Canal Terrace Project Report

Queen’s Park Forum

Canal Terrace Report

Build Up Team, University of Westminster

October 2010

CONTENTS PAGE

1. Executive Summary ................................................................................ 1

2. Introduction .............................................................................................. 2

2.1 Aims and Purpose of the Project ...................................................... 2

2.2 Site and Surroundings ...................................................................... 2

2.3 Transport and Accessibility .............................................................. 5

2.4 Current Use Classes of Canal Terrace Ground Floors ..................... 5

2.5 Demographics .................................................................................. 7

2.6 Policy ................................................................................................ 7

3. Analysis of the Existing State of Canal Terrace and Identification of Key Issues ......................................................................................................... 10

3.1 Conversations with Experts ............................................................ 10

3.2 Commercial Issues - Rent Comparables ........................................ 12

3.3 Harrow Road District Surveys ........................................................ 14

3.5 Vacant Shopfronts - Facades ......................................................... 21

3.6 Vacant Shopfronts - Pop-up Shops ................................................ 22

3.7 Harrow Road Green Space ............................................................ 23

3.8 Transport ........................................................................................ 23

3.9 SWOT Analysis for Canal Terrace ................................................. 29

4. Proposed Solutions from the Canal Terrace Build-up Team ................. 30

4.1 Transport Options........................................................................... 30

4.2 Streetscape Options ....................................................................... 30

4.3 Community Options ........................................................................ 32

4.4 Harrow Road Green Space Options ............................................... 33

4.5 Commercial Options ....................................................................... 34

4.6 Canal Options ................................................................................ 35

5. Implementation ...................................................................................... 44

5.1 Planning Policies ............................................................................ 44

5.2 Canal Terrace Task Force .............................................................. 44

5.3 Collaboration .................................................................................. 44

5.4 Funding .......................................................................................... 44

6. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 46

7. Acknowledgements ............................................................................... 48

Appendices................................................................................................. 49

Appendix 1: Land Registry Data and Use Classes for ground floor properties 431 to 487 Canal Terrace, Harrow Rd, London W10................. 50

Appendix 2: Use and Ownership Profile ..................................................... 52

Appendix 3: Policy/Management background ............................................ 82

Appendix 4: Survey Results ....................................................................... 95

Appendix 5: Contacts ............................................................................... 100

Appendix 6: Author Contact Details ......................................................... 103

1

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 The aim of the report is to propose interventions to reduce the present negative impact of Canal Terrace. The Terrace is currently under-occupied and many of the ground floor units have been subject to poor levels of maintenance. Feedback to Queen’s Park Forum (QPF) from the Build-up Team suggests that the low level of maintenance and under-usage blight the area for residents. 1.2 A key point to emerge is that there is no single solution that will lead to an increase in activity in the area of the Terrace as a commercial parade (not necessarily retail). 1.3 Experience from other regeneration areas suggests that securing buy in from the various interested departments at Westminster City Council (WCC) will be important. Local residents will be an important tool in identifying and reporting unauthorized usage to the Planning Authorities who will need to respond appropriately. 1.4 The consensus was that the Terrace is very unlikely to succeed as entire retail parade although some units may remain viable as retail. One option may be to seek to cluster retail uses at the ends of the terraces and Westminster Council could potentially look at revisiting zoning for the Terrace itself. Additionally, businesses that do not depend on passing footfall are likely to do better on the Terrace, e.g. dentist, doctor, optician, artists. If units are given over to residential use this is likely to be an irreversible change as residential rents are significantly higher than for other uses. In the absence of a strategy for the parade more units may be lost to residential use – possibly through appeal. 1.5 A clearly articulated vision for the area would greatly help the council to resist future change of use to residential. Therefore we propose that, as a matter of urgency a planning brief be developed and/or further detail on the Terrace be added to the conservation area audit/ statement. 1.6 We have proposed a number of short term interventions but the long term future of the Terrace will probably depend on the realisation of a more ambitious, cohesive long-term vision. We suggest that this could include the remodelling of the green space at the west end of the Terrace and opening up access to the rear of the Terrace by constructing a ‘pontoon’ that could help exploit the canal as an asset. Moorings beside the existing green space could offer a commercial payback to the British Waterways Board (BWB) who manages the Canal. 1.7 The Terrace could present an opportunity for WCC to successfully seek grant funding from English Heritage (EH). This ability to leverage private sector funding is clearly an attractive proposition in the present economic climate. The message from the experts we spoke to and from our wider interviews is that Canal Terrace represents an opportunity.

2

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Aims and Purpose of the Project

The ‘Build Up’ team of the University of Westminster was commissioned by Queen’s Park Forum (QPF) to carry out research on the potential to reduce the current negative impact of much of Canal Terrace and to bring the Terrace back into commercial use at ground floor level. The study area is outlined in red in Figure 1 below. QPF launched the project by arranging for a presentation and meeting with a range of representatives from Westminster City Council (WCC) and others concerned with the Terrace. The team, a group of experienced professionals with varied skills in planning, architecture, development, and transport, has met separately with a series of experts on conservation, retail and urban realm. The team has also spoken to a series of property agents, occupiers of units in the Terrace and officials at WCC. This report is based on the findings from these meetings and its review of WCC policy and professional analysis.

2.2 Site and Surroundings

Canal Terrace lies at the western edge of the City of Westminster district, close to the boundary of Kensington and Chelsea and the Borough of Brent. It is located on the southern side of Harrow Road. Canal Terrace is located within a mixed area of residential, retail and commercial uses. The site comprises 29 units. Each of the units varies in size and have ground floors that are split level. The profiles for each of the buildings are attached in Appendix 2. The buildings are three storeys in height and of Victorian style. There remain only a handful of active shop-fronts within the parade; the majority of the units have become vacant, converted to residential uses, or are being used for non-active shop fronts. The Terrace represents a relatively high quality build from the Victorian period. Many original features remain and the basic fabric of the Terrace – from a visual inspection - appears sound.

3

Figure 1 Site Map

Harrow Road

Thi

rd A

venu

e

4

Abutting the rear of the Canal Terrace is the Grand Union Canal. To the west lies public green space (Harrow Road Open Space). Opposite Canal Terrace is a residential council estate which backs on to Harrow Road, and a few local convenience stores. To the east of the site lies a pedestrian bridge, Halfpenny Steps Bridge, which connects Westminster to Kensington and Chelsea and a new mixed use development comprising of a new NHS surgery open 12 hours a day 365 days a week at ground floor and residential above with A1 restaurant space anticipated to open Fall 2010. Both the pedestrian bridge and the new development separate Canal Terrace from the Harrow Road District Centre. The canal towpath running along the south side of the Grand Union Canal is designated as a ‘Site of Nature Conservation Importance’ (SNCIs), in the adopted UDP for Kensington and Chelsea. The buildings along Kensal Road, to the south of the Canal Terraces site, are in an Employment Zone. The Kensal Employment Zone comprises mostly of small office and light industrial firms, including those engaged in media, design, printing, publishing and communications. The site is within a designated Conservation Area (See Figure 2). Figure 2 Conservation Zone Map

5

2.3 Transport and Accessibility

As outlined above, Canal Terrace is situated on Harrow Road; a busy main road which runs from Paddington to Harrow on the A404, with good links to Central London. It passes through Maida Hill, Kensal Town, Kensal Green and runs partially alongside and underneath the Westway urban motorway/A40. The site is in close proximity to two tube/overland stations and lies within Zone 2 of the London fare zones. Both Queen’s Park and Westbourne Park stations are within a 0.8 mile radius of the site (about 15-16 minute walking distance). London Underground services can be accessed from both stations; additional London Overground services can also be accessed at Queen’s Park station. The site is served by a number of bus routes, including connections to Brent Cross, Wembley, Marylebone and Euston. There are four bus stops along the main stretch of Harrow Road, plus additional stops on surrounding roads. Car parking is limited on Harrow Road, with much of the road marked with single or double yellow lines. There are no parking spaces directly serving Canal Terrace. Paid parking is available on cross streets close to the site. Some cycle parking is also available adjacent to the site. There is some provision for loading bays on Harrow Road but it is unclear if they are for commercial use only or if they can be used by customers. There are no loading bays directly serving Canal Terrace. The area is also affected by the Western Extension Zone, an extension to the London Congestion Charge, though Harrow Road itself is an uncharged road. The current Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, is in the process of revoking the western extension of the congestion charge zone which have an impact.

2.4 Current Use Classes of Canal Terrace Ground Flo ors

The ground floor units of Canal Terrace are currently authorized for a wide variety of use classes as per data from the Land Registry, July 2010, including one apparent residential use.

6

Figure 3 Ground Floor Uses

7

2.5 Demographics

Population data was obtained from Office of National Statistics from the Census data in 2001. The population data is based upon the amalgamation of two Super Output Areas, which are the closest areas to Canal Terrace. From the data, the key findings can be summarised as follows:

• Whilst a large proportion of people in the study area is white (54%), there is generally a high proportion of ethnic minority communities, which account for the remaining population.

• Younger than average population, educated and open to new influences.

• 19% of the population have lower managerial and professional occupations.

• Over 55% of the population are Christian, the second largest religion is Islam accounting for 17.5%.

• Approximately 54% of the population are economically active, compared with �GB's average of 66%.

• 7.4% of the population are unemployed within the study area, compared with �GB's average of 3%.

Please see the Harrow Road Retail Development Strategy summary in Section 3.3.1 below for further information on local catchment areas and socio-demographic profiles.

2.6 Policy

The team reviewed relevant policy applying to Canal Terrace. 2.6.1 Unitary Development Plan (UDP)

The relevant local policies, which future planning applications for the change of use and amendments to the shopfronts of Canal Terrace will be considered against are contained in Westminster Unitary Development (UDP), adopted January 2007. It confirms that subject site is within the designated Queens Park Conservation Area, and is also within North Westminster Special Policy Area (NWWSPA). The key policy considerations for the site are as follows.

• Policy NWW1 (Small Scale Business Development) encourages new small scale business uses where there will be no detrimental impact on residential amenity.

• Policy DES1 (Principles of urban design and conservation) encourages development to be of the highest standards of sustainable and inclusive urban design and architectural quality.

8

• Policy DES9 (E) (Changes of use within conservation areas) states that permission will be granted for development, involving a material change of use, which would serve either to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area, bearing in mind the detailed viability of the development.

• Policy DES13 (Canal) encourages development that can provide new public access routes to and alongside the canal.

• Policy SS8 (Shops and Services Outside District and Local Centres) states that the loss of A1 use would be discouraged, however the loss of non A1 retail uses to residential and B1 uses will only be permitted in isolated shop type units.

• Policy SS9 (Long-term vacant shop units in peripheral locations) applies to units on the periphery of undesignated parades or on the periphery of District or Local Centres. Alternative uses which provide employment e.g. studios, workshops, training centres, live/work units, health, educational or other community uses may be considered suitable. Applications for change of use which does not attract members of the public, such as residential or B1 office use will not normally be permitted if the unit is in a parade or group of shops and service uses. This policy may be applied in these locations where a similar unit in the frontage has been vacant and marketed for at least 18 months without success.

• Policy SS17 (Window Displays) Non A1 service or office uses at ground floor level in shopping frontages shall be maintained to ensure that it is in keeping with the character and appearance of the streetscape.

2.6.2 Queens Park Conservation Area Audit SPG (2005 )

This document describes the historical development and character and appearance of the Conservation Area identified in Figure 2 . It recognises the importance of how shopfronts contribute to the character and appearance of both buildings and the setting of the Conservation Area, which is relevant to the subject site. As such, the Council wherever possible will seek to retain original shopfronts. The following summary position is drawn in respect of policy matters affecting Canal Terraces, further policy details are given in Appendix 3 :

1. Whilst the site falls within a designated Conservation Area, alternative uses will be considered, bearing in mind the viability of the proposal;

2. That, whilst the site has historically dominantly been retail, the Council has recognised that the site may be suitable for alternative uses, and

9

3. The Council promote in their policy the need to retain window displays for alternative uses which do not serve the general public i.e. B1 offices.

Therefore, prevailing planning policy wherever practicable encourages the retention of retail units, however the ‘de-designation’ of Canal Terrace from a shopping frontage allows greater flexibility for the units to be used for alternative services especially when the units have been vacant for long term or have generally been difficult to let out.

10

3. ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING STATE OF CANAL TERRACE AND IDENTIFICATION OF KEY ISSUES

The team met with several experts in property, conservation, and local council offices to discuss Canal Terrace. The team also surveyed local businesses to understand their concerns and challenges in the area. Below is a summary of the key issues identified.

3.1 Conversations with Experts

The team had several conversations with local estate agents and various experts on Canal Terrace.

3.1.1 Local Estate Agents

Local estate agents noted that Harrow Road commercial lease rates fall quite dramatically past Portnall Road and that the western section of Harrow Road, including Canal Terrace, is not considered to be part of the main shopping district. The units on Canal Terrace have more limited commercial uses as they don’t have basements for storage or back entrances for loading and deliveries. The use is also limited by the fact that the ground floor units average 40-50 sq m (430 – 540 sq ft) over a bi-level with stairs which limits retail space. Agents also noted that the Canal Terrace section of Harrow Road has limited passing footfall so businesses are not able to draw on casual foot traffic. The businesses that appear to be most successful on the terraces are ones that have a dedicated clientele actively seeking out their services, such as the legal services or funeral home. The agents also noted that some people have security concerns and don’t feel safe in the area after dark. When the team inquired about what businesses might work on Canal Terrace, one estate agent noted that there are limited banks in the area. Another agent thinks the block would be better off as office use, given the lack of footfall and storage space, or possibly even as residential given the residential rates are so much higher. Residential, particularly on the upper floors of Canal Terrace with the canal aspect, is quite popular. Another agent thought shared office use, like Westbourne Studios, could work in area and one noted that live/work artist units could be of interest. The agents agreed that creating more street life/interaction would be helpful. They also noted that there are parking challenges for the units since there is no parking on the street and the nearest cross street parking can be quite far away from some of the further units.

11

The estate agents do get inquiries from McDonalds, Costa, betting shops, and other national chains on a regular basis looking for sites in the area but they require a minimum of 1500 sq ft (140 sq m) with basements and delivery/loading areas which virtually eliminates the possibility of their locating on Canal Terrace unless adjacent units could be joined together. 3.1.2 GVA Grimley (Leading UK Property Consultants)

The team spoke with an expert from GVA Grimley who gave us his informal view on the area. He noted that there is already a substantial amount of retail in the area and that Canal Terrace might be better off with a combination of uses, rather than solely retail. He suggested focussing on revitalizing one part of the terrace, particularly the eastern end which borders the Harrow Road main shopping district, and suggested that the rest of the terrace remained residential. He did not believe that the entire terrace could support retail at this stage. 3.1.3 Meeting with Alec Forshaw (Conservation Exper t, formerly Conservation Officer with London Borough of Islingt on)

Mr. Forshaw, with extensive design and conservation experience, was very hopeful about the possibilities of regenerating the Canal Terrace area. He emphasised the need to make an attractive space for people to consider coming and noted that the canal aspect could be an unique selling point. He also noted that the section of the canal behind the terrace is wide, which would lend itself to adding pontoons or a walkway providing some sort of commercial opportunity, and in addition, there would be space for revenue generating moorings which British Waterways Board would likely look upon favourably and would create footfall by having a residential base. Another strategy he mentioned would be to urge Westminster Council to develop site specific policy guidance for Canal Terrace as presently it does not have any clear policy strategy. 3.1.4 Discussion with John Phillips from London Pri nt Studio

A conversation with the London Print Studio (LPS), a local printing and art college led to a discussion of deploying a community led project that would see a use of the windows that the local community could relate to and feel ownership over. John Phillips has in the past worked on local community art projects that were informed by local school children and parents. The goal of the LSP is to seek to empower people and communities through practical engagement with the visual and graphic arts.

12

3.1.5 Discussion with Toby Cuthbertson, Conservatio n Officer at Westminster City Council

Toby Cuthbertson the Design and Conservation Officer at Planning Delivery Unit of Westminster City Council during his visit of the Harrow Road Open Space identified two locations at either end of the space for possible public art interventions. He thought the idea of Public Art displays was a good one and spoke about contacting local artists (some located in the terrace itself) in the area. Exhibiting at the weekends and doing something with the co-operation of the library would be a good starting point. This is dependent on the sourcing of any finances. Should financing become available then the council can help to deliver any approved projects. He stated that he would add the site to the sculpture site list and raise it with the Parks and Public Realm department and also investigate the need for the railings. 3.1.6 Issues Identified

Based on the conversations with the above experts, the team identified the following issues:

• Lack of footfall in the area and concerns about security

• Challenges with the sizes and layout of existing units

• Underutilization of canal aspect which is an unique selling point

• Underutilization of Harrow Road Open Space

3.2 Commercial Issues - Rent Comparables

The team also surveyed the local estate agents and reviewed publically available data about residential and commercial rental data. This information is based on data as of July 2010. COMMERCIAL RENT Area Rent per sq ft (annual) Harrow Road (from Prince of Wales junction to Portnall Road), assuming basement storage

£18-25

Harrow Road (from Portnall to Third Avenue, including Canal Terrace)

£10-20

Estate agents noted that Harrow Road, west of Portnall Road, was a less desirable commercial area and commercial rents fell accordingly. The lower rents also reflected the physical challenges with the units because of the lack

13

of basement/storage and loading areas. The ground floor units on Canal Terrace average 430 – 540 square feet. RESIDENTIAL RENT Area Rent per sq ft (annual) Harrow Road - one bedroom flat – assuming average size 400 sq foot

£25-32

Harrow Road - two bedroom flat – assuming average size 650 sq foot

£25-30

The estate agents and market rents do not differentiate between the different areas of Harrow Road and estate agents noted that Canal Terrace is a popular residential area because of the canal aspect. RESIDENTIAL RENT CURRENT LOCAL

HOUSING ALLOWANCE BENEFITS

Area Rent per sq ft (annual) Harrow Road - one bedroom flat - assuming average size 400 sq foot.

£245 a week £32

Harrow Road - two bedroom flat - assuming average size 600 sq foot.

£330 a week £29

Current housing allowance benefits for the area include payments in line with private rentals, therefore, providing a compelling reason for landlords to lease flats to housing cooperatives in the area in addition to private tenants. The proposed new housing benefits are unlikely to affect the Canal Terrace area as even with the reduced benefits, residential rental rates are still higher than present commercial rates: RESIDENTIAL RENT PROPOSED LOCAL

HOUSING ALLOWANCE BENEFITS

Area Rent per sq ft (annual) Harrow Road - one bedroom flat - assuming average size 400 sq foot.

£215 a week £28

Harrow Road - two bedroom flat - assuming average size 600 sq foot.

£290 a week £25

14

Although under the new proposed housing benefits, residential rates will fall approximately £4 per square foot per year, residential rental rates are substantially higher than commercial leases, in addition to providing further certainty and a more stable rental base and no business rates. Therefore, there is an economically rational argument for changing the ground floor units to residential where possible on Canal Terraces. 3.2.1 Issue Identified

Based on the analysis of current rent yields, the team identified the following issue:

• Residential use of the Canal Terrace units has a significantly higher yield

3.3 Harrow Road District Surveys

As part of the research, the team reviewed the Harrow Road District Centre Shopping Area Health Check, dated January 2007, conducted by Nathanial Lichfield and Partners and the Harrow Road Retail Development Strategy dated 9 May 2008, prepared by The Retail Group which contain salient data relevant to Canal Terrace. Rather than summarize the full reports, below are key points raised which corroborated the findings from the team’s survey and discussions with the experts. 3.3.1 Harrow Road Retail Development Strategy -

The Harrow Road Retail Development Strategy identified local catchment areas, socio-demographic profiles and main concerns from store owners.

• Most people interviewed come from the local area, postcodes W9 3, W9 2, and W10 4 and accounted for 70% weekday visits and 74% weekend visits. (Slide 8)

• The majority of people interviewed were on the street because they lived there (~70%) with approximately 20% were using the shops. (Slide 9) The main type of shopping was for food. (Slide 49)

• Catchment area data shows four key Mosiac profiles which can be useful in understanding demographic psyche and spending patterns (Slides 10 -18):

o Urban Intelligence (56%), subgroups Counter Cultural Mix / City Adventurers – younger than average, well-educated, open to new influences who seek new ideas and trends and place high importance on personalisation and authenticity. Leisure focus on travel, arts and culinary experiences. (Slide 14)

15

o Welfare Borderline (24%), subgroup Metro Multi-culture – rented public housing and high proportion of minority groups with lower income service jobs who are motivated by designer labels.

o Ties of Community (10%), subgroup Settled Minorities – young families, close-knit communities, self sufficient who like mass market brands are frequent shoppers, often supporting 24 hour economies.

• Study noted that few shops on Harrow Road cater to the Urban Intelligence group, and retail offer is primarily focused to the other groups.

• Study noted the poor condition of many shopfronts, limited shop size, and that there were few chain stores.

• Local business owners who were surveyed about their concerns in the area noted (slide 55) –

o Dangerous (53%) – muggings, crime, drug addicts o Parking (37%) – not enough, too expensive, too many yellow

lines o Businesses closing down (21%)

• Retailers would like to see the following improvements made (slide 57): o Better parking facilities (32%) o Shop front improvements (32%) o More police presence (26%) o More support for small businesses (16%) o More shops, especially multiples (16%) o Promotion of the area (11%) o Fewer betting shops (11%) o CCTV (11%)

3.3.2 Harrow Road District Centre Shopping Area Hea lth Check

The Harrow Road District Centre Shopping Area Health Check contains similar information to the above study regarding consumer demographics and the retail experience and corroborated many of the above findings. It also compared the area to six other retail centres in Westminster. We note that the Harrow Road District Centre does not include Canal Terrace. Some further key findings –

• The average length of a visit to Harrow Road is 48 minutes and most visitors were food shopping, (p.23).

• The average intended spend for food shopping was £11.40 and £12.70 for others who intended to spend. (p.21-22).

16

• Seventy-seven percent of local residents surveyed walked to Harrow Road (p. 33) and 45% of visitors walked and 44% came by public transport (p.32),

• Only 5% of residents and locals surveyed travelled by car (p.32, 33)

• Of visitors who were familiar with parking in the area, the overall response was that parking availability and charges in the area was quite poor and businesses felt that it had quite a negative impact on their business. Local residents were less negative on parking. (p.35-37)

• Footfall on Harrow Road was quite low in comparison to the other shopping districts, and it was especially low at the Canal Terrace end of Harrow Road and can be seen on the thermal map below (Figure F2) which was at 3-5pm, peak time. In the evening, the pedestrian numbers fall further.

17

Figure 4 Footfall

18

3.3.3 Issues Identified

Based on the review of the above surveys, the team identified the following issues:

• The current retail offering does not appeal to the “Urban Intelligence” demographic

• Businesses are concerned about parking and security

• Footfall is highly limited in front of Canal Terrace

3.4 Canal Terrace Survey The team put together a survey to gauge the attitudes of business owners on Canal Terrace. Members of the team went out and conducted face-to-face survey interviews and held discussions with nine commercial occupiers over June-July 2010. See Appendix 4 for more details on the survey. The team asked companies why they chose to locate on Canal Terrace. The majority of respondents noted that they were located on Canal Terrace because of the reasonable rent and for legacy reasons:

Figure 2 Location Preferences

The survey asked the respondents to identify what some of the major challenges were in operating a business on Canal Terraces. Respondents cited parking availability and location as the number one issues, followed by poor quality restaurants/shops and area demographics.

19

Figure 3 Location Challenges

The team then asked the respondents what would improve the Canal Terraces in their opinion. The two most popular suggestions were improving the appearance of the shop facades and adding parking in front of the shops. Respondents also citied improving security, improving the quality of the shops, and allowing pavement seating.

Figure 4 Terrace Improvement

Six of the nine respondents specifically said they plan to stay on Canal Terrace and cited reasons such as reasonable rent and established clienteles.

20

The survey also queried respondents about “pop up” shops, which are temporary shops that occupy vacant shopfronts for short periods. Five respondents felt pop up shops could be successful on Canal Terrace and noted that arts and crafts, retail/seasonal products and restaurant/café/bakery would be of interest. When queried about businesses they wanted to see on Canal Terraces, respondents said they would be interested in seeing restaurants, banks, and art galleries.

Figure 5 Preferred Uses

Conversations from survey participants also noted the following key points:

• Concerns about safety/security after dark

• Demographics of the area and spending patterns have an impact on business success

• Lack of footfall

• Poor condition of shop fronts and area, including graffiti, litter

• Lack of street life and vibrancy

• Challenges with loading and parking for clients

• Lack of integration between Canal Terrace retail and Harrow Road retail

21

• Green space at the western end of Canal Terrace and canal interaction is limited and in poor repair with vermin problems.

• Some store owners felt isolated from the main shopping district.


Based on the results of the survey and conversations with businesses located on Canal Terraces, the team identified the following issues:

• Parking is an issue: both for loading/deliveries and for customer parking

• The poor condition of the shopfronts is also a significant concern

• Businesses have concerns about security

3.5 Vacant Shopfronts - Facades

Based on the team’s research, one of the major challenges with the Terrace is the vacant and empty shopfronts.

Blank shop fronts No activity

Architecturally the Terrace has good design details that are characteristic of good quality Victorian finishing. However these shopfronts themselves through uses that do not interface with the street are comprised of boarded up windows and painted over impermeable glass fronts (see pictures above). One option the team researched is “fake shop fronts”. Fake shopfronts are created by sticking adhesive films to the inside of display windows, giving a sense of a busy shopfront as seen below. Under the current economic downturn where shops have become vacant leading to unsafe and unpleasant high streets some local authorities have adopted the use of ‘fake shopfronts’.

22

3.5.1 Issue Identified

The team identified the following issue:

• Vacant, boarded up, and blank shopfronts give the Terrace a desolate feel

3.6 Vacant Shopfronts - Pop-up Shops

Another idea for revitalizing the terrace and making use of vacant stores could be the use of pop-up shops in the short term. Pop-up shops are temporary stores that operate for short periods, from days to months. The main aims of Pop-Up Shops are to:

• Reduce the visual impact of empty property in town centres.

• Increase footfall and attract new visitors to the borough’s town centres by providing a range of exciting businesses, activities and exhibitions.

• Generate publicity for town centres and the local area.

• Offer reduced cost/free space for local entrepreneurs, artists and community groups to try out new ideas and/or reach new audiences.

• Showcase empty property to potential tenants to help it be re-let.

• Pop-up shops benefit landlords by reducing costs and increasing the exposure of the property.

Pop-up shops, as an interim measure have been considered and are generally supported by the local community, but landlord support and buy-in would be required. Similar schemes have been successfully implemented in other boroughs, and should be considered for the duration of the economic downturn. Camden and Fulham have hosted pop-up shops and Kensington and Chelsea recently hosted a Brompton Road fashion pop-up shop in October 2010. Some jurisdictions, such as Camden, have provided support for pop-ups by reducing business rates, building insurance, and building service charges in the short-term. Westminster City Council could support the use of pop-up shops by implementing similar policies.

23

Figure 9 Pop-Up Shops



• Vacant or boarded up shopfronts give the Terrace a desolate feel and do not earn revenues for the landlords.

3.7 Harrow Road Green Space

Based on discussions with interested stakeholders, the team identified the Harrow Road Green Space as being underutilized and another option the team considered was making better use of the green space to the west of Canal Terrace to increase footfall and provide an open area for community residents.



• The Harrow Road Green Space is currently underutilized and is considered unwelcoming

3.8 Transport

This section will examine transport and accessibility around Canal Terraces and outline options for improving accessibility around the site. An analysis of the transport offer around Canal Terrace has been undertaken and a set of recommendations have been developed. Harrow Road is a borough road and the London Borough of Westminster is the highways authority for the road. Harrow Road is also on the Strategic Road Network, which means that Transport for London (TfL) is the traffic

24

authority for Harrow Road. TfL is also responsible for all traffic signals In London. Consultation has therefore been undertaken with both parties. 3.8.1 Local Implementation Plan

London Boroughs are required by the Greater London Authority Act 1999 to produce a Local Implementation Plan (LIP). The LIP outlines how the City Council intends to implement the Mayor of London's Transport Strategy. Proposals for improving transport and accessibility around Canal Terrace should therefore be captured within Westminster’s LIP. The current LIP was produced by the borough in 2006; however with the recent adoption of the Mayor’s updated Transport Strategy for London, it is now likely to be out of date. Also, inclusion within the LIP does not necessarily mean that funding will be available for proposals Proposals for improving accessibility around Canal Terrace have been assessed against the borough’s current LIP. 3.8.2 Options for Improving Accessibility:

• There are four main bus stops located on Harrow Road – the bus stop

closest to the site could be relocated closer to Canal Terrace to help draw in people and increase footfall.

• There are currently limited car parking spaces available around the site, especially free parking. There is also no car parking directly serving Canal Terrace – there is an opportunity for provision of short-stay car parking spaces outside of Canal Terrace (including loading bays) to make Canal Terrace more accessible to customers / visitors as well as making it easier for businesses located there to receive deliveries.

• The nearby Pay by Phone car parking provision around Harrow Road is inaccessible for people without credit cards – alternative types of cash free parking could be offered more widely, such as the scratch cards available in the library. Perhaps these could be sold by local newsagents.

• Although there is some cycle parking available on Harrow Road adjacent side to Canal Terrace – additional cycle parking can be provided outside the site to serve Canal Terrace.

• Harrow Road is a busy main road making it difficult for people to access the site – the development of pedestrian crossings and other traffic calming measures will increase pedestrian accessibility around Canal Terrace.

25


The team identified the following issues:

• Car parking, both for loading/deliveries and for customers, is limited

• Cycle and scooter parking is limited on the Terrace

• Pedestrian crossings in front of the Terrace is challenging

26

3.8.4 Feasibility of Transportation Proposals

The table below sets out responses from TfL and the London Borough of Westminster in relation to each proposal, it also highlights relevant LIP policies. Proposals Transport for London

Response Local Implementation Plan Action / Recommendation?

Relocating the bus stop closer to Canal Terrace to draw people to Canal Terrace

Relocating the bus stop is acceptable in principle if there are no changes to bus routes. However, TfL would generally avoid placing two bus stops directly opposite each other on roads like the Harrow Road as it’s relatively narrow and a stopped bus pushes the passing traffic towards each other. TfL can assist with accessibility, stop spacing, and operational practicalities.

The current LIP does not set out any specific requirements in relation to relocating bus stops. However, the borough is required to reserve kerbside spaces for TfL bus services.

Arrange a meeting with TfL for further discussion, contact at TfL is Simon Horsley ([email protected]).

Provision of short stay on-street car parking spaces outside Canal Terrace including loading bays to make it more accessible for customers / visitors.

Harrow Road is a Borough road; the London Borough of Westminster should be the first point of contact. TfL have suggested Sean Dwyer ([email protected]), Highways Planning Manager at Westminster. Harrow Road is also on the Strategic Road Network, which means that while

The LIP sets out that the borough will generally control car parking provision in Westminster. There are no loading controls (by means of kerb stripes), either to prohibit or limit loading on most Westminster streets. But the borough will only support the provision of specific parking/ loading bays in special circumstances.

Contact the London Borough of Westminster for clarity. Consultation should be undertaken with TfL before any proposals are taken forward. Contact at TfL is Lucy Ryan, Forward Planning team ([email protected]).

27

Westminster are the Highway Authority, TfL are the Traffic Authority. Provision of car parking spaces is feasible in principle but the decision lies with the London Borough of Westminster although consultation should be undertaken with TfL before any proposals are taken forward.

Provision of alternative types of cash free parking.

n/a The LIP supports cash free parking initiatives.

Provision of cycle parking outside Canal Terrace.

Awaiting response. The LIP supports cycle parking.

The development of pedestrian crossings and other traffic calming measures to increase pedestrian accessibility around the site.

The London Borough of Westminster is the highway authority for Harrow Road and therefore if changes are proposed these should be captured within Westminster’s Local Implementation Plan (LIP).

Two key factors should be recognised:

The LIP supports Traffic management measures and supports the provision of controlled pedestrian crossings, including zebra, pelican, puffin and toucan crossings.

A new crossing would need to be delivered jointly by the Borough (as the highway authority) and TfL (as the traffic authority for signals).Contact at TfL is David Rowe ([email protected]), Head of Borough Projects and Programmes.

28

TfL is responsible for all traffic signals in London (regardless of whether they are on Borough or TfL roads) and therefore if a new crossing was proposed this would need to be discussed and agreed with TfL.

Inclusion within the LIP does not necessarily mean it requires funding from TfL – it may be developer funded, or funded through the Borough’s own revenue (e.g. parking revenue). All proposals for new traffic signals would need to be discussed and agreed with TfL. A new crossing would need to be delivered jointly by the borough (as the highway authority) and TfL (as the traffic authority for signals).

Figure 10

29

3.9 SWOT Analysis for Canal Terrace

After reviewing the data, the team has determined the following strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats for the Canal Terrace site: Strengths

• Canal aspect • Flexibility in uses • Strong community links • Good transportation links

Weakness

• High business rates • Low footfall • Small units with no storage,

steps, and limited access • Non-welcoming, vacant

facades in disrepair • No on-street parking • Concerns about security • Multiple ownership

Opportunities

• Library • Green space • Proactive, supportive

community and neighbourhood forum

• New developments in the area such as Nido student housing and new NHS clinic and A1 use

• Vacant ground floor units

Threats

• General economic climate • Historic ability to convert units

to residential means that some units may remain residential

30

4. PROPOSED SOLUTIONS FROM THE CANAL TERRACE BUILD-UP TEAM

Based on the above research, the Canal Terrace Build-up Team has put together a number of options and solutions for the identified problems. These options can be implemented individually or collectively over the short or long term. These recommendations, listed by category, have been supported in principle by agencies, stakeholders and the experts the team consulted with. The short-term solutions are a mix of elements which will contribute to the enhancement and use of the public realm and measures which will help alleviate the somewhat grim aspects of the terrace until some of the other long-term measures are affected.

4.1 Transport Options

As discussed in the Analysis sections: Harrow Road District Surveys and Transport, two of the key issues identified were the lack of footfall in the Canal Terraces area and difficulties in parking. The team suggests exploring the listed initiatives below to try and create footfall in the area and make parking, for both the businesses and their customers, easier.

Short Term Longer Term

• Provide bicycle/ scooter parking • Re-locate bus stop on the Canal Terrace side (south side);

• Provide short term service parking for businesses;

• Short term parking facility for customers;

• Add an additional pedestrian crossing near the bus stop

• Disabled parking

All the proposed solutions listed above involve works on the Harrow Road side of the Terrace which will involve WCC and TfL. Contact details for the relevant individuals are included in Figure 10.

4.2 Streetscape Options

The team indentified a number of issues affecting the pedestrian street-level experience including concerns about security and the fact that a number of the Canal Terrace shopfronts are boarded up or have blank windows; see Analysis sections Analysis sections: Harrow Road District Surveys and Vacant Shopfronts.

31

The following are some ideas to enhance the pedestrian experience:

Short Term Longer Term

• Introduction of low level lighting on the south side

• Increase width of footpath in combination with other improvements

• Improve signage for existing businesses

• Introduce table crossings and pedestrian crossing s to increase pedestrian priority and reduce the visual intrusion of vehicles

• Removal of blank walls and translucent glazing on shop fronts

• Introduction of planters and potted plants at street level

• Adhesive film fake shop fronts to create street life

• Introduce folding timber shutters if privacy is an issue

• Make the brick wall of the housing estate look more welcoming, e.g., murals painted by schoolchildren

The short term solutions are street-level improvements which can be carried out with relatively minor cost and disruption and add to the beauty and quality of life on the terrace as well as enhance the pedestrian experience to encourage footfall in the area.

Fake shopfronts has been discussed briefly with design and conservation officers at Westminster City Council, where they have no objection to the implementation of ‘fake shop fronts’.

32

Figure 11 Fake shop fronts

The fake shopfront option is a short-term solution that with the co-operation of the property owners could be implemented quickly. The fake shop fronts give a sense of a used and busy high street detracting from the negative connotations usually associated with underused spaces.

4.3 Community Options

In order to create a welcoming environment and ensure that all stakeholders are able to participate in improving Canal Terrace, the team suggests the below community options: Options

• Greater engagement with the Library for community involvement and information

• Create Local Organization to Advocate for Canal Terraces – Canal Terraces Task Force

• Increase on-street community police presence The local library across the street from the terrace can be an important resource for engagement with the community. The facilities provided by the library can be linked to some of the services on Canal Terrace. This aspect will require further research and coordination. Creating a task force will ensure that Canal Terrace continues to have an advocate and allow local residents to work to improve the area. If a task force or amenity society can be an empowered local organisation that understands local planning and conservation and can monitor the conditions and usages of units on the terrace. Increasing on-street police and community officer presence will address concerns about security and safety, particularly after dark. Other options include deploying crime prevention officers to do door to door reassurance and offer advice.

33

4.4 Harrow Road Green Space Options

As discussed in Analysis sections: Harrow Road District Surveys and Harrow Road Green Space, the Harrow Road Green Space is an underutilized area which does not feel safe or hygienic to local residents. Revitalizing this area improves the quality of experience on Canal Terrace and will encourage footfall and people visiting the area, in addition to potentially providing health and community benefits. Short Term Longer Term

• Revitalize Harrow Road green space with public art and other initiatives such as a small scale market to be held weekly or monthly etc

• Better lighting in the green space to improve perception of safety etc.

• Remove railing to link with canal

• Add exercise equipment

• Organize markets/music/swap meets/art displays which may possibly be linked by a temporary boat or ferry service to “speak” with residents and passers-by on the other side of the canal

This space could be used for a multitude of different activities such as a small scale market to be held weekly or monthly (Souk market, spice market, local jewellery making, handicrafts etc) that will bring the community together, offer a connection to the water and provide a continuation of the terrace and towards the pub. Another option might be looking into introducing basic activities/exercise structures that also offer a better visual effect and could potentially be able to be used by older people and/or made accessible. Below is an image depicting a sample.

34

Figure 12

Realising the potential of the canal; connection to the water is a major issue on the site. Existing vegetation on the green area, blocks any visual effect to the canal the shrubs are rather unattractive and dust and pollution traps from the traffic. The area appears dark, unfriendly and often used by rough sleepers.

4.5 Commercial Options

Conversation with experts and local business owners, and the team’s review of the commercial rental market, see sections Analysis sections: Harrow Road District Surveys and Rent Comparables, indicate that there are economically compelling reasons that a number of the units have converted to residential usage. In addition to the above options to encourage footfall and improve the general pedestrian experience, the team recommends the following: Short Term Long Term

• Extend Harrow Road Business District to include Canal Terrace to provide support for existing businesses

• Encourage multiple unit owners to combine units to create value and appeal to a wider variety of commercial tenants and possibly attract an anchor tenant

• Lower business rates temporarily on properties converted from residential back to commercial to encourage landlords to support original uses

• Encourage local task/amenity society force to monitor usage of units and report any suspected issues to the relevant authorities

• Work with landlords/owners on short term pop up shops in vacant units, especially those that will appeal to “Urban Intelligence”

• Encourage clustering of media/design based businesses on the Terrace to allow cross-fertilization and promote a

35

demographic and attract community interest and footfall, creative uses in particular

community

• Build relationships with landlords/owners to foster community and encourage them to invest in their properties.

• Encourage landlords to select future tenants with a view to developing a community and encouraging successful businesses

4.6 Canal Options

The team’s research identified the opportunity to integrate the canal into Canal Terrace and use the canal to its full advantage and create a true visual connection. Short Term Long Term

• Increase visual permeability/ connection between the footpath on Harrow Road to the Grand Union Canal

• Reverse fronting – look at the Canal side as the primary façade for the terrace

• Speak with the London Waterbus Company about creating a waterbus stop at Halfpenny Steps Bridge or the Harrow Road Green Space on Saturdays to link Camden Market and Paddington Basin with Portobello Market

• Introduce signage, lighting and re-fenestration on the Canal side

• Increase interaction with the canal by kayaking lessons, pop up boat ice cream shop, etc

• Introduce footpath on pontoons or pile foundations wide enough to have a ‘trading strip’

• Explore options to physically connect Harrow Road footpath to ‘walkway’ through some of the shops

• Continue to engage with British Waterways to have moorings for

36

narrow boats along the footpath

• Design physical connection between the ‘breakout space’ to the east to the ‘green strip’ to the west via the footpath, include lockable gates at either end for security

• Explore possibility of a service point for boats, which could be integrated in the open space design to make the proposal more acceptable to British Waterways, this enhances the overall security and use of the green strip

• Explore feasibility of a future second bridge over the Canal nearer to the Nido students’ housing to the green stretch.

The team believes adding a canal-side walkway along the rear side of the terrace that would encourage pedestrian circulation and human interaction with the canal. This would allow Canal Terrace to truly differentiate itself, link the Terrace to the canal, and bring much needed activity to the area. This could be an area that could allow a small table with two chairs or could be dedicated only to circulation. The walkway is a more ambitious feature of our proposals which would have to be properly vetted and consulted. It could be safely locked during night hours to prevent unwanted use or violation. The canal is wide at this point and so navigation issues should not be a fundamental barrier. There could be potential for moorings alongside the green space which could generate revenue for British Waterways and add activity to the green area, adding activity and potentially reducing the fear of crime. Our initial contact with British Waterways suggests that they would be open to negotiations for a pontoon if this were part of a larger regeneration project for the area. The following drawings illustrate the pontoon walkway utilizing the canal:

37

Figure 13 Canal Side Elevation

38

Figure 14 Cross Section

39

In this example we can see how a pontoon can be employed for canal side cafes. Canal Terrace is south facing allowing for maximum sun exposure

40

Figure 15 Birds-eye View

A second footbridge to cross the Canal could also be considered which would establish a more direct link to the upcoming Nido students’ housing and encourage the students to utilize Harrow Road. Below is an illustration of what a second pedestrian bridge might look like:

41

Figure 16 Illustration of a Second Footbridge

Figure 17 Aerial View

42

Figure 18 Aerial View

43

Figure 19 Canal View

44

5. IMPLEMENTATION

This section will set out recommendations for implementing the proposals outlined within this report.

5.1 Planning Policies

For proposals to be implemented they must be supported by Westminster’s planning policies and vision for the borough. Westminster is currently preparing a new development plan for the borough, called the Local Development Framework (LDF). Westminster is also likely to update its LIP in the near future. It is therefore suggested that new policy is monitored and representations are submitted for the interests of Canal Terrace. It is possible to join databases such as the LDF Consultation Database, to keep updated with plans that the borough is preparing. Consider developing specific policy covering Canal Terraces to deal with site specific issues.

5.2 Canal Terrace Task Force

It is recommended that a community/ residents forum is set up so that lobbying can continue for improvements to be undertaken at Canal Terrace. As any work is likely to be driven by the London Borough of Westminster, it is suggested that a Council Officer is invited to sit on the forum. The officer can be used as the point of contact for the council for issues relating to Canal Terrace. A Canal Terrace Forum can also empower residents to understand and appreciate the planning policies affecting their neighbourhood and encourage them to report planning violations.

5.3 Collaboration

As part of this study contact has been initiated with a number of organisations and external stakeholders including British Waterways, Transport for London and English Heritage. Most of these organisations have expressed support for improvement works around Canal Terrace. It is suggested that further consultation is undertaken with relevant bodies and a list of contacts is provided within Appendix Five.

5.4 Funding

Any improvements works at Canal Terrace would either be funded by the borough’s planning/ regeneration department or a private developer wishing to redevelop the site. However, funding may be available for some elements of the project from other means. The table below sets out the types of funding that may be available for some of the proposals set out in this report.

45

Proposal Funding

Transport and accessibility Proposals could be funded through TfL funding or Section 106 planning contributions from development around Canal Terrace. Proposals could also be developer funded or borough funded e.g. through parking revenue.

Public art Funding could be gained from bodies such as the Arts Council and the Historic Monuments Council. Funding could also be secured through S106 contributions.

Urban realm improvements Funding could be gained from English Heritage or TfL. Funding could also be secured through S106 contributions.

Please note in order to secure funding from bodies such as the Arts Council, a party will need to go through an application and selection process. For other types of funding such as S106 contributions, this could be processed through the Officer who is to sit on the Canal Terrace Forum.

46

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 This study was commissioned by the Queens Park Forum (QPF) and undertaken by the Build Up team in conjunction with Westminster University. 6.2 The objectives of the report are to suggest solutions and practical ideas, both short and long term, to rejuvenate the fortunes of Canal Terrace, currently under occupied and devoid of community and commercial aspirations. A clear vision for the future of the terrace will hopefully give impetus to a healthy re-vitalisation of what is now an area of low activity and negative quality public realm. 6.3 The Build Up team with the guidance of QPF has carried out various discussions and surveys with local stakeholders in the vicinity to establish their views for future action and direction. This analysis has involved conversations with experts on the ground. Local estate agents, both commercial and residential were canvassed on their opinions as to the suitability of uses for Canal Terrace. It was noted that the units on the terrace did not lend themselves particularly well to retail commercial uses because of their floor layout, lack of storage facilities and delivery access. Agents were more positive in suggesting that the terrace should become more office/ service orientated, uses such as banks, medical services, live/work units, or artists units which could have realistic and long term potential. 6.4 Views from a leading property company were of the opinion that the area was already well served by retail outlets and that the terrace might be better off with a combination of uses. Businesses with a dedicated clientele such as the existing solicitors, legal aid providers, hair salons, takeaways would provide a strong presence to attract other firms and create a robust street life and community interaction. 6.5 Research into both commercial and residential rents in the area suggest that current housing allowance benefits are in line with private rentals, therefore there is a compelling rationale for leasing flats to Registered Social Landlords (RSL) rather than commercial rents which are currently substantially lower than their residential counterparts. Therefore, investing in solely retail activities within the private sector is currently not viewed as a sensible business model. 6.6 Businesses in the terrace were canvassed for their opinions as to the benefit of operating in Canal Terrace and the majority of respondents indicated that they were located there because of the reasonably low rents and the businesses already established there. The major challenges that firms saw as problems centred on lack of parking provision and the location, followed by poor quality shops and the potentially unsafe environment at night and daytime.

47

6.7 Results from the “improvements survey” suggested that businesses cited improving the appearance of the shop facades and the introduction of a number of parking spaces in the terrace would help footfall immensely. 6.8 Canal Terrace has many beneficial strengths and opportunities to offer the local area and all who live there. The canal view is considered by its very nature a unique asset, currently under utilised and with great prospects and increased benefits, served with good transportation links. With the possible addition of a pontoon to the rear of the terrace this will create connectivity from the half -penny bridge end of the terrace to the green open space so by creating a sense of identity and a place where people from within the community and afar will want to visit. 6.9 However, there still remain real challenges to overcome, such as non-welcoming vacant facades in disrepair, shop fronts not being used as retail and general concerns about security. The Build Up team have attempted to address some of these pressing issues in their report and provide realistic and sensible short and long term suggestions as to how to bring back life and vitality to a much needed community in the London Borough of Westminster.

48

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Canal Terrace Build-up Team would like to thank the following individuals for their invaluable assistance throughout the project:

• Fabian Sharp and Muhammad Ahmedullah, Queens Park Forum

• Martin Whittles and Westminster City Council

• Julia Harrison

• Simon Ryder, Beauchamp Lodge

• Canal Terrace businesses and community members

• Alan Mace and Orna Rosenfeld, University of Westminster

49

APPENDICES

50

APPENDIX 1: LAND REGISTRY DATA AND USE CLASSES FOR GROUND FLOOR

PROPERTIES 431 TO 487 CANAL TERRACE, HARROW RD, LONDON W10

Number Listed Use Class Listed Owner/ Tenant 431 A3 Notting Hill Home Ownership Ltd 433 A5 Ms. P.M. Parsons 435 A1 Mr. B. Barker

437 B1 Mr. J. Garcka Mr. R. Garcka

439 B1 In House Property Services Ltd 441 B1 In House Property Services Ltd 443 A1 Noticeobtain Ltd 445 A1 In House Property Services Ltd 447 A1 In House Property Services Ltd 449 A1 In House Property Services Ltd 451 A1 Co-Operative Group Ltd

453 D1 Beauchamp Lodge Settlement of The Stowe Centre

455 C3 Belinda Syme 457 A1 Aslam Noor & Shehnaz Noor 459 A2 Gillian Radford 461 A1 Robert & Yvonne Jarman 463 A1 Julia Harrison 465 A5 M. Tariq & R. Khan

51

467 A1 A. Mengrani 469 A1 In House Property Services Ltd 471 A3 S & M Cheong 473 Sui generis In House Property Services Ltd 475 Sui generis Upperside Ltd 477 A1 Woodfield Building Services Ltd 479 A1 W.& E. Long 481 A1 A. Salimian 483 A1 P. Halperin 485 A1 Ventra Investments Ltd 487 A2 S. Bhimani Source : Land Registry Data, August 2010

52

APPENDIX 2: USE AND OWNERSHIP PROFILE

53

431 Harrow Road, London W10 4RE Current Owner(s): Notting Hill Home Ownership Ltd. Historical Use of Ground Floor

Planning History Application Reference

Proposal Date Received

Date of Decision

Decision

83/03666/ADV Advertising Hoarding 27/10/1983 13/11/1983 REFUSED 97/05142/FULL Change of use of ground floor

to Class A3 (Food & Drink) the erection of ventilation duct at rear and alterations to the rear

16/06/1997 25/09/1997 PERMITTED

98/03660/FULL Retention of existing 2no. flats at first and second floor level

29/04/1998 23/06/1998 PERMITTED

00/1725/FULL Retention of pontoon/landing stage at rear of café

29/02/2000 27/07/2000 PERMITTED

01/01869/ADV Display of a board outside shopfront

08/03/2001 01/08/2001 REFUSED (NFA)

02/09709/FULL Retention of three roller shutters and associated box housing at the rear of the property

16/12/2002 31/03/2003 WITHDRAWN

05/06829/FULL Variation of Condition 1 of planning permission dated 27 July 2000 for retention of pontoon/landing stage at rear, namely, to allow the use of the pontoon landing stage by the Sudanese People Support Association (SPSA).

22/08/2005 18/11/2005 PERMITTED

Source: Westminster City Council Website

1900 Tailor 1935 Milliner 1939 Milliner 1969 Launderama 1974 Launderama 1979 Launderama

54

433 Harrow Road, London W10 4RE

Current Owner(s): Ms P.M Parsons Historical Use of Ground Floor

Planning History

Application Reference

Proposal Date Received Date of Decision

Decision

86/00656?FULL Conversion into two self contained flats above shop and alterations to shopfront to provide new access to upper floors

14/04/1986 25/06/1986 PERMITTED

89/06508/FULL Change of use from existing dry cleaners to Indian takeaway

12/12/1989 14/02/1990 PERMITTED

02/06943/FULL Conversion to form one studio apartment and the installation of a shopfront. Modifications to the rear elevation with associated internal alterations

02/09/2002 30/01/2003 WITHDRAWN


1900 Gilder 1935 Laundry 1939 Milliner 1969 Dry Cleaners 1974 Dry Cleaners 1979 Dry Cleaners

55

435 Harrow Road, Touch of Klass

Current Owner(s): Mr B. Barker Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

86/02180/FULL Formation of self-contained flats

06/05/1986 27/08/1986 REFUSED

86/04860/FULL Formation of two flats above shop

29/09/1986 17/12/1986 PERMITTED


1900 Ladies Outfitters 1935 Boot Dealer 1939 Boot Dealer 1969 Hosiers 1974 Hosiers 1979 Paddington Neighbourhood Advice

Bureau & Law Centre

56


Current Owner(s): Mr J. Garcka, Mr R. Garcka and Miss K. Pinkerton Historical Use of Ground Floor

Planning History



Date of Decision

Decision

02/09205/FULL Removal of shopfront and alterations to ground floor frontage erection of rear first floor conservatory and 3rd floor extension in connection of use from ground floor shop and residential maisonette into three separate flats.

27/11/2002 14/04/2003 REFUSED

03/04532/FULL Alterations in connection with use of ground floor for A2 purposes. Use of 1st floor as a 1 x 2 bed flat, 2nd floor and loft conversion as 1 x 3 bed flat

10/06/2003 23/09/2003 PERMITTED

04/00327/ADFULL Details of shopfront, roof lights and waste pursuant to conditions 4,5 and 3 of permission dated 23/09/2003

16/01/2004 09/03/2004 PERMITTED


1900 Cloth Dealer 1935 Ironmongers 1939 Ironmongers 1969 Ironmongers 1974 Ironmongers 1979 Ironmongers

57

439 Harrow Road, Paddington Law Centre

Current Owner(s) : In House Property Services Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

98/03171/ADV Internally illuminated fascia box signs & double sided projecting box signs

14/04/1998 05/05/1998 REFUSED

99/00137/ADV Installation of fascia & projecting signs at 451 Harrow Road

11/01/1999 21/01/1999 PERMITTED


1900 Wardrobe Dealer 1935 Hosiers 1939 Hosiers 1969 Hosiers 1974 Hosiers 1979 Paddington Neighbourhood Advice

Bureau & Law Centre

58

441 Harrow Road, London

Current Owner(s): In House Property Services Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor

Planning History No planning history online. Source: Westminster City Council Website

1900 Wardrobe Dealer 1935 Hosiers 1939 Hosiers 1969 Hosiers 1974 Hosiers 1979 Paddington Neighbourhood Advice

Bureau & Law Centre

59


Current Owner(s) : Noticeobtain Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor 1900 Cutler 1935 London Cooperative Society 1939 London Cooperative Society 1969 London Cooperative Society 1974 London Cooperative Society 1979 Unknown

Planning History

No planning history online. Source: Westminster City Council Website

60


Current Owner(s) : In House Property Services Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor 1900 Harrow Road & Queens Park

Industrial Cooperative Society 1935 London Cooperative Society 1939 London Cooperative Society 1969 London Cooperative Society 1974 London Cooperative Society 1979 Unknown



Date of Decision

Decision

83/02216/FULL Change of use of No. 445 to production of continental meats

11/07/1983 26/09/1983 UNKNOWN _ LEGACY DATA

83/02215/FULL Refurbishment of shopfronts 11/07/1983 26/09/1983 PERMITTED 93/05777/FULL Erection of rear roof

extension in connection with conversion of upper floors to create four self contained flats. Alterations to rear elevation at ground floor and new shopfront

10/09/1983 09/11/1993 REFUSED

94/00865/FULL Conversion of roofspace and installation of velux windows in connection with conversion of upper floors to create 4 self contained flats. New shopfronts

07/02/1994 16/03/1994 REFUSED

94/03633/FULL Alterations & roof extensions to 2 existing maisonettes to provide 4 self contained flats. Alterations to existing ground floor shops

16/06/1994 01/08/1994 PERMITTED


61





Date of Decision

Decision

83/02215/FULL Refurbishment of shopfronts 11/07/1983 26/09/1983 PERMITTED 93/05777/FULL Erection of rear roof

extension in connection with conversion of upper floors to create four self contained flats. Alterations to rear elevation at ground floor and new shopfront

10/09/1983 09/11/1993 REFUSED

94/00865/FULL Conversion of roofspace and installation of velux windows in connection with conversion of upper floors to create 4 self contained flats. New shopfronts

07/02/1994 16/03/1994 REFUSED

94/03633/FULL Alterations & roof extensions to 2 existing maisonettes to provide 4 self contained flats. Alterations to existing ground floor shops

16/06/1994 01/08/1994 PERMITTED


1900 Draper 1935 London Cooperative Society 1939 London Cooperative Society 1969 London Cooperative Society 1974 London Cooperative Society 1979 London Cooperative Society

62




1900 Furniture Dealer 1935 Woodware Factors 1939 Plywood Merchants 1969 London Cooperative Society 1974 London Cooperative Society 1979 Unknown

63

451 Harrow Road, Co-operative Funeral Care

Current Owner(s) : Cooperative Group Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor

Planning History



Date of Decision

Decision Comments

85/03622/ADV Internally illuminated fascia and projecting box sign

03/10/1985 02/01/1986 PERMITTED No plans/documents online

85/04755/FULL Installation of shopfront

14/10/1985 02/01/1986 PERMITTED No plans/documents online


1900 Confectioner 1935 Woodware Factors 1939 Plywood Merchants 1969 London Cooperative Society 1974 London Cooperative Society 1979 London Cooperative Society

Funeral Service

64

453 Harrow Road, Kongolese Centre Current Owner(s) : Beauchamp Lodge Settlement of the Stowe Centre Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

95/05209/FULL Relocation of Beauchamp Lodge from Warwick Crescent; use of premises for Class D1 educational and training purposes

06/07/1995 17/08/1995 PERMITED

95/05153/FULL Change of use from retail/residential to Class B1 Office Use on all floors

06/07/1995 17/08/1995 PERMITTED

95/07556/FULL Dormer window extension (flat roof) to rear roof & external ductwork for kitchen extract hood

12/10/1995 10/01/1996 PERMITTED

98/06236/FULL Conversion of second and third floors from offices and bedsit to a self contained 2 bedroomed maisonette

24/07/1998 02/09/1998 PERMITTED

98/07407/FULL Change of use of ground floor to office 02/09/1998 01/12/1998 PERMITTED 06/09624/LBC Demolition of rear lean-to, creation of

rear conservatory 01/12/2006 13/12/2006 WITHDRAWN

06/09623/FULL Use of first floor from office (Class B1) to self contained flat (Class C3) and replacement of rear lean to with conservatory

01/12/2006 06/02/2007 PERMITTED


1900 Furniture Dealer 1935 Picture Frame Makers 1939 Picture Frame Makers 1969 Book Centre 1974 Book Centre 1979 Book Centre

65

455 Harrow Road, London W10 4RE Current Owner(s) : Belinda Syme Historical Use of Ground Floor

.



Date of Decision

Decision Comments

94/07717/FULL Change of use on ground floor from Class A3 to residential

14/11/1994 17/02/1995 REFUSED Appeal lodged on 28/07/1995 and appeal allowed on 08/01/1996.


1900 Groceries 1935 Picture Frame Maker 1939 Perambulator Dealer 1969 Record Dealers 1974 Unknown 1979 Fish and Chips

66


Current Owner(s) : Aslam Noor & Shehnaz Noor Historical Use of Ground Floor 1900 Watchmaker 1935 Domestic Machinery Dealers 1939 Perambulator Dealer 1969 Unknown 1974 Unknown 1979 Unknown



Date of Decision

Decision

91/02141/FULL Use of ground floor as a mini cab office

16/05/1991 20/08/1991 REFUSED

94/00850/FULL Change of use of ground floor shop to temporary use as studio flat/shop

04/05/1994 21/06/1994 REFUSED


67

459 Harrow Road, Solicitors

Current Owner(s) : Gillian Radford Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision Comments

99/12251/ADV Erection of banner sign to rear

22/11/1999 26/11/1999 REFUSED No plans/documents online

06/05573/FULL Erection of PVCU conservatory to rear of property

20/07/2006 13/11/2006 REFUSED Documents available


1900 Umbrella Maker 1935 Chemist 1939 Chemist 1969 Unknown 1974 Unknown 1979 Unknown

68


Current Owner(s) : Robert & Yvonne Jarman Historical Use of Ground Floor


1900 Printer 1935 Hairdresser 1939 Hairdresser 1969 Hairdresser 1974 Hairdresser 1979 Hairdresser

69


Current Owner(s) : Julia Harrison Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

86/08089/FULL Change of use from commercial to residential on 1st and 2nd floor

08/10/1986 07/05/1987 PERMITTED


1900 Medical & Surgical Institute 1935 Printers 1939 Printers 1969 Machine Manufacturers 1974 Machine Manufacturers 1979 Warehouse

70


Current Owner(s) : M. Tariq & R. Khan Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

84/05009/FULL Alterations to shopfront and self containment of access to upper part

31/12/1984 20/06/1985 PERMITTED

99/04608/FULL Use of ground floor as a Class A3 hot food takeaway with installation of an extract duct on the rear elevation

21/06/1999 04/11/1999 PERMITTED

04/08520/ADFULL Details of measures to control litter pursuant to Condition 7 of planning permission dated 4 November 1999

29/10/2004 10/11/2004 PERMITTED

04/08686/ADFULL Details of noise insulation measures pursuant to Condition 8 of planning permission dated 04 November 1999

04/11/2004 10/11/2004 PERMITTED


1900 Boot Repairer 1935 Boot Repairer 1939 Boot Repairer 1969 Woodworkers’ Suppliers 1974 Unknown 1979 Unknown

71


Current Owner(s) : A. Mengrani Historical Use of Ground Floor 1900 Stationers 1935 Fancy Repository 1939 Fancy Repository 1969 Maternity Wear 1974 Unknown 1979 Unknown Planning History



Date of Decision

Decision

90/00668/FULL Conversion of existing buildings into self contained shop and self contained flats

01/03/1990 22/01/1991 REFUSED


72

469 Harrow Road, London W10 4RE Current Owner(s) : In House Property Services Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

84/04095/FULL Use of 1st and 2nd floors as studios with residential space retained

01/01/1984 01/01/1984 UNKNOWN

87/04521/FULL Change of use from club to use as family dwelling and shop

10/09/1987 24/02/1988 PERMITTED


1900 Music Seller and Queens Park School of Music

1935 Music Seller 1939 Unknown 1969 Wholesale Clock Dealers 1974 Wholesale Clock Dealers 1979 Wholesale Clock Dealers

73


Current Owner(s) : S & M Cheong Historical Use of Ground Floor


1900 Shirt and Collar Dresser 1935 Dress Agency 1939 Dress Agency 1969 Fishing Tackle Dealers 1974 Unknown 1979 Cheungs Chinese Restaurant

74





Date of Decision

Decision

01/10175/CLEUD Use as a private hire car service

18/12/2001 21/03/2002 PERMITTED


1900 Tobacconist 1935 Confectioner 1939 Confectioner 1969 Confectioner 1974 Confectioner 1979 Paddington Tyre Service

75


Current Owner(s) : Upperside Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

95/00052/CLOPUD Certificate of lawfulness for the proposed use of the ground floor as a minicab office

01/01/1995 01/01/1995 UNKNOWN


1900 Unknown 1935 Haberdasher 1939 Haberdasher 1969 Haberdasher 1974 Haberdasher 1979 Paddington Tyre Service

76


Current Owner(s) : Woodfield Building Services Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor


1900 Florist 1935 Clothier 1939 Clothier 1969 Clothier 1974 Clothier 1979 Clothing Store

77


Current Owner(s) : W & E Long Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

86/04388/FULL Conversion of existing roof space into office and bathroom incorporating dormer window on rear elevation

10/10/1986 06/03/1987 REFUSED


1900 Furniture Dealer 1935 Wireless Supplies Dealers 1939 Popular Library 1969 Electrical Contractors 1974 Electrical Contractors 1979 Electrical Contractors

78


Current Owner(s) : A. Salimian Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

86/06297/FULL Rear extension for residential use

01/01/1986 11/06/1987 UNKNOWN


1900 Clothier 1935 Pet Stores 1939 Pet Stores 1969 Unknown 1974 Builder 1979 Builder

79

483 Harrow Road, London W10 4RE Current Owner(s) : P. Halperin Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

85/04337/FULL 2 Storey rear extension for bedroom, bathroom and lounge

19/09/1985 14/02/1986 REFUSED

86/01547/FULL Erection of single storey extension to rear for residential use

01/04/1986 10/06/1986 REFUSED

03/09238/FULL Erection of externally illuminated fascia sign 330mm x 6630mm and projecting sign 900mm x 700mm

02/12/2003 07/01/2004 WITHDRAWN

03/09239/ADV Erection of an internally illuminated fascia sign and internally illuminated projecting box sign

02/12/2003 14/04/2004 REFUSED


1900 Cutler 1935 Cutler 1939 Cutler 1969 Unknown 1974 Unknown 1979 Unknown

80

485 Harrow Road, London W10 4RE Current Owner(s) : Ventra Investments Ltd Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

87/04460/FULL Conversion of first and second floors to form maisonette

07/09/1987 26/01/1988 PERMITTED

94/00021/FULL Rear extension at first and second floor and in connection with creation of self contained flat.

25/01/1994 16/03/1994 REFUSED

94/04595/FULL Erection of first floor rear extension to create self contained maisonette

07/07/1994 23/08/1994 REFUSED

00/06881/FULL Change of use from shop to artists studio/showroom

29/08/2000 24/11/2000 WITHDRAWN

01/10122/FULL Erection of first floor rear extension with a terrace

17/12/2001 26/02/2002 WITHDRAWN

02/05195/FULL Continued use of ground floor shop as live work space (Class B1/C3)

09/07/2002 13/08/2003 PERMITTED

02/08226/FULL Erection of first floor rear extension

24/10/2002 08/01/2003 REFUSED

08/05943/FULL Use of the first and second floors as 1 x1 bedroom flat and 1 x studio flat

10/07/2008 03/09/2008 PERMITTED


1900 Hairdresser 1935 Hairdresser 1939 Hairdresser 1969 Belts Manufacturer 1974 Belts Manufacturer 1979 Belts Manufacturer

81


Current Owner(s) : S. Bhimani Historical Use of Ground Floor



Date of Decision

Decision

83/02150/FULL Creation of self contained maisonette at first and second floor levels including extension at first floor level at rear

13/07/1983 29/11/1983 PERMITTED

86/01186/FULL Change of use of ground floor from accommodation agency to dental surgery

10/03/1986 10/06/1986 PERMITTED

87/01349/ADV Advertisement Hoarding 13/03/1987 07/05/1987 REFUSED 87/01351/FULL Conversion of first and second floors to

form two self contained flats 17/03/1987 11/09/1987 REFUSED

87/01350/FULL Change of use of part ground floor from retail to class 2 office use

17/03/1987 04/08/1987 REFUSED

87/00689/FULL Conversion to nine self contained flats including proposed new third floor and second floor rear roof terrace

21/04/1987 24/07/1987 PERMITTED

92/06246/ADV Retention of one advertising hoarding at first and second floor level measuring 6.1m x 3.05m

01/10/1992 20/10/1992 REFUSED

99/03098/FULL Change of use of Class A1 shop to Class A2 use

26/04/1999 17/08/1999 PERMITTED


1900 Umbrella Maker 1935 Umbrella Maker 1939 Umbrella Maker 1969 British Red Cross Society 1974 British Red Cross Society 1979 Mirror Manufacturers

82

APPENDIX 3: POLICY/MANAGEMENT BACKGROUND

The following are policies taken directly from the current development plan documents, the Unitary Development Plan and other planning documents available for download directly from the council website. The most pertinent of the numerous policies in the UDP and supporting documents are conveniently gathered in one place below for the convenience of QPF’s further research and information. The italicised text embedded in the policies below are Build Up’s comments. The bold headings are the references to the particular policy documents. Unitary Development Plan introduction: Section 54A of the 1990 planning act requires the council to determine planning applications in accordance with the Development plan (UDP in Westminster) or other material considerations.

Plan is the written statement, has two parts 1 is overall strategic planning aims, 2 refers to national planning framework. Both take into account the London Plan. Proposals map supports and illustrates written statement.

Policies are set out in the following way:

a) aim : what we want to do b) policy : how we are going to do it c) policy application : any tests or special circumstances we may apply d) reasons : why we are doing it.

Prescriptive policies make firm indication of outcome in positive ‘permission will be granted’ and restrictive ‘permission will not be granted’ Queens Park Estate Conservation Area Audit SPG

Queens Park Estate is the only cottage estate in city council boundary. Built in 1873. Listed buildings: The following is not a fixed number and at the time of printing it was correct (2005).

83

Listed Buildings Table

Name/Address Type Date

Grade

Droop Street Droop Street School (London School Board)

School

1877 II

Fifth Avenue 68-82 even (east side) Terraced houses 1880 II 84-98 even (east side) Terraced houses 1880 II 100-114 even (east side) Terraced houses 1880 II 116-130 even (east side) Terraced houses 1880 II 132-154 even (east side) Terraced houses 1880 II 156-170 even (east side) Terraced houses No.

170 shop/flat 1874 (Nos. 166-8) 1876 (others)

II

67-81 odd (west side) Terraced houses 1880 II 83-97 odd (west side) Terraced houses 1880 II 99-113 odd (west side) Terraced houses 1880 II 115-129 odd (west side) Terraced houses 1880 II 131-145 odd (west side Terraced houses 1874 II 147-167 odd (west side) Terraced houses No.

167 shop/flat

1876 II

Harrow Road

578-580 Queens Park Meeting Hall

Ground floor shops with Estate Meeting Hall above

1883-4

II

Local History For information on all aspects of local history contact:

City of Westminster Archive Centre 10 St. Ann's Street London SW1P 2XR General Enquiries: Tel: (020) 7641 5180

84

Chapter 2 of UDP Commerce (Offices, Industry and Sh owrooms) 2.77 Within the North West Westminster SPA, the City Council will generally protect and encourage employment uses, including industrial uses, which provide local employment opportunities and do not cause adverse impacts to residential amenity, in order to assist the regeneration of the area. (See also Chapter 5: Policies for North West Westminster, section B). 2.9 Arising from the North West Westminster Planning Study, published in October 2000, the City Council wishes to expand employment opportunities and foster economic growth within the North West Westminster Special Policy Area to assist the regeneration of the area. Existing office-based employment will be protected within this area and new office development encouraged, where these provide local employment opportunities and do not have adverse impacts on residential amenity. (See Chapter 5: Policies for North West Westminster, policies NWW 1 and 2). Chapter 3 of UDP Housing POLICY H 1: PREVENTING THE LOSS OF HOUSING (A) Planning permission to change housing, or land in housing use, to other uses will not be granted other than in exceptional circumstances.

This policy is the first and foremost policy in the Housing chapter of the UDP. It therefore makes the changing of use of the shop front in to retail/commercial difficult. However, it can be argued that this move is a revert back to the original intended use of the ground floor level of the buildings.

The City Council will only consider the loss of housing in exceptional circumstances. Three such circumstances would be where:

a) Housing would be lost to a community use that is essential for local residents and there is no alternative suitable site nearby. Essential uses include health facilities such as doctors’ and dent ists’ surgeries

b) In the North West Westminster Special Policy Area (see chapter 5: Policies for

North Westminster) on sites where the provision of commercial uses will have a significant regeneration benefit that is considered to outweigh the loss of a small amount of housing.

c) Replacement housing is provided in accordance with Policy COM 3 on the

relocation of uses.

It might be argued that the precedent set by the first established use was a result of an unauthorised change of use and therefore materially detrimental to the viability and vitality of a street intentionally designed for retail uses. Indeed this stretch of the Harrow Road is outside of the primary shopping frontages but in terms of design there is nothing that separates it from other primary shopping frontages. Otherwise community run commerce may

85

be looked upon as a favourable use in the policy context as per Para 3.8 ‘council will look favourable to losing residential use to community uses.’

Social housing requirement begins from 10 or more units or site of over .3 hectares. (Policy H4) (D) The City Council will, with a view to achieving the 50% affordable housing target set out in policy STRA14 (C) : 3.27 Policy 3A.6 in the London Plan says that ‘Affordable housing comprises social housing, intermediate housing, and in some cases, low-cost market housing.’ Social housing is subsidised housing provided as secure or assured tenancies, with access on the basis of need. Intermediate housing comprises subsidised sub-market housing, provided as shared equity schemes, discounted home ownership, or secure or assured tenancies. In Westminster key workers have priority for this type of housing. The London Plan says that intermediate housing can also include some low-cost market housing, but in Westminster there is little or no prospect of low-cost market housing, irrespective of size, making a contribution to priority housing needs. Such provision will not therefore, count towards meeting the affordable housing requirement. It is the city council’s aim to provide suitable gardens and community facilities to support resident’s needs. At the moment we know the stretch of green space on Harrow road is an underutilised asset which needs to be unlocked through innovative and bold design solution as the split level characterises of the site poses a challenge to this. Policy H10 is particularly concerned with open space provision for new housing developments. UDP Chapter 5: Policies for North West Westminster

Unlike any other parts of Westminster it scores highly on social deprivation. The railway and Grand Union Canal are seen as significant barriers to improving the character of the area. Harrow road is the principal local centre for shopping and services but in policy terms this view does not exist on the study site. It is acknowledged that there are high numbers of vacant shops and an under representation of national retailers.

Ethnically diverse high proportions of Afro-Caribbean, Black African and residents of Asian ethnic origins.

• 47% of children have English as an additional language. • 40% of households own cars compared to a London average of over 60%. • 98% of employers in the area employ less that 50 employees.

86

The study site is close to major regeneration works at and around Paddington station and basin. That area has its own special policy ‘Paddington Special Policy Area’ so there is potential for the study site to provide and be supported by these huge regeneration works that cover 30 hectares (70 acres). Some of the development here has already begun and is beginning to change the look and feel of North West Westminster (NWW) area also. Cross rail will be connecting Paddington to a wider area, this is also where the Heathrow Express departs from.

North West Westminster Special Policy Area (NWWSPA) Para 5.93: accepts that the environmental quality of the Harrow Road corridor is poor and seen to be holding back investment. A report was commissioned by the City of Westminster Council called NW Westminster Planning Study to look into the socio-economic impacts of Westminster’s UDP intended to contribute to the review the UDP published in 2000

87

NWWSPA boundary map

5.93 The railway, Harrow Road, Westway and Grand Union Canal are significant boundaries and help to define the character and partly dictate how the area functions. There is a core of retail uses mainly along the Harrow Road with some smaller centres elsewhere and a variety of community facilities and open spaces. These serve a number of mainly residential neighbourhoods. Whilst the environmental quality of many parts of the area is good, that of the Harrow Road corridor is poor, and is seen to be holding back investment in the area. The North West Westminster Planning Study identified six key issues requiring a policy framework:

1) Delivery of regeneration and economic developmen t initiatives : The need to promote regeneration and economic development and to encourage

the participation of residents, businesses and the voluntary sector in the regeneration process

2) Business development & training : The need to facilitate and encourage

business development appropriate to the area and to support the

88

development of skills appropriate to the opportunities provided in growth sectors.

3) Environmental improvement and management : Improving the environment

and management of key areas in order to build business and community confidence and improve safety and security

4) Shopping frontages : The need to strengthen and where necessary, to

concentrate retail frontages to ensure the future viability and vitality of shopping centres and encourage the diversification of retail uses. There is also a need to facilitate the possible use of redundant shop premises outside the main shopping centres for business enterprises that can add to the character and function of the area and create employment opportunities.

5) Housing and community facilities : The need to facilitate the provision of a

mix of housing tenures and a range of related community facilities, which facilitate the establishment of sustainable neighbourhoods.

6) Movement and parking : The need to improve the pedestrian environment,

facilitate the use of alternative transport such as cycling and public transport, and ensure more targeted approaches to parking which address the requirements of both residents and businesses and the need to promote sustainable development objectives.

5.95 In promoting regeneration, and in assessing development proposals, the City Council will work in conjunction with other agencies having an impact on the area, such as the Paddington Development Trust, the Health Authority and, the Local Strategic Partnership. 5.97 Also, unlike the rest of Westminster, within the NWWSPA the loss of existing residential accommodation may be acceptable in certain instances. For example, the change of use of residential above existing and former shop premises to commercial/business use - where the regenerative benefits are deemed to be sufficiently great. 5.99 Some shopping frontages in the Harrow Road which were formally protected in the adopted UDP (1997) have been de-designated. These ‘de-designated’ frontages represent key opportunities for business development. Accordingly the City Council will resist their conversion to residential use and they are therefore are an exception to Policy SS 9. In the revised District and Local Centres, Policies SS 6 and SS 7 apply. 5.101 New entertainment uses such as restaurants, pubs, music and entertainment venues could play a role in the regeneration and economic development of the area. The number of A3 uses in the Harrow Road District Centre, for example, is low in comparison with similar centres elsewhere in Westminster. Because these uses, depending on their type and size, can have very detrimental effects on residential

89

amenity it is their effect on residential amenity that will be the deciding factor in whether they are acceptable. Therefore the locations where proposals for such uses are likely to be more favourably considered are in the Harrow Road District Centre and Harrow Road East Local Centre, subject to policies SS 6 and SS 7. All proposals will be assessed against policies TACE 8-10. 5.106 The Harrow Road contains certain shopping frontages which are designated as District and Local Centres, to which policies SS 6 and SS 7 apply. Outside these Centres, the shopping function is generally in decline. This particularly applies to certain frontages designated in the 1997 Adopted Unitary Development Plan as main or mixed shopping frontages. These shopping frontages have now been ‘de-designated’. They are shown on map 5.2 and include:

a) 324-334 Harrow Road b) 374-414 Harrow Road c) 431-487 Harrow Road

Figure 6 De-designation of shopping frontages & tow nscape and public realm (light shaded right)

This figure shows the study site in red as the area that lost its policy status as being shopping frontage area. It seems fractured and incongruent with the actual design of this stretch of the street. Not sure what informed this policy move would be very interesting to discover. 5.107 These shopping frontages are particularly suitable for a range of uses, including business development and live/work units. On these dedesignated frontages business/commercial accommodation at basement, ground and upper floors would be suitable - subject to the potential impact on residential amenity and traffic and servicing requirements. In these areas proposals larger than 250 sqm will be viewed positively, subject to the amenity/servicing issues listed in paragraph 5.103. POLICY NWW 3: TOWNSCAPE AND PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENT The area shown on Map 5.2 is defined as a townscape and public realm enhancement area. The City Council, in conjunction with local regeneration agencies and the local community, will bring forward an enhancement strategy for the improvement of this area. Development proposals within this and the wider area of

90

the NWWSPA will be expected to contribute to this strategy. The last sentence gives us some hope in arguing for reverting residential at ground level to retail or other active uses to encourage streetlife. UDP Chapter 7: Shopping and Services POLICY SS 6: (A) Permission will not be given for proposals, such as A3 uses, that would harm residential amenity or local environmental quality as a result of smells, noise, increased late-night activity and disturbance, or increased parking and traffic. (B) Core Frontages: At ground-floor level, proposals for A2 and A3 or other non-A1 town centre uses will only be permitted where the proposals would not harm the vitality or viability, or character or function of the parade, Core Frontage or the centre. In addition:

1. the total length of Core Frontage in non-A1 use at ground-floor level must not exceed: • 30% in Marylebone High Street District Centre and Harrow Road District

Centre • 25% in Queensway/Westbourne Grove District Centre and Warwick

Way/Tachbrook Street District Centre • 20% in Church Street/Edgware Road District Centre and St. John’s Wood

District Centre 2. the proposal must not lead to, or add to, a concentration of non-A1 units in any individual frontage or parade.

3. the proposal must not result in more than two non- A1 units located consecutively in a frontage.

4. the proposal must not reduce the range of local convenience shops or shopping facilities, or reduce the attractiveness of the centre to shoppers.

At basement and first-floor level, A2, A3 and other non-A1 uses will only be permitted if the proposal would not:

5. harm the vitality or viability, or character or function of the parade, frontage or centre.

6. have a detrimental effect on the environment or residential amenity.

7. unacceptably intensify an existing use or existing concentration of uses.

8. jeopardise the long-term A1 use of the ground floor.

(C) Secondary Frontages:

91

(includes all the Praed Street District Centre) Proposals for uses within A2 and A3 or other non-A1 town centre uses at ground-floor level in the Secondary Frontages will be permitted where:

1. the proposal would not harm the vitality or viability, or character or function of the parade, frontage or centre 2. the total length of Secondary Frontage in non-A1 use at street level would not exceed 45% 3. the proposal must not lead to, or add to, a concentration of non-A1 units in any individual frontage or parade 4. the proposal would not result in more than three non-A1 units located consecutively in a frontage

4. the proposal would not involve the loss of an A1 unit last used as a local convenience shop, or reduce the range of local convenience shops in the centre.

At basement and first-floor level, A2, A3 or other non-A1 uses will only be permitted if the proposal would not:

6. harm the vitality or viability, or character or function of the parade, frontage or centre 7. have a detrimental effect on the environment or residential amenity 8. unacceptably intensify an existing use or existing concentration of uses 9. jeopardise the long-term A1 use of the ground floor

Harrow Road District Centre 7.77 Harrow Road District Centre has a high number of vacancies and has been classified in the Town Centre Health Check (2002) as a centre ‘in decline’. The City Council is keen to improve both the retail offer in this centre and the general appearance of the centre. Where possible S106 Agreements to improve the centre will be entered into (see paragraph 7.111 regarding nearby residential schemes). The North West Westminster Special Policy Area covers the Harrow Road District Centre as well as a number of local centres and policies relating to this area are covered in more detail in Chapter 5. 7.86 In the Harrow Road area in particular, in order to consolidate centres with high numbers of vacancies, changes of use to residential or studio/workshop space may be considered acceptable on the outer fringes of centres. For proposals for changes

92

of use from any non-A1 retail use listed in paragraph 7.22 a) b) or c) to residential, see policies SS2 and SS 9. UDP Chapter 7: Shopping and Services POLICY SS 8: SHOPS AND SERVICES OUTSIDE DISTRICT AND LOCAL CENTRES (OUTSIDE THE CAZ). (A) Planning permission will not be granted for change of use from an A1 use or launderette. (B) Loss of non-A1 retail uses, to residential, B1 or other uses which do not serve visiting members of the public, will only be permitted in isolated shop-type units. (C) Planning permission will not be given for proposals that would significantly harm residential amenity or local environmental quality as a result of smells, noise, increased late-night activity and disturbance, or increased parking and traffic. POLICY SS 9: LONG-TERM VACANT SHOP UNITS IN PERIPHERAL LOCATIONS (A) Planning permission will normally be granted for the change of use to residential or other appropriate use, of a long-term vacant shop-type unit, which is:

1. on the periphery of a District or Local Centre 2. on the periphery of a small parade 3. an isolated shop-type unit formerly occupied by a non-A1 use

(B) Planning permission for the change of use to residential or other appropriate use, of a long-term vacant isolated shop formerly in A1 use will only be granted in exceptional circumstances Market pitch proposals: POLICY SS 13: STREET MARKETS AND INDIVIDUAL TRADING PITCHES (D) Proposals for new street markets and relocation of existing markets will be considered with reference to amenity, parking, servicing, highway, cleansing, refuse storage, recycling and licensing considerations, and the effect on existing street markets, and local shopping facilities. POLICY SS 16: PAVEMENT SHOPS Permission will not be given for pavement shops that would reduce the free passage and safety of pedestrians or other highway users, or have a detrimental effect on the townscape, residential amenity, character or appearance of the street.

93

POLICY SS 17 WINDOW DISPLAYS Non-A1 service or office uses at ground-floor level in shopping frontages will be required to maintain a window display. The window display shall be in keeping with the character and appearance of the streetscape. UDP Chapter 10 Urban Design and Conservation POLICY DES 13: CANALS (A) Access and activity Permission will be granted for developments which provide:

1) new public access routes to and alongside the canal and its towpath 2) environmental improvements including improved footway surface treatments 3) uses devised and managed to sustain or enhance canalside interest, vitality

and ecological value. (B) Alignment and form 1) Permission will be granted for developments which:

a) are no higher than neighbouring canal-side buildings, unless significant benefit to the local townscape is thereby demonstrated

b) are orientated to the canal and adjoining public spaces c) safeguard or enhance the setting, important views of the canal and ecological

value. 2) Permission will not be granted for developments that create any boardwalks or other projections over or into the canal or towpath, unless significant benefits to the canal setting accrue. 3) The provision of moorings, for both permanent and visitor use, and facilities for boaters, will be encouraged in locations where these will not hinder navigation of the canal, and will be welcomed as a planning advantage on the canalside sites.

The council are in the process of drafting and new planning policy for which key dates are listed below.

Core Strategy.

• Issues and Options - consulted on over the summer 2007

• Preferred Options - consulted on over the summer 2008

94

• Publication Draft - consulted on between 12th November 2009 and 13th January 2010

• Submission Document - sent to the Secretary of State April 2010

• Examination in Public - Pre-hearing meeting 18th June 2010 and Hearings start on the 27th July

• Adopted Document - subject to the outcome of an Independent Examination, the Core Strategy Document is planned to be adopted in late 2010

95

APPENDIX 4: SURVEY RESULTS

Number of surveys 9 1. Please identify your interest in the area. Store Owner/Operator 2 Store Employee 4 Landlord/Freehold Owner 2 Estate Agent Community Member/Resident Other (please specify) 1 Independent artist 2. What address is your property located at? 453 435 439 431 459 441 433 451 469 3. If you are a store owner/operator/employee, what type of business is it? Food/grocery/convenience store Pharmacy Restaurant/café 2 Deli/Take-away Pub Hairdresser/Beauty Salon 1 Dry-cleaners/Shoe Repair Estate Agency Health Centre/Clinic/Surgery Hardware

96

Electronics Bank Post office Non-profit/Charity 3 Legal services 3 Office services Art gallery Other (please specify) 2 Studio, Funeral home 4. Why did you choose to locate your business on C anal Terraces? (please check all that apply) Location Building (layout suitable, historical aspect, etc.) 1 Customer demographics Area resident 1 Reasonable rent 5 Transport links Legacy (e.g. business already there) 4 Other 1 Lack of choice 5. In your opinion, what are the greatest challenge s in running a business on Canal Terraces? (please check all that apply) Rent Business rates 2 Quality or size of the premises, i.e. space/layout constraints 1 Area demographics 3 Parking availability and location 6

97

Parking costs 2 Accessibility via public transport Conservation issues/limited ability to modernize General economic climate 1 Many of the storefronts are vacant or residential 1 Security issues 1 Poor quality shops 3 Poor quality restaurants/cafes/bars 3 Lack of services (e.g. banks, dentists, estate agents) No specific challenges Other (please specify) 1 Doesn't attract funding/investors 6. What do you think would improve the Canal Terrac es area? (please check all that apply) Changing pedestrian access (e.g. more pedestrian crossings, zebra crossing) 2

Adding parking in front of the shops 4 Esp. disabled parking and loading/delivery zones

Moving the bus stops to stop in front of the terraces on the south side 1 Improving the garden area at the western end of Canal Terraces 2 Allowing pavement seating for cafes and restaurants 3 Improving the quality of the shops 3 Improving appearance of shop facades 4 Making the area safer (CCTV, policing, better lighting) 3 Police presence, in winter, CCTV Pop-up shops (temporary shops that are in business for a few weeks at a time) 1 Other (please specify) 2 Focusing on canal aspect

98

7. For businesses located on CT, do you plan to st ay on CT? Yes, because 6 But because no funding to move elsewhere No, because 2 Selling biz, lease expiring in 2012 8. What types of business/services would you like to see on Canal Terraces? (please check all that apply) Food/grocery/convenience store Clothing shop 1 Pharmacy Restaurant/Café 3 Deli/Take-away 2 Pub 1 Hairdresser/Beauty Salon Dry-cleaners/Shoe Repair Estate Agency Health Centre/Clinic/Surgery Hardware Electronics Bank 3 Post office 1 Non-profit/Charity Office services 1 Art gallery 4 Pop-up shop 1 Health Centre/Clinic/Surgery Other (please specify) 4 Museum McDonalds Toy shop Florist

99

9. Pop-up shops are temporary stores/businesses th at appear for a matter of days or weeks using vacan t storefronts. Do you think pop-up shops would work on Canal Terra ces and if so, what type of business? No Yes: 5 Retail 3 Seasonal products Art and crafts 4 Restaurant/café/bakery 2 Community services – legal, tax, health information, etc. Other (please specify)

100

APPENDIX 5: CONTACTS

101

Name Organisation Position summary discussion

Contact Info Date Carried out by

Gez Kellaghan

Westminster City Council

Strategic Partnerships Officer (Housing) Housing Strategy and Performance

Agreed to supply info on: a) how many of the unites are used as temp acc. b) how many have HB claimants living in them.

[email protected] (t) 020 7641 2609

20/07/10 Fazan

Toby Cuthbertson


Design and Conservation Officer. City Planning Delivery Unit.

Happy to visit the Green Space to see if it is suitable for public art.

Tel: 020 7641 8705 [email protected]

20/07/10 Fazan

John Wilman


Area Design and Conservation Officer

Said that he saw no issue with the use of fake shopfronts stuck to the inside of windows.

[email protected] 020 7641 5961

Around 20/07/10

Fazan

John Phillips London Print Studio Director Very keen on developing a holistic project for shopfronts and open space led by local school children and parents.

John Phillips London Print Studio 425 Harrow Road 020 8969 3247 [email protected] www.londonprintstudio.org.uk

On going Fazan

102

Claire McAlister

British Waterways, London

Planner Initiated discussion on walkway on the Canal, open suggestions in principle but require overall plan.

1 Sheldon Square, Paddington Central, London, W2 6TT D 020 7985 7229 F 020 7985 7201 M 07917 616832 E:[email protected]

On going Jaideep

Heloise Brown The Victorian Society Conservation Adviser

Not concerned with change of use, advised to talk to Westminster Conservation Officer on serving Article 4 direction removing permitted development rights.

1 Priory Gardens London W4 1TT T: 020 8994 1019 D: 020 8747 5892 F: 020 8747 5899 www.victoriansociety.org.uk

28/07/10 Jaideep

Richard Parish

English Heritage Grant Officer to contact regarding Partnership Schemes in Conservation Areas - funding scope

0207 9733000

103

APPENDIX 6: AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS

The Build Up Team Members are - Marianna Cavada, [email protected] Jaideep Chakrabarti, [email protected] Brandy Collins, [email protected] Charles French, [email protected] Fazan Khaliq, [email protected] Joyce Wong, [email protected]