892-home mixed-use redevelopment at Borough Triangle Land And Site At 18-54 Newington Causeway, Southwark

What was proposed

The application sought changes to an approved mixed-use redevelopment, including revised cores and layouts, fire-safety updates, and at least 10% affordable housing.

“Proposal: Variation of Conditions 1 (approved plans, including affordable housing) and 45 (Wheelchair adaptable user dwellings) and 49 (fire safety) pursuant to planning permission 24/AP/1958 Phased mixed-use redevelopment of the site comprising: Demolition of all existing buildings/structures and site clearance, except 82 and (part) 83 Borough Road which are to be retained, altered and refurbished for Flexible Commercial, Business and Service, and Learning and…”

Officer report

The site and development

The 1.12-hectare Borough Triangle site would provide 892 homes, four new buildings, commercial and leisure uses, community space, and public open space.

“The 1.12 hectare site known as ‘Borough Triangle’ is a key regeneration site. It comprises almost all of the land falling within the NSP44 ‘Newington Triangle’ site allocation in the Southwark Plan (2022).”

“The development would be phased with a basement structure and 4 new buildings (Buildings A to D) to provide housing, flexible commercial, and mixed food and drink and leisure uses. A total of 892 homes is proposed, with 60 being affordable (10% by habitable rooms) of which 42 units would be for social rent. The quantum of affordable housing has been tested by the council’s own viability assessor and is considered to be the maximum that can be achieved on the site.”

Officer report

What officers advised

Officers recommended refusal because reducing affordable housing materially weakened the public benefits needed to outweigh heritage harm from the buildings’ scale.

“In conclusion, the proposed development would provide 10% affordable housing by habitable room, which would equate to 60 affordable homes (42 social rented and 18 intermediate). This would be significantly below the minimum 35% required by policy, although it is noted that this is subject to viability.”

“Both the Council and the GLA identified that the public benefit of providing a policy compliant 35% level of affordable housing was a significant factor outweighing the impact of harm caused by the scheme particularly to heritage assets.”

Officer report

Who addressed the committee

Objectors, the applicant’s representatives, and Councillor David Watson as ward councillor addressed the committee and answered questions.

Members’ consideration

Members questioned officers, objectors, and the applicant’s representatives before the committee entered a closed session and returned to the open meeting.

“The applicant’s representatives addressed the committee and answered questions put by members of the committee.”

“The committee then entered into closed session and returned to the open session at 9pm.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee refused permission because affordable housing was too low to outweigh heritage harm, unmet affordable-housing need, and harm to neighbouring amenity.

“The proposed development, owing to the low level of affordable housing would fail to deliver sufficient public benefits to outweigh the heritage harm to the character and appearance of the Trinity Church Square Conservation Area, owing to the height, scale and massing of proposed blocks A and B.”

“The proposed development, owing to the low level of affordable housing, would fail to meet the significant need for social rented and intermediate homes in the borough. As such the proposal would be contrary to policy HO8 ‘Providing affordable homes’ of the NPPF (2026) Policy H4 ‘Delivering Affordable Housing’ of the London Plan (2021) and Policy P1 ‘Social rented and intermediate housing’ of the Southwark Plan (2022) and the Affordable Housing SPD (2025)”

Minutes