You are on page 1of 45

PLANNING COMMITTEE I COMMUNITY COUNCIL

CASE OFFICER REPORT RECORD SHEET

Proposa I (1 0-AP-27 54)

Address

Demolition of Capital House, and erection of a 21 CAPITAL HOUSE, 40-46 WESTON STREET, LONDON SE1 3QD and 31 storey building (2 basement levels plus ground and 30 upper storeys) to a maximum height of 108.788m (14,738sqm GEA) to provide Ward Grange 470 student accommodation units (sui generis) on floors 1-27 (13,289sqm GEA), ancillary bar, gym, library and student hub on floors 28, 30, retail/cafe units (flexible class A1, A3 use) (286sqm GEA) at ground floor level, 261 cycle parking spaces, 2 disabled car parking spaces and 1 service bay at basement level, associated refuse and recycling, and an area of public open space. Case Officer: Gordon Adams Recommendation proposed by Case Officer: date

Signed~~=---_~_~_~_';:_··--_· _._~_,~_' _~~_"'_.

11/It
.

/ 2.0,,::;

7'
Recommendation Signed

cleared by Team Leader I Group Manager: _,..o.~__ date

~:N~! ...
Vv 2010 NIIVe:;

I-~

~dC· '''c::),._:j

I '-::f- -

(r - 2l) ( 0

~~I/ ~U

Recommendation

cleared by Head of Development Management:

Sighed~

date

L 1-//. 'Z6io

~~;"l£~~
Recomme'hdation NOT cleared by Team Leader I Group Manager OR Head of Development Management

Signed Reason Recommendation NOT agreed:

date

_

Item No. 1 Report title:

Classification:
OPEN

Date:
30 November 2010

Meeting Name:
PLANNING COMMITTEE

Development Management planninq application:
Appli.cation 10-AP-2754 for: Full Planning Permission

Address:
CAPITAL HOUSE, 40A6 WESTON STREET, LONDON SE1 3QD

Demolition of Capital House, and erection of a 21 and 31 storey building (2 basement levels plus ground and 30 upper) to a maximum height of 108.T88m (14,738sqm GEA) to provide 470 student accommodation units (sui generis) on floors 1-27 (13,289sqm GEA), ancillary bar, gym, library and student hub on floors 28, 30, retail/cafe units (flexible class A 1, A3 use) (286sqm GEA) at ground floor level, 261 cycle parking spaces, 2 disabled car parking spaces and 1 service bay at basement level, associated refuse and recycling, and an area of public open space. Ward(s) or Grange

Proposal:

groups affected:
From: HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
I AppiicationExpi

Application Start Date 20/09/2010

ry Date 20/12/201 0

RECOMM ENDATION
1 1) Subject to the applicant first entering into an appropriate legal agreement (at no cost to the Cou neil) by no later than 20 decem ber 201 0, and su bject to referral to the GLA,. planning permission be granted subject to conditions. 2) In the event that the requirem ents of 1 are not met by 20 Decem ber 201 0, the He ad of Planning. be authorised to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out under paragra ph 127. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Site location and description
2 The application site is located on the eastern edge of Guy's Hospital and King's College campus. It is bounded by St Thomas Street to the north, Melior Street to the south, and Weston Street to the west. North ofthe site is London Bridge Station whilst to the north west is the 310 metre tall London Bridge Tower (known as the Shard). The redevelopment of the station approved by the Council in 2000 includes a new entrance to St Thomas Street opposite the site. On the west side of Weston Street (opposite the site) is the York Clinic, a five storey building, and Guy's tower, a 34 storey building behind the York Clinic, To the southwest Is Wolfson House, a 16 storey tower which is on a lone-lease to Kings College for student accommodation with a swimming pool in its basement for use by Kings College students.

3

4

To the east of the site is 60-68 St Thomas Street (Beckett House), a six-storey office building used by the home Office Border and Immigration Service and beyond that is the Snowsfields Car Park site. To the south, on Melior Street, is a seven storey residential building with an estate agent on the ground floor. With the exception of the railway arches to the north and a church to the south east, the immediate context of adjoining buildings date from 1970s to 1980s. The application site is not in a Conservation Area but the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area is to the south and south east of the site. There are also nearby listed buildings at London Bridge Station Platforms 9 - 16, which face onto St Thomas Street (Grade II); and Guys Hospital Main Building, St Thomas Street (Grade 11*). The existing Capital House was granted planning permission in 1963 and constructed in 1965. It is comprised of a two storey podium deck with eight storeys above (ten storeys in total) that is set back from the St Thomas Street frontage. It is of little architectural merit and does not positively contribute to the urban realm. Details of proposal

5

6

7

The proposed development involves the erection of two linked buildings up to a maximum height of 31 storeys (108 metres) comprising retail on the ground floor (A1/A3 Use Class) and student accommodation above. On the ground floor, the St Thomas Street elevation has been set back to provide a 4.8m pavement width whilst a double height setback is proposed on the corner of 8t Thomas Street and Weston Street. In addition, a landscaped courtyard is proposed off Weston Street which is also accessed by a route through the building from 8t Thomas Street on the north east corner. The footprint of the building rises to 8 storeys before it separates into two elements with the southern core rising to 21 storeys and the northern core rising to 31 storeys. Between the two building elements there are connecting access bridges at the 12th, 16th, and 20th floors. Access to the student accommodation is via a foyer area facing onto the double height recess on the corner which leads up to the first floor welcome area and gathering zone. The remainder of the first floor is occupied by further informal gathering areas, security room, manager's office, WCs, and student rooms. In total there are 470 self contained student rooms within the development that range from 15sqm to 28sqm in size. Within the southern building element there is a communal area on the 20th floor whilst within the northern building element there is a reading room on the 28th floor, a gym on the 29th floor, and a coffee/juice bar on the 30th floor.

8

9

10

11

12

Of the 470 rooms, 5% are dedicated for disabled users whilst a further 5% are designed to be adaptable rooms for disabled users. All of these flats have access to at least two lifts. Planning history

13

The development of Capital House as an office building was granted permission on appeal on 15th March 1963. 09-AP-2657: application withdrawn by the applicant on 20/09/2010 for demolition of

14

Capital House, and erection of a 32 storey building (2 basement levels plus ground and 31 upper storeys) of a maximum 114.15m AOD high (109.5m AGL), 18,557sq.m. (GEA) to provide 525 student accommodation units (Sui Generis use) on floors 1-28, ancillary bar, gym and library on floors 29-31, a retail/cafe unit (flexible Class A1iA3 use) (371 sqm gea) at ground floor level, 290 cycle parking spaces, 2 accessible car parking spaces and 1 service bay at basement level, associated refuse and recycling and an area of public open space. Planning history of adjoining sites 15 There are a number of major sites in the surrounding granted permission or are under construction: area that have either been

London Bridge Tower (Shard of Glass) (LBS ref 01-AP-0476): redevelopment of Southwark Towers for a 306m tower for offices, hotel, residential and public viewing areas. This development is currently under construction. London Bridge Place (LBS ref 07-AP-0815): the redevelopment of New London Bridge House for an 18 storey office building. This development has been implemented with New London Bridge House being recently demolished. London Bridge Station Masterplan (LBS ref 00-AP-0333 and 08-AP-0832): .Redeveloprnent of the station to provide a street level concourse and provision of retail space as well as construction of an office building rising t067m comprising 43,000sqm of f1oorspace. The new concourse includes a new pedestrian entrance to the station opposite the application site in St Thomas Street. KEY ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION Summary of main issues 16 The main issues to be considered in respect of this application are: a) the principle of the development in terms of land use and conformity with strategic policies. b) Environmental Impact Assessment c) Height d) Design e) Impact on Character and Setting of a Listed Building and Conservation Area f) Internal layout g) Impact on adjoining occupiers h) Transport issues i) Planning obligations j) Sustainability k) Archaeology Planning policy 17 The statutory development plans for the borough comprise The London Plan 2008 (Consolidated with Alterations since 2004) and The Southwark Plan (2007). The site is located within the: • • • • Central Activities Zone (CAl) London Bridge Opportunity Area London Bridge Transport Development Area Borough, Bermondsey and Rivers Archaeological Priority Zone

18

• • • 19

Air Quality Management Area London Bridge District Town Centre Bankside, Borough, London Bridge Strategic Cultural Area

To the south lies the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area whilst to the north is the Grade [I listed section of London Bridge Station (train shed - platforms 9-16). Southwark Plan 2007 (July) Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy 1.1 1.7 1.8 2.5 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.9 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.18 3.19 3.20 3.21 3.22 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 6.2 Access to Employment Opportunities. Development within town and local centres. Location of developments for retail and other town centre uses. Planning Obligations. Environmental effects. Protection of Amenity. Sustainability Assessment. Energy Efficiency. Renewable Energy. Air Quality. Waste Reduction. Water. Efficient Use of Land. Quality in Design. Urban Design. Designing Out Crime. Conservation of the Historic Environment. Setting of Listed Building and Conservation Areas. Archaeology. Tall Buildings. Strategic Views. Important Local Views. Locating Developments. Transport Impacts. Walking and Cycling. Public Transport Improvements. Transport Development Areas. Car Parking. Parking Standards for the Mobility Impaired. London Bridge Opportunity Area.

20

21

London Plan 2008 consolidated with alterations since 2004 Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy 2A.1 2A.2 Sustainability Criteria. The spatial strategy for development. The Central Activities Zone. Opportunity Areas. Areas for Regeneration - London Bridge. Town Centres - Borough High Street is a District Centre. Developing London's Economy. Office Demand & Supply. Mixed Use Development. Improving employment opportunities for Londoner'S Integrating Transport Development. Matching Development to Transport Capacity. Sustainable Transport in London. Parking Strategy. Supporting Town Centres.

2AA
2A.5 2A.7 2A.8 3B.1 38.2 3B.3 38.11 3C.1 3C.2 3C.3 3C.23 30.1

Policy4A1 Policy 4A2 Policy 4A3 Policy 4A4 Policy 4A6 Policy 4A7 Policy 4A9 Policy 4A13 Policy 4A19 Policy 4A20 Policy 48.1 Policy 48.2 Policy 48.3 Policy 4B.5 Policy 48.9 Policy 48.10 Policy 48.16 Policy 48.17 Policy 50.1 Policy 50.2 Policy 6A.4 Policy 6A5 Core Strategy 22

Tackling Climate Change. Mitigating Climate Change. Su sta inable Desig n and Constructi on. Energy Assessment. Oecentralised Energy Heating, Cooling and Power. Renewable Energy. Adaptation to Climate Change. Flood risk management. Improving air quality. Reducing Noise and enhancing soundscapes. Design Principles fora Compact Ci,ty. Promoting World Class Architecture and design. Enhancing the quality of the Public Realm. Creating an Inclusive Environment. TaU Buildings. Large Scale Buildings - design and impact. London View Management Fram€lwork. View management plans. The strategic priorities for South East London. Opportunity Areas in Sou.th East London (London Bridqe/Bankside). Priorities in Planning Obligations. Planning Obligations.

The Council submitted the draft Core Strategy to the Secretary of State on 26 March 2010 and the Examination in Public hearings took place in July 2010. The Core Strategy policies should be considered as currently having no weight when determining planning applications as they are awaiting the Inspector's report and his finding of soundness. Applications should continue to be determined pending receipt of the Inspector's report primarily in accordance the saved policies in the Southwark Plan 2007 and the London Plan 2008. The Inspector's report on the Cafe Strategy is to be issued in December 2010. With a recommendation of soundness from the inspector there wi![ be a very high degree of certainty that the Core Strategy will be adopted and that a number of existing Southwark Plan policies will be replaced. In view of this, on publication of the inspector's report, all core strategy policies should be given significant weight in determining planning applications. Less weight should be given to existing policies which are soon to be replaced. Formal adoption of the core strategy is expected in January 2011. Strategic Policy 8 of the Core Strategy Submission Version requires proposals for student accommodation to provide 35% affordable housing. within the development. The detail of how this is to be provided is intended to be contained within a revised Afforda ble HOusing SPD. Until th e Inspecto r's report on the Core Strateg y is received, this policy holds no weight; there is also the possibility that the Inspector may not accept the provisions regarding affordable housing in student accommodation. Accordingly, the requirement for affordable housing within the proposed development is not relevant under current adopted policy. Planning Policy Guidance (PPG} and Planning Policy Statements (PPS)

23

24

24

The following. national planning guidance has been taken into account PPS 1 PPS4 Delivering Sustainable Development. Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms.

PPSS PPS6 PPS9 PPS10 PPG13 PPG16 PPS22 PPS23 PPG24 PPG2S 26

Planning for the Historic Environment. Planning for Town Centres. Biodiversity and Geological Conservation. Planning for Sustainable Waste Management. Transport. Archaeology and Planning. Renewable Energy. Planning and Pollution Control. Planning and Noise. Development and Flood Risk. Planning Documents:

LBS Supplementary

Sustainability Assessment (SPD 2009) Sustainable Design and Construction (SPD 2009) Bankside, Borough and London Bridge (Consultation draft SPD 2010) Section 106 Planning Obligations SPD (200?) Residential Design Standards SPD (2008) Principle of development Central Activities Zone (CAl) 2? The Central Activities Zone straddles a number of boroughs in central London. Whilst the primary role is to encourage office and retail uses, diagram SG.. of the London 1 Plan identifies a number of mixed use quarters with important clusters of specialised 'central activities': legal, health, academic, state and 'special uses' and states these specialised functions should be supported. It further advises that account should also be taken of the needs of individual, important facilities in and around the CAl such as medical institutions at London Bridge and Euston, which will enhance the status of the CAl. It is considered that student accommodation for King's College within the campus is in accordance with the specialised activities referred to by supporting the needs to the College that will enhance the CAl. Opportunity Area 28 London South Central is a strategic regeneration priority area identified in the London Plan. It stretches across the northern part of three boroughs of central London south of the Thames (Southwark, Lambeth, and Wandsworth) and contains four Opportunity Areas, one of which is the London Bridge Opportunity Area within which the application site is located. Policy SD.2 of the London Plan states that developments within Opportunity Areas in south east London "will be expected to maximise residential and non-residential densities and to contain, mixed uses". Paragraph 5.108 of the London Plan goes on to state that "Redevelopment and intensification of London Bridge station and its environs are proposed within the draft London Bridge framework together with improved public transport and interchange facilities and better pedestrian integration with the surrounding area. Parts of this area may accommodate tall landmark mixeduse developments". The Southwark Plan underpins the London Plan in terms of Opportunity Areas and states that Southwark's vision for London Bridge is for: A successful central London mixed use district town centre, full of vitality and providing commercial activity, jobs, an evening economy and high quality homes, supported by thriving tourism, arts, entertainment and cultural activity and a very accessible, integrated public transport system within a unique historical area.

29

30

31

Policy 6.2 - London Bridge Opportunity Area - of the Southwark Plan states that development at London Bridge should seek: i. The best use of land and transport resources, developing high density, sustainable buildings on key sites; ii. To protect and expand cultural, arts and entertainment uses; iii. An improved and highly efficient public transport interchange; IV. To integrate development with public transport nodes and walking and cycling routes within the Transport Development Area; v. To secure major improvements through the development process to public transport to increase capacity and promote ease of use for all groups including people with a mobility disability; vi. That proposals for tall or large scale buildings respect the setting of the proposed London Bridge Tower, and are of exceptional design quality, and located within a planned strategy for the siting of tall bui.ldings with reference to the London Plan; vii. To improve London Bridge's retail base, concentrating on areas around the station, and encouraging a range of unit sizes; viii. Improvements to the environment, especially the public realm and pedestrian environment; ix. Improvements to the distribution and quantity of public open space whilst also seeking to maintain its quality; x. To increase employment especially of local people in commercial, tourism, health and retail activities; xi. Active frontages to encourage footfall, improve safety and further create a sense of place. There is an additional requirement for retail as the predominant ground floor use along Tooley Street and Borough High Street; XII. To protect and expand health functions and associated businesses; xiii. To preserve or enhance the historic character of the area, especially Conservation Areas; xiv. That all developments meet the highest urban design standards; xv. That all developments contribute to achieving improved air quality; xvi. That developments create new high quality residential units to deliver 40% of additional conventional homes as affordable housing, the tenure mix should be 70% social rented and 30% intermediate housing; and xvii. The Thames Policy Area (TPA) (which has been identified on the Proposals Map to allow special control of developments adjacent to the riverside), creates and capitalises on opportunities to enhance the character of the area and ensures continued and improved access to the river. In addition to the above, the site is located within a Transport Development Area. Policy 5.5 of the Southwark Plan requires developments to: I. Maximise the efficient use of land around major transport sites; and ii. Strengthen and enhance links to existing public transport nodes; and iii. Strengthen and enhance walking and cycling infrastructure; and iv. Improve the legibility of the public transport network; and v. Be of exemplary design quality. The application site is located within an area designated for growth and is located adjacent to a major public transport interchange. Accordingly, the principle of a high intensity development is accepted and supported by both local and regional policy that encourages development in highly accessible locations to enable sustainable development. '

32

33

Bankside. Borough and London Bridge (consultation draft) SPD 34 The Council consulted on the above SPD in February 2010 and has recently completed an additional round of consultation. The intention is to revisit the SPD in collaboration with the GLA and produce a joint document which the Mayor of London can endorse as an Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF). A fresh round of consultation on a revised draft SPD/OAPF is expected in May to July 2011. The SPD sets out the overall plan and detailed guidance for how development in Bankside, Borough and London Bridge should occur. It will cover the following topics: • • • • • • • • • A vision for how opportunities should be taken. What uses should be included in new development and how their impacts will be controlled. How the design of development needs to respond to the unique heritage and history of places. . What heights are appropriate in different locations and the criteria that tall buildings need to meet. Improving the look and feel of streets and public spaces, including how easy it is to get around. Managing the impact of development on traffic and transport infrastructure. Opportunities in the area to respond to climate change. The particular contribution that development on certain sites can make to improving places. How S106 Planning Obligations will be used to help deliver the facilities and infrastructure needed to support a growing population.

35

36

The site is identified as an Opportunity Site within the SPD together with the adjoining Beckett House site. It seeks the retention of existing office space with the preference for an increased provision as well provision for additional retail, leisure, community, or residential uses. It is also identified as having the potential for a tall building element. As the SPD is currently in draft form, it holds limited planning weight but is still a material consideration when considering an application for development within the _area together with the relevant development plans and other adopted SPDs. Loss of office space

37

38

The site is not located within a Preferred Office Location. Outside these areas, policy 1.4 of the Southwark Plan seeks to retain existing Class B Use within certain areas, including the CAZ. Whilst the existing building was constructed as an office building, the applicant has submitted supporting information demonstrating the building has been in use as ancillary education support for the wider campus for over 10 years. The following departments occupy the building: • • • • • • Thames Cancer Registry King's College London Finance/Business King's College London Estates and Facilities King's College London Human Resources King's College London Division of Health and Social Care King's College London Institute of Psychiatry

39

40

Accordingly, it is accepted that the existing use is ancillary to the college and not considered to be Class B Use and that the provisions of policy 1.4 are not relevant in

this instance. In additian, the uses currently .occupying the building are to be redistributed within the remainder of the haspital/callege campus as part of the redevelapment masterplan which will mean there will be no net lass of empl.oyment as a result of the develapment. 41 In additian, eviden ce has been subm itted demanstrating the am aunt of office flaarspace that has recently been campleted, is under construction or has been granted planning permission in the area. These include: • • • • Londan Bridge Tower (Shard of Glass): 53,585sqm of office space Londan Bridge over-statian develapment: 43,000sqm of office space Landan Bridge Place: 41 ,000sqm of office space Mare Landan: 195,000sqm of office space

Student accammadatian 42 In Sauthwark, student accammadation is cansidered to be non self-cantained accommodation, defined as sui generis under the Use Classes Order, and residential hausing palicies are nat applicable. Sauthwark's Strategic Hausing Market Assessment and Housing Requirements Study identify the significant need far mare family and affordable hausing and it is acknawledged that student hausing traditianally does nat contribute tawards increasing the supply of either of these types of hausing. The Mayar of London Hausing SPG (2005), in paragraph 9.9, states that 'hausehald spaces in non-self cantained accammadation also count tawards overall hausing targets. This category can include student hostel accommodation.' Whilst there is no specific target far provision of non-self cantained accammadation, it does cantribute taward the overall hausing target that Sauthwark needs to meet as set by the GLA. PPS1 and PPS3 emphasise the benefits of creating mixed communities. PPS1 promates the efficient use of land through high density, mixed use develapment an previausly develaped land. PPS3 and the London Plan with its supplementary guidance say local autharities must take into account and acknawledge that students need to be provided far and that lacal authorities' strategies must take students inta account. Londan Plan Palicy 3A.5 seeks to ensure that new develapments offer a range of hausing choices in terms of the mix- of hausing sizes and types, taking account of the housing requirements of different graups and Palicy 3A.25 advises that student accommodation should be supparted. The Sauthwark Plan daes nat contain specific policies on student hausing, with student accommodation covered under policy 4.7. This policy states that new develapment which pravides non self-cantained residential accommodation will normally be permitted where the need far and suitability of the accommodation can be demonstrated, and where adequate amenities and facilities including details of security and long-term management and maintenance arrangements of the student accammadation are provided. A scheme shauld also avoid a significant loss of amenity to neighbauring occupiers. Palicy 4.7 alsa advises that the Local Planning Autharity must seek ta hause all sectors of the cammunity, and that provision must be made far alternative accommodation arrangements. Hawever, there is no specific guidance an haw student hausing need should be assessed. Sauthwark's Residential Design Standards SPD gaes a step further by requiring developers to pravide a letter from a lacal higher educational institutian as evidence of need, as well as details of affardability, management, and security arrangements. There are no specific standards relating to design. The applicant has submitted a Student Market Repart that outlines the demand far purpase-built student .accommodation in London, and specifically Southwark. It cancludedthat:

43

44

45

• •

King's College has an urgent need of an extra 2,000 bed spaces in the immediate future Students occupy 4.1 % of the dwellings in Southwark, excluding halls of residence (South East London Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2009) and that students who move to purpose-built student accommodation will free up urgently needed residential accommodation There is a general need in London for at least another 100,000 student bedrooms

46

From the above it is clear that there is a demonstrable need for student accommodation within London which is supported by the Planning Inspectorate's appeal decision on the proposal for student accommodation at 120 Walworth Road. King's College, London is a major institution within the borough. It is one of the world's top 25 universities as ranked by OS World University Rankings and has a current student population of nearly 23,000 students, over 8,600 of which are postgraduates. The London Bridge campus, together with Guy's Hospital, is seeking to become a world class facility and, in terms of sustainable development, student accommodation should be located close to educational institutions in highly accessible areas. The proposed development is included within the King's College campus/Guy's Hospital and has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 6 on a scale of 1 to 6, where 6 is the most accessible. Accordingly, the site is ideally located for student accommodation. Section 4.3 of the Residential Design Standards SPD states that planning applications for student accommodation will have to be accompanied with evidence that there is an identified local need for this type of housing, including: • • • • A letter from a recognised local educational establishment Confirmation that the accommodation will be affordable to the identified user group Details of security arrangements Details of the tong-term management and maintenance arrangements of the student accommodation.

47

48

49

Whilst Investream is the freeholder, King's College is the long lessee for the site and has submitted a letter of support for the proposed development with the application. The Section. 106 legal agreement has been drafted to include an obligation on the applicant that students within the development will be those attending King's College and that other students can only be considered if there is a vacancy after first offer to King's. In addition, the legal agreement requires confirmation that the accommodation will be affordable and also secures the provision of a Resident's Management Plan that will detail security arrangements, long-term management and maintenance arrangements of the student accommodation.
,

50

The applicant has advised that there are two options for managing the building following construction. The first being the appointment of a management company subsidiary of the applicant to manage the building which has been done on some of their other student developments. Alternatively, King's may choose to manage the property in house. In either scenario management of the building will need to comply with the legal obligations in the Section 106 in terms of the Resident's Management Ptan. It is considered that the relevant tests have been met in. terms of student housing provision. In addition, robust obligations in terms of affordability, management, and linkages to King's College, have been secured within the legal agreement.

51

Environmental 52

impact assessment

An Environmental Statement is not required with this application as the development does not fall within Schedule 1 or 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Reg ulations 1999. The applicant made two Screening Opinion requests .in relation to the proposed development. In both instances, the Council advised that the development was not considered to be EIA development and that an Environmental Statement was not required. The site does not exceed 0.5ha (being O.0912ha), and therefore is not classified as a Schedule 2 'urbah development project', It has been determined that the development is unlikely to have a significant effect upon the environment by virtue of its nature, size or location based upon a review of the Schedule 3 selection criteria for screening Schedule 2 Development. The site has an established use as offices, and is located outside a sensitive area as per Regulation 2(1) and the development is unlikely to geIJerate any significant environmental effects. Therefore an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required. Design Height

53

54

The site is located within the London Bridge Opportunity Area which seeks to encourage and support high density sustainable development. The supporting text for policy 50.2 of the London Plan acknowledges that the environs around the station may be suitable for tall buildings whilst policy 6.2 of the Southwark Plan seeks to ensure tall buildings at London Bridge respect the setting of the Shard. Tall buildings at highly accessible transport nodes are the most sustainable form of development with there being policy support for taU buildings in the Opportunity Area. Policy 3.20 of the Southwark Plan states that any building over 30 metres tall (or 25 metres in the Thames Policy Area) should ensure that it: i. Makes a positive contribution to the landscape; and II. Is located at a point of landmark significance; and iii. Is of the highest architectural standard; and iv. Relates well to its surroundings, particularly at street level; and v. Contributes positively to the London skyline as a whole consolidating a cluster within that skyline or providing key focus within views. The scheme addresses each of these in turn. Despite its constrained site, the proposal devotes a large proportion of the ground floor to high quality public realm not just as a semi-private forecourt to the student housing but as a new connection between Weston Street and St Thomas Street. Further, the lowest two floors are recessed in order to maximise the public space at the foot of the building. In this way the proposed scheme makes a considerable contribution to the public realm. In addition to this, the building line in St Thomas Street has been set back to provide a generous 4.8 metre pavement that not only provides a greater space in terms of the setting for a tatl building, but it will also accommodate the greater number of pedestrians expected with the new developments within the area and the redeveloped mainline station. This tall building is located at a major transport interchange, a location that is not just a result of its accessibility but also the focus of many views both from the railway and the local roads. Once the consented redevelopment of London Bridge Station proceeds, as is necessary for the full implementation of Thameslink 2000, this site will be located directly opposite the new southern entrance to the new street level

55

56

57

concourse. In this way the junction of Weston Street and St Thomas Street takes on a particular significance, signalling the new entrance to the station and joining the Shard and Guy's Tower as marking the location of London Bridge Station.

58

The sections following in relation to quality of design confirm the exceptional architectural qualities of the design. In its fabric, geometry and function it exceeds expectations and takes on an exceptional sculptural and architectural form that will transform and compliment its context. The scheme is located in the emerging cluster of tall buildings at London Bridge. At 310 metres, the Shard will be western Europe's tallest building whilst Guy's tower, at 143 metres, is the world's tallest hospital building. The proposed building is approximately 80 metres from Guy's Tower, less than 100 metres from the Shard and, at 108 metres in height, forms a 'foothill' building to the primary landmark of the cluster. By being 40 metres lower than Guy's Tower and one third the height of the Shard, the proposed scheme makes an important contribution to the cluster cementing its qualities and confirming the importance of the Shard as the pinnacle of the emerging cluster. The scheme is located in the area identified by the B8LB SPD as a location that is appropriate for tall buildings. The draft SPD sets out the additional criteria that buildings of this scale will need to meet which include: • Make a significant contribution to the local regeneration; • Tall buildings are located in the right place; • Outstanding architectural quality; • Sensitive to the historic context; • Sustainable design and construction; • Bring life and activity to the area and create vibrant and attractive streets and spaces; and • Sensitive to its impact on the local environment. Officers have considered this scheme against the emerging policy context and find that it addresses all the additional requirements of the SPD appropriately. Concern has been raised in submissions received during public consultation that the proposed building will set a precedent for tall buildings and that it would be out of context with the character of the area. In relation to precedence, each application needs to be considered on its merits 'and, in-relation to tall buildings, against the relevant tall building policies. Given the proposed development is located adjacent to the Shard and Guy's Tower, it is considered that the issue of precedence for tall buildings has already been set and that this building will sit comfortably within the London Bridge context. Context and the adjoining conservation area are covered in further detail below, however it is acknowledged that the site is affected by two different contexts - the lower scaled conservation area to the south, and the tall buildings to the north west. In this way, the form has been designed as a transition between the two in that the height of the southern edge is the same height as the existing Capital House building, with the roof then sloping up to the maximum height on the northern edge. It is considered that this form successfully accommodates the transition between the lower context to the south and the taller context around the station. An additional concern raised has been prematurity in considering this application in advance of the BBLB SPD being adopted. The primary instrument when considering a planning application is the development plan in place at the time of determination, in this case the London Plan and the Southwark Plan. Both of these documents contain policies that identify areas that could accommodate tall buildings and also specific polices on judging their appropriateness. Supplementary Planning Documents are

59

60

61

62

63

intended to provide additional detailed guidance when considering planning applications and, whilst it is currently in draft form and therefore of limited weight, the BBLB SPD is still a material consideration. Having said that, in the absence of an adopted SPD, regard should be had to the policies contained within the adopted development plans and wHether the proposed development is in conformity with them. 64 Whilst Cabe raised specific concern in relation to some aspects of the scheme, they concluded that the height of the proposal was acceptable. In addition, the GLA have supported the principle of a tall building on the site. The site is located within an area identified as being appropriate for tall buildings, subject to meeting certain criteria. As such, having regard to the London Plan and the Southwark Plan, the principle of a tall building is accepted and that there are no grounds for refusal based on the principle of a tall building. Urban Design 66 Policy 3.13 of the Southwark Plan asserts that the principles of good urban design must be taken into account in a" developments. This includes height, scale and massing of buildings, consideration of the local context, its character and townscape, as well as the local views and resultant streetscape. The local context varies in its scale and ranges from two and three-storey residential and industrial properties to the south rising to 9-10 storey buildings onto St Thomas Street. The site is immediately to the south of London Bridge Station and falls broadly within the emerging London Bridge Quarter which includes the 310m tall Shard development and the 143m Guy's Tower but also includes the listed arched railway viaduct fronting onto St Thomas Street. The existing building on the site is 10-storeys high and has a poor relationship with the street. The site sits between the civic scale of St Thomas Street and the finer grain and lower scale of the conservation area to the south of Melior Street. In this way the proposal on this site has to reconcile these two contexts, to respond to the unique historic and architectural character of the conservation area and to the substantial scale of one of London's main-line stations to the north. An important part of the design is the relationship of the scheme with Weston Street and particularly the corner of that Weston Street and St Thomas Street which is to incorporate a new southern entrance to London Bridge Station. The submitted proposal addresses both Weston Street and St Thomas Street appropriately; the ·ground floor is characterised by active frontages and a dramatic 'scoop' of public space which encourages public access around and through the site. Reception spaces for the student accommodation have been located on the upper floors and the corner of St Thomas Street and Weston Street set-back sufficiently to allow for a generous forecourt and an increased permeability between these streets to create a much improved experience at street level. The 'scoop' extends vertically to the full height of the building and gives the development its striking sculptural form. More than that, this feature of the design has been given a sense of purpose as it leads the pedestrian across the site and to the St Thomas Street frontage, picking up on the permeable character of the local area. The double-height arches of the railway viaduct on St Thomas Street have been reflected in the design of the lower storeys and link the development to its immediate context where it meets the ground. The footprint of the proposal meets the edge of the north and east boundaries of the site and rises to 31 storeys (108m) at its tallest point. It is a dynamically shaped building with a deep 'scoop' that rises up the western face and is complimented by a dramatic diagonal chamfer to the south. Through its shape the building seeks to benefit from the southerly aspect of the site and rises from 10-storeys at its southerly

65

67

68

69

extreme to a 31-storey presence onto St Thomas' Street. The transition in scale is handled by a dramatic sloped roof, its fifth elevation, which rises from the 1a-storey southern extremity to its 31-storey pinnacle at the northern end of the site. 70 During the previous application, concerns were raised about the scale and bulk of this proposal particularly when viewed from the east and, for a tall building of this stature, any assessment of its design will include an appraisal of its silhouett.e. The eastern flank is a prominent elevation of this proposal, visible not only in the local approach from St Thomas Street but also the elevated railway approach to London Bridge Station to the north. The design of the scheme has been revised to address the earlier concerns raised and the building has been split into two with a deep cut that reveals a glazed inner facade. This revision has resulted in two sculptural forms which relate to each other in the round and give the development a three-dimensionality and a dynamic silhouette highlighted by the connecting bridges which the earlier versions lacked. . As a tall building that is substantially taller than its immediate context to the south its approach to urban design needs to be generous to its context and outward-looking. It is considered that the scheme embraces and adapts to its context. At the ground level it has a generosity in the amount of public space it offers and presents an elegant and sculptural three-dimensional form that will compliment the local views and the emerging context of St Thomas Street. Quality in Design 72 Policy 3.12 of the Southwark Plan asserts that developments should achieve a high quality of both architectural and urban design, enhancing the quality of the built environment in order to create attractive, high amenity environments people will choose to live in, work in and visit. When assessing the quality of a design, the fabric, geometry and function of the proposal are considered as they are bound together in the overall concept for the design. The fabric of the proposed development takes its cue from the concept of the quill and it uses its facade expressively. The facade of the building has a depth and complexity which gives its elevation quality that will set it aside from other buildings in the area. The facade is predominantly of metal arranged in vertical strips which give way to a glazed crown. The dramatic fifth elevation, the angled roof, is to be in photovoltaic glazing to give this development a dynamic sustainable face. In the reveal between the two towers the facade is in a dramatic glazed facade in a combination of clear and translucent glazing introducing colour to accentuate the contrast and emphasise the verticality of the scheme; this element within the 'cut' extends to the soffit of the double height setback on the corner of St Thomas and Weston Streets. Finally, the quill is expressed feathered strands which extend beyond the roof to give the design a crown and express its top in an appropriate manner befitting the design rationale. In its geometry, the scheme is characterised by its dual form; the two towers echo and compliment each other and use their geometry to emphasise their verticality. The development has a strong base, middle and top and it changes as it reaches its crown. At the same time the scheme has responded to the strong historic context of the Grade " listed double-height railway arches onto St Thomas Street by incorporating the prevailing heights into the design of the lower floors and sets back dramatically from the corner to create a generous forecourt to St Thomas Street. The scoop on the western facade is the design's most dramatic feature which not only g.ives the development a generosity on the ground floor but develops the feature to encourage a thoroughfare and improve permeability across the site through to St Thomas Street. Increased permeability is encouraged by the draft BBLB SPD and will assist pedestrian movement as the area develops further.

71

73

74

75

The Design Review Panel reviewed the previous scheme twice and raised a number of concerns with the proposal. The points raised by the panel included: • • The prominence of the proposed design in the local views The height, bulk and mass of the proposed design particularly the development of what was an interesting concept into a thin veneer placed over a very large and bulky building The form - while interesting to the west remains bulky and solid in its execution The surface - here the Panel were concerned with the unrealistic nature of the design, the complexity of the cladding and the quality of the accommodation under the glazed angled roof At street level, whilst the Panel welcomed the increased permeability, they were concerned that the building did not address St Thomas Street and placed its lift cores and staircases on this important frontage Sustainability - the Panel felt the scheme lacked credibility and expressed their disappointment that the environmental requirements of the scheme had not informed the aesthetic aspects of the design In its concept the scheme relied on the outer decoration of a bulky and predetermined shape rather than a form that grew out of the concept

• •

76

On all these points the design has been developed substantially to address each of these directly. The coupled form and quill-like bridges has fundamentally changed the design to give it a three-dimensionality and reduce its earlier bulky form. The concept of a handful of quills is reflected successfully particularly in the narrow tower fronting onto St Thomas Street and illustrates the ambition of the developer to establish a presence in the area and the London skyline. The resultant form is elegant and dynamic, particularly in the prominent views from the east from where it compliments the local views. The scheme tries to relate to the emerging context of the London Bridge Quarter to the west whilst at the same time responding successfully to the finer grain and intimate scale of its local context to the south and east. Efficient use of land

77

Policy 3.11 of the Southwark Plan states that all developments should ensure that they maximise the efficient use of land whilst: i. Protecting the amenity of neighbouring occupiers or users; and ii. ensuring a satisfactory standard of accommodation and amenity for future occupiers of the site; and iii. Positively responding to the local context and complying with all policies relating to design; and IV. Ensuring that the proposal does not unreasonably compromise the development potential of, or legitimate activities on, neighbouring sites; and v. Making adequate provision for servicing, circulation and access to, from and through the site; and vi. Ensuring that the scale of development is appropriate to the availability of public transport and other infrastructure. With the exception of iv), the above points are covered separately within the body of this report. An objection has been received from the owner of the site adjoining Capital House to the east on the grounds that the proposed development will adversely impact their site and compromise its development potential. In working with the applicant on the revised proposal, this ·issue was raised and discussed at length. It is considered that the amended form of the development to

78

79

create the 'cut' in the building improved the relationship with the adjoining site. In addition, the windows within the eastern elevation of the southern section have been angled to the south in order to avoid overlooking. This is the case for the existing building on the site as well as addressing its future development potential. 80 The application site is constrained in terms of size and yet has provided generous pavement widths in St Thomas Street and on the corner of Weston Street and also creates a new courtyard on the western elevation. The adjoining site is larger in area and currently includes a pocket park to the rear of the existing building. Given the identified lack of existing open space within the area, the draft BBlB SPO requires this open space to be retained within any future development of the site and it is considered that this space could assist in the separation between the two buildings. Any development scheme on the adjacent site, particularly if for a tall building, will similarly require generous public realm and an open setting to ensure permeability. Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed development will invariably impact on the development potential of the adjoining site to a degree, it is not considered to be unreasonable for the reasons given above. Hence the proposed development meets all the criteria listed in policy 3.11 and, on balance, it is considered that the building will be a highly efficient use of land. Impact on character and setting of a listed building and/or conservation area 83 Policies 3.15 and 3.18 of the Southwark Plan require that permission wiH not be granted for developments that would not preserve or enhance the setting or views ofa listed building or the setting and views into or out of a Conservation Area. In addition, PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment' advises that developments must either conserve or enhance the setting of Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings. PPS5 Policy HE10 relates to the setting of heritage assets and states that 'when considerinq applications for development that affect the setting of a heritage asset, local planning authorities should treat favourably applications that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the asset.' Further, the PPS5 Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide advises in relation to the setting of heritage assets that 'a proper assessment of the impact on setting will take into account, and be proportionate to, the significance of the asset and the degree to which proposed changes enhance or detract from that significance and the ability to appreciate it.
r

81

82

84

The proposed development is across St Thomas Street from the listed section of the London Bridge Station. Whilst a transient shadow will pass over the arches as a result of the development, this is a common occurrence within central London and is not considered to significantly impact the listed item. Having said that, the applicant has offered a financial contribution of £50,000 secured through the Section 106 legal agreement to go towards repairs and maintenance of the arches to mitigate against any impacts of the development The site is located outside the nearby Borough High Street and Bermondsey Street Conservation Areas but will be visible from within them. Weston and Melior Streets form the western and northern boundaries of the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area and development on the application site will affect the local views out of and into the conservation area. The application material includes a detailed townscape analysis which includes the local views from Weston Street, the Leathermarket Community Park, Snowsfields and St Thomas Street itself. 'PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment states that "When considering applications for development that affect the setting of a heritage asset, local planning

85

86

authorities should treat favourably applications that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the asset. When considering applications that do not do this, local planning authorities should weigh any such harm against the wider benefits of the application. The greater the negative impact on the significance of the heritage asset, the greater the benefits that will be needed to justify approval." This application site is located in a part of the setting of the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area, the setting of which is characterised by substantial of London Bridge station, the Shard, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital and the commercial structures around the station. 87 Specific concern has been raised by residents over the impact on the Street Conservation Area, in particular the views out of the conservation the site. At one third the height of the nearby Shard, it is considered that development will not harm to the Views out from the conservation area form will be subservient to the taller buildings beyond. Bermondsey area towards the proposed and that the

88

The character of the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area is largely 'fine grain, generally low scale development with a range of movement options for those circulating around it. As such, there are areas where a glimpse of the proposal would be experienced and areas where it would be fully visible in the setting. The building is designed in an elegant form that is modern and includes a steeply sloping roof that slopes away from the conservation area. In those parts where a glimpse of the building is present, it would still preserve the experience of the special character that justifies its designation; indeed, this situation is one that already exists with glimpses of other large scale buildings. Further afield, a number of photomontages were presented to illustrate the impacts of the proposed development on the views from the north, particularly from the Tower of London World Heritage Site and the strategically defined river prospects. The wider Townscape and Visual Impact analysis for the proposal addresses the requirements of the London View Management Framework and illustrates its contribution to the backdrop of St Paul's where it appears briefly in a form that compliments the currently implemented Shard of Glass. Particular care is taken to eliminate any harmful impact on the viewer's appreciation of the strategic landmarks particularly the Tower of London and Southwark Cathedral from these locations. Accurate Visual Representations (AVRs) of these views have been prepared and illustrate not just the static impact, but also dynamic presence of this scheme particularly in the views from within the World Heritage Site. In these views it is evident that the development is only visible for around seven metres within the Tower environs and disappears from view as the viewer approaches the Queen's House. At the same time the material submitted illustrates that the form visible from the Tower is always curved and not rectilinear and results in an elegant sculpted profile which is spire-like in its appearance not detrimental in this historic context. Dueto concerns raised with the previous scheme, the top of the building was revised to make it more sculptural and pointed, making the form more spire-like when viewed from a distance. The result is that, when viewed from within the Tower of London, the top of the building appears as an incidental element alongside existing chimneys and other elements on the roof of the Queen's House. In addition, the element of the proposed development viewed above the Queens House is inconsequential when considered next to the bulk of Guy's Tower and height of the Shard that dominate the views from within the Tower. Internal layout

89

90

91

Criterion (iv) of Policy 4.7 of the Southwark Plan requires any proposal for student accommodation to provide a satisfactory standard of accommodation, including

shared facilities. There are no policy standards for size of units within the student accommodation. 92 There are no specific amenity space standards for student accommodation application hasto be judgedon its own merits. so each

93

The proposed development involves the. provision of 470 self contained rooms ranging from 1Ssqm to 28sqm. All rooms include a bed, work station, storage, kitchenette, and bathroom. In terms of daylight, all rooms have floor to ceiling windows whilst those located within the sloping roof section have 300mm glazed sections between PV panels and the framing elements. Each floor offers a variety of unit sizes, including a 5% provisron of wheelchair accessible rooms as well as double and twin units. The bespoke nature of the room layouts is considered to be a positive aspect of the scheme in that it moves away from the traditional standard grid layout of halls of residence and provides students with the option of different layouts that are dynamic and interesting. Throughout the building there. are informal communal areas whilst on the upper levels there is also a gym, reading room, and cafe/bar. Laundry facilities are located throughout the building with all rooms being within one floor of a laundry. The proposed internal layouts provide a dynamic and interesting living environment for students that moves away from the standard grid layout whilst the communal facilities are considered acceptable in terms of quality of accommodation. Impact of proposed surrounding area development on amenity of adjoining occupiers and

94

95

96

97

Policy 4.7 states that the provision of non-self contained housing should not result in a significant loss of amenity to neighbouring occupiers. Policy 3.2 relates to the protection of amenity and states that permission will not be granted where a loss of amenity would be caused. London Plan policy 4B.9 requires that all large scale development should be sensitive to their impact on the micro climate in terms of sunlight, reflection, overshadowing and wind. Sunlight/daylight

98

A Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare Report was submitted with the application. Vertical Sky Component (VSC) assesses loss of daylight entering existing rooms by considering the amount of sky light reaching a window, Average Daylight Factor (ADF) determines the natural internal light or daylit appearance of a room, and the No Sky Line (NSL) considers the change in the visible sky line from the existing and proposed situations. Sunlight Assessment only considers the annual probably sunlight hours (APSH) for windows facing within 90° of due south. The addresses considered as part of the assessment include: • • • 16 Melior Street (also known as 48-50 Weston Street 14 Melior Street Melior Street/Fenning Street pocket park indicates the following impacts to key developments

99

100

In summary the report surrounding the site: •

The proposal is fully compliant with the BRE Guidelines when considered against the Daylight Distribution and ADF tests

• • • • •

All surrounding habitable rooms will retain a level of daylight that is in excess of the ADF levels proposed by the BRE Guidelines The analysis showed that there were no windows that lead to residential properties that face within 90 degrees of due south None of the adjacent amenity areas experience permanent overshadow The potential for solar glare will not be of significant impact to affect pedestrians, motorists, or train drivers All student rooms will meet and exceed the required ADF values

102 Accordingly, it is considered that there is no detrimental impact on adjoining occupiers in relation sunlight, daylight, and solar glare, and the proposed student accommodation is afforded sufficient natural daylight. Noise and Vibration 103 Policy 3.2 of the Southwark Plan seeks to protect the amenity of existing and future occupiers in the surrounding area or on the site.

104 A Noise and Vibration report was submitted in support of the application. In terms of its final operation, the proposed development is not considered to generate any significant noise that will impact adjoining occupiers. The only noise generated by the development is expected to be plant associated with the general operation of the building which would be expected on any new development and is not considered to be of particular concern. 105 In relation to the amenity of the student accommodation, the report recommended a number of mitigation measures which have been incorporated into the design of the scheme. These include: .• • • Double glazing to be provided to all residential rooms An alternative method of background ventilation provided to all rooms Fixed plant associated with the development must not exceed emissions criteria

106 Accordingly, there are no concerns in this regard.

107 The applicant submitted a Microclimate Wind Assessment which assesses the impact of the development in terms of wind tunnelling. It concluded that the proposed development would not have an adverse impact on the wind in or around the site and that pedestrians in the surrounding area will not notice any significant changes or experience any increased discomfort or danger as a result of the new building. As such, there are no concerns in relation to wind impacts arising from the development. Traffic lssues 108 Policy 5.1 of the Southwark Plan seeks to ensure that development is located near transport nodes, or where they are not it must be demonstrated that sustainable transport options are available to site users, and sustainable transport is promoted. London Plan policy 3C.1 promotes the integration of transport and new development, 3C.2 seeks to match development to transport capacity, and 3C.17 seeks to address traffic congestion. Access 109 Policy 4.7 concerning non self-contained housing requires such developments to be

located in areas where there is adequate infrastructure in the area to support any increase in residents. The site is situated adjacent to London Bridge Station which is served by overland rail, two underground lines, and a bus station. Accordingly, the site has the highest possible public transport accessibility rating (PTAL) of 6b and is a sustainable location for student accommodation. Car Parking 110 In line with national policies, the, Council is seeking to encourage reduced car dependence particularly in areas with good accessibility to public transport and thus encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes. Two disabled car parking spaces are provided within the basement. Evidence su bm itted by the appl tea nt sh ows that 714 out of a total of 19,31 0 students at King' s Colleg e are cI assed as havi ng a disa biIity. 16 students 0 ut of the 19,31 are wheelchair users or have a mobility difficulty which equates to 1% of the total number of students. In addition, King's has an agreement with Addison Lee with respect to transport for disabled students. Accordingly, it is considered that the level of disabled parking is acceptable.

111

a

112 Generally, developments in the CAZ with good levels of public transport are expected to be car free, with the exception of disabled parking. Given the highly accessible location and in line with Southwark policy, the Section 106 legal agreement will restrict all students from obtaining a parking permit. Accordingly, there will be no impact on the existing street network in relation to on-street parking and congestion. Cycle, Parki ng 113 Policy 5.3 of the Southwark Plan and 3C.22 of the London Plan require development to improve conditions for cyclists including providing convenient secure and weatherproof cycle parking. The Southwark Plan does not provide a standard for student accommodation, however TfL requires one cycle space for every two students (or bed spaces), leading to a requirement for 235 cycle spaces based on a possible maximum occupancy of 470 students. The scheme proposes cycle storage for 246 bicycles in the basement for students, wtnch exceeds the requirement. For the commercial units, cycle parking is required at a rate of 1 cycle space per 250sq.m of retail floorspace which calculates to a minimum of 2 cycle spaces. 5 spaces are provided within a separate store in the basement, which is in excess of requirements. In addition, the scheme proposes 10 visitor bike spaces at surface level and a new TfL Bike Hire -docking station which is being secured through the Section 106 legal agreement. Move in/Move out procedure 114 Each student will be sent a Welcome Pack prior to the start of the new academic year that provides information on the Move In procedure. The residence will operate an electronic student registration procedure with the Welcome Packs detailing the requirement to obtain an "arrival slot". This is to ensure an ordered and smooth transition for those students choosing to arrive by car. They will have 20 minutes to unload within their allocated slot however, should parents wish to stay longer after unloading, they can park within the two nearby public paid car parks within St Thomas Street and Snowsfields. The move out procedure is essentially the same as the move in procedure in reverse.

115 The Welcome Packs sent to students will include: • The access routes to the Development (which where 'possible will avoid travel through Central London) and will seek to route traffic via main routes to the

Site. Details of parking and loading provision in the immediate locality of the Site will be provided with comprehensive information on restrictions, length of stay and penalties and, in addition, information on congested traffic times, to ensure that users are discouraged in the strongest possible terms from behaving in a manner which will cause any disruption to the local road network. It is also anticipated that this detailed information will serve as a further discouragement to driving and encouragement of the use of public transport and it is noted here that the information both on public transport and on car access will be phrased in such a way to reinforce the encouragement of public transport access Details of car parking locations off street and of regulations on surrounding streets and for immediate loading; this will include details of (i) on street loading constraints and opportunities and (ii) wider-area public (pay) car parking which can be used post-unloading by parents.

116 The Move In/Move Out procedures are included in the Transport Assessment, the Service Management Plan, and also the Student Accommodation Plan which is. to be included within the legal agreement for the development. It will also be subject to annual reviews to ensure it is operating effectively. 117 In addition to the above, it is anticipated that, due to the highly accessible nature of the site, many students will arrive by public transport. Travel Plan 118 A Travel Plan was submitted with the application to promote more sustainable transport choices such as walking, cycling and public transport. The Section 106 Agreement will cover the Travel Plan monitoring within which time necessary adjustments can be made in accordance with the success and evolution of the scheme. Servicing 119 The service bay within the basement can accommodate van deliveries whilst refuse will be moved by management from the basement stores to the kerb in Melior Street for collection. Larger deliveries can be accommodated within an existing service bay located across Weston Street within Guy's Hospital. 120 Overall, the proposal is considered to be consistent with policies 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.6 and 5.7 of the Southwark Plan and that the development will not result in any adverse impacts in relation to transport. It would help promote non-car modes of transport and would provide an acceptable level of car parking and bicycle storage. Planning obligations (S.106 undertaking or agreement) 121 Policy 2.5 of the Southwark Plan and 6A.5 of the London Plan advise that planning obligations can be secured to overcome the negative impacts of a generally acceptable proposal. Policy 2.5 of the Southwark Plan is reinforced by the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Section 106 Planning Obligations, which sets out in detail the type of development that qualifies for planning obligations, and Circular as/os, which advises that every planning application will be judged on its own merits against relevant policy, guidance and other material considerations when assessing planning obligations.

122 The applicant has submitted a proposed Heads of Terms based on the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. As the scheme is for student accommodation, contributions in relation to Education and Children's Play are not required and the contributions

have been calculated on future completed development. 123

occupancy

rates

(Le. bed spaces)

within

the

The details below set out the contributions offered by the applicant in this case. These figures were discussed at length with officers during pre-application and either meet or exceed the minimum contributions required by the Planning Obligations SPD toolkit. a) Employment and training • The applicant proposes to provide their own Work Place Coordinator. In the event that a WPC is not provided, a financial contribution of £311,646 is required. • Employment During Construction Management Fee: £25,269 b) Public Open Space • £67,187 c) Sports development • The applicant has advised that students will have access to the Pawi Gym facilities and swimming pool within the main campus. Accordingly, the Sports Development contribution is not required. However, if evidence is not produced ensuring students have access to these facilities, a £163,956 financial contribution is required. c) Strategic Transport • £105,293 d) Site Specific Transport • £30,000 contribution towards a new pedestrian crossing over Weston Street • £20,000 contribution towards a contraflow cycle lane in Snowsfields from Weston Street to St Thomas Street e) Public Realm • As part of the development, the applicant will be providing new pavements from the building line to the kerb edge on St Thomas Street, Weston Street, and Melior Streets as well as the provision of the open space within the site to the indicative val ue of £321 ,180 • The applicant has also offered to repave the opposite pavement in Weston Street to the extent of their site to the indicative value of £21,142 • New street lighting to the indicative value of £15,500 to be provided by the applicant, and • The applicant will remove the tarmac in Melior Street to expose the granite setts to the indicative value of £23,200 f) Health • The applicant has advised that students will have access health facilities provided by King's College. Accordingly, the Health contribution is not required. However, if evidence is not produced ensuring students have access to these facilities, a £218,550 financial contribution is required. g) Archaeology • £14,402 h) Heritage • The applicant has offered £50,000 to go towards repairs and maintenance of the listed arches in St Thomas Street

i) Transport for London • The applicant is to provide a 16-bicycle docking station on the proposed area of open space and will make a financial contribution of £115,000 for the management and maintenance of the docking station. 124 Total Contributions: • Cash contributions: £427,151 • Administration fee of 2%: £8,543 • Total financial contribution: £435,694 • Total Contribution: £1,510,868 (financial contribution of £435,694 combined with Equivalent in Kind contribution of £381 ,022 and equivalent in lieu contributions of £694,152 if not provided by the applicant). 125 The following clauses are also to be included within the Section 106 Agreement: • Restrict the use of the accommodation to full-time students and university staff only during term-time and that the accommodation should only be let at a rent no greater than rents of comparable student housing in order to ensure the affordability of the housing to this user group. • Restrict the occupation of the units to ensure that all single rooms remain in single occupancy in accordance with the submitted plans. • Ensure that the development may not be used for any use other than to provide accommodation for full-time higher education students and staff during term-time. During the holiday period the accommodation is not to be used independently by a hostel or hotel operator, but can be used by the university for uses related to the institution's operations, including housing summer school students and university staff. • The submission and approval of a Residence Management Plan • Commitment to developing, implementing and monitoring a travel plan including the appointment of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator; • Details of the public realm works to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority. • The applicant will be required to enter into a s278 agreement with the Highways Authority in relation to public realm. • The applicant has agreed that Guy's and St Thomas' Trust are to be a signatory in respect of construction clauses to avoid adverse impacts on the hospital during construction. • Amendment to the Traffic Management Order restricting occupiers from obtaining parking permits and a £2,750 financial contribution. The contributions agreed are considered to provide significant environmental improvements in the area and adequately mitigate against the impacts of the development in accordance with Policy 2.5 of the Southwark Plan. In the absence of a legal agreement being completed by 20 December 2010, the applicant has failed to adequately mitigate against the impacts of the development and, in accordance with Article 22 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (England) (Amendment) Order 2003, it is recommended that the application be refused for the following reason: "In the absence of a signed Section 106 Agreement, there is no mechanism in place to , avoid or mitigate the impact of the proposed development on the public realm, public open space, the transport network, health facilities and employment and the proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy 2.5 of the Southwark Plan and Policy 6A5 of the London Plan." Sustainable development implications

126

127

128

Policy 3..3 of the Southwark Plan asserts that development will not be granted unless the economic, environmental and social impacts of a development have been addressed through a Sustainability Assessment. Policy 3.4 of the Southwark. Plan seeks energy efficient development. Policy 3.9 advises that all development shouldincorporate measures to reduce the demand for water supply. Policy 4.8 of the London Plan requires that major development schemes should provide an assessment of their energy demands and demonstrate how they have taken steps to apply the Mayor's energy hierarchy. These policies are reinforced by the London Plan which requires a demonstration that the scheme has applied the Mayor's enetgy hierarchy and that a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of 20% can be gained from on site renewable energy generation (required by London Plan policies 4A.1 and 4A.7).

129 The proposed development has been designed to achieve a BREEAM rating of 'Excellent' which exceeds the minimum requirement of 'Very Good'. 130 Be lean: the proposed development uses less energy through: • Improved U-values • Naturally ventilated rooms • Highly efficient variable refrigerant volume with heat recovery shall provide heating and cooling where required • Use of high efficacy heat recovery units where appropriate • Use of low energy lighting systems 131 Be Clean: the proposed development supplies energy efficiently though: • Use of a natural gas fired CHP system • Use of high efficient gas fired boilers Be Green: renewable energy: • 20Dsqm of photovoltaic panels are proposed within the roof of the southern tower whichequates to 1.93% carbon reduction.

132

133 The combined C02 reductions from the energy savings, CHP, and renewable energy technology equates to approximately 30%. 134 In addition to the above measures, the revised scheme now proposes a green roof over the 8 storey element between the two core elements and water use is proposed to not exceed 110 litres per person per day.

135 Whilst the development may not reach the full 20% renewables target, it is considered that under the circumstances given the substantial overall C02 saving, there Is no objection in terms of the approach to energy, and it is considered that the Energy Hierarchy has been followed appropriately. By achieving a BREEAM rating of 'excellent' the scheme has indicated that it will be in compliance with Sustainahility Policies of both the London Plan and Southwark Plan Archaeology 136 The site in question is located within the Borough, Bermondsey and Rivers Archaeological Priority Zone. The evaluation report submitted with the application revealed a late med ieval timbe r revetm ent dated styllsti.caHy to the mid 15th century, by comparison with waterfronts found at Fastolfs Palace on Tooley Street. Comments from the timber specialist indicate that this late waterfront may be part of a chronological sequence of waterfronts within this area. A number of the results from excavations in this area have shown that, due to the presence of the waterfront, it was not possible for the evaluation to descend to levels where Roman material has the

potential to be encountered. Conclusion on planning issues 137 The proposed development is located within an area designated for growth and is located adjacent to a major public transport interchange. Accordingly, it is considered that a high intensity student accommodation scheme is appropriate given that local and regional policy encourage development in highly accessible locations to enable sustainable development. King's College london are a well respected educational institution with a significant presence within the borough and the addition of 470 student rooms will assist in them meeting the need for good quality accommodation within the london Bridge King's College/Guy's Hospital campus. The london Bridge Opportunity Area acknowledges that tall buildings may be appropriate within the area and it is considered that the striking design of the building, together with its elegant form, will create an appropriate third element within the emerging cluster with Guy's Tower and the Shard.

138

139

140 The proposed development is acceptable in terms of principle of the use, design and the height, bulk and massing. It is in conformity with the adopted development plan and does not present any sufficient grounds for refusal. Accordingly, it is recommended that the application be approved. Community impact statement 141 In line with the Council's Community Impact Statement the impact of this application has been assessed as part of the application process with regard to local people in respect of their age, disability, faith/religion, gender, race and ethnicity and sexual orientation. Consultation with the community has been undertaken as part of the application process. The impact on local people is set out above. Consultations 142 This resubmitted application follows the withdrawal of a previous development for student accommodation (application reference 09-AP~2657). There were 8 objections, 2 general observations and 5 letters of support submitted in relation to the previous application. Details of consultation undertaken in respect of this application are set out in Appendix 1. By coincidence, the statutory consultation period for this' application coincided with the additional public consultation carried out for the draft BBlB SPD. Of the 173 objections, 147 have been submitted as template objections in response to the BBlB SPD that have also raised concern with the proposed development. These objections generally relate to: • • • • The timing of the SPD when considering the application in relation to tall buildings guidance That the building will not be built as proposed That the application is a paper exercise to increase the value of the site That King's College has no relationship with the proposed development

143

Appl icant' 5 Can sultation 144 As well as the statutory consultation carried out by the Council following submission of the planning application, the applicant has carried out their own public consultation on

the proposals and submitted a Statement of Community Involvement. a list of consultation carried out by the applicant from March 2009: •

The fonowing is

• •

• • •

• •

• • • •

Briefing information sent, and meetings offered, to ward councillors and Cllrs Paul Noblet and Nicholas Stanton in 2009, (they were then Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Council Leader respectively at the London Borough of Southwark) Briefings with Bermondsey Street Area Partnership. Distribution of a newsletter advertising the pre-planning public consultation exhibition on 11 May 2009 to Southwark Council members and 1,000 local addresses including businesses and residents. Exhibition promoted on SE1 website. A pre-planning public consultation exhibition was held on the application site, 40-46 Weston Street on 20 and 21 May 2009 from 4pm - 8pm. A summary report of the comments made by those who attended the public consultation exhibition was sent to the Councillors and Officers in the London Borough of Southwark. Presentation to London Borough of Southwark Design Review Panel (11 May and 10 November 2009). Distribution of a second newsletter to update parties on the proposals and givin·g further opportunity to provide feedback in the form ofa detachable comments card (13 July 2009). Consultation with London Bridge Business Improvement District including a presentation to the London Bridge Construction Support Group Meeting on 3 March 2010 and a meeting with London Bridge Business Improvement District on 3 September 2010. Meetings with Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Trust on 20 January 2010 and 31 August 2010. Meetings with Threadneedle and their Planning Advisors, Indigo Planning, on 1 February 2010 and 7 September 2010. Briefing meeting with CABE on 23 June 2010 and 1 September 2010 including an Internal Presentation to CABE on6 September2010. Briefing information sent and meetings offered to local ward councillors, CUr Fiona Colley (new Cabinet member for Regeneration) in September 2010.

Consultation replies 145 Details of consultation responses received, includIng a summary of those responses, are set out in Appendix 2. Human rights implications 146 This planning applicationeng.ages certain human rights under the Human Rights Act 2008 (the HRA). The HRA prohibits unlawful interference by public bodies with conventions rights. The term 'engage' simply means that human rights may be affected or relevant. 147 This application has the legitimate aim of providing a mixed use development for retail use and student accommodation. The ri.ghts potentially engaged by this application, including the right to a fair trial and the riqht to respect for private and family life are not considered to be un!awfullyinterfered with by this proposal.

Application file: 10~AP~2754 Southwark Local Development Framework and Development Plan Documents

Regeneration and Neig hbourhoods Department 160 Tooley Street London SE12TZ

PIanning enq uiries telephone: 020 7525 5403 Planning enquiries email: plan ning. enq uiries@southwark.gov .uk Case officer telephone:: 02075255906 Council website: www.southwark. ov.uk

APPENDICES

AUDIT TRAIL Gary Rice .~Head of Development Management Gordon Adams 17/11/2010

Officer Title Strategic Director of Communities, Law & Governance Strategic Director of Regeneration and Ne ighbou rhoods Strategic Director of Environment and Housing

Comments Sought No Yes Yes

Comments included NIA Yes Yes

APPENDIX 1 Consultation undertaken Site notice

date: 05/10/2010

Press notice date: 30/09/210 Case officer site visit date: Various over the preceding 01/11/2010 unaccompanied. Neighbour consultation letters sent: 27/09/2010 Internal services consulted: • • • • • • Economic Development and Strategies Environmental Protection Team Planning Policy Transport Planning Archaeology Officer Public Realm 10 months, most recent

Statutory and non-statutory organisations consulted: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Metropolitan Police Service Environment Agency Greater London Authority Thames Water Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment Corporation of London London Borough of Islington London Borough of Camden London Borough of Lambeth City of Westminster English Heritage Historic Royal Palaces London Fire and Emergency Planning Transport for London

Neighbours and local groups consulted: • • • Team London Bridge Bermondsey Street Area Partnership Letters were sent to 670 nearby occupiers in accordance with the map included at Appendix. 3 - a full list of those consulted is available on the case file.

APPENDIX 2 Consultation responses received Internal services Environmental Protection Team: sought additional information; no objection subject to conditions Public Realm: no objection; new pavements should be secured through the Section 106 agreement. Transport planning: requested second lift for cycle store; cycle details to be secured by condition; car parking acceptable subject to parking permit restrictions on residents; requested allocated slots for move in procedure; pedestrian assessment should be carried out; pavements around the site should bereplaced. Archaeology officer: archaeological revetment; requested conditions evaluation revealed a late medieval timber

Planning Policy: sought further information and justification in relation to land use and energy Statutory and non-statutory organisations London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority: plans. raised no objections: requested site

Metropolitan Police Service (Secured by Design}: no objections; glazing. should have a laminate thickness of at least 6.8mm London Fire Brigade: dry risers to be included. London Borough of Lambeth: no objections raised.

London Borough of Camden: no objections raised. City of Westminster: no objections raised. Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment: accept that the site is appropriate for a tall building; find the impact of the height proposed on the view from the inner ward of the Tower of London acceptable; proposal will form part of a background of existing and proposed buildings including City Hall, More london, and the Shard; student accommodation is suitable in this highly accessible location at the edge of King's College campus; support the client's aspiration to provide high quality student accommodation, but consider the 'quill' narrative to be working against the integrity and sustainability of the architecture, the quality of the accommodation, and the university; form and detailing is over complex and internal. planning is convoluted; scheme does not meet standards set out in Cabe's 'Guidance on tal'l buildings' and are unable to support application. Transport for london: principle of development is we!comed; requested further information; sought a contribution towards Legible London; cycle parking is in line with TfL standards; welcomes the car free nature of the development; on going discussions in relation to a larger Bike Hire docking station. English Heritage: in respect of the views of the Tower of London in its setting,

especially from the north, the impact of the proposed building in its revised form would not be significant. However, it is the impact that the proposed building will upon views within the Tower - and especially from the inner ward - that are more significant. The intrusion of the modern world upon the strong historic and architectural character and appearance of the Tower's inner sanctum will harm the Outstanding Universal Value of the Tower of London World Heritage Site. For this reason, English Heritage object to the proposal. . Historic Royal Palaces: acknowledge efforts made to develop high quality design; have expressed concerns from the outset over the top of the building breaking the ridge line of the Queen's House seen from in front of the Waterloo block from within the inner ward of the Tower of London World Heritage Site; intrusion in this view would be harmful. Greater London Authority: • Principle of development: applicant has adequately justified the Joss of 81a office space and the provision of student housing is accepted. • Student housing: broadly accepted subject to obligations included in the legal agreement • Urban design: external appearance of the building is of the highest order and consistent with the LVMF; question impact of internal layout, access to lifts and laundry facilities • Inclusive design: laundry facilities should be on every floor • Climate change: seeking further information • Transport: seeking further information Thames Water: no objection raised. Environment Agency: no objections subject to conditions. Neighbours and local groups In objection: As a result of the public consultation, a number of template objections were received. Listed below are addresses for each followed by the concerns raised in each letter. Template 1: 5 Grange Walk SE1 30T; 28a Kings Ave SW4 88Q; Flat 11, 15 Cluny Place, Icon Apartments SE1 4QS; 31 Mill Street SE1 2AX; 89 Borough High Street; Apartment 4, 72 Weston Street SE 1 3QG; Leathermarket Street; Flat 17, 70 Weston Street SE 1 3QG; 34 Oxford Drive, Bermondsey Street SE1 2FB; 4a Brighton Drive, Northolt UB5 4DQ; 28 Swan Close, Feltham TW13 6PA; 76 Orwell Court, Pownall Road E8 4PR; 43 Hamilton Road W5 2EH; 1 Red Hood Close, Mitcham Croydon CR4 1JN; 171 Wilmot Street E2 OBY; 18 Oxford Drive, Bermondsey Street SE1 2FB; Flat c 55 Flaxman Road SE5 9DN; Flat 1 Stanstead Road Forest Hill SE231 HP; 72 Mountfield Close, Catford SE6 1AF; No address supplied: 20 • Proposed development is an attempt to pre-empt tall buildings policy within the draft Borough Bankside/London Bridge SPD

Officer comment: see paragraphs 62 and 63 of the report. Template 2: No address supplied: 2

Proposed development is an attempt to pre-empt tall buildings policy within the draft Borough Bankside/London Bridge SPO see paragraphs 62 and 63 of the report

Officer comment:

Template 3: 20 St Thomas Street; Flat 7, 70 Weston Street; 29A Belfast Road N16 6UN; 11 Bermondsey Square SE1 3UN; 28 Burwash House Kipling Estate SE1 3PW; 28 Strathaven Road SE12 8BY; 178 Berglen Court E14 7JY; Arch 817 Holyrood Street SE1 2EL; 41 Oxford Drive SE1 2FB; Arch 897 Holyrood Street SE1 2EL; Flat 4, 191 Bermondsey Street SE1 3UW; 23 Pooles Lane SW10 ORH; 44 Voltaire Road SW4 60; Flat 31, 239 Long Lane SE1 4PT; 20 Raeburn Street SW2 50U; 55 Broughton Avenue N3 3EN; 45 Clamel Road, Teddington, Middlesex TW1 OST: 18 Kings Road, Aldershot, Hants GU11 3PO; 205 Antonine Heights SE1 30B; 58a Wickham Road SE4 1LS; % Tanner Street SE1 4TL; 210 Bermondsey Stree SE3 3TQ; Flats 3 and 9, 230 Long Lane SE1 4QB; 153 Tower Bridge Road; 47 Pages Walk SE1 4HO; 21 Providence Square, Bermondsey Wall West SE1 264; Flat G10 Alaska Building 61 Grange Road SE1 3BB; 271 Neckinger Estate SE16 30B; 15 Spa Road SE16 3SA; Flat 9, 136 Bermondsey Street SE1; 37 Stockholme House E1 8HR; 361/2 and 46 Tanners Yard 239 Long Lane SE1 4PT No address supplied: 4 Preservation and future character of Bermondsey village would be pre-judged and undermined by granting permission. Officer comment: see paragraphs 62 and 63 and paragraphs 87 and 88 of the report • King's College acknowledge that it will never be built as proposed. Officer comment: through the approved drawings and detailed conditions, officer's are satisfied that the building will be constructed as proposed. • It is just a paper exercise enhancing asset values. Officer comment: rio! a planning issue Template 4: 5 Red Post Hi!! SE21 7BX; St Giles Trust 64-68 Camberwel! Church Street SE5 8BJ; 110 Ribblesdale Road SW16 6SR; Unit 6 139-143 Bermondsey Street SE1 3UW; Flat 35 12 Bermondsey Square SE1 3FD; 4 Lockwood Square Drummond Road SE16 2HS; Flat 10 64 Weston Street SE1 30J; 608 Antonine Heights SE1 30F; 20 Mossford Street E3 4TH; 22 Kitson Road SE5 7LF; 7 Ennnismore Mews SW7 1AP; 38a Beaconsfield Road SE3 7LZ; 10 Winnington Way, Surrey GU21 3HL No address supplied: 1 • Proposed building cannot be built, either technically or economically. Officer comments: the applicant has advised that they have factored in the additional cost of the detailed design; architect has confirmed the building can be constructed as proposed. • Paper exercise in increasing site's value by establishing high rise precedent Officer comment: not a planning issue • The client is not King's College Officer comment: see paragraph 49 of the report • Application should not be approved in advance of draft SPD Officer comment: see paragraphs 62 and 63 of the report •

Template 5: 30 Curlew Street SE1 2ND; 68 Tiller Road E14 8NN; 178 Berglen Court E14 7JY; 12

Somerford Grove 415 Olympic House N16 7TX; 10 Bickel's Yard 150-153 Bermondsey Street SE1 3HA; 25 Copperfield House Wolsely Street SE1 2BN; Dickinson House, Turin Street E2 6BP; 64 Bentley Lane, Dalston N16 4HX (returned undelivered by Royal Mail); Bramah House, Bermondsey Street SE1 3XF; 92a East Hill, Wandsworth SW18 2HG; 17 York Road, Loughboroqgh, Leicestershire LE11 30A; 2 and 24 Mulvaney Way SE1 3RG; Flat 19, 70 Weston Street SE1 3HJ; 7th Floor, 2 More London Riverside SE1 2JT; 54 Exeter Road Croydon CRO 6EG; 120 Oswald Building 374 Queenstown Road SW8 4PJ; 11 Adolphus Street SE8 4LU; 11 Cheseman Street SE26 4KA; 22 Treby Street E3 4TE; 23 Curtis Way SE1 5XW; Flat 19 The Grain Stores 70 Weston Street SE1 3HJ; Unit 6 Cluny Place SE1 4QS; 6 Goldhill Road Leicester LE2 3LE; A410 The Jam Factory 27 Green Walk SE1 4TI; 200A Finnis Street Bethnal Green E2 OOX; 22 Arthur Road Holloway N7 6DR; 9 The Printworks 230 Long Lane SE1 4QA; 44 Ability Plaza Arbutus Street E8 4DT; 6 Horselydown Lane SE1 2LN; 67 Southwark Park Road SE16 3TY; 129 The Circle, Queen Elizabeth Street SE1 2JJ; 12 Grandison Road SW11 6LW; 53 Broughton Avenue Finchley N3 CEN; G10 Alaska Building, Grange Road SE1 3BB; 11 Anerley Hill SE19 3BH; 502 Cedar Court, 1 Royal Oak Yard SE1 3GA; 15 Grandison Road SW11 6LW; 6 Grange Walk SE1 30T; 7-9 Crucifix Lane SE1 3JW (returned undelivered by Royal Mail); 34 Henshaw Street SE17 1PE; 22 Guiness Court, Snowsfields SE1 3SX; 28 Potier Street SE1 4UX; 7 Sanford Walk SE14 6NS; Appt 66 Newington Causeway SE1 6BA: 15 Arundel Buildings, Webb Street SE1 4AS; 89a Cricklewood Broadway NW2 3EL; 2 Morocco Street SE1 3HB; 88 Butlers and Colonial Wharf SE1 2PY No address supplied: 3 • Cabe and King's College say that it can't be built Officer comments: the architect has confirmed the building can be constructed as proposed. • Paper exercise to increase site value Officer comment: not a planning issue • King's College misrepresented as the client Officer comment: see paragraph 49 of the report • Application should not be approved in advance of draft SPD Officer comment: see paragraphs 62 and 63 of the report Non-template: 76 Bermondsey Street SE1 3UD: proposal would act as a catalyst to future planning applications, setting a precedent for other tall buildings; ugly in design; height should be in keeping with other neighbourhood properties, capped to 10-15 storeys. Flats 10 and 11, 22 Leathe rmarket Street SE 1 3HP: proposa I is an attem pt to preempt and promote high rise concept prior to consultation on draft SPD. Flat 11, 51-53 Leroy Street SE1 4SR: too many design ideas being squeezed into constrained site; objects to the design; proposal misses an opportunity to define corner of Weston and St Thomas Streets. Flat 3, 72 Weston Street SE1 3QG: surrounding buildings. building is too high and out of character with

409 Vesta Court, City Walk SE1 3BP: high rise buildings being erected closer to the Bermondsey Street conservation area completely out of place and will damage the character of the conservation area; _ proposal will set a precedent for further high rise buildings along St Thomas Street and Weston Street.

Flat 2, 72 Weston Street SE1 30G: proposal wlll not provide quality student accommodation; no design integrity, coherence, or longevity; concern over transport impacts; inadequate existing infrastructure and facilities to support increase in people; loss of sunlight; glass building will reflect noise; inadequate public spate at ground level. No address provided: proposal would only be for overseas student population; should be a lower scaled building. Flat 7, 40 Snowsfields SE1 3SU: proposal will block light; impact on character of area; students already make a noise nuisance; concern over noise and construction. Flat 5, The Morroco Store, 1 Leathermarket Street SE1 3HN: proposal would cause disruption; high rise buildings will ruin the historical atmosphere of the area; concern over traffic in St Thomas Street and congestion at Bermondsey Street; should convert existing building or not go higher. 145 Bermondsey Street: proposal is too tall and out of context; will create canyon effect on Weston Street; concern over traffic impacts when students are moving in and out; over development of the site; proposal should include affordable housing; concern regarding overshadowing on the surrounding streets and buildings; concerns over wind tunnelling; unconvincing skyline; facade uncluttered, looks confusing and complicated, and not of sufficient quality. 70 Weston Street: scale and intensity of the proposal is excessive; proposal would dominate the area and harm the character. Flat 9 The Printworks 230 Long Lane SE1 40B; proposal should not be considered in advance of draft SPO; unacceptable to place a modern building opposite listed arches; nota suitable transition to conservation area; proposal is not for housing which there is a need for; transitional international students will not benefit local community; believe that view of St Paul's will be obscured; shadows and wind tunnels will be created. Flat 14, 22E Leathermarket Street SE1 3HP: tall buildinqs at odds with character and spirit of Bermondsey Street and Bermondsey Village conservation areas; current infrastructure will not cope new footfal.l;insufficient school provision in the neighbourhood; GPs are oversubscribed; concern over traffic impacts. Bermondsey Street Area Partnership Planninq Subcommittee: object to the height in relation to the surrounding context; too tall and would create canyon effect; overdevelopment of the site; overshadowing of surrounding streets; wind tunnelling; concern over the design; insufficient servicing provisions; support the principle of student accommodation although no affordable housing provision provided. Threadneedle Investments (Beckett House): proposal is designed in isolation and will prevent meaningful development of Beckett House; ability to implement is questionable in respect of building regulations and party wall agreements; desiqn quality is not high enough; lack of EIA No address provided: tall buildings do not suit the area and take away light. No address provided: object to the three towers due to design, loss of light, noise, dust, design, increase in traffic . . Top Flat, 108 Lady Margaret Road N19 5EX: application should not be considered in advance of SPD

47 Pages Walk SE1 4HO: object to the height 41 Guildford Grove SE10 8JY: will set a precedent for tall buildings 31A Herne Hill Road: object to the height Flat 6, 59 Great Suffolk Street: preservation of the area development opposes the spirit of conservation and

FlatS The' Printworks 230 Long Lane SE1 4BQ: modern building does not compliment listed arches; does not provide suitable transition to conservation area; student accommodation is not of obvious benefit to the local community; does not provide g.eneral. housing; views of St Paul's will. be affected; impact of shadows and wind; too high; design is fussy; valuation exercise Flat 25, 161 Grange Road SE1 3GH: modern building does not compliment listed arches; does not provide suitable transition to conservation area; student accommodation is not of obvious benefit to the local community; does not provide general housing; views of St Paul's will be affected; impact of shadows and wind; too high; design is fussy; valuation exercise The Tanneries, 55 Bermondsey Street: too high; wind impacts; street level not able to cope with the volume of people with new developments in the area Bermondsey Village Action Group: paper exercise to increase value of the site; proposal will never be built for technical and economic reasons; proposal is premature in relation to the SPO; impact on the capacity of the surrounding infrastructure; impact on the quality of the public space around the building in respect of over-shadowing, wind tunnelling, and traffic; impact on the protected views from Parliament Hill to St Paul's Cathedral; impact on heritage assets and the conservation area including overshadowing. the railway arches; CAZ policy calls for employment and housing; cost for student accommodation will be too high; whilst not of architectural merit, the existing buHding is capable of be.ing retained; disagree that there is noloss of office tloorspace: replacement building. should be of the same scale and massing as the existing; use should be for office; student accommodation does not currently provide affordable housing - attempt to pre-empt the Core Strategy; fails to address traffic issues; impact of traffic during move in period. In support: No address provided: suitable development due to proximity with Guy's Tower and the Shard; design is of high standard. Address withheld: design is thoroughly worked out; scheme is less bulky and more refined than previous; good site for medical student accommodation next to Guy's Hospital; will give area mixed use; bling design which Gould work well against su rro unding buiIdings; S 106 shauld secu re quality pavements a IJ arou nd the buiIding; queried relationship with Beckett House. 1 Leathermarket Court SE1 3HS: design is outstanding and will compliment the Shard; hopefully enhance arid re-invigorate St Thomas Street; student accommodation will support local economy For comment No address provided: proposal should exceed BREEAM 'Excellent'; should better

APPENDIX 3 Neighbour consultee map

RECOMMENDATION
This document shows the case officer's recommended decision for the application referred to below. This document is not a decision notice for this application.

Applicant Application Type Recommendation

!nvestream Limited Full Planning Permission Grant subject to Legal Agreement and GLA Draft of Decision Notice

Reg. Number Case Number

10-AP-2754

TP1214-40

Planning Permission was GRANTED for the following development: Demolition of Capital House, and erection of a 21 and 31 storey building (2 basement levels plus ground and 30 upper storeys) toa maximum height of 1.08.788m (14,738sqm GEA) to provide 470 student accommodation units (sui generis) on floors 1-27 (13,289sqm GEA), ancillary bar, gym, library and student hub on floors 28,30, retail/cafe units (flexible class A 1, A3 use) (286sqm GEA) at ground floor level, 261 cycle parking spaces, 2 disabled car parking spaces and 1 service bay at basement level, associated refuse and recycling, and an area of public open space. At: CAPITAL HOUSE, 40-46 WESTON STREET, LONDON SE1 3QD with application received on 20109/2010

In accordance

and Applicant's Drawing Nos. Drawing nos: 0802 CH-E-00-OS-1 01 P2; 0802 CH-E-20-0G-301 P2; 0802 CH-E-20-MF301 P2; 0802 CH-E-20-MF-302 P2; 0802 CH-E-20-MF-303P2; 0802 CH-E-20-MF-304 P2; 0802 CH-E-20-MF-30S P2; 0802 CH-E-25-MF-201 P2; 0802 CH-E-2S-MF-202 P2; 0802 CH-E-25-MF-203 P2; 0802 CH-E-20-MF-204 P2; 0802 CHE-08-0G-301 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-301 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-302 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-303 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF304 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-305 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-201 P2; 0802 CH-E-08~MF-202 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-203 P2; 0802 CH-E-08-MF-204 P2; 0802 CH-P-00-OS-101 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-B2-301 P2; 0802 CH~P-20-B1-301 P2; 0802 CH-P20-0G-301 P2;. 0802 CH-P~20-01-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-02-301 P2: 0802 CH-P-20-03-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-04-301 P2; 0802 CH-P~20-05-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-06-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-07-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-08-301 P2; 0802 CHP-20-09-301 P2;. 0802 CH-P-20-10-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-11-301 P2; 0802 CH~P-20-12-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-13~301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-14-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-15-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-16-301 P2; 0802 CH~P-20-17-301 P2; 0802 CH· P-20-18-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-18-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-19-301 P2; 0802 CH~P-20-20-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-21-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-22-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-23-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-24-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-25-301 P2; 0802 CHP-20-26-301 P3; 0802 CH-P-20-27-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-28-301 P2; 0802. CH-P-20-29-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-30-301 P2; 0802 CH·P-20-0R·301 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-101 P2; 0802 CH-P·25-MF-102 P2; 0802 CH-P-2S-MF-103 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-l04 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-201 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-202 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-203 P2; 0802 CH-P-25MF-204 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-205 P2; 0802 CH-P-2S-MF-206 P2; 0802 CH-P-26-MF-201 P2; 0802 CH-P-26-MF-202 P2; 0802 CH~P-70-MF-501 P2; 0802 CH-P-70-MF-502 P2; 0802 CH-P-70-MF-503 P2; 0802 CH-P-70-MF-S04 P2; 0802 CH-P-70-MF-SOS P2; 0802 CH-P-70-MF-506 P2; CH-P-MF-501 Rev 2; CH~P-MF-502 Rev 2; CH-P-MF-503 Rev 2; CH-PMF-504 Rev 2; CH-P-MF-505 Hev 2; CH-P-MF-506 Rev 2 Statement of Community Involvement Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare Report Sustainability Statement Transport Assessment Transport Assessment Addendum - Nov 2010 BREEAM Pre-assessment Servicing Management Plan - Nov 2010 Archaeoligical Evaluation Television Reception Impact Assessment Microclimate Wind Assessment Student Accommodation Market Report Autu mn 2010 Tree Survey Air Quality Assessment Phase 1 Environmental Review Student Accommodation Management Plan Noise and Vibration Report Planning Statement Travel Plan - Nov 2010 Flood Risk Assessment Heritage, Townscape & Visual Assessment. Part L2A Compliance and Energy Strategy Report for Weston Street (Quill),

Student Accommodation, London Design and Access Statement

Subject to the following condition: 1 The deve 10 pment hereby permitted shall be beg un before the end of three years from the date ofth Is permission. Reason As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended 2 A full-scale mock-up of one storey of the cladding demonstrating the construction of all and external facing materials including the glazed return facade to be used in the carrying out of this permission shall be constructed and presented on site and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work in connection with this permission Is carried out; the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. These samples must demonstrate how the proposal is to be constructed and the quality of materials to be used. Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the design and details in accordance with Policies: 3.12 Quality in Design; 3.13 Urban Design; of The Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007. 3 1:5/10 section detail-drawings through: • the facades; • parapets; • roof edges; • junctions with the existing buildings; and • heads, ellis and jambs of all openings, to be used in the carrying out of this permission shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work in connection with this permission is carried out; the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the design and details in the interest of the special architectural or historic qualities of the listed building in accordance with Policies: 3.12 Quality in Design; 3.13 Urban Design; of The Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007. 4 Landscape~drawings,1 :50, 1:10 and 1:5 scale drawings of the layouts, planting schedules, materials and edge details of the plaza and the elevated green roof to be used in the carrying out of this permission shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any work in connection with this permission is carried out; the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the design and details in the interest of the special architectural qualities of the existing building and the public spaces around it in accordance with Policies: 3.12 Quality in Design; 3.13 Urban Design; of The Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007. 5 All residential premises shall be designed to attain the following internal noise levels: ".Bedrooms- 30dB LAeq,T* and 45dB LAfmax - Living rooms- 35dB LAeq, T* Reason To ensure that the occupiers and users of the proposed development do not suffer a loss of amenity by reason of excess noise from environmental and transportation sources in accordance with Policy 3.2 'Protection of Amenity' of the Southwark Plan 2007 and PPG 24: Planning and Noise. *T- Night-time 8 hours between 23:00-07:00 and daytime 16 hours between 07:00-23:00. 6 The noise level from any plant (e.g. refrigeration, air conditioning), together with any associated ducting, shall be 10(A) d!3 or more below the lowest measured external ambient LAeq, T* at the site boundary. The equipment shall be installed and constructed in accordance with any approved scheme and be permanently maintained thereafter. Reason To ensure that users of the surrounding area not suffer a loss of amenity by reason of noise nuisance and

other excess noise from plant and that the operation of plant does not add by cumulative effect to the existing sound environment in accordance with Policy 3.1 'Environmental Effects' of the Southwark Plan 2007. *LAeq, T T= 1 hr between 07:00 and 23:00 and 5min between 23:00 and 07:00. 7 The mitigation measures identified in Section 6 of the Air Quality Assessment approved development and permanently retained thereafter. shall be incorporated into the

Reason To ensure the occupants of the rooms identified have acceptable air quality in accordance policy 3.2 of the Southwark Plan 2007. 8 The use hereby permitted shall not be begun until full particulars: and details (2 copies) of a scheme for the ventilation of the premises (including any A3 use and CHP) to an appropriate outlet level, including details of sound .attenuation for any necessary plant and the standard of dilution expected, has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any approval given. Reason In order to that the Council may be satisfied that the ventilation ducting and ancillary equipment will not result in an odour, fume or noise nuisance and will not detract from the appearance of the building in the interests of amenity in accordance with Policy 3.2 of the Southwark Plan 2007. 9 a) Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether Or not it originates on the site. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority prior to implementation. The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: 1 • human health, 2 • property (existing or proposed) including buildi.ngs, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, 3 • adjoining land, 4 • groundwatersand surface waters, 5 • ecological systems, 6 • archaeological sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s}. Thiesmust be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'. b) Submission of Remediation Scheme A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives: and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. c) lrnplernentationof Approved Remediation Scheme The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure that risks from rand contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecolog.ical systems, and to ensure that the devel.opment can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite

receptors in accordance with policy 3.1 Environmental effects of the adopted Southwark Plan 2007 and PPS 23. 10 The development shall not commence until details of an Environmental Management Plan for COnstruction has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that part of the development. The Environmental Management Plan shall oblige the applicant, or developer and its contractor to use all best endeavours to minimise disturbances including but not limited to noise, vibration, dust, smoke and plant emissions emanating from the site during demolition and construction and will include the following information for agreement • A detailed specification of demolition and construction works at each phase of development including consideration of environmental impacts and the required remedial measures. • The specification shall include details of the method of piling. • Engineering measures, acoustic screening and the provision of sound insulation required mitigating or eliminating specific environmental impacts. • Arrangements for publicity and promotion of the scheme during construction. • A commitment to adopt and implement of the ICE Demolition Protocol and Considerate Contractor Scheme registration. All demolition and construction work shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the approved management scheme and code of practice, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason To ensure that and occupiers of neighbouring premises do not suffer a loss of amenity by reason of pollution and nuisance in accordance with Policies 3.1 'Environmental Effects' and 3.2 'Protection of Amenity' of The Southwark Plan 2007.

11

The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the following approved plans: 0802 CH-P-00-OS-101 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-20-01-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-20-o5-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-2o-o9-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-:P-2o-13-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-2o-17-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-20-20-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-20-24-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-20-28-301 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-25-MF-101 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-25-MF-201 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-2S-MF-205 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-7o-MF-501 P2; 0802 0802 CH-P-7o-MF-50S P2; 0802 503 Rev 2; CH-P-MF-504 Rev 2; CH-P-20-B2-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-B1-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-2o-oG-301 P2; CH-P-20-02-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-03-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-o4-301 P2; CH-P-20-06-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-07-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-o8-301 P2; CH-P-20-10-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-2o-11-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-2o-12-301 P2; CH-P-20-14-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-15-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-2o-16-301 P2; CH-P-2o-18-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-18-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-2o-19-301 P2; CH-P-20-21-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-22-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-2o-2s-301 P2; CH-P-20-2S-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-26-301 P3; 0802 CH-P-20-27-301 P2; CH-P-20-29-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-30-301 P2; 0802 CH-P-20-0R-301 P2; CH-P-25-MF-1 02 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-1 03 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-1 04 P2; CH-P-25-MF-202 P2; 0802 CH-P-25-MF-203 P2; 0802 CH-P-2S-MF-204 P2; CH-P-2S-MF-206 P2; 0802 CH-P-26-MF-201 P2; 0802 CH-P-26-MF-202 P2; CH-P-7o-MF-502 P2; 0802 CH-P-7o-MF-503 P2; 0802 CH-P-7o-MF-504 P2; CH-P-70-MF-S06 P2; CH-P-MF-S01 Rev 2; CH-P-MF-502 Rev 2; CH-P-MFCH-P-MF-SoS Rev 2; CH-P-MF-506 Rev 2

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. 12 Details of the facilities to be provided for the secure storage of cycles shall be submitted to (2 copies) and approved by the local planning authority before the development hereby approved is commenced and the premises shall not be occupied until any such facilities as may have been approved have been provided. Thereafter the cycle parking facilities provided shall be retained and the space used for no other purpose without the prior written consent of the local planning authority, to whom an application must be made. Reason In order to ensure that satisfactory safe and secure cycle parking facilities are provided and retained in order to encourage the use of cycling as an alternative means of transport to the development and to reduce reliance on the use of the private car in accordance with policy 5.3 of the Southwark Plan. 13 Details of any external lighting [including design, power and position of luminaires] and security surveillance equipment of external areas surrounding the building shall be submitted to (2 copies) and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any such lighting or security equipment is installed and the development shall thereafter not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any approval given. Reason In order that the Council may be satisfied as to the details of the development in the interest of the visual

amenity of the area, the safety and security of persons using the area and the amenity and privacy of adjoining occupiers in accordance with Policies 3.2 and 3.14 of the Southwark Plan. 14 No roof plant, equipment or other structures, other than as shown on the plans hereby approved or approved pursuant to a condition of this permission, shall be placed on the roof or be permitted to project above the roofline of any part of the building[s] as shown on elevational drawings or shall be permitted to extend outside of the roof plant enclosure[s] of any building[s] hereby permitted without the prior written consentof the Local Planning Authority. Reason In order to ensure that no additional plant etc. is placed on the roof of the building in the interest of the appearance and design of the building and the visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policies 3.12, 3.13, and 3.2 of the Southwark Plan. 15 Not withstanding the provisions of Parts 24 and 25 The Town & Country Planning [General Permitted Development] Order 1995 [as amended or re-enacted] no external telecommunications equipment or structures shall be placed on the roof or any other part of a building hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason In order to ensure that no telecommunications plant or equipment which might be detrimental to the design and appearance of the building and visual amenity of the area is installed on the roof of the building in accordance with Policies 3.12, 3.13, and 32 of the Southwark Plan. 16 Before any work hereby authorised begins, the applicant shall secure the implementation of a programme of archaeological mitigation works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason In order that the details of the programme of works for the archaeological mitigation are suitable with regard to the impacts of the proposed development and the nature and extent of archaeological remains on site in accordance with policy 3.19 of the Southwark Plan 2007. 17 Within six months of the completion of archaeological site works, an assessment report detailing the proposals for post-excavation works, publication of the site and preparation of the archive shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and that the works detailed in this assessment report shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. Reason In order that the archaeological interests of the site are secured with regard to the details of the postexcavation works, publication and archiving to ensure the preservation of archaeological remains by record in accordance with policy 3.19 of the Southwark Plan (July 2007). 18 Before any work hereby authorised begins, a detailed scheme showing the complete scope and arrangement of the foundation design and all ground works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. Reason In order that details of the foundations, ground works and all below ground impacts of the proposed development are detailed and accord with the programme of archaeological mitigation works to ensure the preservation of archaeological remains by record and in situ in accordance with policy 3.19 of the Southwark Plan (July 2007). 19 The window glazing of any non-residential ground floor unit to any public space shall not be painted or otherwise obscured and shall permanently retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. Reason To safeguard the appearance and character of the development and to maintain vitality at ground floor level within the public square in accordance with policy 3.12 Quality in Design of the Southwark Plan 2007. 20 Prior to the first occupation of the commercial elements, a certificated BREEAM final certification (or other verification process agreed with the Local Planning Authority) shall be provided, confirming that the development has achieved a minimum 'Excellent' rating. Reason

To ensure the proposal complies with Policy 3.4 of the Southwark Plan 2007. 21 Development shall not commence until a drainage strategy detailing any on and/or off site drainage works, has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the sewerage undertaker. No discharge of foul or surface water from the site shall be accepted into the public system until the drainage works referred to in the strategy have been completed. Reason To ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to cope with the new development. 22 The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) for 40-46 Weston Street, prepared by Pell Frischmann, dated September 2010, reference A12216-VAA-FRA-0001 and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA: 1. Thresholds to basements are set no lower than 300mm above the surrounding AOD land level of 4.5m

2.

Finished floor levels for residential aspect of development are set no lower than 7 m above Ordnance Datum (AOD).

Reason To reduce the impact of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants and to reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants. 23 Prior to their occupation the wheelchair accessible units as shown on the drawing/s hereby approved shall be constructed and fitted out to the South East London Wheelchair DeSign Guide. Reason To ensure the wheelchair units approved are delivered to the. relevant standard in accordance with policy 4B.5 Creating an Inclusive Environment of the London Plan 200S and policies 3.12 Quality in Design,and 3.13 Urban Design of the Southwark Plan 2007. 24 A minimum of 2 disabled parking spaces, as shown on the drawings hereby approved, shall be made available, and retained for the purposes of car parking for the disabled for as long as the development remains in existence. Reason To ensure that an adequate level of parking for people with disabilities is maintained within this development, in accordance with policy 5.7. 25 1:50; 1:10 and 1:5 Scale drawings of the detailed design of the top 6 floors of both buildings to be used in the carrying out of this permission, including the protruding quill design at the crown of the building, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work in connection with this permission is carried out; the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the design and details of the prominent top of the building in the interest of the special architectural qualities of the existing building and preserve its presence from the Tower of London World Heritage Site in accordance with Policies: 3.12 Quality in Design; 3.13 Urban Design; and Policy 3.18 Setting of listed buildings, conservation areas and world heritage sites; of The Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007. 26 The ground floor glazing should have a laminate thickness of at least 6.Smm. Reason To ensure the ground floor is sufficiently protected in compliance with Secure by Design principles and policy 3.14 of the Southwark Plan. Reasons for-granting planning permission This planning application was considered with regard to various policies including, but not exclusively: a] Southwark Plan (2007) Policy 1.1 ("Access to Employment Opportunities") advises that for all developments creating over 1OOOsq.mnew or improved floorspace, the LPA will seek to enter into planning obligations in relation to

training, employment opportunities, chiJdcare, and facilities for those with disabilities. Policy 1.4 ("Employment Sites outside Preferred Office and Industrial Locations") advises that for al'l developments located outside POLs and PILs which have an established B Class Use, subject to certain criteria, development will be permitted provided there is no net loss of floorspace in Class B, subject to a number of exceptions. Policy 1.7 ("Deve.lopment with in Town and Local Centres") states that most new developments for retai I and other town centre uses should be accommodated within existing town centres PoliCy 2.5 ("Planning Obligations") seeks to ensure that any adverse effect arising from a development is taken into account and mitigated, and contributions towards infrastructure and the environment to support the development are secured, where relevant, in accordance with Circular 05/2005 and other relevant guidance. Policy 3.1 ("Environmental effects") seeks to ensure there will be no material adverse effect on the environment and quality of life. resulting from new development. Policy 3.2 ("Protection of amenity") protects' against the loss of amenity, Including disturbance noise, to present and future occupiers on or in the vicinity of the application site. Polley 3.4 ("Energy efficiency Efficiency") states that development should be designed to maximise from

energy

Policy 3.5 ("Renewable energy") states that development should draw on at least 10% of the energy requirements from on-site renewable energy production equipment or renewable energy sources. Policy 3.6 ("Air Quality") states the permission will hot be granted for development that would lead toa reduction in air quality. Pol icy 3.12 ("Q ual ily in desi gn") req uires new develop rnent to ach ieve a high qual ity of arch itectu ral and urban design. Policy 3.13 ("Urban design") seeks to ensure that principles account in all developments. of good urban design are taken into

Policy 4.7 ("Non Self Contained Housing for Identified User groups") advises that appropriate new development or changes of use which provide non self contained accommodation will normally be approved where need can be supported, Where there is no significant loss of amenity, there is adequate infrastructure and a satisfactory standard of accornmooanon. Policy 5.2 ("Transport trnpacts") states that permission will not be granted for development which has an. adverse impact on transport networks through significaht increases in traffic or pollution and consideration has been given to impacts on the Transport for London road network as well as adequate provision for servicing, circulation and access to and from the site. Policy 5.6 ("Car parking") requires all developments spaces provided requiring Gar parking to minimise the number of

Policy 5.7 ("Parking Standards for Disabled People") states that developments parking for disabled people and the mobility impaired. Policy 6.2 ("London Bridge Opportunity Area") bj The London Plan 2008 (Consolidated with Alterations sinCe 2004):

must provide adequate

3A.13 Special needs and specialist housing, 3B.3 Mixed use development, 3C.21 Improving Conditions for Walking, 3C.22 Improving Conditions for CyCling,3C.23 Parking Strategy, 4A.3 Sustainable Design and Construction, 4A.4 Ehergy assessment, 4A.7 Renewable energy, 4A.11 Living Roofs and Walls, 4A. 12 Floodi ng, 4A.13 Flood Risk Manag em ent, 4A.14 Sustainable Drainage, 4A. 16 Water Suppl ies, 4A. 19 Improvi ng Air Qua lity, 4A. 2.0 Red ucing NOise, 4 B.1 Design Princi pies for a Compact City, 4B. 2 Promoting World Class Architecture and Design, 48.3 Enhancing the quality of the Public Realm., Policy 4B.10 Large-scale buildings,6A5 Planning Obligations c] Planning Policy Statements

PPS 1: Planning for Sustainable Communities;PPG 13: Transport; PPG 16: Archaeology; PPS 22: Renewable Energy; PPG 23: Planning and Pollution Control; PPG 24: Planning and NOise; PPS 25: Development and Flood Risk; Design and Access Statements SPD (2007); Section 106 Planning Obligations SPD (2007); Residential Design Standards SPD 2008 Particular regard was had to the principle of the proposed uses and the loss of office floorspace that would result from the proposed development but it was considered that there was demonstrated need for student accommodation within the borough and that the scheme would enhance the Opportunity Area by providing student accommodation for King's College, which Will make an important contribution to the regeneration of the London Bridge area. The impacts on neighbouring amenity and transport conditions were assessed and were considered acceptable. Planning obl.igations are also secured to offset the impact of the development in accordance. with the Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligations. It was therefore considered appropriate to grant planning permission having regard to the policies considered and other material planning consideration s.

Informatives 1 At least 6 months before the occupation of the new buildings or units of accommodation hereby permitted you are advised that you must obtain the Council's approval forthe numbering and naming of buildings and the naming of any new streets created by the development 2 The planning permission granted includes alterations and amendments to areas of public highway which will need to be funded by the developer ..Although these works are approved in principle by the Highway Authority, no permission is hereby granted to carry out these works until all necessary and appropriate design details have been submitted and agreed. You are advised to contact the Principal Engineer, Infrastructure Group (02075255509), and Environment and Housing, Public Realm (chris.johnson@southwark.gov.ukJ 020 75252 2063) at least 4 months prior to any works commencing on the public highway. The details andlor Samples required by the Condition(s) above must be accompanied by a letter stating: 1. the LBS Reference Number which appears at the top of this decision notice; 2. the full address of the application Site; 3. which condition(s) you seek to discharge; and 4. a list of all drawing numbers/ sample name and manufacturer, together with the condition(s) they relate to. All samples submitted must be clearly labelled with the LBS Reference Number of the original application and the address of the application site. Please note that the approval of details are subject to the same eight week timeframe as a ful.1planning permission. 4 The applicant should be aware of any loading waiting and restrictions that operate in the area and that any contraventionS will be enforced accordingly. The parking of any motorised vehicle on the public footway/footpathis also illegal and enforceable (unless otherwise indicated). You are advised that under Section 80 of the Building Act 1984 you are required to give the Council a minimum of 6 weeks notice of your intention to carry out any works of demolition of the whole or part of a building. You should submit your notice of intended demolition to the Council's Building Control SeNice. For further advice on.subrnittinq your notice and details of the few exemptions that apply please contact the Building Control Service by telephone.on 020 7525 5500 or email at building.contro/@southwark.gov.uk. The Archaeology Officer can, on request, provide an archaeological brief detailing the methodology of the archaeological programme and can also provide information on concerning archaeological organisations who work frequently within the Borough and who may be able to carry alit the works. Dur.ing demolition and construction on site: • • The best practical means available in accordance with British Standard Code of Practice B.S. 5228: 1997 shall be employed at all times to minimise the emission of noise from the site; The operation of the site equipment generating noise and other nuisance causing activities, audible at the. site boundaries or in nearby residential properties shall only be carried out between the hours of 0800 - 1800 Mondays-Fridays, 0800 -1300 saturdays and at no time on sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority; Vehicular access to adjoining and opposite premises shall not be impeded; All vehicles, plant and machinery associated with such works shall be stood and operated within the curtilage of the site only;

3

5

6

7

• •

• • •

No waste or other material shall be burnt on application site; A barrier shall be constructed around the site, to be erected prior to demolition; Asuitable and sufficient means of suppressing dust must be provided and maintained.

The developer should consult the Environment & Leisure Department to agree how the Council's Code of Construction Practice will be applied to the proposed development. Please contact the Pollution section, Chaplin Centre, Thurlow Street, SE17 (tel: 02075255000).