{"id":875,"date":"2014-04-26T12:17:57","date_gmt":"2014-04-26T12:17:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stqw.org\/?page_id=875"},"modified":"2015-05-17T11:31:49","modified_gmt":"2015-05-17T11:31:49","slug":"housing","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/draft\/housing\/","title":{"rendered":"Housing"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Objective 10 \u00a0\u00a0<em>Contribute to the Borough\u2019s housing targets and<\/em> s<em>eek out opportunities for building housing affordable to younger generations<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>RBKC Housing policy and targets<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>10.1.1\u00a0 \u00a0Current RBKC policies on Housing are set out in the Chapter 35 of the 2010 Local Plan. \u00a0In its 2013 Housing Policy Review the Council noted that &#8216;<em>Since the adoption of the Core Strategy in December 2010 house prices have continued to rise to an average of over a million pounds (\u00a31,094,203). This is nearly double the average house price in 2005 and the highest average in England&#8217;.\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n<p>10.1.2\u00a0 \u00a0Demand for housing in the Borough is &#8216;insatiable&#8217; (The Council&#8217;s own term).\u00a0 RBKC&#8217;s stated strategic focus is therefore on &#8216;<em>achieving a diversity of housing in mixed communities, to reduce the potential of further polarisation between, in broad spatial terms, the north and south of the Borough&#8217;.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>10.1.3\u00a0 \u00a0The tenure profile in the Borough\u00a0based on the 2011 Census\u00a0is:\u00a036\u00a0% owner occupation,\u00a0 24% social rented housing,\u00a0 37% private rented housing and 3% other. The private rented sector has the highest turnover of households compared to the other tenures, with 20% of the population estimated to change each year. \u00a0Comparable figures for Inner London as a whole are around 40% of homes as owner occupied, 40% as social rented housing and 20% in the private rented sector.<\/p>\n<p>10.1.4\u00a0 The 2010 Local Plan set housing targets of a minimum of 3,500 homes to be provided between 2007\/8 and 2016\/7 (i.e. a rate of 350 units per year). \u00a0The London Plan was amended and adopted in July 2011 and the RBKC target was increased.\u00a0 The 2014 Further Alterations to the London Plan have further increased the RBKC annual target to 733 housing units per year.<\/p>\n<p>10.1.5\u00a0 The agreed RBKC target for affordable housing in the adopted London Plan (July 2011) is 200 units per year, to be provided over a 10 year period.<\/p>\n<p>10.1.6\u00a0 In reality, numbers of houses built in the Borough have not got close to these targets in recent years. \u00a0The workings of the development market are such that actual completions of new housing units also fall well below the level of permissions granted.\u00a0 Figures for actual completions in 2009\/10 and 2010\/11 were 324 and 175.\u00a0 The 2013 RBKC Monitoring Report notes a further reduction in the 2011\/12, with 244 units approved and only 65 units completed.<\/p>\n<p>10.1.7\u00a0 \u00a0Three of the housing challenges facing the Borough were identified in its 2012 Issues and Options paper:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Affordability of housing remains a key issue in the Borough, with rising house prices.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>Following the Government&#8217;s introduction of Affordable Rent Tenure, very few households on the Register can afford Affordable Rent at 80% of the median market rent.<\/li>\n<li>Many of the market housing units that are delivered in the Borough do not address the range of identified local housing need <em>&#8216;but do meet an international need for those able to afford the very high residential prices within Kensington and Chelsea and contribute to London&#8217;s role as a Global City&#8217;.\u00a0 <\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>10.1.8\u00a0\u00a0 At the top end of the income spectrum, the \u2018Buy to Leave\u2019 phenomenon in parts of Kensington &amp; Chelsea and in other Inner London boroughs has become a feature of the central London housing market.<\/p>\n<p><strong>How much new housing should the StQW area provide?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>10.2.1 \u00a0The Council does not disaggregate its borough-wide targets down to individual wards or to smaller areas within its boundary.\u00a0 Nor does RBKC (as yet) publish detailed figures for a Five Year Housing Supply, on a site by site basis and including smaller sites of 10 or some homes.\u00a0 Hence there is no notional target figure for housing starts that the StQW Plan will be expected to deliver.\u00a0\u00a0 Most of the new housing in the Borough is expected to result from development of the Kensal Rise Opportunity Area, still several years away from coming onstream.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.2 \u00a0\u00a0Local residents have no great wish to see a housing market in the StQW neighbourhood which <em>&#8216;meets an international need for those able to afford very high residential prices&#8217;. <\/em>\u00a0There are enough other parts of the Borough which are experiencing, and meeting, these global housing market demands. \u00a0\u00a0What people in the neighbourhood seek are smaller units at prices which are \u2018more affordable\u2019 plus an element of affordable housing delivered via housing associations.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The nature of housing in the StQW area <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>10.2.3\u00a0 \u00a0There is a perception of the StQW neighbourhood (promoted by local estate agents) as an area on the edge of fashionable Notting Hill and one which is swiftly becoming a high-income residential enclave.\u00a0 The reality is more complex.\u00a0 It is true that house prices in W10 have risen sharply in recent years (and particularly sharply in 2013\/2014) as a result of the \u2018ripple effect\u2019 of Prime London.\u00a0 As for the rest of the Borough, prices are now levelling off or falling, as from November 2014.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.4 \u00a0\u00a0Within the streets of the StQW area there remain a significant number of less affluent households, including families which have lived in the neighbourhood for generations.\u00a0 In Dalgarno ward 64.9% of housing properties are socially rented (mainly north of Dalgarno Gardens and outside the StQW area).\u00a0 In St Helens ward, 43.5% of housing property is socially rented.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.5\u00a0\u00a0 An analysis of \u2018fair rents\u2019 rents pre-dating the abandonment of rent control in January 1989 reveals a total of 246 rents registered with the Valuation Office, within the StQW neighbourhood.\u00a0 These are in Kelfield Gardens (8),\u00a0 Brewster Gardens (8) and Coronation Court (10),\u00a0 Bracewell Road (10),\u00a0 Highlever Road (23),\u00a0 St Quintin Avenue (28) and Cowper Terrace (9),\u00a0 Latimer Road (21), St Helen\u2019s Gardens (22), \u00a0Wallingford Avenue (10),\u00a0 Oxford Gardens (8),\u00a0 Kingsbridge Road (1) and Evelyn Fox Court (27),\u00a0 Finstock Road (9),\u00a0 Balliol Road (7),\u00a0 North Pole Road (4),\u00a0 St Quintin Gardens (8), Blakes Close (12),\u00a0 St Marks Road (20),\u00a0 Bramley Road \u2013 Robinson House (19).<\/p>\n<p>10.2.6\u00a0 Given that these numbers are part of the estimated 100,000 registered rents remaining from 1989 legislation (and steadily shrinking as tenants die or relocate) this is a significant number for such a small area.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Argyll-Place.gif\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1151\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Argyll-Place.gif\" alt=\"Argyll Place, the new development built on the site of the fomer Princess Louise Hospital in Pangbourne Avenue\" width=\"960\" height=\"720\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p><em>Argyll Place, the new development built on the site of the fomer Princess Louise Hospital in Pangbourne Avenue. \u00a0<\/em><em>While the smaller units at the rear of the development have sold, the larger \u2018townhouses\u2019 shown here have been marketed unsuccessfully for over a year.\u00a0 Prices have been reduced from \u00a34m to \u00a33.5m.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>10.2.7\u00a0 \u00a0While the average\u00a0 gross annual pay of RBKC residents in 2012 was the highest amongst all\u00a0London boroughs at \u00a336,000, income levels vary significantly within the Borough when looked at spatially.\u00a0 Many residents in the north of the Borough have incomes below \u00a320,000 per annum, along with high levels of benefit claims.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.8\u00a0 Significant investment is being made in existing houses in the neighbourhood, particularly in the properties in the &#8216;red-brick&#8217; Edwardian streets of the St Quintin Estate.\u00a0 Over 50 basement projects have been granted permission in these streets since 2002, with an acceleration of activity in the 2012-2014.\u00a0 Total refurbishment of properties, undertaken by developers for resale, has become more common.\u00a0 \u00a0Such houses sell for well over \u00a32m once refurbished and with a basement added.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/W10-House-prices.gif\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1152\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/W10-House-prices.gif\" alt=\"Asking prices for 2 bedeoomewd flats in W10.  Source Property Watch\" width=\"960\" height=\"720\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p><em>Asking prices for 2 bedroomed flats in W10. Source Property Watch<\/em><\/p>\n<p>10.2.9\u00a0\u00a0 Responses to the StQW survey show some nervousness over these market trends. \u00a0While recognising the rights of homeowners to invest in their properties, there are those who are concerned that the area is changing too fast, raising the bar as to who can afford to live in it.\u00a0 There are anxieties over a perceived loss of \u2018neighbourliness\u2019 and over the exodus of younger people, within what has hitherto been a multi-generational and mixed community.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.10\u00a0 \u00a0The StQW neighbourhood has long attracted families with young children.\u00a0 The attractions are the house-type (not too many stairs, easy adaptability, room for a buggy or pram, some garden space) and the local environment (wide and safe streets and pavements, easy residents parking).\u00a0\u00a0 There are good schools in the neighbourhood at primary level (Oxford Gardens as a state school, Bassett House as private) as well as several nursery schools.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.11\u00a0\u00a0 These are all features of the area much valued by local residents, new and existing.\u00a0 The area&#8217;s \u00a0popularity amongst those with significant capital funds (but unable to afford \u2018Prime London\u2019) is evident from the regular flow of estate agent flyers, seeking new properties to put on their books.\u00a0 For older families established in the area for decades (some for several generations) there is concern that their own offspring now lack any realistic chance of affording to remain in the area.<\/p>\n<p>10.2.12\u00a0 The availability of lower cost property in the streets north of North Pole Road, and in the Oakworth Road\/Methwold Road area, has helped to mitigate this trend.\u00a0 But even in these streets, young professionals and public sector employees are being forced to look elsewhere, further north or west.\u00a0 There are also comparatively few smaller flats suitable for older couples looking to downsize.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Affordable housing<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>10.3.1\u00a0\u00a0 RBKC 2010 Core Strategy policies require new developments to provide affordable housing at 50% of floor area, on residential floorspace within developments in excess of 800 sq.m gross external area.\u00a0\u00a0 They also require provision to be in the form of a commuted sum in lieu of the equivalent amount of affordable housing floorspace where in excess of 800 sq.m but less than 1,200 sq.m of gross external residential floorspace.<\/p>\n<p>10.3.2\u00a0\u00a0 In practice these \u2018thresholds\u2019 have no real impact.\u00a0 The Council accepts that \u2018<em>In practice it has been found that the existing 50% floorspace target has never been close to being achieved as it is subject to a financial viability assessment\u2019.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>10.3.3\u00a0\u00a0 The implications of Affordable Rent tenure introduced by the Government have also limited access to social housing.\u00a0 Very few households on the Register can afford Affordable Rent at 80% of the median market rent (the Government\u2019s figure) with the most practical level for Affordable Rent being 45%.<\/p>\n<p>10.3.4\u00a0 Eligibility for social housing involves a number of criteria, including cases where the council has a duty to rehouse those living in temporary accommodation or on priority health grounds.\u00a0 The income ceiling is set at a gross household income of up to \u00a366,000 per annum when applying to rent or buy a one or two bedroom property or up to \u00a380,000 when applying to buy a family sized property (three bedrooms or more).\u00a0 Hence for many, including key public sector workers, \u2018affordable\u2019 housing in the Borough remains out of reach even if the household were to meet the eligibility criteria.<\/p>\n<p>10.3.5\u00a0 Part of the 2010 RBKC Core Strategy Policy CH2 requires that any off-site affordable housing (i.e. that where a developer provides funds to build units away from the site which is the subject of the planning approval) should\u00a0<strong>not\u00a0<\/strong>be located in certain wards, including the former Notting Barns and St Charles wards (the StQW neighbourhood).\u00a0 This policy was aimed at maintaining what the Council considered in 2010 to be an appropriate diversity of housing across the Borough.\u00a0 The 2013 Partial Review proposes to drop this policy , and adjusts the floorspace levels at which developments are required to provide affordable housing.\u00a0 Proposed new RBKC Policy CH2 (which has yet to go through an Examination in Public):<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>requires developments that involve a net increase of 800 sq m of next floorspace to provide affordable housing at 40% by floor area on all the net additional floorspace created<\/li>\n<li>requires development of over 800 sq m of net additional residential floorspace to provide affordable housing on the total net increase in residential floorspace either<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol>\n<li>i) as a commuted sum for developments with a net additional floorspace of below 2,400 sq metres<\/li>\n<li>ii) on site where the development involves a net additional residential floorspace of 2,400 sq metres or more<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>10.3.6\u00a0 \u00a0As in the rest of the Borough, land and sites for new housing is very scarce within the StQW neighbourhood.\u00a0 Little new housing has been built in recent years, apart from the one scheme of market housing in Pangbourne Avenue (Argyll Place). \u00a0\u00a0One or two infill developments have taken place on small sites.<\/p>\n<p>10.3.7\u00a0 \u00a0The main increase in housing floorspace in the neighbourhood will have come from loft extensions and basements in owner-occupied properties rather than from wholly new homes.\u00a0 Unlike the streets with larger houses in the eastern part of the Oxford Gardens CA, loss of housing units through de-conversions of flats has not been a significant issue in the StQW neighbourhood.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Potential sites for housing development<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>10.4.1\u00a0\u00a0 Overleaf, an options appraisal of potential development sites in the StQW neighbourhood looks at four on which housing could be considered.\u00a0 This includes the land at Nursery Lane (which the StQW Forum does not see as a potential housing site but RBKC seemingly does) and the land on the western side of Latimer Road (on which these positions are reversed).\u00a0 The site at Crowthorne Road is a site with clear potential for housing development.\u00a0 The fourth site, at 142A Highlever Road, currently operates as a family-owned garage\/workshop and petrol station, a use dating back to 1918.<\/p>\n<p>10.4.2\u00a0\u00a0 The reasons why the StQW Forum does not consider the Nursery Lane site to be suitable for housing\u00a0are:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>this backland is one of the original features of the St Quintin Estate, and has never been developed. The StQW Forum consider that its status is &#8216;greenfield&#8217; land, whereas the NPPF gives priority to development on &#8216;brownfield&#8217; land.<\/li>\n<li>the land provides an amenity to its neighbours and an area of tranquillity to the wider neighbourhood<\/li>\n<li>two previous planning inquiries have resulted in decisions to protect this green space<\/li>\n<li>until recently, local residents had long understood that the policy protection granted to the site in the RBKC 1990 Oxford Gardens CAPS document meant what it said.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>10.4.3\u00a0\u00a0 Annexe C to this Draft Plan sets out the detailed evidence base for why this and two other backland sites should be designated as Local Green Space and\/or continue to be protected from housing development.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Scope for Housing in Latimer Road<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>10.5.1\u00a0\u00a0 In the view of the StQW Forum, the western side of Latimer Road (brownfield land and currently developed at low intensity) makes for a more suitable location for new housing in the StQW neighbourhood.<\/p>\n<p>10.5.2\u00a0\u00a0 Detailed feasibility work on the scope for redevelopment of a typical unit amongst the light industrial\/warehouse Units 1-14 has shown that<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>up to 10 studio or one\/two bed flats can be provided on the approx 400 sq m footprint of a single unit, within height levels seen as acceptable following two sets of discussions at open meetings of the StQW Forum<\/li>\n<li>conversion of the ground and mezzanine floors of these units can provide good quality office space of the type in demand from small businesses and creative industries in North Kensington.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>10.5.3\u00a0\u00a0 Such redevelopment would restore the street to a closer approximation of its 19<sup>th<\/sup> century urban form, raise levels of footfall, and increase the viability of service and retail activity thereby contributing to the wider StQW neighbourhood and the local economy.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-section-2.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1305\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-section-2.jpg\" alt=\"Section and elevation of potential housing above commercial spae at Units 1-14 Latimer Road\" width=\"960\" height=\"720\" srcset=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-section-2.jpg 960w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-section-2-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-section-2-624x468.jpg 624w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 960px) 100vw, 960px\" \/><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><em>Section and elevation of potential housing above commercial spae at Units 1-14 Latimer Road<\/em><\/p>\n<p>10.5.4 \u00a0\u00a0Redevelopment of each of Units 1-14\u00a0 is highly unlikely to take place simultaneously, given the separate ownerships of these premises. \u00a0Building owners may take their view that their existing uses and tenancies are providing an adequate financial return, or meet their individual needs.\u00a0\u00a0 The proposed StQW policies are calibrated (in terms of acceptable building heights) with the intention of providing a sufficient return on investment to encourage redevelopment, while not leading to excessive change in hope values for these properties.<\/p>\n<p>10.5.5\u00a0\u00a0 Within the 5 year period that the NPPF defines as meeting the criteria for \u2018deliverability\u2019 of housing sites, the Forum considers it realistic to assume that 50-75% of building owners of the 14 units might choose to redevelop.\u00a0 This would create 50 to 75 housing units (up to 2 bedroom).\u00a0 While this size profile of does not correspond to the RBKC current preferred size mix, in policy terms, it is felt that Latimer Road (west side) is best suited to smaller units, targeted to young couples and older downsizers, than for family homes. \u00a0The neighbourhood is already well provided with 3 and 4 bed family homes.<\/p>\n<p>10.5.6\u00a0 \u00a0In responding in March 2015 to lobbying by London BIDS, seeking wider exemption from the current\u00a0 Permitted Development flexibilities on office to housing, the Communities and Local Government Department has responded \u00a0\u201c<em>The Government\u2019s change of use reforms are providing badly needed homes such as studios and one-bedroom flats for young people, especially in London where there is a particularly acute need for more housing\u201d.\u00a0 <\/em>The StQW Forum shares this view.\u00a0 Latimer Road provides a suitable and viable location for such housing.<a href=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-housing-streetscape.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1307\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-housing-streetscape.jpg\" alt=\"Street view of potential housing above commercial space on west side of Latimer Road\" width=\"960\" height=\"720\" srcset=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-housing-streetscape.jpg 960w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-housing-streetscape-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Latimer-housing-streetscape-624x468.jpg 624w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 960px) 100vw, 960px\" \/><\/a><em>Street view of potential housing above commercial space on west side of Latimer Road<\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/stqw.org\/draft\/housing\/slide1\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-1383\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-1383\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide1.jpg\" alt=\"Slide1\" width=\"960\" height=\"720\" srcset=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide1.jpg 960w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide1-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide1-624x468.jpg 624w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 960px) 100vw, 960px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/stqw.org\/draft\/housing\/slide2\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-1384\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-1384\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide2.jpg\" alt=\"Slide2\" width=\"960\" height=\"720\" srcset=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide2.jpg 960w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide2-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Slide2-624x468.jpg 624w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 960px) 100vw, 960px\" \/><\/a><em>(Please refer to PDF version of StQW Plan to see detail of Housing Site options appraisal) \u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Other potential housing sites<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>10.6.1\u00a0\u00a0 The other two potential development sites for housing within the StQW Neighbourhood are at 3-5 Crowthorne Road, and at 142A Highlever Road.\u00a0 The former is disused B2 industrial site, for which a mixed use proposal was refused by RBKC in 2013 as detailed in the table above.\u00a0 The latter is occupied by a garage workshop and petrol station, run by the same family since 1918 and for which change of use is a realistic prospect (assuming support at examination to StQW Draft Policy 10b below).<\/p>\n<p>10.6.2\u00a0\u00a0 The Crowthorne Road site could deliver 15-20 housing units, while the St Quintin Garage site would allow for some 6-10 low rise or mews houses.<\/p>\n<p>10.6.3\u00a0 \u00a0The development site at 301 Latimer Road, of which roughly one third will be taken up by the proposed underpass from Latimer Road to Imperial West, is a further potential mixed use housing site.\u00a0 Section 5 of this Plan explains the case for allocating this site for potential transport infrastructure use.\u00a0 Were the relevant transport proposals not to emerge from TfL (the ultimate owner of the land) StQW Draft Policy 8b would support\u00a0 a mixed use development with residential on upper floors.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>HOUSING:\u00a0\u00a0 DRAFT POLICY StQW 10<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em><strong>10a) To allocate for predominantly housing use the land at 3-5 Crowthorne Road, subject to any development providing a 30% element of employment floorspace (B1) and meeting RBKC Local Plan policies on affordable housing.<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em><strong>Reasoned justification:\u00a0 this site is well located for predominantly housing use.\u00a0 A 2013 proposal was refused on several grounds, including the fact that <\/strong><\/em><strong><em>178 sq m of commercial floorspace was not seen as outweighing the loss of 1235 sq m of general industrial floorspace and that no affordable housing was offered. The proposed 30% element of employment floorspace reflects the history of previous planning applications and pre-application advice on this site.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong><em>10b) To allocate for housing use the land at 142A Highlever Road, in doing so recognising the history of the site and applying a flexible approach to RBKC policy on the protection of petrol filling stations as a social and community use. <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong><em>Reasoned justification.\u00a0 This irregular shaped backland site lies within a wholly residential area and its use since the 1918 as a garage workshop and filling station is neither a suitable use for the location nor one likely to continue after the retirement of the present owner.\u00a0 Planning conditions do not allow any signage for the filling station, and use of the site as such is limited to a small and shrinking clientele.\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em><strong>10c) \u00a0To allocate the sites occupied by Units 1-14 Latimer Road for mixed use development, allowing housing use (C3) subject to ground and mezzanine floors remaining in commercial use (B1, B8, A or D class).<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em><strong>Additional housing units in Latimer Road were approved by RBKC in 1992 (Westview Close) and in 2010 (290-294 Latimer Road).\u00a0 Further housing on the western side of the street would contribute to RBKC housing targets and add activity and vitality to the street, increase footfall and viability for A and D class uses, and improve its safety and security.\u00a0 The urban form and building heights in the street would also revert to a form closer to their 19th century origins.<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_1309\" style=\"width: 635px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><a href=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Housing-sites-map.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1309\" class=\"size-large wp-image-1309\" src=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Housing-sites-map-805x1024.png\" alt=\"Map showing allocated housing sites at  142a Highglever Road (top)  Latimer Road (above commercial) 3-5 Crowthorne Road (bottom) \" width=\"625\" height=\"795\" srcset=\"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Housing-sites-map-805x1024.png 805w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Housing-sites-map-236x300.png 236w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Housing-sites-map-624x794.png 624w, https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/Housing-sites-map.png 1232w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 625px) 100vw, 625px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-1309\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Map showing allocated housing sites at<br \/>142a Highglever Road (top)<br \/>Latimer Road (above commercial)<br \/>3-5 Crowthorne Road (bottom)<\/p><\/div>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><em><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/em><\/span><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Objective 10 \u00a0\u00a0Contribute to the Borough\u2019s housing targets and seek out opportunities for building housing affordable to younger generations RBKC Housing policy and targets \u00a010.1.1\u00a0 \u00a0Current RBKC policies on Housing are set out in the Chapter 35 of the 2010 Local Plan. \u00a0In its 2013 Housing Policy Review the Council noted that &#8216;Since the adoption [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":997,"menu_order":11,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-875","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/875","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=875"}],"version-history":[{"count":20,"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/875\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1398,"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/875\/revisions\/1398"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/997"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stqw.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=875"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}