Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed7 December 20213255361

74-84 Long Lane , London, SE1 4AU

the demolition of the existing building and the erection of a mixed-use 10-storey building together with basement and mezzanine to provide office space (Class B1); flexible retail space (Classes A1/A2/A3/A4/A5); new landscaping and public realm; reconfigured pedestrian and vehicular access; associated works to public highway; ancillary servicing; plant; cycle storage and associated works with ancillary facilities

Authority
London Borough of Southwark
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
employment-industrial · Other minor developments
Inspector
Whelan P

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the site is a suitable location for a tall building
  • The visual effects of the proposed development, with particular regard to the height, scale and mass of the building, and the quality of the public realm
  • The environmental effects of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of 89 Long Lane, and the occupiers of dwellings in the Empire Square development, with particular regard to privacy, outlook and light
  • The functional effects of the proposed development, in regard to the needs of visitors to the development who require disabled car-parking spaces
  • Whether the provisions in the appellant's undertaking meet the tests for planning obligations, with particular regard to the undertakings in connection with affordable workspace, and business relocation and retention

What decided it

The design of the Pilgrimage Street elevation, which would appear as a single monolithic mass and overpower the finer scale of the side street, causing very significant harm to the spatial character of the area and conflicting with the Framework's requirement for high-quality, beautiful buildings.

The substantial benefits of the proposal including high-quality office space, improved public realm, economic benefits and around 500 jobs did not outweigh the very significant harm to the spatial character of the area from the design of the fourth elevation.

Framework references: 57, 112

Plan policies cited: London Plan policy D9, London Plan policy D3, London Plan policy D8, London Plan policy E3, London Plan policy T6.5, Southwark Plan 2007 saved policy 3.20, Southwark Plan 2007 saved policy 3.2, Southwark Plan 2007 saved policy 3.12, Southwark Plan 2007 saved policy 3.13, Southwark Plan 2007 saved policy 5.7, Core Strategy 2011 policy 12, New Southwark Local Plan policy P16, New Southwark Local Plan policy P12, New Southwark Local Plan policy P13, New Southwark Local Plan policy P30, New Southwark Local Plan policy P54, New Southwark Local Plan policy P55

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.