Greenford Hotel Planning

HOTEL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL De Wood Group

1109-1119 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP

De Wood Group

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP email: ali@dewood.co.uk mobile: 07712-563524 telefax: 020-8422-3129

HOTEL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 1109-1119 GREENFORD ROAD GREENFORD MIDDLESEX UB6 0DP

Acknowledgements: 1. Ali Musani - De Wood Group (Design & Planning Consultants) 2. Narinder Juttla – SCP Architects Ltd 3. Peter Causer – Planning Consultant 4. Philip Dinn – Dinnwin Environmental Ltd (Environmental Consultants) 5. John Minelly – Minelly Associates (Transport Consultants) 6. Alan Harris – Pax Consulting (Transport Consultants) 7. Paul Fawell – Right of Light Consulting (Daylight and Sunlight Consultants) 8. Jacques Crosa – Trelleborg Building Systems (Green Roofing Systems) 9. Maria Prem – Renderviz (Architectural Rendering) 10. Sylvia Rust – Franchise Services Director, Choice Hotels UK 11. Anil Vadgama – Quantity Surveyor 12. Serge M’Panzu – Graphics 13. Kevin Savage – Shore Engineering (Building Control Consultants) 14. Bob Masdin – Crime Prevention Design Officer, Metropolitan Police Ealing 15. Planning & Urban Design Officers of Ealing Council

(This complete document is printed on both sides to save paper, it is also available on our website www.dewood.co.uk in PDF format, if you have to please only print the pages you require)

CONTENTS Page

1. Planning Statement

2. Architectural Rendered Images

4 – 25 26 - 29

3. Plans – Ordnance Survey, Floor and Elevation

30 - 42

4. Sustainability Checklist - SPG1

43 – 49

5. Water Drainage Flooding – SPG2

50

6. Refuse Recycling – SPG4

50

7. Environmental Study Report covering Noise

and Vibration, Air Quality and Contaminated

Land – SPG3 & SPG10

51 - 63

8. Places for Drinking, Eating and Entertainment -

SPG18

63

9. Urban Design Statement – SPG5

64 - 71

10. Plot Ratio – SPG6

72

11. Access Statement – SPG7

73 - 76

12. Safer Ealing – SPG8

76 - 78

13. Trees – SPG9

14. Renewable Energy & Green Credentials – SPG12

79 - 81 82 - 87

15. Transport Assessment & Green Travel Plan –

SPG20 & SPG21

88 - 110

16. Daylight & Sunlight Study

111 - 120

17. Statement of Community Involvement

121 - 125

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group All other copyrights within this document acknowledged.

CONTENTS

De Wood Group

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP Email: ali@dewood.co.uk Tel: 07712-563524

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

INTRODUCTION SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA PLANNING USE AND HISTORY THE PROPOSAL PLANNING POLICY PLANNING ASSESSMENT & JUSTIFICATION CONCLUSION EXCERPTS EALING Section106 INTEREST LETTER, FRANCHISE LETTER

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This statement has been prepared in support of a planning application of a new build 59 bedroom hotel of modern contemporary design of part 2,3 & 4 storeys at 1109-1119 Greenford Road, Greenford, to replace 3 shops and a warehouse on a site which has been mostly vacant between 4-9 years and is becoming dilapidated.

1.2 The proposal has evolved from numerous meetings and discussions with Planning and Urban Design officers, Brendon Fewster, Juliana Kenney and Justin Kelly, since 20th April 2006 and various schemes that have been amended to justify this proposal. Initially the meeting was to discuss the conversion of the existing buildings to a hotel branded under the Easy Hotel franchise, but the consensus from both Council officers was that they would prefer to see the demolition of the existing buildings and replacement with a new build hotel of high contemporary style in this location, hence this proposal.

PLANNING STATEMENT

1.3 This statement describes the proposals in more detail and assesses the Council’s planning policies and concludes that planning permission should be granted.

2.0 SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

COMFORT HOTEL 1109-1119 GREENFORD ROAD GREENFORD MIDDLESEX UB6 0DP

7th AUGUST 2007

Ali Musani

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group All other copyrights within this document acknowledged.

1.1 The buildings are situated on the west side of Greenford Road at its junction with Oldfield Lane North and Wadham Gardens. Wadham Gardens forms the southern boundary of the site which is occupied by three shops, which are two-storeys with a very high pitched roof, fronting onto Greenford Road, and a significantly high warehouse building to the rear. The corner shop, no.1109 Greenford Road, and the warehouse at the rear have been vacant for over 9 years and were previously used as warehousing and ancillary offices, and was granted planning permission to convert to a 26 bed hotel with restaurant and bar in 2002, the middle shop, no.1111 Greenford Road has been vacant for nearly 4 years and previously operated as a café, there was planning granted in 2003 for an extension at the rear of the café, the shops to the north and at the end of the parade, nos.1113/1113a Greenford Road, have been split from one shop to two and operate as a carpet shop and hairdressing salon, there is also a possibility to extend the rear of the shops similar to what was granted to no.1111. The upper floors are in residential use and are accessed via an alleyway on the north side of no.1113 and via a common external metal staircase at the rear of the shops. The residential above no.1119 was included as hotel rooms as part of the planning permission granted for the hotel use in 2002. The warehouse has a part mezzanine floor, this has direct access to Wadham Gardens via large metal gates, and this is where large lorries in the past delivered and picked up goods. There is a clinic adjoining the west side of the site. There are primarily residential premises to the north of the site and in Wadham Gardens.

2.2 The residential house no.1121 to the north of the site is a two-storeys and has had a two-storey extension built on the side next to the site with a flat roof above this extension. This house is on higher ground by approximately 600mm as the road on this side goes uphill towards the multi-storey Kellogg’s building after Whitton Avenue, approximately 200mts away. Sudbury Hill Underground Station is 450mts from the site.

2.3 To the south there are 2 storey houses on Oldfield Lane North, a Texaco Petrol Station and the multi-storey Glaxo Buildings, approximately 200mts away.

2.4 To the east and across the Greenford Road are residential properties which then join onto a large parade of shops.

2.5 To the west is the clinic right behind the warehouse and Wadham Gardens which is mainly residential.

LOCAL CYCLE NETWORK

`

As can be seen from the above National Rail, Tube and Bus Services Maps the site is ideally located to major public transport routes to take full advantage of the Wembley Stadium and Heathrow Airport.

PICTURES OF EXISTING SITE

FRONT ELEVATION

CORNER ELEVATION

SIDE ELEVATION

GATES TO REAR YARD

YARD TO REAR OF SHOPS

VIEW OF WAREHOUSE

Site Area:

920 sq. mts.

Current Site Coverage: 665 sq. mts. (72%) Additional Planning Granted at No. 1111: 35 sq. mts.

Additional Possibility of Planning at No. 1113: 35 sq. mts.

TOTAL SITE COVERAGE AFTER EXTENSIONS: 735 sq. mts. (80%) AERIAL VIEW

3.0 PLANNING USE AND HISTORY 3.01 Ref:

3.02

1109 / 1115 Greenford Road, Greenford, UB6 0DP - UPRN is 12066276 Date

1111 / 1117 Greenford Road, Greenford, UB6 0DP – UPRN is 12067117

Ref:

Date

Proposal

Decision

Proposal

Decision

11617

07.01.70

Erection and display of illuminated box sign

Granted

01738 19.03.51

Change of use from retail distributing dairy to wholesale for storage of motor car spares.

Granted

11617/1

27.01.71

Installation of illuminated projecting box sign

Granted

01738/A

07.01.52

New petrol pump and tank (not for re-sale).

Granted

11617/2

17.05.72

Installation of shopfront

Granted

01738/1

24.01.55

Continued use as warehouse.

Granted

11617/3

25.04.72

Installation of illuminated transom light

Granted

01738/A1 12.05.58

Retention of petrol pump and tank.

Granted

11617/4

18.04.73

Installation of illuminated fascia sign

Granted

01738/B 08.12.58

Use of shop portion of premises as offices in Connection with the warehouse

Refused

11617/5

17.04.97

Change of use of retail premises (A1) to restaurant (A3)

Granted

01738/1A 29.07.70

Use of premises as wholesale and retail warehouse for storage of motor car and motor cycle stores (Renewal of consent).

Granted

Use of Café/Restaurant as a Public House Bar, extension of opening hours, and erection of single storey rear extension

Refused

01738/2 01.02.71

Erection of single storey extension rear of premises and domestic light shaft.

Granted

01738/3 15.03.72 Erection of single storey extension rear of storey extension to house domestic

lift and alterations to access

Granted

01738/4

24.06.85

Single storey extension to side of retail shop, offices and storage building.

Granted

01738/5 23.06.97

Change of use of warehouse and ancillary office/residential to day care centre for people with learning difficulties including retention of residential unit.

Withdrawn

01738/6 11.06.98 with ancillary office

Change of use of warehouse with ancillary offices

Granted

accommodation.

01738/7 11/02/02

Alterations, including provision of pitched roof to warehouse building fronting Wadham Gardens; alterations to the building fronting Greenford Road including provision of a mezzanine floor between ground and first floors. Change of use of ground floor of building fronting Greenford Road into a restaurant and use of upper floors of this building and whole of the warehouse building as a hotel.

Provision of new vehicular access and parking.

11617/6 24.03.03

11617/7 11.02.02 Ground floor extension to rear of existing and new external staircase premises, two

Granted

cafe/restaurant,

NB: No. 1111 – The last previous use from 1997 to April 2004 was as a Café and this changed hands a number of times and was closed because this parade has not been economically viable. The Café has now been vacant since April 2004. Planning was granted in 2002 for rear single storey extension.

3.03 Ref:

1113 / 1113a / 1119 Greenford Road, Greenford, UB6 0DP UPRN is 12113421 Date

Proposal

Decision

04103 05.06.59 Display of illuminated box sign Granted NB: Nos. 1113/1113a is essentially one shop that was divided into 2 shops, both operate as A1 Retail units on drastically low concessionary rents compared to market rents. to light industrial

Granted

NB: No.1109 – The shop and warehouse were previously used for distribution of Kitchen equipment and as ancillary offices, the residential flat above was also used as offices for a number of years by the previous owners until 1998, they been vacant since. Planning was granted in 2002 for a Hotel and Restaurant Use, this planning permission is now live as a Building Notice has been submitted and accepted due to commencement of works before the expiry of the planning permission. The scheme has not been carried out from 2002 due the viability of a small bed breakfast on such a prominent site, and therefore further site acquisition was carried out of the properties below.

4. 0 DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL 4.01 The proposal is to demolish the dilapidated and mostly vacant three shops and warehouse and replace with a Four Star AA standard 59 bedroom (3 Special Needs rooms) branded hotel incorporating a restaurant and bar.

There is a need for this type of hotel in this location to service Kellogg’s, Glaxo, other local companies in the industrial area in Oldfield Lane and Wembley Stadium, business that is currently going to Harrow or further afield into the West End. The viability of a branded hotel in this location is borne out by the interest of major international brands that have shown an interest in this site namely Ramada Encore, Holiday Inn, Ibis Hotels, Days Inn, Easy Hotel and our final choice Comfort Hotel which is part of the Choice Hotels International group, the choice of location by these major companies in the hospitality field involves site specific investigation before a franchise is granted, and this particular location was passed by all the aforementioned hotel groups.

4.02 The building is designed as a part 2, part 3 and part 4 storeys to create a focal point in the corner, the design of which is described in more detail in the Urban Design section. The building steps in both to the North and the West to reduce overbearing and mass and density as agreed with Justin Kelly, the Urban Design Officer is now acceptable.

4.03 The building is of a modern contemporary design with part brick on the ground floor and render and cladding on the upper floors. It was at a meeting on the 2oth of April, 2006, with Brendan Fewster, the Planning Officer, and Juliana Kenney, the Urban Design Officer, where it was suggested to design a modern contemporary building

instead of converting the existing buildings on site.

4.04 There would be basement parking for 22 cars, of which 6 Spaces are for the Disabled, 6 Cycle spaces and 1 space for a Delivery Van. This is dealt with in detail in the Transport Assessment and Green Travel Plans.

4.05 The Hotel has been designed to take account of Sustainability issues, Renewable Energy, Water Conservation, Biodiversity and Considerate Construction techniques by using Off-Site manufacturing of bedroom pods to minimise construction time and reduce noise and disturbance to neighbours. All the items mentioned are dealt with in later sections.

4.06 There will be approximately 20 jobs created for Full and Part-Time staff.

4.07 The large pavement at the front of the property has had a vandalised telephone box for many years, the proposal seeks to come to an agreement with the Highways Department of the Council to adopt part of it and landscape it, and this will in effect improve the public realm, nevertheless the scheme could be revised to exclude this pavement if the council has a problem transferring this. There will also be a request to highways for provision of a temporary drop-off car parking space limited to a maximum of 20 minutes on the corner of Wadham Gardens for guests checking into the hotel prior to parking in the basement. Both these items can be dealt with via the Section 106 undertaking.

Overall Aim Environmental Resources and Waste Green Space and Natural Environment Urban Design Business Transport Legal Agreements and Partnership Water - Drainage, Flood Prevention and Environment Air Pollution and Quality Contaminated Land Hazardous Substances Energy Waste Minimisation and Management Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Design of Development Inclusive Design – Access for All Community Safety Landscaping, Tree Protection and Planting Hotel Development Development, Access & Parking Walking and Streetscape Cycling Accessible Transport Highways and Traffic Management Freight Public Car Parks and Private (non-residential) Parking Areas Sustainability Checklist Water, Drainage, Flood Risk and Development Air Quality and Pollution Storing Waste for Recycling and Disposal Urban Design Statement Plot Ratio Accessible Ealing – Design & Access Statement

Safer Ealing Trees and Development Guidelines Noise Vibration Greening Your Home Places for Drinking, Eating and Entertainment Transport Assessments Green Travel Plans

5.01 In terms of use the site, which measures 920 sq.mts. , already has planning permission for a hotel, which can still be implemented on 600 sq.mts., which is approximately 65% of the total site area.

5.02 UDP Policy 1.1 Overall Aim To secure a good environment for all through sustainable development, meeting the needs of the different sections of the community, the different areas of the borough, and the borough’s role in wider planning issues, now and in the future.

1998 Plan GL7, GL20, Ob1, Ob2, Ob11, P1, R1, A1 New Plan Map Sheet 1, Strategic Land Use Relevant Documents PPG1 General Policy and Principles, PPS 1, PPG12 Development Plans, PPS 12, Ealing Community Strategy

5.0 PLANNING POLICY This proposal has taken account of the following Policies: UDP Policy Nos. 1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.6

1.9

1.10

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

2.10

3.8

4.1

4.3

4.4

4.5

6.7

9.1

9.5

9.6

9.7

9.9

9.10

9.11

SPG Policy Nos. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 9 10 12 18 20 21

Response: This is a highly sustainable development, furthermore it will bring investment to this part of the borough which hardly sees any inward investment as most of the development either takes place in Ealing Town Centre or Park Royal.

5.03 UDP Policy 1.2 Environmental Resources and Waste To secure a pattern and form of land use consistent with the efficient use of land, water and energy, which safeguards air quality, minimises waste and forms the basis for sustainable local communities in Ealing.

1998 Plan GL2A Relevant Documents The London Plan2004, Chapter 4A. Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 5.

Response: This proposal supports these aspirations by making efficient use of the site, safeguarding air quality, minimising waste and incorporating best practice in renewable energy which in itself reduces wastage not only on a local basis but on wider scale nationally and globally.

5.04 UDP Policy 1.3 Green Space and Natural Environment To maintain the system of Major Open Areas linked by Green Corridors, to protect green space in Ealing, to preserve and enhance biodiversity and nature conservation, to provide new outdoor recreation opportunities in areas of need and to improve open space wherever possible.

1998 Plan GL3, GL3A, GL4, GL5, GL5A, GL6, Ob3 Relevant Documents The London Plan 2004, Chapter 3D, Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 5.

Response: This proposal incorporates a “Green Roof – Sedum Mat” and landscaping on a large pavement, where none exists currently, thereby enhancing biodiversity and improving the public realm.

5.05 UDP Policy 1.4 Urban Design To promote good urban design through planning, so that buildings and spaces are attractive, accessible, safe and consistent with the principles of sustainable development, and that there is proper protection of the borough, particularly areas and buildings that are of historic and architectural value.

1998 Plan GL6A, Ob4, Ob5 Relevant Documents The London Plan 2004, Chapter 4B

Response: This proposal is of a high quality design and is attractive in its setting, the design has evolved over a long period of time in liaison with planning and urban design officers, and this is addressed in depth in the report attached

taking account of SPG 5 “Urban Design Statement”. The accessibility aspect has been addressed in accordance with SPG 7 “Accessible Ealing” and is dealt with in depth in the report appended.

5.06 UDP Policy 1.6 Business To promote balanced economic development, with an emphasis on employment serving community regeneration areas, encouraging a high quality, modern, attractive working environment and local enterprise. New development will also be expected to be consistent with the principles of continuous environmental improvement.

(1998 Plan GL9, Ob7) Relevant Documents The London Plan 2004, Chapter 3B, Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 8.

The Council recognises the differential impact of economic changes in London in respect of skills mismatch, persistent unemployment and low pay which affect some sections of the population. The borough-wide strategic policy for business development seeks to retain an appropriate supply of industrial and allied uses in Major Employment Locations, identify sites for office use, and respond to the demand for hotel and associated development. It also aims to target employment opportunities to people most in need and ensure that environmental criteria are met. Action is envisaged to promote regeneration of those parts of the borough where there is relative deprivation and where advantage can be taken of new transport opportunities and the changing economic structure. During the development process, ‘green business’ practice will be encouraged, with a view to continuous environmental improvement in terms of the local area, and in terms of more general environmental issues such as renewable energy and waste minimisation. Green Travel Plans will contribute to environmental improvement.

The performance of this policy will be measured on the basis that: • Development should provide jobs consistent with employment needs in the locality and accessible by public transport; Response: The large industrial park being built in Oldfield Lane North will create even more demand for hotel space from visitors within the area, the proposed hotel is only a short distance away. This proposal will also create approximately 20 to 25 new jobs, where none exist at the moment, and it will possibly have more Green credentials than any other development within the locality, therefore standing out as a model development. There is also a Green Travel Plan attached taking account of SPG 21 “Travel Plans”.

5.07 UDP Policy 1.9 Transport To provide sustainable access from homes to jobs, shops and services, and from business to business, by integrating land use and transport planning, restraining car traffic, promoting improved public transport and facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, and making freight distribution more sustainable. In addition, the Council will have regard to the impacts of international air travel from Heathrow Airport, in respect of surface access, business and employment, environmental impacts and sustainability in general.

1998 Plan GL13, GL14, GL15, GL16, GL16A, GL17, GL18, GL19, Ob10.

Relevant Documents The London Plan, Chapter 3C, Borough Spending Plan (Transport), Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 6.

Response: We are willing to enter into a Section 106 agreement with Ealing Council. There was a payment of £25,000 deposited with Ealing Council under a Section 106 payment on the previous planning permission granted for a hotel due to a shortfall of 3 parking spaces, as this will not be the case in the present proposals, as there is no shortfall of parking spaces, and this amount, including interest accrued, now stands at just over £31,000, it is our wish that this could be used for nos. 2 and 16 in Table 1A “Criteria for Legal Agreements on Development in Ealing”, but further to a discussion with Brendan Fewster, the Planning Officer, we will not be putting in a unilateral undertaking, rather we will negotiate a bilateral agreement under the aegis of Ealing’s Supplementary Planning Document (SPD9) as to the best use of these funds.

5.09 UDP Policy 2.5 Water - Drainage, Flood Prevention and Environment

1. Before planning permission is granted for development, the Council will ensure that there is sustainable management, based on Catchment Management principles, of: i) Drainage infrastructure and capacity ii) Flood risk iii) Surface water run-off iv) Surface water re-cycling.

2. The Council will not grant permission for any development or intensification of development, which would result in an increased flood risk, either in the vicinity or downstream, unless shown to be acceptable by a formal Flood Risk Assessment, and application of a sequential test to examine the need for the development in a location where flood risk is an issue. New impermeable surfaces will only be permitted if local ground conditions are unsuitable for source control or other measures for surface water drainage.

3. The Council will seek measures to conserve water in new development, including grey water recycling and rainwater harvesting.

4. Development likely to pollute or adversely affect the quality of ground water or rivers and surface water will not be permitted.

1998 Plan R10 Relevant Documents PPG 25 Development and Flood Risk North London LEAP 2001 See Environment Agency advice on Surface run-off. SPG 2 – Water, Drainage, Flood Risk and Development

The London Plan (2004), Policies 4C.6 and 4C.7 The London Plan (2004), Policy 4A.11 The London Plan (2004), Policy 4A.12

Response: The proposal provides sustainable access by limiting car parking spaces to the maximum allowed, provision of cycle spaces in excess of the requirement, and making freight distribution sustainable by sourcing suppliers willing to deliver by smaller vans rather than by large lorries; the site is rated as PTAL3, and there are good public transport links in close proximity. A detailed report taking account of SPG 20 “Transport Assessments” is enclosed.

8.08 UDP Policy 1.10 Legal Agreements and Partnership To use legal agreements with developers to assist the best use of land and a properly planned environment as a means of ensuring that the wider planning implications of development schemes are taken into account, and where necessary to enter into partnerships with other agencies to promote appropriate development.

1998 Plan P2 New Plan Table 1A – Criteria for Legal Agreements Relevant Documents DETR Circ 1/97PPG 1,2,3,6,7,8,9, 12, 13, 17, 20, 22, 23 and replacement PPS’s.

DTLR ‘Reforming Planning Obligations’ Consultation 2002 The London Plan 2004, Policies 6A.4, 6A.5 Agreements will be considered in relation to any development with the matters to be covered related to the 10

type, scale and location of the proposed development. The emphasis is on seeking voluntary agreements with landowners. An agreement will only be essential to the grant of planning permission where it overcomes an otherwise unacceptable direct impact of the proposed development and where without such an agreement planning permission would be refused.

The performance of the plan, in respect of this strategic policy, will be evaluated having regard to the benefits achieved over the plan period through legal agreements associated with approved development.

Response: The proposal has taken account of this policy and SPG2 in the following manner: 1. The Car Park surface will be constructed in permeable materials 2. The Green Roof will reduce rainwater run-off by as much as 60-80% and we will be looking into rainwaterharvesting solutions to re-use the remainder within the hotel 3. Water conservation will incorporate the following: (i) Grey water harvesting (ii) Water leakage reduction through use of water fuses (iii) Usage of less water during construction stage as most of the building, the bedroom pods are being manufactured Off-site in a factory under a controlled environment (iv) Water efficient taps (v) Water efficient toilets (vi) Passive infrared Sensors (PIR) in Urinals (vii) Low output showers (viii) Flow restrictors to manage water pressures to achieve optimisation (ix) Use of a water meter with device attached to guide consumption and increase savings 4. The development will not have any use that creates pollution affecting the quality of ground water.

Further guidance will be sought from Envirowise (www.envirowise.gov.uk), and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, DEFRA, regarding the Enhanced Capital Allowances

Scheme for water Technologies (www.eca-water.gov.uk) 5.10 UDP Policy 2.6 Air Pollution and Quality

1. The Council will seek reductions in the level of the air pollutants referred to in the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and will seek to achieve the statutory limits and the tolerability of any increased air pollution when considering proposals for development.

2. Development proposals will be considered for their effect on air quality and the exposure of people to air pollutants. A formal Air Quality Assessment will be required where there is the potential for significant increases in air pollutants. Permission will be refused where development hinders the achievement of local air quality objectives, or there is likely to be a significant increase in air pollutants. Developments will not be permitted in areas where air quality objectives are not currently being achieved unless the effects on people can be demonstrated as acceptable in relation to air quality objectives.

Relevant Documents PPG 23 Planning and Pollution Control

DTLR Air Quality Advice

Ealing Air Quality Strategy and Management Plan SPG 3 ‘Air Quality & Pollution’,

The Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy,

Ealing’s Community Strategy – Chapter 5

New Plan Table 2A Policy 1.10 and Table 1A

3. The cumulative effect of individual developments will be taken into account, both in terms of impact and remedial measures.

Response:

This development is not taking place in an area identified by the Council as an area where government objectives for nitrogen dioxide are likely to be exceeded. The scale of the development and level of extra traffic flow generated is so low as not being able to make any identifiable increase in pollution in this area. The site will be screened off whilst demolition takes place, there will be Construction Management Plan (CMP) in place. The number of journeys and time on site will be reduced due to off-site manufacturing of rooms. The development will incorporate non-polluting and efficient forms of energy generation.

The proposal takes account of both UDP Policy 2.6 Air Pollution and Quality and Ealing Council’s Supplementary Guidance SPG3 Air Quality and Pollution see “Environmental Study covering Noise and Vibration, Air Quality and Contaminated Land” report by Philip Dinn of Dinnwin Environmental Ltd attached.

5.11 UDP Policy 2.7 Contaminated Land

1. Where a development site is known or strongly suspected to be contaminated, the Council will require an Assessment to demonstrate that the development can be carried out safely, before any application is determined. Such assessment should investigate and propose remedial measures that are required to avoid harm for the intended use of the site, and the immediate area, unless the unavoidable risks to public health and safety are demonstrated to be acceptable.

2. Remediation, treatment or other mitigation measures proposed should be contained within the site wherever feasible and capable of practical implementation, ongoing management and monitoring where required.

Relevant Documents PPG 23 Planning and Pollution Control

Ealing Contaminated Land Strategy

The London Plan (2004), Policy 4A.16

Response: There is no record of any use at this site which would have led to contamination, a desktop study was carried out and led to the same conclusion, please see “Environmental Study covering Noise and Vibration, Air Quality and Contaminated Land” report by Philip Dinn of Dinnwin Environmental Ltd attached.

5.12 UDP Policy 2.8 Hazardous Substance

1. Development involving the storage, use or other presence on site of hazardous substances or uses which need hazardous substances consent will be refused unless the unavoidable risks to public health and safety are demonstrated to be acceptable. Permission will not normally be granted for such uses within or near to residential areas, buildings or areas where the public gains access, or areas of nature conservation importance.

1998 Plan R5 Relevant Documents PPG 12 Development Plans, PPS 12, Local Development Frameworks,

PPG 23 Planning and Pollution Control DETR Circular 04/2000 – Planning Controls for Hazardous substances The London Plan (2004), Policy 4A.17 2. Development proposed near to uses involving hazardous substances will either be refused, or permitted only where there is an acceptable residual risk after mitigation measures have been carried out.

Response: There will be no hazardous substances used in this proposal, neither is the site proposed near to uses involving hazardous substances.

5.13 UDP Policy 2.9 Energy

The Council will:

1. Encourage environmentally sensitive forms and schemes of energy efficiency and generation (as an integral part of a development or for the generation of energy for use elsewhere), particularly where locally sourced, consistent with national and local renewable energy targets. No significant harm should be caused to landscape, nature conservation or historic features within or immediately adjacent to the site;

2. Expect all major developments (above a threshold of 1,000 sq m or 10 dwellings) to incorporate equipment for renewable power generation so as to provide at least 10% of their predicted energy requirements;

3. Seek application of energy efficiency principles and environmentally sensitive forms of energy generation wherever suitable for new development and other schemes with new floorspace, in their location, layout, design, and orientation.

1998 Plan R17, R18Relevant Documents PPS 22 Renewable Energy

Renewable Energy in London (2000)

Planning for Passive Solar Design (2000)

The Mayor’s Energy Strategy

The London Plan (2004), Policies 4A.7, 4A.8, 4A.9 & 4A.10

SPG 12 ‘Greening Your Home’

Ealing’s Community Strategy – Chapters 2 & 5

The Council will consider applications for renewable energy installation in terms of both the immediate impacts on the local environment and its wider contribution to reducing greenhouse gases. Provided there is no significant harm to landscape, nature conservation or historic features, permission can normally be recommended.

Aspects of energy conserving design include, in descending order of efficiency: • maximising passive solar gain (by location and orientation); • natural ventilation; • thermal insulation; • energy efficient domestic appliances and boilers; • solar panels, including photovoltaic cells and cladding; • micro-wind.

New buildings should aim to achieve the highest standards of energy efficiency and conservation, as measured by the Building Research Establishment standard assessment of building energy efficiency (BREEAM), or an equivalent standard of energy efficiency and management.

Response: The development will incorporate energy generation from among others Photovoltaic cells, Solar panels, Ground Source Heat Pumps etc. There will also be energy efficient equipment and switches, and low energy lamps. The Green Roof will cut the amount of air-conditioning required in summer and also cut down on heating required in winter. The hotel rooms, most of them at the front will be facing South, South East and East, maximising solar gain.

This proposal is aiming to increase in excess of the 10% of energy requirements from renewable sources as per Government guidance. We have already contacted the National Energy Foundation (NEF), which is an independent educational charity, based at Milton Keynes in the UK, controlled by an eminent Board of Trustees, for consultancy work on this project. Its objective is to work for the more efficient, innovative, and safe use of energy and to increase the public awareness of energy in all its aspects. Currently it is working in the areas of renewable energy and energy efficiency. (www.nef.org.uk) 11

5.14 UDP Policy 2.10 Waste Minimisation and Management

1. In order to achieve more sustainable waste management in accordance with the hierarchy set out in the Government’s Waste Strategy 2000: England and Wales, the Council will support and seek the inclusion of the following in development:

i) the use of locally available and second-hand building materials;

ii) provision within the layout of new development, for sorting, recycling and processing waste materials likely to arise from the future use of a site for both reuse or recovery;

viii) The promotion of waste management good practice in major commercial developments and town centre improvement projects, in cooperation with traders and the occupiers of flats above business premises, and building on the ‘Greening the High Street’ initiative;

1998 Plan R12, 13, 14, 16 Relevant Documents PPG 10 Planning and Waste Management, PPG 23 Planning and Pollution Control

LPAC Advice London Pride Waste Action Plan,

DTLR Document ‘Making Waste Work’

Ealing Waste Strategy 2001

The London Plan (2004), Policies 4A.1, 4A.2 & 4A.3

The Mayor’s Municipal Waste Management Strategy

Ealing’s Community Strategy – Chapter 5

Response:

There will be maximum possible re-use of building material from the demolition, for example for hardcore, the rest such as steel beams, roofing tiles etc. will be sold to second hand dealers for reuse on other sites. There is also next to the bin area a recycling area for waste, such as cardboard boxes, paper, bottles and waste food, in fact we have already been in touch with Biffa with reference to their recycling services.

5.15 UDP Policy 3.8 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation

1. The Council will protect landscape features, both in the built-up area and on open land, which are affected by development and will promote conservation and enhancement of important features of the natural environment such as ancient habitats, river flood plains, woodland, canals and other locally important habitats.

1998 Plan OL19, 20, 21, 22 Relevant Documents PPG 9 Nature Conservation Draft PPS 9 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation London Ecology Unit: Nature Conservation in Ealing

Ealing’s Community Strategy – Chapter 5

Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy for London

Ealing Biodiversity Action Plan

The London Plan (2004), Policy 3D.12 New Plan Map Sheet 5 Sites & Areas Schedule 10.7

Response: This development will contribute towards the goals of the Council, albeit in a small way, by incorporating landscaping and a Green Roof.

5.16 UDP Policy 4.1 Design of Development

1. The design of development should be guided by the following principles:

i) Good Layout;

ii) Appropriate Height and Scale;

iii) High Quality Architecture and Character;

iv) Appropriate Materials;

v) Sustainability;

vi) Inclusive Design - Access for all;

vii) Community Safety;

viii) Legibility;

ix) Appropriate Hard and Soft Landscaping;

x) Adaptability.

2. The Council will only approve development that respects current standards of safety, natural light, 12

health, privacy and freedom from traffic nuisance, disturbance or visual intrusion in relation to neighbouring land uses.

3. An Urban Design Statement should be submitted for all significant development proposals within the Borough, particularly those sites that are likely to have a significant impact on the public realm, are sited within an area of character or are major regeneration schemes.

1998 Plan B1, B3, B4, B5, B7, B18, B26, ES1, ES32, PR18, HDC21 New Plan SPG12: Greening Your Home SPG5: How to prepare an Urban Design Statement SPG6: Plot Ratios Table 4A Sites & Areas Schedule 10.8 Map Sheet 6 Policy 4.3 Relevant Documents PPG1 General Policies and Principles, PPS1 By Design: Urban Design in the planning system: towards better practice (CABE & DETR 2000).

Better Places to Live: By Design (CABE) The London Plan 2004, Chapter 4B Response: 1. (i) A lot of thought and time has been expended on designing a good layout (ii) The height and scale have been reduced from the initial proposal and according to Justin Kelly, the Urban Design Officer at Ealing, he said in his email of the 17th of May, 2007 “I think that the massing and bulk of the building has been greatly improved in this latest iteration and would be in-keeping with the surroundings”. (iii) The proposal is of high architectural quality in a contemporary style (iv) There is mix of materials consisting of brick, render and cladding (v) The building will be highly sustainable (vi) The building will be inclusive and accessible to all (vii) Community safety is paramount, and to that end CCTV cameras are being installed on the exterior to monitor the street outside and these will be manned 24 hours by reception, there is also a lot of glass on the ground floor that will allow visual monitoring of the public realm just outside the hotel. (viii) The signs outside will be large enough to be legible (ix) There will be soft landscaping where none exists at the moment, and the hard landscaping proposed will break up the front pavement which is currently monotonous paving, see rendered images.

2. The proposal has been designed to take account of the safety of the community and hotel guests as a priority, internally and externally, the design also maximises natural light, as this was the one of the briefs of the discussion between Juliana Kenney, the Urban Design Officer, Brendan Fewster, the Planning Officer, and ourselves, to incorporate a lot of glass on the ground floor and the corner tower. There is not going to be a significant increase in traffic from what it would be if all the existing uses were fully operating on the site, and it would probably be less than the previous use of the warehouse, when 20 and 40 foot container lorries would block the Wadham Gardens whilst offloading their goods. The privacy of the neighbouring land has been fully addressed in liaison between the 2 neighbours immediately to the North, nos. 1121 and 1123 Greenford Road, and ourselves, the windows were designed, partly by the Neighbour at no.1121 in a manner where the glass panels facing their gardens will be fully obscure, and the clear opening glass panel opens in an angle where it would be impossible for a guest of the hotel to stick their head out to view these private spaces.

A Light and Shadow report is enclosed, and it surpasses the requirements of BRE 3. Urban Design Statement is enclosed as per Table 4A and SPG5 guidelines.

5.17 UDP Policy 4.3 Inclusive Design - Access for All

Development should be accessible to all, and proposals will be expected to provide:

1. Appropriate design of spaces between and around buildings, including parking provision, access points for public and community transport, surface treatment of pavements and pedestrian areas, kerbs and crossing, ramped changes in level, street furniture and sign-posting;

2. Accessible entrances to/exits from buildings, including level or ramped access points, handrails for use by adults and children, entrances which are wide enough for wheelchair users and doors that everyone can use safely;

3. Internal space and layout which allows for accessible reception areas, corridors, toilets, lifts, stairways and the main areas of buildings;

4. Requirements relating to different aspects of disability, including wheelchair use, guide dog use,

ambulant disability and sensory impairment (sight or hearing).

1998 Plan B1, B6, B20, ES3, ATC16, ESC12, E22 New Plan SPG 7: Accessible Ealing Policy 5.3 Relevant Documents PPG1 General Policy Principles, PPS1 Disability Discrimination Act 1995 The London Plan 2004, Policy 4B.5 Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 6.

Well-designed streets and buildings should be inclusive and therefore accessible by all. This includes those people in wheelchairs, the elderly, with children, with guide dogs and people with other disabilities. Such consideration has been a statutory requirement on Local Planning Authorities since the Chronically Sick and Disabled Person’s Act, 1970, with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 requiring that all providers of goods, facilities and services are to take reasonable measures to ensure that they are not discriminating against disabled people. Within the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, later incorporated into planning legislation, there is a requirement that buildings, to which the general public are admitted, including places of employment and education, are accessible to disabled people and have suitable parking and toilet facilities.

The Council therefore seeks to ensure that all facilities and developments within Ealing are accessible to all, and where appropriate will seek to negotiate with applicants to achieve the standards set out in supplementary guidance ‘Accessible Ealing’. To ensure that access is considered at the earliest possible stage in the development process, applicants are expected to submit an Access Statement with their planning application.

The Access Statement should set out details of how the development will contribute to achieving inclusive design. The Access Statement can either be incorporated into the Urban Design Statement, or produced as a separate document. Guidance on preparing an Access Statement is contained with supplementary guidance SPG7 ‘Accessible Ealing’. Particular attention needs to be paid to the accessibility of buildings by the disabled/ elderly.

Response: The proposal will fully comply with UDP Policy 4.3 and SPG7 Accessible Ealing, see separate report.

5.18 UDP Policy 4.4 Community Safety

New development will only be permitted where the layout and design is based on the promotion of a safe and secure environment, including the maximum possible adoption of natural surveillance of public spaces.

1998 Plan B19, B20 New Plan SPG: Safer Ealing Relevant Documents PPG1 General Policy Principles, PPS1, ‘Secured by Design’ The London Plan 2004, Policy 4B.1

Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 4.

Response: The scheme was designed with advice received during a meeting on the 20th of April, 2006, with Bob Masdin, the Crime Prevention Design Advisor, from the Metropolitan Police at Ealing. The building has been designed to incorporate the following: (i) The whole of the ground floor has a large shopfront facing both the Greenford Road and Wadham Gardens, this creates natural overlooking (ii) There will be CCTV Cameras at the front and side of the building, the entrance to the Car Park, in the Car Park itself, in all common areas and the corridors within the building. These will be manned 24 hours by reception. This will increase the safety of the neighbourhood, in fact the neighbour at no.1121 Greenford Road has requested that the front camera should be angled in such a way as to include coverage of his front parking area to increase his safety. (iii) All pedestrian gates will be locked from the inside, and there will be no protrusions on the exterior to aid climbing. (iv) Access to the Car Park will be via an electric roller shutter and controlled from reception by staff. (v) The reception desk has been centrally positioned within the building to give a 200° external view and 270° internal view, the rest of the blind spots will be covered with CCTV (vi) The toilets on the ground floor have been positioned at the rear of the reception area, this increases the monitoring and control of this facility. (vii) The building will be fully compliant with the requirements of the Fire Department and Building Regulations.

See separate report for full details covering SPG8 Safer Ealing.

5.19 UDP Policy 4.5 Landscaping, Tree Protection and Planting

1. The Council will require that a well designed and integrated landscaping scheme, with appropriate longer term maintenance and management will accompany any application. Landscaping schemes should ensure the identification and protection of existing vegetation of value, as well as the planting of new suitable trees and shrubs in appropriate locations.

2. The Council will continue to make Tree Preservation Orders, particularly where trees are likely to be affected by development, and/or where the trees are particularly visible or are:

• Large or healthy specimens;

• Part of a group which contributes to the character of the area.

1998 Plan B2, B16, B17, ES4, ESC28, ESC29, GTC13 New Plan See Ch3: Green Space Relevant Documents PPG1 General Policy Principles, PPS1, PPG7 The Countryside

Ealing Biodiversity Action Plans

Borough Tree Survey

3. The Council will seek to enhance small open sites for: landscaped sitting areas, children’s play areas and tree planting as appropriate; in shopping and district centres, Major Employment Locations, at Employment Sites and in residential areas.

Response: There is a high quality of landscaping incorporated within the proposals, there will be a requirement to remove a tree where the new entrance into the basement will be, but we are willing to replace the tree further along the pavement.

5.20 UDP Policy 6.7 Hotel Development Proposals for new hotel building or for the conversion of existing premises to a hotel will be given positive consideration on sites in town centres, and in areas with good public transport access. The development will be assessed in relation to the Council’s employment and environmental policies, and on the basis that there would be no loss of housing.

(1998 Plan E17, 18, 19, 20, 21) Relevant Documents PPG 6 and 21 Mayor’s Economic Development Strategy The London Plan (2004), Policy 3D.6

“Tourism related activity is increasing and the growing difficulties in meeting demand in Central London puts increasing pressure on outer London to provide accommodation for tourists requiring access to transport networks local, national, and international. The Council recognises the issues arising for housing, traffic, and the use of open land, and the potential conflict that might arise from hotel development. However it also recognises the opportunities for employment, leisure provision and added vitality to town centres associated with such development.”

Response: The proposal is creating between 20 to 25 new jobs, besides regenerating the local area by replacing dilapidated buildings that cannot sustain any form of business that would be economically viable in this location. The loss of residential accommodation is negligible, as 1 flat has already been granted planning permission for hotel bedrooms in the previous application, and in any case the suitability of the flats for families is questionable due to the poor accessibility and lack of amenity space. There was a payment of £25,000 deposited with Ealing Council under a Section 106 payment on the previous planning permission granted for a hotel due to a shortfall of 3 parking spaces, as this will not be the case in the present proposals as there is no shortfall of parking spaces and this amount including interest accrued now stands at just over £31,000, this could form part of the new Section 106 payment towards loss of these units to enhance the local area.

It is also the Mayor’s policy through the London Development Agency (LDA) to encourage, through the localised West London Business Chamber of Commerce, hotel developments away from Central London to the outer London Boroughs, to take advantage of local tourist sites and distribute the economic benefits this entails further afield. There is also a lot of encouragement from the LDA, the London Tourist Board and the Olympics Committee to the development of new hotels as the whole of London is currently short of thousands of rooms and there is a huge gap to fill for 2012. The opening of Wembley Stadium has created a vast demand for rooms that are currently being met as far as Heathrow and Hampstead, whereas our site is only 2.5 miles away, and with a direct bus route, No. 92, right outside the proposed hotel. Local companies, such as Kellogg’s, which is within 2 minutes walk of the site, currently use hotels in Harrow and due to the shortage of beds as far as the West End, 13

this is revenue that could be spent in the London Borough of Ealing. The majority of the site has been vacant therefore the Business Rates payable are only 50% of the charge, the site attracts graffiti from time to time, there is an employment opportunity being wasted.

5.21 UDP Policy 9.1 Development, Access and Parking

Planning permission will normally only be granted for development which ensures traffic safety, and:

i) maximises access on foot, and by wheelchair and bicycle, including provision for parking and other facilities;

ii) maximises public transport use by visitors, employees and residents;

(1998 Plan T1, T31-61, PR7) New Plan Appendix 1 indicates minimum parking provision for disabled car users and cycle parking standards Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, The Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy, Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 6

iii) considers the availability of car parks and onstreet parking in the area, and where necessary, contributes to parking control and other local traffic restraint measures, consistent with the local Area Transport Strategy;

iv) provides off-street car parking for journeys which cannot be catered for in any of the above ways, and in any case no more than the Council’s maximum requirement;

v) provides space for servicing and the parking of service vehicles and coaches, including

• adequate manoeuvring and loading/unloading space for freight and passenger vehicles

• adequate means of vehicular and pedestrian access to the site

• Good design of the parking and servicing area;

vi) ensures that the surrounding streets are not subject to parking stress or danger or nuisance from inappropriate on-street parking or waiting as a result of the proposed development;

vii) provides a Travel Plan and a Transport Assessment when requested by the local planning authority.

Relevant Documents Area Transport Strategies (LBE) New Plan Appendix 1 indicates the maximum provision for car parking, New Plan Appendix 1 sets out the requirement for service vehicles and coaches, New Plan Map Sheets 1,12 Relevant Documents SPG 21 Green Travel Plans, SPG 20 Transport Assessments, PPG13 Transport (Para. 89)

14

This policy arises from government guidance (PPG13) which requires development plans to promote more sustainable transport choices, whilst also reducing congestion, pollution and reliance on the car. The guidance indicates that reduced levels of parking in development are essential. It allows for the use of maximum parking standards, but precludes minimum standards, except to provide for disabled car users. It also provides specific guidance on the use of Travel Plans and Transport Assessments in conjunction with development.

The policy is consistent with the key priorities of the Mayor of London’s Transport Strategy, which seeks to reduce the rate of growth of traffic in outer London. It also contributes in particular to the Mayor’s objective of ‘improving access’ (in terms of better integrated and more sustainable transport and planning), and the objective of ‘protecting health and the environment’ - through promoting patterns of movement which facilitate improvements in air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, visual amenity, community integration and the health of Londoners. At a sub-regional level, the policy has regard to the West London Transport Strategy. It contributes to the policies on promoting bus, rail, walking, cycling and reducing car traffic. The policy refers to cycle parking and other facilities.

Cycle Parking and other facilities Secure cycle parking encourages cycling by increasing its convenience and by indicating that cyclists are welcome at a venue. It is also the case however, that there is a high level of cycle theft in London. It is therefore important to provide secure cycle parking, where theft is made difficult because the location is easily visible to people passing by and by staff (e.g. reception or security staff) employed at the venue. The ‘other facilities’ referred to in 9.1(I) include shower and changing facilities for cyclists.

Public Transport Having considered trips on foot, by bicycle or wheelchair, the next thing is to maximise public transport usage for trips to and from the development. It is important to measure the public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of sites which are proposed for development. This information can assist in determining whether a site has a public transport accessibility level appropriate to the type of development proposed, and that access and parking for the site are planned having regard to the PTAL. The Council will have regard to the PTALs calculated by Transport for London to measure the accessibility of an address in relation to the public transport network.

This takes into account the time it takes to walk to the bus stop or station, and the frequency and choice of public transport services. PTALs are a fairly crude tool, as they cannot satisfactorily consider off-peak travel

opportunities, leisure travel, network travel, cross London commuting, or walking. However, they do provide an indication of the transport alternatives available for a particular development. Although walking and cycling accessibility are absent from the PTAL assessment, these must be considered under criterion (i) of the policy, and the Transport Assessment should examine all modes of travel.

Parking As indicated in the policy, for those trips where car use is necessary, the first consideration is the availability of existing car parking in the area. Having considered any such potential, the provision on site should be considered in the light of Transport Appendix One. Appendix One refers to two parking zones.

Zone One is the four town centre areas of the borough (Ealing Broadway/West Ealing, Acton, Southall, Greenford Broadway), an area north west of Greenford station, an area north west of Hanger Lane station, an area east of Park Royal station, and a large part of Park Royal (as defined on map sheet 12). These are areas where access to public transport is or should be the best in the borough. Hence the maximum parking requirement is lower than elsewhere in the borough for retail, business, industry and warehousing.

Zone Two is the remainder of the borough.

Appendix One specifies maximum provision for most cases and minimum requirements in relation to car users with disabilities(‘no more than/no less than’).

Residential development which has less than the maximum parking provision is allowed for in Policies 9.1 and 9.8. In addition, Policy 9.8 refers to the opportunities for car sharing through a ‘city car club’, which means that less parking provision is required on site. In other circumstances, proposed development which indicates parking provision below the levels shown in the table will be considered on its merits, in the light of the factors set out in Policy 9.1. In all cases, development must have proper regard to the needs of people with disabilities.

In addition, the level of parking control must be sufficient to ensure that the development will not lead to on street parking problems in the area.

Disabled Car Users The number of car spaces provided with a ‘disabled’ logo and reserved for disabled car users is normally regarded as a proportion of the total number of spaces provided for a development. They are not an additional amount. A minimum provision of at least 1 space (for a disabled person) is required in all developments.

The parking provision for disabled car users indicated in Transport Appendix One represents the minimum requirement. With the exception of car parking for dwellings (which are allocated to residents), parking spaces which are usable by people with disabilities must be clearly signposted using the British Standard disabled symbol. All such spaces should be located as near as possible to the entrance of the building.

Parking and Servicing Areas Clause (v) of the policy seeks to promote the creation and enhancement of appropriate servicing facilities in conjunction with development proposals. Wherever possible, on-street loading and unloading of freight will be discouraged, except at those times when this will least interfere with other traffic and local activity. This may be specified in conditions on planning permission. In implementing this policy, the Council will also ensure that development proposals do not prejudice existing on-site and rear servicing arrangements to neighbouring residential, community and commercial property.

The dimensions for parking spaces and loading bays required by virtue of UDP policy are indicated in Transport Appendix One. This should be read in conjunction with the Ealing Design Guide for Road and Sewer Works on New Developments.

Travel Plans and Parking The policy indicates that for certain categories of development, developers will be expected to provide a Travel Plan. This is to specify and justify the developer’s proposals to promote trips by modes other than the car. It should also indicate the planning obligations which the developer is prepared to undertake to ensure appropriate transport access and parking provision, and the management arrangements necessary in order to sustain the plan in the future.

Most non-residential development above 1000sq.mts will require a Travel Plan, notwithstanding that the maximum car parking is proposed (see Appendix One). The Travel Plan and the associated Transport Assessment must demonstrate that the development will not cause problems of congestion, danger or inappropriate parking in the area – i.e.: • congestion through excessive traffic movements; • pressure for parking in streets within 500m of the access to the site, at levels greater than their capacity; • the likelihood of illegal or improper parking.

This final point may be defined as parking on pavements and verges, at bus stops or crossovers, or near corners, or anywhere that could potentially cause an accident or create an obstruction.

In all cases where this would be likely to happen, the development will normally be resisted.

Response: (i) There will be clear access into the property by foot, level access by wheelchair, by cycle and basement car parking. (ii) The site is close to a Tube station, and various bus routes, and our website and literature will be used to get this message across, including highlighting the limited parking on site. Staff will not be allowed to bring their cars on site, see Green Travel Plan for further details. (iii) There are no car parks in the vicinity, and we would want to discourage onstreet parking in the vicinity. (iv) There will be 22 car parking spaces, including 6 disabled parking bays, 6 cycle spaces and 1 Service bay.

As the site falls within Zone 2 the requirement is 20 car spaces, including 5 disabled bays, for the 59 bedrooms, 2 spaces for the ancillary Restaurant/Bar area of approximately 200sq.mts., this includes 1 disabled bay, 3 cycle spaces are required for the 59 bedrooms and 1 space for the Restaurant/Bar area, therefore we have 2 extra spaces which Staff will use. This meets the Council’s requirements. See Transport Assessment Report attached. (v) The van delivery space caters for a larger van, the space allocated is 7.25m x 3.66m, therefore it exceeds the Council’s required dimensions of 6mx3.5m. All the suppliers contacted will deliver by van. See swept paths attached in Transport Assessment Report. (vi) This is unlikely, see Transport Assessment report. (vii) Green Travel Plan and Transport Assessment provided.

Note: This proposal is for C1 Hotel Use, and Ancillary A3 Restaurant & A4 Hotel Bar 5.22 UDP Policy 9.5 Walking and Streetscape

The Council will ensure that development proposals include footpaths/pavements that are safe, attractive, well-lit, and comfortable for all, particularly for those who have difficulties with mobility by:

ii) ensuring that any development proposal which straddles or adjoins a footpath identified on the borough network, includes good links to the route and contributions to its enhancement, where appropriate;

iv) careful consideration of the choice and location of surface materials and street furniture, including lighting, signposts, planting, seats etc.

(1998 Plan T12, T13, B12) New Plan See footpath network on Map Sheet 13. Policy 4.1 and Table 4A Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy, The London Plan (2004), Policy 3C.20,

Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 6

This policy is based firmly on the principle (established in government’s guidance in PPG13) that patterns of

development should be planned to minimise the need to travel. The intention of the policy is that people can have a real choice to stay local rather than travel further, because walking in the neighbourhood will be an efficient, attractive and safe option. This approach is entirely consistent with the strategies introduced by the Mayor of London and in West London.

In applying the policy, the Council seeks to ensure that: • pedestrian routes to local facilities are consistent with traffic management schemes, and that unlawful parking and other forms of obstruction of the footway are prevented; The Council will undertake street improvement projects in collaboration with landowners, public utility operators, developers and others, in promoting better standards of design, and in the management of pedestrian routes.

Particular care will be taken in evaluating the choice of surface materials and street furniture on pavements and footpaths. Developers should seek excellence in design, excluding clutter and ensuring sensitive siting, so as to avoid difficulties for people with disabilities.

Response: Part of the pavement at the front will be well lit and landscaped with low level planting and surface materials used that take special account of persons with mobility problems and disabilities. This will form part of the Section 106 agreement.

5.23 UDP Policy 9.6 Cycling

The Council will require development proposals to have regard to the safety and ease of movement of cyclists through:

iv) secure cycle parking facilities, including the provision of fully lockable cycle parking cages for employees, and cycle stands for short term visitors provided as near as possible to the entrance of the building and under cover where appropriate;

v) showering and changing facilities for cyclists in major non-residential development.

(1998 Plan T14, T15) New Plan See Strategic Cycle Routes on Map Sheet 14.

Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy, The London Plan (2004), Policy 3C.21

Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 6 New Plan See also Transport Appendix 1

The policy complements Policy 9.5 on walking, and seeks to facilitate access to local schools, shops, and services etc. The design of development will be expected to include cycle facilities and to take account of the needs and safety of cyclists. Developers will also be expected to contribute to the enhancement of a sign-posted strategic network of cycle routes and lanes in the Borough. The aim is to ensure that cycling in London is made (and perceived to be) safe and as pleasant as possible.

Response: There is provision for secure undercover cycle spaces within the development, and also showering and changing facilities.

5.24 UDP Policy 9.7 Accessible Transport

1. The Council will encourage development that makes provision for accessible transport, serving people with disabilities and others with mobility difficulties.

2. Designated drop-off and pick-up points should be provided within the site, which facilitate access for disabled people.

3. Development which generates large numbers of trips to and from the site should contribute to accessible transport services through planning obligations.

(1998 Plan T10, T11) Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy New Plan See also Transport Appendix 1

One of the ten key priorities in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy is improving the accessibility of London’s transport system so that everyone, regardless of disability, can enjoy the benefits of living in, working in and visiting the capital, and thus therefore improving social inclusion.

Response: The proposal takes account of Accessible transport by incorporating disabled bays. We will be requesting a dropoff bay outside the hotel at the corner of Wadham Gardens, this will be a short-term bay, but could double as a 15

disabled bay. There will also be tactile paving from the access level leading towards the main hotel entrance.

5.25 UDP Policy 9.9 Highways and Traffic Management

1. The Council will regulate development in the interests of road safety and to make the best of available road space for all users. The classification of the road to which the development would gain access is an important consideration:

• On Strategic and Main Distributor Roads, access points will be limited, with proposals to enhance bus operations, cycling and the local environment;

• Development which would generate significant traffic increases on local roads will be resisted.

2. In considering new road schemes or alterations to the existing network, the Council will support schemes that help to reduce local congestion and improve environmental conditions and safety for all road users, provided that they do not increase overall capacity on major routes in London.

3. The design and layout of new roads, paths and means of access within development sites, should contribute to the quality of the environment, as a place for people, rather than the motorcar.

(1998 Plan T21, T22, T25)Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy, Borough Spending Plan (Transport),

Ealing Community Strategy, Chapter 6 New Plan See Sites & Areas Schedule 10.20 – Road Hierarchy. See also Map sheet 12. New Plan See Table 9A

Response:

There is no new access required as the proposal only involves moving the existing access off a Local Access Road into the site by a few metres. The internal access into the basement is open to the air therefore there will be avoidance of traffic fumes. See Transport Assessment for splay information.

car park.

6.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT & JUSTIFICATION

5.26 UDP Policy 9.10 Freight

The Council will encourage:

• the management of goods vehicle movements by restricting the permitted hours of servicing and operation where this is appropriate;

(1998 Plan GL15, T16) Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy The London Plan 2004, Policy 3C.24, 3C.25

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy aims to meet the distribution needs of business as efficiently as possible, whilst minimising negative environmental impacts. The Strategy will help facilitate a progressive shift from road to rail and water, where this is economic and practical.

“In addition, small road haulier depots will be encouraged at sites adjacent to strategic and main distributor roads, to provide facilities for splitting up bulk loads for distribution within the Borough.”

Response: There should be no problem in restricting the permitted hours of delivery to 7.00am – 7.00pm Monday-Friday.

We have already sourced suppliers who already deliver by smaller vans, therefore this meets the “splitting up bulk loads for distribution” requirement of this policy.

5.27 UDP Policy 9.11 Public Car Parks and Private (non-residential) Parking Areas

1. In areas where the Council is satisfied that there is a shortage of public car parking, developers will be encouraged to enter into legal agreements so that their private non-residential car parking is made available to the public.

2. The Council will normally resist the creation of temporary off-street public car parks.

3. The Council will respond positively to applications for the alternative use and development of private non-residential parking areas, provided that the proposed development is accompanied by a travel plan which can justify the loss of parking spaces.

(1998 Plan T42) Relevant Documents PPG13 Transport, Mayor’s Transport Strategy, West London Transport Strategy New Plan See Appendix 1

Parking control is one of the main ways to restrain car usage and thus reduce congestion. There is, however, a need for off-street public car parks to meet the needs of shopping centres, community facilities and business locations. This provision should be sufficient to meet the requirement for trips that cannot be made by other modes, but there should not be over-provision.

Response:

The private parking is just about sufficient for the hotel use, therefore it will not be made available as a public 16

6.01

The site is getting blighted over the years, and constantly has graffiti and illegal posters pasted onto the vacant shops, which is not a good outlook for the neighbourhood

6.02

Large capital investment to regenerate the local area, there’s hardly been any new investment in this part of the borough

6.03

Creation of approximately 25 new jobs

6.04

Environmentally friendly building, incorporating best practice in renewable energy and sustainability

6.05

Increasing the security of the area as there will be CCTV manned 24 hours a day

6.06

Promotion of Green Travel Plan, we will be promoting this on all our literature and website.

6.07

High quality Urban Design which has also taken into account the neighbouring properties in the design process

6.08

Positive knock-on effect for surrounding businesses

6.09

Glaxo and Kellogg Brown & Root, both the largest employers in the area use hotels in Harrow and Wembley, whereas the proposed hotel will be within 2 minutes walk of their complexes, and therefore keeping the business locally.

6.10

The opening of Wembley Stadium has created a flurry of activity as far as Hampstead and Heathrow, there is a shortage of accommodation and we are only 2.5 miles away with a direct bus from outside the site to the Wembley Complex.

6.11

Excellent public transport within the vicinity

6.12

Generation of business rates, currently we are paying empty rates on 2 shops and the warehouse

6.13

There will be more landscaping provided in this scheme than exists at the moment. The only thing we will request is that at the front of the site there is a very wide pavement, nearly 10 metres, which belongs to Ealing Council, where there is a vandalised telephone box, previously there were 2 boxes, both vandalised, and this is an eyesore, therefore we are willing to adopt part of it for landscaping as per our plans and perspective. There will also be a tree that will be removed to allow for the new crossing, this will be replaced further along the pavement or another location with guidance from your landscape officer.

6.14

The proposal will be fully compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and in some instances such as parking spaces exceed Ealing Council’s planning guidelines and will be fully compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995

6.15

Secured by Design/ Designing out Crime All issues, hopefully, that were discussed in a meeting with Bob Masdin, of the Metropolitan Police, have been addressed: (i) Side Gate at the front locked and no projections on the outside of the gate to allow for a foothold (ii) Gate to Bin Area locked same as above (iii) Electronically controlled roller shutter to Parking Area controlled from reception (iv) CCTV monitoring 24 hours to the front and side of the building, and the parking area, therefore providing for a safer neighbourhood (v) Access to toilets via manned Reception area (vi) Access to Lift and Stairs via manned Reception Area

6.16

Consultation carried out on site with neighbours, quite a few of whom are supporting the scheme

6.17

Section 106 Contribution towards local area enhancement

6.18

The current existing situation is as follows:

Site Area: 920 sq. mts.

Current Site Coverage: 665 sq. mts. (72%) Additional Planning Granted at No. 1111: 35 sq. mts.

Additional Possibility of Planning at No. 1113: 35 sq. mts.

TOTAL SITE COVERAGE AFTER EXTENSIONS: 735 sq. mts. (80%) The proposed development will be as follows:

Site Area(including the pavement) Proposed Site Coverage:

1060 sq. mts.

648 sq. mts. (61%)

Therefore considering the above existing situation in comparison to the proposal which will be 648 sq.mts.

(61%), the site coverage reduces by 25% and the quality of the development and the increase of landscaping, where none exists at the moment, by far outweigh the loss of the existing buildings which would be a haphazard development as per the current uses and past planning permissions granted.

6.19

The new building will achieve a much better rating on reduction of Carbon Emissions that the existing buildings will never be able to achieve that is probably one of the strongest points of this proposal. We have approached the Carbon Trust informally to seek guidance on this matter as well as expert companies, it may well be that we will be applying for grants to achieve our goals to try and reach as close to Zero Rating as possible.

6.20

The proposal scores highly on Sustainability issues, a score of 74 which exceeds the minimum requirement of 50.

6.21

The proposal started as a conversion of the existing buildings to a hotel branded under the Easy Hotel franchise, but the consensus from both Council officers was that they would prefer to see the demolition of the existing buildings and replacement with a new build hotel. The new build started as a 91 bedroom hotel with a Holiday Inn Express franchise with a lot more massing, density and on 5 floors throughout, this was not acceptable, therefore the design has evolved through various stages to 69 bedrooms then to 63 bedrooms and finally down to 59 bedrooms, on part 2, 3 and 4 floors, which is the bed count for this proposal. The viability of the project is just borderline at this number of bedrooms, and most franchises do not accept room counts below 75-80 bedrooms, but Comfort have accepted this lower number, and for survival in the hospitality sector branding the hotel is absolutely crucial, therefore we feel we have met all the concerns of the officers at the Council by not only reducing the number of rooms from the initial proposal by 35% but also the massing and density by the same percentage.

each other sustainably, providing the right conditions to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport.

REGIONAL The London Plan The London Plan, which was adopted in February 2004, sets out an integrated social, economic and environmental framework for the future development of London. The vision of the Plan is to ensure that London becomes a prosperous city, a city for people, an accessible city, a fair city and a green city. The plan identifies six objectives to ensure that the vision is realised: Objective 1: Making the most sustainable and efficient use of space in London; encouraging intensification and growth in areas of need and opportunity; Objective 2: Making London a better City for people to live in; Objective 3: Making London a more prosperous city with strong and diverse economic growth; Objective 4: Promoting social inclusion and tackling deprivation and discrimination; Objective 5: Improving London’s transport; Objective 6: Making London a more attractive, well designed and green city.

LOCAL Adopted Ealing Unitary Development Plan 2004.

Corporate Strategy The overall strategy of the UDP has these key objectives: 1. Prioritising locations and land-uses to achieve sustainable development; 2. Reducing the need to travel; 3. Protecting and enhancing the environment; 4. Meeting employment needs and regenerating industry and business; 5. Regenerating areas important to London as a whole; 6. Supporting town and local centres; 7. Promoting tourism and the arts; 8. Treating waste as a resource.

The Built Environment In accordance with the overall aim of making the borough a more attractive place in which to live and work, the policies contribute towards achieving the following objectives: 1. Reinforcing the attractive qualities of Ealing’s built environment, to establish positive images and identities, and enhance the quality of life for all its inhabitants; 2. Securing a higher standard of architectural and urban design for all development, ensuring sympathetic integration within their context and respecting principal views across the borough; 3. Promoting high quality development and investment in Ealing’s built environment, particularly for areas identified as most needing improvement; 4. Working, in partnership with the community to promote a sustainable, fully accessible and safe environment; 6. Raising local awareness about urban design issues, and promoting appreciation of the built environment in Ealing.

6.22

POLICIES

NATIONAL Planning Policy Statement 1 – Creating Sustainable Communities (2005) This PPS replaces PPG1 – General Principle and Policy (Feb 1997) supports the reform programme and sets out the Government’s vision for planning, and the key policies and principles which should underpin the planning system. These are built around three themes: sustainable development – the purpose of the planning system; the spatial planning approach; and community involvement in planning.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 – Transport (March 2001) PPG13 outlines the Government’s aim of achieving reduced car dependency via transport and planning policies that are integrated at the national, strategic and local level. The guidance places an emphasis on putting people before traffic, indicating that new development should help create places that connect with

Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 – Planning and Noise PPG24 sets out advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impact of noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on development or adding unduly to the costs and administrative burdens on business. The guidance also advises local planning authorities to consider carefully in each case whether proposals for new noise-sensitive development would be compatible with existing activities. It also advocates the use of planning conditions which may enable development proposals to proceed where it would otherwise be necessary to refuse permission.

Environmental Protection Taking account the state of Ealing’s environment, and the various requirements of government policy and guidance, the objectives of the UDP’s policies towards environmental protection are as follows: 1. To work, in partnership with the community, business and the Environment Agency, to monitor and protect the environment of Ealing – especially towards meeting national and international environmental standards; 2. To locate development where sustainable business practices are unhindered; 17

3. To integrate measures for the sustainable use and management of resources into new development and regeneration programmes.

Transport Taking into account the background to transport in the Borough, and the various requirements of government policy and guidance, the objectives of the UDP’s policies towards transport are as follows: 1. To reduce the environmental by-products of traffic, such as noise, vehicle emissions and accidents; 2. To reduce the need to travel, especially by the private car; 3. To co-ordinate planning and regeneration to achieve transport improvements which enhance the attractiveness of regeneration areas; 4. To ensure that the Borough’s residents, workforce and visitors have real choices in the means of transport they use; 5. To make better use of existing roadscape reducing the environmental impact of traffic by prioritising sustainable modes of transport – such as walking, cycling and buses; 6. To ensure that the needs for freight transport and servicing are met; 7. To ensure that planning decisions support the targets set in the Borough’s Air Quality Strategy, Traffic Reduction Plan and Road Safety Strategy.

Employment In the light of the substantial changes affecting the local economy, and persistent high levels of unemployment among sections of the Borough’s population, the objectives underlying the Council’s planning policies towards economic activities and employment in the Borough are as follows: 1. To maintain existing employment-generating activities in the Borough and allow for their expansion; 2. To sustain a wide range of employment opportunities in the Borough by attracting new employment uses; 3. To ensure that employment premises are accessible to the whole community by a choice of travel modes, and reduce the traffic impact, particularly by car; 4. To ensure that where alternative uses are required for those employment sites that are not suited for retention in employment use, or where it is considered that the site is no longer required for employment use such as redundant or obsolete buildings, new uses are in accordance with the priorities of the plan; 5. To tackle persistent unemployment in the borough.

There will be sufficient measures and commitments in the S106 agreements and conditions to ensure that the proposed development will make a significant contribution to the national policy and one of the Council’s strategic aims of achieving a more sustainable form of development.

7. CONCLUSION The site is currently vacant, dilapidated and an eyesore. This development will bring much needed vibrancy and will uplift the whole tone of the area. There is a need for a hotel in this area as proven by the interest shown by various large hotel groups and the opening of Wembley Stadium. There will also be benefits in 2012 as the hotel would be fully operational before then. This proposal would set a standard within the locality of sustainable building.

We are committed to work with the local community and we wish to strengthen this commitment. This project could be a catalyst for further development in this area, bringing more jobs and economic prosperity, and for the reasons outlined in this document we think planning permission should be granted.

8. Excerpts

8.1 West London and the 2012 Olympics Prepared by the West London Alliance with the West London Partnership and the support of the London Development Agency

While many visitors will pass through Heathrow quickly, a significant number will use the hotels around the airport, with benefits for the local economy. Others will join friends and family in West London, bringing further social and economic benefits.

We will be seeking for the benefit of West London… # A visitor environment throughout Heathrow Airport that matches the quality being created in Terminal 5 # Higher-paid employment opportunities for West London’s residents and employees # Social, cultural and local economic benefits from a co-ordinated ‘family and friends’ programme to provide accommodation in West London. This programme would be carefully planned to take advantage of the wide range of contacts and origins of our sub-region’s communities and the continuing links between our communities in West London and family networks in south Asia, parts of Africa, the Caribbean, Japan and a number of European countries. This programme would also be designed to benefit from the existing and planned transport connections between Heathrow and parts of the sub-region. # Inclusive ‘packages’ for accommodation, transport, cultural events during the Games and entrance to Games events themselves In the wider context, work is already in progress through the LDA to develop a tourism strategy for West London. A sub-regional steering group is being set up, with the active support of the LDA Tourism Development Officer based at West London Business. The current consultation document on the West London tourism highlights the need to improve the visitor welcome at Heathrow.

As well as strengths in sectors and particular firms, the West London boroughs have three universities – Brunel, Westminster and Thames Valley – and high levels of skills and experience among their residents and firms in: • project design and management; • international networking; • translation and interpretation; • hospitality and tourism • construction.

The National Stadium in Wembley will be used for a number of Olympic football events, including the final.

Wembley is an internationally recognised name, one of London’s ‘world brands’. It helps to ‘sell’ London. Over the next few years, Wembley will become one of London’s key areas for leisure, entertainment and sporting activities and a major tourism destination in its own right.

18

8.2 WEST LONDON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY DECEMBER 2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.2 million sq ft project will include a new retail centre and transport links, and is expected to leave a legacy of 5,000 full and part-time jobs.

About West London West London possesses a number of unique factors that distinguish its economy from its neighbours and the rest of the UK. These include Heathrow Airport, a significant creative industries sector, some of the biggest blue chip businesses in the world, a significant concentration of employment within the transport and logistics sector, particularly within air transport, and excellent road, rail and air links to all parts of Britain.

With a population of almost 1.5 million people West London is a large and diverse economy which contributes £27 billion to the UK economy and employs almost 750,000 people. One of West London’s key strengths is that it has a diverse, energetic and dynamic population, with some 35% of residents from black and minority ethnic communities.

This rich, multi-cultural and international base provides a strong link to international communities and markets.

Unemployment in West London is also relatively high at 6.4%. West London generally possesses a high quality environment, with large areas of open space, parkland and green belt land for leisure and recreation. The sub-region’s public transport network is extensive, with a large number of underground, overland and bus connections with the centre of London.

Sustainability & Diversity

International Setting

8.3

West London has a number of global sector strengths, some of which are clearly linked to Heathrow. They include tourism; logistics; ICT; media and creative industries and food processing.

West London and its Surrounding Regions Located between the economically prosperous areas of Central London and the Home Counties, West London’s accessibility characterises its competitive position relative to other sub-regions. West London contributes approximately 17% of the output of Greater London. Output per capita and per worker within West London exceeds the British average, although West London lags behind the rest of London. Employment growth experienced by West London since 1994 has exceeded national growth in employment, but is similar to growth in London.

Drivers There are a number of key economic drivers in West London: Heathrow Airport – Employment within air transport has grown by 6% per annum between the years 1998 and 2002 – an increase of over 25% during the four year period. Tourism and the visitor economy – Already a significant contributor to the sub-regional economy, the economic impact of tourism and the visitor economy will grow, with an expected increase of 30 million passengers per annum passing through Heathrow Airport as well as the projected development of the ‘Visiting Friends and Relatives’ and ‘Business Tourism’ markets that West London is ideally placed to exploit.

Recreational and cultural activities – The new Wembley Stadium project epitomises the growth within these sectors.

The food cluster – With particular concentrations around the Park Royal/Wembley area and Southall. The creative industries – West London has a strong representation within the creative industries, with TV and radio having a particularly strong representation within the area epitomised by the BBC studios at White City. The digital media and ICT sectors are also strong in West London. Other important features of the West London economy include the key employment and development areas of Wembley, Park Royal and White City.

Park Royal – is an economic area of national significance, centrally located within the West London sub-region.

Straddling the three London boroughs of Brent, Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham, it is the largest industrial and business location in the UK and home to 2,000 businesses.

Wembley Development – The new 90,000 seater, £757m Wembley Stadium development is not only a new iconic sporting venue, the 42 acre area around it will be a sporting, leisure, cultural, accommodation and commercial centre for London, unprecedented in its scale and scope. It demonstrates the importance of the growing leisure and tourism industry in West London.

White City – represents one of the most significant urban regeneration projects in West London. The £600 million,

The cultural and racial diversity of West London is a great strength and asset that provides many opportunities for the sub-region’s economy, particularly in terms of the broad range of language skills and a high level of connectivity to international markets. This will involve addressing the needs, aspirations and cultures of the different communities.

This Economic Development Strategy celebrates and promotes cultural diversity and the contribution different communities have to make to life in West London.

Key Issues There are obvious strengths in the sub-region, such as transport and communications, but West London needs to develop more specialisms in the knowledge-based sectors. The tourism market offers significant opportunities for West London.

TACKLING THE IMPACT OF INCREASING REGULATION A CASE STUDY OF HOTELS & RESTAURANTS June 2000

Ealing was stakeholder in The Better Regulations Taskforce set up in 1997 to advise Government on improving the quality of regulations.

Hotels and restaurants employ some 700,000 workers. The sector is attractive to those seeking flexible working hours to dovetail with family commitments. Women account for 63% of employees in this sector and 9% are from ethnic groups – both higher proportions than in other industries. The sector also has more than double(54%) the proportion of part-time jobs found elsewhere. Many workers join the industry with relatively low skills. Britain has a disproportionately large number of such people who find it increasingly difficult to find work, so a strong hotel and restaurant industry is critical to the Government’s Welfare to Work Programme.

Some Councils, such as Ealing, have developed a more responsive and innovative services and have succeeded in increasing hotel development.

Ealing decided to develop and market the town as a base for tourists visiting London, recognising the potential economic and community benefits. To support this Ealing began to promote development of hotels.

8.4

HOTEL DEMAND STUDY

Prepared by Grant Thornton and The Leisure & Tourism Organisation for the Greater London Authority June 2006(Full report available at www.london.gov.uk ) A key policy tool in the London Plan is the benchmark target for the provision of new hotel bedroom supply. The current benchmark is for an extra 36,000 rooms over the 2001-2016 period, the equivalent of 2,400 new rooms per annum in total.

The dispersal of accommodation represents opportunities for businesses outside of Central London Trends in geography The Central London sub-region accounted for around 77% of hotel bedrooms in 1996, and this share has declined to 69% in 2005. Over the 2000- 2005 period, there have been 5,000 new rooms developed in the central sub-region, despite suggested pressures on site and land availability in the central boroughs. This compares to around 3,600 and 2,700 new rooms in the Eastern and Western sub-region respectively over the same period. While more rooms are being built in the central sub-region, the share is declining as the 5,000 new rooms built in the central sub-region account for only 41% of the total built over the 2000-2005 period.

This trend is expected to continue with the share of total hotel room stock in central London reducing to around 67% by 2008. New hotel stock development in the central 19

region over the 2006-2010 period is expected to be around 5,500 rooms, some 51% of the total 10,900 new rooms predicted by the Visit London Hotel Development Monitor. Given that this central sub-region was responsible for around 77% of the capital’s bedstock in 1996, this change is significant. With the continued development in Docklands, increasing hotel bedrooms in the west and eastern boroughs is a trend that is likely to continue.

Such activity will encourage GLA, LDA and Visit London s overall objectives for dispersal or spreading the benefits of tourism, but the polarisation between the central sub-region which will retain much of London s four/ five star stock and the rest of the capital, with its two star and budget hotels will continue.

West Outside of the central zone, other areas with considerable stock include Hillingdon and Hammersmith and Fulham in the west with 7.3% and 3.5% of London’s total stock of serviced bedrooms in 2005. Over the next five years, the key growth areas are expected to by Brent, Hillingdon and Hounslow. The growth in Brent will more than double the current estimated stock, while growth in Hounslow will build on healthy growth to date.

Visit London has indicated that the percentage of branded budget hotels in London has increased to around 13% of the total supply in the capital, with chains such as Whitbread s Premier Travel Inn, Travelodge, IHG s Express by Holiday Inn, Accor’s Ibis, Choice s Comfort Inn and Quality Hotels increasing their exposure. This growth in the budget hotel market throughout all parts of the capital, as elsewhere, has been the key trend in this industry over the last decade.

Supply of accessible rooms in London In undertaking this part of the study we have met with and held discussions with a number of stakeholders and policy makers. These consultations have elicited valuable information on the stock of accessible accommodation and issues regarding the provision of accessible accommodation in London. There are two key issues regarding the supply of accessible rooms. The first and most important issue is the scarcity of rooms. The second issue is the lack of information available to disabled people on accessible rooms in London.

(NOTE : Ealing will be lagging behind on hotel development and miss out on the economic benefits that accrue from such developments – our note)

Key points Information on the supply of accessible rooms in the capital is extremely limited. There are a very limited number of rooms in the capital that have been assessed for accessibility. There are just 23 rooms verified as being wheelchair accessible (by Holiday Care/English Tourist Board) with only two of these including a hoist, and a total of 165 rooms formally verified as having some improved level of accessibility. A dearth of information on accessible rooms and other hotel facilities and other non-accommodation related barriers to disabled people are limiting visits to the capital.

It is likely that the Olympic and Paralympic Games will require a much greater stock of accessible accommodation, accompanied by clear information on room and facility accessibility. Greater training and awareness of the needs of disabled people for all aspects of their hotel experience will also be important in achieving an inclusive Olympics.

There have been some policy interventions that have helped to improve London’s offering of accessible accommodation although much remains to be done. Demographic trends suggest that demand for accessible accommodation is likely to increase in the future.

Accessible accommodation is graded according to its suitability to people with different levels of disabilities.

1. Category 1 hotels are accessible to a wheelchair-user travelling independently (and refer to a 1 NAS or 1 ETB grading as carried out by Holiday Care (now Tourism for All) or the English Tourism Board respectively).

2. Category 2 hotels are accessible to a wheelchair-user travelling with assistance (2 NAS or 2 ETB grading) 3. Category 3 hotels are accessible to someone with limited mobility, but able to walk a few paces and up to a maximum of three steps (3 NAS or 3 ETB).

(Information received from Stephen Springer (John Broom Holidays) and Tourism) ( NOTE: The proposal for the Comfort Hotel at Greenford is designed to be graded under the highest Category 1 – our note)

20

The 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games To ensure that the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games is an inclusive event, the current stock of accessible accommodation will need to be assessed and likely increased. Action will need to be taken to identify the current stock and its characteristics, capture planned upgrades and compare this with expected demand for accessible rooms.

Accessibility standards New accessibility standards (through the revised National Accessible Scheme) have been developed by VisitBritain and introduced to provide more information on room facilities in a nationally consistent way.

The scheme allows accommodation providers to display a rating to show that their property has been independently assessed and found to be meeting rigorous standards of accessibility. Properties can be assessed under any one, two or three categories - Mobility, Visual and Hearing - and therefore provide improved information to guests about the facilities included in the hotels.

Few hotels in London are joining the National Access Scheme. The ones joining are mainly the large chains. We definitely notice a higher resistance from London hotels to both the quality and accessibility ratings due to the fact that can be full the whole time without trying too hard. We are working to get more London hotels into the scheme ( NOTE: The Comfort Hotel at Greenford will be joining the National Access Scheme – our note) Forecasts by sub-region The growth in the number of hotel rooms is expected to be proportionately higher outside the central area as shown in the figure below. Although the stock of hotels in the central area is likely to grow by 15,000 rooms over the 2007-2026 period, this growth is quite low at 1.0% reflecting the finding that the central area is already close to saturation point in terms of the available space to build new hotels and new hotel rooms.

Growth in areas outside the central London boroughs is expected to be much higher. Dispersal is therefore set to continue with total stock in central London falling to 60% by 2026.

Central and West London are predicted to require the largest number of new hotel rooms of 750 and 500 per annum respectively and at 1.0% and 2.7% per annum. The East and South region experience the greatest proportionate increases in hotels at 3.2% and 3.8% per annum respectively, although these sub-regions are starting from a relatively low base in terms of the number of hotel rooms.

Demand by tourists for locations outside the central London area is also likely to increase significantly, with the trend towards visiting friends and relatives one factor in pushing up demand for hotels as an option of staying close to, but not with, friends and relatives.

21

8.5 TOMORROW’S TOURISM A growth industry for the new Millennium Department for Culture, Media & Sport New targets for hotel development in London and a further £4.5 million for marketing to exploit its potential as a premier location for business travellers and holiday-makers and as a gateway to Britain; Accommodation shortages in London can lead to increased prices, reduced value for money in some establishments, and reduced competitiveness, all of which compromises future growth potential.

The London Tourist Board has been tackling this problem, in joint initiatives with London First, to promote an increased supply of accommodation and improve standards. In the last three years alone, 55 new hotels with some 5,000 rooms have been added to the capital’s accommodation stock and a further 4,200 rooms are now under construction.

The London Tourist Board will encourage further hotel development in the next Millennium to satisfy the anticipated demand for accommodation.

Our aim is to ensure that new tourism development is more sustainable by ensuring that it: is located on public transport routes; offers pedestrian and cycle access; is linked to other infrastructure (for example, hotels and restaurants); is aesthetically attractive; is in keeping with the quality of building and identity of the area; and causes the minimum of environmental damage during construction, adaptation and operation.

If we are to reap the benefits tourism can bring to local communities, and encourage development that is sustainable and enhances rather than detracts from the local environment, then we need to ensure that there is dialogue between planners and developers. Planners need to be aware of the benefits of tourism and of the potential of well-planned tourism developments to bring substantial economic, employment and social benefits to local communities. Equally, 22

developers often find the system of building regulation confusing. They need to improve their understanding of the tasks of planners, building inspectors and those involved in maintaining the heritage, so as to encourage sympathetic, well-designed developments that enhance the local environment.

The Government has also been focusing specifically on the interaction of leisure and tourism developments with the planning system and has commissioned research looking at, for example: “whether planning authorities should be more proactive in recognising the role of tourism in urban and rural regeneration�

Building partnerships between the public, private and voluntary sectors 4.1.15 Sustainable tourism will be most easily achieved when consumers demand more sustainable products and businesses understand the benefits of providing such products. To raise awareness among consumers and businesses of the benefits of adopting a sustainable approach, the new national tourism body and the RTBs will: (i) Businesses promote better understanding among operators of the business benefits available from programmes to reduce energy consumption (especially those developed by the Building Research Establishment), waste production and water use; ensure that through the National Sustainable Travel and Tourism Website businesses have access to advice about sustainable tourism issues, focusing on areas of specific need, such as small and medium enterprises; work with the NTOs for tourism to ensure that sustainable tourism issues are integrated into formal and informal training programmes for students of tourism and employees receiving vocational training;

23

(ii) Consumers: Encourage local authorities and tourism businesses to communicate environmental and sustainable tourism issues to visitors through brochures, ticket wallets, indestination and other marketing and promotional material; and Work with the Sustainable Development Education Panel, which is developing a strategy for sustainable development education in England to ensure that it embraces tourism within its scope so that the consumers of tomorrow understand the issues and the need for action.

Widening access to tourism opportunities 4.2.6 The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 was designed to protect disabled people from discrimination in employment and to increase access to goods, facilities and services. The Act’s employment provisions and the duty on service providers not to treat disabled people less favourably have been in force since December 1996.

Improving access to employment in tourism 4.2.9 The Government aims to improve access to employment opportunities for all sectors of society, and will: Encourage trade associations to work with disability groups to develop training and information programmes which raise awareness of the potential of these groups, identify their specific needs as employees, and seek to overcome prejudice; and Encourage tourism employers to adopt equal opportunities policies to recruit from the widest possible range of employees, including: older people, disabled people, women wanting to return to work, those from lower income groups, and those from different ethnic backgrounds; and 4.1 Definition and Issues Product development issues identified in consultation to date include: • The need to both add to West London’s hotel and other visitor accommodation stock and to improve the quality of existing accommodation. Town centres and recognised Opportunity Areas with good public transport access to central London and international/national transport terminals should be promoted.

• The need to identify and develop tourism development opportunities associated with major transport developments and improvements.

• The need to work with communities to capitalise in tourism terms on West London’s multi-cultural ‘assets’ (e.g.

Southall, the Mela).

• The need to optimise for the sub-region the visitor potential of major infrastructure projects such as the new Wembley Stadium and associated developments (retail, accommodation and proposed casino), Heathrow Terminal 5 (indeed Heathrow in general), and Chelsfield’s White City Development.

• The need to identify, further develop and grow visitor interest in unique product strengths, such as the clusters of creative and media industries ‘attractors’, the often ‘ethnic-based’ speciality shopping, and West London’s range of major sporting venues.

• The need to fully embrace and support London’s bid to host the 2012 Olympics.

• The need to optimise the visitor potential of major events and festivals.

24

8.6 Culture, Tourism and 2012 Forum Background Report on London Councils 2012 Team and Next Steps Towards Vision and Strategy Report by: Date: Summary

Job title: Simon Edwards Head of Policy 2012 Games Team 11 December 2006 This report provides members with a background to the work of the newly formed 2012 Games Team, an update on key issues and details the next steps for this programme of work.

That Members agree that London Councils undertakes the following work in this area: 1.

Continue to focus on policy priorities and mainstreaming priorities as set out in the report below.

2.

Continue to support boroughs and focus on key lobbying priorities as set out in the report below.

3.

Produce a clear vision and strategy, including communication and lobbying strategy, and a programme of work to support delivery of this vision and strategy.

4.

Consult with members and officers on this vision and strategy to get buy in and sign off from boroughs at political and officer level.

• Boroughs need to be partners in terms of the objective to 'Promote the quality and availability of accommodation stock' given that boroughs also carry out inspection on hotels (mainly trading standards) and boroughs are the local planning authority which will have an impact on the development of new hotel stock. It will be particularly important that work on accommodation quality involves access for disabled people especially (but not because of) the Paralympic Games.

Finance Services

Mr A Masani

By E-Mail Ali@Dewood.co.uk

Ealing Council Perceval House - Uxbridge Road Ealing W HL Tel: (020) 8825 7902

th June 00 Dear Mr Masani

18 August 2006

Ali Musani DeWood Group 143 Greenford Road Harrow HA1 3QN

Dear Ali

Re: Section106 Agreement re 1109/1115 Greenford Road Middlesex (hotel/restaurant) Interest Statement Further to our recent telephone conversation, I confirm that interest to accrued to date on the above scheme is £ , . 0 which according to the terms of the agreement is repayable to the developer on demand.

The interest is broken down as follows Interest accrued up to . .0 Interest 00 /0 Interest 00 /0 Interest 00 /0 Total Interest

C.H.E. Hotel Group plc, Premier House, 112–114 Station Road, Edgware, Middlesex, HA8 7BJ Tel: (+44) 020 8233 2001 Fax: (+44) 020 8233 2110

£ , . , .0 , 0 . , .

6,343.70

Further to our meeting in June and subsequent communications I would like to advise you of our interest in working with you on the development of your hotel in Greenford. Our experience of the London and Greater London hotel market indicate that there is a high demand for quality hotels operated to high standards by professional hoteliers.

The area that you are planning to develop your hotel is under-represented in the hotel market by the branded hotel operators and we believe that its proximity to the Greenford trading estates, the A40 and Wembley will make this a very successful venture. We look forward to working with you on the development of your hotel, we believe that it needs to be at least 75 rooms to satisfy demand, and progressing your franchise application with us over the next few months. I understand that your plans are likely to show 69 bedrooms and in this instance we will be prepared to accept a lower number of rooms.

Yours sincerely,

If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

David Murray

Yours sincerely

Finance Manager Regeneration and Strategic Projects

James O’Brien Director of Franchising

www.choicehotelseurope.com email:jamesobrien@choicehotelseurope.com For world-wide reservations call 0800 44 44 44 from the UK Or 1800 500 600 from Ireland Registered office as above. Registered No: 9725 England and Wales

25

26

FRONT ELEVATION

CORNER ELEVATION

27

28

SIDE ELEVATION

NIGHT VIEW

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

SUSTAINABILITY CHECKLIST

SPG1

the SUSTAINABILITY Checklist Address of Site

for planning applications and projects

1109-1119 GREENFORD ROAD, GREENFORD, MIDDLESEX, UB6 0DP

Checklist completed by Ali Musani, De Wood Group

Planning applications and projects are usually proposed because they will bring immediate benefits for the applicant. By using this checklist, a proposal can be tested to see how ‘sustainable’ it is. The Sustainability Checklist

7th August, 2007

Date

Office use only: PLAN REF ……………………………..

measures the wider consequences of the development, now and for the future.

Anyone preparing a major* planning application or project is invited to complete the Sustainability Checklist. It should not take longer than 0 minutes. Guidance is

provided overleaf.

This exercise may suggest ways in which the proposal could be improved. The finalised planning application and checklist should be submitted to the local authority

together.

The achievement of Sustainable Development is a major objective of the planning system. The criteria in the sustainability checklist are taken from the Plan for the Environment, the council’s unitary development plan, which forms the basis for planning decisions in the London borough of Ealing.

On receipt of a planning application, officers in the Planning Policy team will check its sustainability (if possible, based on the applicant’s checklist). This appraisal will assist the Team in its policy advice on the planning application. *Major planning applications are those which provide 0 or more residential units, or ,000m

floorspace or are hectare or more in area.

What is Checklist?

the

Sustainability

The Sustainability Checklist is a quick way to evaluate the environmental and community benefits arising from a proposed property development, and to identify any negative economic social and environmental impacts.

The checklist covers ten aspects of sustainability • Land Use and Location • Transport • Energy • Waste • Community Development • Biodiversity/Open Environment • Built Environment • Pollution • Human Activity • Significance Please note that the checklist identifies a wide range of sustainability issues, but does not prioritise these in any way.

For each of these aspects of development, a project can score between 0 - 10 points, and consequently the maximum score is 100 points.

Projects which exceed 50 will be regarded as broadly sustainable.

The sustainability score is not a direct indication of whether a proposal will be approved or refused, but a low score may well indicate that a project has serious shortcomings.

Notes to help you fill in the checklist Completing the checklist should be a quick exercise. The checklist comprises ten aspects of Sustainability: . . . . .

Land Use and Location Transport Energy Waste Community Development

. Biodiversity/Open Environment . Built Environment . Pollution . Human Activity 0. Significance

For each of these aspects of Sustainability, there are a number of questions with multiple choice answers.

You need to ask yourself, ‘Does my project provide or otherwise affect this matter?’ There is a choice of three

answers for each question, and these score 0, or points. The possible answers are printed in italics. All you have to do is to circle the appropriate answers (one answer per row), enter the scores in the Score column,

and then tot up the scores.

You will find that the questions are largely matters of fact, and so the answers should be easy to provide.

However, you may find it useful to refer to relevant UDP policies (Oct 00 version) and supplementary

guidance, which are indicated for each criterion.

In most sections of the checklist, the fifth and last question deals with ‘other’ matters, ie ‘Is there any other way in which my project affects this aspect of sustainability?’ If the project has no ‘other’ implications, circle ‘not applicable’, and score . If there are ‘other’ consequences, you should state what they are, and indicate whether they amount to a ‘problem’ (score 0), or a ‘benefit’ (score ).

Printed and published by the Planning Policy Team, London Borough of Ealing, Perceval House, 14-16 Uxbridge Road, London W5 2HL. Tel 020 8825 7284.

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc 43

1.0 No 1 1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

2.0

Land Use and Location Land Use and Location

Score 0/0*

Score 1

Score 2

Shops, offices, restaurants etc

none provided, less than before, or not in right place*

provision no less than before, and located in the right place

as score 1 and <200m from complementary uses and public transport

none provided, less

provision no less than before, and located in the right place

as score 1, & <200m from complementary uses and public transport

Industry, warehousing, transport

hotels, places of assembly and leisure, & nonresidential institutions

than before, or not in

right place*

none provided, less than before, or not in

right place*

Leisure and sports associated with open space

none provided, less

Residential, including hospitals and hostels etc

none provided, less

than before, or not in

right place*

than before, or not in

right place*

Score

2

as score 1, & <200m from complementary uses and public transport

provision no less than before, and located in the right place

as 1 and <400m from complementary uses and public transport

0

no less than before, and in the right place

as 1, and <400m from public transport

0

Total score for land use and location

No. 2 2.1

Transport

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Public transport

No improvement

plus improved network

0

2.2

Walking

No improvement

better facilities & links within site better facilities & links within site

plus improved footpath network

0

2.3

Cycling

No improvement

better facilities & links within site

plus improved cycle network

1

2.4

Car parking provision

Provision higher than max standards

no more than max/green travel plan prepared

provision below max. standards/green travel plan

2.5

*Other:

Problem

not applicable

benefit

0

provision no less than before, and located in the right place

*including asterisk if land use is ‘not in the right place’

Transport

2

Total score for Transport:

4

Notes to help you complete the checklist This aspect of sustainability awards a score to the proposed land use, provided that it is in the ‘right place’, i.e. it does not conflict with the area policies in the Plan for the Environment. For example, a mixed-use renovation with ground floor retail use in a designated shopping frontage would be in the right place, but a residential

development in the middle of a Major Employment Location would not.

Development which is not in the right place is likely to be refused planning permission as a departure from the development plan, irrespective of how high it scores against other sustainability indicators. If the proposal is

‘not in the right place’, the score should be asterisked (0*). The asterisk is carried forward to the total.

Note that single use developments will not score as highly as mixed uses, which are in the right place.

As distinct from all other aspects of sustainability, this section does not have an ‘other’ category. This is

uses for residential uses should include shops, community uses and primary schools.

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

44

2 4

Notes to help you complete the checklist This aspect of sustainability provides a measure of the development‘s accessibility by modes other than the car. A score of is available if ‘better facilities’ are planned than existed before. This could mean a new bus stop within the site, or covered cycle parking and showers for example. To get the point, there must also be ‘better links’ to the public transport, pedestrian or cycle routes. Two points are awarded in each case, if the developer is proposing to invest in the network so that the capacity or quality of non-car modes of transport is

improved.

A score for ‘parking provision’ is dependent on not providing an excess of parking spaces. A score of point is available where a green travel plan has been prepared and parking provision is no more than maximum standards indicated in the UDP. An additional point is available where parking provision is below maximum standards. The primary purpose of the GTP (Green Travel Plan) will be to achieve sufficient public transport

opportunities so as to avoid spillage of on-street parking within the neighbourhood of the development.

There may well be ‘other’ transport implications of the development. For example if the developer sets out to attract car-borne trade by making a restaurant a ‘drive-in’, this would be unsustainable and would score 0. On the other hand, if an industrial development is to be serviced by rail or there is a traffic management scheme

associated with the project, this would gain an extra score of .

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

UDP policy/SPG reference 9.4, SG21 9.5, SG21 9.6, 5.5, SG21 9.1, SG21 9.1, SG21

UDP policy/SPG reference 7.2, 7.7, 7.8, 6.1, 6.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, SG24 6.1, 6.4, SG24 5.1, SG24 6.7, 8.4, 8.6, 8.8, SG24 3.5, 8.4, SG24

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

1

* Cycles will be provided to staff and loaned to guests on request

because all land uses should be classified in one or more of the five categories offered.

An extra point is available if the proposed land use is near public transport ie a bus stop or station. In all cases except for leisure with open space, the proposal must also be near ‘complementary uses’ if it is to score the extra point. This means uses which might be visited during a trip to the proposed land use. For example, the complementary uses for a proposed shop would include other shops or leisure uses. Note: the complementary

Score

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

3.0

4.0

Energy Energy

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Energy efficient building systems and appliances

none

insulation and double glazing provided

plus heating and lighting systems

3.2

Layout: minimise wind chill

no

no additional energy use

wind chill minimised

3.3

Layout: maximise sunlight

no

no additional energy use

sunlight maximise 2

4.3

Composting facilities

3.4

Renewable Energy provision

none

renewable energy generated on site

10% or greater of energy consumed 2 produced on site

4.4

3.5

*Other:

problem

not applicable

benefit 2

4.5

No. 3 3.1

Score

Waste

Total score for Energy:

2

No. 4 4.1

Waste

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Recycling facilities

none

provided on site

provided and managed

4.2

Water efficiency

none

preventative measures to minimise water consumption

plus provision for reuse of ground water

none

facilities provided on site

facilities provided and managed

Recycled/reused building materials used in project

none

use of recycled or reused materials

with >30% of these materials originating 1 on site.

*Other:

problem

not applicable

benefit 2

2

2 2 0

Total score for Waste:

10

* Use of "Green Roof - Sedum Mat". This will substantially reduce heat loss and will keep the building cooler in summer so less energy required running air-conditioning.

Score

7

Recycling greywater from showers and washbasins and harvesting rainfall, reusing to flush toilets

Notes to help you complete the checklist This aspect of sustainability relates to energy conservation and the use of renewable energy. Where These matters are not planned for, no points will be awarded. However, if there will be ‘no energy use’ (eg playing fields or storage sheds), a score of is awarded.

In respect of energy efficient building systems and appliances, a score of point is awarded where insulation and double glazing are provided to reduce heat loss and maximise solar gain. An additional point would be awarded where the installation of heating and lighting systems are also proposed, eg. low energy lighting,

condensing boilers etc.

With regard to the layout of the proposed development a scheme which generates no additional energy use is awarded a score of . A further point will be awarded where wind chill is minimised and sunlight maximised

through careful layout.

The installation of renewable energy generating equipment is encouraged both in UDP policy and SPG. Examples of which could include photovoltaics, wind power, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis etc. Accordingly, installations for the generation of renewable energy would merit point. Where 0% or more of the energy

Notes to help you complete the checklist Scores are awarded for good waste management. A distinction is drawn between the provision of facilities (for recycling and composting) which merits a score of , and an undertaking to use these facilities through the life of the project, which scores . There is also consideration of building materials used in creating the development, with scores for using recycled and reused materials from local demolition sites - eg hardcore recycled from crushed material, and bricks which are salvaged for reuse. In this respect a score of points is

awarded where greater than 0% of the recycled or reused material originated on site.

Water efficiency is also encouraged and a score of point will be awarded where preventative measures are taken to minimise water consumption. An additional point is available where provision is made for the reuse of

groundwater.

Again, there is scope for recognition of ‘other’ waste management initiatives. A score of can be awarded for the development of installations for generating energy from waste.

consumed on site is to be produced by these installations, points will be awarded.

‘Other’ forms of sustainable energy use might include the use of low energy vehicles as part of the

development.

Checklist no. .

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

Policy/SPG reference

UDP policy/SPG reference 4.1, 2.9, 5.5, SG12 4.1, 2.9, 5.5, SG12 4.1, 2.9, 5.5, SG12 4.1, 2.9, 5.5, SG12 SG12

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

. . . .

UDP policy/SPG reference 2.10, 5.5, SG12, SG4 2.5, SG12, SG2 2.10, SG4, SG12 2.1, 2.10, 4.1 2.9

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

45

5.0

6.0

Community Development

No. 5 5.1

Community Development

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Community safety

not considered

proposal referred to CPDA

plus complies with‘Safer Ealing’

5.2

Access for all

not considered

proposal referred to Access Committee

plus complies with‘Accessible Ealing’

2

action taken

responses reflect borough’s diverse community

2

5.3

5.4

5.5

Inclusive consultation

Community support

*Other:

not considered

no consultation or significant opposition on planning grounds

development favourably viewed by majority

plus support from at least one ‘target’ community

problem

not applicable

benefit

Score

2

1

Biodiversity and Open Environment

No. 6

Biodiversity and Open Environment

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

6.1

Biodiversity

harmful effect

no loss of biodiversity/No change

biodiversity improved

2

6.2

Designated green space*

none/reduced

Retained

created/increased

2

6.3

Non-designated green space

none/existing area reduced

Retained

created/increased 2

6.4

Tree protection & planting

none

Complies with SPG

Best practice achieved

2

6.5

Other:

problem

not applicable

benefit

1

Total score for Biodiversity:

2

Total score for Community Development

Score

9

9 * Excludes nature conservation designations which are dealt with in 6.1

* Regenerating rundown properties and improving the area visually, and also increasing the surveillance of the public realm and reducing crime by increasing the ground floor windows, CCTV cameras and hour reception staff Notes to help you complete the checklist Recognition is awarded to development which is designed with community safety and access for all in mind, and which provides gardens or other space for food growing. These are all necessary aspects of a sustainable

community. Community involvement in the development process is also an important factor.

A score of is available to projects which have been referred to the ‘CPDA’ - Crime Prevention Design Adviser, who liaises with the council on community safety. A score of is awarded if the project is consistent

with the council’s guidance on planning for a ‘Safer Ealing’.

Similarly, a score of is available if projects have been referred to the Ealing Access Committee, an independent committee of local people with disabilities who make recommendations to the council on planning

and transport matters. A project which complies with the council’s guidance ‘Accessible Ealing’ will score .

Developers should involve and consult the local community prior to submitting a planning application. It is important that this consultation is inclusive, i.e. efforts are made to reflect the different groups making up Ealing’s diverse population. A score of is available where inclusive consultation has been undertaken. A score of is awarded where the proportion of responses from ‘target groups’ reflects the proportionate size of these groups in the population. Moving onto ‘community support’ for the development. Where no preapplication consultation is undertaken or significant opposition is levelled against the proposal 0 points will be awarded. This opposition will only be considered where it relates to matters which are material to land use planning. Development which is viewed favourably by the majority of the public on valid planning grounds will merit point. A second point will be awarded where overall support is reinforced by support from either ethnic

Notes to help you complete the checklist This aspect of sustainability values the protection and enhancement of the natural environment. A score of is available if there is no loss of this land or biodiversity. The development can score points if there is an

increase in biodiversity, designated green space or landscaped/garden area.

In respect of tree protection and planting a score of point is awarded where the proposal complies with the planning criteria in the SPG on trees (SG ). A score of two will be given for achieving the recommended (but

optional) best practice also outlined in this SPG.

‘Other’ opportunities to improve biodiversity and the open environment include enhancement initiatives such as allotment improvements, nature conservation management regimes etc. Scores of 0 for ‘other’ biodiversity issues can arise from development which would overshadow a nature conservation area or produce pollution

which would damage the local ecology.

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

UDP policy/SPG reference 3.8 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.8, 4.5, SG13 4.5, SG9

minorities, women or disabled persons.

‘Other’ elements of community development can be valued too - including the location of a project where it is particularly needed by the community - eg development in a community regeneration area, the provision of parks, nature conservation areas or leisure facilities in an area where such facilities are lacking. These are

shown in the Plan for the Environment, but the principle can apply to other community needs too.

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

46

UDP policy/SPG reference 4.4, SG8 4.3, SG7 5.5, 5.9

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

7.0

8.0

Built Environment Built Environment

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Previously Developed Land (PDL)

Not PDL

PDL

PDL comprising vacant & dilapidated buildings

7.2

Existing building(s)

<75% retained

>75% retained

>75% retained and renovated

0

7.3

Heritage value

Value reduced

not applicable or, heritage protected

value enhanced

1

No. 7 7.1

7.4

Relationship to neighbouring properties

Incompatible

compatible

positive Improvement

7.5

*Other:

Problem

not applicable

benefit Total score for Built Environment

Score

2

2 2

Pollution

No. 8 8.1

Pollution

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Score

Air

increased

No change

Reduced

1

8.2

Water

increased

No change

Reduced

0

8.3

Land

Contamination, but not yet investigated

No contamination problem, or planned remediation

Land to be remediated on site.

1

8.4

Noise

Noise problem but no action taken

no noise problem, or measures taken to minimise effects

Improvements in noise quality in the area.

1

8.5

other:

problem

not applicable

Benefit

1

Total score for Pollution:

7

4

* On the advice of Officers a high quality Modern Contemporary Building Design Notes to help you complete the checklist This section recognises the value of development on previously developed land, the renovation of existing buildings, the need to protect heritage value and the importance of good quality design.

The need for good quality design is particularly important in respect of the relationship of the proposal with neighbouring properties. This criterion effectively measures the ‘neighbourliness’ of the proposal and scores are awarded depending on the capability of the project with neighbouring properties. Moreover, a higher score will be awarded where a scheme brings positive improvements/enhancements to the neighbouring area. In assessing the compatibility of a project in terms of its design, attention should be paid to policies . & . of

the UDP which establish good design criteria.

‘Other’ benefits and problems associated with the good built environment include treatment of high buildings,

views, exceptional design quality and quality of accommodation for users.

. . . .

This aspect of sustainability is concerned with air, water, land and noise pollution. It considers the effects of these pollution problems on the development in question, and it also considers any pollution caused by the development. A score of is available in the case of air and water pollution, where the level of pollution is reduced or mitigated. The reference to air pollution includes ‘process’ fumes ie air pollution caused by

industrial processes or air conditioning. It also takes account of traffic fumes.

With regard to the issue of contaminated land, a scheme will score , where no contamination exists on site, or where remediation works are planned. A score of is awarded where the land is to be remediated on site to a

level which is ‘suitable for use’.

In respect of noise pollution, a scheme will score where no noise problem exists or measures are planned to minimise noise pollution. Where the proposal would enhance the noise quality of the local environment, i.e. by

replacing a ‘noisy’ use, the proposal will be awarded a score of .

‘Other’ pollution issues can also be considered. For example light pollution, which can include the effect of light spillage on the amenity of neighbouring properties often associated with floodlighting, or the impact of

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. .

Notes to help you complete the checklist

unnecessary light on the visibility of the stars in the night sky.

UDP policy/SPG reference 2.2, 5.1 2.1, 5.1 3.3, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9 4.1, 5.5, SG5 4.1, SG5, SG14, SG15, SG16, SG19, SG6

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

UDP policy/SPG reference 2.6, 9.1, SG3 2.6, 2.5, SG2 2.7 4.11, SG11 4.12

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

47

9.0

Human Activity

10.0 Significance

No. 9 9.1

Human Activity

Score 0

Score 1

Score 2

Paid Employment

none or less than before

no less than before

More than before

2

9.2

Commercial goods/services

none or less than before

no less than before

More than before

2

9.3

*Social goods and services

none or less than

no less than before

More than before 2

before 9.4 9.5

Score

No. 10

Significance

Score –10

Score 0

Score +10

Select one of the following:

Significant problems indicate what they are:

No particular significance

Significant benefits - indicate what they are:

Not applicable Land Use and Location Transport Energy Waste Community Development

Management of activity by local people

none or less than before

no less than before

**other:

problem

not applicable

Biodiversity/Open Environment *Built Environment Pollution Human Activity Other:

More than before 2 Benefit

2

Total score for Human Activity:

10 The Hotel intends to play a major role in the “Neighbourhood Watch” scheme, as we will have CCTV cameras and hour staff. ** Purchasing of foodstuffs from "Fair Trade" sources and use of recycled paper for stationary Notes to help you complete the checklist

See Note below

Total score for Significance:

10

10

* North Greenford has hardly seen any new investment in recent years, this is an opportunity to redevelop rundown buildings and replace them with a modern attractive building that is will score highly in sustainability and will help revitalise the whole area Notes to help you complete the checklist

This aspect of sustainability recognises ‘paid employment’, the availability of ‘goods and services’ for local consumption, and the involvement of local people in the ‘management’ of these activities.

This aspect of sustainability is rather different from the other nine. It allows a full 0 points to be added to or

‘Commercial’ goods and services include food and other convenience and durable goods, and all types of services from cafes to concert halls. ‘Social’ goods and services are those which are provided through some form of state or voluntary sector intervention. This latter category may exist because some goods and services are not provided on a commercial basis eg public parks, libraries, or because commercial provision is too

checklist.

expensive for many people, eg social housing, the health service and free education.

In some types of goods and service, eg music, arts and drama, it may be that commercial production can only sustain a fairly limited range of choice. In this case, there is room for community-based cultural activity and

state-support for innovative or minority cultural activity.

Commercial and social goods and services are measured in terms of the amount of floorspace or residential

units that will result on site.

The ‘management’ category recognises the value of local involvement in the various activities in the area, for

example it can highlight local business initiatives, and local community projects.

subtracted from the score for the development on the basis of one significant sustainability issue. It applies if there is one obvious and important issue which has not been valued sufficiently in the previous sections of the

There may in fact not be a major sustainability issue, in which case ‘not applicable’ should be circled along with

‘no particular significance’, and the score will be 0.

However, it may be appropriate to circle one of the aspects of sustainability listed, or indeed to circle ‘other’ (which could be something not properly described by the items on the list, or could be a combination of more than one of these items). It is then necessary to indicate if this is a ‘problem’ by circling the italicised text and then to describe the problem eg major building in the green belt, a major car traffic generator, a major polluting industry. On the other hand, it might be that the significant issue is a ‘benefit’ in sustainability terms, and this should then be described, eg a major development powered by renewable energy, a housing renovation and conversion project with an innovative recycling scheme, a new transport interchange, a mixed development

providing major employment opportunities.

‘Significance’ only allows for one score, and this can be either + 0 or - 0, no more and no less.

‘Other’ activities with a sustainability implication include: • green business (if not accounted for elsewhere) • information technology initiatives • fair trading • co-operative development • unpaid work in the production (as opposed to the consumption) of community activities etc • the activity is aimed at social groups which are normally excluded – e.g. people on low income & different ethnic groups.

Policy/SPG reference Checklist no. . . . . .

UDP policy/SPG reference 1.6, 6.1 7.6 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.7, 8.6, SG20 SG20

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

48

Score

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

Sustainability Checklist SUMMARY

For office use only Applicant’ s SCORE

Land Use and Location (incl *)

4

Transport

4

Energy

10

Waste

7

Community Development

9

Biodiversity

Planning Services: Any Negotiated Changes

Final Proposal SCORE

Comments from Planning Policy Team

9

Built Environment

7

Pollution

4

Human Activity

10

Significance

10

Total (out of 100)

PPT commentary

PPT score

Conclusions

74

Summary Finally, the scores for the individual aspects of sustainability should be totalled in the Checklist Summary.

Commentary This is for council officers in the Planning Policy Team to comment on the assessment of Sustainability.

Officers may contact the applicant. This commentary is the basis of policy advice on the development.

It is important for the applicant’s sustainability assessment to be available. This will be considered fully when a decision is being made on the planning application. If there are any alternative views expressed by officers,

both points of view will be set out in the application report.

Planning Policy Officer:…………………………..

PLANNING POLICY 020 8825 8446 or 020 8825 7284

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc

LONDON BOROUGH OF EALING PERCEVAL HOUSE, 14-16 UXBRIDGE ROAD LONDON W5 2HL

G:\Policy\madaline\spg\01-Sustainability.doc 49

Water, Drainage, Flood Risk and Development SPG2

REFUSE RECYCLING

The Council has issued SPG2 to complement in particular Policy 2.5 of the Replacement UDP – Ealing’s New Plan for the Environment, which seeks to ensure that developments in the Borough: • conserve water • provide for proper drainage infrastructure • avoid and reduce flood risk, and • reduce run off and pollution from surface water

Storing waste for recycling and disposal SPG 4

Response: The site is not within a flood risk area according to the Environment Agency.

The proposal has taken account of this policy and SPG2 in the following manner: 1. The Car Park surface will be constructed in permeable materials to reduce rainwater run-off into drains 2. The Green Roof will reduce rainwater run-off by as much as 60-80% and we will be looking into rainwaterharvesting solutions to re-use the remainder within the hotel 3. Water conservation will incorporate the following: (i) Grey water harvesting (ii) Water leakage reduction through use of water fuses (iii) Usage of less water during construction stage as most of the building, the bedroom pods are being manufactured Off-site in a factory under a controlled environment (iv) Water efficient taps (v) Water efficient toilets (vi) Passive infrared Sensors (PIR) in Urinals (vii) Low output showers (viii) Flow restrictors to manage water pressures to achieve optimisation (ix) Use of a water meter with device attached to guide consumption and increase savings

4. The development will not have any use that creates pollution affecting the quality of ground water.

Further guidance will be sought from Envirowise (www.envirowise.gov.uk), and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, DEFRA, regarding the Enhanced Capital Allowances Scheme for water Technologies (www.eca-water.gov.uk)

The New Plan for the Environment includes policies for Waste Minimisation and Management (Policy 2.10), the Design of Development (Policy 4.1) and Residential Design (5.5). These policies indicate that appropriately designed bins and enclosures need to be provided in conjunction with new buildings and other development, so that materials which are no longer required can be stored pending collection for recycling or disposal.

This document supplements the policies in the New Plan for the Environment. It provides guidance on the location and design of bins and enclosures.

In development where storage facilities for waste recycling and disposal are proposed, the following design criteria should be met: 1. stands, containers and enclosures, should be located conveniently to the nearest access point for the collection vehicles. Skips require vehicle access at the location of the skip; 2. enclosures for mobile containers should be located where they can be screened from the street and neighbours; either by structures, buildings or landscaping.

3. Where collection cannot be undertaken from the rear or side of a property, recycling and refuse enclosures should be provided in the forecourt or front garden if there is no alternative, and should be well located in relation to each dwelling. These should be kept as low as possible; constructed in materials to match the front elevation of the property; provided with a watertight roof and doors; and screened by planting with adequate provision of soil, if appropriate; 4. the provision of recycling and refuse, enclosures should be included in the design of buildings or boundary walls where possible; 5. adequate space should be provided for the appropriate volume of waste for recycling, according to the individual development; 6. Stands and enclosures must be located not more than 25m from the nearest access point for the collection vehicle; and wheeled refuse containers not more than 10m away from the vehicle access point and preferably on a level surface; 7. Access roads and approaches to buildings should be level or have a gradient from the refuse storage area of not greater than 1:12. Drop kerbs should be provided to permit safe transfer of wheeled containers to carriageway level.

Response: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

The bin enclosure is located at the nearest access point on Wadham Gardens for collection vehicles The enclosure is totally enclosed within the building and does not need further screening Not applicable Already designed as part of the building Adequate space provided, approximately 20 sq.mts.

Enclosure is only 4 metres from the the access point on Wadham Gardens for collection vehicles.

The gradient will comply and a drop kerb will be provided

A contract will be in place to recycle as much waste as possible, to this effect initial approaches have been made to Biffa Waste Services

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group 50

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group

Philip Dinn MSc. BSc (Hons). MIOA. MCIEH. 01590 624588, 07712588636 dinnwin@btopenworld.com ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONTENTS Section 1

Executive Summary

Section 2

Noise and Vibration

Environmental Study covering Noise and Vibration, Air Quality and Contaminated Land

3

Executive summary

4

General

4

Development and existing noise sensitive premises

5

Development of noise sensitive premises in existing noise climate 9

For Redevelopment of: 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road.

Section 3

Section 4

Appendix 1

Survey data

11

Appendix 2

Graphical data

14

Appendix 3

Equipment

17

Appendix 4

Photographs

19

Air Quality Executive Summary

21

Background information

21

Contaminated Land Executive Summary

23

Background information

23

Appendix 5

25

Historical maps

© Dinnwin Environmental Ltd 2007 ________________________________________________________________________

Dinnwin Environmental Limited. Registered in England and Wales. Registration Number: 4861782 Registered office: 7 Lynwood Court, Priestlands Place, Lymington, Hampshire, SO41 9GA

2 51

1

Executive Summary

SECTION 2

1.1

There are no reasons for refusal for planning permission on grounds of noise or vibration.

2.1

Noise and Vibration

Executive Summary – Noise and Vibration

1.2

Noise monitoring on site has identified that the development of a hotel will be subject to high noise levels caused by local traffic but that sufficient attenuation can be achieved to ensure a good internal noise standard.

2.1.1 Noise monitoring on site has identified that the development of a hotel will be subject to high noise levels caused by local traffic but that sufficient attenuation can be achieved to ensure a good internal noise standard.

1.3

Existing noise background levels have been monitored at noise sensitive premises to ensure that all noise creating activities associated with the development are designed to meet the requirements of Supplementary Planning Guidance 10, Noise and Vibration.

2.1.2 Existing noise background levels have been monitored at noise sensitive premises to ensure that all noise creating activities associated with the development are designed to meet the requirements of Supplementary Planning Guidance 10, Noise and Vibration.

1.4

Initial discussions with officers in the Environmental Quality Team confirmed that the development was not considered to be subject to levels of vibration that would require further study.

1.5

There are no reasons for refusal for planning permission on grounds of air quality.

1.6

This development is not taking place in an area identified by the Council as an area where government objectives for nitrogen dioxide are likely to be exceeded. The application of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges screening software confirms this.

1.7

The development is proposed in an area where PM10 particle levels comply with objectives covered by Regulations and where the indicative objective for London in 2010 is just likely to be met. This is primarily caused by the high background levels across London. It is recommended that air drawn into the ventilation system is from a point furthest away from the front façade.

1.8

The scale of the development and level of extra traffic flow generated is so low as not being able to make any identifiable increase in pollution in this area.

1.9

There are no reasons relating to contaminated land to refuse planning permission or to require site investigative works at this site.

1.10

There is no record activity likely to give rise to contamination prior to the development of this site, at some point between 1914 and 1936.

1.11

There has been no change in use since 1936 and there is no record of the warehouse, shops or flats having any use which could give rise to contamination of the land on which it was built.

2.1.3 Initial discussions with officers in the Environmental Quality Team confirmed that the development was not considered to be subject to levels of vibration that would require further study.

2.1.4

There are no grounds for refusal on noise matters.

2.1.5 Specific reference to Ealing SPG 10. Noise control in the UK is subject to various statutory controls, standards and guidance which have been bought together in the form of Supplementary Planning Guidance 10. This noise report has therefore been structured to correlate with that guidance and avoid unnecessary repetition.

2.2

General description of area and observations.

2.2.1 The proposed development comprises the demolition of 3 retail units with flats above fronting onto the junction of Greenford Road and Old Field Lane North with flanking walls along Wadham Gardens and the adjacent domestic property of 1121 Greenford Rd. There is a warehouse unit to the rear which also forms part of the redevelopment site. The proposed development comprises of a hotel with 59 guest bedrooms (including 3 to cater for guests with special needs) and 4 staff units. There is also provision for secure parking for 22 cars, service vehicle and 6 bicycles 2.2.2 The Greenford Road has an annual average daily traffic flow of 31,623 (London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory 2003) which is interrupted at this point by tailbacks on the north flowing carriage way caused by the junction with Whitton Avenue. Traffic waiting in Old Field Lane North at the junction with Greenford Road also adds to the traffic noise at this point and is characterised by low frequency engine noise of vehicles pulling away and the playing of hi-fi equipment in vehicles, in addition to high frequency sirens of emergency vehicles approaching this junction.

2.2.3 Graph 1 in Appendix 2 gives a good visual representation of the erratic nature of the traffic flow at the start of the evening rush hour. Graph 2 gives an example of the differing 1/3 octave analysis experienced (A weighted) over very short periods of time. Each of the lines gives an analysis of an individual sound pressure level lasting 1/10 second and demonstrates the low frequency and high frequency peaks that are experienced above the quieter periods.

2.2.4 Graph 4 shows how during the course of the late evening and into the night there is a slow reduction in the background (LA90) noise level but the area is still subject to relatively high peak values demonstrating the need for careful consideration of attenuation to ensure good internal noise levels on this façade.

3 52

4

2.2.5 The clinic in Wadham Gardens to the rear of the proposed development is a day time NHS clinic which does not have provision for overnight medical care. The day clinic does carry out hearing tests and speech therapy sessions for children. The design criteria for plant and equipment for the nearest noise sensitive premises (rear of 1121 Greenford Road) is expected to ensure that there is no intrusive noise.

2.3

Development and existing noise sensitive premises.

2.3.1 The proposed development has the potential to cause disturbance through the following activities.

Roof mounted plant and equipment.

Operation of kitchen extract plant Movement of vehicles entering and exiting via Wadham Gardens Amplified music and speech transmitted from a source (the restaurant) not attached to a sensitive site (1121 Greenford Road).

2.3.2 The operation of plant and equipment and movement of commercial vehicles are covered the requirements of Ealing SPG 10, Section 3A. 2.3.3 The potential for noise breakout from music and by patrons is covered by the requirements of Ealing SPG 10, Section 3 B. 2.3.4 Application of BS 4142. Two monitoring sites were identified as being in close proximity to the most noise sensitive dependant on different activities. No details of plant are available at present so the application at this stage is restricted to establishing the background.

2.3.5 The equipment used is detailed in Appendix 3 including copies of the relevant certification.

Details of the sites and observations are recorded below.

2.3.6 Weather on 11/12/13 April was consistently dry and sunny during the day with no perceptible wind by day or night.

2.3.7 Initial site investigations. A brief and comprehensive initial survey was carried out to estimate the acoustic climate and establish appropriate monitoring points. Photographs of these sites are found in Appendix 4. a) Pavement outside 5 Rex Court. This point was picked as being opposite the rear access to the proposed hotel. It was evident that the main perceived source of noise was from Greenford Road. b) Pavement outside the bend in Wadham Gardens. This point was picked as being further away from the effects of traffic on Greenford Road and with line of sight to proposed plant on the roof of the hotel. The day clinic is also visible. c) Pavement to front of 1117 Greenford Road. This is an area of high traffic noise but passing pedestrian access required a more discrete and secure monitoring location. It is however evident that there is a similar noise exposure to 1121 which is the first premises after the shops.

and flank wall to 1121 Greenford are evident to the left of the photograph. insecure for unattended monitoring.

2.3.8

It was deemed to be

Definitive monitoring positions. (Appendix 4 Photographs)

2.3.9 Front faรงade of 1117 Greenford Road. The microphone was mounted on an extension arm protruding from the louver window above the door way to the empty shop. The external noise was personally monitored from within the shop during periods of recording to ensure that there was no extraneous noise from the flat above or pedestrian activity directed against the microphone. The microphone was 1.2 m from the solid faรงade of the shop / flat and 3m above ground level.

2.3.10 Outside 5 Rex Court. The microphone was attached to the end of an extension arm and fixed to the Land Rover parked outside of 5 Rex Court.

2.3.11 Tripod mounted rear of 1121 Greenford Road.

2.3.12 Noise sensitive background site 1. Rex Court in Wadham Gardens is directly opposite the proposed vehicular access and roof mounted air handing plant. It is however anticipated that given the relative height of the proposed plant there may be some barrier effect which will be less effective at greater distance.

2.3.13 Initial site investigations confirmed that the relative noise levels taken at a height of 1.2m in front of 5 Rex Court and bend in Wadham Gardens show a reduction in the background levels away from the Greenford Road. However the expected attenuation over distance from any point source equipment on the roof of the hotel is greater. 5 Rex Court was therefore selected as the most sensitive site in Wadham Gardens with the provision that the lowest night time LA90 is likely to be in the order of 1 - 2 dBA lower at the bend in Wadham Gardens when background levels would converge when direct noise from the Greenford Road reduces at night 2.3.14 Any direct comparisons should be considered in the context of the known fluctuating conditions that occur in traffic flows at this point on the Greenford Road.

Table 1.

Extract from Appendix 1 Survey Data

Date Ref 11/04/07 700 703

Duration Time 15m 13:02 15m 15:26

LAmax 73.4 68

LA10 56.5 56.7

LAeq 54.5 53.8

LA90 45.9 46.4

LAmin Observations 39.2 5 Rex Court 38.7 5 Rex Court

15m

15:43

67.8

54

51.4

42.7

37.3

12/04/07 711

5m

01:27

67.1

59.3

54.1

41

37.4

712

5m

01:34

52.4

45.6

42.2

38.1

36.1

713

5m

01:43

63.5

52.3

48

38.7

37.2

704

Bend in Wadham Gardens 5 Rex Court inc 1 aircraft movement Bend in Wadham Road 5 Rex Court

d) Rear yard to 1119 Greenford Road. This was accessed via an alley way between the shops and 1121 Greenford Road and gave access to the flats above the shops. It can be seen from the photograph that the site was secluded and well shielded from the Greenford Road. The alley-way

2.3.15 It was not possible to leave the SLM in the front garden of 5 Rex Court, under normal free field conditions as recommended in BS 4142:1997. The microphone was attached to an extension arm and connected to the SLM via an extension cable. The microphone was checked with both the external acoustic calibrator and internal calibrator at the start and finish of the monitoring exercise, during which the SLM body was housed inside the Land Rover. The extension arm was fixed to the Land Rover securing an overall height of 3.5m from ground level at distance of 7m from the faรงade

5

6 53

of Rex Court. The Land Rover is fitted with a plywood roof decking to minimise reflections from the roof. The site gave uninterrupted acoustic transmission from surrounding sources as opposed to the pavement measurements which were subject to some shielding / reflections by parked vehicles.

Table 2.

Date 12/04/07

Lowest LA90 (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 Graph 5) Ref 714

Duration Time 15m 03:19

LAmax 64.9

LA10 51.7

LAeq 48.1

LA90 39

LAmin 37.1

Observations Microphone mounted on extension arm.

2.3.16 Examination of the results in Appendix 1 Survey data and Appendix 2 Graph 5 shows that the LA90 was fairly constant between 02:00 hrs and 04:00 hrs. From 02:30 onwards the LAmax start to rise and the corresponding LA10 and LAeq. 2.3.17 LA 90 of 39 dB at 5 Rex Court would indicate a likely LA90 of 37 -38 dB at the bend in Wadham Road however it should be noted that the effects of Greenford Road on the background will become less pronounced. The traffic flow data collected the same night indicates that traffic flow down Wadham Gardens would have acoustically affected both sites.

2.3.18 Noise sensitive background site 2. 1121 Greenford Road is directly adjacent to the proposed hotel and initial sound pressure levels taken in the rear courtyard of 1119 indicated that the rear façade of the 1121 Greenford Avenue could be more sensitive than the front façade of 5 Rex Court.

Table 3.

Date Ref 11/04/07 702 706 12/04/07 710

Extract from Appendix 1 Survey Data Duration 12m49s 13m6s 5m

Time 14:09 16:18 01:13

LAmax 72.2 63.6 60.2

LA10 56.6 53.7 51.5

LAeq 54 51.1 47.5

LA90 45.9 46.6 36.3

LAmin 39.4 43.6 33.4

Observations Rear yard Rear yard Rear yard includes 1 aircraft movement

2.3.21 Comparisons between sites show a similar levelling out of LA90 between 02:00 and 04:00 with both minimums occurring at just after 03:00 hrs with LA10 and LAeq reflecting the increased shielding from the Greenford Road than that experienced outside 5 Rex Court. Given the time of levelling of the LA90 it seems likely that any potential contribution from the water feature level remained below the background level.

2.3.22 For calculations in relation to fixed plant and equipment on the hotel, the rear of 1121 Greenford Road is the most sensitive premises, and the lowest free field LA90 is 38dB. 2.3.23 Ealing SPG 10 states that background noise levels at sites sheltered from busy main roads in the Borough fall to 40 dB LA90 in the late evening and approach 35 dB LA90 in the middle of the night, and this agrees with the results of this survey.

2.3.24 Details of air handling plant have not yet been made available so it would be expected that the Planning Authority will require a Planning Condition to be implemented.

2.3.25 Information received the Traffic Consultant indicates a trip generation of peak hour AM flow in 5, flow out 8 and peak hour PM hourly flow in 6, flow out 4. This includes deliveries. It is not anticipated that there would be any movements after 23.00 or before 06.00. Access to the parking area will be controlled by a shutter system under the direct control of the 24 hour reception staff so access movements can be monitored if required.

2.3.26 The shutter system has not been identified as yet but it is recommended that full acoustic details are obtained before ordering to ensure compliance with Ealing SPG 10, B2.

2.3.27 Monitoring outside of 5 Rex Court indicates that the area is already subject to traffic movements in excess of those identified in SPG 10 B2, but given the expected level of trip movement and the restrictions on delivery times any increase will not be discernable.

2.3.28 Activities of the new premises outside the remit of BS 4142 2.3.29 Restaurant use activities.

2.3.30 Ealing SPG 10, B1 a) applies as the development is not attached to a noise sensitive premises.

2.3.19 The occupier of 1121Greenford Road agreed to allow monitoring to be carried out on the night of 12/04/07 – 13/04/07.

2.3.20 The area to the rear of the main house contained a pond with a small running water feature so it was not possible to site the sound level monitor in that area. There was however an area to the rear of the garage which meant that there was a stout timber fence between the sound level meter and the water feature. At this point the water was not discernable but it was noted that due to the adjacent alleyway there was less noise shelter from the traffic on the Greenford Road.

Table 4.

Date Ref 13/04/07 717

Lowest LA90 (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 Graph 6) Duration 15m

Time 03:15

LAmax LA10 57.8 47.8

LAeq 44

LA90 38.1

LAmin 35.4

Observations Water feature on all night.

7 54

2.3.31 Monitoring carried out at the front of 1117 Greenford Road is presented in Appendix 1 and Graphs 1, 2, 3 & 4. This indicates the high levels of noise caused by passing of traffic and individual events associated with this.

2.3.32 Personal observations included the effect of individual sirens and hi-fi systems in vehicles affecting both the high and low frequencies perceived. This is clearly identified in Graph 2. It should be noted that the RION NA 28 in wave form function captures data every 1/10 second so the 3 examples represent very specific points in time. Ealing SPG10, B1 a) requires the existing L90 15 min 1/3 octave band levels 50 – 160 Hz to be measured. This has been included in Appendix 2 Graph 3. Also on that graph is the linear frequency analysis of the event identified in Graph 2. This seems to confirm that 15 min period is heavily influenced by several individual events with low frequency peaks, either caused by vehicle hi-fi or engine noise.

2.3.33 It was noted that Volvo engined double decked buses stopped at the junction from Old field Lane North in front of 1121 Greenford Road before pulling away. It is not known if this is the same

8

type of new Volvo engined bus that has been identified elsewhere as having an increased low frequency output.

2.4.7 Ealing SPG 10 Noise and Vibration identifies internal levels that have been adopted as appropriate by the Council and are taken from WHO (99) and BS 8233.

2.3.34 It is noted from Graph 4 that there is little fall off of noise from 19:30 to 00:30 as determined by the LAeq which reflects the LAmax levels and L10 traffic noise despite the lowering of the background values.

Table 6.

2.3.35 Internal noise levels within the restaurant are not expected to be such that it is necessary to install a noise limiter. Design criteria are recommended to reduce internal noise levels by use of non reflective surfaces and positioning of speakers to comply with B1 a) before the need to install a limiter.

2.4

Development of noise sensitive premises in existing noise climate.

2.4.1 An assessment was carried out to ascertain the Noise Exposure Category for the development.

Internal noise levels

Externally generated noise due to transport noise sources, affecting new housing, hostels and hotels.

Area Noise Criteria Bedrooms Not greater than 30 dB LAeq.1hr 23.00 – 07.00 hrs Not greater than 45 dB LAmax,1hr(fast) 23.00 – 07.00 hrs Living rooms & dining rooms Not greater than 35 dB LAeq.1hr 07.00 – 23.00hrs Kitchen / bathrooms / utility rooms Not greater than 45 dB LAeq.1hr 07.00 – 23.00 hrs 2.4.8 Constructional details have not been made available at present but the attenuation to be achieved at the façades should pay particular attention to the low and high frequency peaks identified during the survey.

2.4.2 The development includes the provision of staff accommodation. The hotel guest bed rooms are not directly covered by the provisions of PPG 24 but it is recommended that provisions that apply to the private accommodation should be applied as good practice.

2.4.3 Having regard to internal noise transmission, rooms for residential purposes is a term defined in Regulation 2(1) of the Building Regulations 2000, as amended, as a room, or suite of rooms, which is not a dwelling house or flat and which is used by one or more persons to live and sleep in, including rooms in hotels, etc.

Table 5

Determination of Noise Exposure Category

Comments Measured Calculated Calculated Measured

Units of measurement LA10.3hr LA10.18hr LAeq.16hr LAeq.3hr

Measured

LAeq.4hr

Estimated Measured

LAeq.8hr LAeq.2.75hr

2.4.4

Results 69.7 68.7 66.7 67.8 64.7 66.4 64.4 59 65.6 63.6

1.2 m from façade Using CTRN shortened measurement procedure PPG24 Annex 1 Para 9 12/4/07 AM Façade correction 11/4/07 PM Façade correction Using data from Wadham Gardens 11/4/07 Façade correction

For the purposes of PPG 24 the development will be in Noise Exposure Category C.

2.4.5 For Category C sites the advice in PPG 24 for new dwellings is ‘Planning permission should not normally be granted. Where it is considered that permission should be given, for example because there are no alternative quieter sites available, conditions should be imposed to ensure a commensurate level of protection against noise’.

2.4.6 The granting of permission is therefore dependant upon circumstances. In this instance the concept of dwellings as applied to staff living accommodation may be considered to be disproportionate for considering refusal but appropriate in terms of applying conditions to ensure an appropriate internal noise level. Staff accommodation is provided, in part, to reduce the need for staff to use personal modes of transport when the public transport system is not available.

9

10 55

APPENDIX 1

SURVEY DATA

APPENDIX Date Ref Duration /0 / 00 Calibrate AU 00 m A wieghted 0 m 0s Fast 0 m s 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m s Calibrate AU 0 m AU 0 m m m AU 0 m AU 0 m m m s 0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m Calibrate 0 m m m m Calibrate m m m m m

m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

SURVEY DATA Time Lmax L 0

LAeq L 0

Lmin Observations

:0 : :0 : : :0 :

. .

. .

0. .

. Pavement outside Rex Court . Front pavement Greenford Rd . Rear yard Greenford Rd . Front pavement Rex Ct . Bend in Wadham Gdns . Front pavement Greenford Rd . Rear yard Greenford Rd Mount on pole to project . m from faรงade of Greenford Rd Wave form & / octave . . .

Wave form & / octave . . . Change batteries .

. .

0. . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . . .

0.

. . .

. . .

.

0. . .

. .

. . . . . . .

:0 : : 0 : : : : :0 : : : : 0: 0: 0: 0: : : : : : : : : : : : : 00: 00: 00:

. . .

0 0. . . . . . . .

. .

. . .

. . . . . .

. . .

0. . . . . . . .

0 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :

0. . . .

0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0

0. .

0.

.

. . . . Rear yard inc. aircraft . . . Rex Court inc aircraft . . . . Bend in Wadham Gdns . . . Outside Rex Court Mount on Land Rover . . . .

0. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. .

0 .

0.

0. .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . .

0. . . . . . .

11

Calibrate m Calibrate hr Calibrate AU 0 m Calibrate Au m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0

. . . .

.

.

0. .

0. . .

. .

.

. . . .

. .

. . . . .

. .

0. . .

0.

. . . . . . . . .

0.

0. . .

. . . . .

. .

0.

. . . . . .

0. . .

. . . . . .

0. . 0. . Rex Court pavement

0:00 . . . . . Pole in front of : :00 : : 0 : :00 : : 0 : :00 : : 0 : :00 : : 0 : 0:00 0: 0: 0 0: :00 : : 0 : :00 : : 0 : :00 : : 0 : 00:00 00: 00: 0 00: 0 :00 0 : 0 : 0 0 :

Wave form & / octave 0.

0. .

0. . . . . . .

0. . . . . . .

0. . . . . . . . .

0. . .

0. . .

0. . . . . . . .

.

. . . .

0. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . .

0.

0. . . . . . .

.

0. . . . .

0. . . . . . .

.

0. . . .

0. . .

0.

0.

0. .

0.

0. . . .

.

0. . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0. . .

0.

0 . . .

. Rear of Greenford Road 0. . . .

0. . . . .

. . . .

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0. . .

0.

0. . . . . . . . .

.

. .

12 56

APPENDIX 2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0. .

GRAPHS

GRAPH 1

1117 Greenford Road

0

0

0

dB

0 LAF 0

0

0

0 :0 :

11th April 2007

GRAPH 2

minutes starting .0

Ref 7212 @ 17:16:51.7, Ref 7216 @ 17:16:52.1, Ref 2537 @ 17:09:05.2

0 0 0 0 0 Ref Ref

0

Ref 0 0 0

0 kHz

kHz

. kHz

kHz

0 kHz

kHz

. kHz

kHz

. kHz

kHz

. kHz

. kHz

kHz

. kHz

00 Hz

0 Hz

00 Hz

00 Hz

Hz

0 Hz

00 Hz

0 Hz

Hz

0 Hz

00 Hz

Hz

0 Hz

- 0

0 Hz

0 Hz

. . .

. . . . . .

0.

0. . .

.

. Hz

.

.

. . . .

. . . .

0.

0 Hz

.

. . . . . . .

0. . . .

.

Hz

.

0.

. .

.

0.

0. . .

0. .

0. .

. Hz

0 :00 0 : 0 : 0 0 : 0 :00 0 : 0 : 0 0 : 0 :00 0 : 0 : 0 0 : 0 :00 0 : 0 : 0 0 :

dBA

Calibrate

m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

1/3 octave

13

14 57

GRAPH 5

GRAPH 3

Outside Rex Court 12th April 2007

0

Ref 7212 linear & L90(15min)linear - start 17:04:52, 11th April in front of 1117 Greenford Rd.

0

0 0

0

0

0 LAeq

dB

dBA

0

L 0

0

Lmax

Linear Ref

0

L 0 0

L 0 linear ( min)

0

0

0 0 0 0 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 :0 Time

0 kHz

kHz

. kHz

kHz

0 kHz

kHz

. kHz

kHz

. kHz

kHz

. kHz

. kHz

kHz

. kHz

00 Hz

0 Hz

00 Hz

00 Hz

Hz

0 Hz

00 Hz

0 Hz

Hz

0 Hz

00 Hz

Hz

0 Hz

0 Hz

Hz

. Hz

0 Hz

Hz

. Hz

0

1/3 octave

GRAPH 6 GRAPH 4

Rear of 1121 Greenford Road 12 -13 April 2007

0

Front of 1117 Greenford Road 11 - 12 April 2007

0

0

0 00

dBA

0

0

dBA

LAeq L 0

0

Lmax L 0

0

LAeq

0

L 0 LMax

0

L 0

0 0 0 0

:0 0

: 0

:0 0

: 0

:0 0

: 0

:0 0

: 0 0 :0 0 0 : 0

:0 0

: 0

:0 0

: 0

:0 0

: 0 00 :0 0 00 : 0 0 :0 0 0 : 0 0 :0 0 0 : 0 0 :0 0 0 : 0 0 :0 0 0 : 0 0 :0 0 0 : 0

0

time

0 : : : : 0: 0: 0: 0: : : : : : : : : : : : : 00: 00: 00: Time

15 58

16

APPENDIX 3

EQUIPMENT

Certificate of Conformance RION NA-28

Certificate of conformance NC-74

17

18 59

APPENDIX 4 PHOTOGRAPHS.

APPENDIX 4 PHOTOGRAPHS

19 60

20

Section 3 3.1

Air Quality.

a)

Executive Summary.

b)

3.1.1 The whole of the London Borough of Ealing has been declared an Air Quality Management Area in recognition of the failure to meet some specific government objectives for air quality in ‘hot spot areas’. This has enabled the London Borough of Ealing to apply measures to improve air quality over a wider area than just the identified ‘hot spots’.

3.1.2 This development is not taking place in an area identified by the Council as an area where government objectives for nitrogen dioxide are likely to be exceeded. The application of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges screening software confirms this.

3.1.4 The scale of the development and level of extra traffic flow generated is so low as not being able to make any identifiable increase in pollution in this area.

There are no reasons for refusal for planning permission on grounds of air quality.

3.1.6 The London Borough of Ealing has sought through other measures available to ensure that permitted developments minimise the impact of traffic generated pollution. These measures are included under a separate report dealing with traffic and transports plans but should also be considered as part of the applicant’s commitment to reducing specific pollutants.

3.1.7 Air quality pollution control in the UK is subject to various statutory controls, standards and guidance which have been bought together in the form of Supplementary Planning Guidance 3.

This air quality report has therefore been structured to correlate with that guidance and avoid unnecessary repetition.

3.2

d) 3.3

3.1.3 The development is proposed in an area where PM10 particle levels comply with objectives covered by Regulations and where indicative objective for London in 2010 is just likely to be met.

This is primarily caused by the high background levels across London. It is recommended that air drawn into the ventilation system is from a point furthest away from the front façade.

3.1.5

c)

Nitrogen Dioxide

3.2.1 This development is not taking place in an area where government objectives for nitrogen dioxide are likely to be exceeded. There is a note of concern in London that there does appear to be a slowing in the expected reduction / slight increase of nitrogen dioxide levels which may not be entirely reflected in software modelling.

3.2.2 The London Borough of Ealing has for a number of years been using diffusion tubes as a way of monitoring nitrogen dioxide levels across the borough. The latest results being contained in the London Borough of Ealing Air Quality Progress Report April 2005.

3.2.3 This identifies the closest site as being in Gainsborough Gardens at a point north and west of the junction between the Greenford Road 4090 and Whitton Avenue East A4090. This is classified as an ‘intermediate site’ , 10 – 40 m from a main road.

the degree of uncertainty associated with methodology to provide specific data as opposed identifying trends; advice from the author of the LBE Air Quality Progress Report that ‘ care should be taken with the future intermediate predictions as the methodology used is truly only applicable to roadside data’; the 2006 LBE USA Report (an Update and Screening Assessment required by central government as part of the Air Quality Management Area implementationd) did not identify this area as a area where government objectives were unlikely to be met prevailing winds at Gainsborough Gardens from source to monitor are the opposite to those at the development site and the development site is further away from the A4090.

Particles (PM10)

3.3.1 PM 10 levels in London are recognised as being high and the government objectives for 2010 are indicative pending further advice and strategy review. This does not however change the potential risks related to health.

3.3.2 The 2006 LBE USA Report identified the junction of Greenford Road and Whitton Avenue as being a junction where PM10 levels are likely to be high.

Table 7.

Provisional objectives for PM10 (Greater London) outlined in the Air Quality Strategy Addendum Pollutant Criteria Measured as Date to be achieved by PM10 10 Days >50 µg/m3 24 hour mean 31.12.2010 23µg/m3 20µg/m3 3.4

Annual mean Annual mean

31.12.2010 31.12.2015

Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

3.4.1 The use of the software associated with Design Manual for Roads and Bridges is recognised screening method that is applicable to smaller developments. Discussions with officers in the LBE environmental quality team confirmed that this applicable for this development.

3.4.2 On 27th July the Highways Agency issued advice to DMRB users of a further update on version 1.03 (Jan 07) which had been issued in May 2007. The latest version is 1.03c (July 07) and the initial results have been re-evaluated to ensure compliance with that version.

3.4.3 Traffic input data was obtained from the London Atmospheric Emission Inventory 2003 correlated by the office of the Mayor for London for Greenford Road. Traffic levels for London have been fairly static over this period and although there is uncertainty as to the effect of the congestion charge the figures are taken as being representative for the model. It is noted that Department for Transport Annual Average Daily Traffic Flow figures for Greenford Road are slightly lower.

3.2.4 Any direct comparison with the development site DMRB predictions should take into account;

21

22 61

Section 4 Contaminated Land.

Table 8 Taxis Cars Buses and coaches LGV Rigid 2-axel Rigid 3-axel Rigid 4-axel Artic 3/4-axle Artic 5- axle Artic 6-axle Speed

293 26,659 444 2,944 785 57 82 143 118 98 31.75 KpH

4.1

4.1.1 There is no record activity likely to give rise to contamination prior to the development of this site, at some point between 1914 and 1936 4.1.2 There has been no change of use since 1939 and there is no record of the warehouse, shops or flats having any use which could give rise to contamination of the land on which it was built.

4.1.3 There are no reasons relating to contaminated land to refuse Planning Permission or to require site investigative works at this site.

4.2

3.4.4 Background levels for nitrogen dioxide, oxides of nitrogen and PM10 for the year 2010 were obtained from the UK Air Quality Archive for Km square TQ 515500 185500 in which the proposed development is situated.

3.4.5

The DMRB predicted levels for the development site are:

Table 9.

Pollutant PM10 NO2 3.4.6

Executive Summary

Criteria

Value

Annual mean Days >50 µg/m3 Annual mean

23.8 µg/m3 10 days 28.2 µg/m3

Desk top survey.

4.2.1 A desk top search of data held by the LB Ealing and historic maps showed that there was no records giving rise to any concerns about this site. Copies of the 2 relevant maps are included in Appendix 5. These maps are reproduced solely for the benefit of the London Borough of Ealing to assist in the determination of a planning application and must not be reproduced for any other purpose.

Levels predicted for nitrogen dioxide at the site in 2010 comply with government objectives.

3.4.7 Levels predicted for PM10 are mathematical projections without adjustment for prevailing wind conditions. It is likely that given more detailed modelling the PM10 level is just likely to meet the indicative level set for London. These levels are in themselves slightly higher than those set the rest of the country. It is recommended that inlets to mechanical ventilation are positioned away from the Greenford Road façade.

3.4.8 The National Society of Clean Air have issued guidance on the level of development where an increase in traffic is expected to impact on local air quality. This is also included in LBE SPG 3.

These being where: a) proposals that will increase in vehicle trip generation in the local area and which result in increases in traffic volumes (AADT) of 5% or more on individual road links with more than 10,000 vehicles per day; b) proposals for new developments with 300 parking spaces .

3.4.9 Information from the Traffic Consultant confirms that for this development there will be parking provision for 22 vehicles and the expected peak hourly trip generation is 13.

3.4.10 Local traffic generation from this development will have no discernable influence on existing or projected air quality in the area.

23

62

24

APPENDIX 5

PLACES FOR EATING, DRINKING AND ENTERTAINMENT

Historical Maps.

SPG18 The new Uses Class Order classifies A3 as Restaurant and Bar as A4. The proposal has to be seen in its entirety as the restaurant and bar would be ancillary uses to the hotel use, and would not be standalone operations therefore the normal concerns of such uses do not come into play as there is much more control in a hotel setting.

The community safety aspect has been taken account of in the Safer Ealing report, and residential amenity will be controlled via environmental conditions and the control of hours of operation which can be part of planning conditions, as our intention is to shut the restaurant and bar at 11.00pm and lock the main entrance doors for the safety of all concerned. There will be no audible music, as the only music will be background music and there will be a plasma screen at the bar end, which is not neighbouring any property, but nevertheless this will not be audible outside.

The restaurant and bar will be fully accessible and this has been dealt with in the Accessible report, pollution has been dealt with in the Environmental report, parking and public transport have been dealt with in the Transport Assessment report.

The layout lends itself to natural surveillance, and there will be no private functions or late night drinking, as even the guests will have mini bars in their rooms.

There is no issue of litter as it is not a takeaway service and all food is served at the table.

Notwithstanding the above no.1109 Greenford Road already has permission for Restaurant and Bar (A3 in the previous Uses Class Order) in the previous planning granted and no.1111 Greenford Road, has a Restaurant (A3) use, therefore this ancillary uses with the hotel improve on the existing situation, where no.1111 is a standalone restaurant user.

These maps are reproduced solely for the benefit of the London Borough of Ealing to assist in the determination of a planning application and must not be reproduced for any other purpose.

25 63

1.

INTRODUCTION:

1.1

This design statement has been produced by De Wood Group to explain the design concept

and urban design rationale for the redevelopment of 1109-1119 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP, to a hotel.

De Wood Group

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP Email: ali@dewood.co.uk Tel: 07712-563524

1.2

It has been prepared taking into account policy 4.1 in the New Plan for the Environment, “By

Design” – DETR & CABE 2000/2001), and Council officer’s advice.

1.3

This document further explains the amount of development, the layout the massing, access

and appearance and character of the development 1.4

This document should be read in conjunction with the other reports appended, Planning

Statement, Renewable Energy, Accessibility and Sustanability Checklist.

1.5

The site lies on the Greenford Road 150metres to the North of Glaxo and 200 metres to the

South of Kelloggs and Whitton Avenue West. It is a standalone parade of mostly derelict vacant shops and a warehouse which have outlived their useful life. The shops are 2 storey buildings with very high pitch roofs and the warehouse at the rear is double height. There are residential houses to the North and south including a petrol station, a clinic to the West, and to the East it faces houses and a large parade of shops. Greenford Road is a busy road, and the site being on the corner of Greenford

URBAN DESIGN STATEMENT SPG5

Road and Wadham Gardens creates an opportunity for a landmark development.

1.6

Please refer to the full site history on all 3 properties and pictures, which are the subject of

this application, in the Planning Statement appended, suffice to say 75% of the site area has a “live” planning permission for a hotel use.

2. POLICY & GUIDANCE 2.1

COMFORT HOTEL 1109-1119 GREENFORD ROAD GREENFORD MIDDLESEX UB6 0DP

7th AUGUST 2007

This statement reiterates the guidance contained in PPS1 “Delivering Sustainable

Development and general guidance on good urban design contained in “By Design”, and PPG1.

2.2 The guidance highlights the following points: Good urban design is essential if we are to produce attractive, high-quality, sustainable places in which people will want to live, work and relax. Urban design is a key to creating sustainable developments and the conditions for a flourishing economic life.

3. DESIGN OBJECTIVES & DESIGN SOLUTIONS The objective was to to design a new build hotel, after several discussions with the Planning and Urban Design Officers a final proposal for a 59 Bedroom Hotel with ancillary Restaurant and Bar has been prepared taking the following considerations into account during the design stage: Character A place with its own identity

Ali Musani

Response: The buildings existing on site are 1930’s built, therefore the brief was to create a building that would be contemporary and standout in this corner but still have some materials such as brick incorporated, this has been achieved by a mix of brick, render and cladding as it would be difficult to create a modern building in the previous style.

Continuity and enclosure A place where public and private spaces are clearly distinguished

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group

All other copyrights within this document recognised.

Response: A clear demarcation exists and this did not create a problem, the pavement which is incorporated into the plans has planters and railings to mark this boundary Quality of the public realm A place with attractive and successful outdoor areas

64

Response: The problem here was that there is no outdoor area on site, although there is a large pavement at the front, whereas the building lines of the houses to the north project about 6 metres in front of the houses. There is a vandalised telephone box, previously there were two boxes, and this creates an eyesore, therefore the pavement has been incorporated within the plans to create landscaping and an al-fresco dining area, this is subject to negotiations with the Council as this land is in the ownership of the Council.

Ease of movement A place that is easy to get to and move through Response: There was a problem with this but due to the slope of the site the design of the pavement helped create a level access into the building where it is level at the northern end of and has steps at the southern end of the site Legibility A place that has a clear image and is easy to understand Response: The site is quite prominent on a corner and there is no problem with the image, this building will stand out due to the high quality design and the stepping effect that rises towards the corner.

Density and mix The amount of development on a given piece of land and the range of uses. Density influences the intensity of development, and in combination with the mix of uses can affect a place’s vitality and viability.

Response: The scheme started initially as a conversion of the existing buildings to a hotel, but further to a meeting with the Planning officer and Urban Design officer it was suggested that the site would better fulfil its role as a new build contemporary hotel. Thereafter a scheme was put together and that was for a 91 bedroom hotel on 5 floors, this was considered as a high density scheme and after a few revisions we have come up with a scheme that cut the density by as much as 35%, and the rooms to 59 bedrooms, if we are asked to go anywhere below this the viability of the whole project will be jeopardised.

Scale: height Scale is the size of a building in relation to its surroundings, or the size of parts of a building or its details, particularly in relation to the size of a person. Height determines the impact of development on views, vistas and skylines.

Adaptability A place that can change easily

Response: The initial height of the first scheme that was submitted for comments was 5 floors all the way round, and this was seen by both officers as too high in comparison to what surrounded the site, which were predominantly 2 storey houses, therefore it was suggested by the officers a stepped effect solution, 2, 3 and 4 floors, and the reduction of one floor at the corner would overcome these objections. This approach was followed and a final version arrived at.

Response: The current properties as they stand would create haphazard mixed uses and therefore would create conflicts between those uses, the new use is adaptable if the hotel use were ceased in future for flats.

Scale: massing The combined effect of the arrangement, volume and shape of a building or group of buildings in relation to other buildings and spaces.

Diversity A place with variety and choice

Response: The initial massing was considered as too much, again this was has reduced considerably.

The following was the last comment by Justin Kelly, the Urban Design officer, “I think that the massing and bulk of the building has been greatly improved in this latest iteration and would be inkeeping with the surroundings”

Response: The current site is mostly vacant therefore this new development will create an opportunity for a place variety and choice, as it incorporates a restaurant and bar.

ASPECTS OF DEVELOPMENT FORM Layout: urban structure The framework of routes and spaces that connect locally and more widely, and the way developments, routes and open spaces relate to one other.

Response: The layout of the building works quite well with the main entrance fronting Greenford Road, and the access to parking from the side at Wadham Gardens. This does not change the existing situation much.

Layout: urban grain The pattern of the arrangement of street blocks, plots and their buildings in a settlement.

Response: The new building does not encroach onto the pavement, it respects the existing building line at the northern end and in fact sets back into the site at the southern end by 1.5metres, this is due to the grid of the volumetric/modular building system that requires in most cases a 90% angle at corners.

Landscape The character and appearance of land, including its shape, form, ecology, natural features, colours and elements, and the way these components combine.

Response: There is no landscaping on site at the moment. This scheme incorporates landscaping at the front with low shrubs and planters, there is also a small area at the corner of the southern end of the building that has low planting. The courtyard at the back of the office is also proposed for plants, and the car park for climbing plants. There is also a green roof incorporated although this not for visual purposes it satisfies a very important role of sustainable development.

Appearance: details The craftsmanship, building techniques, decoration, styles and lighting of a building or structure.

Response: The building is using the volumetric/modular system of building which is done off-site, all the bedrooms will be manufactured under a controlled environment, this creates a high quality finish, as any consideration of Urban design should take into consideration not only external but also internal finishes. The building is split into different levels visually, the ground floor with the reception, restaurant and bar area incorporating a lot glass, as per the Urban design officer’s suggestion, this creates a visual hub, the upper floors taper upwards into the corner, which has large glass expanses right to the top floor which is visually striking, before ending a sharp profile at the top at roof level creating a corner landmark vista.

Appearance: materials The texture, colour, pattern and durability of materials, and how they are used.

Response: The ground floor mainly consists of a glass frontage to the main Greenford Road, and wraps around onto Wadham Gardens, where it continues with yellow stock brick. The two floors above have rendered panels, except for the projection in the middle at Wadham Gardens which is a cladding, this will be maintenance free and of sustainable material, and comes in a variety of colours, of which two are shown in the rendered images. The top floor is also cladding, but to break it up this will be of aluminium/steel finish. All the materials used will be sustainable and durable.

65

London Borough of Ealing DRAFT Urban Design Checklist “…buildings and spaces (should be) attractive, accessible, safe and … sustainable”

CONTENTS . Good layout – Urban Structure and Grain . Height, Scale, Massing and Density

1. Good Layout – Urban Structure and Grain • Link into, and if possible improve system and network of pedestrian routes and open spaces that connect locally and more widely to development and setting.

Yes

• Provide ease of movement for hierarchy of transport modes (pedestrians/ disabled servicing, cycling, public transport, taxis, car)

Yes

• Efficient and attractive design of street block and plot. Good orientation, prospect and aspect.

Yes

• Use of natural light in orientation

Yes

• Use of natural ventilation

No

. Useful and Quality Architecture and Character . Legibility, Continuity and Enclosure

2. Height, Scale, Massing and Density

. Hard and Soft Landscaping – Quality Public Realm . Access for All – improving access for pedestrians and disabled . Community Safety

• Relates in scale to adjoining buildings where appropriate.

Yes

• Relate to plot ratio and site coverage standards where appropriate.

Yes

• Protect designated local and strategic views and vistas

N/A

• Protects neighbouring amenity to an appropriate level.

Yes

. Appropriate Structural and External Materials . Adaptability and Flexibility 0. Local Area Strategies and Planning (Democracy and Accountability) . Sustainability (This needs to be considered separately by completing the Sustainability Checklist: SG )

3. Useful and Quality Architecture and Character

66

• Reinforces quality locally distinctiveness in town and landscape where appropriate.

Yes

• Where site/area lacks quality local character/ distinctiveness establishes new context for future. Development should “lift the spirits” by pleasing the eye and mind.

Yes

• Respect conservation areas, listed buildings and important facades.

N/A

• Development is functional and fit for purpose.

Yes

• Development is well built.

Yes

4. Legibility, Continuity and Enclosure

7. Community Safety

• Clear image and easy to understand.

Yes

• Contributes to safe and secure environment (and/or no worse).

Yes

• Provide and contribute to recognisable routes to and from development.

Yes

• Improves natural surveillance of public realm.

Yes

• Signage where appropriate on and off site

Yes

• Clear distinction and/or relationship between private and public spaces inside/outside building.

Yes

5. Hard and Soft Landscaping – Quality Public Realm

8. Appropriate Structural and External Materials • Attractive

Yes

• Harmonious

Yes

• On site – integrated landscape and hardscape with appropriate maintenance regime.

Yes

• Safe

Yes

• Off site/site setting - integrated landscape and hardscape with appropriate maintenance regime.

Yes

• Durable

Yes

Yes

• Green Energy and waste principles (solar, conservation, recycling) promoted

Yes

• Encourages renovation and re-use rather than redevelopment

No

• Easy to maintain (without significantly compromising principles above)

Yes

• Where appropriate, contribution to streetscape improvements and maintenance (trees, street furniture, streetscape decoration, essential pedestrian and transport facilities).

6. Access for All – improving access for pedestrians and disabled • Development should improve accessibility of building setting and context for disabled and pedestrian users (routes and signage).

Yes

• Building entrances and exits.

Yes

• Internal building spaces and facilities.

Yes

• Suitable for use by ambulant disabled and people with sensory impairment.

Yes

• Sustainable location – close to public transport

Yes

9. Adaptability and Flexibility • Create a place that can respond easily to changing property needs.

Yes

• Promotes mixed use and diversity (a place of variety and choice) where appropriate

Yes

67

10. Local Area Strategies and Planning Briefs (Democracy and Accountability)

VARIOUS DESIGN SCHEMES

• Development supports local area strategies where they exist (eg town centre/ regeneration area strategies/ master plans)

Yes

• Development complies with Planning Brief where it exists.

Yes

• Supports regeneration strategy/aims (eg town centre/are regeneration improvements plans)

Yes

• Subject to public consultation process (pre-development)

Yes

• Does client/occupier like development? (subject to separate assessment)

Yes

• Does local community like development? (subject to separate assessment)

1. EASY HOTEL – 63 bedrooms, Restaurant, Conference Room, Bar & Flats

Some

11. Sustainability

This needs to be considered separately by completing the Sustainability Checklist: SGP1 Submitted

This scheme was discussed with the Planning Officer and Urban Design Officer on the 20th of April, 2006, and it was felt that a better use of the site would be via a new build hotel, as this design was not a quality design. There were also problems with bin collection, “Secured by Design”, parking and generally it was felt that this design and layout was not acceptable. The brief was to create a modern contemporary building with a lot of glass wrapping around from Greenford Road and turning the corner into Wadham Gardens.

68

2. HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 91 Bedrooms, Restaurant, Bar & Conference Room

3. COMFORT HOTEL â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 69 Bedrooms, Restaurant, Bar, Conference Room & Penthouse Flat

A scheme was prepared in the following weeks and was commended on the high quality of the design, but there were reservations as to the height, density, massing and the number of rooms. It was suggested that we reduce all these factors and come back stepping away from the house to the North, no.1121 Greenford Road.

This scheme took account of the house to the North and moved it away by 4 metres, and also did away with most of the fifth floor except at the corner where there is a rotunda which would have been the penthouse flat for the manager. The massing and density was also reduced. This was not acceptable as it still incorporated the fifth floor and the stepping effect had not been achieved, we were also asked to reduce the glass frontage to the northern end by 2 metres away from the house.

69

4. COMFORT HOTEL â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 70 bedrooms, Restaurant and Bar, Managerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Flat

A completely fresh approach was taken to the site taking into account the comments of officers and the building was redesigned. The stepping account was taken into account and the glass frontage on the ground floor was moved away from the next door house, the conference room was also removed and the massing and density further reduced. The comments from officers were that we needed to still remove the top floor, reduce the width of the module at the corner, step in further on the third floor as the stepping as monotonous, remove the railing and put steps instead in the corner to allow that side to be used as the main entry point into the building so as to keep the activity away from the house to the north, lessen the render on the ground floor and generally reduce the massing slightly.

70

5. COMFORT HOTEL - 59 Bedrooms, Restaurant & Bar (FINAL SCHEME)

The final scheme has taken account of all issues raised, the height has been reduced by one floor at the front, the third floor has been stepped back further away from the house to the north and the stepping is no longer repetitive, the render on the ground floor has been replaced with brick, reduced by one floor on the Wadham Garden side, the number of rooms have been reduced from the initial proposal of 91 rooms to 59 rooms, the external stairs have been placed at the southern end thereby re-orientating the main entrance to that location and the massing has been reduced by more than 35%. The height of the building at the northern end does not rise above the parapet of the 2 storey side extension of the neighbouring house and the same pattern has been used on the side next to the clinic at the rear.

There have been quite a few revisions to get to this stage as can be evidenced by these schemes.

71

PLOT RATIOS SPG 6

Although the plot ratio is slightly higher in the new proposal than what is achievable in the existing site the following have to be taken into consideration:

“This SPG has been produced to encourage appropriate scale, physical bulk and intensity of use so that all new developments within the London Borough of Ealing are in character with and do not adversely affect their urban environment. However plot ratio, site coverage and cubic context criteria are secondary requirements of quality design, hence the inclusion of figures for plot ratio within an SPG, as opposed to within the policy of the UDP itself.

This guidance supplements Policy 4.1 and 6.4 contained within the UDP, Ealing’s New Plan for the Environment.

All floorspace will be measured including basements except for underground car parks required by the parking standard. In all cases the ability for plot ratios to be maximised will depend on the local context including built form, character, plot sizes and existing or potential public transport capacity. Development should normally have a maximum plot ratio of 1:1 (this is particularly relevant to industrial and warehousing development) except in town centre developments that have a high public transport accessibility. In these locations, ratios should not normally exceed 1.5:1, but ratios up to 2:1 might be acceptable. In all cases site coverage should not be more than 75%. Site coverage is the percentage of the site area covered by buildings.”

1. The existing buildings if extended will be haphazard and will not be far off from the proposal in terms of plot ratio 2. The new proposal will be of a high quality design 3. The new proposal creates an opportunity to incorporate a high quality landscape design including a green roof 4. Opportunity for a highly sustainable and ‘green’ building 5. Reduction in site coverage, including doing away witha substantial warehouse building away from the neighbouring garden of no.1121 6. This proposal incorporates the following spirit of SPG6 which says: “Supplementary Guidance, as the title suggests, is to guide development. It is not meant to be definitive, and much of the guidance represents minima which are to be improved on if possible in the interests of good design”, which this does.

The current existing situation is as follows: Site Area: 920 sq. mts.

Current Site Coverage: 665 sq. mts. (72%) Additional Planning Granted at No. 1111: 35 sq. mts.

Additional Possibility of Planning at No. 1113: 35 sq. mts.

TOTAL SITE COVERAGE AFTER EXTENSIONS: 735 sq. mts. (80%) The proposed development will be as follows: Site Area (including pavement) Proposed Site Coverage:

1060 sq. mts.

648 sq. mts. (61%)

Therefore considering the above existing situation in comparison to the proposal which will be 648 sq.mts. (61%), the site coverage reduces by 25% and the quality of the development and the increase of landscaping, where none exists at the moment, by far outweigh the loss of the existing buildings which would be a haphazard development as per the current uses and past planning permissions granted.

If all extensions that have been granted, including the mezzanine floors in the previous hotel planning permission that were granted and the extension to the cafe, and further extensions for which planning could be applied for including the rear of nos.1113/1113a and the loft spaces of nos. 1115, 1117 and 1119, and not forgetting mezannine floors in nos.

1111, 1113 and 1113a, then the total area of floorspace could reach approximately 1700 square metres which would give a plot ratio of approximately 1.9:1 Existing and planning possibilities as follows: 665sq.mts. Ground floor (Existing) 300sq.mts Mezzanine in previous hotel and restaurant planning granted 35sq.mts no.1111 Café extension granted 35sq.mts nos.1113/1113a possibility of similar extension to no.1111 75sq.mts no.1111 possibility of mezannine floor 75sq.mts nos.1113/1113a possibility of mezannine floor 260sq.mts first floors of nos.1115, 1117 and 1119 existing 260sq.mts loft floors of nos.1115, 1117 and 1119 possibility to convert 1705sq.mts TOTAL

PLOT RATIO 1.9:1

Proposed planning as follows: 182sq.mts Basement (includes rooms and plant area but excludes car park area) 516sq.mts Ground floor 615sq.mts First floor 531sq.mts Second floor 192sq.mts Third floor 2036sq.mts TOTAL

PLOT RATIO 1.9:1

72

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group

ACCESSIBLE EALING SPG7 This Access Statement demonstrates that the building would be designed to Approved Document M (2004) standards.

There would be lift access to all bedrooms rooms and provision of disabled parking spaces - the proposal includes both, it will also comply with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

HOTELS/MOTELS A proportion of the sleeping accommodation in hotels, motels and student accommodation should be designed for use by wheelchair users. The remainder should be suitable for people with a range of disabilities.

Wheelchair users should be able to reach all the facilities available within the building. At least one accessible bedroom should be provided for every 20 bedrooms, or part thereof. All facilities provided should also be accessible, including balconies etc. Accessible bedrooms should comply with the requirements outlined in Part M of the Building Regulations. Moreover all rooms should be visitable by a wheelchair user.

A3 FOOD & DRINK Refreshment Facilities – i.e. restaurants and bars should be designed so that wheelchair users are able to visit them independently or with companions. Bars and counters (or sections of them) should be at a level suitable for wheelchair users, preferably 600/800mm high. Chairs and tables should not be fixed. It may be necessary to remove seating to allow wheelchair users to sit at a table, or someone may need additional leg room if they have stiff joints. At least some chairs should have armrests. For wheelchair users the recommended table dimensions are 800mm wide, 550mm deep & 750-800mm high. Any change in level should be accessible by all. All public areas, including lavatory accommodation, public telephones and external terraces should be accessible.

Individual car parking spaces should measure 4.8m x 2.4m. Disabled parking bays (off-street) should also measure 4.8m x 2.4m, with an additional 1.2m wide transfer strip along one side of the bay which could be shared by two bays.

Where space permits a 1.2m safety zone should also be provided at the rear of the car parking space. Such bays should be clearly signposted and marked on the ground, using the British Standard Wheelchair symbol.

The transfer zone will be protected by hatched markings.

Response: Parking: There 6 disabled parking bays in the scheme, this meets the requirements as per the table above, 5 spaces for 59 bedrooms and 1 space for the ancillary Restaurant/Bar area. The parking bays comply with Part M of Building Regulations.

Hotel Bedrooms: There are 3 accessible bedrooms out of a total of 59 bedrooms, and the proposal has gone one step further by interconnecting these with the adjoining bedrooms for use by accompanying carers where required. These bedrooms and en-suite bathrooms will be compliant with Part M of Building Regulations. The hotel’s reservation policy will be that the accessible rooms are either reserved for disabled guests in advance or are allocated last of all, to avoid rooms being allocated to able bodied guests and thereby letting down disabled guests, this is a core fundamental of the Comfort Hotel Franchise and all staff are trained in this aspect.

Reception, Restaurant, Bar and Lavatory facility: The layout of the ground floor is open plan and this assists in ease of movement for persons with limited mobility.

The reception counters will be designed to take account of wheelchair users, and furniture for the restaurant/bar will be procured keeping this in mind. There is also a lavatory facility adapted for wheelchair users, this is 1700mm x 2200mm, just over the minimum guidelines and the door size complies and it is outward opening. The external seating area is fully accessible.

Other Common Areas: The access to the main entrance into the hotel at the front is level with the pavement at the northern end to allow for wheelchair access and persons with mobility problems. The clear opening widths of these doors conform to the relevant provision of the Approved Document M. The entrance doors will operate with electronic sensors. The circulation within the ground floor area is clearly demarcated from the restaurant and bar areas leading onto the lift which again will be wheelchair user compliant, the whole of the ground floor is level. All the floors will be slipresistant. All corridors leading to the accessible bedrooms are a minimum of 1400mm and in the lift areas over 2200mm except in the basement where it is 1500mm which is the minimum required.

This following section offers general guidelines that apply to most non-residential developments, irrespective of their specific use. This section is split into 3 separate headings: Outside, Entering and Inside Buildings.

1. OUTSIDE BUILDINGS CAR PARKING The following minimum provision of disabled parking spaces will be sought as part of all development proposals.

In addition to the above, developers should also seek to satisfy the following criteria: • The car park surface should be firm, smooth, even and free from loose stones.

• Bays designated for wheelchair users should be clearly signposted at the car park entrance. Accessible bays should normally be located close to the entrance of the building (within 50m if uncovered and within 100m if covered).

• Between the parking area, and routes to buildings, kerbs should be dropped, allowing access for wheelchair users.

Setting Down Points If feasible, a designated setting-down point suitable for disabled passengers should be provided in addition to the designated parking spaces. The surface of the footway, alongside a setting-down point should be level with the carriageway at that point, to allow convenient transfer onto and from a building.

Response: Parking: There 6 disabled parking bays in the scheme, this meets the requirements as per the table above, 5 spaces for 59 73

bedrooms and 1 space for the ancillary Restaurant/Bar area. The parking bays comply with Part M of Building Regulations, the car surface will be firm and smooth, and the spaces will be clearly marked. We are requesting the Council for a setting-down point at he corner of Wadham Gardens and Greenford Road. The distance from the accessible bays to the entrance is 22 meters to the furthest bay.

PAVEMENTS, FOOTWAYS AND PEDESTRIAN AREAS All routes used by pedestrians should: • Be at least 2000mm wide (Whilst the Council will seek to achieve this as a minimum standard, a reduced width of 1,800mm as set out in BS:8300/2001 will be accepted where the larger standard is not achievable) to allow people with prams/buggies and wheelchairs to pass without difficulty. Where it is unavoidable obstacles which are positioned on the footpath, should leave a minimum clear pavement width of 1200mm – this will cater for most wheelchairs, scooters and double buggies. This reduced width of 1200mm should be for no more than 6m in length around obstructions; • Have an even, well maintained non-slip surface; • Be as level as possible, with gradients not exceeding 1 in 20 (crossfall gradient not more than 1 in 50); • Have well-defined edges for the benefit of visually impaired persons; • Be well signposted with good contrasting colours and clearly defined symbols; • Provide a direct, well-lit route from A to B. Response: There will be tactile paving from the level approach on Greenford Road to the main entrance doors of the hotel. There will not be any obstacles placed on this walkway. There will also be led lights on either side of this paving as a guide, or possibly the paving tiles incorporating LED lights, this is a new product on the market.

CHANGING LEVELS The approach to a building should be level. This can usually be achieved if ‘access’ is considered at the earliest stage of design. If a change in level is unavoidable, it will be necessary to provide sloped access in accordance with the standards identified below. As some disabled people have difficulty using ramps, it is undesirable for a ramp to be the only approach to a building Response: (i) External Ramps There are no external ramps, the building was designed in such a way as to avoid unsightly ramps at the front, and advantage was taken of the slope of the site. (ii) External Steps Although there are steps at the front of the building, there is a level access along the pavement and that will give access to the front entrance.

LIGHTING All pedestrian routes and facilities such as car parks, steps, ramps and precincts should have a high standard of artificial lighting, and this should be designed to prevent glare and shadows. Lighting columns should be located in such a way so as to prevent any obstruction.

Response: Lighting will be specified to comply with this policy.

SIGNPOSTING Information signs should: • Form an integral part of the overall design; • be well and evenly lit; • be positioned at a height clearly visible to children and wheelchair users; • Content of message should be clear, with character size reflecting the distance at which the message will usually be read. For example for long distance reading, a minimum size of 150mm will be required. For medium range reading, for example direction signs in corridors, a size of 50-100mm would be acceptable. For close up reading, i.e. a wall mounted information sign, a size of 15- 25mm is best. Typeface should normally be Sans Serif and Arabic numbers should be used.

• Use recognised symbols or simple words; • Be positioned against a background of low level light; 74

• A matt finish is preferable.

• Be translated into appropriate local minority languages.

• Tactile signage should also be employed where appropriate Sign posting should indicate where accessible entrances are located if this is not immediately obvious.

Appropriate signage is very important in relation to emergencies. Exit routes must be clearly signposted. Further information regarding signage can be found in JMU’s design guide ‘Sign Design Guide – a guide to inclusive signage’.

Response: All signage will comply with this policy.

2. ENTERING BUILDINGS MAIN ENTRANCE The concept of ‘Inclusive Design’ seeks to remove barriers without creating separation or special treatment and enables everyone to participate equally.

Accordingly the principle entrance to a building should be accessible for all. Separate access for ambulant and nonambulant people should be avoided.

The main entrance to a building should: • Be easy to identify, covered, and well lit; • Provide level access, or where necessary ramps and steps (see section on Changing Levels); • Have a flush threshold; (or if unavoidable of a height not exceeding 15mm) Any structural supports at an entrance should not be located so as to present an obstruction to visually impaired people.

Response: The entrance is inclusive, it will also be easy to identify, covered with aluminium canopy, and well lit. It will also have level access and a flush threshold, and structural supports will be located away from the entrance.

ENTRANCE DOORS • The threshold should be level • Should have an effective clear opening of at least 900mm to allow access for larger electric wheelchairs or a double buggy.

• The space into which the door opens should be unobstructed, on the side next to the leading edge for at least 300mm (see diagram 6 over).

• Door furniture should be easy to see, grip and operate. Lever handles positioned 950mm above the ground, or sloping D-shaped handles which start not more than 750mm from the ground and reach no higher than 950mm at the opening side, should be provided.

• Should have a floor spring or door closer with delayed action; • Should have long glazed vision panels to enable children and wheel-chair users to be seen. A minimum zone of visibility from a height of 900mm to 1500mm from the finished floor level should be provided.

• Glass doors, windows or any other full height glazing must have contrasting markings (manifested) so that visually impaired people can distinguish them; • Entrance doors should be light and easy to open; • Have a kickplate.

Types of door: Revolving doors should be avoided, as they are rarely suitable for disabled persons.

Automatic sliding doors are often preferred by people with wheelchairs or push chairs. Where provided sensors must be adapted to respond to varying heights and weights and must have reasonable opening time to avoid accidents.

Response: There will be no revolving doors, the main entrance double doors are just over 1660mm and they would operate via sensors opening inwards, door furniture will comply with this policy.

ENTRANCE LOBBIES • Should allow for adequate space for wheelchairs and double buggies to manoeuvre without obstruction. In particular a wheelchair user should be able to move clear of one door before using the next one. There should also be sufficient space for someone assisting the wheelchair user.

• The length and width of the lobby should be at least 1570mm and 1200mm respectively.

• Doormats must be inset flush with a non-slip floor.

• Lighting and colour schemes should be used to improve contrast and visibility when moving from the bright light outside into the darker interior. Uplighting (lights which shine upwards then reflect down) is preferred by partially sighted people.

• Columns/ducts or other full height obstructions should not project into the lobby area.

Response: The lobby area is wide and open plan therefore leaving large manoeuvring space for wheelchairs and buggies. All other requirements of this policy will be complied with 3. INSIDE BUILDINGS RECEPTION AREAS Reception areas should be designed in line with the following criteria: • The reception point should be located away from the principal entrance where external noises are likely to be a problem for those hard of hearing.

• The reception point should be clearly identifiable from the entrance door or lobby, and the approach to it direct, and free from any obstructions. The receptionist should have a clear view of visitors so can offer help where necessary • Sufficient space should be provided for adequate circulation of prams, buggies, wheelchairs and people.

• A section of the desks and counters should only be 750mm high, allowing wheel chair users and children to see and be seen over the top of them. In addition a clear space should be provided below this desk/counter, not less than 700mm.

• Seats should be available at varying heights, but never lower than 420mm; • Induction loops, indicated by a clear visible sign should be available, and staff should be trained in their use.

• Furniture should be laid out in such a way so as to avoid positioning desks and counters in front of windows. Bright lights behind a speaker’s head make it very difficult to lip-read; Provision for the benefit of people with impaired hearing The design of the acoustic environment should ensure that audible info can be heard clearly. Public address (PA) systems should be clearly audible and wherever practicable supplemented by visual information. In some instances, it may be appropriate to provide an induction loop. An induction loop is an insulated cable laid around a listening area, with a microphone or other input source such as a TV or loop amplifier. The loop sets up a magnetic field so that the person using a hearing aid with a pick-up coil can receive sound without loss or distortion through bad acoustics or extraneous noise. The loop should be able to suppress reverberation, audience or other environmental noise, thereby enabling a hearing aid user to fully benefit from and participate. Induction loops should be installed, particularly in closed reception areas, churches and church halls. Alternatively an infra red system could be installed.

Response: The reception desk has been positioned taking full account of these guidelines, there will be compliance will the rest of the advice.

INTERNAL DOORS, CORRIDORS & CIRCULATION SPACE Doors act as potential barriers for disabled people, therefore their use should be avoided wherever possible. Where provided, the presence of doors, whether open or closed, should be apparent to visually impaired people through careful choice of materials. In particular viewing panels should be provided. For internal doors a minimum clear door width of not less than width 900mm should be provided. In addition there should be an unobstructed space of at least 300mm between the leading edge of a door and a return wall.

Corridors should be 1500mm (1200mm unobstructed width) wide to allow a wheelchair user to manoeuvre and people to pass. Ideally corridors should also have an unobstructed width of at least 1800mm at intervals, to allow wheelchair users to pass each other. Furniture and fittings (e.g. radiators) should not project into corridors.

Any change in level must be well lit and identified by contrasting colours and texture (see section D). Any section with a gradient of 1:20 or steeper should be designed as an internal ramp. Internal steps must comply with the same standards as external steps (see section D), to allow good access for the ambulant disabled.

Whilst the Council will seek to achieve this standard, the Council will require that at a minimum the standards with regard to internal door widths outlined in the Draft Part M of the Building Regulations are achieved.

Response: The doors to the corridors and accessible bedrooms will be 900mm, the corridors are 1500mm. There will be clear

viewing panels in all corridor doors.

TOILETS A minimum of one accessible toilet should be provided on each floor of a building. Where only one accessible toilet is provided access to this toilet should not be via a single sex facility. Facilities for Small Children and Carers: Baby changing facilities should be provided in a separate cubicle and not within a wheelchair accessible toilet. In addition, facilities should be provided for people to change and wash babies and small children.

Check List: • Wheelchair accessible toilets should be located as close as possible to the entrance and/or waiting area; • A clear space of approximately 850mm should be provided next to the toilet (for transfer from a wheelchair to the toilet); • The WC seat should be firmly fixed and of a closed type; • Grab rails within easy reach of the toilet should be installed; • A full-length mirror positioned opposite the toilet-seat, to check dress, should be provided; • An automatic flush system employing sensors is preferred. A push button flush should be avoided; • A non-slip floor surface in contrasting colour to the wall; • The light switch should be set between 900mm and 1100mm above floor level.

• A red pull-cord operated alarm bell should be provided (The cord should hang down to floor level and be provided with two red bangles of at varying heights). This alarm should be audible and visible outside the toilet • A toilet paper holder for single handed operation; • A coat hook 1,400mm from floor level should be installed.

• Locks on cubicles should be designed so that they can be operated by people with limited dexterity.

• Doors should be outward opening and fitted with an emergency release mechanism operated from the outside.

• Mobile hoists should be provided in commercial buildings.

• Toilets should not be used as an additional store area.

Grab rails should: • Be 35mm in diameter and have a good grip when wet; • Be in contrasting colour to the walls; • Be fixed both vertically and horizontally. A drop down rail should be provided next to the WC. Showers (where provided): • Where shower facilities are proposed, i.e. in office buildings, these facilities should be provided independently of accessible toilets, so as to avoid conflict of use; • Shower areas should have slip resistant surfaces; • Shower heads should be height adjustable.

• Clothes hooks should be positioned low enough for wheelchair users Response: The proposal will comply with these guidelines, there is a disabled toilet and also baby changing facilities. The male and female staff showers in the basement will also comply.

LIFTS In multi-storey buildings, a passenger lift is the most appropriate means of access when moving from one storey to another, and should therefore be provided whenever possible. The requirement for passenger lifts depends on the floor area and use of the building and its use.

As a minimum multi-storey buildings should have at least one lift that is of a sufficient size to be accessible by people with mobility difficulties. This lift should serve all floors.

Lifts should have: • A clear manoeuvring space (landing area) of at least 1500mm x 1500mm in front of each lift.

• A car whose width is at least 1100mm and whose length is at least 1400mm for less intensive use, and 2000mm x 1400mm for a lift which would be used more intensively; It is noted that these dimensions are minimum sizes and the lift size should be chosen to suit the anticipated density of the building and the needs of disabled people.

• A door or doors which provide a clear opening width of at least 800mm; • Two separate doors, where planning allows, to allow the wheelchair user to leave the car without turning around.

• Doors which will stay fully open for at least 5 seconds, in order to allow adequate time to enter and exit the lift.

• Landing or car controls which are positioned not less than 900mm and not more than 1200 mm above the landing and the car floor respectively, at a distance of at least 400mm from the front wall. Where possible two sets of controls should be provided; 75

• Suitable tactile indicators should be installed on or adjacent to lift buttons within the car and on the landing to indicate the floor number; • A visual and voice indication system where the lift serves more than three floors; • Signs indicating the location of an accessible lift should be clearly visible from the building entrance.

Response: The lift will 1100mm x 1400mm, there is also a larger manoeuvring space than the minimum requirement, all the other requirements will be met.

INTERNAL STAIRS/RAMPS The dimensions for internal stairs/ramps are similar to those established for external stairs/ramps (see section D). (i) Steps • treads must measure at least 280mm; • risers (i.e. height of step) must not exceed 150mm and should not be open; • each flight must not exceed16 risers (12 for external); • Each flight of stairs should have an unobstructed width of at least 1000mm; • the edges of the steps should be clearly marked with permanent contrast; • The length of each landing should not be less than1200mm. ii) Handrails • Should be continuous on both sides of ramp or steps; • Should be positioned 900 - 1000mm above surface level and extend at least 300mm beyond both the top and bottom of the ramp or steps; • Should be circular or oval and be is easy to grip, with a diameter of approximately 40- 50mm. There should also be a clearance of at least 50-60 mm between the handrail and any adjacent wall surface.

• Should end positively either with a rounded end, or return to the wall.

• In addition a lower handrail (approximately 600mm) should be provided for children’s use.

Response: Steps and handrails will comply.

FIRE AND MEANS OF ESCAPE The Building Control section, in conjunction with the Fire Authority, can advise on suitable escape arrangements for new and existing premises. Escape routes should be free from any features which might impede movement. This may involve the provision of evacuation lifts, evacuation chairs and management procedures. For specific advice please contact the Principal Building Surveyor, or the Fire and Licensing Surveyor.

Fire alarm systems should include both visual devices for those with hearing impairments, and audible devices for visually impaired people. Escape routes and symbols should be obvious. These routes should be checked along their entire length to ensure adequate width for wheelchair users.

In larger buildings it may be necessary to provide refuges where disabled people can wait in relative safety before continuing to a final exit. A refuge is effectively an area that is both separated from the fire by fire resisting construction and provided with a safe route. The minimum space provided for a wheelchair in refuge, excluding manoeuvring space, needs to be at least 700mm x 1200mm. Wheelchair refuges should be clearly marked. A communication system within the refuge area is also essential.

Where an evacuation lift is provided, this should be used as a last resort when all other options have been explored.

It is essential that a lift which is to be used as a means of evacuation for disabled people is able to continue to operate with a reasonable degree of safety when there is a fire. In some instances it may be appropriate to use a fire fighting lift for evacuation purposes, if provided.

Notices and signs regarding evacuation in the event of fire or bomb scare must be clearly visible incorporating the wheelchair symbol. Exits should be well signposted. All such notices must remain unobstructed, and be at a height visible to all.

For further management details see BS 5588 (part 8 1999) a Code of Practice for Means of Escape for Disabled People.

Response: Full advice will be taken from the Building Regulations Department and the Fire Authority prior to any construction.

There is provision for disabled refuge areas on each floor above ground and this is 2050mm x 2488mm in area, which is sufficient. © Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group 76

SAFER EALING GUIDE SPG8 “Ways in which personal safety and crime prevention should be considered in the design of housing, community and commercial developments, streets and open spaces.”

(A check list for building developers in the London Borough of Ealing) 1. Buildings front the public realm with windows & doors allowing open views Building fronts the public realm and has numerous windows and double front doors 2. Clearly defined public & private spaces using real or symbolic barriers Clearly defined spaces at the front with railings and planters 3. Natural surveillance is maximised of public and communal spaces Large wraparound glass frontage giving 200° external view stretching from Greenford Road to Wadham Gardens, see hatched plan enclosed.

4. All entrances are visible to passers by and well lit All entrances will be well lit, the front entrance will be monitored by 24 hour reception staff 5. Unobserved and unnecessary access routes are avoided None on site 6. Blank facades are avoided as far as possible No blank facades 7. Building Lines have been laid out with the avoidance of recesses Only recess is where there is access for parking, this is unavoidable, but it will be well lit and monitored by CCTV camera 24 hours a day 8. Car Parking is located within view of units and users Parking is in the basement, the access to this will be controlled by electric shutters operated from the reception and the whole car park will be monitored by CCTV 9. Secure pedal cycle parking is provided within view of units & users Cycle Parking is in the basement, the access to this will be controlled by electric shutters operated from the reception and the whole car park will be monitored by CCTV 10.Appropriate defensible planting & landscaping has been incorporated There will be defensible planting at the front close to no.1121, there will be an 800mm high planter constructed and tha will be planted with prickly shrubs to discourage anyone sitting on the wall 11.There is the provision of suitable lighting to current standards There will be suitable lighting conditions incorporated to relevant standards 12.Graffiti resistant walls and fences have been used There will a clear coating of anti-graffiti protection applied to the ground floor brick walls

77

13.Pavements & footpaths are clear for ease of pedestrian access & well lit All pavements and footpaths will be clear and well lit 14.Alternatives to solid shutters have been used in the protection of commercial premises See-through shutters will be used for the car park area if required 15.CCTV has been incorporated where appropriate Large number of CCTV cameras will be sited on the exterior as well as interior, these will be placed at such angles that will not cause visual intrusion to neighbours

Landscape There will be high quality landscape design incorporated, currently there is a vandalised telephone box on the pavement, there were two boxes before, and they were used by passer-by’s to relieve themselves, and the glass has all been smashed, therefore our proposal introduces a much better scenario here.

Natural Surveillance The proposal scores highly on natural surveillance, as can be seen from the plan attached. The visibility is in the order of 200° without infringing on anyone’s privacy. The natural surveillance in conjunction with the CCTV operation will be 24 hours from the reception desk therefore increasing the security of the area.

17.Crossing points have been provided if appropriate & at ground level No crossing points required

Access and footpaths Access to the car park will through electric shutters controlled by reception, all gates will be designed following guidelines contained in the Alleygater’s Guide. Access to the main entrance to the reception will be shut by 11.00pm and no members of the public, except guests of the hotel, will be allowed access.

Access to guests already booked in will be by swipe cards, and after that through entry phone connected to reception. All corridors leading to bedrooms will be swipe card controlled.

18.New alleyways, where deemed necessary, have been suitably gated Gates provided, all locked internally, with no railings or protruding locks on the Exterior, guidance received from Bob Masdin, Metropolitan Police, The Alleygater’s Guide to Gating Alleys

CCTV There will be CCTV cameras installed externally and internally. Externally they will cover the front and side of the building and entry to the car park, without being intrusive to the neighbours, internally they will be positioned in the car park, the bar and restaurant area and all the corridors leading to bedrooms.

16.Adequate signage and waymarking has been provided These will be provided

19.Further guidance as set out within ‘Secured by Design’ Guidance followed from ‘Secured by Design’ leaflets available from www.securedbydesign.com . We will be aiming to gain Secured by Design approval.

Our approach in designing the hotel from the outset has been guided by Security issues and to that effect we had a meeting with Bob Masdin, the Crime Prevention Design Officer, on the 20th of April, 2006, who was quite helpful and gave advice and also supplied publications that have helped us arrive at the design that we feel meets all the concerns of ‘Secured by Design’, UDP Policy 4.4: Community Safety: “New development will only be permitted where the layout and design is based on the promotion of a safe and secure environment, including the maximum adoption of natural surveillance of public spaces”, and SPG8.

Integrated Approach We have followed an integrated approach, and we will enter into a more involved dialogue with the Crime Prevention Design Officer during the detailed design stage before construction.

Environmental The environmental quality of the project is well designed and attractive, therefore engendering an atmosphere of safety.

Site Management The site will be managed by 20 to 25 employees, therefore creating a feeling of safety for users and neighbours, and regular maintenance of the building fabric will be carried out to maintain it’s attractiveness to end users.

78

Lighting The proposal will incorporate a variety lighting solutions, taking into consideration the safety aspects but also importantly preventing light spillage is kept to a minimum so as not to inconvenience neighbours, and in fact a lighting consultant has already been approached to help in this matter.

Design of Reception, Restaurant and Bar Area A lot of consideration was given to designing this area, and after a lot of thought it was decide to keep the whole of this area open plan and centralising the reception desk, so that not only does it help in natural surveillance of the exterior, but also the interior. The angle of interior view is approximately 270°, which by any standards is very good, and any blind spots are covered by CCTV. Toilets The toilets are located behind the reception area, away from the main entrance, and the monitoring will be by natural surveillance and CCTV, therefore there will be a high degree of control. The entrances to the male, female and disabled toilets are separate from each other. There will be no suspended ceilings and cisterns will be concealed.

The proposal will comply with any matters raised that have not been covered in this response, and any further advice is welcomed.

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group

TREES & LANDSCAPING SPG9 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (section 197) recognises the importance of trees and charges Local Planning Authorities with a specific ‘duty’, ‘to ensure, whenever it is appropriate that, in granting planning permission for any development, adequate provision is made by the imposition of conditions for the preservation and planting of trees’ and ‘to make such (Tree Preservation) Orders............... as appear to the Authority to be necessary in connection with the grant of such planning permission whether for giving effect to such conditions or otherwise’.

Government guidance in the form of ‘Tree Preservation Orders, A Guide to the Law and Good Practice (March 2000)’ requires that: ‘Local Planning Authorities must include in their Plans land use and development policies designed to secure the conservation of the natural beauty and amenity of the land.’ and adds that: ‘.... (Development Plans) should include policies on the measures that the LPA will take when dealing with applications to develop land, to protect trees and other natural features, and provide for new planting and landscaping.’

Ealing Council’s New Plan for the Environment (UDP) 2nd Deposit Stage (2002) contains a range of tree and landscape related policies (refer to Appendix 1 for further details).

Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPGs) are released by the Government from time to time to guide the planning process at Local Authority level.

• PPG1 General Policy and Principles (February 1997)*, emphasises the contribution of the planning system to achieving sustainable development by’ protecting and enhancing the environment,’ and adds: ‘As the appearance and treatment of the space around buildings is often of comparable importance to the design of the buildings themselves, landscape design should be considered as an integral part of urban design.’

• PPG3, Housing (March 2000) states that: ‘Landscaping should be an integral part of new development and opportunities should be taken for the retention of existing trees and shrubs, and for new plantings.’

• The effect on underground services.

The Council will also expect that consideration be given to the London Borough of Ealing’s Biodiversity Action Plans. These plans have been devised to inform, protect, and set objectives for important habitats/areas and species within the Borough, and as a result any relevant Biodiversity issues should be integrated within proposed landscaping schemes.

Response: The proposal incorporates landscaping where none exists at present. The large pavement at the front of the property fronting onto Greenford Road and at the corner of Greenford Road and Wadham Gardens, which belongs to the Council and which we would like to adopt, will have a low level planting scheme of shrubs, there will also be planters which will clearly demarcate the boundary between this area and the public footpath. There will also be a an 800mm high wall planter next to the boundary with no.1121, planted with prickly plants to discourage anyone from sitting on the wall as well as creating a screening effect.

There is a damson tree next to the gate that will have to be removed and replaced elsewhere as the new access will be moving there from where it currently is. We will fund the removal and replacement of a new tree further along the pavement.

There are no other trees on site, although there are trees on the adjoining site at the rear that are on the Clinic’s site, and these will have to be pruned from our site as the branches are overhanging.

Within the site there will be a small courtyard to the office that will be planted with low level shrubs in planters, and the high wall separating the parking area from adjoining the garden of no.1121 will have climbing plants.

There will be no light issues from our planting scheme, and there will be a regular maintenance schedule in place.

There will be a green roof installed, most probably Sedum Mat, and this will increase the biodiversity of the area, for further information see report on Renewables and Green Credentials attached.

The types of species will be determined at a later stage and can be part of reserved conditions, this will be done by a landscape designer in conjunction with the Council’s Landscape Officer.

See plans of topographical survey and general landscaping details attached.

Appendix 1 - Development plan policies pertaining to trees and landscaping (taken from 2nd deposit UDP Policy 4.5 Landscaping, Tree protection and Planting 1. The Council will require that a well designed and integrated landscaping scheme, with appropriate longer term maintenance and management will accompany any application. Landscaping schemes should ensure the identification and protection of existing vegetation of value as well as the planting of new suitable trees and shrubs in appropriate locations.

2. The Council will continue to make Tree Preservation Orders, particularly where trees are likely to be affected by development, and/or where the trees are particularly visible or are: · Large or healthy specimens · Part of a group which contributes to the character of the area 3. The council will seek to enhance small open sites for landscaped sitting areas; children’s play areas and tree planting as appropriate, in shopping and district centres, Major Employment Locations, at Employment sites and in residential areas.

Soft landscaping providing for appropriate plants and trees sustains a range of wild life and appears attractive in its own right. Tree planting and plant retention should form part of an integrated landscaping scheme. Such schemes should include ground and shrub cover together with hard surface and paving materials, adequate light, grass verges and continuity of fencing or walling with boundary treatments, which reduce likelihood of graffiti and which should contribute to the street scene or semi-rural character as appropriate.

In order to achieve this successful integration, landscaping requirements should be considered at the initial stage of the detailed application, and the integrated landscape scheme should be included at the design stage of any detailed application, and not fitted afterwards. All trees to be retained should be distinguished from new trees; heights of new plants should be noted and proposals for future maintenance included. Consideration should be given to:

• Boundary planting to integrate the development with neighbouring sites;

• The use of climbing plants against flank walls;

• The provision of low shrubs to soften settings of buildings;

• Landscaping of parking areas;

• Provision of amenity space;

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group 79

80

81

RENEWABLE ENERGY & GREEN CREDENTIALS Climate change is now accepted by government as one of the most pressing problems facing society. The planning system has a crucial role to play in helping the UK combat the threat and adapt to its now inevitable impacts. Energy generation emits around a third of the UK’s CO2 emissions and so increasing the proportion of energy This guide draws heavily on government policy, contained in PPS22 (Renewable Energy) and guidance supplied by renewable sources is a vital component of an effective climate change strategy.

1. Planning policy framework As well as setting targets, the government has sought to address climate change through a number of policy initiatives.

Tackling climate change is identified as a priority in Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; with further reference in PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas; PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; PPS11: Regional Spatial Strategies; PPS22: Renewable Energy; PPS23: Planning and Pollution Control; and forthcoming PPS25: Development and Flood Risk. PPS1 makes clear that “regional planning bodies and local planning authorities should ensure that development plans contribute to global sustainability by addressing the causes and potential impacts of climate change.” (para 13ii). More specifically, paragraph 13i of PPS1 states, “Development plans should ensure that sustainable development is pursued in an integrated manner, in line with the principles for sustainable development set out in the UK strategy.”

Current national planning policy on renewable energy is set out in PPS22, which is also accompanied by technical guidance in a Companion Guide ‘Planning for Renewable Energy’. As part of a broader framework for delivering renewable energy through the planning system, it calls for positive planning policies at regional and local levels, encouraging the use of the full range of available renewable resources. It requires targets to be expressed as the minimum amount of installed capacity for renewable energy in the region (and sub-region where appropriate), and emphasises that targets must not be regarded as a ceiling for development; rather they should be reviewed regularly and revised upwards as they are achieved, or become close to being achieved.

2. Renewable energy policies in Development Plan Documents Compliance with PPS22 should enable renewable energy policies to be cascaded from the regional to local level.

Whilst the regional level will provide much of the strategic framework, at the local level, LPAs should tailor planning policies to reflect local circumstances. Box 2 sets out key issues in planning for renewables at the local level. Local policies in Development Plan Documents (DPDs) should not duplicate what is already written in higher level policy (PPS or RSS). Rather they should add value, focussing on meeting regionally set targets, locally specific issues, and how they should be addressed. PPS22 requires planning

82

policy at a local level to provide guidance in relation to both standalone renewable energy schemes and the integration of renewable energy into new development. It is therefore likely that there will be two different policy areas in the plan to cover these issues.

Renewable energy policies should be contained within the Core Strategy to clarify the importance of addressing the sustainability objectives established by the LPA (Chapter 4 of the Companion Guide to PPS22 covers these issues in more detail). However, more detailed policies may also be included within separate DPDs. For example, in a Sustainable Energy DPD encompassing renewable energy and energy efficiency, or within a Development Control DPD. The decision as to what is most appropriate will depend upon local circumstances.

LPAs may want to prepare Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) on renewable energy and design. While these cannot introduce new policy, they can elaborate on the policies and proposals in DPDs. The PPS22 Companion Guide suggests that SPD might include: design guidance, referring to topics such as passive solar design or building integrated renewables and site development briefs.

2.1 Standalone renewable energy schemes Any policy should begin with a statement of general support for renewables. Box 3 sets out government advice and Box 4 includes examples of wording in emerging LDF Core Strategies. A commentary on the particular wording is also given to assist LPAs in developing strong and effective policies of their own. Wording similar to that set out below meets the requirements of PPS22, but may need to be adapted to meet the area’s specific needs.

‘Renewable energy proposals will be supported throughout the plan area unless they would have unacceptable adverse effects which are not outweighed by local and wider environmental, economic, social and other considerations of the development. This includes wider benefits arising from clean energy supply, reductions in greenhouse gas and other polluting emissions, and contributions towards meeting regional and national targets for use of renewable energy sources.’

83

RENEWABLE ENERGY & GREEN CREDENTIALS Climate change is now accepted by government as one of the most pressing problems facing society. The planning system has a crucial role to play in helping the UK combat the threat and adapt to its now inevitable impacts. Energy generation emits around a third of the UK’s CO2 emissions and so increasing the proportion of energy This guide draws heavily on government policy, contained in PPS22 (Renewable Energy) and guidance supplied by renewable sources is a vital component of an effective climate change strategy.

1. Planning policy framework As well as setting targets, the government has sought to address climate change through a number of policy initiatives.

Tackling climate change is identified as a priority in Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; with further reference in PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas; PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; PPS11: Regional Spatial Strategies; PPS22: Renewable Energy; PPS23: Planning and Pollution Control; and forthcoming PPS25: Development and Flood Risk. PPS1 makes clear that “regional planning bodies and local planning authorities should ensure that development plans contribute to global sustainability by addressing the causes and potential impacts of climate change.” (para 13ii). More specifically, paragraph 13i of PPS1 states, “Development plans should ensure that sustainable development is pursued in an integrated manner, in line with the principles for sustainable development set out in the UK strategy.”

Current national planning policy on renewable energy is set out in PPS22, which is also accompanied by technical guidance in a Companion Guide ‘Planning for Renewable Energy’. As part of a broader framework for delivering renewable energy through the planning system, it calls for positive planning policies at regional and local levels, encouraging the use of the full range of available renewable resources. It requires targets to be expressed as the minimum amount of installed capacity for renewable energy in the region (and sub-region where appropriate), and emphasises that targets must not be regarded as a ceiling for development; rather they should be reviewed regularly and revised upwards as they are achieved, or become close to being achieved.

2. Renewable energy policies in Development Plan Documents Compliance with PPS22 should enable renewable energy policies to be cascaded from the regional to local level.

Whilst the regional level will provide much of the strategic framework, at the local level, LPAs should tailor planning policies to reflect local circumstances. Box 2 sets out key issues in planning for renewables at the local level. Local policies in Development Plan Documents (DPDs) should not duplicate what is already written in higher level policy (PPS or RSS). Rather they should add value, focussing on meeting regionally set targets, locally specific issues, and how they should be addressed. PPS22 requires planning

84

policy at a local level to provide guidance in relation to both standalone renewable energy schemes and the integration of renewable energy into new development. It is therefore likely that there will be two different policy areas in the plan to cover these issues.

Renewable energy policies should be contained within the Core Strategy to clarify the importance of addressing the sustainability objectives established by the LPA (Chapter 4 of the Companion Guide to PPS22 covers these issues in more detail). However, more detailed policies may also be included within separate DPDs. For example, in a Sustainable Energy DPD encompassing renewable energy and energy efficiency, or within a Development Control DPD. The decision as to what is most appropriate will depend upon local circumstances.

LPAs may want to prepare Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) on renewable energy and design. While these cannot introduce new policy, they can elaborate on the policies and proposals in DPDs. The PPS22 Companion Guide suggests that SPD might include: design guidance, referring to topics such as passive solar design or building integrated renewables and site development briefs.

2.1 Standalone renewable energy schemes Any policy should begin with a statement of general support for renewables. Box 3 sets out government advice and Box 4 includes examples of wording in emerging LDF Core Strategies. A commentary on the particular wording is also given to assist LPAs in developing strong and effective policies of their own. Wording similar to that set out below meets the requirements of PPS22, but may need to be adapted to meet the area’s specific needs.

‘Renewable energy proposals will be supported throughout the plan area unless they would have unacceptable adverse effects which are not outweighed by local and wider environmental, economic, social and other considerations of the development. This includes wider benefits arising from clean energy supply, reductions in greenhouse gas and other polluting emissions, and contributions towards meeting regional and national targets for use of renewable energy sources.’

2.2 Integration in new development On-site renewable energy generation can provide an important contribution to renewable energy targets (heat, cooling and power). The Companion Guide to PPS22 says that ‘a general policy could be included in the Core Strategy, with reference to a separate SPD. The latter would explore how different technologies could be integrated into the design of development or enabled for future fitting through, for instance, orientation of development (Para 4.12).

There are a variety of technologies that can be applied at a small scale including solar, biomass, and domestic wind turbines. The Companion Guide goes on to say that LPAs should take into account the following considerations:  policies should encourage developers to consider a range of renewable energy technologies on their sites (but should not specify which technologies to use on named sites - this is too prescriptive);  policies should be flexible: not all technologies are appropriate on all sites and locational constraints should be borne in mind (for example, any requirement for connection to the electricity distribution network);  policies should not place undue burdens on developers: local authorities should be mindful of the level of development pressure in their area in setting generation targets; and  authorities may wish to lead by example and install schemes at their own premises or develop ‘private wire’ networks in town centres - this can encourage neighbouring developers to follow suit and there may be advantages in developing a local distribution network. (para. 4.14) Based on experience around the country, the following wording options should be considered: ‘All non-residential or mixed use developments (new build or conversion) above a threshold of 1,000m2 will be expected to provide at least 10% of their energy requirements from onsite renewable energy generation.

All residential developments (new build or conversion) of 10 or more units) will be expected to provide at least 10 per cent of their energy requirements from onsite renewable energy generation.’

The percentage and threshold are indicative. While these may be set lower, the pressing urgency of combating climate change is a crucial material consideration, as set out in PPS1, and so the aim should be for the highest percentage possible. In some cases policies refer to reducing CO2 emissions rather than meeting predicted energy demand.

This helps set the policy within an overall climate change or emission reduction strategy. For example: ‘The Council will expect all development (new build, conversion, or refurbishment) with a floorspace of 1,000m2 or ten or more residential units, to incorporate renewable energy production equipment to reduce the overall CO2 emissions by at least 10 per cent.’

The aim should be for all new developments to be built to net zero carbon standards, by maximising the energy efficiency of buildings (and appliances) and ensuring that any residual energy demand is met from new renewable energy capacity, either from within or outside the development area. As a minimum standard, local planning policy should drive for improvements in building performance of at least 20 per cent above whatever current building regulations require by setting targets for on-site renewable energy generation and energy efficiency measures, to maximise carbon emissions savings. This will make an important contribution not only to renewables targets but to reducing the carbon footprint of new development.

3. Other relevant policy issues to comply with PPS22 In accordance with PPS22, local authorities should prepare criteria-based policies that focus on key local issues and reflect local circumstances, within the framework set out by national planning policy and the RSS. This offers local authorities an opportunity to tailor-make their policies, ensuring that all aspects, and features, of their local area are considered.

Set out below are examples of issues that will need to be considered by LPAs in order to comply with PPS22, but that may well be covered in other policies. PPS22 sets out policy on these, and its Companion Guide gives more detailed technical advice. The list in not exhaustive and it is the responsibility of the local authority to draw out those issues which are specific to their local area, and apply the guidance accordingly.

3.1 Impacts on residential and natural Amenity Renewable energy developments can give rise to a number of impacts, the type and extent of which will vary depending on the nature and scale of the proposed development and its location. Positive effects of development might include increased security and reliability of supply, job creation, tourism potential, educational opportunities and the management of existing environments, in addition to the resulting reductions in CO2 emissions. However,

effects such as noise, emissions (from manufacturing processes, and transportation), and increased traffic flow could have a negative impact on people or wildlife.

The Mayor’s Energy Strategy for London: http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/energy/docs/energy_strategy04.pdf The Mayor considers that London should seek to maximise its own generation of renewable energy through developing urban renewables, and use its considerable purchasing power to support renewable energy across the rest of the UK. There are many renewable energy technologies that are well suited to urban environments and could be deployed in London. Urban renewables are most likely to be small and medium scale, as opposed to the growing size of rural or marine-based renewable energy technologies. The following technologies and uses are considered particularly appropriate for London’s buildings: passive solar design, passive ventilation, borehole cooling, solar water heating, photovoltaics (PVs), biomass-fuelled CHP, biomass boilers, heat pumps, and possibly building-mounted wind turbines.

Using the renewable energy in the building where it is generated also improves the economics of a scheme.

The Mayor would like as much of London’s energy as possible to come from renewables. This includes power imported over the grid as well as generated within the London area. Green tariffs or green electricity - where electricity is sourced from renewables - are available for commercial and domestic customers from most energy supply companies.

BUILDING GREEN AND BIODIVERSITY There are considerable opportunities for creation of new habitats presented by the built environment itself, greener cities would bring immeasurable benefits to the people who live and work in them.

We need appropriate development which incorporates an ecological approach to building and landscape design. This means replacing land lost beneath buildings and roads with a layer of plants on hard surfaces. By strategically adding ‘green skins’ in this way, it is possible to create a new network of vegetation linking roofs, walls, courtyards, streets and open spaces. This is particularly important in the city centres where vegetation may cover only about one third of the land surface, compared with 75%-95% in the outer suburbs.

Quite apart from the significant psychological advantages, there are numerous other benefits that come from growing vegetation on and around buildings. Plants have a beneficial effect on city air and water and are good investments too.

Greenspaces slow down stormwater runoff Soil and vegetation retain moisture long after brick, concrete and tarmac have dried out. Studies in Berlin have shown that on average green roofs absorb 75% or precipitation that falls on them so that immediate discharge is reduced to 25% of normal levels. This means that sewers are better able to cope with runoff from streets and other hard surfaces and the risks of flooding are considerably reduced.

Greener cities exert less pressure on the wider environment. Cities which have a higher proportion of greenspace and unsealed surfaces have microclimates which are more similar to rural regions nearby. Also, by using less water through recycling schemes, green cities do not require the building of such large reservoirs in other areas.

Vegetation on buildings helps to offset the erosion of wildlife habitats Wildlife habitats are invariably lost when open land disappears beneath built development. The effects are particularly acute in the inner city where there may be no greenspace associated with high density developments. Although additional plant life on and around buildings cannot make up for the loss of wildlife habitat, there is no doubt that here too it has a compensatory role to play.

GREENING THE COURTYARD Courtyards are potential delights. They can provide green space for work or relaxation, be cultivated as wildlife habitats, or simply organised as attractive green areas to offer pleasing views from the home or office window.

85

Courtyards can be defined as an open area surrounded by walls or buildings. They may be located within the envelope of a large building, such as an office, large home or hospital, or created by the juxtaposition of several buildings as in the case of blocks of inner city flats.

Courtyards can be used as walled gardens, using plants and water to create a pleasing microclimate. Such projects demonstrate that even in densely built up areas there is scope for greatly increasing plant cover.

Planting a courtyard has a considerable effect on its microclimate. Where courtyards are too hot, plants help to lower the air temperature by providing shade and through the actions of transpiration and evaporation which draw heat from surrounding air. Surfaces with a covering of plants heat up less, making the climate more comfortable in summer. A covering of soil and plants also helps to absorb rainwater, thus ensuring that the surface of the courtyard does not contribute to stormwater runoff problems.

Plant species may be chosen according to moisture and sunlight availability in the courtyard, but also with regard to attractiveness and wildlife value. Many grasses will offer cover and breeding places for certain invertebrates as well as food for some birds such as finches. More open but sheltered courtyards are particularly suitable for colourful plants which thrive in full sun. These will function as bee and butterfly gardens, supplying a rich source of nectar from spring to autumn.

GREEN WALLS Modern cities provide enormous areas of wall space. Not all of this space is appropriate for growing plants, but much of it is – certainly much more than has been utilised in recent years.

Benefits of Green Walls

Plant cover protects the wall from the elements also, a layer of vegetation protects a building from radiation and reduce thermic tensions within the structure.

Amenity Benefits

The most obvious benefit to be gained from encouraging plants to grow on walls is visual enhancement. There is also the advantage of a variety of natural scents.

Energy Conservation

Vegetation on walls can assist in cooling buildings in summer and insulating them in winter. In the summer, solar gain on the façade of a building is reduced by shading and, as many species of climbing plants raise their leaves in response to the high angle of the sun, the effect of a ventilation blind is created; cool air is drawn inwards and upwards, and warm air is vented at the top. Evaporation and transpiration provide an additional cooling force. In winter, evergreen species offer a degree of insulation by trapping a layer of air against the façade and reducing convectional heat loss.

An insulating effect of up to 30% has been recorded although such a high percentage is only likely when temperatures fall close to freezing. Contrary to popular belief, façades covered with plants can also be drier – another factor which cuts heat loss by reducing conductivity: rainfall is shed by leaves onto the ground whilst the walls remain dry. This can also help to prevent the harmful effects of acid rain since carbonic acid (formed by carbon dioxide and rainwater) is one of the substances responsible for chemical weathering of stonework buildings.

Health

The leaves of climbing plants on walls provide a large surface area which is capable of filtering out dust and other pollutants. Large areas of vegetation also reduce noise levels. Low humidity levels in cities are common, and green façades can help here too. Hard surfaces of concrete and glass encourage swift runoff of rainwater into the sewage system.

Plants hold water on their leaf surfaces longer than man-made materials, and through the processes of transpiration and evaporation, can add more water into the air. The result is a more pleasant climate.

Benefits to Wildlife

Green walls can provide resting and feeding places for birds, invertebrates and even small mammals. Wrens and blackbirds may be found – even shrews and voles. Watching these animals can be a source of considerable pleasure to city dwellers.

BENEFITS OF GREEN ROOFS

Roofs present by far the most significant opportunities for the greening of buildings. Many cities have millions of square metres of unused and unattractive roofs. They represent enormous wasted opportunities for improving 86

the quality of city life.

Every type of green roof makes a contribution to the urban environment. The largest help to cleanse the air. Smaller ones provide a source of food and shelter for birds.

Green roofs make good sense. As well as benefits to the environment there are technical advantages for the building itself.

Advantages of Specifying A Green Roof Ecological

● reduction of stormwater runoff ● provision of wildlife habitats ● absorption of CO2, some air pollutants and dust ● links in city-wide networks of green space ● reduction of urban ‘heat-island’ effect

Technical

● protection of roof surface from ultra-violet radiation and mechanical damage ● thermal insulation ● acoustic insulation

Financial

● lower maintenance costs for roofing materials ● attractive to clients and owner (or lessee) of building facilities

Benefits to Wildlife

Green roofs cannot be straight substitutes for wildlife habitats at ground level – many animals cannot get to the rooftop and growing conditions are not suitable for all plants. However many insects and birds will find suitable food and shelter and perhaps even a place to breed. Green roofs can go some way towards replacing lost open space beneath buildings, roads and car parks.

The most attractive green roofs for wildlife are those which supply an animal’s four basic needs: food, cover, water and an area to breed.

The soil will provide a home to spiders, earthworms, beetles and ants. Roof vegetation is usually subjected to less disturbance than an equivalent space on the ground – an important factor to birds and insects wary of human disturbance.

Environment

Roof gardens embody many of the environmental benefits already described, for instance the improvement of the urban climate and more gradual absorption of stormwater . The larger the green roof, the greater the environmental benefits.

Technical Planting roofs affords technical advantages to developers, clients and people who live and work in city buildings.

Chief among these is the high level of protection given to roofing materials: a layer of soil and plants keeps damaging influences away from the roof surface for 40-50 years, In contrast, the average flat roof has a life expectancy of 10 to 15 years.

Perhaps the most important technical advantage of vegetation on the roof is protection from ultra-violet radiation.

Planted areas heat up much less than exposed surfaces of asphalt or bitumen. Some studies show that the exposed area of a black roof can reach 80ºC when an equivalent area beneath grass is only 27ºC. The temperature difference between a gravel covered and planted roof is less extreme but still significant.

A layer of soil and plants also protects the roof from physical damage. Maintenance activity can result in punctures or cracks, particularly when bitumic materials are softened by heat. Green roofs can also add to the insulation value of the roof, sometimes by as much as 10% it has been found that in summer the room temperature beneath a gravel roof was 30ºC in contrast to 26ºC under a planted roof. Green roofs can also provide a degree of acoustic insulation.

Another benefit is more difficult to quantify – the financial value of planting the roof. Green roofs clearly attract interest and usually result in a positive image for those organisations that instigate them. They are attractive to planning authorities and provide added incentive to those looking to purchase or lease property.

Extensive Extensive green roofs are mainly developed for aesthetic and ecological reasons. Most aim to be self-sustaining, requiring low inputs of water, fertiliser and, in most cases, minimal maintenance. Growing mediums are normally much thinner, as little as 50mm, and plants are chose for their natural ability to survive the particular conditions associated with living on the roof. They are generally not used for recreation. Whilst gaining in popularity in continental Europe, this type of green roof is so far uncommon in Britain.

Green Roof Extensive Ecological

Thin soil, little or no irrigation, stressful conditions for plants.

Advantages ● lightweight – roof generally does not require strengthening ● suitable for large areas ● suitable for roofs from 0º - 30º slope ● low maintenance ● often no need for irrigation/ drainage system ● relatively little technical expertise needed ● often suitable for refurbishment projects ● can leave vegetation to develop spontaneously ● relatively inexpensive ● looks more natural ● easier for planning authority to demand green roof as a condition of planning permission

Disadvantages ● more limited choice of plants ● usually no access for recreation etc. ● unattractive to some, especially in winter

BUILDING FOR BIRDS The design and planning of urban renewal and new build schemes should take the needs of birds into account.

A wide variety of species can be attracted to nest on and in buildings, providing a great deal of enjoyment for the human inhabitants.

Many of the ideas discussed so far for greening buildings will automatically benefit birds by: ● providing food sources, either directly in the form of berries or indirectly as a result of encouraging invertebrates, ● providing cover. This process can be taken a step further by supplying additional food sources, using feeders and bird tables attached to the outside of buildings or incorporated into their structure. However, birds also need nesting places. In many locations natural nest sites will be insufficient or non-existent, so if birds are to be attracted, artificial nest sites must be provided on or around the building.

Nestboxes A wide range of artificial structures have been used throughout the world to provide nest sites for a great range of birds (see page 46). They range from the familiar hole-entrance nestbox placed in gardens to attract small, hole-nesting birds, to large platforms (often old cart wheels) placed on top of chimneys by villagers in many parts of Europe to encourage nesting white storks. Many types of nestbox can be attached to the outside of buildings. They should be sheltered from prevailing wind, rain and strong sunlight, and ideally placed on a wall facing north or east. Small, holeentrance boxes will be used by tits, while open-fronted boxes may attract robins, pied wagtails, spotted flycatchers and, if larger boxes are used, blackbirds. Very large nestboxes will provide suitable sites for kestrels if placed on tall buildings. Artificial nests for house martins, made from papier-mâché or fibreglass, often attract other house martins to build natural mud nests nearby.

87

List of Figures.......................................................................................................................... 3 List of Appendices................................................................................................................... 3 1

Introduction...................................................................................................................... 4

1109 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1119 Greenford Road

2

Location and Highway network....................................................................................... 5

Ealing

3

Public Transport............................................................................................................... 6

4

Development Proposal..................................................................................................... 7

5

National Regional and Local Authority Guidance........................................................... 8

6

Road Safety.................................................................................................................... 10

7

Transport sustainability.................................................................................................. 11

8

Traffic Impact and parking............................................................................................. 12

9

Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 14

Comfort Hotel

TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

List of Figures

Minelly Associates Principal- John Minelly C Eng, MICE, Dip TP, MRTPI (ret) 9 Rose Walk Surbiton SURREY KT5 8HR

88

Figure 1

Location plan and sightlines to entrance

Figure 2

Swept Path 1 of 7.5 Tonne Panel Van entry

Figure 3

Swept Path 2 of 7.5 Tonne Panel Van entry

Figure 4

Swept Path 3 of 7.5 Tonne Panel Van exit

Figure 5

Swept Path 4 of 7.5 Tonne Panel Van exit

List of Appendices Appendix 1 TRICS data Appendix 2 Personal injury accident (PIAs) data within 500m of the site

1

Introduction

This report sets out the potential transport assessment for a proposed hotel of 59 bedrooms planned to be located on a site bounded by Wadham Gardens, Oldfield Lane North and Greenford Road. To the west it abuts a clinic, and to the north residential properties.

Currently the properties located on site are, a warehouse of 300 sq m. and a row of three shops, one of which is divided into two shops, with flats above. Only two of the shops are occupied; the remainder of the properties being derelict. The proposed hotel is planned to have a vehicular access off Wadham Gardens which would serve 22 parking spaces, 6 cycle spaces and a service bay for vehicles up to 7.5 tonnes.

2

Location and Highway network

2.1

The site is in close proximity to two major highways. The A4127 Greenford Road forming its eastern frontage is a busy wide single carriageway principal road and bus route. A hundred metres north of the site, is the A 4090 Whitton Avenue running east – west which is of a similar nature. Wadham Gardens, however is a residential street of low traffic flow, it is however heavily parked on either side during the working day as are all the roads in the vicinity of the site.

2.2

The major roads in the vicinity are not ideal for cycling but the availability of routes 43, 86, 87 and 88 of the London Cycle network run in the vicinity

2.3

Access for walkers to and from public transport is afforded by the footway system and signal controls for crossing main roads at significant crossing points including busy intersections. There is a zebra crossing of Oldfield Lane North and Greenford Road close to the site.

3

Public Transport

Bus services on Greenford Road adjacent to the site, are The 92 service between Wembley Stadium and Southall, the H17 service between Wembley Hospital and Harrow Town Centre and, on Whitton Avenue, the 487 service provides access to South Harrow to the west and Willesden Junction to the east.

The area is reasonable well served by public transport, with the Sudbury Hill Station on the Piccadilly Line some 500m to the North, and a Network Rail station located beyond.

Sudbury Hill, Network Rail

Peak frequency (minutes)

Off Peak Frequency (minutes)

30

60

Piccadilly Line

5-10

5-10

Route 92 Route H17 Route 487

10-12 15 15

Walking Distance from site (metres)

4

Development Proposal

4.1

This transport assessment is in support of an application for a hotel of 59 bedrooms and ancillaries. 22 car parking spaces are proposed which just meet the requirements in the UDP of 1 space to 3 bedrooms, of which six are suitable for the disabled, which again surpasses the UDP guidelines of 1space to 12 bedrooms, and the rest of the 3spaces for the ancillary uses of restaurant and bar.

4.2

Vehicular access is proposed to be located approximately 40 metres from the intersection of Wadham Gardens and Oldfield Lane with a clear sightline for 50metres to the right. The building line is 2.5 metres back from the kerbline thus affording a sightline from a point more than the minimum 2.4 metres normal to the highway as shown on figure 1.

4.3

Covered secure cycle spaces are proposed for up to six cycles, this exceeds the minimum requirement under the adopted UDP of 1 space per 20 bedrooms. In addition to accommodating the parking area, the access off Wadham Gardens has been tested to accommodate a 7.5 tonne service vehicle. This has been tested for access and egress by this class of service vehicle in a forward gear as is set out in figures 2 to 5.

5

National Regional and Local Authority Guidance

5.1

National guidance in relation to transport for development is set out in Planning Policy Guidance number 13 (PPG 13). This document has an overall thrust towards restraint in travel by private car particularly for travel to and from work and is supportive of other means of travel including public transport, cycling and walking where practicable.

5.2 The Regional Planning Guidance for the South East, The Mayor’s Transport Strategy and the Local Authority, London Borough of Ealing, each endorse this government guidance in this respect. The Borough provides special planning guidance (SPGs) which set out the structure of any transport assessment and travel plan which may be required in support of a development proposal Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 entitled ‘Transport’ (PPG13) provides advice on transport matters with regard to new development proposals.

5.3

The key objective of this policy is to reduce dependency on car usage as part of central government’s aim to promote sustainable development. It seeks to achieve this by encouraging alternative means of travel, which have less environmental impact and reduce reliance on the private car.

5.4

The guidance also encourages the promotion of alternative forms of transport by promoting better integration between planning and transport and between different transport modes.

5.5

In practical terms PPG13 advocates local planning authorities to adopt a more flexible and less rigorous approach to the provision of off street car parking places particularly in town centre locations with good access to public transport.

5.6

The ‘Comfort Hotel’ site is located in an area with potential for relatively good public transport facilities where the above opportunity exists, in relation to the proposed new development. This is possible due to the availability of three bus routes within comfortable

600 500 30 250 300

89

walking distance together with a tube and heavy rail station also within walking or cycling distance.

Local plan policy 5.7

The relevant local plan is Unitary Development Plan with Ealing’s New Plan for the Environment adopted in 2004 Chapter 9 of the Plan, endorses the policies of PPG13 as previously discussed with respect to the thrust towards reduced dependence on private cars, whilst encouraging the use of public transport and cycling with walking for shorter distance travel.

6.5

The two remaining serious accidents were respectively between vehicles, one of which was performing a right turn at an uncontrolled junction and the other due to misjudgement at a signal controlled junction.

6.6

As the Average. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) of Greenford Road is of the order of 28,500 vpd, it is possible to calculate the accidents per vehicle miles as 1.28. This is somewhat higher than the national average for this class of road of 0.822

6.7

It is encouraging that there were no accidents involving cyclists, and that the pedestrian accidents were not at or near crossing points and had parked vehicles as a contributing factor.

7

Transport sustainability

5.8

Restraint in private car use is proposed by limiting the supply of car parking spaces both in new development and by control of kerbside parking provision.

7.1

Sustainability in transport depends on several factors, for instance, the level of restrain in the supply of parking spaces for any new development can encourage the use of public transport, cycling and walking were the circumstances so permit.

5.9

With regard to new development, a Special Planning Guidance (SPD) on Transport Assessments is relevant as the Local Planning Authority by controlling the number of parking spaces associated with planning permissions, seeks a reduction in car use through restraint based car parking policies and the promotion and provision of alternative transport modes.

7.2

In this case, the location has been found to be reasonably well served by public transport with three bus routes and two rail routes within reasonable walking distance. An accepted measure of accessibility to public transport in London is that of the so called PTAL system.

This measure has been tested for this location which has returned a value of 3 which is a reasonable level of accessibility for such an outer London location. It is noteworthy that access to a tube line and network rail are available; many regard such access as being much more desirable than bus access due to their relative journey speeds and capacities for longer distance travel.

5.10 With specific regard to the provision of off street car parking for hotels, the UDP standard sets a maximum supply of one space for three bedrooms in this location. Parking for disabled people is required as a minimum on the basis of one space per 12 bedrooms and for cycles, a minimum of one space per twenty bedrooms.

6 6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

90

8 8.1

Road Safety As is normal on carrying out a TA, it is customary to check the accident history of the road network planned to serve any new development. This has been carried out by first obtaining 3 years worth of personal injury accidents (PIAs) within 0.5 kilometres of the site. In this case, it amounts to some 40 PIAs over one kilometre of Greenford Road and 0.6 kilometres of Whitton Avenue, West and East. (In effect, one mile of major highway).

Of significance also were two accidents involving motorcyclists; one where responsibility was judged to be that of the cyclist but the other due to careless driving of a four wheeled vehicle.

As is normal practice for a new development, it is necessary to use historical traffic data from a similar development of that same land use, or a group of such developments to estimate the likely traffic generation. In this case, a group of four existing hotels in outer London have been chosen on average having of the order of 3 car spaces to 10 bedrooms and therefore most representative of the conditions which would give rise to traffic flow at this site. The sites used were located respectively in Hillingdon, Merton, Newham and Tower Hamlets; each of which have a reduced ratio of car parking provision in relation to bedrooms generally of the order of one car space per three bedrooms.

The details of these data are located in appendix 3 from which, the trip generation by car in the AM and PM peak hours can be extracted as follows:

On analysis of the data, it was found that the majority of the accidents were of the ‘slight injury’ category between four wheel or more vehicles involving shunts and conflicts with right turns at uncontrolled junctions. There were however four serious accidents and fortunately no fatalities.

Of the four serious accidents, two involved pedestrians crossing the road other than at a regular crossing point and obscured by parked vehicles. There were in addition, three other accidents involving pedestrians again not at regular crossings, one of which involved a child struck by a drunk driver.

Traffic Impact and parking

8.2

Trip Rate Vehicles Round

AM Peak Hour 8.00-9.00 Flow in Flow out 0.074 5.18 5

0.119 8.33 8

PM Peak Hour 17.00-18.00 Flow in Flow out 0.08 5.6 6

0.060 4.2 4

It can be seen from the above that the maximum two way flow at the site entrance likely to coincide with the network peak is likely to be of the order of 14 vehicles per hour in the AM peak hour. The flow of Wadham Gardens has been found to be of the order of 681 vehicles per day peaking at 50 vehicles per hour in a recent survey by automatic counter. At this level of flow, the introduction of the above development flows is of little consequence and access and egress could be accommodated without significant conflict.

8.3

Highway Network Flow Two major highways, Greenford Road and Whitton Avenue East and West form a distribution system north-south ad east-west respectively.

Traffic flow on each are available in the form of average annually daily flows (AADFs) from the DfT web site as set out below:

Cars Bus Light Goods HGV M/C P/C Total Vehicles

Vehicles per day ( AADF) A4127 Greenford Road A4090 Whitton Avenue 24,598 14,046 462 321 1900 1680 727 278 209 132 59 59 28,896 16,457

From the above it can be calculated that the content of heavy vehicles including buses is relatively low being 4.1 and 3.64% respectively for the two roads.

Parking demand 8.3

8.4

It is noted that the local streets are heavily parked during the working day. Anecdotal information is that this is largely due to local major employers in the area and, possibly also park and ride associated with the tube station where local CPZ, in that vicinity force parking further from the immediate area. It is also understood that a survey of public response to the possibility of provision of a Controlled Parking Zone held in 2005 resulted initially in the imposition of such further controls close to the tube station. It is understood however that a new round of survey has to be carried out, which the applicant would welcome as a potential CPZ would ensure a fairer use of kerbspace and a generally safer environment for both pedestrians and motorists.

In any event, the current parking regime with a largely static saturation level of kerbside space does, by default ensure that car trip generation to and from the site will be restrained to that of the on site supply.

9 9.1

Conclusions

It has been demonstrated that the proposed development had a minimal impact on the road system and is unlikely to add to the general level of traffic congestion or parking demands of the area.

TRICS 2007(a)

(C) 2007 JMP Consulting on behalf of the TRICS Consortium

JMP Consultants Ltd

Latchford House

Lichfield

Friday 30/03/07 Page 1 Licence No: 500000

TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS: Land Use Category

: 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK : A - HOTELS

VEHICLES

Selected regions and areas: 01 GREATER LONDON HD HILLINGDON MR MERTON NH NEWHAM TH TOWER HAMLETS

1 days 1 days 1 days 1 days

Main parameter selection: Parameter: Range:

Number of bedrooms 83 to 289 (units: )

Date Range:

01/01/98 to 21/10/05

Selected survey days: Tuesday Wednesday Friday

1 days 1 days 2 days

Selected survey types: Manual count Directional ATC Count

4 days 0 days

TRICS 2007(a) JMP Consultants Ltd

(C) 2007 JMP Consulting on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Latchford House

Lichfield

Friday 30/03/07 Page 2 Licence No: 500000

LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters 1

2

3

4

HD-06-A-01 SIPSON ROAD

TRAVELODGE, WEST DRAYTON

WEST DRAYTON Total Number of bedrooms: 289 ****** MR-06-A-01 EXPRESS BY HOL. INN,COL. WOOD CHRISTCHURCH ROAD COLLIERS WOOD Total Number of bedrooms: 83 ****** NH-06-A-01 HOTEL, STRATFORD ROMFORD ROAD STRATFORD Total Number of bedrooms: 108 ****** TH-06-A-01 TRAVELODGE, EAST INDIA DOCKS CORIANDER AVENUE EAST INDIA DOCKS Total Number of bedrooms:

HILLINGDON

MERTON

NEWHAM

TOWER HAMLETS

233 ******

91

TRICS 2007(a) JMP Consultants Ltd

(C) 2007 JMP Consulting on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Latchford House

Friday 30/03/07 Page 3 Licence No: 500000

Lichfield

TRIP RATE for Land Use 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK/A - HOTELS

VEHICLES Calculation factor: 1 BEDRMS

BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period

Time Range 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 07:00 - 08:00 08:00 - 09:00 09:00 - 10:00 10:00 - 11:00 11:00 - 12:00 12:00 - 13:00 13:00 - 14:00 14:00 - 15:00 15:00 - 16:00 16:00 - 17:00 17:00 - 18:00 18:00 - 19:00 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Daily Trip Rates:

No. Days

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0

ARRIVALS Ave. BEDRMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 96 96 96 0 0

Trip Rate 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.090 0.074 0.074 0.058 0.046 0.050 0.052 0.032 0.052 0.055 0.080 0.101 0.047 0.063 0.047 0.000 0.000 0.921

No. Days

DEPARTURES Ave. Trip BEDRMS Rate 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 4 178 0.129 4 178 0.119 4 178 0.098 4 178 0.062 4 178 0.048 4 178 0.056 4 178 0.045 4 178 0.041 4 178 0.059 4 178 0.062 4 178 0.060 4 178 0.062 2 96 0.052 2 96 0.047 2 96 0.031 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0.971

Parameter summary Trip rate parameter range selected: Survey date date range: Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): Number of Saturdays: Number of Sundays: Optional parameters used in selection: Surveys manually removed from selection:

92

83 - 289 (units: ) 01/01/98 - 21/10/05 4 0 0 NO 0

No. Days

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0

TOTALS Ave. BEDRMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 178 96 96 96 0 0

Trip Rate 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.219 0.193 0.172 0.120 0.094 0.106 0.097 0.073 0.111 0.117 0.140 0.163 0.099 0.110 0.078 0.000 0.000 1.892

93

0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.090 9.8 0.074 8.0 0.074 8.0 0.058 6.3 0.046 5.0 0.050 5.4 0.052 5.6 0.032 3.5 0.052 5.6 0.055 6.0 0.080 8.7 0.101 11.0 0.047 5.1 0.063 6.8 0.047 5.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0

%

0

00:00-01:00 01:00-02:00 02:00-03:00 03:00-04:00 04:00-05:00 05:00-06:00 06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 09:00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 12:00-13:00 13:00-14:00 14:00-15:00 15:00-16:00 16:00-17:00 17:00-18:00 18:00-19:00 19:00-20:00 20:00-21:00 21:00-22:00 22:00-23:00 23:00-24:00

% 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.129 13.3 0.119 12.3 0.098 10.1 0.062 6.4 0.048 4.9 0.056 5.8 0.045 4.6 0.041 4.2 0.059 6.1 0.062 6.4 0.060 6.2 0.062 6.4 0.052 5.4 0.047 4.8 0.031 3.2 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0

Rate

0

Latchford House

Time

JMP Consultants Ltd

TRICS 2007(a)

00:00-01:00 01:00-02:00 02:00-03:00 03:00-04:00 04:00-05:00 05:00-06:00 06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 09:00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 12:00-13:00 13:00-14:00 14:00-15:00 15:00-16:00 16:00-17:00 17:00-18:00 18:00-19:00 19:00-20:00 20:00-21:00 21:00-22:00 22:00-23:00 23:00-24:00

Rate

Latchford House

Time

JMP Consultants Ltd

TRICS 2007(a) Licence No: 500000

1

3

4

5

Percentage

6

5.1 %

5.1 %

5.6 % 6%

5.4 % 5.6 %

7

6.8 %

8

Licence No: 500000

(C) 2007 JMP Consulting on behalf of the TRICS Consortium

2

3.5 %

5%

6.3 %

8% 8%

9

8.7 %

10

1

0% 0%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2

3

4

3.2 %

5

6

6.4 %

8

Percentage

7

6.1 % 6.4 % 6.2 % 6.4 %

5.8 %

5.4 % 4.8 %

4.6 % 4.2 %

4.9 %

9

10

11

10.1 %

12

11

12.3 %

13

11 %

14

13.3 %

VEHICLES

9.8 %

VEHICLES

TRIP RATE GRAPH - DEPARTURES 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK A - HOTELS

Lichfield

0% 0%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

TRIP RATE GRAPH - ARRIVALS 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK A - HOTELS

Lichfield

(C) 2007 JMP Consulting on behalf of the TRICS Consortium

Frida

Frida

of (summary)

Page:

0

1

0% 0%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2

3

4

5

4.1 %

3.9 %

6.3 %

7

Percentage

6

5.2 % 5.8 %

5.9 % 6.2 %

5.6 % 5.1 %

5%

8

7.4 %

9

8.6 %

11

10.2 %

Date Period

10

9.1 %

BROPHYM

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

RACCM INTL

0

Accidents

11.6 %

12

VEHICLES

The description of how the accident occurred and the contributory factors are the reporting officer's opinion at the time of reporting and may not be the result of extensive investigation

Topic Based Query

Site Reference and Description (zero accident counts shown in bold)

Summary of Accidents Selected

Licence No: 500000

TRIP RATE GRAPH - TOTALS 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK A - HOTELS

Interpreted Listing

0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.219 11.6 0.193 10.2 0.172 9.1 0.120 6.3 0.094 5.0 0.106 5.6 0.097 5.1 0.073 3.9 0.111 5.9 0.117 6.2 0.140 7.4 0.163 8.6 0.099 5.2 0.110 5.8 0.078 4.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0

%

Lichfield

(C) 2007 JMP Consulting on behalf of the TRICS Consortium

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

00:00-01:00 01:00-02:00 02:00-03:00 03:00-04:00 04:00-05:00 05:00-06:00 06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 09:00-10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 12:00-13:00 13:00-14:00 14:00-15:00 15:00-16:00 16:00-17:00 17:00-18:00 18:00-19:00 19:00-20:00 20:00-21:00 21:00-22:00 22:00-23:00 23:00-24:00

Rate

Latchford House

Time

JMP Consultants Ltd

TRICS 2007(a)

94

Frida

95

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - U UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M UB ) BT - NOT REQUESTED VEHICLE

N TO S COMM TO/FROM WORK O/S HIT FIRST

W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

NODE

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (AGGRESSIVE DRIVING)

STANDING IN RD NOT CROSSING

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

S TO N DID NOT IMPACT

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED VEHICLE

IN ROAD - NOT CROSSING GOING AHEAD OTHER

PEDESTRIAN 00 (000) CAR ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

SLIGHT VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA )

0 0 XD 0 0 TUE / /0 : DARK GREENFORD ROAD J/W WHITTON AVENUE EAST NODE 4 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG NO XING FACILITY IN 0M FOLLOWING DAMAGE ONLY ACCIDENT BETWEEN V AND V , DRIVER V ALIGHTED VEHICLE. DRIVER V THEN DROVE DRIVER V

V00 B 0 (DISOBEYED AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL)

GOING AHEAD OTHER

VEHICLE x

SERIOUS DRIVER/RIDER

AUTO SIG

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

JCT CLEARED

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

JCT CLEARED

JCT MID

JCT MID

0 / / 0

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC

JCT APP

JCT APP JNY PART OF WORK N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST N TO S BACK HIT FIRST

JCT APP

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA )

NODE

N TO S BACK HIT FIRST

V00 A 0 (FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE)

GOING AHEAD HELD UP

0 0 XD 0 0 THU 0/ /0 : DARK WHITTON AVENUE EAST J/W GREENFORD ROAD 3 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS V DISOBEYED RED ATS AND WAS HIT BY V

Topic Based Query

GOING AHEAD HELD UP

GOING AHEAD OTHER SKIDDED

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

V00 A 0 (TRAVELLING TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS)

00 (00 ) TAXI (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

DRIVER/RIDER

VEHICLE

SLIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA )

0 0 XD 0 MON 0 /0 /0 : 0 LIGHT GREENFORD ROAD M N J/W WHITTON AVENUE EAST 2 POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG V HIT REAR STATIONARY V PUSHING IT INTO REAR STATIONARY V

JCT APP

JCT APP

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC 0 / / 0

NODE

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

SW TO NE FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

V00 A 0 (FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE)

SW TO NE BACK HIT FIRST

DRIVER/RIDER SLOWING OR STOPPING

SLIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F HA ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

PEDN PHASE AT ATS

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA )

Topic Based Query 0 0 XD 0 THU /0 /0 : 0 LIGHT NFL GREENFORD ROAD J/W WHITTON AVENUE EAST 1 POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG V HIT THE REAR OF V BY FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE BEHIND

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

96 of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

JCT MID

JCT MID

JCT APP

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

E TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

( Yrs - M UB )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE VEHICLE

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

( Yrs - M UB )

DRIVER/RIDER 00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

SLIGHT

xCASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

PASSENGER

VEHICLE

SLIGHT

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F W )

S TO E O/S HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

E TO W BACK HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

Sch Attended : N/R

FRONT SEAT

NODE

DAMAGE FRONT

DAMAGE FRONT

GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

Sch Attended : EARLSMEAD

FRONT SEAT BACK SEAT

0 0 XD 0 FRI /0 /0 : DARK WHITTON AVENUE EAST J/W MELVILLE AVENUE 8 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-WET WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN V TURNED RIGHT INTO THE PATH OF V

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M N ) BT - NOT REQUESTED VEHICLE

( Yrs - M HA )

DRIVER/RIDER PASSENGER PASSENGER

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT

VEHICLE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA ) CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA ) xCASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA )

JCT MID

JCT MID

0

0

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

LEAVING MAIN RD

JCT MID

Topic Based Query ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC 0 0 XS00 THU /0 /0 : DARK WHITTON AVENUE EAST J/W MELVILLE AVENUE, GREENFORD NODE 0 7 / / 0 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M 0 V TURNING RIGHT COLLIDED WITH ONCOMING V

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

BROPHYM

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

V00 B 0 (EXCEEDING SPEED LIMIT)

E TO W FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F UB ) BT - NOT PROVD (MEDCL REASONS)

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (DISOBEYED AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL)

VEHICLE

SLIGHT CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F UB ) DRIVER/RIDER SLIGHT DRIVER/RIDER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F UB ) xVEHICLE 00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F UB ) BT - NOT PROVD (MEDCL REASONS)

AUTO SIG

NODE NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

NE TO SW FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

JCT APP

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC NODE 0 / / 0

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

NE TO W BACK HIT FIRST

AUTO SIG

TURNING RIGHT

FRONT SEAT BACK SEAT

0 0 XD 0 SUN /0 /0 : 0 LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE WEST J/W GREENFORD ROAD 6 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS V DISOBEYED RED ATS & COLLIDED WITH V IN MIDDLE OF JUNCTION

V00 A 0 (FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE)

VEHICLE

SLIGHT PASSENGER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - F UNKN) SLIGHT PASSENGER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - F UNKN) xVEHICLE 00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F HA ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

Topic Based Query 0 0 XD 0 SUN 0 /0 /0 :00 LIGHT GREENFORD ROAD J/W WHITTON AVENUE WEST 5 POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS V HIT REAR STATIONARY V

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

97

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M NW 0) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

BROPHYM

00 (000) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB ) VEHICLE x

SLIGHT

PEDESTRIAN ( Yrs - F TW )

N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

GOING AHEAD OTHER

CROSSING ROAD WITHIN 0M XING W BOUND

LINK -

DAMAGE FRONT

FROM DRIVERS N/SIDE

LINK -

DAMAGE FRONT

DAMAGE BACK

PEDN PHASE AT ATS

N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER 00 (00 ) GDS . - . T ( Yrs - M TW ) BT - NOT REQUESTED VEHICLE

13 0 0 XS00 SUN /0 /0 : 0 DARK GREENFORD RD GREENFORDJ/W HORSENDEN LANE NORTH WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY PI WALKED OUT IN RD HIT BY V

N TO S BACK HIT FIRST

SLOWING OR STOPPING

DRIVER/RIDER 00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

SLIGHT VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA )

PEDN PHASE AT ATS

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY) 12 0 0 XS00 THU /0 /0 0 :0 LIGHT GREENFORD RD J/W GREENFORD MIDDX J/W OLDFIELD LANE NORTH WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY V HIT V SLOWING TO STOP

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

W TO S O/S HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F W ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

VEHICLE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA ) SLIGHT DRIVER/RIDER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F W ) SLIGHT DRIVER/RIDER xVEHICLE 00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F HA ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

JCT APP

JCT APP

JCT APP

JCT MID

JCT MID

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

RACCM INTL

0

00

0 / / 0 0

00

0 / / 0

JCT APP NEARSIDE

JCT APP

JCT APP

JCT MID

JCT MID

0 / / 0

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC NODE GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

11 0 0 QA 0 MON /0 /0 :0 LIGHT GREENFORD RD J/W RIDDING LA POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY PRIV DRIVE V TURNED RIGHT INTO THE PATH OF V

Topic Based Query

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

E TO N N/S HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

N TO E O/S HIT FIRST

FRONT SEAT WAITING TO TURN LEFT

PASSENGER

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F TW ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

SLIGHT

NODE GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - F UNKN)

10 0 0 XD 0 SUN 0 /0 /0 : LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE EASTJ/W RIDDING LANE POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN V TURNED IN PATH V , IMPACT CAUSED V TO HIT V

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

S TO E N/S HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

( Yrs - F HA )

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

W TO E O/S HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC NODE 0 / / 0

GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

VEHICLE

SLIGHT DRIVER/RIDER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HP ) SLIGHT DRIVER/RIDER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA ) xVEHICLE 00 (00 ) M/C > 00CC ( Yrs - M HP ) BT - NEGATIVE

0 0 XD 0 SUN /0 /0 : 0 LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE EAST J/W MELVILLE AVENUE 9 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN V TURNED RIGHT ACROSS PATH V

Topic Based Query

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

98 of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

DAMAGE FRONT

N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - U UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

of

Page:

W TO S N/S HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

E TO W O/S HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

LINK - NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

BROPHYM

( Yrs - M UB )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

DRIVER/RIDER

VEHICLE

SLIGHT

( Yrs - F UB )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F UB )

SW TO NE FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

N TO SW FRONT HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

DAMAGE FRONT

DAMAGE FRONT

LINK - 0 18 0 0 XS0 TUE 0 / /0 0 :0 LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE O/S GREENFORD MIDDX M S/W OF J/W MALDEN AVE GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY PRIV DRIVE V EXITING ALLEY INTO MAIN RD COLLIDED WITH V

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

( Yrs - M E )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

DRIVER/RIDER

VEHICLE

SLIGHT

( Yrs - M W )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M W )

V TURNED IN PATH V

DARK HORSENDEN LANE NORTH J/W GREENFORD ROAD WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY) 17 0 0 XD 0 FRI / /0 :0 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

( Yrs - F UB )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

W TO S O/S HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

00

00

00

JCT MID

RACCM INTL

0

0 / / 0 0

ENTERING MAIN RD

JCT MID

JCT MID

0 / / 0

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 0 / / 0 NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

( Yrs - M UB )

DRIVER/RIDER

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

SLIGHT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

Topic Based Query 16 0 0 XD 0 0 WED 0/0 /0 0: 0 DARK GREENFORD ROAD 0M NORTH J/W HORSENDEN LANE NORTH POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M V PULLED OUT ACROSS PATH V

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

Interpreted Listing

V00 A 0 (DISOBEYED AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL)

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

JCT MID

W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (DISOBEYED AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL)

( Yrs - M HA )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

JCT MID S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

BACK

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

( Yrs - F HA0 )

DRIVER/RIDER

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

SLIGHT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA0 )

LINK -

DAMAGE BACK

N TO S BACK HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD HELD UP

( Yrs - M N )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

PEDN PHASE AT ATS

DAMAGE FRONT

N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD HELD UP

( Yrs - M SL )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

15 0 0 XD 0 WED 0 /0 /0 : DARK GREENFORD ROAD J/W HORSENDEN LANE NORTH POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-WET RAINING SINGLE CWY CROSSROADS AUTO SIG V STOPPED IN MIDDLE OF JUNC DUE TO TRAFFIC - V TRIED TO GO ROUND & THEY COLLIDED

DAMAGE BACK

N TO S BACK HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD HELD UP

DRIVER/RIDER DRIVER/RIDER DRIVER/RIDER

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F OX ) BT - NOT PROVD (MEDCL REASONS)

SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 00 / / 00

VEHICLE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F OX ) CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M SL ) xCASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M N )

Topic Based Query 14 0 0 XS00 THU /0 /0 : LIGHT GREENFORD RD M NORTH OF J/W BERKELEY AVENUE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M V HIT V PUSHED V INTO V & V INTO V IN TRAFFIC

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

99

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

SW TO NE FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) OTH MOT VEH ( 0 Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

DAMAGE BACK

0 of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

SLIGHT

PEDESTRIAN 00 (000) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

LINK -

C00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

UNKNOWN

GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

GOING AHEAD OTHER

Sch Attended : N/R

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (SUDDEN BRAKING)

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (IMPAIRED BY ALCOHOL)

E TO SW DID NOT IMPACT

GOING AHEAD LEFT BEND 00 (000) M/C - 00CC BT - POSITIVE VEHICLE

( Yrs - M UB )

S TO E DID NOT IMPACT

TURNING RIGHT

DRIVER/RIDER 00 (000) GDS =< . T ( Yrs - M NW 0) BT - NOT REQUESTED

SLIGHT VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

JCT MID NEARSIDE JCT MID

0

RACCM INTL

0

0 / / 0 0

ENTERING MAIN RD

JCT MID OFFSIDE

0 / / 0

00

JCT APP

JCT MID

JCT APP

RACCM INTL

00 / / 0

0 / / 0

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 00 / / 0

LINK - 0 24 0 0 XD 0 TUE /0 /0 :00 LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE WEST M WEST J/W GREENFORD ROAD POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY PRIV DRIVE RIDER V BRAKED TO AVOID COLLISION WITH TURNING V

C00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

x VEHICLE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA0 )

23 0 0 QA 0 TUE /0 /0 : LIGHT GREENFORD RD J/W HORSENDEN AVENUE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN PEDESTRIAN RAN ACROSS THE PATH OF V

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

P TO P O/S HIT FIRST

PARKED 00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED VEHICLE

V00 A 0 (VEHICLE DOOR OPENED OR CLOSED NEGLIGENTLY)

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

DRIVER/RIDER

VEHICLE x

SLIGHT

DAMAGE FRONT

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - M UNKN)

Topic Based Query LIGHT GREENFORD ROAD SLIP ROAD 0M SW J/W HORSENDEN AVENUE 22 0 0 QA 0 FRI /0 /0 : 0 POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M DRIVER V OPENED DOOR INTO THE PATH OF V

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

S TO E FRONT HIT FIRST TURNING RIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

BROPHYM

E TO W FRONT HIT FIRST

DRIVER/RIDER GOING AHEAD OTHER

SLIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F UB ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F UB )

GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

LINK -

DAMAGE FRONT

N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST

MOVING OFF

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - F UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

21 0 0 XS0 0 TUE / /0 0:0 LIGHT ENNISMORE RD J/W WHITTON AVENUE EAST POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN V DROVE INTO THE PATH OF V

DAMAGE FRONT

NE TO SW O/S HIT FIRST

FRONT SEAT GOING AHEAD OTHER

PASSENGER

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

SLIGHT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - F UB )

JCT APP

JCT APP

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 0 / / 0

LINK - 0 20 0 0 XS00 THU /0 /0 : LIGHT WHITTON AVE WEST GREENFORD MIDDX M S/W OF J/W GREENFORD POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-WET WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY PRIV DRIVE GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M V PULLED OUT OF PRIVATE DRIVE COLLIDED WITH V

SW TO NE BACK HIT FIRST

DRIVER/RIDER GOING AHEAD HELD UP

SLIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

Topic Based Query 19 0 0 XS00 0 TUE /0 /0 : LIGHT GREENFORD RD HARROW O/S 0 M N/E OF J/W GAINSBORO GARDENS POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN GIVE WAY/UNCONT ZEBRA V HIT REAR STAT V IN TRAFFIC

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

100 of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

SLIGHT PEDESTRIAN

00 (000) CAR ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UB ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

BROPHYM

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY) V00 A 0 (TRAVELLING TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS)

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

E TO P FRONT HIT FIRST

V00 A 0 (LOSS OF CONTROL)

PARKED

W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST HIT OTH OBJECT E TO P O/S HIT FIRST

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

VEHICLE

GOING AHEAD OTHER SKIDDED HIT KERB PARKED

DRIVER/RIDER

VEHICLE

SLIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M NW 0) BT - NEGATIVE LEFT CWY OFFSIDE 00 (00 ) GDS =< . T ( Yrs - M UB ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M NW 0) VEHICLE x

LINK - 0 NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY) 29 0 0 XD 0 MON /0 /0 : DARK WITTON AVENUE WEST 0M WEST J/W GREENFORD ROAD POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M V LOST CONTROL & VEERED ACROSS ROAD HIT V & V THEN HIT A GARDEN WALL

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

E TO W O/S HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

E TO E BACK HIT FIRST

U-TURNING

RACCM INTL

RACCM INTL

00 / / 0

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 0 / / 0 NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

00 (00 ) M/C > 00CC (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - NOT PROVD (MEDCL REASONS)

VEHICLE

( Yrs - M UB )

DRIVER/RIDER

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

SLIGHT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - M UNKN)

Topic Based Query 28 0 0 XD 0 TUE /0 /0 : 0 DARK WHITTON AVENUE EAST 0M WEST J/W MELVILLE AVENUE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M V U - TURNED IN PATH V

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

C00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE VEHICLE'S PATH OR SPEED)

BROPHYM

C00 A 0 (CROSSED ROAD MASKED BY STATIONARY OR PARKED VEHICLE)

FROM DRIVERS N/SIDE

C00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

E TO W FRONT HIT FIRST

N BOUND

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

GOING AHEAD OTHER

Sch Attended : N/K

CROSSING ROAD (NOT ON XING)

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

00 (000) CAR (? Yrs - U UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

SERIOUS PEDESTRIAN

0 / / 0

JCT CLEARED

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

LINK - 0

JCT CLEARED

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

JCT CLEARED

0 / / 0

S TO N BACK HIT FIRST

V00 A 0 (TRAVELLING TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS)

x VEHICLE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA )

27 0 0 XD 0 SAT /0 /0 0: DARK WHITTON AVENUE WEST M EAST J/W VERNON RISE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M PED CROSSING ROAD FROM BEHIND A PARKED VEHICLE IS STRUCK BY V WHO FTS

V00 A 0 (FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE)

GOING AHEAD OTHER

00 (00 ) OTH MOT VEH ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

VEHICLE

( Yrs - M HA )

GOING AHEAD HELD UP

DRIVER/RIDER

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M HA ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

SLIGHT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA )

V HIT REAR STATIONARY V PUSHING IT IT INTO REAR STATIONARY V

S TO N FRONT HIT FIRST

STANDING IN RD NOT CROSSING MSK

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC 0 / / 0

LINK -

LINK - GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

SLOWING OR STOPPING

IN ROAD - NOT CROSSING

26 0 0 XD 0 THU 0 /0 /0 :00 DARK GREENFORD ROAD J/W HORSENDEN AVENUE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN

V00 B 0 (AGGRESSIVE DRIVING)

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F UB )

25 0 0 XD 0 SAT /0 /0 : LIGHT NFL GREENFORD ROAD M S J/W CAVENDISH AVENUE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-WET RAINING ONE-WAY ST NO JUN IN 0M V DROVE INTO PED

Topic Based Query

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

101

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

DAMAGE NONE

E TO W FRONT HIT FIRST REVERSING

BROPHYM

VEHICLE x

SLIGHT

DRIVER/RIDER 00 (000) CAR ( Yrs - M UNKN) BT - NOT REQUESTED LEFT CWY NEARSIDE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UNKN)

NW TO SE FRONT HIT FIRST HIT TREE

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

HIT KERB

GOING AHEAD OTHER

DAMAGE FRONT

LINK - GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

DAMAGE OFFSIDE

S TO N O/S HIT FIRST GOING AHEAD HELD UP

FRONT SEAT

34 0 0 XS00 THU 0/0 /0 :0 DARK MELVILLE AVE J/W BOURNE VIEW GREENFORD POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-WET WEATHER-OTHER SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN V LOST CONTROL VEERED OFF RD HIT TREE & UNTO FOOTPATH

VEHICLE

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M HA0) SLIGHT DRIVER/RIDER CASUALTY 00 (00 ) (? Yrs - F UNKN) SLIGHT PASSENGER xVEHICLE 00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M HA0) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

LINK - 33 0 0 QK00 0 MON 0 /0 /0 0 : 0 LIGHT MELVILLE AVENUE 0M S J/W WHITTON AVENUE EAST POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY PRIV DRIVE V REVERSED INTO STATIONARY V

V00 A 0 (DISTRACTION OUTSIDE VEHICLE)

RACCM INTL

JCT APP

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

00

0 / / 0

0 / / 0

ENTERING MAIN RD

JCT MID

JCT APP

N TO S FRONT HIT FIRST GOING AHEAD OTHER 00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M BN ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED VEHICLE

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

JCT APP

N TO S JNY PART OF WORK BACK HIT FIRST GOING AHEAD OTHER

DRIVER/RIDER

VEHICLE x

SLIGHT

GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

LINK -

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F HA0 ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F HA0 )

32 0 0 XD 0 MON 0 / 0/0 0 : LIGHT GREENFORD ROAD J/W HORSENDEN AVENUE POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN V COLLIDED WITH REAR V

Topic Based Query

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

0 / / 0

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC

JCT MID

W TO S FRONT HIT FIRST

TURNING RIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE ( Yrs - M RM 0)

JCT MID E TO W FRONT HIT FIRST

GOING AHEAD OTHER

SERIOUS DRIVER/RIDER

00 (00 ) M/C - 00CC ( Yrs - M UNKN) BT - NOT REQUESTED

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UNKN)

LINK - 31 0 0 XD 0 TUE 0 /0 /0 : LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE EAST J/W ENNISMORE AVENUE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M V TURNED RIGHT ACROSS PATH V

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

W TO E BACK HIT FIRST

SLOWING OR STOPPING

(? Yrs - M EN )

00 (000) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

W TO E BACK HIT FIRST

SLOWING OR STOPPING

( Yrs - F W )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE

FRONT SEAT W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST

PASSENGER GOING AHEAD OTHER

SLIGHT

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M XX ) BT - NOT REQUESTED

ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 0 0 / / 00

NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F XX )

Topic Based Query 30 0 0 XD 0 WED / /0 : LIGHT WHITTON AVENUE WEST 00 MTRS W OF J/W GREENFORD RD POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY NO JUN IN 0M V COLLIDED INTO V V COLLIDED INTO V

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

102 of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

00 (000) M/C - 00CC BT - NEGATIVE

SLIGHT

DRIVER/RIDER

( Yrs - M OB )

of

Page:

Interpreted Listing

JCT MID

JCT MID

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

0 / / 0

C00 A 0 (DANGEROUS ACTION IN CARRIAGEWAY (EG PLAYING))

SERIOUS PEDESTRIAN 00 (000) CAR ( Yrs - M UNKN) BT - NOT REQUESTED

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - F SG ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED VEHICLE

CELL 000/ 00

DAMAGE NONE

FROM DRIVERS N/SIDE MSK

JCT APP

JCT MID

W TO E FRONT HIT FIRST N TO W FRONT HIT FIRST

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

End of Report

TURNING RIGHT

GOING AHEAD OTHER SKIDDED

DRIVER/RIDER 00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - F TN 0) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

SLIGHT VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F TN 0)

W BOUND NE TO SW FRONT HIT FIRST

GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

GOING AHEAD OTHER

CROSSING ROAD (NOT ON XING)

40 0 0 XD 00 SUN /0 /0 : 0 DARK NFL HORSENDEN HILL J/W SHERWOOD AVENUE T/STAG JUN SINGLE CWY RAINING POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-WET V TURNED IN PATH V

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

RACCM INTL

0 / / 0

0

0

0 / / 00 0

FOREIGN REG LHD

JCT APP

CELL 000/ 00 39 0 0 XS00 THU /0 /0 : DARK OLDFIELD LANE SOUTHALL MIDDX FLAGGED 0M SOUTH OF J/W MALDEN AVE NO JUN IN 0M SINGLE CWY WEATHER-FINE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY NO XING FACILITY IN 0M PI WALKED FROM FRONT OF VAN COLLIDED WITH V

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

E TO W FRONT HIT FIRST

STANDING IN RD NOT CROSSING

C00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE VEHICLE'S PATH OR SPEED)

GOING AHEAD OTHER

IN ROAD - NOT CROSSING

V00 A 0 (SUDDEN BRAKING)

( Yrs - M UB )

PEDESTRIAN

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

00 (000) CAR BT - POSITIVE

SLIGHT

V00 A 0 (IMPAIRED BY ALCOHOL)

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

Topic Based Query ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC DARK DIMMOCK DRIVE M EAST J/W MATTHEW'S ROAD 0 CELL 00/ 000 38 0 0 XD 0 FRI / 0/0 : / / 0 T/STAG JUN SINGLE CWY WEATHER-FINE POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M INTOXICATED DRV V PULLED OUT OF DRIVEWAY & HIT CHILD PED WHO WAS IN CARRIAGEWAY

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

LAAU - Accident Analysis System

V00 A 0 (CARELESS/RECKLESS/IN A HURRY)

BROPHYM

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO LOOK PROPERLY)

NW TO SE JNY PART OF WORK O/S HIT FIRST

V00 A 0 (FAILED TO JUDGE OTHER PERSON'S PATH OR SPEED)

GOING AHEAD OTHER

GOING AHEAD RIGHT BEND S TO NE FRONT HIT FIRST

FRONT SEAT

V00 A 0 (POOR TURN OR MANOEUVRE)

( Yrs - M UNKN)

00 (00 ) GDS => . T BT - NEGATIVE

PASSENGER

VEHICLE

SLIGHT ( Yrs - M HA )

00 (00 ) CAR BT - NEGATIVE

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - F UB )

LIGHT OLDFIELD LANE NORTH J/W CLARE ROAD 37 0 0 XD 0 FRI /0 /0 0 :00 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-WET RAINING ROUNDABOUT ROUNDABOUT V PULLED OUT ONTO ROUNDABOUT IN FRONT V

CELL 00/ 00 GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

JCT MID

GOING AHEAD RIGHT BEND S TO NE FRONT HIT FIRST

00 (00 ) CAR (? Yrs - M UNKN) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

VEHICLE

V00 A 0 (FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE)

JCT MID

GOING AHEAD RIGHT BEND S TO NE BACK HIT FIRST

DRIVER/RIDER

JCT APP

00 (00 ) CAR ( Yrs - M UB ) BT - DRV NOT CONTACTED

SLIGHT

DAMAGE FRONT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M UB )

V HIT REAR V

SE TO NW FRONT HIT FIRST

CELL 00/ 00 GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

SLOWING OR STOPPING

36 0 0 XD 0 TUE /0 /0 : 0 LIGHT CLARE ROAD J/W OLDFIELD LANE NORTH POLICE - OVER COU ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE ROUNDABOUT ROUNDABOUT

VEHICLE x

CASUALTY 00 (00 ) ( Yrs - M OB )

Topic Based Query ORDER BY ASSIGNED_TO ASC,AREFNO ASC LINK - 0 35 0 0 XS00 SUN 0 /0 /0 :0 LIGHT MELVILLE AVENUE J/W BOURNE VIEW GREENFORD MIDDX / / 0 POLICE - AT SCENE ROAD-DRY WEATHER-FINE SINGLE CWY T/STAG JUN GIVE WAY/UNCONT NO XING FACILITY IN 0M

V SLOWING LOST CONTROL FELL OFF

All Accidents 500m Radius Circle area -3yrs to 30 Nov.2006

0 MAR 00 :

Date:

103

104

105

106

107

Comfort Hotel 1109 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1119 Greenford Road

1. Introduction 2. Context of the Plan

2.1 Planning Policy..................................................................................................

2.2 ........................................................................................Car Parking Provision

Ealing

3 Objectives of the Plan 3.3

3.1 Overall Objectives.............................................................................................

3.2 ...............................................................................................................Targets

4 Measures to achieve Objectives

TRAVEL PLAN

4.1 Walking..............................................................................................................

4.2 Cycling..............................................................................................................

4.3 Emergency Ride Home.....................................................................................

4.4 Public Transport................................................................................................

4.5 Demand Responsive Transport.........................................................................

4.6 Staff Recruitment Policy....................................................................................

4.7 Staggered and flexible hours............................................................................

4.8 Bus and Rail information...................................................................................

4.9 Virtual Transport................................................................................................

4.10 Employee Starter Pack...................................................................................

4.11 .............................................................................................. Staff Workshops

5 Managing the Plan

5.1 Travel Plan Co-ordinator (TPC).........................................................................

5.2 Car Park Management......................................................................................

5.3 Implementation of the Plan...............................................................................

5.4 ......................................................................................Monitoring and Review

6 Summary and Recommendations

Minelly Associates Principal- John Minelly C Eng, MICE, Dip TP, MRTPI (ret) 9 Rose Walk Surbiton SURREY KT5 8HR 108

1. Introduction This document identifies the elements of a Travel Plan (referred hereafter as the Plan) which has been compiled to accompany the Transport Assessment for the proposed Comfort Hotel planned to be located at a corner site on Greenford Road. The development is for a Hotel of 59 bedrooms with limited car parking and ancillaries such as a restaurant and bar. It is proposed to be located at a corner site on the west side of Greenford Road bounded by Oldfield Road and Wadham Gardens. The vehicular access to parking and the service bay is planned to be accessed off Wadham Gardens.

2. Context of the Plan 2.1

4.1

Walking Walking is both a means of keeping fit and the most convenient means of to and from work for distances up to one mile. For travel beyond this, the pavement system and crossing points on the main roads are adequate for accessing the bus and rail systems in the vicinity.

4.2

LB Ealing recognises the role of restraint based parking can have on travel mode choice and have set a standard which allows a maximum of one space per 3 bedrooms in this area of the borough. This standard does have a measure of restraint built into it as unconstrained value has been quoted in GLA sources as one space per bedroom.

It has been suggested in some parking studies that the level of parking supply can be the most significant factor in determining the means of travel, particularly of travel to and from work. In the case of the proposed Comfort Hotel, the proposed parking will not be available to staff and will be available to guests and visitors only.

3

Objectives of the Plan

3.1

Overall Objectives The end user of the hotel is fully committed to producing and implementing the Plan in accordance with the detail set out in this document.

4.3

Emergency Ride Home A regular arrangement with a local mini- cab company will be set up for emergency purposes to provide emergency ride home where a staff member is taken ill or has to return home to deal with a domestic emergency particularly in an overnight situation. This should allay the temptation for any employee to bring a car to be parked nearby where such a possibility is present.

4.4

Public Transport To encourage staff to use public transport, and recognising the possibility otherwise of them parking externally at the kerbside in uncontrolled parking areas, subsidies will be provided to staff living beyond five kilometres of the hotel.

5.5

Demand Responsive Transport Demand response transport will be made available in the form of a pick-up facility for groups of guests or staff from rail stations such as Greenford or Sudbury Hill where deemed necessary.

4.6

Staff Recruitment Policy A policy of local recruitment of staff will be followed. Greenford is a heavily populated area and, as the nature of hotel work is facilitated by the location of staff within walking and cycling distance, such a policy would be advantageous to the operation of the establishment in addition to providing additional employment opportunities locally.

4.7

Staggered and flexible hours Allowing flexibility in working hours will encourage employees to travel outside of the traditional commuter hours thus contribution a little to minimising congestion of public transport and have safety benefits for those who chose to cycle to work.

Targets Staff will not be permitted to use the available car parking supply.

Given the need for some staff to work unsociable hours, 4 bedrooms will be made available for overnight resting after such shift work.

Cycling Secure cycle stands, provision of shower facilities and changing facilities will be provided to all staff to facilitate cycle to work and for guests should they wish to avail themselves of the facilities. In the case of guests, it is proposed that two cycles will be available on the premises for their use should they require this facility.

Car Parking Provision Car parking provision is for a total of 22 spaces including 6 disabled spaces. This complies for a hotel of 59 bedrooms at this location as set out in the UDP standard.

3.2

Measures to achieve Objectives

Planning Policy The policies of Central Government in regard to sustainable transport are set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note PPG 13 - ‘Transport’ March 2001. PPG 13 sets out clearly the government’s intention to ‘promote the widespread use of Travel Plans among businesses’. It is clear that these policies are endorsed by both Ealing Borough Council and The GLA with the intention of reducing the reliance of on travel by private car and to encourage a shift in the mode of travel for a business towards more sustainable transport.

2.2

4

4.8

Bus and Rail information Travel information will be provided in a number of forms. Hard copy bus and rail timetables will be made available to every guest on arrival or pre-booking. The reception will have a a computer link to the London Transport and any other Web site or for personal use or on request: Every room will

109

be able to access broad band Internet wireless facilities for guests with their own laptop.

4.9

conditions of employment with respect to non-car travel modes to and from their workplace. The implementation of which will be the responsibility of the TPC. The TPC activities will include;

Virtual Transport

• Workshops and seminars • Publication of relevant and up to date information • Car park utilisation surveys • Cycle usage analysis • Pedestrian activity • Demand surveys for group transport of guests or staff • Maintaining records • Arranging annual staff travel survey

Telecommuting which can in some instances be a substitute for conventional transport is perhaps not a significant option for hotel employees other than for a limited amount of paperwork at management level, but this facility is obviously available for guests via the broadband facility previously discussed and may well reduce or replace travel needs for guests who require to otherwise travel extensively throughout the conurbation or beyond.

4.10 Employee Starter Pack

The result of the above process will form the basis of an annual monitoring report to be made available to the highway authority for their review.

The Hotel management will provide each employee on with a starter pack setting out all the travel Facilities and benefits as outlined above

4.11 Staff Workshops To ensure successful implementation of the Plan, regular workshops will be held initially on the occasion of the Hotel being opened, after one month of operation and at regular six monthly intervals to ensure that the plan is being successfully implemented and to ensure staff are complying with their travel obligations as set out in their conditions of employment.

5

Managing the Plan

5.1

Travel Plan Co-ordinator (TPC) A travel plan co-ordinator will be appointed from the instigation of the hotel who will be responsible for implementation, monitoring and reporting of the plan as required by the local authority.

6

Summary and Recommendations It is envisage that the provision of a suitable Plan will form the basis of a Section106 agreement.

The Plan will set the basis of a continued sustainable travel system for the hotel and ensure that this will be sustained throughout the life of the establishment.

The principal measures as previously noted will be;

6.1

Provision of cycle parking and availability of additional cycles for the use of staff and guests.

6.2

Ensure car parking is for guests and visitors only

6.3

Provision of public transport finance to all staff living beyond one mile of the hotel.

6.4 Appointment and maintenance of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator to enforce the Plan

2.2

Car Park Management The car park access will be controlled by means of a video link to the reception desk. Only guests will have access and will be directed to numbered parking spaces which will be allocated in accord with their booking.

Six parking spaces have been laid out as suitable for the use of disabled people. In the event of these not being sufficient, a foldable barrier will be located centrally to one regular space such the three regular spaces can be re-allocated as two wider spaces for disabled use should the need arise.

5.3

Implementation of the Plan The TPC will implement the plan through the conditions of employment of all staff. In the event of staff being found to violate their obligation with respect to travel, disciplinary action will be taken and dismissal will be a consideration where necessary.

5.4

Monitoring and Review The process of monitoring travel patterns of staff will be to ensure that they comply with their

110

Report Prepared By

:

Paul Andrew Fawell B.Sc. (Hons) MRICS

Specialist Field

:

Daylight and Sunlight Chartered Surveyor

Daylight and Sunlight Study 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

th July 00

Right of Light Consulting 0 Sandhill Road Eastwood Leigh-on-Sea Essex SS BY Tel: 0 00

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

111

CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................... 2 .

Overview ....................................................................................................................

2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3 .

Documents Considered ..............................................................................................

3 METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY..................................................................................... 4 .

BRE Digest 0 : Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight.............................. .

Daylight to Windows ................................................................................................... .

Sunlight availability to windows .................................................................................. .

Overshadowing to Gardens and Open Spaces ..........................................................

4 RESULTS OF THE STUDY................................................................................................. 7 .

Windows Considered ................................................................................................. .

Numerical Results ...................................................................................................... .

Daylight to Windows ................................................................................................... .

Sunlight to Windows ................................................................................................... .

Overshadowing to Gardens and Open Spaces .......................................................... .

Conclusion..................................................................................................................

5 CLARIFICATIONS .............................................................................................................. 9 .

General....................................................................................................................... .

Project Specific...........................................................................................................

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 . .

Right of Light Consulting has been commissioned to undertake a daylight and sunlight study of the proposed development at 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP.

. .

The aim of the study is to assess the impact of the development on the light receivable by the neighbouring residential properties at Greenford Road, to Oldfield Road North and to Rex Court.

The existing Clinic building on

Wadham Gardens is also considered. . .

The study is based on the various numerical tests laid down in the Building Research Establishment (BRE) Digest 0 ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: a good practice guide’ by P J Littlefair .

. .

The window key in Appendix identifies the windows analysed in this study.

Appendix gives the numerical results of the various daylight and sunlight tests.

. .

All neighbouring windows pass all of BRE diffuse daylight and direct sunlight tests.

The proposed development will not cause more than 0% of any neighbouring

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 2

Overview

garden or amenity areas to remain in permanent shadow on st March.

The

development therefore satisfies the BRE overshadowing requirements.

WINDOW KEY DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT RESULTS . .

In summary, the proposed development will have a low impact on the light receivable by its neighbouring properties. Right of Light Consulting confirms that the proposed development design satisfies all of the requirements set out in BRE Digest 0 Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight.

In most instances, the development

surpasses the BRE requirements by a significant margin.

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

112

Page

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Page

2

INTRODUCTION

2.1 . .

3

Documents Considered

3.1

This report is based on the design detailed on drawings:

. .

Proposed Basement Plan Proposed Ground Floor Plan Proposed First Floor Plan Proposed Second Floor Plan Proposed Third Floor Plan Proposed Roof Plan Proposed Front Elevation Proposed Side Elevation

BRE Digest 209 : Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight The study is based on the various numerical tests laid down in the Building Research Establishment (BRE) Digest 0 ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: a

SCP Architects Limited A0 – 00 A0 – 00 A0 – 00 A0 – 00 A0 – 00 A0 – 00 A0 – 00 A0 – 00

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

good practice guide’ by P J Littlefair . In general, the BRE tests are based on

Rev – Rev – Rev – Rev – Rev – Rev – Rev – Rev –

the requirements of the British Standard, BS 0 Part . . .

The standards set out in the BRE guide are intended to be used flexibly. In instances where there is a special requirement for daylight or sunlight, higher levels may be deemed necessary.

In other situations, such as with urban developments, lower

daylight and sunlight levels may be unavoidable. The following statement is quoted directly from the BRE guide: . .

“The guide is intended for building designers and their clients, consultants and planning officials. The advice given is not mandatory and this document should not be considered as an instrument of planning policy. Its aim is to help rather than constrain the developer. Although it gives numerical guidelines, these should be interpreted flexibly because natural lighting is only one of the many factors in site layout design.”

3.2 . .

Daylight to Windows Diffuse daylight is the light received from the sun which has been diffused through the sky. Even on a cloudy day when the sun is not visible, a room will continue to be lit with light from the sky. This is diffuse daylight.

. .

Diffuse daylight calculations should be undertaken to all main windows at adjoining residential properties. The calculations should be applied to non-domestic buildings where there is a reasonable expectation of daylight.

The BRE guide states that

windows to bathrooms, toilets, storerooms, circulation areas and garages need not be analysed.

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Page

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Page

113

. .

The BRE guide contains three tests which measure diffuse daylight.

These are

3.3

explained in the following sections. . . . .

Test Vertical Sky Component

The BRE sunlight tests should be applied to all main living rooms and conservatories which have a window which faces within 0 degrees of due south. The guide states that kitchens and bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to

The percentage of the sky visible from the centre of a window is known as the

block too much sunlight. In non-domestic buildings, any spaces which are deemed to

Vertical Sky Component. Diffuse daylight will be adversely affected if after a

have a specific requirement for sunlight should be checked.

development the Vertical Sky Component is both less than % and less than 0. times its former value. . .

Sunlight availability to windows

. .

The BRE guide recommends that main living room windows should receive at least % of the total annual probable sunlight hours, including at least % of the annual

Test No-Sky Line

probable sunlight hours during the winter months between st September and st

The no-sky line test involves calculating the percentage of a room’s area which can

March. Sunlight availability will be adversely affected if both the total number of

receive direct sky light. Diffuse daylight is likely to be adversely affected if after the

sunlight hours falls below these targets and is less than 0. times the amount before

development the area of a room receiving direct skylight is less than 0. times its

the development.

former value.

3.4 . .

Test Average Daylight Factor The Average Daylight Factor test is more reliable than the first two diffuse daylight

. .

variables which the other tests do not.

For example, only the Average Daylight

Factor test takes into account the size of the window and whether the room has more than one window. These are important factors which affect the level of illumination within a room.

The BRE test is based on the British Standard BS 0 Part , which recommends

The availability of sunlight should be checked for all open spaces where sunlight is required. This would normally include:

tests. This is because Average Daylight Factor test takes into account a range of

. .

Gardens, usually the main back garden of a house, and allotments Parks and playing fields Children’s playgrounds Outdoor swimming pools and paddling pools Sitting out areas, such as those between non-domestic buildings and in public squares

The BRE guide recommends that for an open space to appear adequately lit

an Average Daylight Factor of % or more if there is no supplementary electric

throughout the year, no more than 0% and preferably no more than % of its area

lighting, or % or more if supplementary lighting is provided. There are additional

should be prevented from receiving any sunlight at all on st March.

minimum recommendations for dwellings of % for kitchens, . % for living rooms

availability will be adversely affected if both the amount of sunlight falls below these

and % for bedrooms.

targets and is less than 0. times the amount before the development.

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

114

Overshadowing to Gardens and Open Spaces

Page

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Sunlight

Page

4

4.6

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

4.1 . .

4.2 . .

. .

Conclusion The proposed development will have a low impact on the light receivable by its neighbouring properties. The development design satisfies all of the requirements

Windows Considered Appendix provides photographs to indicate the positions of the windows analysed in

set out in BRE Digest 0 Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight. In most

this study.

instances, the development surpasses the BRE requirements by a significant margin.

Numerical Results Appendix lists the detailed numerical daylight and sunlight test results. The results are interpreted below.

4.3 . .

Daylight to Windows All windows pass all three of the BRE daylight tests. The proposed development satisfies the BRE daylight requirements.

4.4 . .

Sunlight to Windows Windows to pass both the total annual sunlight hours test and the winter sunlight hours test. All other windows do not face within 0 degrees of due south.

These windows do not need to be tested for direct sunlight.

The development

therefore satisfies the BRE sunlight to windows requirements.

4.5 . .

Overshadowing to Gardens and Open Spaces The only nearby garden to the north of the development site is that belonging to No. Greenford Road. From the aspect of No. , the proposed development broadly follows the massing of the existing site buildings. There will be a very small increase in overshadowing to No. â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rear garden. Before the development, % of No. â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s garden is in permanent shadow on st March. This will increase by % to % after the development. The ratio between the before and after overshadowing is 0. which according to the BRE will be unnoticeable. The development therefore satisfies the BRE overshadowing to gardens and open spaces requirements.

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Page

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Page

115

5

CLARIFICATIONS

5.1 . .

General The report provided is solely for the use of the client and no liability to anyone else is accepted.

. .

External areas will have been inspected from best vantage points or a standard twelve-foot surveyor’s ladder. We shall have undertaken the survey following the guidelines of the RICS publication “Surveying Safely”.

. .

Where limited access is available, reasonable assumptions will have been made.

. .

Right of Light Consulting have endeavoured to include in the report those matters, which they have knowledge of or of which they have been made aware, that might adversely affect the validity of the opinion given.

. .

Right of Light Consulting have indicated the sources of all information used in the report.

. .

APPENDICES

Right of Light Consulting will notify those instructing them immediately and confirm in writing if for any reason the report requires any correction or qualification.

. .

Right of Light Consulting confirm that they have not entered into any arrangement where the amount or payment of fees is in any way dependent on the outcome of a planning decision.

. .

Right of Light Consulting confirm that they have used their best endeavours to ensure that the facts stated in this report are correct and that the opinions expressed represent a true and complete professional opinion.

5.2 . .

Project Specific None

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

116

Page

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

Window Key

Non habitable

1121 Greenford Road

APPENDIX 1 WINDOW KEY

Non habitable

1121 Greenford Road

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP

117

1121 Greenford Road

0

1 to 6 Rex Court

118

579 to 581 Oldfield Road North

Clinic, Wadham Gardens

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT STUDY 0 to Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB 0DP % % % % % %

to Oldfield Road North Window Habitable Living to Rex Court Window Window Window Window Window 0 Window

n/a = window does not face within 0 degrees of due south

Non domestic Non domestic Non domestic Non domestic Non domestic Non domestic Non domestic

% 0% % % % % %

%

Bedroom Bedroom Habitable Living Kitchen

Greenford Road Window Window Window Window

Clinic, Wadham Gardens Window Window Window Window Window Window Window

% 0% % %

Room Use

Window Reference

Habitable Living Habitable Living Habitable Living Habitable Living Habitable Living Habitable Living

DAYLIGHT AND SUNLIGHT RESULTS

% % % % % % %

% % % 0% % %

%

% % % 0%

.0 .0 .00 0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

Pass

Pass Pass Pass Pass

% % % % % % %

% % % % % %

0%

% % % %

% % % % % % %

0% % % % % %

%

% % % %

.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00

0.

0.

0.

0.

0. .00

0.

.00 .00 .00 .00

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

Pass

Pass Pass Pass Pass

.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0%

. % . % . % . % . % . %

. %

.0% .0% . % .0%

. % . % . % . % . % . % . %

. % . % . % . % . % . %

. %

. % . % . % . %

. % . % . % . % . % . % . %

. % . % .0% .0% . % . %

. %

. % . % 0. % . %

% % % % % % %

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

% % % % % % %

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

.0 .0 0.

0.

0.

0. .00

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

% % % % % % %

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

% % 0% % % % %

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

0. .00 0.

0.

0.

0. .00

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Daylight to Windows Sunlight to Windows Vertical Sky Component No-Sky Line Average Daylight Factor Total Sunlight Hours Winter Sunlight Hours Existing Proposed Ratio Result Existing Proposed Ratio Result Target Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Ratio Result Existing Proposed Ratio Result

Appendix 2 - Daylight and Sunlight to Windows Results

APPENDIX 2

119

120 1121 Greenford Road Rear garden

Reference

st

%

%

Area receiving no sunlight on March Existing Proposed

Appendix 2 - Overshadowing to Gardens and Open Spaces Results

%

Existing

%

Proposed

Area receiving at least some sunlight on st March

0.

Ratio

Pass

Result

Statement of Community Involvement We have endeavoured to involve the local community and councillors in the scheme by informal discussions and writing to them to attend a presentation, preparing a “Frequently Asked Questions” sheet, and inviting further comments. In fact all the windows at the rear have been designed in conjunction with the neighbours at nos.1121 and 1123 Greenford Road and taking on board their views to minimise overlooking by incorporating angled windows with obscure glass.

One of the main concerns is about the restaurant/bar being used for all night drinking and also wedding or other functions, this was made clear at the presentation that this was not the case, we have been informed that a rumour persists about precisely this, therefore we are reiterating the following as part of this application and planning and licensing conditions, when we apply for this, can be attached: 1. The main hotel doors will close to the public except guests at 11.00pm, therefore the restaurant and bar will close at that time.

2. We do not intend to hold any functions, and the layout of the open plan reception, restaurant and bar area would in any case not be conducive for such a use.

3. The restaurant/bar are ancillary uses of the hotel, and they are not the main business per se of this proposal .

The other concerns raised were: 1. Light spillage – the external lighting will be designed by a lighting specialist and will comply with Council guidelines to prevent light pollution 2. Noise – there will be no loud music and the air-condition unit is placed on the second floor in the middle of the roof, and again this will comply with Council guidelines and is covered in our Environmental report 3. Parking – we have incorporated the maximum parking allowed under the Unitary Development Plan of the Council, and the Transport Assessment report addresses this issue by giving comparables.

4. Overlooking – there is no overlooking 5. Light & Shadowing – this meets the requirements, the scheme has worked well, see Light & Shadow report 6. Homeless Families – this proposal is for a 4 star AA rated hotel and is not a hostel 7. Will there be lorries delivering goods? – No, unlike in the past when Gilberts occupied the site and container lorries used to block Wadham Gardens when delivering to the warehouse, we will have deliveries by van only.

8. Will the Green roof be used as a garden for hotel guests? – No, this is only for environmental reasons, the access door to the roof will be locked and this is for maintenance only.

9. How long will the construction take and will it disturb us? – We are anticipating to finish the construction in 9 months using revolutionary modular/volumetric construction techniques where the bedrooms will be manufactured in the factory and delivered to the site. This will not only reduce the time of construction by 40-50% but also there will be less tradesmen and construction on site and consequently less noise.

The plans and all the reports have been uploaded onto our website www.dewood.co.uk and a printed hardcopy has been left at Victor’s Hairdressers, 1113a Greenford Road, Greenford, UB6 0DP, for viewing by residents who may not have access to a computer or may not be able to travel to the planning offices. We will also be available by telephone, email and post to answer any further questions local residents may have. Please see documents attached.

De Wood Group

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP email: dewoodgroup@aol.com

Dear Resident; Saturday 7th July, 11.00am to 1.00pm, at 1111 Greenford Road. Greenford Invitation to look at and comment on our proposed hotel development at 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road.

We are writing to invite you to come along and look at our plans to develop a new hotel on the site of 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road, at the corner of Wadham Gardens with Greenford Road.

We would welcome the opportunity to explain our proposals to you in an informal, relaxed atmosphere and to listen to your comments on what we are proposing.

We are intending to submit our plans for the redevelopment to Ealing Council very shortly and your views, as neighbours, will be invaluable to us.

Many of you will be formally consulted by the Council when the application is submitted but we feel that it is important to let you know beforehand what we are proposing and to give you the opportunity to look at and comment on our proposal in a less formal way.

We hope you will be able to visit us on Saturday and look forward to seeing you.

Yours sincerely,

Ali Musani De Wood Group

121

Subj: Re: Proposed hotel development at c/o Oldfield Lane North and Wadham Gardens

De Wood Group

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP email: dewoodgroup@aol.com

Mr Kilduff North Greenford Residents’ Association 89 Currey Road Greenford Middlesex UB6 0DP 30th June, 2007 Dear Mr Kilduff I am writing to you in your capacity as the Chairman of the North Greenford Residents’ Association to invite you and your committee to the following: Saturday 7th July, 11.00am to 1.00pm, at 1111 Greenford Road, Greenford Invitation to look at and comment on our proposed hotel development at 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road.

Date: 12/04/2007 17:03:41 GMT Standard Time From: Petercauser To: jason.stacey@ealing.gov.uk, susan.emment@ealing.gov.uk, william.brooks@ealing.gov.uk

Dear Councillors; I am writing to you, on behalf of De Wood Estates, to invite you to look at and comment on their proposals for an hotel on this corner site (1109 - 1119 Greenford Road). I have been engaged by De Wood Estates to give planning advice. We have had discussions with the Planning Department and we believe we have taken on board comments they have made on earlier schemes.

Before submitting a formal planning application, De Wood Estates will shortly be organising a small presentation to the local residents, including the Residents’ Association but, as matter of courtesy, they would first like to make you, as ward councillors, aware of their proposals, since, inevitably, you will be asked about the scheme by your constituents.

I realise that you are all very busy and that your time is very precious but, if there is a time, preferably within the next week, when you could spare half an hour so that we can brief you on the proposals and listen to any comments you may have, it would very much be appreciated.

If you could let me know of any times when you would be able to attend a short presentation, probably at No 1109 Greenford Road (c/o Oldfield Lane North and Wadham Gardens), we can then make the necessary arrangements.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely, Peter Causer

We are writing to invite you to come along and look at our plans to develop a new hotel on the site of 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road, at the corner of Wadham Gardens with Greenford Road.

We would welcome the opportunity to explain our proposals to you in an informal, relaxed atmosphere and to listen to your comments on what we are proposing.

We are intending to submit our plans for the redevelopment to Ealing Council very shortly and your views, as neighbours, will be invaluable to us.

Many of you will be formally consulted by the Council when the application is submitted but we feel that it is important to let you know beforehand what we are proposing and to give you the opportunity to look at and comment on our proposal in a less formal way.

We hope you will be able to visit us on Saturday and look forward to seeing you.

Yours sincerely, Ali Musani De Wood Group

122

Email to Local MP Dear Mr Pound

I am writing to invite you, as the local MP, to look at and comment on our proposals for an hotel on the corner site, 1109 - 1119 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP, which we will shortly be submitting for planning.

We will be holding a presentation to the local residents, including the Residents’ Association, and local councillors have also been invited on Saturday the 7th of July between 11.00am and 1.00pm at 1111 Greenford Road, Greenford, and would appreciate it if you could make some time from you busy schedule to view our proposals so that we may listen to any comments you may have, it will be highly appreciated, I am sorry to have left it so late.

We look forward to seeing you, and if you cannot make it then we will be only too pleased to answer any questions you may have by email.

Yours sincerely,

Ali Musani De Wood Group Mobile: 07712-563254

De Wood Group

De Wood Group

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP email: dewoodgroup@aol.com

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP email: dewoodgroup@aol.com FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

TO THE RESIDENTS & ANY OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT AT 1109 – 1119 GREENFORD ROAD WE WOULD LIKE TO KINDLY REQUEST YOU TO REGISTER YOUR NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE REGISTER PROVIDED AND IF YOU WISH YOU MAY ADD ANY COMMENTS YOU MAY HAVE ON THE SCHEME. WE WILL KEEP YOU INFORMED OF THE PROGRESS ON THE APPLICATION BY EMAIL, OR YOU MAY ACCESS IT ON OUR WEBSITE www.dewood.co.uk BY THE 31st OF JULY, 2007, WHERE YOU WILL BE ABLE DOWNLOAD PDF DOCUMENTS. YOU MAY ALSO MAKE SUGGESTIONS OR COMMENTS BY EMAIL OR POST. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND ATTENDANCE. DE WOOD GROUP

PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT AT 1109 – 1119 GREENFORD ROAD 1. HOW MANY ROOMS ARE PROPOSED? 59 BEDROOMS AND 4 STAFF BEDROOMS 2. HOW MANY PARKING SPACES ARE PROPOSED AND ARE THEY SUFFICIENT? 22 PARKING SPACES AND 6 CYCLE SPACES ARE PROPOSED. EALING COUNCIL’S GUIDELINES STATE THAT THERE SHOULD BE 1 CAR SPACE PER 3 BEDROOMS MAXIMUM, THIS IS ALSO THE GOVERNMENT’S GUIDELINE THAT THERE SHOULD BE LESS PARKING, THEREFORE EVEN IF WE COULD PROVIDE MORE PARKING WE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO INCORPORATE THAT INTO OUR PLANS. IN PRACTICE HOTELS OPERATE ON AN AVERAGE OF 65% OCCUPANCY WHICH MEANS ON AVERAGE 40 ROOMS WOULD BE OCCUPIED AND CONSIDERING NOT EVERYONE ARRIVES BY CAR THERE COULD BE VERY LITTLE OVERSPILL ONTO THE STREET, IN FACT SOME OF THE ROOMS WILL BE TAKEN BY LOCAL COMPANIES LIKE KELLOGGS AND GLAXO WHOSE STAFF AND VISITORS CAN ACTUALLY WALK TO THE HOTEL, AND AS PART OF OUR COMMITMENT STAFF WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BRING THEIR CARS TO WORK OR PARK IN THE CAR PARK. WE ARE ALSO WILLING TO COMMIT SOME FUNDS TO THE COUNCIL FOR IMPLEMENTING A CONTROLLED PARKING ZONE IN PART OF WADHAM GARDENS AND OLDFIELD LANE NORTH IF THE RESIDENTS SO WISH. 3. WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE BAR IN THE HOTEL AS WE PREVIOUSLY HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE CLUB AT THE OLDFIELD PUB, HOW WILL THIS AFFECT US? FIRST OF ALL A HOTEL BAR IS DIFFERENT FROM THE FX CLUB THAT WAS OPERATING AT THE OLDFIELD PUB, AS THEY WERE IN THE BUSINESS OF ATTRACTING A YOUNG CROWD AND IT WAS A NIGHTCLUB, SECONDLY IT IS IN OUR INTEREST THAT OUR CLIENTS, WHO WILL MOSTLY BE CORPORATE CLIENTS, ARE SAFE ON OUR PREMISES, THIRDLY OUR MAIN BUSINESS IS SELLING ROOMS NOT SELLING ALCOHOL WHICH IS ONLY ANCILLARY TO THE HOTEL AND FINALLY WE WILL BE MANAGING THE HOTEL WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF OUR STAFF, WHO WILL BE WELL TRAINED. 4. HOW WILL THE HOTEL BENEFIT THE LOCAL COMMUNITY AND AREA? THE PROPOSED HOTEL WILL BENEFIT THE AREA BECAUSE: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)

OF ITS HIGH QUALITY DESIGN WHICH WILL BOOST THE AREA AND REJUVENATE THE SITE WHICH HAS BEEN VACANT FOR MANY YEARS IT WILL CREATE LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IT WILL INCREASE THE SECURITY OF THE AREA AS CCTV CAMERAS WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE EXTERIOR MANNED 24 HOURS BY THE HOTEL RECEPTION WE WILL SUPPORT LOCAL ORGANISATIONS WE WOULD LIKE SUGGESTIONS AS TO WHAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD WANT SEE IN THE LOCAL AREA FROM OUR FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION

5. HOW LONG WILL THE CONSTRUCTION TAKE? WE ANTICIPATE CONSTRUCTION TO TAKE 9 MONTHS BECAUSE WE WILL BE USING A 123

REVOLUTIONARY BUILDING METHOD WHERE ALL THE BEDROOMS WILL BE BUILT IN A FACTORY, THIS REDUCES THE TIME BY 35% AND IT ALSO REDUCES THE DISTURBANCE TO NEIGHBOURS AS THERE WILL BE LESS TRADESMEN AND VEHICLES FREQUENTING THE SITE.

De Wood Group

6. WILL THERE BE NOISE EMANATING FROM THE HOTEL? THERE WILL BE NO NOISE COMING FROM THE HOTEL AS THE ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT WILL BE PUTTING CONDITIONS IF PLANNING IS GRANTED AND WE WILL TAKE MEASURES TO ENSURE WE FOLLOW THEIR GUIDELINES 7. HOW WILL DELIVERIES BE MADE? DELIVERIES OF LINEN AND FOOD WILL BE MADE BY TRANSIT VANS OR SMALLER VANS AT SET TIMES TO BE AGREED WITH EALING COUNCIL. THIS WILL BE AN IMPROVEMENT ON THE PREVIOUS USE WHEN LARGE TRUCKS USED TO BLOCK WADHAM GARDENS DELIVERING TO THE WAREHOUSE AT THE REAR.

8. WILL THE WINDOWS AT THE BACK HAVE A VIEW INTO OUR GARDENS? NO, IF YOU NOTICE THE WINDOWS AT THE BACK ARE ALIGNED IN AN ANGLE AT THE BACK AND THE GLASS FACING THE GARDENS WILL BE OBSCURE GLASS 9. WHAT IS THE GREEN ROOF? WILL THERE A ROOFTOP GARDEN? A GREEN ROOF IS PLANTED WITH A PLANT CALLED SEDUM AND THIS HELPS TO KEEP THE BUILDING WARM IN WINTER AND COOL IN SUMMER. THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS ONTO THE ROOF EXCEPT FOR MAINTENANCE.

1109 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP email: ali@dewood.co.uk

15th August, 2007 Dear Resident

Planning Application for proposed Hotel Development at 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 0DP We are writing to inform you that the planning documents for the development of a new hotel on the site of 1109 – 1119 Greenford Road, at the corner of Wadham Gardens with Greenford Road, are now ready, we apologise for the delay in posting these on our website due to unforeseeable circumstances.

The plans and documents are now accessible on our website www.dewood.co.uk , and for those who may not have access to a computer or do not wish to go to the planning department we have left a hard copy of the proposal, which has all the reports incorporated, with a set of full-scale plans at the following address, please do not take these away: Victors Hairdressers 1113a Greenford Road Greenford Middlesex, UB6 0DP (Please be mindful of Don’s, at Victors Hairdressers, time so as not to cause him any inconvenience as he has kindly allowed us to leave the copies there for your convenience) Alternatively you can call, email or write to us directly and we are willing to discuss any aspects of the application with you on site at the Café, 1111 Greenford Road, Greenford, by appointment.

We would welcome the opportunity to answer any questions you may have once you have looked at the plans, your views as neighbours are important to us.

You will also be formally consulted by the Council for your views.

Yours faithfully, Ali Musani De Wood Group Mobile: 07712-563254

124

INVITATION FOR PRESENTATION DELIVERED BY HAND ON 01/07/2007 1121-1143 GREENFORD ROAD 1414-1484 GREENFORD ROAD 551-581 OLDFIELD LANE 1-19 OLDFIELD CLOSE 1-48 WADHAM GARDENS 1-6 REX COURT WADHAM GARDENS CLINIC Email to Councillors Jason Stacey, Susan Emment & William Brooks Email to Rt.Hon. Steve Pound, MP Posted Letter to North Greenford Residents’ Association – Mr. F. Kilduff (Chairman)

PRESENTATION DAY 07/07/07

FURTHER LETTER INVITING COMMENTS ON FINAL PLANNING DOCUMENT DELIVERED BY HAND ON 15/08/2007 1121-1143 GREENFORD ROAD 1414-1484 GREENFORD ROAD 551-581 OLDFIELD LANE 1-19 OLDFIELD CLOSE 1-48 WADHAM GARDENS 1-6 REX COURT WADHAM GARDENS CLINIC Email to Councillors Jason Stacey, Susan Emment & William Brooks with PDF Email to Rt.Hon. Steve Pound, MP with PDF File Email to North Greenford Residents’ Association – Mr. F. Kilduff (Chairman) Emails to residents who provided email addresses on the day of presentation.

CONSULTATION AREA

© Copyright Ali Musani, De Wood Group 125