Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Allowed30 November 20233319797

Plot H1 Elephant Park, Land bounded by Walworth Road, Elephant Road, Deacon Street & Sayer Street North, London, SE17 1EN

redevelopment of the site to provide an 18-storey building (including a mezzanine floor) plus basement and rooftop plant providing office floorspace (Class E(g)(i)) and areas of floorspace for the following flexible uses: office/retail/services/food and drink/medical or health floorspace (Class E(g)(i), E(a), E(c), E(b) or E(e)), including ancillary cycle parking, accessible car parking, servicing, plant, roof terraces, landscaping, public realm improvements, and other associated works incidental to the development

Authority
London Borough of Southwark
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
employment-industrial · Other Major Developments
Inspector
Griffiths P

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area including design, the response to context, and any impact on the setting and thereby the significance of heritage assets
  • The effect of the proposal on the living conditions of nearby residents and in particular, levels of daylight in nearby dwellings, and visual impact or loss of outlook
  • Compliance, or otherwise with the development plan, and following on from that, any other material considerations including the wider policy background, and specifically, the principle of an office-based development on the site, as opposed to housing, including any 'planning balance' necessary

What decided it

The exemplary, contrasting design quality of the proposed building, combined with its compliance with development plan policies supporting a substantial office development on this last undeveloped plot of Elephant Park, decided the appeal in its favour.

the Inspector found the proposal complied with the development plan as a whole, with no unacceptable harm to character, appearance or living conditions, and no material considerations pointing to a different conclusion, so no countervailing balance against harm was required

Framework references: 56, 57

Plan policies cited: Policy SD1 (Opportunity Areas), Policy SD4 (the Central Activities Zone), Policy SD6 (Town Centres and High Streets), Policy ST1 (Southwark's Development Targets), Policy ST2 (Southwark's Places), Policy SP4 (Green and Inclusive Economy), Policy P30 (Office and Business Development), Policy AV.09 (Elephant and Castle Area Vision), Policy H8, Policy SD5, Policy GG2, Policy D3, Policy D9 (Tall buildings), Policy D4 (Delivering good design), Policy P13 (Design of places), Policy P17 (Tall buildings), Policy D6, Policy P56

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.