Agenda item

The attached report has been revised and now replaces the version sent to you earlier.

The current SPG Design Guide for New Developments was adopted in 2001.  The document has served its purpose well but due to its age requires updating.  Since 2001 planning policy has changed significantly, particularly in relation to urban areas with much greater emphasis on maximising development density and the promotion of the efficient use of land particularly in areas of high public transport accessibility consistent with London Plan Policy 3.2: Optimising Housing Potential.  The proposed review of the SPG17 document would also provides the opportunity for it to be a promotional tool, giving a positive message about development potential within Brent and the need for high quality design.

Paul Lewin (Planning Policy and Projects Manager) informed the Committee that the current SPG17, which primarily has a focus on the typical inter-war suburban context of Brent, was relevant in areas to much of the Borough where major change to the existing character was not envisaged..  However, there may be scope for greater flexibility for areas of larger transformational change, such as South Kilburn or Wembley where densities much higher than traditionally provided in Brent were anticipated.  With reference to the report, he set out the steps towards achieving improved and successful developments in the borough.

Paul Lewin also clarified the approach to tall buildings adding that Brent’s policy was in keeping with the London Plan.  In working through the document members made various points on the following:

Incorporation of an overview of what makes a good development, e.g. sufficient infrastructure, landmark buildings.

Minimum standard to me maintained and flexibility provided where the applicant could show benefits/high amenity environment being created and softer approach to higher density, e.g. encouraging higher density development where suitable.

A greater emphasis on images with more soft landscaping/ spacing between buildings.

A reference to preventing/dealing with anti-social behaviour

Reference to the right tree in the right location

More emphasis on energy efficiency of buildings

 In terms of understanding and promoting design improvements, Members indicated a need for plans and images for residential and commercial proposals of sufficient quality to be submitted to enable them to be more fully considered and to reduce the risk of delay in decision making.  Members were also keen to see a requirement for excellent design standards in all future developments especially on landmark sites.  They also indicated a desire to develop existing opportunities to see proposals at an earlier stage in the planning application process, e.g. pre-application stage.  They were also supportive of the proposal to retain an expert throughout the development construction to maintain high standards. Members suggested that wherever possible separate entrances for affordable housing units and owner occupiers should be avoided and that schemes should design out crime, particularly anti-social behaviour (ASBO).  ).  Members also queried the scope to amend the current general approach if densities and heights were significantly greater.  In concluding on the item, the chair indicated that whilst it might not be appropriate to incorporate all changes to comments made, that officers should provide a response to members of the Committee as to how they had dealt with the points raised prior to consultation on the document.

Paul Lewin also clarified the approach to tall buildings adding that Brent’s policy was in keeping with the London Plan.  In working through the document members made various points which officers noted down.  In terms of understanding and promoting design improvements, Members indicated a need  for plans and images for residential and commercial  proposals of sufficient quality to be submitted to enable them to be more fully considered and to reduce the risk of delay in decision making.  They also indicated a desire to develop existing  opportunities to see proposals at an earlier stage in the planning application process, e.g. pre-application stage. Members suggested that wherever possible separate entrances for affordable housing units and owner occupiers should be avoided and that schemes should design out crime, particularly anti-social behaviour (ASBO).  Members also queried the scope to amend the current general approach if densities and heights were significantly greater. In concluding on the item, the chair indicated that whilst it might not be appropriate to incorporate all changes to comments made, that officers should provide a response to members of the Committee as to how they had dealt with the points raised prior to consultation on the document commencing. 

RESOLVED:-

(I)        that the existing general approach within the guidance and  the need to review and produce a new Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document to reflect its application within the Borough be supported;

(ii)       that subject to incorporation of feedback from members,  a draft Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document be issued for public consultation.