough are recognised as being deficient in open space.

If we do not have a policy to protect and enhance publicly accessible open space and connections to these spaces, we would be at risk of further reducing the amount of this valuable resource within the borough. Specifically, we would lose out on the benefits that open spaces provide to our health, quality of life, social interaction, culture and play. Not only do they provide recreational and environmental character, but they also offer a welcome relief in the built form of the urban environment, limit the impacts of noise, play a major role in climate change mitigation and adaptation, improve habitat provision and act as a ‘lung’ for the city.

With significant residential and commercial development projected for the borough, open space is under constant pressure - both from direct pressure on existing open space and the impacts of intensity of their use as a result of adjacent development. The Council currently applies a monitoring standard for open space of 1.2ha of open space per 1,000 population, a figure deemed the minimum appropriate for residents to enjoy access to and the benefits of open space in the borough.



Creating a green and blue grid

39



We could introduce a policy to clarify that we will protect all open space from all development other than development purely ancillary to the use and enjoyment of the open space, such as changing rooms to support the use of football pitches.

As part of the policy we could require all new development to contribute to the expansion, enhancement of, and mitigation against intensification of, publicly accessible open spaces. This could include contributing to: the enhancement of links between public open spaces; usability of and accessibility to open spaces; and way-finding to and between open spaces, in accordance with the Council’s Open Space Strategy and Green Grid Strategy.

We could also work with developers and Registered Social Landlords to convert and improve open spaces currently with restricted access into publicly accessible open space which the wider community can use.


1. Do you agree with the approach that, along with new open space and no further loss of open space, the priority is to improve the quality of open space?

2. How else can we improve the quality and increase the provision of open space?

40



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and supplement policy SP04 (2) and (3), we need a policy to ensure that new development contributes to greening the built environment and protects and enhances biodiversity.

Biodiversity provides us with many of the things that sustain our lives. Protecting our species and their habitats also improves our quality of life and our standard of living. The identification and protection of biodiversity throughout the borough is necessary to support a significant proportion of London’s wildlife and their habitats and to provide the opportunity for people to see, learn and enjoy nature.

If we did not have these policies, there is a risk that we would not create and maximise on opportunities to enhance the borough’s green and blue spaces as well as spaces of biodiversity value. It becomes more important that we do so in a borough like Tower Hamlets given its inner London urban environment and character and the potential limitations to accommodate such needs.

Furthermore, without this policy, the residents within the borough may miss out on opportunities to interact with nature and the benefits this has mentally and physically.


We could have a policy that requires development to contribute to biodiversity enhancement within the borough through the provision of ‘living elements’ within the development, such as living roofs and living walls. These would be areas of planting or habitat, designed into the external structure of the building. Where practical, it would be beneficial that users of the building (and possibly the public) would have access to these areas to enable interaction with the natural environment.

The policy could also include requirements for habitat enhancements for particular species that might exist or can be accommodated in the area. The Council’s Biodiversity Action Plan could help

DM12 Biodiversity and living buildings



41


developers plan for any enhancements as it sets out local priorities for biodiversity protection in the borough, including identifying priority species and habitats. The Council’s Biodiversity Action Plan also complements the UK and London plans and as such we could ensure that developments make particular reference to how they accord with this higher level guidance and requirements.

An alternative approach could be to require a minimum area of biodiversity provision to be set aside in each development site.

A further alternative could be to rely on the green and blue grid Development Management policies requiring only sites located within these areas to provide for biodiversity and green space.

Consultation Questions

1. Do you agree that we should seek to require new developments to enhance the borough’s biodiversity by requiring them to incorporate aspects of natural planting and habitat, such as living roofs and living walls?

2. If so, do you support the concept that these should be accessible to the users of the building or public in order to increase the opportunities for contact with nature and the natural environment?

3. Do you consider that there should be a minimum level of biodiversity enhancement required on each site? For example, a minimum area of biodiversity provision per area of floorspace.

4. Should biodiversity enhancement be focussed in the identified blue and green gridareas or should it be across the whole borough?

42


DM13 Water spaces and flood prevention


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP04 (4) and (5) we need a policy to ensure that any development coming forward responds appropriately and sensitively to our waterways and water spaces and reduces the risk and impact of flooding.

Blue spaces are referred to in the London Plan as the Blue Ribbon Network, which is made up of canals, tributaries, lakes, docks, streams and rivers including River Thames, which has its own designated policy area. These water areas are of significant importance for transportation, drainage, water supply and supporting biodiversity. They are also important for recreation and provide an attractive focus for regeneration and new development.

If we did not have a policy, we might find that developments along the edge of waterways and moorings have a negative impact on these spaces. For example, they might result in inadequate public access along the water frontages, threats to biodiversity and their habitats, compromise on nature conservation and impact on water quality. The open nature of water areas and access along their frontages could be lost or severely diminished if threatening developments are allowed to dominate Tower Hamlets’ blue spaces. At worst, development might adversely impact on the borough’s natural and man-made flood defences putting at risk our residents and their properties.

To create a high quality, well-connected and sustainable natural environment of green and blue spaces that are rich in biodiversity and promote active and healthy lifestyles.


To reduce the risk and impact of flooding on people, property and the environment.


43



We could introduce a policy to ensure that we protect and safeguard all existing water spaces and their surrounds within the Blue Ribbon Network and the Thames Policy Area from inappropriate development and activity. The other development management and Core Strategy design, conservation, amenity and transport policies will also help to implement our vision, together with the Thames Strategy East.

As part of this, developments would be expected to demonstrate principles of sustainability, high quality design and connectivity, with a mix of appropriate uses.

Within the policy we could also request a risk assessment for the application to cover impacts on navigation, hydrology and biodiversity. While it would be expected that any impacts to these will be avoided, where this is not possible, proposed mitigation and compensation measures should be identified. In addition, we could require that development should seek to enhance the watercourse’s value for biodiversity and measures to achieve this should be proposed as well as mitigation measures for identified impacts.

As we know how much our community values access to the Blue Ribbon Network we could also make it clear that we will resist developments that impede the use of waterways and inhibit access to the waterside.


1. Are there any uses we should be looking to promote in and around our water spaces?

2. Is there any particular pressure or use you feel should be discouraged? Are there particular parts of the borough where there are particular problems? 3. What sort of water-related uses would you consider essential to be protected.

4. Should we demand access to the water frontages in all developments? If not, what types of development should be exempt and why?

44


DM14 Minimising waste and maximising recycling


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP05 (1), we need a policy to demonstrate how development is implementing the waste management hierarchy of ‘reduce, reuse and recycle’.

If we did not have this policy we would not be able to achieve a level of local self-sufficiency in waste management which is a requirement for the Council. More importantly, we would not be able to contribute positively to improving our environment. Also, there are climate change consequences to land-filling and the Council could attract European Union penalties if it does not show how it intends to discourage continuing dependence on the current form of waste disposal. Targets set by the government and the Mayor of London are to be applied in pursuit of the ‘reduce, reuse and recycle’ combined objectives, and the role of Development Management would be to present additional policy tools to manage waste issues. A firmer response to the growth in waste as the population increases, accompanied by changing consumer lifestyles and accelerating development activity, might be more easily achieved with additional and complementary guidance.


We could introduce a policy where we require a Waste Reduction Management Plan to be submitted for all new developments. This would need to demonstrate: how the development will make appropriate and adequate provision for the storage and collection of waste and recyclable material; how development will reduce and manage construction, excavation and demolition waste (including recycling of materials from one new development to another); and how the development will allocate space for composting, where suitable.

Provision of individual and internal and external storage spaces for recyclables in developments and retrofitting facilities would encourage individuals to participate in the waste reduction drive.

To plan for and manage the borough’s waste efficiently, safely and sustainably, by minimising the amount of waste produced, maximising recycling, and managing non-recyclable waste using treatment methods other than landfill.


Dealing with waste

45


The council’s Waste Management Strategy will help set out the framework for collection, treatment and disposal of municipal waste.


1. Do you think enough is being done to tackle the problem of rising waste production? Are there specific actions you would wish to see improved?

2.Would you support the requirement for the provision of recyclable storage and /or composting spaces in all developments, including existing buildings? If no, what type of management of waste to ensure reduction would you consider appropriate in these circumstances?

46



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and to provide further guidance to SP05 (2) (3) and (4) we need a policy to ensure that new waste management facilities are appropriately provided, located and designed.

If we did not have a policy, we might not be able to manage the waste we produce in the most environmentally friendly and effective way. It is necessary to do so in order to meet the London Plan requirements to manage 311,000 tonnes of municipal (solid) waste and commercial and industrial waste by 2010 and 484,000 tonnes by 2020. Currently, just 11% of municipal waste was recycled or composted in 2009/10 was 18.99% with 61.82% landfilled.

Given the built-up form of the borough, opportunities to provide facilities to deal with all the waste generated locally are limited. However if we continue to send much of our waste to dwindling landfill sites there would be severe financial and environmental implications for the borough.


The requirement to significantly reduce locally produced waste going to landfill sites outside the borough will initially be addressed through the Sites and Placemaking DPD which identifies sites in appropriate locations to accommodate these facilities.

For other waste management facilities proposed, we could introduce a policy that provides further guidance on what would be deemed appropriate for this type of development. For example, we could include criteria to ensure that the waste management facility: is located where it would not have an adverse impact on residential amenity; is located close to the source of the waste; adopts sustainable modes of transport (including water); and complies with the Council’s Waste Management Plan.The choice of facilities should be based on exploiting sustainable new, modern technologies which would be able to extract valuable resources such as energy from waste.

DM15 Managing waste in the borough


To plan for and manage the borough’s waste efficiently, safely and sustainably, by minimising the amount of waste produced, maximising recycling, and managing non-recyclable waste using treatment methods other than landfill.


47


Consultation question

1. If a waste management facility was to be located in your neighbourhood, what criteria do you think would be most important for the development to comply with?

48

TOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKTOWER HAMLETS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

49


DM16 Local job creation and investment


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP06 regarding the delivery of successful employment opportunities, we need policies to support the borough’s role in the London economy as well as to protect and facilitate local job opportunities.

If we did not have these policies there is a danger that we would continue to lose employment space and therefore job opportunities for local people. Understandably there is significant pressure for other land uses in the borough, particularly housing. Balancing the need for these uses can be difficult. With the changing nature of the economy however, there may be an opportunity to use some industrial or employment land more efficiently, either through reconfiguration of land parcels or sites, allowing intensification of land by introducing other uses with the employment, or even releasing some of this land. We can already see how this might positively happen on a large scale in Fish Island with the help and guidance of the Area Action Plan being produced. On a local level however, without careful management we could lose valuable employment land and miss out on opportunities that would allow us to provide jobs and homes for local people.

We know from consultation with local businesses that many feel they are being displaced by new development coming into the borough and that much of the new employment space being provided is not being designed to the right standard or size to meet their needs.

It is a priority that all employment opportunities and functions are being used properly, especially in light of employment space being such a valuable resource for the borough. One way the Council tried to facilitate economic development in the past was by allowing live / work developments in the borough. This was a way to allow people to operate a business from home. In recent years however, these units have been used more like homes. If we did not have a policy to better manage this type of working, then there is a risk that we could continue to lose valuable employment floorspace.


Outside of the office and industrial employment designations protected in DM17 and DM18, we could introduce a policy that allows us to be more flexible in the loss of an employment use (B use class) but only support this where we know the employment space has been vacant for a long time, is proven to no longer be viable and its vacancy is becoming a blight in the area. Furthermore, the policy could request the developer to explore the provision and/or integration of alternative employment uses, such as a creative and cultural business or providing a space for small, medium or micro businesses. The developer should do this before proposing a non-employment use or ensure employment is provided as a major part of any mixed-redevelopment.





Delivering successful employment hubs

50



1. Do you think it is important to protect employment uses? Should these employment uses be protected outside of the designated areas?

2. How else can we further support SMEs and micro-businesses in the borough?

3. How can businesses assist with improving the skills of local residents to help them gain access to employment?

In doing this we could require the developer to demonstrate how existing businesses on the site are being accommodated in the new development or how they are being relocated to other suitable premises.

Any proposals for a non-employment use would also have to demonstrate how it would be better for the local area.

We could also encourage new employment proposals to provide flexible space as part of their development to support small and micro businesses and we could set standards for the design of this space to make sure it is of the right size and quality.

51



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP06 (2) and (3a) regarding the management of office floorspace in the borough, we need policies to support the borough’s role in the local, regional (London) and global economy.

If we did not have these policies we would be in danger of allowing changes of use away from office and eroding the unique provision of floorspace in these locations, some of which includes large floorplate and high specification provision. This would impact our ability to serve the local and wider economy.

Furthermore, if we did not have this policy we might not be able to sustain, enhance or develop our unique office clusters at Canary Wharf and Aldgate, which are defined as Preferred Office Locations (POL). This could have an implication on how our office clusters continue to function effectively and competitively. We might also not be able to consolidate and expand the strengths and uniqueness of our existing local office markets, such as in Whitechapel, defined as Local Office Locations (LOL).

These are different primarily due to the market they serve and what their requirements are. For example for the POL, the offices might be tall, large buildings with a lot of supporting infrastructure and for the LOL, there would be smaller and more flexible work spaces.

DM17 Office locations





52



We could introduce a policy to ensure that designated office sites are rigorously protected.

In Preferred Office Locations we could require there is no net loss of office floorspace in any redevelopment proposal.

In Local Office Locations we might consider proposals for redevelopment and/or change of office floorspace, where a marketing report demonstrates that the office has remained vacant over a period of at least two years and there is no realistic prospect of the building being used as office in the future. Following this, any redevelopment proposal would still need to demonstrate that employment is the main use within a mixed-used redevelopment scheme.

As part of this policy, we could also ask the developers to consider providing opportunities for training which will help local residents access some of the jobs being created.

The Sites and Placemaking DPD will define boundaries for each of our POLs and LOLs which will assist in delivering this policy.


1. Do you agree with rigid protection approach to POLs?

2. Do you agree with implementing a level of flexibility in LOLs where office use is retained as the main use?

3. Do you think these are the best planning tools for protecting employment floorspace?

4. Is two years a reasonable period of time in assessing the viability of a vacant office building within a LOL? Is there any additional evidence you think we should require?

53



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP06 (5b) regarding managing industrial land within the borough, we need a policy to provide additional guidance around safeguarding and intensifying land within our Local Industrial Locations (LIL). The policy for protecting Strategic Industrial Locations (SIL) is covered by the London Plan and Core Strategy, and detailed boundaries will be defined in the Sites and Placemaking DPD.

If we did not have this policy we would risk losing this type of employment floorspace which meets the needs of different types of industrial functions and uses. It is important to remember that the term ‘industrial’ refers to a wide range of uses, not just traditional heavy industry. For example, in an industrial area we could find creative and cultural industries, transport depots, business parks and research and development uses.

If we do not safeguard and manage industrial space we might not be able to support the service sector or undertake important functions for everyone in the borough. For example Canary Wharf and local businesses both need packages delivered as well their commercial and residential rubbish processed. These functions form part of the industrial role and specifically relate to manufacturing and maintenance, waste management and recycling, wholesale and logistics, all of which are an important part of how our business and day-to-day lives work. It is also important to ensure that there is sufficient space to accommodate demand for workspace suitable for small and medium enterprises and for new and emerging industries.

DM18 Local industrial locations





54



1. What types of industrial use do you think we should be protecting and promoting in Tower Hamlets?

2. Do you agree with our approach in managing industrial land in Local Industrial Locations?


We could introduce a policy to provide additional guidance on the types of industrial employment uses that are acceptable within Local Industrial Locations as part of mixed use development. This could include a requirement for no net loss of industrial employment floorspace and that any residential use within the scheme does not compromise the integrity of the industrial designation.

55



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP07 (2) and (3) regarding education provision across the borough such as children’s centres, primary and secondary schools, we need a policy to ensure that new schools proposed create the best possible learning environment for our children.

If we did not have these policies we might miss out on an opportunity to best plan for the needs of our children, such as for their outdoor learning and recreation (for example, play space), how they access resources (for example, co-location of activities and uses), and how the school might function (for example, layout). It is also important that schools are appropriately located so that they are safe and convenient for children to access on foot, by bicycle or public transport.

With regard to school play space and sport facilities, it is important that we plan for this in order to ensure the promotion of healthy lifestyles among young people. Given that school play space is a scarce resource, it is important that any development is not at the cost of play space. There are innovative ways of re-providing play space within the site if necessary and different options should be explored.

The Sites and Placemaking DPD will identify locations for the new primary and secondary schools. We are aware that the Government is promoting the creation of ‘free schools’ and it is important that we are able to assess these on the same basis as Local Authority schools to ensure all pupils in the borough benefit from a high quality learning environment.

DM19 Delivering a network of schools and lifelong learning

To improve education, skills and training in the borough and encourage and facilitate life-long learning.


To promote the growth and expansion of further and higher education establishments as drivers of improved skills and a key part of the wider knowledge economy.


56



We could introduce a policy to ensure that any development or re-development gives careful consideration to the requirements of the pupils attending that school in terms of layout, play space provision and demonstrate that pupils can safely access the school.

Through this policy, we could also require that there is a demonstrated need for the school outside of that which the Council has already identified in the Core Strategy.

Note:

The Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) has recently consulted on proposals to remove the need for new schools to apply for planning permission for the change of use of an existing building.

This would be achieved through changing the existing use class order. This could mean that the use of any building could be changed to a school without the need to apply for planning permission. It is noted that any development works such as extensions would still require planning permission.

It is important to be aware of these changes as it could impact upon the provision of educational facilities in the borough. This could impact upon Core Strategy policy SP06 and proposed DM policy for delivering education in the borough.


1. How do you think the Council should respond to the planning challenges of the introduction of Free Schools?

2. What do you think are the most important things to consider when planning for new schools or extensions to existing schools?

Improving education and skills

57



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP07 (4) and (5) regarding further and higher education across the borough, we need a policy to ensure that new facilities proposed meet an appropriate local need and provide a high quality learning environment.

The Council has noticed that there has been an increase in applications for further education establishments – many of which are not linked to the borough’s established further and higher education providers. If we did not have a policy there is a risk that new proposals for further education would not meet an identified local need and therefore could come at the cost of other important land uses such as employment floorspace and housing. It is also important that both students and staff can easily access their place of learning by sustainable transport, for example, on foot, on bicycle or by public transport.


We could introduce a policy to ensure that any development or re-development gives careful consideration to whether there is a local need for this type of educational use. In doing so we could require information on student and staff numbers and enrolment details, as well as details regarding the curriculum (demonstrating that courses on offer are Level 4 and above). The policy would also request that applicants show that the school is in a suitable location in terms of public transport, that the layout is suitable, and that they have the necessary accreditation. Evidence of partnership working with existing institutions in the borough could also be sought.


DM20 Further and higher education in the borough

To improve education, skills and training in the borough and encourage and facilitate life-long leaning.


To promote the growth and expansion of further and higher education establishments as drivers of improved skills and a key part of the wider knowledge economy.


58



1. Do you agree that higher education establishments and additional further education establishments in the borough, should be focussed to meet the needs of local students?

2. Is there anything else we should consider when planning for new higher and further education establishments?

59


60


DM21 Integrating development with a sustainable transport network


To achieve the Core Strategy vision and provide further guidance to policy SP08 (1), (2) and (3) with regards to improving public transport and accessibility, we need a policy to ensure that additional journeys generated by a proposed development can be successfully accommodated within the borough’s transport system.

If we did not have a policy requiring the consideration of our transport infrastructure capacity, we might see developments come forward which would put too much pressure on how we move around, within, as well as to and from the borough. This is especially relevant in a place like Tower Hamlets given the scale of housing and employment growth and where an increasing population needs access to jobs and essential services.

There would be serious repercussions to the transport network if impacts were to go unmitigated and improvements and upgrades were not made in conjunction with the development.


We could introduce a policy requiring developments to demonstrate how they are properly connected with the transport network, having no unacceptable impact on capacity. As part of this, the policy would aim to ensure that the highest levels of accessibility and inclusiveness are considered and implemented for all users.

Any policy will require developers to submit Transport Assessments for all major developments or Transport Statements for minor developments, setting out an assessment of the impact on the transport network, including consideration of the cumulative impacts from other development, and the measures to mitigate these.

Deliver an accessible, efficient, high quality, sustainable and integrated transport network to reach destinations within and outside the borough.


Making connected places

61


The policy could also set out the level of detail to be provided in a Transport Assessment and a Transport Statement. For example, a Transport Assessment would be more detailed addressing matters such as: the anticipated movements to, from and within the site; stress on the local transport network; and, servicing vehicle arrangements included loading bay provision where appropriate. The Transport Assessments could also consider and propose measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate these impacts. Such measures could include improving pedestrian and cycle networks; delivering safe and secure transport interchanges; and minimising the need for road transport through the design of the development. A Travel Plan would also be required where significant transport impacts have been identified in the Assessment.

For a Transport Statement, the Council could require that the developer shows how it has taken account of both specific and cumulative traffic and transport impacts within the context of the wider area. The statement would be in proportion to the scale of development.

For all development where existing transport capacity is not sufficient to meet the demands of the new developments, we can have policy requiring developers to directly contribute to increasing the capacity of the transport network to meet additional demand.

We could also implement a policy seeking to improve the immediate area around transport interchanges as shown in the Sites and Placemaking DPD engagement document (known as Transport Interchange Areas) which would help to make changing between different modes of transport easier and increase the accessibility of these interchanges. Consultation Questions

1. How can we further ensure additional journeys generated by a proposed development is successfully accommodated within the borough’s transport system?

2. Do you agree that the policy should require a Transport Statement for smaller developments? 3. What do you think should be the key areas for consideration within the Transport Statement?

4. Should the availability of adequate transport facilities influence the location of new development?

62



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP08 (4) we need a policy to ensure that any freight movement crucial to the borough and the London economy is efficient, sustainable and minimises environmental and amenity impacts.

If we did not have a policy tackling the issue of freight movement throughout the borough developers and operators may not consider more sustainable alternatives, leading to higher levels of congestion on the borough’s road network, worsened air quality and negative impacts on the environment. While movement of freight is vital for the local and wider London economy, the majority of freight is currently being moved on the borough’s road network, which has significant detrimental impacts on the borough and its residents. Given the borough’s extensive Blue Ribbon Network and existing safeguarded wharves, there are considerable opportunities for freight movement to be undertaken by water and rail as part of a more integrated network of freight distribution.


We could introduce a policy to ensure developments which generate a significant volume of freight – either during construction or when completed – demonstrate how the impacts on the transport network, the environment and on amenity will be minimised and mitigated. This could be demonstrated through transport assessments, construction logistics plans and delivery and service plans.

To reduce the number of freight journeys, the policy could support the creation of freight consolidation centres, as supported regionally, in appropriate locations such as industrial areas and existing identified wharves, where this is viable. These would be centres serving construction sites and town centres and would help to reduce the amount of freight movement by consolidating small loads before delivery.

DM22 Sustainable transport of freight

Deliver an accessible, efficient, high quality, sustainable and integrated transport network to reach destinations within and outside the borough.


63



1. Do you support the use of the borough’s waterways for the movement of freight?

2. Do you think freight consolidation centres are a good idea?

3. Is there anything we should consider as part of this policy to promote sustainable freight transport?

In this policy we would also promote sustainable forms of freight movement and require developments to prioritise freight movement by methods of transport such as by water and rail as well as by using low emission and electric vehicles.

In addition to the above, the policy could require that developments that are adjacent to wharves do not have a negative impact on their operation.

64



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and to provide further guidance to SP09 (4) regarding minimising on-site and off-site car parking provision, we need a policy to help us best manage the appropriate locations and levels of parking.

If we did not have a policy to help us plan more carefully for the provision of parking, we could be encouraging the use of cars, which has a number of far-reaching and long-term implications on the borough and its residents.

Cars can contribute to congestion, poor air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and traffic all of which can impact on the lives of people who live in, work in and visit the borough. Car parking can also be an inefficient use of land and can promote unsustainable transport choices.

We recognise however that certain groups in the borough do need access to a car, for example disabled people, while often families find using a car convenient in accessing shops and services.

We need to find a way to ensure residents, workers and visitors do not have rely on cars and therefore the need for parking will be reduced. One way we could do this is by encouraging sustainable alternatives to get around the borough, such as walking, cycling and using the bus.


The policy could set maximum car parking standards for residential, employment and other uses. The standards would take into account access to public transport with minimal parking being provided in town centre locations and other areas well served by public transport. For residential development we would set a minimum requirement for disabled parking. We could also require that where off-street parking is provided, a proportion of this must be for family and affordable homes within the development.

DM23 Parking

Deliver a safe, attractive, accessible and well-designed network of streets that make it easy and enjoyable for people to move around on foot and bicycle.


65


The policy could also give support and encourage the use of car club schemes that provide communal-use cars by providing car club parking spaces within developments as a priority. Support would also be given to electric charging points and car parking spaces for electric vehicles to encourage the use of low emission vehicles. In addition to this, minimum standards would be set for cycle parking in all developments.


1. Are there locations within the borough where you feel all developments should not provide parking spaces?

2. Are there locations within the borough where you feel developments need to have parking spaces?

3. What can we do to encourage more sustainable transport options?

4. Do you think car clubs and promoting electric and low emission vehicles is a good idea?

66



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP09 (1) (2) (3) (5) and (6) regarding the creation of safe, attractive, accessible and well-designed streets and spaces, we need a policy to ensure that developments coming forward in our borough look beyond their property boundary and consider how their investment can improve the surrounding environment and public realm. With a new development comes new, and sometimes increased activity, and it is important to ensure that this is managed in a way that there are no negative impacts on both existing and any new populations and that they can all enjoy the streets, spaces and places in a safe and comfortable manner.

If we did not have these policies, we might see the introduction of features or design elements of new developments which do not fit in with their surroundings. For example, without careful consideration for what, who and where schemes are being developed, we might see the borough’s places becoming disconnected, the scale of development being out of proportion, public realm being of lower quality, areas becoming unsafe and inaccessible and increased street cluttering.


We could introduce a policy which ensures that proposals for major development make improvements to the existing pedestrian infrastructure as a priority and that they assess, enhance and improve how the site is connected to its surrounding context. This could be demonstrated by setting out in the policy that all major developments have to provide an ‘urban design analysis’. This would address

DM24 Streets, places and public realm for people

Deliver a safe, attractive, accessible and well-designed network of streets that make it easy and enjoyable for people to move around on foot and bicycle.


Create streets, spaces and places which promote social interaction and inclusion, and where people value, enjoy and feel safe and comfortable.


Creating attractive and safe streets and spaces

67


issues that could include paving, street illumination design, lighting levels/types, street furniture, trees & planting and any other elements of the public realm that the community consider important. Where development proposals are near the borough boundary, they would additionally be expected to provide analysis of connectivity to the neighbouring borough.

As part of the provision of public realm improvements, it would also be necessary to demonstrate how these add to the safety of the borough and provide access for all.

There are other aspects of public realm that this policy could address, such as the provision of public art as part of major development proposals and the ability of new development to de-clutter some of the existing public realm and build on the identity of places in the borough.


1. Do you think that the requirement for an urban design analysis is a useful tool for public realm improvements?

2. If yes, what do you think should be included in an urban design analysis?

3. What other methods do you think might be more beneficial in identifying public realm improvements that would harmonise development sites with the wider public realm?

4. Do you have a view on what aspects of public realm are most important for you?

68



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP10 (1) regarding protecting, managing and enhancing the Tower of London World Heritage Site, we need a policy to ensure that any new development coming forward has no negative impact on its setting or surrounds.

If we did not have this policy, we might not be able to robustly protect the Tower of London as a heritage focal point and ensure that, as a national and global treasure, residents and tourists alike can enjoy the site. While the City must maintain its prominence as a world financial centre and have development to support its role, without a clear and robust policy there may be some compromise to the significant historical asset that sits alongside it.

Additionally, without a policy we might be at risk of not securing connectivity and appropriate signage necessary to ensure it remains a focus.

Already the Tower serves as the historical basis for the borough’s name, with the hamlets being those places that evolved around the Tower over history, and so any diminishing of its importance could be detrimental to its history and symbolism. Its importance is already universally acknowledged and recognised through the World Heritage status awarded to it by UNESCO. In a recent visit UNESCO expressed concern at the impact of surrounding development on the setting of the Tower.

DM25 Tower of London World Heritage Site

Protect, celebrate and improve access to our historical and herit-age assets by placing these at the heart of reinventing the hamlets to enhance local distinctiveness, character and townscape views.


Promote a borough of well designed, high quality, sustainable and robust buildings that enrich the local environment and contribute to quality of life.


Creating distinct and durable places

69



We could introduce a policy that ensures that any new development in the borough does not negatively affect the UNESCO World Heritage Site status of the Tower of London and must be tested for its impact on the site’s outstanding universal value relating to its historical, architectural and cultural importance.

As part of this policy, developments would also demonstrate that they do not have a negative effect on the Tower’s setting, including any strategic or local views to and from it.

For proposed developments in the vicinity of the Tower of London, the policy could further require that the development demonstrates how local access routes to the Tower and signage to help visitors navigate their way to it are being improved.


1. Do you think that the significance of the Tower of London warrants the Council including a separate policy for its protection? OR Do you think there are adequate safeguards in place through existing national, London Plan and Core Strategy policies?

3. Do you think that it might also be useful referencing the criteria that UNESCO use to assess the protection offered to the Tower as aspects that developers should have to consider when bringing forward development proposals in its vicinity?

70



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and add further guidance to SP10 (3) we need a policy to ensure that any new proposals or development do not have a negative impact on the built heritage and historic environment of the borough.

If we did not have this policy, there might be a danger of diluting the significance and value of the borough’s heritage assets and historic environment. It might also mean that we see limited contributions from development being made to preserve or enhance the character of the borough and its individual places. Without such a policy we could ultimately put the borough’s local distinctiveness at risk and threaten the borough’s attractiveness to visitors and investors. A key part of this policy will be facilitating bringing empty heritage buildings back into a modern and productive use, as is supported by national planning guidance.


We could introduce a policy that sets out guidance around how development proposals can protect and enhance the borough’s heritage assets, their setting and their significance as key elements of developing a sense of place.

In acknowledging that sometimes changes to heritage buildings, spaces and features may occasionally be necessary and beneficial, the policy can consider any proposals in the context of such things as; the contribution being made to the existing character or appearance of the area; the wider

DM26 Heritage and the historic environment





71


benefits of the proposed use; the potential for enhancement of architectural or historic interest; and the contribution to the local economy.

It is also important to set out criteria to ensure that changes to built heritage can deliver energy efficiencies and make heritage assets fit for contemporary use, all the while not compromising the intrinsic qualities of the building/asset itself.

In addition to these criteria, the policy would require that any proposals for development in Conservation Areas should demonstrate how it preserves and enhances the character of the conservation as set out in the relevant Conservation Area Appraisal. Furthermore, for proposals in/adjacent to Archaeological Priority Areas, an Archaeological Evaluation Report would also need to be produced.


1. Do you think that development proposals for adapting heritage buildings/assets should be required to comply with a set of criteria in order to preserve its heritage value?

2. What important considerations do you think need to be taken into account in bringing heritage assets back in to use?

72



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and provide further guidance to SP10 (4) regarding the good design of buildings and neighbourhoods, we need policies to ensure that development proposals safeguard amenity and achieve high-quality design.

If we did not have a policy we might risk allowing development in the borough that does not respect and build on the borough’s established urban form and fails to respond to the challenges of sustainability. This would cumulatively have a significant impact on how the borough looks and feels and how we might enjoy our neighbourhoods.

Without a policy, development may also result in undesirable impacts on the amenity of those who live in, work in and visit the borough. Given the scale of growth that Tower Hamlets, as a small inner-city borough, is required to accommodate, we need safeguards to ensure that people feel comfortable in their home and their surroundings.


We could introduce a policy which will set out details regarding what developments will need to consider in terms of protecting amenity and promoting high quality design.

Specifically for amenity, there could be a requirement that the proposal considers such things as; the impact of the development on visual privacy and overlooking; sense of enclosure; loss of sunlight and

DM27 Sustainable neighbourhoods and place sensitive designs





73


daylight; noise and air pollution; and any significant effects on microclimate.

In terms of design, key considerations should be the character, setting, scale and form of development and its relationship to the surrounding area; the quality and appropriateness of materials to be used; the existing public realm and how it can be enhanced; and the appropriate form of amenity space to be provided. As part of the design, we would expect that all developments meet the highest standards of access and inclusion.

The policy might also include the requirement that development must comply with measures set out in the Zero Carbon policy (DM29), specifically regarding the integration of design techniques to reduce the impacts of climate change, such as limiting water run-off, reducing domestic and commercial water usage, containing air pollution and using landscaping for purposes of natural shading and cooling.


1. What are the key design considerations you would like us to include in the design element of this policy?

2. What are the key amenity issues this policy should look to safeguard?

3. Should we provide detailed guidance on sustainable design principles as part of this policy?

74



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and provide further guidance to policy SP10 (5) we need a policy to set out more detail regarding the suitable design of tall buildings and the locations where they would be considered acceptable.

If we did not have a policy we could find that the tall buildings being proposed end up having limited architectural quality which does not suit or complement the character of the area. Without this policy we may also find that that these tall buildings begin to appear in more locations all over the borough.

Given the borough’s position geographically (inner London), economically (financial centres of the City and Canary Wharf) and socially (highest housing targets), there is pressure to build tall buildings in order to accommodate important land uses, such as housing and offices. The challenge is that there are only limited places that are suitable for tall buildings in the borough. It therefore becomes even more crucial that we very carefully plan and guide the design and context of the buildings so that they are of the highest standard and to ensure that any environmental and socio-economic impacts are mitigated.

Either way, tall buildings have the potential to have a significant impact on their surrounding area – either positive, in terms of providing a landmark, or negative, in terms of being an ‘eyesore’.


In addition to the two locations identified appropriate for tall buildings (Canary Wharf and Aldgate), we could introduce further guidance in the form of robust criteria based policy to be applied to all developments to ensure the design and context of the building is of the highest quality and is in keeping with the local context.

Examples of the criteria to be applied to a tall building development could include: achieving high

DM28 Tall buildings



75


architectural quality and innovation in the design of the building; no adverse impact on important views including strategic London wide views and important local views; no adverse impact on biodiversity, open spaces or the public realm; positive contribution to the social and economic vitality of the surrounding area; seek high levels of access to the buildings; and ensure transport serving the building is adequate.

An alternative option could be to give guidance about heights of buildings across the borough. This could mean that we look to define appropriate heights for each of our different places in the Sites and Placemaking DPD. Another way of achieving this would be to link tall buildings to the town centre hierarchy with the tallest buildings at Canary Wharf and the CAZ and smaller scale buildings at district centres and at transport interchanges.

In formulating the policy we would also need to consider a proposal which is replacing an existing tall building which was a legacy from past development. It may be that we do not consider it a precedent for acceptability of tall building forms, especially if it would no longer be considered an appropriate location for a tall building.


1. What do you consider to be a tall building?

2. What do you think is the most appropriate way for managing tall buildings?

3. What areas in the borough do you think are suitable for tall buildings? What areas may not be suitable for tall buildings?

76



To achieve the Core Strategy vision and supplement SP11 regarding the need to reduce carbon emissions across the borough, we need a policy to set out how new developments can reduce their emissions and contribute to the zero-carbon target.

If we did not have a policy, the activities and development within the borough would result in increased carbon dioxide emissions and continue to contribute to the impacts from global warming. These have far-reaching and significant adverse impacts on the way we live now and how our future residents will live. In Tower Hamlets in particular, this could mean we are more at risk from flooding and poor air quality for example.

One of the main causes of carbon dioxide emissions is the burning of gas, coal and petrol, which happens when we need to create energy to supply electricity to our homes and heat up our buildings. As one of the worst emitters of carbon dioxide, Tower Hamlets needs to radically change the ways in which we use and create energy in the borough.


We could introduce a policy that ensures that new developments within the borough will only be supported when they are in accordance with the London Plan Energy Hierarchy. In doing so they are showing how they will meet the 2016 zero-carbon target. Alternatively, we could introduce a policy that requires any future or new development within the borough to exceed the regional targets, making Tower Hamlets a leader in the push to prevent contributions to global warming.

As part of any zero carbon policy, we might include requirements to encourage the use of more sustainable energy production and modes of transport, such as solar energy, district heating schemes and electric vehicles.

The policy could also include a requirement for developers to lower the carbon dioxide emissions

DM29 Zero-carbon borough

Achieve a zero-carbon borough in the borough in the 21st century, with 60% reduction in carbon emissions by 2025.


Working towards a zero-carbon borough

77


attributed to existing buildings when undertaking renovations and redevelopments, by requiring improved insulation for example.

We could also include in the policy a requirement that all development not proposing connection to an existing or proposed decentralised heat and/or energy system should be future proofed with connection provisions to allow connection into decentralised heat and/or energy systems when they become available within the area. The potential locations of these decentralised energy systems are being developed by the Council with the Mayor of London and are suggested within the Sites and Placemaking DPD engagement document.


1. Do you agree that we should seek to set carbon dioxide emission reduction targets that exceed the London wide targets and seek to make Tower Hamlets a leader in reducing carbon dioxide emissions?

2. What more could we do to ensure we contribute to a zero-carbon borough?

3. Do you consider that it is appropriate to require new developments to include provision to connect to district heating schemes should they become available?

4. Do you consider that it is appropriate to require renovations and redevelopments to include provisions for sustainable energy production?


78



79

Delivery and monitoring

Delivery

Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ requires that local authorities, to achieve the clear objectives and vision of their spatial plans, have “strategies for delivery and implementation.” It further states that “Plan policies should lead and focus on outcomes and must be set out clearly, with indicators against which progress can be measured. Plans should guide patterns of development and seek to manage changes to the areas they cover.”

The purpose of this section of the DPD is to set out how the policies of previous chapters will be delivered in general terms and how the policies will be monitored to ensure Council objectives are being met.

In order to ensure that the policies of this document are delivered and that sites in the borough, including key sites identified in the Sites & Placemaking DPD, are developed and delivered according to the Council’s vision and objectives, the Council will work with key organisations, businesses and local communities. With an ambitious spatial strategy set out in the Core Strategy, the Council has maintained ongoing dialogue with key stakeholders throughout the preparation of this document. It is committed to further partnership working through The Tower Hamlets Partnership, responsible for the Core Strategy that runs to 2020, to deliver the overarching vision of One Tower Hamlets and its four key themes of: A Great Place to Live; A Prosperous Community; A Safe and Supportive Community; and A Healthy Community.

The key external agencies working in partnership with the Council include the following bodies:

• London Thames Gateway Development Corporation;• LDA• GLA;• NHS• Neighbouring Local Authorities, including LB Newham, LB Waltham Forest; LB Hackney and the

City of London;• Homes and Communities Agency;• English Heritage;• Environment Agency;• Transport for London;• British Waterways;• Registered Social Landlords in the borough.

(NB: some of these agencies exist on a limited lifespan. In the event of these agencies becoming obsolete, we will continue to work with any replacement agency.)

In order to make sure that the policies in this document are delivered and that sites are appropriately developed, the Council has identified a number of mechanisms that can be used:

Development Management processTower Hamlets has for some time consistently engaged in the Development Management process amongst its teams which work closely together to ensure projects are delivered successfully. There are a number of mechanisms which already exist to facilitate the delivery of Core Strategy policies. At present these include:

• Wood Wharf Master Plan (2003);• Aldgate Master Plan (2007);


80

• Whitechapel Master Plan (2007);• Millennium Quarter Master Plan (2000);• Marsh Wall East Master Plan (currently draft);• Bromley-by-Bow Master Plan (under revew);• Fish Island Area Action Plan (currently draft);• Town Centre specific projects;• Infrastructure Delivery Plan (2009).

This has been the main method for implementing the policies for development of sites, the policies providing the necessary clarity and consistency for stakeholders in assessing suitability in planning terms. This is enhanced by a significant amount of pre-application discussion between developers and the Council to ensure the efficient operation of development management across the borough.

The development management process engages the five transformational programmes set out in the Core Strategy, consisting of Comprehensive Regeneration Areas; the Infrastructure Delivery Plan; Housing Investment programmes; Policy and Strategy programmes; and the Tower Hamlets Green Grid, all of which are informed by the continuously updated Planning for Population Change and Growth model that is managed in-house.

Partnership workingJoint working across several departments enables delivery through securing buy-in and gaining funding commitments. Partnership working is key to the delivery process.

Council role as co-ordinator of funding streamsThere are circumstances where the Council needs or wishes to act as coordinator and facilitator for gaining funds from various funding sources. This will entail close working relationships with partners to link into available funding streams such as Transport for London and Local Implementation Plans.

Planning obligations and the Community Infrastructure LevyPlanning ObligationsThe Council is producing its Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) alongside this DPD. It sets out the Council’s approach to developer contributions that will be sought. This document is supported by robust evidence and has been tested through planning applications. It helps overcome the often protracted process of agreeing appropriate levels of contribution and provides a degree of certainty to both the Council and the developer from the outset. Importantly, the obligations sought will contribute to delivering the policies set out in this document. The document will be valid until 2014, when the Community Infrastructure Levy is introduced, and will provide the basis upon which the charging schedule can be worked up.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)The Council is committed to brining in its own CIL for the borough by 2014. The Council will be


81

fully ready and prepared to collect the London Mayoral CIL by April 2012.

Compulsory PurchaseThe Council has legal powers to compulsorily purchase land to enable development. This may become necessary for land assembly for efficient regeneration aspirations within the borough, although the Council would prefer to assemble sites through negotiation as a starting point.

Monitoring

It is important that a process of monitoring is in place to outline whether the policies, through delivery, are achieving the Core Strategy and Community Plan vision. This allows continuity of the Plan-Monitor-Manage approach used by the Council.

There are a number of borough and regional targets that the Council has to meet and to date the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) has been the key tool in recording the successes of the Council’s policies. Legislation no longer requires in-depth monitoring, however the Council will continue to record its progress against the commitments in the Core Strategy.

Use of conditions

For the Council to deliver the development necessary to achieve the vision set out in the Adopted 2010 Core Strategy, there may be the requirement to impose conditions on development proposals to mitigate negative impacts to make them acceptable. Any conditions that the Council imposes on development proposals must be consistent with relevant guidance, including being necessary, relevant, effective and enforceable, demonstrated through the six tests stipulated by the Secretary of State.

LDF Development Management - Tower Hamlets · The following document is the Development Management...

Documents

Transcript of LDF Development Management - Tower Hamlets · The following document is the Development Management...