Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed16 January 20233290473

New City Court, 4-26 St Thomas Street, London, SE1 9RS

Authority
London Borough of Southwark
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
employment-industrial · Major offices/R&D/light industry
Inspector
Searson C

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Townscape character and appearance
  • Architectural design and quality
  • Public realm
  • Context and character
  • Heritage assets
  • Servicing

What decided it

The public benefits of the 2018 and 2021 schemes were found, under the NPPF paragraph 202 balance, not to outweigh the identified less than substantial heritage harm and townscape harm, leading to dismissal of Appeals A and C, whereas the absence of any harm from the physical listed building works themselves was decisive in allowing Appeals B and D.

For Appeals A and C, the significant public benefits (office floorspace, jobs, affordable workspace, public realm, sustainable transport and heritage restoration) were outweighed by considerable weight given to heritage harm and significant weight to townscape harm, so the balance tipped against the proposals; for Appeals B and D, no harm was found from the listed building works, so no balancing exercise was needed to refuse consent.

Framework references: 8, 18, 56, 57, 81, 111, 112, 126, 130, 134, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 207

Plan policies cited: LP Policy GG2, LP Policy GG5, LP Policy SD1, LP Policy SD4, LP Policy SD5, LP Policy SD6, LP Policy E1, LP Policy E3, LP Policy D3, LP Policy D9, LP Policy HC1, LP Policy HC2, LP Policy HC3, LP Policy HC4, LP Policy T2, LP Policy T7, SP Policy AV11, SP Policy ST1, SP Policy ST2, SP Policy SP4, SP Policy P13, SP Policy P14, SP Policy P17, SP Policy P19, SP Policy P20, SP Policy P24, SP Policy P30, SP Policy P31, SP Policy P50, SP Policy P56

Judgments cited: The London Historic Parks and Gardens Trust v The Minister of State for Housing [2022] EWHC 829 (Admin)

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.