Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) Housing SPD - statement of consultation 1 Introduction 3 2 Consultation Undertaken 4 3 Overview of Responses 5 4 Representations and the Council’s response 6 Appendices 1 List of People Consulted 12 2 Consultation Letters 22 3 Consultation Webpages 25 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) 1 Introduction 1.1 SupplementaryPlanningDocuments(SPDs)maybepreparedtoprovidegreaterdetail onLocalPlanpolicies.TheNationalPlanningPolicyFramework(NPPF)supportstheproduction of SPDs where they can help applicants to make successful applications. To support the implementationofoftheCouncil’sCoreStrategy(October2010),DevelopmentManagement Policies Document (DMPD), Site Specific Allocations Document (SSAD) (February 2012) and thecurrentLocalPlanReview,theCounciliscommittedtopreparinganumberofSPDswhich are detailed in the Local Development Scheme (LDS) (2014). 1.2 TheHousingSPDprovidesdetailedguidanceonplanningpoliciessetoutintheCouncil's Local Plan documents, in particular the detailed policies in the Development Management Policies Document (DMPD). It details criteria that are material in determining planning applications and appeal decisions relating to residential development, including guidance on extensions and alterations. It sets out the other controls required and provides advice on design and good practice, which is especially relevant in conservation areas. As such, the SPD takes forward the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) by aiming to positively contribute towards achieving good design and thereby making places better for people. 1.3 The section of the SPD on residential basements has been modified in response to recent concerns over the impact of basement development in the Borough and to reflect updatedpolicy andbestpractice,includingmanagingtheconstructionprocessandproviding advice to neighbours. In accordance with Regulation 13 of the Town and Country Planning (LocalPlanning)(England)Regulations2012,therevisedSPDbasementssectionwassubject to a five week public consultation period between Monday 23 March 2015 and Monday 27 April 2015. 1.4 Following consultation, minor amendments to the SPD were made in response to representations made along with other minor factual changes and updates. This Statement of Consultation describes the consultation that was undertaken, provides a summary of responses received, and the Council’s responses to these comments. Further information: Visit our website: http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/localplan Telephone: (020) 8871 6649/6650/7218 Email: [email protected] 3 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) 2 Consultation Undertaken 2.1 The Planning Service maintains a database of statutory (specific consultation bodies and duty to co-operate bodies) and non-statutory consultees (Appendix 1 "List of People Consulted").Over1,000consultationletters/emailsweresenttoindividualsandorganisations to notify them of the consultation period and to let them know where to find further informationandhowtomakerepresentations(Appendix2"ConsultationLetters").TheLocal Plan webpage and SPD consultation webpage provided details of the consultation (Appendix 3 "Consultation Webpages"). Letters were also sent to neighbouring authorities and other relevant bodies in accordance with the Duty to Cooperate set out in the Localism Act to ensure strategic issues were raised at the earliest opportunity. In accordance with the Regulations, the Council made a copy of the documents available on its website http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/localplan at Balham, Battersea, Putney, Tooting and Wandsworth libraries and at the Town Hall Customer Services Centre. 4 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) 3 Overview of Responses 3.1 Despite a comprehensive consultation mailshot and dedicated announcement on the Council's website (http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/planningpolicy), the response rate was low. Fourteen consultees respondedto the Housing SPD consultation comprising9 statutory consultees/infrastructureproviders(listedbelow),theBatterseaandtheWandsworthSocieties, and 3 householders: Health and Safety Executive Highways Agency Marine Management Organisation Natural England Office of Rail Regulation Thames Water Utilities Historic England Environment Agency Transport for London (TfL). 3.2 A combination of objections and supportive comments were received which can be summarised as technical/factual comments; comments on planning policy, procedure and implementation; and general comments and observations on the SPD as best practice guidance. The first 5 organisations listed above had no comments to make, whilst the Environment Agency, the amenity societies and one of the residents were broadly supportive of the SPD. However objections and representations seeking further changes were raised by Thames Water Utilities, Historic England, Transport for London, the amenity societies and local residents. 3.3 The main comments were: The need for an outright ban on basements excavations on the grounds that they cause blight, subsidence and loss of gardens; Disturbance to neighbours particularly in relation to noise and dirt nuisance from construction and associated vehicles; Comments relating to planning policy and implementation matters; Comments relating to the planning application process and the consultation procedure; A comment seeking inclusion of information and consultation requirements relating to land safeguarded for the Thames Tideway Tunnel project; The need to provide archaeological information. 3.4 Individual representations are considered in more detail in Chapter 4 of this report. 5 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) 4 Representations and the Council’s response 4.1 A mixture of supporting comments, objections and suggestions were received, and a numberofthestatutoryconsulteeshadnocommentstomake.Asummaryofthecomments and responses are outlined below, set out under the broad topics of the basement section of the SPD. An overview of general matters raised and of responses on planning policy and implementation matters and other miscellaneous comments are also provided below. General Comments 4.2 OverallsupportfortheSPDwasexpressedbyThamesWaterUtilities,theEnvironment Agency,HistoricEngland(formerlyEnglishHeritage)theBatterseaandWandsworthSocieties and one householder respondee. The Battersea Society commented on the the format and presentation of the document. In response the navigation through the document and its content will become clear on publication of the full SPD which includes an index, information on the overall approach and policies relating to all forms of extensions - the consultation version consists of an extract of the Housing SPD as it relates to basement development. Comments on Design and Technical Matters 4.3 Thames Water expressed support for the content of the basements section of the SPD in respect of the reduction and managementof flood risk, and for the recognition that cellars and basements may be particularly vulnerable to flooding. Reference to building over public sewersinparagraph4.37wasalsowelcomed(particularlyinthecontextofincreasedpressure on the public sewer network and vulnerability of basements to sewer flooding), along with the section on groundwater and drainage matters. Thames Water also noted that the SPD encouragesapplicantstoprepareaConstructionMethodStatementwhichwasalsosupported. 4.4 Historic England welcomed references to the impacts of basement development on conservation areas and listed buildings. 4.5 Thames Water Utilities suggested amended text to paragraphs 4.81 (Land Stability, GroundwaterandDrainageMatters)inrespectofthediversionofgroundwaterintothepublic sewertohighlightthat,duringtheconstructionofmanybasementsgroundwaterdewatering is required, which as this is in most cases is a combined sewer, will require a discharge consent from Thames Water. There should be an expectation that developers provide on siteattenuationandappropriatesilt removalpriortodischargeofgroundwaterintothepublic sewer. 4.6 Whilst this paragraph was supportedby Thames Water Utilities overall, the suggested change is not supported as matters relating to permission required from Thames Water Utilitiesarealreadycoveredinparagraph4.37,andthewordingofthisparagraphisconsidered sufficiently flexible to accommodate any changes to procedure over the lifetime of the SPD. 6 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) 4.7 To ensure that developments are in line with the NPPF in terms of being appropriately flood resilient and resistant and, in the interests of good building practice, Thames Water recommended that the second sentence of paragraph 4.84 is updated to ensure that basements incorporate a positive pumped device or other suitable flood prevention device to the development to avoid the risk of sewage backflow and sewer flooding. This is because the sewerage network may surcharge to ground level during storm conditions. 4.8 The suggested replacement wording has been accepted, as it sets out the most up-to-datepositionandprovidesasuccinctexplanationforthechangewhichhasbeenmade to the SPD. 4.9 In relation to groundwater, whilst the impact on groundwater is not a direct Thames Water issue, if the cumulative impact of subterranean development were to increase groundwaterlevelstherewouldbeincreasedrisksofgroundwaterinfiltrationintothesewerage network. This would reduce the capacity of the network to accommodate surface water and foul water flows. As such it is recommended that groundwater levels are monitored and appraised against the impacts of subterranean development. This will help to inform any necessary future changes to Wandsworth Borough planning policy. Thames Water Utilities do confirm in their response that groundwater is not a direct Thames Water issue. This is acknowledged and no changes to the SPD are deemed necessary in this regard. Comments maderelatingtothefuturemonitoringofgroundwaterlevelsandtheimpactsofsubterranean development to inform future changes to future planning policy are noted. 4.10 One resident supported the reference to policies requiring adequate daylight to habitable rooms but was concerned that new rooms created through extensions may not be adequately tested. In response, this matter is addressed in DMPD Policy DMH4 which is referred toin theHousingSPD, andwill be appliedin theassessmentof planningapplications proposing extensions. Another resident suggested that the effect of multi-level basements on ground conditions applies equally to all basements and associated hardsurfacing and is a valid reason to curtail their development. The Council does not have control over hardsurfacing on land around a property as this is nearly always permitted development, as is a basement development which does not extend beyond the floor plate of a property. 4.11 Historic England welcomed the acknowledgement of the impact of basement development on conservation areas and listed buildings, and that the document signposts relevant planning policies and Historic England advice. However, concern was expressed aboutlackofreferencetoarchaeology.WhilsttheCouncilwelcomedthesupportingcomments, in respect of archaeology the limited scope and scale of domestic extensions does not make itpracticabletoseekarchaeologicaladviceand/orinstigatearchaeologicalevaluation.Updated information provided on the contact details of the Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) are noted. 4.12 It was suggested by one resident in regard to boundary treatments accompanying a proposal for a basement, that the policy should aim for the original detailed boundary treatment, researched appropriately. It is not accepted that all boundary treatments must be original. This is because planning legislation confers a duty on the Council to ensure that 7 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) development proposals in a conservation area must demonstrate that they conserve or enhance the conservation area, and this could be achieved by using suitable replacement boundary treatments in agreement with the Council. 4.13 Transport for London sought clarification that skips, construction material and scaffolding may require a licence from TfL. Helpfully, the comments also included reference points for further information including on Transport Assessment and Construction Logistic Plans, and these matters have now been referenced in the final version of the SPD. Comments on Advice to Neighbours 4.14 The Battersea Society welcomed advice to neighbours, but considered that there should be a reminder to consult with neighbours. This is a requirement of the Party Wall Act in paragraph 4.32, which is explained in the SPD, as well as good practice as set out in paragraph 4.100. Comments on Construction Issues 4.15 TheEnvironmentAgencywelcomedtheinclusionofConstructionMethodStatements (CMS)onthegroundsthatthiswillhelpmanagetheimpactofconstructiongiventhecomplex nature of basement conversions, as well as the encouragement of independent verification of a CMS. Support for this new section of the SPD is noted and welcomed. Whilst the Environment Agency has suggested additional considerations to be included in a CMS, it is not proposed to make any changes to the list of what a typical CMS will comprise as this is an indicative example only. 4.16 Although Thames Water Utilities noted and welcomed encouragement to applicants to prepare a Construction Method Statement (CMS) in advance, more detail was sought on their content due to concern that water mains and sewers immediately adjacent to developmentsitesmaybeaffectedbyvibrationasaresultofpiling,possiblyleadingtowater main bursts and or sewer collapses. The suggested changes were that Construction Management Plans should include piling methodology, assess whether the construction will it adversely affect neighbouring utility services, demonstrate that basement development will safeguard structural stability and will not increase flood risk on the site or beyond. One resident considered that initial trial work should be carried out as drainage plans are often non -existent. 4.17 Inresponse,theCouncildoesnotacceptthatConstructionManagementPlansshould include the suggested additional information - matters relating to vibration and piling, safeguarding structural stability, and flood risk are covered by existing procedure and legislation and are referred to elsewhere in the SPD: "Build Over permission" from Thames Water (referred to in paragraph 4.37); the Building Regulations (referred to in paragraph 4.31), and consultation with the Environment Agency (referred to in paragraphs 4.40-4.41) respectively. The SPD encourages early liaison with Thames Water to establish if residents/applicants require permission and /or a licence and Thames Water are best placed to advise on the location of drains and sewers on a site-by-site basis. 8 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) 4.18 Transport for London (TfL) suggested that the Construction Traffic Management element of the SPD should identify where TfL has responsibility as a highways authority (paragraph 4.102). This comment is not supported as the example given of a typical Construction Method Statement (CMS) is not intended to be exhaustive, sufficient contact information is included in the SPD, and the planning application consultation process does not fall within the remit of this SPD. 4.19 Householder support for the encouragement to prepare a CMS and submit it with a planning application, on the grounds that this may help address issues and damage arising during construction. This representation however considered that the Council should go further and require a CMS, along with a requirement for contractors to sign up to a "Considerate Constructors Scheme". Another resident suggested the latter was only appropriate for larger companies. As set out above, the SPD cannot set out new policy or process requirements, but aims to amplify relevant policies and particularly to promote best practice. To address residents' concerns, further information relating to the construction process has been added to the basements section of the SPD but this must remain advisory and not policy, unless the property is a listed building where planning legislation requires a higher level of control over building work affecting the fabric of such a building. It is acknowledged however that it may be appropriate to reconsider planning policies related to basements as part of the next Local Plan review. Comments on policy, implementation and the planning application process 4.20 A number of responses to the SPD consultation raised matters relating to planning policy or the implementation of planning policies. A number understood the SPD to contain policy rather than take the form of non-statutory guidance which is the actual remit of the SPD. As background, the Council has reviewed its Local Plan policies, currently published asthe2ndProposedSubmissionversion2014,andthesewillbeexaminedbyanindependent Inspector in July 2015 and are expected to be adopted in late 2015. 4.21 Comments were received suggesting that policies relating to basement development were stricter and/or that policies should be consistently applied, particularly in respect of loss of front and back garden space, soil remaining above a basement and retention of historic features. Representations received from householders on policy matters sought an outright ban on the excavation of basements on the grounds that they cause blight and subsidence,anewpolicytoaddressdamagecasedbybasementdevelopments,whilstanother considered that basement development should not extend beyond the floorplate of the property. Therewasalsoconcernaboutnoiseanddirtnuisancefromtheconstructionprocess and from the associated vehicles. One objection related to the effect on the supply of small houses, on the grounds that, whilst basement extensions make houses considerably larger, smaller houses are not being built to replace them. 4.22 In response, it is important to recognise that the Council is not in a position to ban excavation of all basement development as many forms of basement excavation do not require planning permission - permission is only required for listed buildings or if you are providing a lightwell for example. The purpose of an SPD is not to set policy, but to explain 9 Housing SPD basements changes - Statement of Consultation (2015) existing policy in more detail and to provide further guidance and advice on best practice. However,furtherclarificationhasbeenaddedregardingtheretentionofsoilaboveabasement which extends underneath the rear garden following the consultation. It is acknowledged thatbasementconstructioncanbeintrusivetoneighbours,howeverthisisprimarilyregulated by otherlegislation.NeverthelessamendmentstothebasementssectionoftheHousingSPD have been made to encourage the provision of a Construction Method Statement (CMS). A CMS can include measures to minimise noise dirt and disturbance, such as management of any construction traffic, and professional verification of works safeguarding amenity - noise, vibration and dust, and the drilling of boreholes for example. A householder representation considered that applicants should submit detailed floorplans showing all habitable rooms to demonstrate that they meet fitness tests, and gave the example of Kensington and Chelsea Councilwhichrequiresthis.Inresponse,theCouncildoesexpectallhabitableroomstomeet daylight and sunlight standards and have an acceptable outlook and levels of privacy. Habitableandnon-habitableroomsaregenerallydistinguishablethroughsizeandtheinclusion of windows on any submitted floorplan. Residential quality standards are set out in the Development Management Policies Document (DMPD) particularly in Policy DMH4, and is amplified elsewhere within the Housing SPD as best practice. 4.23 The Battersea Society sought a statement on basement policy and one householder sought a distinction between policy and SPD guidance. In response, comments are noted however the purpose of this SPD as set out in paragraph 4.27 and 4.28, is to amplify policy and provide best practice advice. The adopted version of the Housing SPD chapter covering extensions, of which this basement section forms a part, does set out the relevant Council policies. 4.24 With regard to the assessment of planning applications affecting the historic environment, Historic England were concerned that the SPD be in line with the NPPF in this respect, identifying and avoiding harm. In response, planning applications are primarily assessed against policies, and the changes to the Local Plan policies now reflect the NPPF, in particular DMPD Policy DMS2 - Managing the historic environment. 4.25 TheWandsworthSocietynotedthatotherboroughsweretighteninguptheirapproach to basement extensions and sought changes to the proportion of garden retained after development.Inresponse,theCouncildoesacknowledge,andhasresearchedpolicychanges proposedbyotherLondonboroughs,however,theSPDprovidesnon-statutorysupplementary guidanceandanyfurtherchangestoWandsworth'splanningpoliciescannotbemadethrough the SPD process. Comments made on damage to neighbouring properties as a result of building work are normally a matter for the Part Wall Act rather than planning policy or guidance, and is included in the SPD in the list of other controls and legislation required. Commentsrelatingtobasementwalls,waterpressureandgroundwaterflowrelatetobuilding control matters and this has been outlined briefly to assist residents in understanding the scope of a basement project. Miscellaneous comments 10