planning report GLA/4313/01 9 April 2018 St George’s Quarter, in the Borough of planning application no. 17/AP/4233

Strategic planning application stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008.

The proposal The development of site including partial demolition of the grade II former Presbyterian Chapel to provide up to 25,400 sq.m. (GEA) of new academic facilities, public realm and associated works, with a maximum building height of 33.5 metres.

The applicant The applicant is London South Bank University and the architect is WilkinsonEyre.

Strategic issues summary: Land use: The provision of high quality, modern academic and cultural facilities, that will form part of London South Bank University’s Southwark campus is strongly supported in accordance with London Plan and draft London Plan policy (paragraph 10 to 12). Design and heritage: The masterplan, building design and architectural treatment is of a high quality. The development will have a less than substantial harm on the conservation area and will bring significant public benefits. (paragraphs 13 to 26). Sustainable development: The energy strategy and flood risk assessment are not compliant with the London Plan or draft London Plan. Additional analysis, verification information and mitigation measures should be provided before Stage 2 (paragraphs 27 to 28). Transport: Trip generation and transport impact assessment require further clarification and further discussion is required on development impact. Further information is required in relation to Blue Badge parking and cycle parking. The travel plan, construction logistics plan and delivery and servicing plan requires also require further detail and once finalised should be secured by condition. (paragraphs 29 to 33). Recommendation That Southwark Council be advised that the application is strongly supported in strategic planning terms, although for the reasons set out in paragraph 34 of this report it does not fully comply with the London Plan and draft London Plan. However, the resolution of those issues could lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan and draft London Plan.

page 1 Context

1 On 12 February 2018 the Mayor of London received documents from Southwark Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor must provide the Council, with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan and draft London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under Category 1B of the Schedule to the Order 2008:

“Category 1B: Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building or buildings with a total floorspace of more than 15,000 sq.m.”

3 Once the Southwark Council has resolved to determine the application, it is required to refer it back to the Mayor for his decision as to whether to direct refusal; take it over for his own determination; or allow the Council to determine it itself, unless otherwise directed.

4 The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk. Site description

5 The site is located in the western part of Southwark on land and buildings located across two sites in the north-western corner of London South Bank University’s (LSBU) Southwark campus. The site includes two urban street blocks between London Road, , Keyworth Street Thomas Doyle Street and currently separated by Rotary Street. The northern part of the site is located in the St George’s Circus conservation area and it incorporates the former Grade II listed Presbyterian Chapel, the former Duke of Clarence Public House, Nos. 113–119 Borough Road and Nos. 2-14 and 123–131 London Road.

6 The London Road (A201) forms part of the Transport for London Road Network and the nearest section of the strategic road network is Waterloo Road (A301). There are 32 bus routes that can be accessed from the site with the nearest bus stop within walking distance on the London Road. The nearest railway station and underground station is Elephant & Castle. The site has a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) 6b.

Details of the proposal

7 The development of site including partial demolition of the former Presbyterian Chapel to provide up to 25,400 sq.m. (GEA) of new academic facilities (D1), public realm and associated works. The proposed development would have a maximum building height of 33.5 metres. Case history

9 The application proposal has been subject of a pre-application meeting on 19 July 2017 and a report was issued on 9 November 2017. The principle of development was strongly supported and the overall design approach was considered to be of a high-quality subject to resolving issues in relation to detailing key street frontages and the public realm.

page 2 Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

8 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the Southwark Core Strategy (2011), the saved policies of the Southwark Plan (2007) and the 2016 London Plan (Consolidated with Alterations since 2011).

9 The following are also relevant material considerations: • The National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Practice Guidance; • The draft National Planning Policy Framework (March 2018); • Elephant and Castle SPD and Opportunity Area Planning Framework (March 2012); • Draft London Plan (consultation draft December 2017); • The Mayor’s draft Transport Strategy (2017); • London economy London Plan; • Education facilities London Plan; • Thames Policy Area London Plan; • Urban design London Plan; Shaping Neighbourhoods: Character and Context SPG; • Heritage London Plan • Inclusive design London Plan; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; • Sustainable development London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy • Transport London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy Principle of development

10 The application proposals are for 25,400 sq.m. (GEA) of new academic facilities and cultural floorspace in the form of a theatre and related performance space and studios. The key driver of the proposals is the creation of a definable centre to London South Bank University’s Southwark campus.

11 The land use proposals are strongly supported by Southwark Council’s Elephant and Castle SPD as the site is located within an area defined as the ‘Enterprise Quarter’ where there is an existing concentration of education and employment uses which are dominated by the University campus. The SPD recognises the significant need to improve the look and feel of the area through better architecture, street forms and new public spaces as well as enhancement of educational facilities.

12 The importance of providing and enhancing higher education facilities to retaining the global competitiveness of London is supported by London Plan Policies 2.1, 3.18 and 4.6. It is also supported by draft London Plan Policy GG5, which makes clear that the Mayor will ensure that London will continue to provide leadership in innovation, research, policy and ideas and facilities that support its role as an international centre for learning and Policy S1 and S3 which specifically support the delivery education facilities. The development proposals are therefore strongly supported by the London Plan and draft London Plan.

page 3 Design and heritage

Design

Layout and public realm

13 The design layout rationale is to create a defined centre to London South Bank University’s (LSBU) Southwark campus, as promoted by Elephant and Castle SPD in area specific guidance for the Enterprise Quarter, which also encourages the promotion of a new public square and enhancement of the existing street form. The strategic spatial context for the proposals is therefore well established and the overall masterplan is of a high quality and strongly supported.

14 The masterplan proposals are based on removing car access to two existing rarely used roads Thomas Doyle Street and Rotary Street and the creation of a pedestrian concourse with a glazed atrium roof surrounding by new and existing buildings. Two new outdoor public spaces are further proposed at the entrances to the concourse from London Road (University Square) and Keyworth Street (Thomas Doyle Square) with a further existing outdoor space created by enlarging the existing space at the Clarence Centre which also serves as an entrance to the proposed theatre.

15 These proposals will bring continuity to the currently fragmented public realm and urban form as the proposal will open up the elevation of the existing university building and sports centre on Thomas Doyle Street to form the southern edge to the glazed atrium concourse public space. The eastern edge to the concourse atrium will form a new frontage to Keyworth Street that is defined by new buildings containing student services and lecture theatres (and other facilities) with a feature building in the form of a glazed fronted automated book storage and retrieval depository.

16 The northern edge to the atrium concourse space and frontage to Borough Road consist of a new building containing a theatre and studio space that subtly incorporates the existing Grade II listed Presbyterian Chapel adding to the richness of the street frontage. The western edge of the concourse formed by a building containing a student centre and creative design studios which also creates a new frontage to London Road.

17 The adopted approach to the masterplan layout is strongly supported as it will create a sequence of indoor and outdoor spaces of varying character and functional role, whilst fulfilling the University’s brief of creating a central reception or heart to a currently fragmented campus. It will effectively address issues with the existing urban form that currently features awkward back and front relationships between buildings, blank street elevations, vacant listed building and poor quality public realm. The central concourse is accessible to the public and will be used for community events, which is welcomed and should be secured by condition.

18 The applicant has addressed minor concerns with the layout raised at the pre-application stage through refinement design. The landscaping approach to London Road entrance now strikes a balance between creating a sheltering screen of planting from the road traffic noise and the need to open the view to entrance to the glazed concourse beyond. The active built edge and public realm of Keyworth Street have been improved by maximising additional openings to the rehearsal room, lecture theatres and studio to expose internal activities together with creation of more prominent entrances. The landscape treatment and active building edges are now well emphasised with the shared surface street design defining safe pedestrian areas. This aspect of the development is complaint with London Plan and draft London Plan Policy D1 and Policy D7.

page 4 Height, massing and scale 19 The new building heights are up to a maximum of eight storeys on Thomas Doyle Street, four storeys on London Road and three storeys on Borough Road with the glazed atrium roof integrated into these building at the third storey. The massing of the new building revolves around the creation of the central glazed concourse within the southern edge being provided by the existing tall and bulky university building and sports centre, this approach effectively defines three outdoor spaces and the indoor University concourse space and raises no strategic concerns in regards to height, massing and scale and is compliant with London Plan and draft London Plan policies.

Building appearance, elevations and materials 20 The approach to building elevations and adopted materials is supported as it reflects the various cultural and educational uses proposed and creates buildings with character and continuity created by use of similar materials and elevational forms.

21 The applicant has addressed concerns previously raised in relation to the new London Road building which accommodates the student centre/creative design studios and its relationship with the existing Grade II Listed London Road terrace. A previously exposed blank end now includes additional window openings that results in a less abrupt relationship between the old and new building and creates a more harmonious street form.

Inclusive design

22 The design and access statement confirms that the development public realm and buildings would be inclusively designed. The shared surfaces, links to adjacent public transport and local services and facilities have been designed to be accessible, safe and convenient for everyone, particularly for disabled and older people. Notwithstanding this, the applicant needs to address concerns over the provision of accessible blue badge parking and include a proportion of outdoor seating with back rests to be fully compliant with draft London Plan Policy D3 Inclusive design and London Plan Policy 7.1. Heritage 23 London Plan Policy and Policy HC1 of the draft London Plan states that development should identify, value, conserve, restore, re-use and incorporate heritage assets where appropriate.

24 The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 sets out the tests for dealing with heritage assets in planning decisions. In relation to listed buildings, all planning decisions should “have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses” and in relation to conservation areas, special attention must be paid to “the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area”. The NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposal on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation, and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be.

25 The applicant has completed a Townscape, Heritage and Visual Impact Assessment from both within and the wider context of the St George’s Circus Conservation Areas and West Square Conservation Area and has demonstrated that heritage impact has been a key part of the iterative design process. It is evident the Grade II listed Presbyterian Chapel benefits from the development proposals through its integration in the proposed Performing Arts Centre through facade retention and that listed buildings The former Duke of Clarence Public House, Nos. 113–119 Borough Road and Nos. 2-14 and 123–131 London Road are not negatively impacted by the scale of development proposed and relate effectively to proposed Rotary Yard public space.

page 5 26 The development is slightly taller than the existing building context, but this scale relationship is not significant given rrecently consented and proposed developments are of a significantly larger scale indicating the changing dynamic of Elephant and Castle. The development proposal is of the highest standard of modern architecture and will contribute to the objective of developing the university quarter and given this context the development will have a less than substantive harm on the conservation areas and will bring significant strategic benefits. Sustainable development

Energy

27 The applicant has submitted an energy statement that sets out how the development proposes to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The carbon savings fall short of the 35% target by 14 tonnes of carbon. The applicant should further reduce carbon emissions by addressing the detailed comments that have been provided under separate cover. The applicant must in particular address concerns with overheating and ground source heat pump capacity and prioritise local heating network connection. Once all measures to minimise on-site carbon savings have been exhausted an appropriate contribution to the borough’s carbon fund should be secured, in compliance with Policy 5.2 of the London Plan and Policy SI2 of the draft London Plan.

Flood risk

28 The site is located within Flood Zone 3a and the flood risk assessment does not contain sufficient detail to be compliant with London Plan Policy 5.12 and draft London Plan Policy SI12. The proposed discharge rate for surface water is unacceptable and the scheme needs to ensure the proposed raingardens and other surface based sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) are used in combination with other techniques. Transport

29 A number of transport issues have been raised and GLA officers are currently working with the applicant and Southwark Council to resolve them to ensure this aspect of the application is compliant with draft London Plan and London Plan.

30 The assessment of the transport impact is currently flawed because it assumes that no additional staff or students will be accommodated on the site and therefore no additional trips will be made. The applicant is required to provide updated trip generation data and transport impact assessment and include a pedestrian environment review survey - this should be undertaken to the nearest public transport in each direction and other local services and amenities. Given the improvements achieved at the Elephant and Castle northern roundabout removal and the Road/Keyworth Street scheme, S106 obligations to improve the public realm will also be required.

31 The proposed reduction of on-street parking provision is acceptable. Further analysis of how disabled drivers will be affected by the proposals is however required, including whether there is sufficient blue badge parking.

32 The site potentially provides good network of pedestrian and cyclist routes and incorporates Cycle Superhighway 7. As there is a lack of information on pedestrian and cycling trip movements the pedestrian route and cycle parking proposals do not meet London Plan and draft London Plan policy requirements. Further assurance and information is required to support the proposed closure of Thomas Doyle Street and Keyworth Street in relation to pedestrian and cycle movements and whether the existing three cycle hire docking stations provided in the area require additional provision.

page 6 33 The Transport Statement contains information on deliveries and servicing, but no assessment has been made of the demand for servicing or the capacity of proposed servicing areas to meet demand and this should be provided. This information and analysis should be provided. The construction logistics plan and travel plan both lack detail and further robust analysis should be provided. This aspect of the application is therefore not compliant with the transport policies of draft London Plan and London Plan. Local planning authority’s position

31 The Council are supportive of the development proposals.

Legal considerations

32 Under the arrangements set out in Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor is required to provide the local planning authority with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. Unless notified otherwise by the Mayor, the Council must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order if it subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the application, in order that the Mayor may decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged, or direct the Council under Article 6 of the Order to refuse the application, or issue a direction under Article 7 of the Order that he is to act as the local planning authority for the purpose of determining the application(the next bit is optional). There is no obligation at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions regarding a possible direction, and no such decision should be inferred from the Mayor’s statement and comments. Financial considerations

33 There are no financial considerations at this stage.

Conclusion

34 London Plan and draft London Plan policies on growing a good economy, education, culture and creative industries, design and heritage, sustainable development and transport are relevant to this application. The principle of the proposal is strongly supported; however the scheme is not currently compliant with London Plan policy and the following matters should be addressed:

• Principle of development: The provision of high quality, modern academic and cultural facilities, that will form part of London South Bank University’s Southwark campus is strongly supported in accordance with London Plan and draft London Plan policy.

• Design and Heritage: The masterplan, building design and architectural treatment is of a high quality. The development will have a less than substantial harm on the conservation area and will bring significant public benefits.

• Sustainable development: The energy strategy and flood risk assessment are not compliant with the London Plan or draft London Plan. Additional analysis, verification information and mitigation measures should be provided.

page 7 • Transport: Trip generation and transport impact assessment require further clarification and further discussion is required on development impact. Further information is required in relation to Blue Badge parking and cycle parking. The travel plan, construction logistics plan and delivery and servicing Plan requires also require further detailed and should be secured by condition.

for further information, contact GLA Planning Unit: Juliemma McLoughlin, Chief Planner 0207 983 4271 email [email protected] Jonathan Aubrey, Senior Strategic Planner (Case Officer) 020 7983 5823 email Jonathan [email protected]

page 8