The document is an agenda for a workshop by Granit on building profits on brownfield sites, highlighting various case studies addressing issues like planning, construction, and profitability. It details specific projects including their financial outcomes, ROI, and challenges faced during development. Overall, it emphasizes the potential for profitable opportunities in brownfield development while navigating planning constraints and employing strategic design solutions.

1. Workshop: Building Profits on
Brownfield Sites
Workshop by Granit
June 2017

2. Agenda
• Introducing Granit
• Case Study 1: Project at Planning- Printworks
• Case Study 2: Project On site- Streatham Common
• Case Study 3: Completed Project- Lydden Grove
• Case Study 4: Completed Project –Townhouse
• Case Study 5: Feasibility -Peckham
• Case Study 6: Feasibility –Clapham Junction
• Discussion?

3. Introducing Granit
• Architects and Interior designers
• 29 years experience
• Clapham based practice, with 16 Architects and 3 Interior designers
• Integrated architecture and interior design service
• Deep knowledge and expertise of building in London / South East, including
difficult planning
• Knowledge of how to maximise ROI on brownfield sites, air rights

4. Case Study 1: Old Printworks

5. Case Study 1: Old Printworks
• Family run print work business being sold
• Brief – create a legacy / build to rent
• Current Use Class B1
Key Planning Issues
• Change of use – loss of employment
• Marketed as B1 and D1 use for 18 months
• Overlooking / privacy
• Minimum space standards / amenity space
• Pre-Planning application
Key site Issues
• Site access / vehicles and pedestrians
• Parking
• Good PTAL rating

6. Case Study 1: Old Printworks

7. Case Study 1: Old Printworks

8. Case Study 1: Old Printworks

9. Case Study 1: Old Printworks

10. Case Study 1: Old Printworks
• 7 houses / 2 flats
• 1-3 storeys
• 2 fully WC accessible
• Lifetimes homes compliant
• Highly energy efficient
• Offsite construction (SIPS /CLT)
• Possible phased construction

11. Case Study 2: Streatham Common

12. Case Study 2: Streatham Common
• Client – Fairway Partnership
• Redundant lock up garages
• Conservation area
• Use class – Sui Generis
• Rights of way
• 10 neighbouring properties
• No Services
• Limited access
• Overlooking / privacy / amenity

13. Case Study 2: Streatham Common
Planning History
• 2008 -site purchased
• 2009 -5/3 house 3-storey scheme refused
• 2010- 3 house 3-storey scheme appeal dismissed
• 2011- Pre-planning / public consultation
• 2012 - 3 house scheme refused
• 2013 -3 house scheme appeal dismissed
• 2014 – 3 house basement scheme refused
• (Rec approv)
• 2014 – Appeal for 3 house basement scheme approved
• 2015 – Planning consent for 2 larger houses
• 2016-2017 – Construction by Developers

14. Case Study 2: Streatham Common

15. Case Study 2: Streatham Common

16. Case Study 2: Streatham Common

17. Case study 2: Streatham Common
• Site Costs £700k
• Construction Value £1.9 Million
• Other costs £450k
• GDV £4M
• (House 1 £1.5M House 2 £2.5M)
• Net Profit after sales £780K
• ROI 25%

18. Case study 3: Wandsworth houses

19. Case study 3: Wandsworth houses
• Former industrial use
• Loss of employment
• 23 neighbours consulted
• Limited access
• Poor PTAL rating
• Possible flood risk
• Overlooking / privacy / amenity
• Proximity to adjoining houses
• Daylight Levels
• CSH Level 4

20. W101
2,363
1,500
G09
2,040
926
W103
982
2,228
W102
500
1,500
G03
1,981
836
W108
982
2,228G04
762
1,981
G04
762
1,981
G07
1,981
836
G06
714
1,981
W107
2,400
2,358
G11
815
2,400
W106
2,400
2,049
G11
836
2,400
G12
836
1,981
G08
836
1,981
W105
2,372
2,400
G11
815
2,400
W104
2,400
497
G11
836
2,400
G05
2,040
926
H
E
E
North Elevation
North Elevation1
4,359
3,025
4,359
3,025
4,359
4,168
660
694
695
1,394
763
3,953
763
3,953
3,959
975
4,038
2,238
4,222
3,472
1,954
1,154
818
2,693
79
982
2,846
892
156
1,600
2,469
130
1,489
1,112
2,670
1,784
100
892
750648
930
3,183
892
230
797
3,674
1,513
1,666
3,441
69
982
3,133
892
120
3,441
452
3,147
2,587
3,747
3,019
130
1,092
130
1,706
1,784
1,035
892
2,442
810
533
1,484
1,375
3,441
69
982
3,133
892
150
695
466
1,249
3,106
4,474
2,878
1,096
2,857
3,375
3,258
2,675
6,587
1,206
2,907
2,134
2,956
3,268
900
905
1,170
3,259
2,301
1,405
969
2,341
1,920
1,606
2,450
2,840
11,536
7,344
2,086
3,501
900
5,913
3,701
2,919
3,855
1,308
1,197
1,287
3,745
380
1,293
744
2,796
892
380
2,845
466
694
223
466
682
818
100
3,449
1,600
1,614
3,025
3,025
4,168
3,179
+1.500
+1.500
+0.780
+1.000
+1.500
+0.400
C
C
B
B
A
D
D
B1
B1
E
E
D/509
D/509
2NO 178 x 102 x 19 UB
440 x 100 x 215 Padstone
in Concrete
660 x 100 x 330
Padstone in concrete
under post
660 x 100 x 330
Padstone in concrete
under post
Wall 2600 High
Wall 1800 High
BATHROOM
BEDROOM
BEDROOM
LOBBY
CBD
BATHROOM
COURTYARD
LOBBY
BATHROOM
COURTYARD
BEDROOM
Rise 280mm 1.14 over 2450mm
Rise 160 1.12 over 1900mm
Rise 160 1.12 over
1900mm
EXISTING SINGLE STOREY
OUTBUILDING
SERVICE YARD
FJ
FJ
FJ
FJ
FJ
FJ
FJ
FJ
L1
L1
L1
L1
L1
L4
L4
L4
FJ
47 x 22
@400 C
=
L1 = Catnic CG 110 / 100
L2 = 2NO 50 x 100 C24 Timbers
152 UB
152UB
140 x 140 x 10.0 SHS
152 UB
152UB
2xFJ
L1
L1 C'BD
6rises@183mm/
going250mm
500
1,500
Wall 2600 High
15 rises @218mm
/ going 250mm
15 rises @218mm
/ going 250mm
1
8
10
11
12
13
14
8
9
7
10
11
12
13
14
2
3
4
5
1
11
12
13
8
5
2
1
8rises@220mm/going250mm
8
5
1
10
5
1
2
MMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevationMMANorthElevation
150 x 90 PFC
150x90PFC
90 x 90 x 5.0 SHS
6
15
1
2
3
4
10
Unit 1 UG-1
13 rises @204mm12 going @250mm
1
2
3
4
5
6
FJ
203 x 60 UC
254UCx89UC
203 x 60 UC
254x89UC
203 x 60 UC
FJ
203 x 60 UC
203 x 60 UC
203 x 60 UC
254x89UC
1
2
3
4
15
9
440 x 100 x 215 PCC Lintel padsto
beams
150 x 150 x 10.0 SHS
150 x 150 x 10.0 SHS
140 x 140 x 10.0 SHS
South Elevation
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
G
1
1
2
2
3
3
5
5
4
4
G01
2,040
926
G11
1,981
836
G11
1,981
836
1,019
3,147
1,634
D/500
D/500
D/508
D/508
WestElevation
Eas
100 x 220 C24
or
125 x 65 x 15 PFC
Under screen
*Steel to be galvanized
Supported by engineering bricks
550 x 100 x 215
Padstone in concrete
100 x 220 C24
or
125 x 65 x 15 PFC
Under screen
*Steel to be galvanized
Supported by engineering bricks
Rise300mm1.14over4200mm
Rise 200mm 1.14 over 3800mm
Rise 200mm over 3500mm
Rise300mm1.14over4200mm
L1
W109Bins
Com
post
Bins
Bins
Bins
Box out corner to
form service riser
Ramp to suit access
Galvansied steel frame with timber finish
Slatted Timber Privacy Scr een
Slatted Timber Privacy Scr een
Dwarf wall built from top of
retaining wall 200mm above FGL.
Detail of balustrade TBC
Existing brick wall
to edge of site
Separating
wall between
properties
Retaining Wall Type A
Separating
wall between
properties
Existing Wall to
edge of site
retained
Vertical shuttered
timber privacy
screens on
galvanized steel
support
Vertical shuttered
timber privacy
screens on
galvanized steel
support
B (Above Ground):
y fixed with skim finish to both sides
Unit 2 Garden
Void over
Lightwell
Unit 3 Garden
Void over
Lightwell
Void over
Lightwell
pe A
Case study 3: Wandsworth houses

21. Case study 3: Wandsworth houses

22. Case study 3: Wandsworth houses

23. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

24. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios
• Client – Perpetuum Developments
• Old recording studios turned into 10
mews houses, 1 apartment and 1
commercial unit.
Key site Issues
• Deep plan
• Complicated existing structure
Key Planning Issues
• Parking restrictions
• London plan space standards
• Amenity space requirements
• 21 planning conditions to discharge
• Retention of commercial space

25. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

26. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

27. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

28. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

29. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

30. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

31. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

32. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

33. Case study 4: Townhouse Studios

34. Case study 5: Car Park
• Council owned carpark
• Possible JV with council
• Central location close to
Peckham Rye
• Underused site
• Some parking needs to be
retained
• 1 of 65 identified sites across
Southwark as potential sites
for development

35. Case study 5: Car Park
• News story Jan 2017

36. Case study 5: Car Park
• Existing site
• Street entrance and rear
vehicular access

37. Case study 5: Car Park

38. Case study 5: Car Park

39. Case study 5: Car Park

40. Case study 5: Car Park

41. Case study 5: Car Park

42. Case study 5: Car Park - Summary
• RESIDENTIAL
• 7 no 2-3 bed flats
• 5 no 3-bed houses
• Construction Value £5M
• Fees, CIL, etc. £1.5M
• GDV £10M (excluding
Commercial)
• ROI £3.5M
• 54% return
• COMMERCIAL
• 80 flexible work space
• Construction Value £1.5M
• Fees, CIL, etc. £0.5M
• Rental income £150K per
annum
• Net Yield 7.5%

43. Case study 6: Supermarket Site

44. Case study 6: Supermarket Site

45. Case study 6: Supermarket Site

46. Case study 6: Supermarket Site

47. • RESIDENTIAL
• 172 no 2-3 bed flats
• Construction Value £18-22M
• Fees, CIL, etc. £4M
• GDV £64M (excluding
Commercial)
• ROI £38M
• 135% return
• Assuming a site value of £30M,
ROI would be 35%.
• COMMERCIAL
• 3000sqm commercial space
• Construction Value £6-8M
• Fees, CIL, etc. £1M
• Rental income £600K per
annum
• Net Yield 8.5%
Case study 6: Supermarket Site

48. Summary
• Brownfield sites offer profitable opportunities
• Often significant planning and site constraints
• Focused strategy for getting a change of use and planning consent
• Clever design solutions required to overcome these constraints
• A planning refusal may be of benefit (lower sale price and a planning steer)
• Presumption in favour of housing in many areas
• New rules on permitted development for change of use
• Tap into long term council and infrastructure plans

49. Contact us
Granit Architects
Studios 18-19
16 Porteus Place
Clapham
London
SW4 0AS
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7924 4555
Email: James@granit.co.uk
@LondonArchitect