The Planning Committee of Kingston upon Thames Council was scheduled to discuss a single planning application for the demolition of existing units and redevelopment of a site at 4 Manorgate Road, Norbiton, Kingston Upon Thames KT2 7EL, to provide a self-storage facility. The report pack detailed the proposal, its potential impacts, and relevant planning policies.

Planning Application: 4 Manorgate Road, Norbiton, Kingston Upon Thames KT2 7EL

The committee was scheduled to consider a full planning application for the demolition of existing buildings at 4 Manorgate Road, Norbiton, Kingston Upon Thames KT2 7EL, and the redevelopment of the site to create a Class B8 self-storage facility. The proposal also included plans for access, car parking, and landscaping. Revisions had been made to the design and updated technical reports were submitted.

The report pack indicated that the site is an existing employment site within a mixed-use area, bordering the Park Road Conservation Area. The proposed development would involve the demolition of three existing buildings totalling 1,727 sqm and the construction of a four-level self-storage facility with an eaves height of 10.8m and a maximum height of 12.3m. The facility was intended to be operated by Safestore, though planning permission would not be restricted to a single operator. The proposed gross internal area for the ground floor was 1,937 sqm, with the potential for future mezzanine additions to increase the total floorspace to 7,432 sqm. The proposed operating hours were from 8 am to 6 pm on most days, with extended hours on Thursdays and shorter hours on Sundays.

Key considerations outlined in the report included land use, character and appearance, heritage, neighbouring amenities, transport, highways and parking, landscaping and biodiversity, flood risk and drainage, sustainability, air quality, land contamination, and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and planning obligations.

The report highlighted that the proposal aimed to provide 1,727 sqm of Class B8 floorspace, with a target of zero carbon emissions and a projected biodiversity net gain of 1479.94%, significantly exceeding the policy requirement of 10%. The development was also designed to be zero carbon in operation.

The report detailed that the application was referred to the committee as it constituted Major Development. The recommendation was to agree to approve the application, subject to conditions and the completion of a legal agreement, with authority delegated to the Director of Planning and Regeneration to finalise these.

The site's planning history included a previous refusal in 2019 for a Lidl supermarket due to concerns about increased vehicular movement impacting the character of the Home Zone.

The report noted that 11 representations had been received from seven postal addresses objecting to the proposals, raising concerns about height, mass, impact on the area's character, loss of light, outlook, overshadowing, and proximity to residential boundaries. No representations in support were received.

Consultation responses from various council officers were included. The RBK Tree and Landscape Officer raised no objection, noting the landscaping would improve the site. The RBK Urban Design Officer commented on the significant footprint, scale, and mass of the scheme, suggesting details should be secured by condition and noting disappointment with the Urban Greening Factor (UGF). The RBK Heritage Officer stated the proposal would result in a minor degree of less than substantial harm to the Park Road Conservation Area. The RBK Neighbourhood Traffic Engineer raised no highway objections, noting the site's good public transport accessibility and that the development would not materially impact the local roundabout performance. The RBK Flooding Officer also raised no objection, subject to a compliance condition. The RBK Environmental Health Officer had no objections but recommended conditions related to noise, air quality, and land contamination. The Kingston CAAC objected, citing harm to the conservation area's setting due to the scheme's scale, mass, and height. Network Rail recommended engagement with their Asset Protection team. The Metropolitan Police's Design Out Crime Officer raised no objection but recommended conditions related to security measures.

The report extensively discussed planning policy, including the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the London Plan 2021, and the Kingston Core Strategy 2012. It detailed considerations for land use, character, appearance, heritage, residential amenity, highways, landscaping, biodiversity, flood risk, sustainability, air quality, land contamination, and fire safety.

Regarding heritage, the report concluded that the proposal would cause a low level of less than substantial harm to the setting of the Park Road Conservation Area, particularly concerning the impact on residential dwellings on Burnham Street. This harm was to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

The report detailed that the proposed development was considered to ensure a good standard of amenity for neighbouring occupants, with impacts on daylight, sunlight, outlook, privacy, and noise deemed acceptable, subject to conditions.

Highway considerations indicated that the proposal would not have a material impact on the road network, and the provision for car parking, electric vehicle charging, and cycle parking was deemed in line with policy. A financial contribution of £12,599.21 was proposed towards traffic management measures in Manorgate Road and the Home Zone.

Landscaping and biodiversity were addressed, with a significant biodiversity net gain of 1479.94% noted. The Urban Greening Factor (UGF) score was calculated at 0.1, which was considered neutral for this type of development.

Flood risk and drainage were assessed as low risk, with a sustainable drainage strategy proposed. Sustainability considerations highlighted a projected carbon reduction of 154% against the GLA baseline, aiming for a zero-carbon operation and targeting BREEAM Excellent standard.

Air quality and land contamination were assessed as acceptable, subject to conditions. Fire safety measures were detailed in a submitted Fire Statement.

Finally, the report discussed CIL and planning obligations, noting that the proposed development, as designed to accommodate future mezzanines without CIL liability on those areas, would not make an appropriate contribution to local infrastructure. A condition was recommended to restrict the floor area to 1,937 sqm to ensure a proportionate contribution. The report concluded that the substantial benefits of the proposal, including economic, environmental, and landscape enhancements, would outweigh the identified heritage harm. The recommendation was to approve the application subject to conditions and a legal agreement.