The Planning Committee (Smaller Applications) of Southwark Council met on Wednesday 2 September 2026. The committee discussed a planning application for a coffee kiosk adjacent to Tate Modern, SE1, and a retrospective change of use at Myatts Field Court, SE5.

Coffee Kiosk Adjacent to Tate Modern, SE1

The committee discussed a planning application for a single-storey coffee kiosk on the riverwalk adjacent to Tate Modern. The application sought to replace an existing converted taxi cab operation with a more permanent, albeit removable, structure.

Concerns were raised by objectors, including Tate Modern, regarding the design, potential for pedestrian congestion, and the lack of public toilets. Supporters highlighted the positive contribution of the existing trader to the local economy and employment opportunities.

The amended scheme relocated the kiosk to a set-back position, reducing its footprint and improving pedestrian flow. The design was also revised to be more in keeping with the surrounding area. The committee noted that while the kiosk would be a commercial structure on designated Borough Open Land, it was considered an ancillary facility that improved upon the existing arrangement. The design was deemed acceptable, and conditions were imposed to ensure the continued management of waste and to prevent the placement of outdoor seating on the public highway. The committee also acknowledged concerns about potential proliferation of similar structures but stated that each application would be assessed on its own merits.

Car Park at Myatts Field Court, SE5

Planning permission was granted for a retrospective change of use of part of the car park at Myatts Field Court, SE5, from residential parking to parking for private hire vehicles. The application covered 20 parking spaces, which were deemed surplus to the needs of the residents of Myatts Field Court.

The change of use was supported by one resident who noted a reduction in anti-social behaviour and an improvement in security since the site began being used for private hire vehicle parking. However, one objector raised concerns about land stability, the principle of the development, loss of amenity, transport issues, and highway safety. The objector specifically cited a crack in a retaining wall between their property and the car park, suggesting that heavy vehicle movements had worsened its structural integrity.

Officers advised that land stability was not a material planning consideration in this case, as no operational development was proposed and the existing lawful use of the land was already for car parking. They also stated that any issues with the retaining wall would be a matter for the Building Control team. The amenity impacts were considered negligible due to the limited number of vehicle movements (estimated at five per day) and the fact that vehicles were only visible from first-floor windows and shielded by a wall. A condition was added to limit the number of private hire vehicles parked on the land to twenty, reinforcing the development description and controlling amenity and transport impacts. The Transport Policy Team noted that while the use did not align with strategic objectives to reduce private vehicle use, the impact was considered negligible.

The committee granted permission subject to a condition restricting vehicle movements to between 8:00 am and 10:00 pm, except in emergencies, and limiting the number of private hire vehicles to twenty. An informative was added to the decision notice regarding the urgency of liaising with the building control team to resolve the structural issue with the retaining wall.