Mixed-use neighbourhood redevelopment at Sainsbury's and surrounding former utilities land, Kensal Green

What was proposed

The hybrid application proposed demolishing existing buildings and creating homes, a supermarket, commercial and community uses, public realm and infrastructure.

“Sainsbury's and surrounding former utilities land, Canal Way, LONDON, W10 Proposal: Hybrid application for the redevelopment of Plots 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 of the masterplan site through demolition of all existing buildings and structures (including supermarket, car park and petrol filling station (Use Class E), office building (Use Class E), community, sports and housing building (Use Class F2 and Use Class C3), and gas governor (sui generis)) and creation of a mixed-use…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site formed part of the Kensal Canalside Opportunity Area and contained a supermarket, petrol station, offices, community facilities, housing and industrial uses.

“The application site forms part of the Kensal Canalside Opportunity (KCOA), see figure 1, and is allocated for mixed-use re-development under both the London Plan 2021, as an Opportunity Area, and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) Local Plan 2024 [Local Plan 2024]. Two locations within RBKC have been identified as areas which hold the greatest capacity to construct new homes and commercial spaces.”

“The London Plan 2021 is a key spatial development strategy for Greater London, produced by the Greater London Authority (GLA). The London Plan 2021 has identified Kensal Canalside Opportunity Area (KCOA) as an area for significant delivery of infrastructure and development since 2011. Table 2.1 of London Plan Policy SD1 ‘Opportunity Areas’ allocates the KCOA as an Opportunity Area with indicative targets for the provision of 3, 500 homes and 2, 000 jobs.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and history

The wider area had earlier redevelopment permissions and applications, including an unimplemented 2002 consent, a withdrawn 2008 application and a 2021 scoping opinion.

“The relevant planning history is summarised in the table below and includes the key planning applications considered most pertinent to the current proposal. The current application site is wider than the land associated with some of the permissions listed below; however, these earlier consents remain relevant.”

“Reference Description Decision TP/97/02707 Provision of 15,989sq.m. of Class B1 (Business) accommodation, and 308 residential units together with restaurant and cafe facilities and associated car parking together with highway improvements, reconfiguration of canal basin and provision of ecology garden. Granted. Section 106. 21/01/2002. Not implemented.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal’s housing, commercial uses and other public benefits outweighed identified policy conflicts and heritage harm, subject to conditions and Section 106.

“There are several public benefits, the most prominent of which is the delivery of high- quality homes, up to 2,519 residential C3 homes, including affordable homes at social rent level and intermediate that meet identified needs. Overall, the public benefits are of substantial weight and outweigh the less than substantial harm to the identified heritage assets identified above.”

“Departures from Development Plan policies primarily in respect of heritage have been identified. However, to the extent that the less than substantial harm to the heritage assets identified above results in any conflict with heritage policies, that conflict is outweighed by the public benefits which the proposals deliver.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Ward councillors, residents, other objectors and a Brent councillor spoke against the application, while the agent and applicant representatives spoke in support.

The committee vote

The committee resolved by a majority to grant planning permission, with Councillor Benton dissenting.

“RESOLVED BY A MAJORITY (with Councillor Benton dissenting): to grant planning permission, in accordance with the recommendations in paragraph 1.66 of the committee report, subject to the amended and additional conditions contained in the addendum report and the amended S106 Heads of Terms set out in the addendum report.”

Minutes