This meeting was about whether to approve two applications for large, mixed-use developments. One was in Bell Green and proposed building 262 new homes, and the other in Deptford proposed building 502 student rooms.

Land at the former Bell Green Gas Works

The meeting report pack included an application to build 262 new homes on the site of the former Bell Green Gas Works. The site is a 0.995 hectare brownfield site¹ that is currently vacant, but previously had two metal gas holder structures (approximately 9 storeys in height) on it. Brownfield land is previously developed land that is not currently in use, that may be contaminated. The application proposed building six blocks of flats, ranging in height from six to 14 storeys, that would include 780.8sqm of ground floor retail and workspace, as well as new landscaped public areas and playspaces.

The application proposed 27% of the homes would be affordable².
Affordable housing is housing that is provided to people who would otherwise be priced out of the housing market. The report pack includes details of a financial viability assessment that was independently reviewed by BNP Paribas Real Estate, concluding that 26% affordable housing was the maximum that could be viably provided, however the applicant subsequently increased the offer to 30%. Of the affordable homes, 60.5% would be affordable rent and 39.5% would be shared ownership.

There were 65 planning objections in the report pack that raised a number of issues. Some objectors felt that the development would be too large, would look out of place, and would harm the nearby Livesey Memorial Hall, which is a Grade II Listed Building. Some were concerned about the impact on traffic, parking and local services, and some felt that there was insufficient affordable housing.

The report pack includes advice from the Council's conservation officer. They advise that the site contributes a small degree to the significance of the Livesey Memorial Hall and great weight must still be given to its conservation. They note that the building would cause harm to the significance of the listed group at the moderate to high end of the scale of less than substantial. However, they note that there are public benefits emerging from the proposal in the form of new housing that must be weighed against the great weight that must be afforded to preserving the significance of heritage assets.

The Council's transport officer noted that the site is well connected to bus services, but has poor access to public transport. They noted that there would be no significant highways impacts associated with the development. Transport for London (TfL) recommended that a number of changes be made to the transport aspects of the development, including improvements to walking and cycling infrastructure and the provision of a car club, in order to better align the development to London Plan transport policies and best practice, including covering issues of safety and inclusive design.

The Council's ecology officer noted that the development would significantly improve the streetscape along Alan Pegg Place and significantly green the site. They also noted that the development would need to take a number of steps to mitigate its impact on the nearby Pool River Linear Park, which is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation.

Scott House

The meeting report pack also included an application to redevelop Scott House, 185 Grove Street, Deptford. The application proposed the partial demolition of Scott House, retaining its northern and eastern elevations, and the construction of a 31-storey building. The development would provide 502 student rooms and 1,072 sqm of employment floorspace.

The applicant, Tribe Grove Street Limited, proposed that 35% of the student rooms would be affordable. They submitted a viability assessment which showed that this was the maximum amount of affordable housing that could be viably provided on the site. The Council's policies would usually require 50% affordable housing on a site like this, but the applicant argued that the 35% threshold approach for affordable housing on site should apply in this case, because the proposal would see no net loss of industrial floorspace.

There were 67 objections in the report pack, many of which concerned the height and scale of the development. Some objectors felt that the development would be overbearing and unsympathetic. Objectors also expressed concern about noise, the impact on local services, and the loss of the existing building, which is locally listed³. Local listing is a way for a local council to identify buildings that are of local importance, but that are not nationally listed. Locally listed buildings are not subject to the same level of protection as nationally listed buildings. Others argued that the development would be a great addition to this neighbourhood and would help free up housing for families and local people.

The report pack includes the Council's assessment of the impact on the nearby Maritime Greenwich World Heritage Site. Officers concluded that the development would cause no harm to the composition of any strategic views of the site.

The report pack also includes a summary of the views of the Lewisham Design Review Panel. The panel felt that the applicant should make some changes to the design of the building, in particular its crown. They felt that the proposal did a good job of integrating the retained parts of Scott House with the new tower, but that some aspects of the design require considerable further development.

The Greater London Authority commented on the application, noting that it would make a significant contribution towards achieving the London-wide target for PBSA of 3,500 new bed spaces every year. They noted that they broadly supported the design of the scheme, but suggested further refinement of the crown, materiality and architectural quality.

TfL requested further information on the compliance with cycle parking standards and increased disabled persons' parking.

The report concludes that the application should be approved, subject to a number of conditions and the completion of a legal agreement (known as a Section 106 agreement) to secure the provision of affordable housing and other benefits. It recommends that the application be referred to the Mayor of London for his consideration, as it is a development of strategic importance.