Sherwood Court, Thurston Road SE13 7SD PDF 432 KB - Council ...

Committee PLANNING COMMITTEE A
Report Title SHERWOOD COURT, THURSTON ROAD, LONDON, SE13 7SD
Ward
Lewisham Central
Contributors Kate Hayler
Class PART 1 Date: 22 NOVEMBER 2012
Reg. Nos.
DC/12/80762
Application dated 06/07/2012 [as revised on 22/10/2012]
Applicant
Proposal
Applicant’s Plan Nos.
Background Papers
Designation
Indigo Planning on behalf of Trademark Home Ltd
The demolition of existing buildings at Sherwood Court, Thurston
Road SE13 and the erection of two x 11 storey blocks
accommodating 142 student housing units (410 bedspaces) and
communal facilities, with ground floor employment floorspace
(569sqm), 260 cycle parking spaces, 4 disabled parking spaces
and associated landscaping works.
489-0001, 489-0005, 489-0006, 489-0010 Rev 03, 489-0011 Rev
01, 489-0012 Rev 02, 489-0019 Rev 02, 489-0023 Rev 01, 489-
0030 Rev 02, 489-0031 Rev 02, 489-0032 Rev 02, 489-0033 Rev
02, 489-0034 Rev 02, 489-0035 Rev 02, 489-0041 Rev 02, 489-
0051 Rev 02, 489-0060, 489-0061, 489-0063, 489-0065, 489-
0066, 489-0067, 50021901-01 Rev E, 50021901-02 Rev C,
50021901-03 Rev A, 50021901-07 Rev A, 50021901-08 Rev A,
26690/001/001, Design and Access Statement (dated July 2012)
part superseded by Amended Design and Street Views (489-
0058) and Approximate Schedule of areas (dated 12/10/12),
Planning Statement (dated June 2012), Statement of Community
Engagement (dated June 2012), Daylight and Sunlight
Assessment (dated 29/06/2012), Wind Tunnel Study (dated
27/06/2012), Phase 1 Habitat Survey (dated 05/07/12), Air
Quality Assessment (dated July 2012), Updated Report prepared
by K F Geotechnical (dated 21/06/12), Sustainable Design and
Energy Report 3494/3/4/SF Rev D (dated September 2012) part
superseded by e-mail received 02/11/2012), Noise Assessment
(dated 10/10/2012), Flood Risk Assessment (Dated July 2012),
Transport Statement (22/06/2012) part superseded by Technical
Note (dated 10/07/2012), Technical Note (dated 27/09/2012), Trip
Generation Figures (received 24/10/2012) and Site Management
Plan (dated October 2012) and Revised Travel Plan (dated
31/10/2012) and addendum e-mail dated 12/11/2012.
(1) Case File LE/132/D/TP
(2) Adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004)
(3) Local Development Framework Documents
(4) The London Plan (June 2011)
(5) NPPF
Adopted UDP - Existing Use, Major District Centre
Core Strategy – Growth and Regeneration Area, Lewisham Town
Centre

1.0 Property/Site Description
1.1 The application site is situated on the north side of Thurston Road, near the junction
with Jerrard Street. The site is a long wedge shape which gets narrower to the
east. There is a gentle slope across the site so that the western end of the site sits
lower than the eastern end. The site is bound to the north by the railway line and a
steep embankment planted with mature trees that is designated as a Green
Corridor. To the east, the site is bound by a cycle and pedestrian path known as
the Waterlink Way that forms a route underneath the railway line and to Elverson
Road Station. Beyond the Waterlink Way is a vacant strip of land that is earmarked
for use as a bus standing area as part of the redevelopment of Lewisham Town
Centre. To the south of the site on the opposite side of Thurston Road is the
Thurston Road Industrial Estate which currently houses single storey industrial
buildings, but has planning permission for redevelopment in the form of a large,
mixed use proposal that will deliver over 400 residential units. To the west of the
site is a vehicle servicing yard.
1.2 The application site is currently occupied by 12, single storey industrial units set
back behind an access road and parking area. The majority of the units in
unauthorised use as places of worship. Only two of the original industrial uses that
used to occupy the units remain.
1.3 The site is located within Lewisham Town Centre and has been identified for
redevelopment in the Lewisham Town Centre Area Action Plan (March 2012) as
part of an opportunity site known as the Railway Strip. The site falls within Flood
Zone 3a and also within an Air Quality Management Area.
2.0 Planning History
2.1 In December 2006 planning permission was refused for the change of use of Unit 4,
Sherwood Court, Thurston Road SE13 to a place of worship and administrative
office (Use Class D1), together with alterations to the front elevation. The
application was refused on the basis of loss of employment potential. The applicant
appealed the decision to refuse planning permission and the appeal was allowed
and planning permission granted for a D1 use for a period of 36 months. A number
of other planning applications were submitted for the use of the other units as
places of worship, but these were never determined.
2.2 Between 2006 and 2009, a number of pre-application discussions took place
between the Council, the GLA and the applicant regarding a large scale, residential
led proposal for the site and the site of the neighbouring vehicle repair garage. No
planning application was submitted.
2.3 In addition to the planning history for the site itself, there are a number of schemes
that have recently been approved in the surrounding area which are of some
relevance, as outlined below:
52-54 Thurston Road
2.4 Planning permission was granted in October 2011 for the redevelopment of 52-54
Thurston Road (to the west of the site beyond the vehicle servicing yard). The
application comprises the construction of a part 9, part 10 storey building
comprising three commercial units to the ground floor (Use Class B1 Business) and
28, 1 bed, 24, 2 bed and 10, 3 bed self-contained flats, together with the provision
of five car parking spaces, bin store and associated landscaping.

Loampit Vale
2.5 Following a resolution to grant planning permission in September 2009, planning
permission was granted in March 2010 for the redevelopment of the land to the
south of Loampit Vale (LPA ref DC/09/71246). This proposal comprises the
redevelopment of the site to provide a new leisure centre, 788 new homes, retail
and business space and the re-provision of the existing London City Mission
provided within eight buildings ranging in height from five to 24 storeys arranged
across the site generally rising in height from the west to the east. There would be
181 car parking spaces within the development, 866 cycle spaces and 26
motorcycle spaces. Development commenced in April 2010.
Lewisham Gateway
2.6 In October 2007, the Council resolved to grant planning permission (part
outline/part detailed) (LPA ref: DC/06/62375) for the comprehensive redevelopment
of the Lewisham Gateway site, which lies to the east of Loampit Vale. The
resolution to grant was subject to referral of the application to the Secretary of State
and the GLA and the entering into a Section 106 Agreement. The legal agreement
was completed and planning permission granted in May 2009. This proposal
comprises up to 100,000 sq. m. of retail, offices and hotel floorspace; approximately
800 residential units; education; health and leisure uses with new road layout,
parking, servicing, associated infrastructure and improvements to the public
transport interchange, as well as open space, rivers and water features. The
Gateway proposals provide for a minimum, optimum and maximum scheme with a
range of building heights, up to 77m (22 storeys) in the maximum scheme.
Thurston Road Industrial Estate
2.7 In 2006 planning permission (LPA ref: DC/05/59343/X) was granted for the
construction of a four to fifteen storey building on the site of Thurston Road
Industrial Estate, Jerrard Street SE13, comprising retail units, including a garden
centre, 19 live/work units, 71 one bedroom, 178 two bedroom, 21 three bedroom
and 1 four bedroom self-contained flats/maisonettes, together with associated
landscaping, provision of a delivery yard, loading bay, stores, bin stores, 185 cycle,
24 motorcycle and 350 car parking spaces on ground and upper ground floor levels,
associated highway works, plant and servicing.
2.8 In 2008 a further planning application (LPA ref: DC/07/65251/X), was granted for
the construction of a 2 to 17 storey building, incorporating balconies/terraces, on the
site of Thurston Road Industrial Estate, comprising up to a total of 6,771 m² nonfood
retail space (Use Class A1), 5 units of flexible commercial (Use Class
B1)/live/work space , 4 units of flexible retail/commercial (Use Classes A1/A2/B1)
space, 406 dwellings comprising 108 one bedroom, 256 two bedroom and 42 three
bedroom self-contained flats/maisonettes, together with associated landscaping,
provision of a delivery yard, loading bay, stores, bin stores, 415 cycle, 4 motorcycle
and 235 car parking spaces comprising 117 retail spaces and 118 residential
spaces on ground and upper ground floor levels, with courtyard garden above,
associated highway works, plant and servicing.
2.9 The 2008 application was subject to an extension of time limit application in
February 2011. It was resolved, subject to referral to the GLA and completion of a
Section 106, to grant an extension to the scheme of 18 months in July 2011. The
legal agreement was completed and the extension of time limit granted in March
2012.

3.0 Current Planning Applications
The Proposals
3.1 The current application is for the redevelopment of the site to provide two 11 storey
buildings, connected at ground and first floor by a central podium providing outdoor
amenity space at first floor level and featuring tree planting. The proposal would
provide accommodation for 410 students in the form of 84 self contained studio
rooms and 58 ‘cluster rooms’ where between 4 and 6 en-suite study/bedrooms
share a communal living space and kitchen facilities. The student rooms would be
situated from the second to 11 th floors. 39 of the units (just under 10%) would be
wheelchair accessible. The ground and first floor would comprise a combination of
communal facilities for the student housing (including a reception area, café,
laundry, seating areas and gym), plant space and 569 sqm of B1 office space.
Each block would be constructed around a central core which accommodates two
lifts and stairs.
3.2 The building footprint would occupy the majority of the site with two areas of
landscaped space to the east and west of the site that would provide both
landscaped public space and controlled access to the service route that runs
through the undercroft along the rear boundary of the site. The undercroft also
provides space for bin storage, four disabled parking spaces and cycle storage for
260 bicycles.
3.3 The built elements would be set back from Thurston Road by a distance that ranges
from 1.8m to 4.1m. The ends of the building would be set back from the
neighbouring site to the west by 12.1m and from Waterlink Way by a distance that
ranges from 6.2m to 14.1m. Overall, the two 11 storey elements would measure
36.5m in height and the built form would measure 90m wide at the widest points
and 77m wide where the blocks are set in.
3.4 The proposed building is set up from existing ground level to address flood risk so
that at the eastern end of the building it would be raised by approximately 1m and
the western end of the building would be raised by approximately 1.8m. A series of
steps and ramps have been designed into the ground floor street landscape to
accommodate the changes in level and provide pedestrian access.
3.5 The built form comprises two ‘h’ shaped blocks connected by the rectangular
podium element. At 23m deep, the western block takes advantage of the wedge
shape of the site and is deeper than the eastern block which is 20.7m deep. This
allows for a set back on the upper floors of the western block where the depth is
reduced to bring the block back into line with the depth of the eastern block.
3.6 At ground and first floor level, the glazed commercial floorspace would be set back
from Thurston Road behind pilasters that extend down from the more solid structure
of the floors above creating a walkway through the building at upper ground floor
level.
3.7 In terms of access, the main pedestrian entrance would be via the stairs and
disabled ramp at the front of the building. There is an additional access from the
disabled parking spaces to the rear via a platform lift. The commercial units would
be accessed from the upper ground walkway with steps at both east and western
ends of the building and disabled access provided through the front ramp and a
additional access from the servicing bay to the rear.

3.8 In terms of materials, the lower two storeys of the building are framed by white
concrete pilasters with aluminium framed glazed full height panels. Above this
base, the student element is made up of repeating window modules finished with
panels of both horizontally and vertically bonded grey reflective facing brick. Each
module incorporates a combination of clear and obscure glazed panels, and a
coloured aluminium insulated ventilation panel that varies in colour across the
different floors of the building.
3.9 The applicant has provided a detailed landscaping scheme for the public realm
areas to the side of the blocks which includes the planting of 16 individual trees, low
level planters that incorporate additional tree planting and hard landscaping.
Details have also been provided of the first floor podium amenity space which will
include a 4 single stemmed and a number of multi-stemmed birch trees.
3.10 Initially the scheme proposed two 13 storey towers and the commercial space on
the eastern block was not set back from the street. Following concerns raised by
Officers, the Environment Agency and the GLA changes have been made to the
proposal that include:
• The height of the towers have been reduced to 11 storeys resulting in the
loss of 88 cluster rooms and 18 communal kitchen/living spaces. A
corresponding reduction in cycle parking has led to the loss of 56 cycle
parking spaces.
• The commercial space in the eastern block has been set back to create a
route through the building from east to west at upper ground floor level
resulting in the loss of 91sqm of commercial floorspace;
• A small coffee kiosk has been added to animate the reception space;
• Flood voids have been added beneath the building plinth. These will be
covered by bespoke grills to create visual interest;
• The fenestration of the eastern elevation has been made larger to increase
the solid to void ratio and further brick detailing is proposed to enliven this
façade in long views;
• Additional trees are proposed to the ground floor landscaping scheme to
increase the green appearance of the public open spaces;
• The sliding metal gate to the turning circle to the west of the site has been
removed to avoid unnecessary visual clutter; and
• The retractable bollards to the western entrance of the site have been moved
back so that cars will not have to stop on the highway to open the bollards
and cause obstruction to the highway.
Supporting Documents
Design and Access Statement
3.11 The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement. This describes
the site itself, the surrounding context, both existing and emerging and outlines
some of the consultation and site history.

3.12 It explains that the site is located within Lewisham Town Centre and policies of
relevance within the Lewisham Town Centre Area Action Plan (AAP) submission
version and also mentions the Tall Buildings Study. The Statement goes on to
outline the opportunities and constraints. The opportunities noted include the site’s
proximity and integration with the town centre and local developments, the adjacent
Green Corridor, the scale of surrounding developments, excellent transport links
and the aspect of the site. Challenges include the proximity to the elevated railway
viaduct, the location with Flood Zone 3a, the linear nature of the site, vehicular
access and relationship with the Thurston Central site.
3.13 The report describes the design approach and sets out the design principles
focussed around reinforcing character and quality, high quality mixed use
development, minimising environmental impact on adjoining properties and
sustainability. The thoughts behind the plan layout, scale and massing (including
details of the development potential of the neighbouring site), the commercial
accommodation and public realm, student accommodation, materials, transport,
sustainability, environmental considerations and lifetime homes standards are also
explained.
3.14 The landscaping approach is outlined, which is focussed around a series of public,
semi-public and communal spaces. These include the western entrance space
designed to be an arrival and transition space as well as a service yard. A similarly
functioning space is proposed at the eastern end which sits adjacent to the public
right of way beneath the railway viaduct. An undercroft would provide a servicing
route to the rear of the site. At first floor level a communal terrace is proposed with
a large area of planting for trees. This would be in addition to green roofs. The
design and access statement explains the lighting strategy for the landscaping with
lighting proposed to the public realm, communal ground floor areas, service yard
and the communal terrace. Trees are proposed as an element of the landscaping
approach to provide functional elements such as boundary buffers, screening,
separation of spaces and shade as well as providing aesthetic elements,
connecting visually with the railway corridor and providing biodiversity benefits. It is
not proposed to retain existing trees on the site, which are stated to be poor quality
specimens, although all trees on the railway embankment would be retained.
Finally, materials considered appropriate for the landscaping are listed along with
precedent images.
3.15 Access and wheelchair housing are addressed within the Statement with the
scheme providing 4 disabled parking spaces on site, 9.5% of units being wheelchair
accessible and the scheme being designed to relevant parts of the South East
London Housing Partnership Wheelchair Homes Design guidance.
Planning Statement
3.16 The Planning Statement identifies the key planning issues related to the proposed
redevelopment, explaining the context of the site and surrounding area, the relevant
planning history and evolution of the site proposals, the description of the scheme,
key planning considerations and the applicant team response to those planning
considerations.
3.17 It argues that the site at present detracts from the town centre and the
redevelopment would enhance the area. The existing buildings are stated to be at
the end of their economic life, providing little employment opportunity. The
proposed scheme would provide an increase in job numbers and, although it would

not provide employment space to an equal or greater amount as required by policy,
it would provide a significant improvement on the present units in terms of quality
and appearance thus being more attractive to prospective tenants. It is argued that
the fit out of the units would make them less attractive to future occupiers as it
would ‘limit marketability’. [The applicant has since agreed to the fit out of the
commercial space.] It is also claimed that the proposed student accommodation
would meet a need within the Borough and London generally which would release
privately rented accommodation currently occupied by students back into
mainstream occupation.
3.18 The design of the scheme is stated to be of high quality, with reference made to the
tall buildings study and surrounding town centre to justify the scale and massing
proposed and reference made to the environmental studies provided which are
noted to suggest suitable environmental conditions. Paragraph 6.76 of the
document argues that the AAP supports tall buildings above 10 storeys on this
specific site. [The site specific policy for this site (Policy S5 ‘Railway Strip’ of the
AAP) states that Thurston Road is a secondary route and not a primary entrance
into the town centre and the scale and massing of buildings should reflect this.
Policy LAAP19 Tall buildings identifies the site as falling within an area that would
be ‘generally appropriate’ for tall buildings subject to a number of policy tests.]
3.19 The report outlines the local context and future options for the neighbouring site, the
street environment and the materials proposed. The remainder of the report
summarises the conclusions of topics covered by separate documents and then
goes on to conclude overall that the scheme would be compliant with policy and
deliver a range of benefits to the local community.
Statement of Community Involvement
3.20 The Statement of Community Involvement outlines the consultation process
undertaken in the run up to the submission of the planning application. This
includes details of pre-application discussions with the Council, the GLA and other
statutory consultees and details of the public consultation undertaken which took
the form of a two day exhibition. In terms of public consultation, of the 14 local
residents that attended the exhibitions, 9 filled out response forms and were
generally supportive of the scheme although concerns were raised about the use of
materials, the height of the proposal and noise from 500 students. It was also
suggested that the commercial floorspace would be better used as a retail unit to
provide convenience shopping for the local community. (No copies of the feedback
form has been included).
Air Quality Assessment
3.21 The Air Quality Assessment submitted in support of the proposal states that the
proposed Development would not lead to material increases in traffic due to its car
free nature. However, the report recognises that future occupants will be exposed
to road traffic emissions from the existing road network so the impact on future
residents from traffic emissions (in particular NO2 and PM10) has been assessed
based on existing data obtained from ongoing monitoring by the LB Lewisham of air
quality. The report also states that the use of a gas fired CHP engine would not
have an impact on air quality due to the size of the equipment proposed.

3.22 The report predicts concentrations of NO2 and PM10 for 4 receptor locations along
Thurston Road at a height of 10.2m where the first level of residential
accommodation is situated. The predicated concentrations are well below the
relevant objectives for annual mean concentrations and the proposed residential
use would therefore be acceptable in terms of air quality without any mitigation
measures being necessary. Given the NO2 concentrations are well below the
annual mean objectives, the report states that it is unlikely that the hourly mean
objective would be exceeded at ground and first floor level where uses such as the
café and gym might be sensitive emissions in the short term. It is therefore
concluded that air quality does not provide any constraints to the proposed
Development.
3.23 No details are provided of mitigation during construction.
Noise Survey
3.24 The noise survey submitted in support of the application assesses the existing
background noise level based on a daytime noise survey and the results of a
previous survey undertaken in 2008. The night time noise levels were predicted
based on the daytime noise levels and the assumption that road and rail traffic
would result in more than 10-15 LAmax events during the night.
3.25 The report uses the requirements of BS 8233 to establish a reasonable standard for
internal noise levels for each room type during the day and night and sets out
recommendations for glazing and ventilation specifications for the facades. The
report recommends that the whole façade will require high performance glazing and
ventilation but that the specification for the upper floors can be slightly lower as
noise from vehicles will reduce as you move up the building. The report therefore
recommends 2 types of high performance glazing and 2 types of ventilation for the
proposal.
3.26 The report states that the end use for the commercial floorspace is not known
[although the application seeks permission for B1 use] but suggests that the
specifications set out for the residential element would be sufficient (although if
frameless doors were fitted these would need to be sealed all round to achieve
appropriate levels).
3.27 The report sets out recommendations for limiting noise from new plant to achieve
35dBA or less when measured at the nearest openable window.
3.28 The vibration levels at the site were measured as part of the 2008 assessment and
the report states that they are believed to be acceptable for the proposed
Development.
3.29 The report concludes that the noise levels required to provide adequate levels
within the Development could be achieved through the use of specialist glazing and
ventilation systems.
3.30 Following concern raised by TfL that the use of the neighbouring site as a bus stand
would lead to additional noise, the applicant revised the noise assessment to take
this consideration into account. The report now confirms that the measures
proposed are sufficient to address any additional noise arising from the future use
of the site.

Geotechnical Report
3.31 A Geotechnical report has been submitted based on previous geotechnical reports
carried out in 2007 and again in 2008. The report provides details of the history of
the use of the site, any pollution incidents, any impact from landfill or other waste
sites, the current land use and natural hazards, ground workings and the results of
on-site investigations.
3.32 The report identifies that until recently (the late 1970’s) the site was occupied by
terraced housing which were likely to have included basements. The report
confirms that when the site was redeveloped a significant depth of infill material was
imported onto the site. There is nothing from the historic use of the site that would
indicate the presence of contamination, any contamination would be from current
uses or the nature of the infill material.
3.33 The testing undertaken on site has identified contamination in the form of elevated
concentrations of arsenic and benzo[a]pyrene. The 2007 and 2008 report confirm
that some remediation of the site would be necessary if landscaped areas were to
be included in the scheme. The mitigations measures recommended would be to
remove the top 500mm – 600mm of soil and replace it with clear inert subsoil and
topsoil. The 2012 report states that no mitigation measures are required as the
whole of the site is to be hard covered. It is not clear how this relates to the areas
of planting and tree pits within the landscape design scheme. The report
recommends that the soil imported for the first floor amenity area should be clean
inert material.
3.34 In terms of foundation design, the report recommends piling as the most
appropriate foundation type due to the infill material. There is a major aquifer
underlying the site and the site falls within a Source Protection Zone 1. There is
therefore a risk of pollution to the aquifer but the report concludes that a
permanently cased cast-in-place end driven pile should adequately deal with this
risk.
Sustainability and Renewables
3.35 The Sustainable Design and Energy Report submitted in support of the application
assesses the scheme’s ability to reduce carbon through the use of passive design
measures, clean energy and on-site renewables. It also includes a BREEAM preassessment
report which confirms that the proposal is capable of achieving
BREEAM ‘excellent’.
3.36 The document estimates that the baseline CO2 emissions for a Building
Regulations (2010) compliant scheme would be 764,751kgCO2 and calculates that
a 31.7% saving (242,509kg of CO2 per year) is possible through a combination of
efficiency measures, the use of a 65kWe/112kWth CHP engine to provide domestic
hot water and a 50sqm array of Photovoltaic Panels on the roof of the building.
3.37 The report sets out that the student accommodation element would be ventilated via
a high efficiency heat recovery ventilation system and would be heated by local
electric heating. Hot water would be provided by a centralised energy centre
comprising a CHP engine and high efficiency gas boilers to cope with peak
demand.

3.38 The commercial and ancillary areas would also be ventilated via a high efficiency
heat recovery ventilation system, but would use Air Source Heat Pumps to generate
hot water and contribute towards heating and cooling.
3.39 The report outlines the sustainability measures generally in terms of materials, solar
control glazing, reduced air leakage and the use of low water fittings to reduce
water consumption. In line with the requirements of the London Plan, it identifies
that there is no existing heat network in the area, but confirms that the Loampit Vale
Town Centre Area is identified for a future cluster and confirms that connections
would be made available to allow for future connection to a district heating system.
The report confirms that the proposal would achieve BREEAM ‘Excellent’ and the
pre-assessment review confirms a score of 73.23%.
3.40 Following an objection from the GLA to the use of electric heating in the student
accommodation element, an updated Sustainable Design and Energy Report was
submitted in September 2012. The revised document alters the heating in the
student accommodation element so that it is provided by local LPHW (low pressure
hot water) heat emitters supplied by the CHP plant. The revised document
calculates that an increased 35.8% carbon saving (270,710kg of CO2 per year) is
possible through this revised combination of efficiency measures, the use of a
65kWe/112kWth CHP engine and a 50sqm array of Photovoltaic Panels on the roof
of the building.
Sunlight and Daylight Assessment
3.41 The Sunlight and Daylight Assessment considers the impact of the proposals on the
daylight and sunlight enjoyed by existing properties to the south and west of the site
and also assesses the internal conditions that will be generated within the proposed
studio units, study bedrooms and communal living space.
3.42 In terms of the impact of the proposals on existing properties in Elswick Road,
Armoury Road and Leathwell Road, the report concludes that the proposal would
have a minimal effect on these properties and any loss of sunlight and daylight
would be within the parameters set out in the BRE document, ‘Site Layout Planning
for Daylight and Sunlight: a guide to good practice’.
3.43 In terms of the sunlight and daylight conditions within the proposed student
accommodation, the report assesses the studios, study bedrooms and communal
living areas on the second floor of the proposal as a ‘worst case scenario’ as rooms
further up the building would be less affected by overshadowing from the approved
development at the Thurston Industrial Estate.
3.44 With regards to daylighting, all of the study rooms would achieve an ADF of 1.5.
The majority of the studios and communal areas would achieve an ADF of 1.5.
3.45 With regards to sunlight, only the studio units and communal living areas that face
within 90 degrees of due south have been assessed (none of the study bedrooms
have been assessed on the basis that sunlight to bedrooms is considered by the
BRE Guidance to be less important). The report finds that all but 1 of the studio
units would meet the BRE requirements in terms of sunlight and this will be limited
to the winter months. Two out of the three communal living spaces which face
more east than south will receive less than the recommended sunlight hours both
throughout the year and during the winter.

3.46 In terms of the proposed first floor amenity space, the majority of this space will
receive more than 2 hours of sun on the 21 March, when assessed without the
consented Thurston Industrial Estate scheme. If the Thurston Industrial Estate
Proposal were to be brought forward, none of the space would receive 2 hours of
sun on the 21 March. The report confirms that the tree species chosen for the
amenity area can thrive in these lighting conditions.
Transport Statement
3.47 The submission is accompanied by a Transport Statement to assess the impacts of
the Development on the local transport network, including during the construction
period as well as the operation of the building.
3.48 The report outlines the relevant policies at the national, regional and local level and
then sets out the baseline conditions for the site, in terms of the local highway
network, public transport and the existing conditions on site. It notes that the
Development comprises 12 small business units of 1,260sq.m with parking for 45
vehicles.
3.49 The existing trip generation provided by the Transport Statement makes an
assumption that the site is still in its existing lawful use. [The site has not been used
in this way for some years, including when the AADT figures were collected. The
trip generation figures were later updated as part of additional information
submitted].
3.50 The Transport Statement estimates that the existing trip generation for the lawful
use of the site is 13 movements in the morning peak hours with 14 movements in
the evening. No analysis of the actual movements attributed to the unlawful
churches that are currently on site have been provided.
3.51 Details of the proposed Development have been provided. It notes that four parking
spaces for disabled users would be provided with no other parking spaces
proposed. It is stated that students would be restricted from having parking permits
within the CPZ although it is proposed that this would not be the case if there were
extenuating circumstances. [The only extenuating circumstance that the Council
would accept is Blue Badge holders who would have access to the disabled spaces
to the rear of the site]. It is proposed that 312 cycle parking spaces are provided
(62%) with evidence submitted to seek to demonstrate that this amount of provision
for the student units would be adequate. In addition, 6 cycle spaces would be
provided to serve the commercial units using Sheffield stands on Thurston Road. It
is proposed that cycle use would be monitored as part of the Travel Plan with
additional cycle spaces provided if necessary.
3.52 Refuse would be stored on the ground floor of the Development with the use of a
mechanical device to move bins to the back edge of the footway on a weekly basis
used to enable the weekly collection to take place.
3.53 Future trips are predicted using Goldsmiths College and Lewisham College as likely
future tenants for the purposes of making assumptions about movements. Using the
percentage modal split for Goldsmiths students (2008 data) it is predicted that 51%
of students would use bus services, 12% would use the DLR, 11% would walk with
a further 11% cycling, 8% would use trains, 4% would drive, 2% would use the
underground and 1% would use motorcycles. The Statement argues that car borne
trips would reduce from the site as a result of the Development. [This is based on

an assumption that the units are being used within their lawful use whereas in
practice they were being used as churches when the AADT data was collected].
The report goes on to state that the movements identified would not all be within
peak hours and further analysis is provided of the actual number of trips predicted
within the peak hours. It concludes that the additional number of students could be
accommodated within the spare capacity available even taking into account
committed development in the Lewisham Town Centre Transport Study area. The
impact on the network is sensitivity tested by assuming that the institute affiliated
with the Development would be central London based and that trips would all be on
the DLR network or the rail network. It concludes that the impact would remain
insignificant with spare capacity able to accommodate users of the Development.
The report goes on to argue that it is considered that the students would have been
using the public transport network in any event and would merely be redistributed
rather than new trips. The impact from the commercial floor space has not been
considered because of the reduction in the area from that existing.
3.54 The final section of the report addresses issues relating to the management of the
site during the start and end of the academic year and construction.
3.55 The activity at the times of the academic year when students would be moving in or
out of the accommodation would require special measures to control the impact. It
is proposed that arrivals would take place over 2 days on a Saturday and Sunday
with female students arriving in the morning and males arriving in the afternoon with
parking allowed for 45 minutes per student on the site. Marshals would be used to
manage this and 25 vehicles could be accommodated on site at any one time.
3.56 On a daily basis, the site would be managed by controlling access to the rear of the
building using gates with these being opened and closed to allow access for
disabled users, cyclists and commercial deliveries. A Site Manager would monitor
use and move on unauthorised vehicles.
3.57 Construction vehicles and deliveries would need to be managed due to the limited
space available to park. Banksmen would be used to assist delivery drivers who it is
suggested would reverse into the western access during the construction period.
Construction hours would be agreed with the Council with deliveries also permitted
within the suggested time frames although they would be prohibited within the peak
hours of 08:00-09:00 and 16:00-18:00. Deliveries would be controlled via a
scheduling and booking system. The average number of movements anticipated
would be less than 2 per day. The Statement sets out a series of environmental
considerations that would be employed on site to minimise disruption.
3.58 A Travel Plan accompanies the Transport Statement. It sets out various objectives
and targets to reduce the number of trips to and from the site by car and increase
trips using sustainable modes such as walking, cycling and public transport. Key
elements include the appointment of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator, promoting the
health benefits of walking, providing information on pedestrian routes and
promotional walking events with similar measures relating to cycling in addition to a
bicycle use group, providing public transport details such as locations and
timetables, providing information on car clubs, a travel pack, awareness campaigns
and setting targets to reduce car usage. The measures would be managed by the
appointed Travel Plan Co-ordinator who would be appointed from first occupation.
Monitoring would take place at 75% of occupation and then at years 3 and 5 of
operation. The Travel Plan includes an action plan as well as details about securing
the plan and it’s ongoing funding.

3.59 Following amendments to the proposal and requests for more accurate highways
information, the applicant has submitted a document that updates the Transport
Assessment in terms of the trip assessment and has also submitted a revised
Travel Plan and Site Management Plan to provide additional information of how the
future transport arrangements of the site will be monitored and improved.
Flood Risk Assessment
3.60 The Flood Risk Assessment identifies the site as being within Flood Zone 3a which
has a greater than 1 in 100 (1%) annual probability of river flooding due to its
proximity to the Ravensbourne River. The Flood Risk Assessment sets out the
relevant policy position and outlines the sustainability benefits of the proposal
including the provision of student housing, the provision of up to 60 jobs, the
redevelopment of brownfield land and the provision of open space. It states that the
proposal would meet the exception test on the basis that the wider sustainability
benefits to the community outweighs flood risk.
3.61 The report establishes a minimum ground floor level for the proposed building at
6.95 AOD (based on being 300mm above the 1 in 100 (1%) annual probability +
20% for climate change flood level of 6.65AOD) and confirms that the building has
been designed so that the ground floor level would achieve this. Modelling of the
site indicates maximum depths of flooding of between 650mm and 1.45m on the
access route to the site which would be classed as a ‘danger for most’. The report
therefore recommends that appropriate mitigation in a major flood event would
comprise appropriate advance flood warning and the provision of safe refuge within
the Development. These matters would be dealt with by way of a Flood Risk
Management Plan which would ensure that both residential and commercial
occupants would be safe during the flood event.
3.62 The report notes that there would be no overall loss of flood plain storage as the
floor area of the ground floor is less than the floor area of the existing buildings on
site. The report states that as the site is situated in Source Protection Zone 1 which
means that the opportunities for infiltration drainage such as soakaways may be
limited to roof drainage in the form of green roofs.
3.63 No details of any alternative Sustainable Urban Drainage system has been provided
although the report states that this will be dealt with at the detailed design stage.
The report makes reference to rainwater harvesting, although no details are
provided of this.
3.64 Following an objection raised by the Environment Agency regarding the failure to
provide sufficient detail of the flood storage volume available at the site prior to and
post development, an amended ground floor plan has been submitted which
confirms that flood voids will be provided beneath the building.
Wind Assessment
3.65 The wind assessment submitted in support of the application assesses the impact
of the proposal on the area immediately around the Development, both in relation to
the existing context and in relation to the emerging context (if the currently
permitted schemes were to come forward). A model of the scheme and the
surrounding context was prepared and wind tunnel testing was undertaken to
assess the impact of the scheme in a number of different locations surrounding the
building.

3.66 The report concludes that the wind conditions around the building and on the first
floor amenity space with the current context are likely to be suitable for pedestrian
activities such as strolling and sitting, although there are 9 areas in the amenity
areas to the east and west that will be unsuitable for long-term sitting. The wind
conditions generated in the emerging context would be improved as a result of the
shelter provided by the Thurston Road Industrial Estate with only 5 locations in the
amenity areas which would be unsuitable for long-term sitting. The report states
that the wind conditions would be acceptable on the basis that the amenity areas
are only intended for occasional use for short term sitting, standing and strolling.
Ecology
3.67 A Phase 1 Habitat Survey has been submitted in support of the planning
application. The document includes details of a desk top assessment to identify
statutory and non-statutory designated nature conservation sites in proximity to the
Development site and details of recordings of protected species in the vicinity of
the site. The site is not part of any statutorily designated nature conservation site,
but falls adjacent to a Green Corridor which runs along the railway line.
3.68 The document also includes details of a habitat survey carried out on the site. This
identified that the habitats on site are only of value within the immediate vicinity due
to their limited extent and low diversity. The scattered trees and shrubs and
buildings have low potential to support bird species.
3.69 The report provides recommendations for mitigation measures to support the
neighbouring Green Corridor and avoid legal offence. These include measures to
protect nesting birds, the protection of any retained trees, the planting of at least ten
species of biodiversity value as part of the planting scheme and suitable protection
of the area of scrub and woodland to the north in the form of fencing or hoarding.
Section 106 Heads of Terms
3.70 Initially, when the application was submitted, the Heads of Terms and contributions
proposed by the applicant were:
• Open space: £127,060.60
• Employment and Training: £97,113.85
• Town Centre Management: £41,514.88
3.71 Following negotiations between Officers and the applicant, which were carried out
with regards to the guidance within the Council’s Planning Obligations SPD, the
proposed Heads of Terms and contributions are now:
• Clause to secure future student housing operator prior to commencement
• Health: £124,800
• Open space: £157,524.30
• Employment/Training: £80,980.86. The use of local labour and employment
during the construction process would also be required
• Town Centre Management/Improvements: £34,659.81

• Community Centres/Halls and Libraries: Provision of ‘in-kind’ benefits to
include the provision of wireless broadband throughout the student
accommodation and communal areas and the retention of the communal
areas shown on drawing number 489_0011 Rev01.
• Sustainability
o Obligation to secure BREEAM ‘Excellent”
o Obligation to secure the identified renewable energy strategy and
the reduction in Co2 emissions over Building Regulations (2010)
o Obligation to secure the pipework to be laid to edge of site to allow
for future connection to district heating system as previously
discussed
• Transport and Public Realm
o Improvements to Waterlink Way (to refer back to drawing number
50021901-01 Rev E)
o any necessary repairs to the footpath following completion of
Development and any necessary changes to the Traffic Regulation
Order to restrict parking along the north side of Thurston Road and
to provide on street disabled parking bays to be secured by way of a
s278 agreement
o Re-provision of adjacent bus stop and £12,000 towards
improvements to bus stop
o Restriction on parking permits
o The implementation of the approved Travel Plan and addendum e-
mail dated 12/11/2012 prior to occupation. The appointment of a
Travel Plan Coordinator. An appropriate monitoring regime of the
Travel Plan, including travel surveys. Payment of Travel Plan
monitoring fee to the Council
o The implementation of the approved Site Management Plan prior to
occupation of the Development. A mechanism to monitor the arrival
of students at the start of the academic year and thereafter at the
start and end of each Academic year for a period of 5 years. A
mechanism to require the developer to have regard to reasonable
recommendations by the council about the outcome of the
monitoring
o Right for public to pass and re-pass over widened area of pavement
and public open space to the east of the site
o Public realm and open space management plan
• Commercial Units
o Management and Marketing plan for the B1 (office floorspace);

4.0 Consultation
o Obligation to secure the fit out of the commercial floorspace
including wheelchair accessible bathrooms and platform lifts and
appropriate level of acoustic glazing
o Secure the retention of the B1 floorspace
• Flood Risk/Management
o Flood Management Plan
o Details of flood voids including maintenance plan
• Student Management Plan
• Meeting the Council’s legal and professional costs for the drafting and
monitoring of the S106 and the consultant costs discussed.
4.1 This section outlines the consultation carried out by the applicant prior to
submission and the Council following the submission of the application and
summarises the responses received. The Council’s consultation exceeded the
minimum statutory requirements and those required by the Council’s adopted
Statement of Community Involvement.
4.2 Site notices were displayed and letters were sent to 438 residents and businesses
in the surrounding area and the relevant ward Councillors. The GLA, TfL and the
Environment Agency were also consulted.
Pre-Application Consultation
4.3 Extensive pre-application discussions took place about the proposed
redevelopment of this site, including presentation to the Council’s Design Panel and
discussions with the Greater London Authority (GLA).
4.4 Written Responses received from Local Residents and Organisations
4.5 Only 1 letter of objection was received from one of the existing businesses
occupying the site. Matters raised related to:
• Loss of affordable industrial premises would result in having to relocate
business outside the M25 and loss of local jobs;
• Sherwood Court was once a thriving industrial estate but has been blighted
in recent years by threat of demolition and redevelopment;
• The proposed ground floor employment floorspace would be unsuitable for
light industrial uses and equates to the floorspace of less than two of the
existing units;
• The cost of relocating the business might force its closure; and
• Scheme is another example of how opportunities for light industrial
manufacturing which provides employment for local people is being eroded
by Lewisham Council.

Written Responses received from Statutory Agencies
Environment Agency (EA)
4.6 Initially, the EA objected to the proposal on the basis of the loss of flood storage.
Following negotiation with the applicant and the submission of revised drawings
showing flood voids beneath the building (Peter Brett Associates’ drawing
26690/001/001, dated 15 October 2012), the EA withdrew their objection on that
basis that the proposal will not result in a loss of flood storage volume, provided the
voids are of an appropriate height and suitably detailed to allow water to enter and
exit the voided area. A condition was recommended to secure the details of the
flood voids. The EA raised concerns about the inaccessibility of the site during
flooding and the council was advised to consult the Emergency Planner as to
whether the additional burden of evacuating and providing refuge for occupants of
this Development would be acceptable.
4.7 With regards to contaminated land, a condition was recommended requiring details
of site remediation measures to be submitted. This related to concerns that the site
is situated over a Major Aquifer in groundwater Source Protection Zone I.
Consequently underlying groundwater is considered to be at very high risk from any
pollution or land contamination. Given the sensitivity of the underlying groundwater
and the historic activities undertaken at the site, the EA required details of a more
comprehensive ground investigation than that submitted in support of the
application.
4.8 With regards to drainage further conditions were proposed in order to control
discharge of water to the ground in order to protect the public water supply.
4.9 With regards to piling, the EA were satisfied that the piling risk assessment and
geoenvironmental comments included in the document ‘Updated Geotechnical
Report- 25/10/12’ from KF Geotechnical Ltd and were satisfied with the report’s
conclusions.
Greater London Authority/TfL
4.10 In the Stage 1 response the GLA found the scheme to comply with some London
Plan policies but concerns were raised that the scheme failed to comply with
policies relating to the following areas:
• Principle of development: the provision of student accommodation was
supported, however, the GLA required Lewisham Council to be satisfied
that the site was not required to meet housing targets. It was also queried
whether the existing church uses should be re-provided.
• Urban design: Whilst the general layout of the scheme was considered
acceptable and the location of the serving to the rear of the site supported,
concern was raised about the impact of the servicing routes passing over
the open space. It was also suggested that the open spaces should be
given a more overtly green character. Consideration was also invited of
whether the building form should be extend towards the railway line to
screen the servicing area and improve natural surveillance of the
underpass.

• Scale height and massing: the height and scale of the proposal was
considered acceptable subject to detailed design. It was stated that the
height would only be acceptable if the buildings were of an outstanding
architectural quality, with exceptionally high quality materials and detailing.
The current proposals were found to be committed to delivering that quality
and the presence of the podium was strongly supported.
• Inclusive access: the level of wheelchair accessible bed spaces was
accepted but concerns were raised that there would be insufficient
communal floorspace for wheelchair and non-wheelchair users. Concern
was also raised that the commercial units did not provide accessible toilets
or platform lifts.
• Climate change mitigation: Modelling was required to demonstrate that the
passive design features could deliver a 18% carbon saving. The proposed
electric heating in the student element was found objectionable on the
basis that if the scheme was connected to a district heating system, the
opportunity for carbon savings would be limited. Further detail of the
location and floor area of the energy centre was also required along with
confirmation that the size of the CHP has been optimised..
• Climate change adaption: Further information on proposed sustainability
measures were required.
• Noise: Additional information was required that takes into account the
approved bus stand.
• Transport: The car free nature of the scheme was accepted, however
justification of the level of disabled parking was required. It was
recommended that a clause to secure the exemption from applying for
parking permits was included in the s106. The proposed Transport
Assessment and Travel Plan was found not to TfL’s best practice guidance.
Further detail was requested on the potential use of buses and an audit on
the quality of local bus stops requested. Given the importance of walking
and cycling as modes of transport, improvements were required to local
walking routes including improvements to Waterlink Way and an
assessment of the quality of the links with Goldsmiths and Lewisham
Collage was requested. The Council was directed to secure these
improvements by condition / s106. The level of cycle parking was found to
be below that required by the London Plan, but this was found to be
acceptable subject to a monitoring clause in the travel plan and the
applicant indentifying additional space for any additional parking identified
as necessary. The applicant’s commitment to providing a student
management plan that controlled students being dropped off / picked up at
the beginning end of term was welcomed and the Council was directed to
secure this by condition. Further details of off street servicing for the
commercial element was requested and the Council was directed to secure
a servicing and delivery plan by condition. The council was also directed to
secure a Construction Delivery Plan by condition.
4.11 Following the submission by the applicant of additional information, the GLA/TfL
provided follow up comments confirming:

4.12 Principle of development: The GLA will require a copy of the draft s106 agreement
to confirm the clause securing the use of the building as student accommodation.
Officers would like to see evidence that the applicant has entered into dialogue with
the existing churches on site to inform them of the possibility of needing to relocate
and to facilitate their relocation;
• Urban Design: The GLA welcome the increased greening of the public
spaces and accept the justification for the servicing routes across the open
spaces and the placement of the eastern block;
• Inclusive Access: The approach to communal accommodation is accepted.
A suitably worded condition securing platform lifts and disabled toilet
facilities in the commercial spaces was recommended;
• Climate change mitigation and adaption: The GLA requested an
opportunity to review the applicant’s water saving calculations. The
provision of heating to the student rooms through space heating was
welcomed and well as details of the sustainability measures to be secured
through the Development. A suitably worded condition to secure the
quality of the green roofs was recommended;
• Transport: TfL requested that real time travel information should be
provided within the building; that additional disabled parking spaces should
be provided on Thurston Road; and that the need to limit parking along one
side of Thurston Road should be investigated to ensure the free flow of
traffic.
4.13 In summary the update confirmed that GLA officers were content that the issues
remaining are capable of acceptable resolution prior to the Mayor’s final decision on
the case.
Lewisham Emergency Planning
4.14 The Council’s Emergency Planning team have confirmed that they would be
satisfied for the Development to provide safe refuge for residents in a flood event
provided that the recommendations of the Lewisham Council Flood Emergency
Plans Guidance & Template v.5 (March 2011) were followed in the Flood Risk
Management Plan for this Development.
Lewisham Design Panel
4.15 The Panel reviewed the scheme prior to the reduction in height to two 11 storey
blocks.
4.16 The panel raised concerns about the height of the proposal and voiced
disappointment that some of the design changes had negatively affected the
proposal. They found the proposal to be unacceptable at 13 stories.
4.17 Concern was raised about the canyoning effect along Thurston Road and about the
level of sunlight and daylight that would be received in the study rooms. While the
break in built form that resulted from the podium element was welcomed, concern
was raised that the gap created was too small in relation to the height and that the
building still appeared as a solid wall creating imposing views from further away.

4.18 The panel felt that the excessive mass of the proposal was made less palatable by
the choice of materials and elevational treatment and that the dark brick would
emphasise the excessive height and increase the oppressive character of the
proposal. The importance of the eastern elevation was raised and further design
evolution of this element recommended.
4.19 Concern was raised about the ground floor arrangement, which was considered to
be mean and also about the high number of single aspect, north facing units.
Concern was also raised about the quality of the amenity space in terms of
overshadowing and whether the proposed trees would survive.
Sustainability Manager
4.20 The Sustainability Manager has raised concerns about the proposed air source heat
pumps which would be used in connection with the commercial element of the
scheme. The applicant provided additional information regarding the efficiency of
the Air Source Heat Pumps and accepted that this technology was generally not as
efficient as the manufacturer’s information would suggest. Revised calculations
were therefore provided of the energy requirements of the Air Source Heat Pumps.
The council’s Sustainability manager still felt that the efficiencies suggested were
too high, however, given that the commercial element is such a small part of the
overall energy requirements of the scheme, these did not have an impact on the
overall energy savings for the Development and the information provided was found
to be acceptable.
4.21 The Council’s Sustainability Manager has confirmed that her preference would be
for the commercial element to be connected to the CHP plant but accepts that this
would raise issues in terms of how the energy bills would be split between the
student housing and commercial element. On balance, and given the limited scale
of the energy requirements of the commercial element, the Sustainability Manager
is satisfied that this issue would not carry sufficient weight to cause her to raise an
objection to the scheme. Therefore, on balance, the proposed energy strategy was
found to be acceptable subject to the imposition of a condition/obligation to secure
the stated CO2 reduction and BREEAM ‘Excellent’.
Highways and Transportation
4.22 Following the revised information submitted to the Council, Officers are satisfied
that that the impact of the proposal has been adequately assessed and it is agreed
that the proposed Development will not have a significant impact on the surrounding
highways and transport networks
4.23 The proposed site layout and parking provision for both cars and cycles is
acceptable for the type and scale of development proposed.
4.24 A final Site Management Plan and Travel Plan has been submitted and are
considered acceptable. These documents should form the approved documents for
the Development to be secured through the s106 agreement.
4.25 Subject to suitable conditions and s106 obligations (listed below), officers are
satisfied that there are no outstanding highways and transportation reasons why the
proposed Development should not be approved on highways grounds.
4.26 Conditions:

• a Construction Management Plan;
• suitable cycle parking arrangements;
• the retention of disabled parking bays;
• a s278 agreement to secure any necessary repairs to the footway following
development and any necessary changes to the Traffic Regulation Order to
restrict parking along the north side of Thurston Road and to provide on street
disabled parking bays; and
• securing a number of specific arrangements within the Site Management Plan.
Planning obligations:
• the implementation and monitoring of the Site Management Plan;
• the implementation and monitoring of the Travel Plan and addendum e-mail
dated 12/11/2012;
• improvements to the adjacent bus stop;
• improvement works to the Waterlink Way;
• any necessary repairs to the existing footway and any necessary changes to
the Traffic Regulation Order to restrict parking along the north side of Thurston
Road and to provide on street disabled parking bays (to be secured via a s278
agreement); and
• a clause to prohibiting future occupiers from applying for parking permits.
Environmental Health
4.27 The details submitted were found to be acceptable subject to suitable conditions
relating to the control of dust and noise during construction, construction hours,
wheel washing facilities and site remediation.
Ecological Regeneration Manager
4.28 The details submitted were considered to be acceptable subject to securing the
recommendations of the Phase 1 Habitat Survey and conditions to secure the two
types of green roof proposed.
(Letters available to Members)
5.0 EIA Screening
5.1 Given the nature of the proposed application and the requirements of the 1999 EIA
Regulations, Officers have considered whether the application falls within the
thresholds for development being potentially EIA development under the Town and
Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011.

5.2 In this regard, particular consideration has been given to the extent to which the site
may be contaminated and the extent that the proposal may have significant noise,
air pollution or traffic impact and whether it would have a significant visual, or
amenity impact. Given the regeneration of the Town Centre and the number of
schemes being brought forward in the vicinity, consideration has also been given to
the cumulative impact of these proposals.
5.3 In combination with the size of the site, Officers have concluded that the proposal
does not give significant rise to these matters and that the Development proposal
does not fall within the thresholds for which EIA screening is normally required. A
letter was issued to the applicant on the 6 th November 2012 confirming that any
issues arising from the Development, including the cumulative impacts, can be
satisfactorily addressed through the technical reports that have been submitted as
part of the application or as required by the recommended conditions.
6.0 Policy Context
Introduction
6.1 Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) sets out
that in considering and determining applications for planning permission the local
planning authority must have regard to:
(a)
(b)
(c)
the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application,
any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application, and
any other material considerations.
6.2 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) makes it clear
that the determination of planning applications must be made in accordance with
the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
6.3 The development plan for Lewisham comprises the Core Strategy, Development
Plan Document (DPD) (adopted in June 2011), those saved policies in the adopted
Lewisham UDP (July 2004) that have not been replaced by the Core Strategy and
policies in the London Plan (July 2011). The National Planning Policy Framework
does not change the legal status of the development plan.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
6.4 The NPPF was published on 27 March 2012 and is a material consideration in the
determination of planning applications. It contains at paragraph 14 a ‘presumption in
favour of sustainable development’. Annex 1 of the NPPF provides guidance on
implementation of the NPPF. In summary this states that (paragraph 211), policies
in the development plan should not be considered out of date just because they
were adopted prior to the publication of the NPPF. At paragraphs 214 and 215
guidance is given on the weight to be given to policies in the development plan. In
summary, this states, that for a period of 12 months from publication of the NPPF
decision takers can give full weight to policies adopted since 2004 even if there is
limited conflict with the NPPF. Following this period weight should be given to
existing policies according to their consistency with the NPPF.

6.5 Officers have reviewed the Core Strategy and saved UDP policies for consistency
with the NPPF and consider there is no issue of significant conflict. As such, full
weight can be given to these policies in the decision making process in accordance
with paragraphs 211, 214 and 215 of the NPPF.
Ministerial Statement: Planning for Growth (23 March 2011)
6.6 The statement sets out that the planning system has a key role to play in rebuilding
Britain’s economy by ensuring that the sustainable development needed to support
economic growth is able to proceed as easily as possible. The Government’s
expectation is that the answer to development and growth should wherever possible
be ‘yes’, except where this would compromise the key sustainable development
principles set out in national planning policy.
Other National Guidance
6.7 The other relevant national guidance is:
By Design: Urban Design in the Planning System – Towards Better Practice
Guidance on Tall Buildings (English Heritage/CABE, July 2007)
London Plan (July 2011)
6.8 The London Plan policies relevant to this application are:
Policy 1.1 Delivering the strategic vision and objectives for London
Policy 2.13 Opportunity areas and intensification areas
Policy 2.14 Areas for regeneration
Policy 2.15 Town centres
Policy 3.8 Housing choice
Policy 3.9 Mixed and balanced communities
Policy 4.1 Developing London’s economy
Policy 4.2 Offices
Policy 4.3 Mixed use development and offices
Policy 4.4 Managing industrial land and premises
Policy 5.1 Climate change mitigation
Policy 5.2 Minimising carbon dioxide emissions
Policy 5.3 Sustainable design and construction
Policy 5.5 Decentralised energy networks
Policy 5.6 Decentralised energy in development proposals
Policy 5.7 Renewable energy
Policy 5.9 Overheating and cooling
Policy 5.10 Urban greening
Policy 5.11 Green roofs and development site environs
Policy 5.12 Flood risk management
Policy 5.13 Sustainable drainage
Policy 5.15 Water use and supplies
Policy 5.18 Construction, excavation and demolition waste
Policy 5.21 Contaminated land
Policy 6.3 Assessing effects of development on transport capacity
Policy 6.5 Funding Crossrail and other strategically important transport
infrastructure
Policy 6.7 Better streets and surface transport
Policy 6.9 Cycling

Policy 6.10 Walking
Policy 6.11 Smoothing traffic flow and tackling congestion
Policy 6.12 Road network capacity
Policy 6.13 Parking
Policy 7.2 An inclusive environment
Policy 7.3 Designing out crime
Policy 7.4 Local character
Policy 7.5 Public realm
Policy 7.6 Architecture
Policy 7.7 Location and design of tall and large buildings
Policy 7.14 Improving air quality
Policy 7.15 Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes
Policy 7.18 Protecting local open space and addressing local deficiency
Policy 7.19 Biodiversity and access to nature
Policy 7.21 Trees and woodlands
Policy 8.2 Planning obligations
Policy 8.3 Community infrastructure levy
Core Strategy
6.9 The Core Strategy was adopted by the Council at its meeting on 29 June 2011. The
Core Strategy, together with the London Plan and the saved policies of the Unitary
Development Plan, is the borough’s statutory development plan. The following lists
the relevant strategic objectives, spatial policies and cross cutting policies from the
Lewisham Core Strategy as they relate to this application:
Spatial Policy 1 Lewisham Spatial Strategy
Spatial Policy 2 Regeneration and Growth Areas
Core Strategy Policy 5 Other employment locations
Core Strategy Policy 7 Climate change and adapting to the effects
Core Strategy Policy 8 Sustainable design and construction and energy efficiency
Core Strategy Policy 9 Improving local air quality
Core Strategy Policy 10 Managing and reducing the risk of flooding
Core Strategy Policy 12 Open space and environmental assets
Core Strategy Policy 14 Sustainable movement and transport
Core Strategy Policy 15 High quality design for Lewisham
Core Strategy Policy 18 The location and design of tall buildings
Core Strategy Policy 21 Planning obligations
Unitary Development Plan (2004)
6.10 The saved policies of the UDP relevant to this application are:
STR URB 1 The Built Environment
STR URB 4 Regeneration Areas
STR ENV PRO 3 Energy and Natural Resource Conservation
URB 3 Urban Design
URB 12 Landscape and Development
URB 13 Trees
URB 14 Street Furniture and Paving
ENV.PRO 10 Contaminated Land
ENV.PRO 11 Noise Generating Development
ENV.PRO 12 Light Generating Development
HSG 4 Residential Amenity

HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential Development
HSG 18 Special Needs Housing
STC 11 Town Centre Regeneration
Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (January 2011)
6.11 This document sets out guidance and standards relating to the provision of
affordable housing within the Borough and provides detailed guidance on the likely
type and quantum of financial obligations necessary to mitigate the impacts of
different types of development.
Emerging Plans
6.12 According to paragraph 216 of the NPPF decision takers can also give weight to
relevant policies in emerging plans according to:
• The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the
preparation, the greater the weight that may be given);
• The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the
less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be
given); and
• The degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the
policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given).
6.13 The following emerging plans are relevant to this application.
Lewisham Town Centre Action Area Plan (LTC AAP)
6.14 At present the LTC AAP carries weight having been the subject of public
consultation and having been submitted for examination in public in September
2012. It provides policies related to the overall town centre areas in addition to site
specific policies to guide development. In particular, the policies within the AAP of
direct relevance to this scheme relate to development of the site itself as part of a
larger site known as the Railway Strip in addition to policies regarding student
housing, mixed use developments and tall buildings.
6.15 It is worth noting that the applicant has submitted a number of representations
about the wording of the policies relevant to this proposal. These comments have
not resulted in changes to the wording of the policies in the submission version and
the Inspector at the examination in public will make final recommendations on the
exact wording of the policy. As set out in the NPPF there are considered to be
unresolved objections to these policies, which cannot therefore be considered to
have full weight. The most significant of these are the objection to Policy S5
Railway Strip. The policy states that Thurston Road “is a secondary route and not a
primary entrance into the town centre and the scale and massing of buildings
should reflect this”. The representation from the applicant’s agent states that this
should be changed to make reference to Thurston Road being an important route.
The Council has not changed the wording of the policy as it is felt that the narrow
width of Thurston Road means that it is reasonable to call it a secondary route. The
representation does not affect the fact that the scale and massing of the proposal
should reflect the narrow width of the street.

7.0 Planning Considerations
7.1 The main issues to be considered in respect of this application are:
a) Principle of Development
b) Relationship with other town centre developments
c) Design
d) Quality of Accommodation
e) Highways and Traffic Issues
f) Noise
g) Environmental Impacts
h) Sustainability and Energy
i) Ecology and Landscaping
j) Flood Risk
k) Planning Obligations
Principle of Development
7.2 Lewisham Town Centre is defined as a Regeneration and Growth Area within the
Core Strategy which will provide key regeneration and development opportunities in
the Borough. The site is currently an ‘other employment location’ as defined by
Policy 5 within the Core Strategy, although it is considered that only a small number
of jobs are currently provided by the illegal churches and industrial uses that would
be lost as part of any redevelopment.
Principle of student housing
7.3 Policy HSG 18 Special Needs Housing of the UDP welcomes applications from
recognised organisations for accommodation for special needs groups, including
students, but seeks to ensure that such schemes do not lead to a concentration of
special residential uses within an established residential area. It is not considered
that there is a particular concentration of students in the Town Centre and the site is
not located in an established residential area.
7.4 Paragraph 3.52 of the London Plan recognises that London’s universities make a
significant contribution to its economy and labour market and that it is important that
their attractiveness and potential growth are not compromised by inadequate
provision for new student accommodation. The paragraph recognises that there is
uncertainty over future growth in the London student population and its
accommodation needs, but estimates that there could be a requirement for some
18,000 – 27,000 places over the 10 years to 2021. Policy 3.8 ‘Housing Choice’
therefore encourages boroughs to work with higher and further education
establishments to meet a demonstrable need for student housing without
compromising capacity for conventional homes. It is considered that the principle of
student housing is encouraged by the London Plan provided it meets a
demonstrable need and that the use will not compromise the delivery of self
contained homes.
7.5 Currently, the application has been made speculatively and the Applicant is in
negotiations with a number of education providers/ student housing management
companies to secure a future end user. The need for such a large number of
student units in this location has currently not been demonstrated by the applicant,
who has only provided evidence of a general need for student housing in London
and confirmation that the site is well connected to higher education establishments

y way of its excellent public transport accessibility. Given the bespoke nature of
student housing as a use, it is necessary to ensure that the design and layout of the
proposal meets the needs of the future end user. In order to ensure both a need for
the use and the deliverability of the proposal, the Council intends to secure an end
user for the Development that is either a higher education provider or an
established student housing management company prior to the commencement of
development. This approach is supported by Policy LAAP 13 in the LTC AAP and
would be secured through the Section 106 agreement and is considered to be
necessary to establish that there is a need for the accommodation in this location.
7.6 This mechanism in the s106 has also been requested by the Greater London
Authority as it is necessary to secure the accommodation provided as student
housing as opposed to any other form of housing to ensure the scheme is not
eligible to make a contribution towards affordable housing.
7.7 Policy LAAP13 of the LTC AAP supports the principle of providing student housing
in the Town Centre provided that the development of a site would not:
• cause a net loss of permanent self-contained homes, employment space or
other town centre uses that add to its vitality or viability,
• prejudice the Council’s ability to meet it’s the London Plan target for
delivery of self-contained homes or,
• involve the loss of sites that are considered especially suitable for
affordable housing; or
• result in an over-concentration of student accommodation.
7.8 The development of the site would not result in the loss of existing homes and the
site is not considered to be especially suitable to deliver a large amount of
affordable housing. In order to deliver the Strategic Housing targets for Lewisham
there is a need to ensure that sufficient housing is brought forward. The site is not
included in the Council’s 5 year housing land supply and the redevelopment of the
site for a mix of uses that does not include self-contained homes would not
undermine the Council’s ability to deliver its target of 2,600 new homes in Lewisham
Town Centre by 2026.
7.9 While the policy does not define an ‘over concentration’ of student housing, it is not
considered that there are a high number of existing students in this area or that the
introduction of 410 student bedspaces would lead to an over concentration of
students. A number of planning applications have been approved in the
surrounding area which will mean that Thurston Road has the potential for a large
residential community in future years (if the applications are implemented). It is
therefore considered that there is a need to seek to secure the amenity of future
residents from potential issues that may arise from the introduction of a large
number of students into the locality. A clause in the s106 is recommended,
requiring the future operator to prepare and implement a Student Accommodation
Management Plan. This is considered to be necessary to ensure that the use
would not lead to noise and disturbance and to be directly relevant to an application
for a large number of student bedspaces.
7.10 The site is identified in Policy S5 of the AAP as being suitable for redevelopment for
a commercially lead mix of uses including B1. This policy states that sensitive
design could make some residential use on the site acceptable. The policy goes on
to state that for all uses, proposals must provide a high quality of accommodation
and amenity by suitably addressing and mitigating against:

• the geographic constraints presented by the narrow plot depth,
• the location adjacent to the Victorian railway viaduct,
• the impact of surrounding developments on the daylight, sunlight and
overshadowing of new development on this site. It is therefore considered
that the principle of the student housing use is acceptable subject to
securing the future end user and providing a suitable level of
accommodation.
7.11 The principle of the redevelopment of the site for a mix of uses that includes student
housing is therefore considered acceptable provided that a suitable end user is
secured through the s106 and the quality of the accommodation created can
successfully mitigate the constraints of the site.
Flexibility and Adaptability
7.12 Policy 15 ‘High quality design for Lewisham’ of the Core Strategy requires
development to be flexible and adaptable to change. Likewise, Policy LAAP13
‘Student Housing’ of the emerging AAP requires student housing to demonstrate it
is suitable for year round occupation and that it has long term adaptability and
sustainability. The applicant has confirmed that the student housing will be occupied
all year round as the lease offered to students will cover holiday time as well as
term time. Certainly, the ground floor commercial space would be occupied year
round as it would not be occupied in connection to the student housing element.
This would ensure that there would be activity at ground and first floor level. In an
attempt to animate the ground floor reception space, the applicant is proposing a
small café that can operate as ancillary to the student housing use. It is considered
that this would also make a contribution towards enlivening the public realm around
the building.
7.13 In terms of being adaptable, the building has been designed with a regular grid
pattern which would ensure that it is adaptable to future changes if the need for
student housing no longer exists at any point in the future. Such changes would be
the subject of a planning application and consideration against the relevant policies
at that time. However, matters worth noting at this stage are that due to the northfacing
nature of the rooms to the back of the site, if the building were to be
converted to residential accommodation, it would need to provide large units that
are dual aspect and therefore provide sufficient daylight and sunlight. While officers
accept that the scheme has been designed to be flexible, if a change of use to
residential were to become necessary in the future, the scheme would become
liable for significant affordable housing contributions and also open space/children’s
play space contributions to mitigate the lack of amenity space provided by the
proposal.
Provision of B1 Floorspace and Loss of Employment
7.14 Policy LAAP11 ‘Employment uses’ of the LTC AAP states that the Town Centre is
the preferred location for B1 (office) use. The site is identified in Policy S5 of the
LTC AAP as being suitable for redevelopment for a commercially lead mix of uses
including B1. The principle of the replacement of the existing industrial uses with
B1 uses is therefore acceptable. It is considered that the nature of the
developments along Thurston Road is changing with the recently approved
developments and that light industrial uses may not be compatible with the future
character of the road. Whilst the loss of the existing light industrial uses on the site

is regrettable, their replacement with B1 uses that can generate a higher density of
jobs is considered to be acceptable. The proposal would make a significant
financial contribution (£80,980.86) towards the Lewisham Local Labour and
Business Initiative which provides support to small and medium sized businesses
that are looking to relocate within the borough.
7.15 The proposal would result in a net loss of employment space of 691sqm. Policy
LAAP11 ‘Employment uses’ of the LTC AAP states that redevelopment proposals
should enable the intensification of sites and there is an opportunity to re-provide
employment of an equal or greater floorspace as part of a wider mix of uses,
including residential. The proposals should therefore provide an equivalent area of
commercial floorspace.
7.16 However, the employment provided by the existing uses on site (a combination of
illegal churches and industrial uses) is considered to be limited and the loss of
employment floorspace will be mitigated by the provision of high quality B1
floorspace. Using the HCA’s Employment Densities Guide (2010) it is estimated
that the proposed employment floorspace could generate up to 47 jobs. It is
considered that the loss of commercial floorspace is acceptable on the basis that
the quality of the B1 floorspace secured is very high and that it can provide a higher
level of employment if it is successfully occupied.
7.17 The cost of fitting out the B1 floorspace is envisaged to be high as the design
specifies double height curtain walling which will need to be acoustically treated to
create a suitable internal environment. The open aspect of the ground and first
floors is necessary to mitigate the height of the proposal (as discussed in later
sections of this report). To ensure that the space is attractive to future occupiers
and to ensure that the site will continue to make a contribution to local employment
(as opposed to remaining vacant) the applicant has agreed to fit out the B1
floorspace. This would be secured through the s106 agreement. The applicant has
also been asked to prepare a management and marketing plan for the office
floorspace to ensure that the space is appropriately marketed to prospective
occupiers to ensure that the space is successfully let. This would also be secured
through the s106 agreement and is considered necessary to mitigate the loss of
commercial floorspace and ensure that the site continues to make a contribution
towards local employment.
7.18 On this basis, it is considered that the redevelopment of the site for a mix of high
quality B1 floorspace and student housing use is acceptable provided the
constraints of the site can be suitably mitigated and a suitable standard of
accommodation can be created in terms of noise and sunlight and daylight.
Loss of Existing Churches
7.19 The GLA Stage 1 response raised the loss of the existing churches as a possible
issue and questioned whether provision should be made to relocate these uses.
However, it is considered that these uses on this site are not lawful and have only
been allowed to continue due to the impending redevelopment of the site. It is
therefore considered that the Council’s priority is to protect the employment
designation of this site and not to seek the relocation of the churches. The GLA has
requested additional information from the applicant confirming that they have
entered into dialogue with the existing churches to discuss the need for relocation
and to see what can be done to aid this process. In addition, the Council is in the
process of preparing an SPD that will provide advice to churches in finding suitable
premises in the borough.

Relationship with Other Town Centre Developments
7.20 The proposed Development forms a key part of the aspiration to regenerate
Lewisham Town Centre and is part of the wider Loampit Vale Character Area in the
Submission Version of the Council’s Lewisham Town Centre Area Action Plan. As
such, in addition to being acceptable in its own right, the proposals also need to fit
within the wider emerging context of the Town Centre and deliver the strategic
objectives for the area. The following paragraphs provide a brief overview of the
relationship of the proposed Development with the town centre. Detailed
consideration of the topics concerned are set out under relevant headings in
Section 7 of this report.
Accessibility/routes
7.21 Thurston Road provides an important link into the town centre. The use of this area
has been employment for some time but with the resolution to approve the Thurston
Road Industrial Estate redevelopment to the south of the site, the approval of the
redevelopment of 52-54 Thurston Road to mixed use and the work that is going on
to enhance Loampit Vale, the character of the area is changing. The introduction of
student housing on the upper floors of the application site should improve the
environment of Thurston Road, the perception of the town centre from the railway
line and make this currently hostile route a more attractive walking/cycling route.
7.22 The site sits adjacent to the Waterlink Way walking and cycling route which is
important to encourage the modal shifts necessary to support the scale of
development proposed in the area. It is considered that the proposal will result in
significant improvements to the section of the route that runs alongside the site,
helping users feel safer as a result of improved natural surveillance and a higher
quality environment.
Urban Design and Open Space
7.23 The site sits within the western boundary of Lewisham Town Centre. There are
approved applications at Lewisham Gateway which would have three zones of
different building heights with three taller buildings (from 54m up to a maximum of
77m in height – approximately 18-22 storeys), a mid-zone of development (34m up
to 47m – approximately 10-16 storeys) and a third zone (14m to 28m –
approximately ground plus 3-7 storeys) which provides the lower part of the blocks
and defines the pedestrian routes; and the extension of time limit for Thurston Road
Industrial Estate, which would have a frontage of 10 storeys, as well as the
aforementioned site at 52-54 Thurston Road with approval for a part 9, part 10
storey building. The redevelopment of Loampit Vale south (buildings ranging from
5-24 storeys increasing towards the east) is also ongoing and reaching the final
phase of development. The area is currently in the process of major change and
redevelopment and the context is being remade. The site sits within a contained
environment between a railway viaduct and Thurston Road and has an important
role to play in forming an appropriate route into the town centre and upgrading the
quality of this area. It is considered that the Development would be comparable with
the future scale of Thurston Road and although taller than developments in this
area currently, it is felt that the scale would be acceptable within the emerging
context.

7.24 The proposed landscaped space along the front of the site would provide a very
important respite to alleviate what is a relatively narrow road. It would help to
establish a building line that would accord with the permitted scheme at 52-54
Thurston Road and would help to reduce any perception of a canyon type affect
along this road as a result of this, adjacent and future developments by providing
high quality, generously spaced public realm. The scheme is also accompanied by
plans detailing a landscaping approach to the Waterlink Way to the eastern side of
the Development. It is considered necessary to secure the delivery of this entire
piece via a planning obligation. Given the policy requirement to promote sustainable
transport including walking and cycling in these areas, which is also necessary to
support the overall modal shifts required in the town centre, the need for this
enhancement to the existing route passing this site is considered to be vital.
7.25 The London Plan identifies central Lewisham (as well as Catford and New Cross)
as an Opportunity and Intensification Area where development will be expected to
optimise residential and non residential densities (Policy 2.13). In the overall area
there is an expectation to deliver at least 8,000 homes until 2026. It goes on to state
that areas should make better use of existing infrastructure and promote inclusive
access including cycling and walking.
Development Opportunities for Neighbouring Sites
7.26 The LTC Local Plan Submission Version includes guidance for the mixed-use
development of land to the Railway Strip to the west of this site and land east of
Jerrard Street. The submission has assessed the ability of neighbouring sites to
come forward in the future to demonstrate that the current proposal would not
prejudice future redevelopment. Officer’s consider that the proposed scheme would
not prevent the delivery of the overall aspiration for the redevelopment of this area.
The recommended planning obligation (discussed under the Environmental
Sustainability heading below) should help ensure that this scheme is future-proofed
to allow for a larger scale decentralised energy cluster to be developed in the future
by linking up with development to the south and east as encouraged by the AAP
and proposed for the Thurston Road Industrial Estate.
Student Housing
7.27 The proposed 62 homes at 52-54 Thurston Road in combination with the 406 for
Thurston Road Industrial Estate and 788 homes being built as part of the permitted
Loampit Vale South scheme would together potentially deliver 76% of the 1,650
dwellings identified as the indicative capacity for the Loampit Character Area in the
AAP Submission Plan. There is no specific identified student housing need in this
area although London wide, additional Student Housing is supported. Overall it is
felt that the delivery of student housing on this site would not undermine the
Council’s ability to deliver the anticipated housing capacity for this area or the
Council’s Strategic Housing targets.
Non-residential uses
7.28 The proposed business space would help to support local jobs within the town
centre and complement the business and retail uses secured on the ground floor of
other sites.

Construction
7.29 The construction of the Loampit Vale South scheme is likely to continue until
November 2015 with demolition work hoped to start on Thurston Road Industrial
Estate in early 2013 with construction taking about 27 months. Work is likely to start
on 52-54 Thurston imminently and early works to the Lewisham Gateway bus
layover could commence in the coming months. There could be an long period
therefore when construction works could be going on at these sites concurrently.
The proposed Environmental Management Plan and Construction Logistics Plans,
which are recommended to be secured by condition would be necessary to control
working practices at the site and help to mitigate traffic impacts, help keep traffic
onto main roads wherever possible and control cumulative impacts arising from the
development proposals.
Design
7.30 The NPPF states that good design is indivisible from good planning and that design
is a key aspect of sustainable development. Policy 15 ‘High quality design for
Lewisham’ of the Core Strategy states that the Council will apply policy guidance to
ensure highest quality design and the protection or enhancement of the natural
environment. The policy requires development to be sustainable, accessible to all,
to optimise the potential of sites and be sensitive to the local context and character.
Within Lewisham Town Centre it requires that new development should result in a
radical upgrading of the social and physical environment. Policy 7.4 ‘Local
Character’ of the London Plan states that new development should have regard to
the form, function, and structure of an area, place or street and the scale, mass and
orientation of surrounding buildings. It goes on to state that in making planning
decisions, boroughs should ensure that buildings, streets and open spaces provide
a high quality design response that, amongst other things, has regard to existing
spaces and streets in scale, proportion and mass, is human in scale and that
buildings create a positive relationship with street level activity and that people feel
comfortable in their surroundings.
7.31 Policy S5 ‘Railway Strip’ of the LTC AAP requires development on the site to take
account of Thurston Road’s status as a secondary route into the town centre and
states that the massing of buildings should reflect this. The policy also requires any
scheme to address the constraints of the site including the proximity to the railway
line, the impact of the approved scheme at Thurston Industrial Estate and the
narrow shape of the site. Policy LAAP13 ‘Student Housing’ requires that proposals
have a positive affect on the existing and emerging environment of the site and
town centre as a whole.
7.32 The existing context of the surrounding area is of low quality, low rise industrial
buildings that do not make a positive contribution to the Town Centre. The
redevelopment of this site and the neighbouring sites along Thurston Road
therefore represent a unique opportunity to significantly improve the quality of the
local environment through the provision of high quality new developments that
deliver improvements to the public realm. The site is located adjacent to a part of
the Waterlink Way that passes under the railway line and currently feels hostile and
uninviting. The council would therefore expect any redevelopment of the site to
improve this route and to make a contribution towards more sustainable means of
transport such as walking and cycling.

Height, scale and massing
7.33 As set out above, the existing context of the area is of low rise industrial buildings.
There have been a number of schemes approved along Thurston Road that have
established a height of 10 storeys along Thurston Road. It is worth noting that the
site to the east is earmarked as the new bus layover for the Lewisham Gateway
scheme, with approval for a building of up to 2 storeys. The application proposes
two 11 storey blocks connected by a two storey podium element that would provide
semi-private amenity space at first floor level. At 11 storeys, the proposed towers
will fall within the Council’s definition of a tall building and will also be over 30m tall
bringing the scheme within the GLA’s definition of a tall building. The massing of
the proposal is significant with the building covering the majority of the depth of the
site and the building line along Thurston Road only being set back from the back
edge of the pavement by between 1.8 and 4.1m. This is in contrast to the existing
building line on site which is set back from the back edge of the pavement by 11m
behind a low brick wall. The height and massing of the proposal is therefore
considered to be challenging and officers consider that it is only the highest quality
design and the provision of a very high standard public realm that would result in
the Development being considered acceptable.
7.34 Policy 18 ‘The location and design of tall buildings’ of the Core Strategy states that
tall buildings may be appropriate in specific locations identified by the Lewisham
Tall Buildings Study. The Applicant states that the Lewisham Tall Buildings study
identifies the site as being in an area that is ‘appropriate’ for tall buildings.
However, it does not directly follow that a tall building would be appropriate on this
site and the Tall Buildings Study sets out that the suitability of a tall building on the
site is subject to understanding the impact of any proposal on a number of issues.
These include the relationship of the proposal to public transport, open space,
historic assets and protected views; the effect of tall buildings on social
infrastructure; how the proposal relates to the existing urban environment; and what
impact the proposal will have on the public realm. Therefore while the document
states that the areas identified may be appropriate for tall buildings it goes on to
state that these localities have sensitivities and constraints that must be assessed
in order to ensure tall buildings fit well into each site.
7.35 The site is well served by public transport and is therefore considered appropriate
for a tall building provided that any impact on the transport network and walking and
cycling routes are suitably mitigated. It is not considered that a tall building in this
location would have an impact on heritage assets, views from open spaces or
protected views as it is not situated in any viewing corridors or in close proximity to
any heritage assets or large public open spaces. The impact of the proposal on
social infrastructure can be appropriately mitigated through the proposed s106
contributions which are discussed in the Planning Obligations section of this report.
It is therefore considered that the impact of any proposal on the urban environment
and the public ream are the factors most relevant to whether a tall building would be
appropriate on this site.
Urban Environment
7.36 In terms of the impact of the proposal on the urban environment, Policy 18 ‘The
location and design of tall buildings’ of the Core Strategy and Policy 7.7 ‘Location
and design of tall and large buildings’ of the London Plan require applications for tall
or large buildings to be accompanied by detailed urban design analysis to assess
the impact of the proposal on the immediate and wider context.

7.37 The Applicant has submitted a series of studies assessing the proposal in views
from the town centre and away from the town centre. The views show that the
height of the proposal at 11 stories is still quite high considering that Thurston Road
is a relatively narrow secondary route into the Town Centre, but that when the
approved planning permissions are considered along Thurston Road, the height is
now equivalent to the average of 10 storeys that has been established and is
responsive to its context.
7.38 Given that the neighbouring site to the east has an extant planning permission for a
bus layover with a 2 storey building, it could be considered that the height of the
proposal on this site should step down from 10 stories. Following concern from
officers, the applicant has carried out further design work on the eastern elevation
of the proposal. Due to the neighbouring bus stand, this elevation would remain
highly visible in views from the town centre and its successful articulation is
considered to be very important to the acceptability of the scheme. The design has
been altered to improve the solid to void ratio, to add additional visual interest
through panels of vertically bonded bricks and the introduction of an additional
coloured panel to the right hand side of the bays. 1:25 details of these bays have
been provided to ensure a high quality of detailing and it is recommended that this
is secured by condition. The design of this elevation is considered to be of a
sufficiently high quality to justify the height of the proposal in views from the Town
Centre.
7.39 In terms of the elevation fronting Thurston Road, the applicant has provided details
to provide comfort that the proposal will be of the highest possible design quality,
with clean, crisp detailing and high quality materials. The details provided include
1:25 sections and plans of the windows bays which would be made up of panels
and both horizontally and vertically bonded bricks, glazing panels with fine framing
and side acoustic panels made up of perforated metal which would vary in colour up
the building to create visual interest.
7.40 The fine detailing of the repeating bays combined with the high quality of the white
concrete frame and pilasters, the ground and first floor level and curtain walling
would ensure that the building would be finished to a very high standard in
accordance with the requirements of the tall building policies in the Core Strategy
and the London Plan. It is considered that the solidity of the ‘outer’ elevations
(which articulate the more private sleeping and study areas) would complement the
transparency of the ‘inner’ communal areas which are located around the core of
the blocks and are fully glazed.
7.41 Some details have been provided of the glazed entrance and podium element, but
this is not considered to be sufficient to convince officers of the high quality of this
vitally important element. A condition is therefore recommended requiring further
details of this element, including how the glazing would fit within the frame of the
larger blocks and how the junctions between materials would be treated.
7.42 The applicant has submitted views of the proposal from various points down
Thurston Road, including from a point between the proposal and the approved
Thurston Industrial Estate scheme. This illustrates how the height of the two
schemes would relate to each other and how the design of the ground and first floor
and the introduction of the podium effect serves to reduce the potential ‘canyoning’
effect. It also illustrates how the set back at 9 th floor level on the western block
serves to reduce the bulk of the building when experienced from the street. While
the scale of the scheme is challenging when the relationship with the neighbouring

approved scheme opposite the site is considered, officers are satisfied that the
quality of the design and the quality of the materials proposed are sufficient to
ensure that the environment created along Thurston Road would be acceptable.
7.43 The detailed plans that have been submitted demonstrate that a quality design is
achievable and are therefore considered to be sufficient to justify the scale and
height of the proposal. Officers consider that the proposed Development has
maximised the potential of the site and the scale of building achievable in this
location but subject to the quality of the detailing and design being adequately
secured through conditions, it is considered that the Development would be a high
quality addition to the town centre.
Public Realm
7.44 The Tall Buildings Study recognises that tall buildings place significant pressure on
the public realm. It highlights the public realm in the Town Centre as being in need
of improvement as it presents a challenge to accessibility and states that in the
Town Centre, development of tall buildings should take into account the quality and
management of the public realm for pedestrian and vehicular movement. It states
that for tall buildings to provide adequate, attractive, inclusive and safe pedestrian
and public transport access, any proposals for tall buildings need to consider the
impact on microclimate, provide active and attractive ground floor uses, provide or
improve sufficient amenity space and facilities (such as bins, cycle storage, etc) and
create a high quality, robust and legible streetscape that takes into account the use
of the public realm for a variety of users and activities.
7.45 In terms of the public realm around the proposal, Policy 18 ‘The location and design
of tall buildings’ of the Core Strategy, Policy 7.7 ‘Location and design of tall and
large buildings’ of the London Plan, the Lewisham Tall Buildings Study and the LTC
AAP all require proposals for tall buildings to create activity at ground floor level and
provide a positive relationship to the surrounding streets, promote pedestrian and
vehicular activity and increase the amount and quality of amenity space.
7.46 The design of the proposal sets out to create a feeling of space at street level in
terms of the second floor being set up on pilasters and ground and first floor being
set back behind the upper ground floor level pedestrian route which will create
activity and soften the built edge of the building. The double height glazing to these
elements would ensure that the ground and first floors are transparent, creating
activity and providing natural surveillance. The provision of the podium element
between the two 11 storey blocks creates relief and breaks up the massing of the
proposal and would lead to a more comfortable environment when experienced
from the street. It is considered that the quality of these spaces would help to
mitigate the scale and height of the 11 storey blocks and the proximity of the front
elevation to the back edge of the pavement.
7.47 Initially concerns were raised that the need to raise the building off ground floor
level to address flood risk concerns would lead to a blank brick wall hard on to the
pavement that would be up to 1.8m high to the west of the site. The applicant has
made changes to the scheme to include flood voids which would be covered by
bespoke grills and climbing plants which would create visual interest. Given the
importance of the public realm and ground floor experience to the scale of the
building, the detailing of these elements are key. The proposal increases the width
of the pavement in many locations which is welcomed and would improve
pedestrian access past the site.

7.48 The proposal would result in the creation of two public open spaces to the east and
west of the site. The applicant has provided landscaping details that confirms that
these would be finished to a very high standard and include the planting of a
number of new trees. These spaces would be subject to natural surveillance from
the commercial units and the student accommodation on the floors above and are
considered to make a valuable contribution towards improving the public realm
along Thurston road. The Council is seeking a clause within the s106 agreement to
ensure that the public can pass and re-pass over this land. This is considered
necessary to ensure that the owners of the site do not seek to limit access to these
areas at any point in the future.
7.49 Whilst the GLA Stage 1 response supported the urban design approach of the
proposal generally and the location of the servicing to the rear of the building, it
raised concerns about having the access route to the servicing area through the
public open space and how this would impact on the use of the public open space
and the quality of the environment created. The applicant responded by pointing
out that the focus of the servicing activities would be on the western access and all
larger vehicle activities would be limited to using this end of the site due to the
limited head height of the undercroft. Activities that would affect the public open
space to the east of the site include vehicle movements associated with the
disabled parking spaces and the servicing of the eastern commercial unit which
would generate a maximum of 10 vehicle movements per day. This area would
also be used at the start and end of term as part of the route for student drop
off/pick up.
7.50 It is considered that there would be a small amount of conflict in these spaces
between pedestrians and vehicles and it is not considered that the open spaces to
the east or west of the site will provide quality amenity space that will provide for
long term sitting. Rather these spaces would serve to improve the visual amenity of
the environment around the building and along Thurston Road and Waterlink Way.
The microclimate conditions in terms of overshadowing and wind mean that these
spaces are not appropriate for long term sitting but will rather serve as transition
spaces and meeting spaces for short term sitting. These spaces have been
designed to ensure that pedestrians have priority and it is not considered that there
would be any safety impactions resulting from the shared use of this space. The
arrangement with the servicing routes is considered necessary to facilitate the
servicing of the Development and it is considered that the lack of usable amenity
space would necessitate s106 contributions towards improving local open spaces
and access to them. Given the likely number of students, such contributions are
considered to be fundamentally important to supporting the scale of the
Development on this site. Overall it is considered that the high quality of these
spaces would make a valuable contribution to the appearance of the public realm
along Thurston Road.
7.51 The Waterlink Way is a walking and cycling route that runs alongside the site and is
considered to be a strategic priority for the Town Centre. It is also another part of
the public realm along Thurston Road that is in significant need of enhancement.
Policy LAAP 21 in the LTC AAP states that the Council will seek specific funding to
improve walking and cycling routes including the Waterlink Way north of the
Lewisham Transport interchange. Therefore, in addition to the on-site
improvements to the public realm, the applicant has committed to improving the part
of the Waterlink Way that runs adjacent to the site as part of the s106 agreement.
The GLA have also sought to secure improvements to this route and the
improvements are considered necessary to making the Development acceptable

oth terms of mitigating the impact of the proposal on local walking and cycling and
also in terms of mitigating the height of the proposal and the pressure this will place
on the public realm.
7.52 It is considered that the design of the proposed ground and first floors and the high
quality of the public realm that would be provided (both on and off site) would
ensure that the proposed scale and height of the proposal would not put
unacceptable pressure on the public realm and would provide a safe and attractive
streetscape and routes past the site.
Deliverability of Design Quality
7.53 The NPPF states that the viability and deliverability of development should be
considered in decision taking. The document goes on to say that to ensure viability,
the cost of requirements should, when taking into account the normal cost of
development and mitigation, provide competitive returns to a willing landowner and
willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.
7.54 The building is simple in design and the palate of materials is limited. The clean
aesthetic that this approach results in is considered to have merit but makes the
detailing of the building and materials of vital importance to support such a simple
approach and it has been necessary for the applicant to demonstrate how this
would be delivered. To overcome concerns about the height and massing of the
scheme and the relationship with the immediate context and town centre generally
(which are fundamental to the acceptability of the redevelopment of this site) it has
been necessary for the Applicant to submit details to demonstrate the inherent
quality of the architecture and design approach and the quality of the public realm.
Detail on the design of the window bays and drawings of the north and south
elevation and the east and west elevations have been provided at a scale of 1:25.
The details provided (which include details of fixing) demonstrate that the views
provided are a realistic interpretation of the proposed building.
7.55 Officers have sought assurances about the cost and viability of the required high
quality design to ensure that the scheme as designed would be deliverable given
that these elements are vital to demonstrate the acceptability of this Development in
principle.
7.56 As part of the submission, the applicant has provided a confidential breakdown of
the build costs for the Development and confirmed that the build costs including the
finishes, the structure to support the first floor podium garden, the fit out of the
commercial space, the introduction of flood voids and the hard and soft landscaping
have been fully costed and are deliverable. The scheme has therefore been
confirmed as being commercially viable as it stands. The applicant has stated that
they are willing to proceed with the Development on the basis of the details that
have been provided and are fully committed to ensuring that a high quality
Development is built.
7.57 It is materially relevant for the Council to consider the likelihood of a proposed
Development being carried into effect and the planning consequences should a
scheme be unviable and therefore not be delivered in accordance with the
approved plans.

7.58 Officers consider that the acceptability of this scheme in principle is inextricably
linked with the design and quality that is inherent within it. The acceptability of the
scale, massing, height and positioning of the proposal is inseparable from the
design specification and delivery of a range of in kind benefits such as the
landscaping and improvements to the Waterlink Way. Given how vital these
elements are to some of the fundamental elements of the scheme, it would not be
possible in officers’ view to leave the detailing to be secured by condition as this
would suggest that the principle of the approach is acceptable irrespective of
detailing which would be capable of being resolved as a separate matter. In fact,
the design of the scheme and some of the most basic elements relating to the site
planning, layout, height and massing are only considered to be acceptable in the
current proposal because of the quality of design that would be delivered. Should
future amendments to the scheme result in it being of a lesser quality than currently
proposed, the entire approach to the Development, its scale, height and massing
would need to be reconsidered as opposed to just considering alternative detailing.
Given that the applicant has provided the details considered to be necessary as
part of the submission and that they consider they could deliver the scheme as
designed, it is felt that the proposal would be acceptable in this regard and the
quality of the proposal would be safeguarded.
Microclimate
7.59 Both London Plan and Core Strategy Policies on tall buildings state that proposals
for tall buildings need to take into account the affects of tall buildings on
microclimate. The application is supported by studies that address sunlight
/daylight and overshadowing and wind conditions. These issues are reported in
more detail later in this report but the details provided confirm that the proposal will
not have an unacceptable impact on Thurston Road despite the height of the
proposal which is considered to be acceptable from a microclimate point of view.
Quality of Accommodation
7.60 There are no specific standards for student accommodation. Policy LAAP13
‘Student Housing’ requires proposals for student housing to provide a high quality
living environment in private and shared spaces and comply with all relevant
national and local standards and codes, including BREEAM. The policy requires
schemes to deliver a range of unit sizes and layouts, including with and without
shared facilities.
7.61 The proposed student accommodation would be a mix of six and four study room
clusters which have shared access to communal faculties and self contained studio
units.
7.62 The cluster rooms range is size from 12.5sqm to 18.6sqm (for the wheelchair
rooms) and comprise an en-suite shower room and room with single bed, desk and
storage space. Each 4 or 6 cluster rooms have access to a communal area that
provides cooking facilities and areas for eating and sitting for 6 people. These
communal spaces are situated in the east or west facing cores with views over the
amenity courtyard or the new open space to the west and east along Thurston
Road. While a number of the study bedrooms would be north facing, all of the
occupants of the north facing rooms would have access to communal areas that are
west or east facing and this is considered to be acceptable.

7.63 The proposed studio units are all south, east or west facing units in the western
block (with the greater floor area afforded by the greater width of this block from 2 nd
to 8 th floor level). The studio units range in size from 20sqm to 32sqm (for the
wheelchair compliant units) and comprise an en-suite bathroom and an open plan
bedroom/kitchenette that contains a single bed, a desk, storage space and a
kitchen area with breakfast bar.
7.64 While the proposed student rooms are small, it is considered that they would meet
the needs of the students they would accommodate. The small size of the units
would be mitigated by access to good quality communal facilities which include a
café, laundry, a gym and communal meeting spaces which are situated at first floor
level. Provided that the accommodation meets the needs of an identified end user
(which would be secured by the s106 agreement) and in the absence of standards
for student accommodation, the sizes of the rooms are considered to be
acceptable.
7.65 The student accommodation has been designed to take into account the constraints
of the site, including the overshadowing effect of the approved Thurston Road
Industrial development (if this gets built), the impacts of noise from the neighbouring
railway line and traffic along Thurston Road and the implications of being situated in
an Air Quality Management Area. All of these matters are discussed in further
detail later on this report, but it is considered that the design of the proposal
successfully mitigates the constraints of the site to ensure that an acceptable quality
of residential accommodation would be created.
Lifetime Homes and Wheelchair Accessible Studios
7.66 Lifetime Homes is a standard that is intended to make new housing more adaptable
to ensure that people can stay in their homes if their mobility requirements change.
The proposal is not a C3 residential scheme, but is for student housing to serve
what is generally a younger section of the population and it is intended that the
occupants would not live in the accommodation provided on a long term basis. It is
therefore not considered appropriate to apply the Lifetime Home criteria to the
Development in full. The applicant has however assessed the scheme and
confirmed that the car parking, access to the building, communal areas, internal
doorways and hallways, communal living and dining spaces and service controls
meet the requirements of Lifetime Homes. Given the type of accommodation
proposed on balance, this is considered to be acceptable.
7.67 With regards to wheelchair housing, 39 units would be provided as wheelchair units
which meet the relevant requirements of the South East London Housing
Partnership wheelchair housing. All the communal areas and entrances are fully
Part M compliant and both cores provide two lifts in case one breaks down. While
the number of wheelchair units is marginally below the 10% required by the London
Plan due to the layout of the building, this is considered to be acceptable and a
condition is recommended requiring the retention of the wheelchair units.
Highways and Traffic Issues
a) Accessibility
7.68 The site is within Lewisham Town Centre, close to bus services along Loampit Vale
and train and Docklands Light Railway (DLR) services from Lewisham Station. It
has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) 6, where ‘1’ is rated as Poor and
‘6’ is rated as Excellent. The Council’s Core Strategy Policy 15 ‘High quality design

for London’ and London Plan Policy 2.13 ‘Opportunity Areas and Intensification
Areas’ encourage relatively dense development to be located in areas such as
Lewisham where the PTAL is Good or Excellent.
7.69 Vehicular access into the site would be from Thurston Road via an entrance to the
east of the building with the exit provided at the western side of the building. It is
proposed that access to the rear would be controlled as part of the management of
the site.
7.70 The proposals include 4 parking spaces at the rear of the site which would be ‘blue
badge’ size car parking spaces for disabled people. It is proposed that the disabled
parking spaces would be available to future occupiers of the student
accommodation and the commercial units. TfL has suggested that additional onstreet
disabled parking spaces should be provided. These would be the subject of
a review mechanism as part of the Travel Plan to secure addition spaces as
required in the future.
7.71 It is recommended that the Travel Plan and addendum e-mail dated 12/11/2012 is
secured by way of the s106 agreement prior to first occupation of the Development
and that it includes suitable monitoring mechanisms and the requirement to appoint
a Travel Plan Coordinator.
7.72 Core Strategy Policy 14 ‘Sustainable movement and transport’ seeks to manage
and restrain car parking in accordance with London Plan Policy. Given the highly
accessible nature of the site, it is considered that the proposed level of car parking
would be acceptable, subject to the incorporation of mitigation and measures to
reduce the reliance on car usage and promote sustainable modes of transport. It is
proposed that future occupiers would be restricted from applying for parking permits
within the CPZ and also any future extensions or adjacent areas. This coupled with
a Travel Plan would be necessary to support the level proposed. Additionally,
access to high quality walking environment and cycling would need to be
incorporated. The proposed enhancement to the public realm with the setting back
of the building line and treatment is considered to be a significant improvement to
the area. The proposed works to the Waterlink Way would also further support
walking and cycling. A contribution of £12,000 is proposed for enhancement to the
existing bus stop on Thurston Road in order to improve the local bus connections.
This is welcomed. The GLA has raised concerns that the bus stop should be
moved as it is close to the steps of the proposed building, but it is considered that
the existing location of the bus stop is most appropriate and moving the stop any
further west might cause a conflict with the servicing entrance.
7.73 TfL has also suggested that real time information covering all modes of transport
should be provided within the building to encourage more sustainable means of
transport. It has been suggested that a screen at reception and/or in another
communal area(s) could fulfil this function although obviously more extensive
provision e.g. direct feeds to rooms would be welcome. It has been recommended
that the s106 agreement will secure wireless internet access throughout the building
and officers are satisfied that occupants will have access to live transport
information via TfL Apps on phones as well as computers. In addition, the applicant
has agreed in an e-mail dated 12/11/2012 that will from an addendum to the Travel
Plan to provide a computer in the reception of proposed Development to display live
departure information via a visible monitor.

) Servicing
7.74 As stated, the proposal will be car free apart from the 4 disabled spaces but would
include an access route over the public open spaces to the east and west to provide
access for the servicing of the commercial and student accommodation elements of
the scheme and access to the parking spaces which are situated in an undercroft
area to the rear of the building. This area also accommodates the 260 cycle
parking spaces that serve the student accommodation element of the proposal.
7.75 The entrance to the service route would be through the western access point and
larger vehicles would need to use a vehicle turning area at the back of the site so
that they can turn and exit the site in forward gear (they would be unable to pass
through the undercroft area due to restricted head height). Access to both routes
would be restricted through the use of retractable bollards which will ensure that the
route is not used as a pick up/drop off point and serve to discourage unauthorised
parking. The bollards have been shown on the ground floor plan as being set back
from the highway by 12m. This is considered necessary to ensure that vehicles do
not need to stop on Thurston Road to open the bollards and causing an obstruction
to traffic.
7.76 The undercroft area would be gated at both ends to prevent unauthorised access
and provide security for the stored bicycles, this is considered acceptable as there
would not be active surveillance of this area and this would serve to prevent the
access route being used as an unofficial drop off route which would have wider
transport implications.
7.77 A Site Management Plan has been submitted which sets out how the site will be
serviced and operate in a way that will not have an impact on the adjacent highway.
Officers are satisfied that the plan would put into place suitable measures to control
the operation of the site. A s106 obligation is recommended requiring the
implementation of the Plan prior to the occupation of the site and to ensure that a
suitable mechanism to monitor and improve the plan are put into place. Suitable
conditions are recommended to ensure that the access arrangements specified in
the plan are secured.
c) Cycle Parking
7.78 The 260 cycle parking spaces proposed would be a provision of 0.63 spaces per
unit. The cycle storage would be dry and secure on the ground floor of the
Development. Officers have raised concerns about the level of cycle parking
proposed, and have advised that one space per student should be provided. The
applicant has noted recent draft TfL guidance stating that the cycle standard for
student housing schemes should be 1 space for every 2 students. Given the lack of
car parking on site and the location of the site next to the Waterlink Way cycle
route, officers are keen to maximise cycle parking. It is therefore proposed that the
Travel Plan includes a review mechanism for cycle take up with capacity provided
to increase on-site cycle parking if required. The Applicant has provided drawings to
confirm that a 1:1 cycle parking provision (410 spaces) is possible on site and a
condition is recommended to ensure that the space identified for any additional
cycle parking is kept clear. Provided that the Travel Plan is secured through the
s106 agreement and includes this review mechanism, it is considered that the
proposals would be acceptable in this regard.

7.79 Initially TfL raised concerns about the level of cycle parking spaces proposed, but
they are satisfied that the review mechanism contained in the Travel Plan would
address any future additional need for cycle parking.
d) Car Parking
7.80 The low level of car parking proposed is considered to be acceptable given the high
PTAL of the site and the location of Lewisham train station and bus stops. Subject
to the future occupiers being restricted from applying for parking permits in the CPZ
including any future extensions or adjacent CPZs, the car parking numbers are
considered to be acceptable. This would be supported by the Travel Plan in order to
ensure its success, which would be secured as a s106 contribution. As set out
above, the Travel Plan includes monitoring of car parking on site for disabled users
as well as the cycle parking provision to ensure that adequate spaces are provided
to support future occupiers and that additional spaces could be incorporated as
required.
7.81 The site does have potential to generate the need for on street parking. There are
22 existing parking spaces on Thurston Road which are not covered by the CPZ.
The inclusion of Thurston Road in the CPZ is under review by the Council and there
has been s106 obligations from other developments in the area towards carrying a
review of the CPZ. A recommendation has been made that a further CPZ
contribution is necessary to mitigate the impact of the proposal, however, given that
a review is already likely and monies have been made available for this review, it is
not considered that a further contribution is necessary.
7.82 TfL have suggested that it may be necessary to limit parking along one side of
Thurston Road as Thurston Road is not wide enough to accommodate parking on
both sides and provide sufficient width for two way traffic. There is currently a
single yellow line along the north side of the road that allows some loading to take
place and could therefore cause some obstruction to the traffic flow along Thurston
Road, particularly in the evenings or weekends and at the beginning and end of
term if students were to unload/load their belongings from this location. The
Council’s Highways team have suggested that a review of the parking
arrangements on the north side of Thurston Road could be undertaken and secured
by way of the s278 agreement. It is therefore recommended that the definition of
the s278 agreement in the s106 agreement include any necessary changes to the
Traffic Regulation Order to restrict parking along the north side of Thurston Road
and to provide on street disabled parking bays.
e) Refuse
7.83 Refuse storage is located on the ground floor. It is proposed that refuse bins would
be moved to the back edge of the footway on a weekly basis as part of the overall
site management so that they could be directly accessed from Thurston Road. No
concerns have been raised about the size of the refuse stores or the refuse
arrangements proposed. The refuse arrangements would be secured through the
Site Management Plan both through the s106 agreement and a condition requiring
the refuse arrangements to be implemented in accordance with the Plan.

f) Effects of the proposed development
7.84 Based on the trip generation the transport assessment predicts that the majority of
residents would be reliant on public transport on a daily basis. Given the relatively
low numbers of journeys expected from the site and the timing of these outside of
peak hours, it is considered that the existing transport infrastructure has the
necessary capacity to accommodate these trips. With the controls that are
proposed to restrict occupiers’ right to a parking permit, the submission of a green
travel plan, the low level of car parking on site and the implementation of the
detailed Site Management Plan, it is felt that sufficient controls would be in place,
should the scheme be approved, to control the effects of the proposed
Development. The submission has been independently assessed and it is
considered that the additional information about traffic impacts provided by the
applicant is sufficient to demonstrate that the level of trips predicted to be generated
by the proposed Development would not have a significant impact on the
surrounding highway and public transport networks.
7.85 Activity on the site would need to be specifically controlled at the beginning and end
of the academic year when students would move into and out of the scheme.
Officers have assessed the details proposed to be put in place, namely the physical
capacity of the site to hold vehicles for loading and unloading as well as the
management of the activity. It is considered that the impact would be adequately
controlled through the Site Management Plan which will be secured through the
s106 and appropriate conditions.
g) Construction
7.86 It is recommended that a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) be secured by way of
planning condition, in line with London Plan Policy 6.14 (Freight) which encourages
the uptake of such plans. Officers recommend that a CLP is secured by way of a
planning condition. This would control the impact of construction activity on the
highway and would also ensure that the construction takes into account the
cumulative impact with other developments that could be on site at that time, should
planning permission be granted.
Environmental Issues
7.87 Core Strategy Policy 18 ‘The location and design of tall buildings’ makes clear that
tall buildings will be considered inappropriate where they would cause harm to
(amongst other things) existing residential environments and their amenity. The
policy goes on to state that an assessment will be made on the potential microclimatic
problems at street level.
7.88 Saved UDP Policies HSG 4 ‘Residential Amenity’ and HSG 5 ‘Layout and design of
New Residential Development’ seek to ensure that new developments are designed
so that the amenities of existing residential properties are not unacceptably harmed.
a) Noise
7.89 The submitted noise assessment demonstrates that the proposed window system
and mechanical ventilation could provide the necessary noise attenuation for future
occupiers to meet Council requirements. Subject to the imposition of a condition
requiring the necessary noise levels to be met and a condition controlling noise
from plant (which has not yet been specified), the Council’s Environmental Heath
Officers have confirmed that the proposal is acceptable with regards to noise.

7.90 Concern has been raised by TfL that there will be additional noise from the
approved bus stand which will have an impact on the east facing windows. The
applicant has revised the noise assessment to take this consideration into account
and it is considered that the proposed mitigation measures are sufficient to address
any additional noise that might arise from the future use of the neighbouring site.
7.91 The applicant has confirmed that the commercial floorspace would be fitted out with
acoustically attenuated curtain walling which would ensure that a suitable
environment is created within the commercial element. It is recommended that this
is secured within the s106.
7.92 In terms of construction noise it is proposed that an Environmental Management
Plan is secured which would control working hours and practices on site, including
the use of best practice means and noise monitoring protocol. Subject to the
appropriate control mechanisms being secured through a EMP, it is considered that
noise levels could be adequately controlled during construction.
b) Air Quality
7.93 Lewisham Town Centre is in an Air Quality Management Area. The scheme is car
free apart from the provision of disabled parking spaces and would not generate
significant additional vehicle trips. In addition, a green travel plan is to be secured
through the s106 agreement to encourage more sustainable means of travel that
will not impact on local air quality. The scheme does not propose an energy system
that would contribute to worsening air quality. The demolition and construction
phase should be controlled by way of appropriate conditions to ensure that the
works are undertaken on site to minimise any impacts from dust etc. As set out in
the Air Quality Assessment submitted in support of the application, air quality does
not present any constraints to the proposed Development given the concentrations
of pollutants predicted. That said, the measures necessary for noise attenuation
which include mechanical ventilation would also help to contribute to improving air
quality for occupiers.
7.94 The Council’s Air Quality Officer has confirmed that he is satisfied with the
conclusions of the Air Quality Assessment and has requested that a condition
relating to dust minimisation during construction/demolition should be included. It is
recommended that a condition requiring a Environmental Management Plan for the
construction period to be submitted is included. This should require details of a
dust management scheme and should be agreed prior to commencement of the
Development.
c) Sunlight and Daylight
7.95 The Sunlight and Daylight Assessment submitted in support of the application
confirms that the site is some distance away from the nearest residential properties
and would not have an unacceptable impact on sunlight/daylight or overshadowing.
7.96 In terms of the internal conditions that will be created within the Development, the
report assesses the existing situation and the cumulative impact of the recently
approved proposals. The window bays and glazing have been specifically designed
to ensure that the amount of daylight received in the rooms and communal areas is
acceptable. In terms of the cumulative impacts of the recently approved schemes,
the report concludes that all but a few of the study rooms and communal areas will
receive adequate sunlight and daylight. The report also finds that the first floor
amenity area would be overshadowed on 21 March meaning that it would serve
more as visual amenity than useable amenity space for parts of the year.

7.97 The BRE Guidance, which has been used to prepare the report, states that the
standards in the report are purely advisory and that the numerical targets can be
varied in order to meet the needs of a development and its location. The document
is not policy and should therefore be applied with a certain amount of flexibility. The
site is located in Lewisham Town Centre which is considered to be a dense urban
environment. Consequently, the scheme approved at Thurston Industrial Estate is
large and it is the approval of this scheme that leads to the minor failures of the
proposal to meet the internal daylight and sunlight targets set out in the guidance. It
is considered that a small number of failures is acceptable on a scheme where the
majority of the spaces will meet the targets and the standard of accommodation
provided generally is good.
7.98 On balance, it is considered that the internal conditions created within the
Development would be sufficient to meet the needs of future occupiers.
7.99 With regards to the amenity space, the applicant has confirmed that the proposed
tree species would survive the low light conditions. The council’s Tree Officer has
queried this and a condition is recommended requiring any planting that dies in the
first 7 years to be replaced to ensure that this space continues to provide visual
amenity. The overshadowing situation means that the proposal will not provide any
usable private or semi-private amenity space for the future occupants. A s106
contribution of £157,524.30 towards open space is recommended to mitigate
against this and is considered to be necessary to make the scheme acceptable.
d) Wind
7.100 The scheme is accompanied by a statement regarding the potential impact from
wind. This assesses the impact of the proposal in terms of the existing situation and
in terms of the cumulative impact of recently approved developments. The report
concludes that the spaces around the Development would be suitable for their
intended activities as a result of the Development (although there will be some
areas in the new public open space that are not suitable for long term sitting) and
would not give rise to any adverse effects. The proposal is considered to have an
acceptable impact in terms of wind.
e) Land Contamination
7.101 The submitted report identifies the potential contamination at the site and the need
to remediate. The report suggests that the entire ground floor would be hard
landscaped but this is not completely accurate as there will be areas of planting and
tree pits where there will be opportunities for users to come into contact with soil.
The Environment Agency has recommended a number of conditions to ensure that
the remediation measures necessary are agreed with the Local Planning Authority
prior to the commencement of development. Issues of contamination relate to land
as well as controlled waters and the Environment Agency have also requested that
a number of conditions are imposed to control this aspect.
f) Impact on Adjoining Properties
7.102 The closest neighbouring residential properties are located some distance from the
site at approximately 45m away with the raised railway embankment situated
between. It is therefore considered that the impact of the building would be limited
on these properties

7.103 The site is opposite the Thurston Road Industrial Estate which would include a
significant residential element. While the relationship of scale along Thurston Road
is relevant and has been discussed above, it is not considered that there would be
any amenity issues raised from the relationship of the sites opposite each other on
Thurston Road. The Council’s Residential Standards SPD recognises that the
acceptable distance between front elevations should normally be determined by the
character of road widths in the area. This relationship is therefore considered to be
acceptable.
7.104 With regards to any future redevelopment of the neighbouring vehicle repair site,
the building has been set back 11m from the boundary with this site and it is
considered that an acceptable relationship can be established through design such
that the development of this site is not considered to prejudice the development of
the neighbouring site and will not have an impact in terms of privacy.
Sustainability and Energy
Renewable Energy
7.105 The scheme includes various passive measures and a high specification of building
materials to reduce energy loss. It proposes to rely on a combined heat and power
(CHP) unit to power the Development, supplemented by PV cells positioned on the
roof of the building to achieve a 35.8% reduction in carbon as summarised in Table
1 below.
Table 1: Renewable Energy Provision
Fig 1 from Sustainable Design and Energy Report (September 2012)
7.106 The proposed system is anticipated to reduce carbon by 35.8% using a combination
of gas fired CHP and 50sq.m of photovoltaic panels. It has been confirmed that the
CHP would comprise of an 65kWe/112kWth engine to ensure maximum run periods
and maximise the carbon reduction potential of the CHP. The commercial areas
would be served by low carbon air source heat pumps with ventilation by heat
recovery air handling units to provide heating/cooling. Although concern has been
raised about the efficiency figures provided for the use of air source heat pumps in
the commercial element, this is such a small part of the overall energy strategy that
even if more realistic efficiency figures were used, it would not have a significant

impact on the overall carbon reductions (which at 35.8% are well over the London
Plan policy requirement of 25% savings). Following comments from the GLA, the
domestic hot water for the student accommodation would be provided by the CHP
and this would also feed into Low Pressure Hot Water heat emitters to provide
seasonal heating. The CHP plant would be ‘topped up’ through the use of high
efficiency gas boilers at peak times. This approach has been accepted by both the
Council’s Sustainability Manager and the GLA.
7.107 The renewable energy system should be captured as a planning obligation to
ensure that it is implemented and that it is used to power the building in perpetuity.
Officers have also been in discussions with neighbouring sites to extend pipework
and infrastructure to the edge of sites to facilitate future energy networks. A similar
obligation is proposed for this site along with reasonable endeavours to secure a
connection with neighbouring sites and would be necessary in order to deliver a
local decentralised energy network in line with Policy 5.5 within the London Plan
and Core Strategy Policy 8. This requires major developments to safeguard
potential network routes and make provision to allow future connection to a network
or contribute to it’s development where possible within the Regeneration and
Growth Areas.
7.108 The scheme would meet BREEAM ‘Excellent’ and a pre-assessment report has
been submitted in support of the application which confirms that an ‘Excellent’ rating
is achievable. Along with the renewable energy provision, it is proposed that these
are secured by planning obligation.
b) Living Roofs
7.109 The application drawings show areas of green roof at podium floor level and also at
roof level which are summarised in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Living Roof Provision
Type of Living Roof
Size of Living Roof
(m2)
Size of Living Roof
(as % of total roof
space)
Extensive Sedum Matting 62 18.6
Extensive Green Roof 340 26.6%
Total 402sqm -
7.110 Section 6.3.6 of the Design and Access Statement sets out the two types of green
roofs that would be utilised on the site; an extensive sedum blanket at second floor
level and a biodiverse green roof on the roofs to the two 11 storey blocks. To
ensure the success and sustainability of the living roofs, the Council’s Ecological
Regeneration Manager has recommended that the second floor living roof should
comprise an extensive sedum blanket that is laid on a minimum of 80mm of living
roof aggregate. It has also been recommended that a 2 year post installation
establishment guarantee is sought from the contractor who lays the green roof.
With regards to the green roof on the top of the accommodation blocks, it has
recommended that these areas should be a plug planted and seeded biodiverse
green roof.

7.111 Two separate conditions are therefore recommended to secure each of the living
roof types and to require details of the roofs to be submitted and approved by the
LPA to ensure that they will make an appropriate contribution to adaptation to
climate change; sustainable urban drainage; and enhancement of biodiversity in
accordance with Policy 5.11 ‘Green roofs and development site environs’ of the
London Plan and Policy 12 ‘Open space and environmental assets’ of the Core
Strategy.
c) Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems
7.112 In addition to the provision of living roofs, the scheme incorporates a flood storage
void to provide flood water storage. Subject to the conditions stipulated by the
Environment Agency, the scheme is considered to be acceptable in this regard.
Ecology and Landscaping
7.113 Policy 12 ‘Open space and environmental assets‘ of the Core Strategy seeks to
recognise the strategic importance of the natural environment and to help to
mitigate against climate change by conserving nature, greening the public realm
and providing opportunities for sport, recreation, leisure and well being. The policy
seeks to encourage the provision of new open space that is of exemplary design,
enhancing biodiversity and promoting living roofs.
7.114 The proposed ground floor landscaping incorporates large areas of hard
landscaping which would be broken up by areas of planting and 16 Betula
jacquemontii (Himalayan Birch) set into the hard landscaping under metal tree grills
and two areas of multi-stemmed Himalayan Birch trees set in soft landscaped beds
that include ground cover. The proposed plant species for the ground cover and
areas of hedging to the back of the site have not been specified and a condition is
recommended requiring details of all the soft landscaping to be submitted.
7.114 The Phase 1 Habitat Survey submitted in support of the scheme recommends the
use of plants of known value to wildlife in the planting schemes throughout the site.
It suggests that at least ten species of biodiversity value should be used in a well
structured scheme that includes trees, shrubs, climbers, herbaceous perennials and
bulbs. The soft landscaping condition should therefore require the inclusion of at
least 10 species of biodiversity value to improve the wildlife value of the site. The
report also recommends that climbers should be planted along the edges of fences
and/or walls where they would provide a green façade of potential value to foraging
birds and insects and that the planting scheme should utilise a high percentage of
native tree and shrub species. These measures are necessary to achieving the 2
BREEAM points for Mitigating Ecological Impact that the applicant has identified as
achievable in contribution towards the BREEAM ‘Excellent’ rating. The scheme
proposes the use of climbing plants to the rear of the site in the turning circle and
also to the front of the site where they will grow up the flood void grills. This is
considered to be acceptable provided that the species proposes are native. The
proposed variety of birch trees (Himalayan Birch) is not native to the UK. The
applicant has confirmed that this variety of tree would survive in shady conditions
but the Council’s Tree Officer has suggested that Birch is a pioneering species that
prefers full sun. The species of tree proposed may need to be amended as part of
the planting schedule submitted to discharge the landscaping condition. In order to
address the Council’s concerns that the trees specified will not survive in the shady
conditions on the site, a condition is recommended requiring any trees that die
within 7 years of the occupation of development to be replaced. This would ensure
that the landscaping continues to provide visual amenity.

7.115 In order to secure the high quality landscaping required by Policy 12 of the Core
Strategy, an additional condition is recommended requiring details of the proposed
hard landscaping to be submitted and approved by the LPA. This should require
details of all boundary treatments, benches and bollards to be submitted and
samples of all hard landscaping materials and handrails/balustrades to be
submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The details submitted
should be in accordance with the approved landscaping drawings.
7.116 The proposed first floor amenity space features a raised bed with 18 single and
multi-stem Birch Trees (a mix of Silver and Himalayan Birch) and ornamental grass
planting. The planter would be surrounded by an area of hard landscaping. A
separate condition is recommended requiring details of the soft and hard
landscaping (including samples of materials) to be submitted and approved by the
LPA and requiring any planting that dies to be replaced for the first 7 years after
occupation of the scheme.
7.117 Subject to conditions securing the quality of the soft and hard landscaping, the
landscaping approach is considered to be acceptable given the urban location of
the Development. Subject to suitable conditions it is also considered that the
planting will include species that would make a contribution to on site biodiversity
and would provide visual amenity and an appropriate setting to the building.
7.118 As discussed earlier in this report, it is considered that the high quality of the public
realm is necessary to mitigate the height of the proposal. In order to secure the
contribution the site makes to the public realm in terms of providing public open
space, a planning obligation is recommended that secures a Public Realm and
Open Space Management Plan to ensure that these spaces are maintained
appropriately and will continue to enhance this area of the town centre. In addition,
a s106 obligation is recommended to secure the right of the public to pass and repass
over the areas of the land that include the two public open spaces to the east
and west and the increased depth of the pavement fronting the site.
7.119 The proposal would result in the loss of a small number of self seeded trees from
the site. These are not considered to be in of high amenity value and this will be
suitably mitigated by the planting of replacement trees. The site is situated adjacent
to a railway embankment that is designated as a Green Corridor. In order to protect
these trees, the Phase 1 Habitat Survey recommends that area of woodland and
scrub immediately to the north of the site should be fenced off with Heras style
fencing or hoarding to avoid encroachment during development. A condition is
therefore recommended requiring details of the protection of this area of off site
trees to be submitted and approved by the LPA. A condition is also recommended
requiring details of the external lighting scheme to be submitted which would need
to avoid light spillage onto the railway corridor as this could disturb wildlife, including
bats.
Flood Risk
7.120 The site sits within Flood Zone 3a, which places it at high risk of flooding. Recent
modelling shows that in a 1 in 100 year flood event with allowance for climate
change, flood waters would reach the site and be at levels that would be classified
as ‘danger for most’ with maximum depths of flooding of between 650mm and
1.45m on the access route to the site. The report therefore recommends that
appropriate mitigation in a major flood event would comprise appropriate advance
flood warning and the provision of safe refuge within the Development. The

scheme has been designed to raise the ground floor level of the building out of the
at risk area and to provide flood storage voids to store flood waters, thereby not
displacing flood waters onto neighbouring sites.
7.121 Initially the proposal did not propose flood voids, but following consultation with the
Environment Agency these were found to be necessary and they were included in
the design. In addition to the flood voids, the scheme has been designed with areas
for safe refuge so that in the event of a flood, residents could be safely
accommodated in the building. A site specific Flood Risk Management Plan would
be prepared for the scheme which would include details of the advance warning
systems that would be used and advice to occupiers of how to deal with such an
event. This approach has been agreed in principle with the Environment Agency
and the Council’s Emergency Planning team have confirmed that they are satisfied
with the approach for this site. A planning obligation is recommended to secure the
preparation of the Flood Risk Management Plan and to ensure that the plan is kept
up to date and made available to all occupiers (including commercial occupiers).
The obligation would also require the flood voids to be maintained in perpetuity with
annual confirmation that the flood voids have been kept clear via the submission of
an annual report. It is considered that this obligation is vital to securing the future
safety of the occupants of the building and is therefore necessary to make the
Development acceptable.
Planning Obligations
7.122 The National Planning Policy Framework (NFFP) states that in dealing with
planning applications, local planning authorities should consider whether otherwise
unacceptable development could be made acceptable through the use of conditions
or planning obligations. Planning obligations should only be used where it is not
possible to address unacceptable impacts through a planning condition. It further
states that where obligations are being sought or revised, local planning authorities
should take account of changes in market conditions over time and, wherever
appropriate, be sufficiently flexible to prevent planned development being stalled.
The NFFP also sets out that planning obligations should only be secured when they
meet the following three tests:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Necessary to make the development acceptable
Directly related to the development; and
Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development
7.123 Paragraph 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (April 2010) puts
the above three tests on a statutory basis, making it illegal to secure a planning
obligation unless it meets the three tests.
7.124 The applicant has provided a planning obligations statement outlining the
obligations that they consider are necessary to mitigate the impacts of the
Development. The need for these obligations and others have been discussed
throughout this report and the necessary obligations, required to mitigate the
impacts of this Development and secure the benefits of the scheme which are
needed to make it acceptable and deliver the required quality of scheme are set out
in the following paragraphs:

7.125 Student Accommodation End User – Obligation to secure an end user prior to the
commencement of development that is either a higher education institution or a
student housing provider. The applicant has not demonstrated the need for student
housing in this location in accordance with the requirements of the London Plan and
it is considered that the involvement of a student housing provider would
demonstrate a market for the proposed use. It is not considered acceptable that the
proposal should be delivered as a speculative development given the bespoke
nature of the proposal and this obligation is therefore necessary to ensure that the
proposal would be deliverable and sustainable. This would also secure the end use
of the building as student housing which is necessary to exempt the proposal from
affordable housing contributions.
7.126 Sustainability – Obligation to secure the 35.8% CO 2 reductions set out in the
Sustainable Design and Energy Report (Ref: 3494/3/4/SF Rev D dated September
2012) along with BREEAM ‘Excellent’. The proposed approach to renewable energy
and sustainability would need to be secured to make sure that the Development
meets the London Plan and Core Strategy policies. This would need to include
requirements to achieve at least a 35.8% reduction in carbon through the use of
gas-fired CHP and 50sqm array of photovoltaics. To meet policy requirement
relating to decentralised energy it would also be necessary to secure that sufficient
pipework infrastructure is put in place to connect with other developments sites to
the south and west of the site, with reasonable endeavours to facilitate this link.
7.127 Highways Improvements – Obligation to undertake improvements to Waterlink Way
based on submitted plans. The applicant has proposed this as part of a scheme to
enhance the public realm and the Council considers these works to be vital in order
to support the regeneration of this area and important route. Policy LAAP 21 in the
Lewisham Town Centre AAP states specifically that funding will be sought from
Town Centre developments to improve walking and cycling routes including the
Waterlink Way north of the Lewisham Transport interchange. The works are
considered to be a vital part of the high quality setting to the building and would
support walking and cycling in this area to justify the height and scale of
development and impact from this site which would have reduced levels of parking.
Obligation to enter into a s278 agreement to secure any necessary repair works to
the footway in front of the building in the instance that this is damaged during
construction and any necessary changes to the Traffic Regulation Order to restrict
parking along the north side of Thurston Road and to provide on street disabled
parking bays. This is considered necessary to ensure the development is
accessible to all and protect the free flow of traffic as Thurston Road is not wide
enough to provide parking on both sides of the road and allow sufficient width for
two way traffic including a bus or other vehicle larger than a car.
7.128 Bus Stops – Re-provision of the existing bus stop and a financial contribution of
£12,000 to be spent on improvements to the bus stop including the provision of
real-time information. The improvements are considered necessary to comply with
the London Plan and also because buses will be an important mode of travel for this
car free Development with new residents, staff and visitors using the bus stop
immediately outside the Development more intensively.
7.129 CPZ Restriction – Restriction of future occupiers applying for permits for CPZ in
order to support a car free development and reduce the risk of future occupiers
parking in surrounding streets, the right for occupiers to apply for permits to park
within the Lewisham Town Centre CPZ, including future extensions would be
necessary. This should also be extended to restrict the right to park in any future
adjacent CPZs.

7.130 Travel Plan – The implementation of the approved Travel Plan and addendum e-
mail dated 12/11/2012 prior to occupation. The appointment of a travel Plan
Coordinator. An appropriate monitoring regime of the Travel Plan, including travel
surveys. Payment of Travel Plan monitoring fee to the Council. The Travel Plan is
required to support the low level of parking proposed
7.131 Site Management Plan – The implementation of the approved Site Management
Plan prior to occupation of the Development. A mechanism to monitor the arrival of
students at the start of the academic year and thereafter at the start and end of
each Academic year for a period of 3 years. A mechanism to require the Plan to be
developed and to require the developer to have regard to reasonable
recommendations by the council about the outcome of the monitoring. The Site
Management Plan is considered necessary to ensure that the operation of the site
does not have an unacceptable impact on the local road network.
7.132 Ability for Public to Pass and Re-pass Over New Open Space – Obligation to
ensure that the public will be able to pass freely over the new areas of public open
space to the west and east of the site and fronting Thurston Road. This is
considered necessary to ensure that these areas will remain unrestricted to the
public and will continue to make a contribution to the public realm and help to
mitigate the height and scale of the proposal.
7.133 Pubic Realm and Open Space Management Plan – detailing the maintenance of the
space and planting to ensure that the public open space continues to make a
positive contribution to visual amenity and provides a high quality public realm to
help mitigate the scale and height of the proposal.
7.134 Commercial spaces – full fit out, including the provision of appropriate acoustically
attenuated curtain glazing, platform lifts and disabled toilets to access the units.
Management and marketing plan submitted for approval to support the economic
viability of the scheme. Obligation to secure the retention of the B1 floorspace to
prevent it being changed to other uses that may not deliver employment. These
obligations are considered necessary to ensure that the proposal continues to make
a contribution towards local employment and to mitigate the loss of existing
employment floorspace. This provision is necessary to support the very principle of
the redevelopment of this site.
7.135 Flood Risk/management – development and maintenance of a site specific flood
alleviation plan which would need to be delivered to maintain the safety of the site in
perpetuity. Flood risk would also have to be mitigated by the management of flood
voids with the responsibility of the developer, owner or any other managing agent to
carry out regular inspections and monitoring to keep under floor voids clear,
unobstructed and fit for purpose in perpetuity.
7.136 Student Management Plan – detailing how the use would be managed to prevent
any amenity impact to neighbouring occupiers that might arise from a large
concentration of students being introduced to the area and it’s emerging residential
nature.
7.137 Community Centres/Halls and Libraries – Obligation to secure the provision of
wireless broadband throughout the student accommodation and communal areas
and the retention of the communal areas shown on the first floor plan. This is
considered necessary to ensure that the Development provides adequate facilities
for occupants in terms of work space and meeting space so that the Development

will not have an impact on local facilities such as libraries and community meeting
spaces. It is considered that this provision is necessary so that a financial
contribution is not required.
7.138 Financial Contributions – Health: £124,800, Employment and Training: £80,980.86,
Open Space: £157,524.30, Town Centre Management/schemes: £34,659.81 –
required to meet the demands that the additional occupiers will place on local
services and facilities, as well as support jobs and mitigate the loss of employment
floorspace. The financial contributions sought have been the subject of detailed
negotiation and consideration of the likely impacts from student occupiers given the
facilities provided by institutions as a matter of course and also those provided at
institutions within a specified catchment area. The Health contribution has been
discounted from the amount required by the Planning Obligations SPD on the basis
that the majority of higher educations institutions within a reasonable travelling
distance from the site provide some form of dedicated health care facilities for
students. The Open Space contribution has been slightly discounted on the basis
that all of the higher education institutions within a reasonable travelling distance
from the scheme provide access to playing fields for students.
7.139 Monitoring and costs – Meeting the Council’s costs in assessing the application
including implementation and monitoring costs.
7.140 Officers consider that the obligations outlined above are appropriate and necessary
in order to mitigate the impacts of the Development and make the Development
acceptable in planning terms. Officers are satisfied the proposed obligations meet
the three legal tests as set out in the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations
(April 2010).
8.0 Local Finance Considerations
8.1 Under Section 70(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), a
local finance consideration means:
(a)
(b)
a grant or other financial assistance that has been, or will or could be,
provided to a relevant authority by a Minister of the Crown; or
sums that a relevant authority has received, or will or could receive, in
payment of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
8.2 Local Planning Authority must have regard to any local finance consideration so far
as material to the application when dealing with the application.
8.3 The Mayor of London's CIL is payable on this application and the applicant has
completed the relevant form.
9.0 Conclusion
9.1 The scheme would make a valuable contribution towards the regeneration of this
area, providing what is considered to be a well designed building with enhanced
employment/business space to the lower levels. Subject to the imposition of
conditions and obligations, all of which are necessary in order to overcome issues
highlighted throughout the report as well to capture those elements that are vital for
delivery to the standard envisaged in the application in order to justify the
Development, the scheme is considered to be acceptable.

9.2 This application has been considered in the light of policies set out in the
Development Plan and other material considerations. Officers consider that the
with the necessary conditions and obligations in place, the proposal would result in
a high quality development that would support the regeneration and growth of
Lewisham Town Centre and the scheme is therefore considered acceptable.
10.0 Summary of Reasons for Grant of Planning Permission
10.1 The Local Planning Authority has considered the particular circumstances of the
application against relevant planning policy set out in The London Plan (2011), The
Core Strategy (2011) and saved policies in the Council’s adopted Unitary
Development Plan (2004). The Local Planning Authority has further had regard to
the Mayor of London’s Supplementary Planning Guidance and Best Practice
Guidance, as well as Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document
(January 2011), the National Planning Policy Framework, and all other material
considerations including the obligations that are to be entered into in the planning
agreement in connection with the Development and the conditions to be imposed
on the permission.
10.2 The Local Planning Authority considers that:
1. The mixed use development of the site for B1 and Student Housing use is in
accordance with Core Strategy Policy 5 which allows the redevelopment of
employment locations in certain circumstances.
2. The site is an appropriate location to provide student accommodation in
accordance with Spatial Policy 2 in the Core Strategy, Policy 3.8 of the London
Plan, identified design principles and public transport capacity.
3. On balance and subject to suitable conditions to secure the exceptionally high
quality materials proposed, the layout of the site, the design of the
Development and its scale and massing is considered to be in accordance with
Policy 7.7 of the London Plan and Policy 18 of the Core Strategy.
4. The provision of new public realm secured through planning obligations, is
appropriate and complies with Policy 7.5 of the London Plan which seeks high
quality and accessible public realm and with Policy URB 12 of the Lewisham
UDP which requires the inclusion of landscape proposals for all areas not
occupied by buildings.
5. The energy demand of the proposed Development has been assessed in
accordance with Policies 5.2, 5.3 and 5.6 of the London Plan and Core
Strategy Policy 8 regarding energy and carbon dioxide savings.
6. The proposed highway works including provisions for pedestrians, cyclists and
other road users and the overall traffic impact of the Development have been
assessed in accordance with Policy 14 of the Core Strategy, and the identified
highway impacts and proposed mitigation measures secured by planning
conditions and obligations, are considered acceptable in accordance with
Policy 14 of the Core Strategy and London Plan policies regarding public
transport as well improvements to facilities for cyclists and pedestrians.
7. The proposed level of cycle parking and associated measures to reduce car
use are in accordance with Policy 14 of the Core Strategy regarding
sustainable movement and transport. Measures to reduce car use, provide offstreet
parking, and to submit a Travel Plan are proposed to be secured by
planning obligations agreed as part of the permission and by conditions.

8. On balance, the benefits inherent in the scheme and the financial contributions
towards achieving other planning policy objectives are in accordance with
Policy 8.2 of the London Plan and Policy 21 of the Core Strategy regarding
planning obligations.
RECOMMENDATION (A1)
To agree the proposals and refer the application and this report and any other
required documents to the Mayor for London (Greater London Authority) under
Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008
(Category 1C of the Schedule of the Order).
RECOMMENDATION (A2)
To agree the proposals and authorise the Head of Law to complete a legal
agreement under Section 106 of the 1990 Act (and other appropriate powers) to
cover the following principal matters:-
• Restriction on the commencement of development until a student housing
management company or higher education institution has been contractually
secured;
• Health:
Contribution of £124,800.00 towards health services
• Open space:
Contribution of £157,524.30 towards open space including routes to open
space in the general vicinity of the site
• Employment/Training:
Contribution of £80,980.86 for employment and training on commencement
of the scheme;
No works to commence until the submission of a Local Employment Strategy
to be approved by the Council;
The approved strategy to be implemented
• Town Centre Management/Improvements:
Contribution of £34,659.81 towards improvements to the town centre
• Community Centres/Halls and Libraries:
The provision of wireless internet throughout the accommodation and
communal areas and the retention of the communal areas as shown on the
first floor plan
• Sustainability:
a) The achievement of BREEAM ‘Excellent”

) Obligation to secure the energy strategy set out in the Sustainable Design
and Energy Report (Ref: 3494/3/4/SF Rev D dated September 2012)
c) The provision of sufficient pipework and infrastructure to enable the
Development to connect with future development sites and decentralised
energy networks to the south and west of the site
• Transport and Public Realm:
a) Improvements to Waterlink Way (to refer back to drawing number
50021901-01 Rev E)
b) Any necessary repairs to the footway following the completion of the
Development and any necessary changes to the Traffic Regulation Order
to restrict parking along the north side of Thurston Road and any onstreet
disabled parking places. To be secured via s278 agreement
c) Re-provision of the Thurston Road bus stop and £12,000 towards
improvement of bus stop
d) Restriction on parking permits in the CPZ including extensions to that and
any adjacent CPZs
e) Implementation of Travel Plan and addendum e-mail dated 12/11/2012
prior to occupation of Development. The appointment of a Travel Plan
Coordinator. An appropriate monitoring regime of the Travel Plan,
including travel surveys. Payment of Travel Plan monitoring fee to the
Council.
f) Site Management Plan – The implementation of the approved Site
Management Plan prior to occupation of the Development. A mechanism
to monitor the arrival of students at the start of the academic year and
thereafter at the start and end of each Academic year for a period of 5
years. A mechanism to require the Plan to be developed and to require
developer to have regard to reasonable recommendations by the Council
about the outcome of the monitoring
g) Ability for public to pass and re-pass over widened area of pavement and
public open space to the east of the site
h) Public realm and open space management plan
• Commercial Units:
a) Management and Marketing plan for the B1 (office floorspace)
b) Obligation to secure the full fit out of the commercial floorspace including
wheelchair accessible bathrooms and platform lifts
c) Obligation to secure the retention of the B1 floorspace
• Flood Risk/Management:
a) Flood Management Plan

) Details of flood voids including a maintenance plan with details of: the
management of flood voids with the responsibility of the developer, owner
or any other managing agent to carry our regular inspections and
monitoring to keep under floor voids clear, unobstructed and fit for
purpose in perpetuity.
• Student Management Plan
• Council's Costs:
a) Meeting the Council’s professional fees and legal and professional costs
for the drafting and monitoring of the S106
RECOMMENDATION (B)
Upon the completion of a satisfactory Section 106, in relation to the matters set out
above, authorise the Head of Planning to Grant Permission subject to the following
conditions:-
1) Environmental Management Plan
No development shall commence on site (including site clearance) until
such time as an Environmental Management Plan has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority, which shall include,
but is not limited to the following items: -
• Dust mitigation measures to meet the London Authorities, Best
Practice Guide: The control of dust and emissions from construction
and demolition;
• Measures to mitigate against noise and air quality impacts
associated with site preparation, demolition, earthworks, materials,
handling and storage, haul routes, vehicles and plant, construction
and fabrication and waste;
• Methods of monitoring construction impacts (noise and air quality);
• Training of Site Operatives and ensuring the chosen contractor
subscribes to the ‘Considerate Contractors’ scheme;
• The location of plant and wheel washing facilities and the operation
of such facilities;
• Details of measures to be employed to mitigate against noise and
vibration arising out of the construction process demonstrating best
practical means;
• Construction traffic details (volume of vehicle movements likely to be
generated during the construction phase including routes and times);
• A risk management assessment of any flood events that might occur
during the construction phase, registered with the Environment
Agency’s “Floodline Warning Direct” service;

• Security Management (to minimise risks to unauthorised personnel);
and
• Hours of working
Works on site shall only take place in accordance with the approved
Environmental Management Plan.
Reason:
In order that the local planning authority may be satisfied that the
demolition and construction process is carried out in a manner that
recognises the locational characteristics of the site and minimises nuisance
to any neighbouring residential occupiers, and to comply with Policies
ENV.PRO 11 Noise Generating Development and HSG 4 Residential
Amenity in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004).
2) Construction Logistics Plan
(i)
(ii)
No works (including demolition and construction) shall commence until
a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority. The CLP shall be
in accordance with the Environmental Management Plan required by
Condition (1) and with relevant TfL guidance.
No works shall be carried out other than in accordance with the
relevant approved CLP.
Reason
To ensure that the demolition and construction processes are carried out in
a manner which will minimise possible disturbance from road traffic and
safeguards road safety in accordance with Policies ENV.PRO 9 Potentially
Polluting Uses, ENV.PRO 11 Noise Generating Development and HSG 4
Residential Amenity in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004)
and that all reasonable measures have been taken to improve construction
freight efficiency by reducing CO2 emissions, congestion and collisions in
accordance with Policy 14 Sustainable movement and transport and Policy
21 Planning obligations of the adopted Core Strategy (June 2011), and
Policy 6.14 Freight in the London Plan (July 2011).
3) Flood Risk Management
The Development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such
time as a scheme to provide suitable floodable voids underneath the
building has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local
planning authority. The scheme shall include details of the flow pathways
into and out of the voided area(s). The scheme shall be fully implemented
and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing
arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as
may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.

Reason
To ensure that the Development will not result in a loss of flood storage,
which could increase risk elsewhere, and that where possible it will reduce
the risk of flooding by creating additional flood storage.
4) Railway Embankment
The Development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until a
scheme of works to protect the existing trees and vegetation on the railway
embankment has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
Authority. This shall include details of fencing, signage and a method
statement for manually retrieving any falling debris landing on the railway
embankment without causing damage to trees or vegetation. No works will
commence on site until the fencing and signage has been installed in
accordance with the approved details.
Reason:
To safeguard the health and safety of the green corridor during building
operations and the visual amenities of the area generally and to comply
with Policy 12 Open space and environmental assets of the adopted Core
Strategy (June 2011) and Policies URB 3 Urban Design, URB 12
Landscape and Development and URB 13 Trees in the adopted Unitary
Development Plan (July 2004).
5) Land Contamination
No development approved by this planning permission shall take place until
a remediation strategy that includes the following components to deal with
the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted
to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:
a) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified:
i. all previous uses
ii. potential contaminants associated with those uses
iii. a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and
receptors
iv. potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the
site.
b) A site investigation scheme, based on (a) to provide information for a
detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected,
including those off site.
c) The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment
referred to in (b) and, based on these, an options appraisal and
remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures
required and how they are to be undertaken.

d) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in
order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy
in (c) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term
monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for
contingency action.
Any changes to these components require the express written consent of
the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as
approved.
Reason
To ensure historic contamination is appropriately investigated and
remediated as necessary to protect controlled waters, including
groundwater in the underlying Principal Aquifer located within Source
Protection Zone 1 of a public water supply. To comply with the principles of
the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
6) Design Quality – Podium and ground floor element
Notwithstanding the details submitted, prior to the commencement of
superstructure works, details of the glazed entrance element and podium
shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.
Details shall include but not be limited to:
• Samples of the glazing system and frame;
• Details of the entrances to the building;
• Details of the junctions between the glazed entrance element and
the commercial element and the concrete frame;
• Details of the roof of the glazed element;
• Details of the junction with the first floor amenity space floorslab;
The details submitted shall be in general accordance with drawing number
489-0066.
The scheme shall be carried out in full accordance with those details, as
approved.
Reason
To ensure that the design is of the necessary high standard and detailing,
and delivers the standard of architecture detailed in the plans, rendered
images and design and access statement in accordance with Policies 15
High quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June
2011) and Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development
Plan (July 2004).

7) Design Quality – 11 storey blocks
Notwithstanding the details submitted, prior to the commencement of
superstructure works, details of all facing materials (including their colour
and texture) to be used on the 11 storey blocks shall be submitted and
approved by the local planning authority.
Details shall include but not be limited to:
• Samples of the window frames and acoustic panels, including details
of how the side return of the acoustic panel relates to the window
frame, the level of opacity of the obscure glazed elements and the
range of RAL colours that will be used in coating the perforated
panels. The details submitted shall be in strict accordance with
drawing numbers 489-0065 and 489-0067;
• Details of the pre-cast brick panel cladding system, including the
construction of on-site sample panels measuring at least 1sqm
showing pointing and mortar colour of both stretcher and vertical
bonding. The details submitted shall be in strict accordance with
drawing numbers 489-0065 and 489-0067;
• Samples of the white concrete frame and structural glazing of the
ground and first floor commercial element, including samples of the
aluminium infill panels and details of the glazed doors; and
• Samples of the roof level aluminium cladding and brise soleil.
The details submitted shall be in accordance with the design approach set
out in Section 5.6 of the Design and Access Statement.
The scheme shall be carried out in full accordance with those details, as
approved.
Reason
To ensure that the design is of the necessary high standard and detailing,
and delivers the standard of architecture detailed in the plans, rendered
images and design and access statement in accordance with Policies 15
High quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June
2011) and Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development
Plan (July 2004).
8) Design Quality – Undercroft area
Prior to the commencement of superstructure works, details shall be
submitted to and approved by the local planning authority of all materials
and finishes to the undercroft area to the rear of the site. 1:50 elevations
shall be provided of this space and the details submitted shall include but
not be limited to full details of access gates, platform lift(s), stair materials,
doors, aluminium louver cladding system, bike enclosure and frames and
glazing system. The Development shall be carried out in strict accordance
with the details submitted unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.

Reason
To ensure that the design is of the necessary high standard and detailing,
and delivers the standard of architecture detailed in the plans, rendered
images and design and access statement in accordance with Policies 15
High quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June
2011) and Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development
Plan (July 2004).
9) External Noise Protection – Fixed plant
i. The rating level of the noise emitted from fixed plant on the site shall
be 5dB below the existing background level at any time. The noise
levels shall be determined at the façade of any noise sensitive
property. The measurements and assessments shall be made
according to BS4142:1997.
ii.
iii.
Development shall not commence above ground level until details of
a scheme complying with paragraph (i) of this condition have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
The Development shall not be occupied until the scheme approved
pursuant to paragraph (ii) of this condition has been implemented in
its entirety. Thereafter, the scheme shall be maintained in perpetuity.
Reason
N07 R
10) External Noise Protection
i. The building shall be constructed so as to provide sound insulation
against external noise, to achieve levels not exceeding 30dB LAeq
(night) and 45dB LAmax (measured with F time-weighting) for
bedrooms, 35dB LAeq (day) for other habitable rooms, with
windows shut and other means of ventilation provided.
ii.
iii.
Development shall not commence above ground floor level until
details of a sound insulation scheme complying with paragraph (i)
of this condition have been submitted to and approved in writing by
the local planning authority.
The Development shall not be occupied until the sound insulation
scheme approved pursuant to paragraph (ii) of this condition has
been implemented in its entirety. Thereafter, the sound insulation
scheme shall be maintained in perpetuity.
Reason
To safeguard the amenities of residents and to comply with Policy HSG 4
Residential Amenity in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004),
and to ensure any impacts arising from the proposed Development (and
any measures required to mitigate those impacts) are consistent with the
Noise Assessment accompanying the application.

11) External Lighting
Details of the external lighting to be installed at the site, including measures
to prevent light spillage onto the railway embankment, shall be submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the
commencement of superstructure works. The details shall be in general
conformity with Section 6 of the Design and Access Statement hereby
approved and drawing numbers 50021901-01Rev E, 50021901-02 Rev C,
50021901-07 Rev A and 50021901-08 Rev A. Any such external lighting
shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and such
directional hoods as are found to be necessary shall be retained
permanently. The applicant should demonstrate that the proposed lighting
is the minimum needed for security and working purposes and that the
proposals minimise pollution from glare and spillage.
Reason
In order that the local planning authority may be satisfied that the lighting is
installed and maintained in a manner which will minimise possible light
pollution to neighbouring properties and the railway corridor and to comply
with Policies ENV.PRO 12 Light Generating Development; HSG 4
Residential Amenity and OS17 Protected Species in the adopted Unitary
Development Plan (July 2004) .
12) Living Roofs – Top floors
Details of the living roofs on top of the 11 storey blocks, which shall cover
an area no less than 340sqm, shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of
superstructure works. A 1:20 scale plan [of the living roof] that includes
contoured information depicting the extensive substrate build up and a
cross section showing the living roof components shall be submitted for
approval. The living roof shall be:
a) biodiversity based with extensive substrate base (depth shall vary
between 80-150mm with peaks and troughs but shall average at
least 133mm);
b) laid out in accordance with plan 489-0023 Rev 01 hereby approved;
and will include details of how the roof has been designed to
accommodate any plant, Brise Soliel, management arrangements,
and any proposed photovoltaic panels and fixings;
c) plug planted & seeded with an agreed mix of species within the first
planting season following the practical completion of the building
works.
The living roofs shall not be used as an amenity or sitting out space of any
kind whatsoever and shall only be used in the case of essential
maintenance or repair, or escape in case of emergency.
The Development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the details
so approved, shall be maintained as such thereafter and no change there
from shall take place without the prior written consent of the Local Planning
Authority.

d) Evidence that the roof has been installed in accordance with subpoints
a) to c) above shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the
Development hereby approved.
Reason
To ensure the Development provides the maximum possible provision
towards creation of habitats and valuable areas for biodiversity in
accordance with policies OS 13 Nature Conservation of the Lewisham UDP
(July 2004); Policies 5.11 (Green roofs and development sites environs)
and 7.19 (Biodiversity and access to nature) in the London Plan (July
2011); and Policies 7 (Climate change and adapting to the effects), 10
(Managing and reducing the risk of flooding) and 12 (Open space and
environmental assets) of the Core Strategy (June 2011).
13) Living Roof – Podium level
Details of the living roof over the first floor level communal facilities, which
shall cover an area no less than 62sqm, shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the
commencement of superstructure works. A 1:20 scale plan [of the living
roof] shall be submitted for approval. The living roof shall comprise:
a) an extensive sedum blanket laid on a minimum of 80mm of living
roof aggregate
b) laid out in accordance with plan 489_0012 Rev 02 hereby approved;
and will include details of how the roof has been designed to
accommodate any plant and management arrangements.
The living roof shall not be used as an amenity or sitting out space of any
kind whatsoever and shall only be used in the case of essential
maintenance or repair.
The Development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the details
so approved, shall be maintained as such thereafter and no change there
from shall take place without the prior written consent of the Local Planning
Authority.
c) Evidence that the roof has been installed in accordance with subpoints
a) and b) above, along with a 2 year post installation
establishment guarantee shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of
the development hereby approved.
Reason
To ensure the Development provides the maximum possible provision
towards creation of habitats and valuable areas for biodiversity in
accordance with policies OS 13 Nature Conservation of the Lewisham UDP
(July 2004); Policies 5.11 (Green roofs and development sites environs)
and 7.19 (Biodiversity and access to nature) in the London Plan (July
2011); and Policies 7 (Climate change and adapting to the effects), 10
(Managing and reducing the risk of flooding) and 12 (Open space and
environmental assets) of the Core Strategy (June 2011).

14) Hard Landscaping
Full details of hard landscaping including any surface finishes, boundary
treatments, handrails and balustrades, planters, seating and bollards shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior
to the commencement of superstructure works. The details shall be in
general conformity with drawing numbers 50021901-01 Rev E, 50021901-
02 Rev C, 50021901-07 Rev A and 50021901-08 Rev A and the design
philosophy set out in section 6 of the design and access statement hereby
approved.
Reason
L01R
15) Soft Landscaping
Full details of soft landscaping including full schedules of planting shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to
the commencement of any superstructure works. The details shall be in
general accordance with drawing numbers 50021901-01 Rev E, 50021901-
02 Rev C, 50021901-07 Rev A and 50021901-08 Rev A and the design
philosophy set out in section 6 of the design and access statement hereby
approved. The details shall include measures to improve the wildlife value
of the site, including a high percentage of native tree and shrub species
and at least 10 species of biodiversity value. The proposed planting shall
include the planting of at least 16 individual clear stemmed trees. Any
trees which within a period of 7 years from the completion of development
die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be
replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species,
unless the local planning authority has given written consent to any
variation.
Reason
L01R
16) Podium Level Hard and Soft Landscaping
Full details of both hard and soft landscaping of the first floor amenity
space including surface finishes, planters and full schedules of planting
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority
prior to the commencement of any superstructure works. The details shall
be general conformity with plan 50021901-03 Rev A and Section 6.3.5 of
the design and access statement hereby approved. Any trees or plants
which within a period of 7 years from the completion of development die,
are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced
in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless
the local planning authority has given written consent to any variation.
Reason
L01R

17) Flood Void Grilles
Prior to the commencement of superstructure works, details including 1:10
plans, sections and elevations of the flood void grills shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason
In order to ensure that the Local Planning authority is satisfied that the
flood voids will provide adequate visual interest and in accordance with
Policies 15 High quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy
(June 2011) and Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary
Development Plan (July 2004).
18) Land Contamination – Verification report
No occupation of any part of the permitted Development shall take place
until a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the
approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation
shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning
authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring
carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to
demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also
include any plan (a “long-term monitoring and maintenance plan”) for
longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and
arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan.
The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as
approved.
Reason
To ensure historic contamination is appropriately investigated and
remediated as necessary to protect controlled waters, including
groundwater in the underlying Principal Aquifer located within Source
Protection Zone 1 of a public water supply. To comply with the principles of
the NPPF.
19) Cycle Parking
i. A minimum of 260 secure and dry cycle spaces shall be provided for
the student accommodation element in accordance with the plans
hereby approved. A minimum of 6 cycle spaces shall be provided for
the commercial element of the scheme in accordance with the plans
hereby approved.
ii.
iii.
The approved cycle storage shall be provided before the
Development hereby permitted is occupied and shall be retained
permanently thereafter.
The position of the additional cycle parking spaces shown on
drawing 489-0010 Rev 03 shall be safeguarded for the future
provision of cycle parking and not be used for any other purpose that
would prevent the provision of additional cycle parking spaces.

Reason
In order to ensure adequate provision for cycle parking for both the student
and commercial elements of the proposal, to secure the delivery of
additional cycle parking if required and to comply with Policy 14
Sustainable movement and transport of the adopted Core Strategy (June
2011).
20) Disabled Parking
The Development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the 4
disabled parking spaces have been provided. The said parking spaces
shall be retained for the lifetime of the Development.
Reason
DS4R
21) Site Management Plan
The Development shall not be occupied until the Site Management Plan
hereby approved (Ref: 003-GD004530-GD-R-06 dated October 2012) has
been implemented. In particular:
• The internal access road shall be a one-way operation with access
into the site for all vehicles from the western access and egress from
the eastern access only;
• Only large service/delivery vehicles unable to negotiate the one way
route (as a result of limited head height) shall be permitted to exit via
the western access under the supervision of a qualified Banskman;
• Electronic gates shall be provided at entry and exit to the undercroft
area of the site; and
• The refuse collection point will be located within 10m from the back
of the public highway of Thurston Road.
The uses in the building shall be carried out in accordance with the Site
Management Plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
Reason
To ensure that the operation of the site after construction is undertaken
efficiently and sustainably in a manner which will minimise possible
disturbance from road traffic and safeguards road safety in accordance with
Policies ENV.PRO 9 Potentially Polluting Uses, ENV.PRO 11 Noise
Generating Development and HSG 4 Residential Amenity in the adopted
Unitary Development Plan (July 2004) and that all reasonable measures
have been taken to improve construction freight efficiently by reducing Co2
emissions, congestion and collisions in accordance with Policy 14
Sustainable movement and transport and Policy 21 Planning obligations of
the adopted Core Strategy (June 2011) and Policy 6.14 Freight in the
London Plan (July 2011).

22) Public Realm
i. The Development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the
scheme of landscape works to the public realm shown on approved
drawings 50021901-01Rev E, 50021901-02 Rev C, 50021901-07
Rev A and 50021901-08 Rev A and approved under condition 14,
15 and 16 of this permission have been implemented in full.
ii.
Prior to the commencement of superstructure works, any necessary
repairs to the footway in front of the site and any necessary changes
to the Traffic Regulation Order to restrict parking along the north
side of Thurston Road and to provide on street disabled parking
bays shall be subject to a s278 Agreement to be completed within 6
months of practical completion of the Development.
Reason
To ensure that the Development achieves the quality proposed in the
application documents and is carried out in accordance with the documents
hereby approved and that it makes a positive contribution to the
appearance of the locality and to comply with Policy URB 3 Urban Design
in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004).
23) Removal of Crossovers
H04
Reason
H04R
24) Disabled Facilities
Prior to the occupation of the commercial units hereby approved, suitable
platform lifts and disabled toilet facilities will be provided.
Reason
In order to provide adequate access for everyone, particularly people with
disabilities and to comply with Policy 15 High quality design for Lewisham
of the adopted Core Strategy (June 2011).
25) Travel Plan
The Development shall not be occupied until the Travel Plan hereby
approved (Ref: 001-UA004530-GD-R-09 dated October 2012) and
addendum e-mail (dated 12/11/2012) has been implemented. The uses in
the buildings shall be carried out in accordance with the Travel Plan and
addendum e-mail dated (12/11/2012), unless otherwise agreed in writing
by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason
In order to encourage more sustainable modes of travel and in accordance
with Policy 14 Sustainable movement and transport of the Core Strategy
(June 2011) and Chapter 6 of the London Plan (July 2011).

Informatives
26) Land Contamination – Controlled Waters
No infiltration or surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other
than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which
may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated
that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters.
Reason
To prevent pollution of groundwater in the underlying Principal Aquifer
located within Source Protection Zone 1 of a public water supply.
27) Wheelchair Units
The scheme hereby permitted shall provide at least 39 wheelchair
accessible units. The units shall be retained in perpetuity.
Reason
To ensure the scheme provides wheelchair accessible accommodation in
accordance with London Plan Policy 3.8.
28) Plumbing or Pipes
B09
Reason
B09R
29) Flood Risk Management
The finished floor levels of the Development hereby approved shall be set
no lower than 6.95 Above Ordnance Datum (AOD).
Reason
To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed Development and future
occupants.
1) For the avoidance of doubt, the Council considers the definition of
‘superstructure’ as having its normal or dictionary meaning, which is: the
part of a building above its foundations.
2) Assessment of the scheme pursuant to condition 9 should be carried out by
a suitably qualified acoustic consultant.
3) Assessment of the sound insulation scheme should be carried out by a
suitably qualified acoustic consultant, and should be guided by the advice
in the NPPF and comply with the standards given in the current BS8233 for
internal noise design levels.

4) Care should be taken during and after construction to ensure that all fuels,
oils and any other potentially contaminating materials should be stored (for
example in bunded areas secured from public access) so as to prevent
accidental/ unauthorised discharge to ground. The areas for storage should
not drain to any surface water system.
5) Where it is proposed to store more than 200 litres (45 gallon drum = 205
litres) of any type of oil on site it must be stored in accordance with the
Control of Pollution (oil storage) (England) Regulations 2001. Drums and
barrels can be kept in drip trays if the drip tray is capable of retaining 25%
of the total capacity of all oil stored.
6) For the avoidance of doubt the Environmental Management Plan submitted
in relation to Condition 1 and the Construction Logistics Plan submitted in
relation to Condition 2 should take into account the cumulative impact of
other developments under construction in the Town Centre.
7) The applicant is reminded that a separate application for advertisement
consent is necessary for proposed signage and consideration of any
signage has not been undertaken as part of the determination of this
planning application.