Construction traffic plan at Development Site, 29 Earls Walk, Kensington, London W8

The site and its setting

The site includes part of a rear garden and car port linked to a home, accessed from a pedestrian gate and a nearby walk, within a conservation area.

“CON/26/00753:2 3.1The proposals relate to part of the rear garden and rear car port originally associated with the two homes at No. 19 Pembroke Square. The site which is linked with No. 19 Pembroke Square with a pedestrian gate. It is also accessed from Earls Walk and is situated between numbers 27 Earl’s Walk to the east and number 20a Pembroke Square to the west.”

Officer report

Planning history

Earlier permission was granted for a new dwellinghouse with a basement, landscaping and associated works.

“/CON/26/00753:3 PP/23/02474 Erection of new dwellinghouse including basement storey, landscaping and associated works. Granted 3/10/23 5.Main policies and strategies relevant to the decision The development plan 5.1The main planning considerations applying to the site and the associated policies are: Local Plan Living conditionsCD9 Construction managementGB7 5.2 These policies can be read online at: ·Local Plan:…”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers found the proposed routes, delivery hours, road width and traffic arrangements acceptable for highway safety and nearby living conditions.

“6.2The decisive issue is: i)Whether the submitted CTMP would minimise the impact of construction works on highway safety and living conditions of those living nearby. 6.3In support of the submission, a CTMP has been submitted using the latest 2019 RBKC pro-forma.”

“/CON/26/00753:4 Monday to Friday. 6.7A minimum road width of 3.5 m would be maintained at all times on Pembroke Square. 6.8The Council’s Transport Officer was consulted on this application. He was of the view that: ·The applicant has demonstrated good neighbour engagement. ·The vehicle scheduling is appropriate and the chosen route acceptable. ·The method of spoil removal is acceptable. ·The method of concrete supply is acceptable.”

Officer report

What people said

Six letters objected over road blockages, parking, access, traffic, noise and disruption, while no statutory consultation was required and twenty letters supported the application.

“7.Consultations carried out Comments from interested parties 7.1There is no statutory consultation process for the approval of details applications. 7.20 letters of support were received supporting the application 7.36 letters were received objecting to the application. These can be summarised as: CommentResponse 1Concerns raised that Earl’s Walk will be effectively blocked when building materials are unloaded, and that the dedicated loading bay may be inadequate.”

“/CON/26/00753:5 carried out without any undue impacts upon local highway conditions. 4The CTMP does not address a necessary footway closure of Earl’s Walk. Earl’s Walk has no footway, it is a shared surface carriageway. 5The temporary closure of the three parking bays will exacerbate existing parking pressure. Complaints about unlawful parking should be directed to the Council's Parking Enforcement team.”

Officer report

Who spoke

One person addressed the committee against the application and another addressed it in support.

The committee vote

The committee unanimously approved the details required by the construction traffic management condition.

“Resolved unanimously: that details of condition 4 (Construction Traffic Management Plan) pursuant to planning permission PP/25/02775 be approved.”

Minutes