Flexible commercial space at Tesco Stores, Kennington, London SE11

What was proposed

Permission was sought to replace vacant office space with one or more flexible retail, food, service, leisure, health, nursery, office, research, education or art uses.

“↑ To contents 1. Summary of application Executive summary 1.1.1 Berkeley Homes (Central London) Ltd has applied for planning permission for the change of use of an existing vacant office space to a flexible use comprising one or more of the following uses: Use Use Class Retail E(a) Food and beverage E(b) Financial/professional services E(c) Indoor sport, recreation or fitness E(d) Medical or health facilities E(e) Creche/nursery E(f) Office E(g)(i) Research and development…”

“The office space is in Block A of the Oval Village development, which is on the east side of Vauxhall Street and accessed by a new access road called Gasholder Place. Block A is a mixed use building and includes a Tesco store, office space, flexible retail space and residential units above. The office space has two ground floor entrances but most of its floorspace is on the first and second floors.”

Officer report

The site

The 2,581-square-metre office occupies the first and second floors of Block A, with entrances from Gasholder Place and residential use above.

“↑ To contents 2. Site context and proposal Site description 2.1.1 The application site (“the Site”) is Phoenix Court, which is a block within the Oval Village development (also known as Block A). It is located on the south side of Kennington Lane at the junction with Vauxhall Street and contains a Tesco store and flexible retail space on the ground floor with office space and residential use above.”

“This application is concerned only with the existing office space within Block A. The office is located on the south side of the block with two entrances on the ground floor and the main office space on the first and second floors. The total floor area is 2,581sqm. Access to the office is from a new road called Gasholder Place, which runs one-way eastward from Vauxhall Street to Montford Place.”

Officer report

Planning history

Earlier permissions approved the wider mixed-use Oval Village development and later variations affecting its buildings, homes, commercial space and energy arrangements.

“First variation 2.1.11.4 20/02203/VOC – Application Permitted – Decision Date: 30.03.2021 Variation of Conditions 2 (Approved Plans) and 70 (Quantum of Development) of planning permission 18/02597/EIAFUL (Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed-use development comprising the erection of 3 new buildings (Plot A,B,C) ranging from 4-17 storeys to provide residential (Class C3), a replacement Tesco store (Class A1), office (Class B1) and…”

“23/01683/VOC – Application Permitted – Decision Date: 31.01.2024 Variation of conditions 2 (Approved Drawings), 39 (CHP Connections), 53 (Energy System Emissions) and 70 (Quantum of Development) of planning permission 20/02203/VOC (Variation of Conditions 2 (Approved Plans) and 70 (Quantum of Development) of planning permission 18/02597/EIAFUL (Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed-use development comprising the erection of…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because marketing showed no demand for the office, the proposed uses were acceptable, and conditions could control noise, servicing and storage.

“Some of the proposed uses could result in additional noise, such as from restaurant, indoor sport and research and development uses, but noise disturbance can be avoided subject to conditions requiring additional noise mitigation is installed prior to commencement. The existing office space has access to cycle and refuse storage but storage requirements may change depending on which use ultimately occupies the space.”

Officer report

What people said

Objections concerned effects on local centres, loss of offices, noise, overlooking, waste, footfall, transport and the use of residential cycle facilities.

“Impact of new commercial uses outside existing local centres A retail impact assessment has been undertaken demonstrating that there would be no adverse impact. See section 4.2.2 The development should not have an active frontage. The site has a very limited frontage at ground floor level, consisting only of two entrance lobbies. The permission would allow for a gym but there are already many gyms in the area. The local area has capacity to support a new gym.”

“The existing cycle spaces should be reallocated to residential use. The development includes sufficient cycle spaces for residential occupiers. The corridors serving cycle store and changing facilities are shared with residential occupiers. This is an existing situation. Access to individual cycle stores is restricted to the relevant tenant by fob access system. Waste…”

Officer report

Who spoke

One interested party spoke in support of the application, and officers answered members’ questions.

Committee discussion

Members discussed the application before the Chair put the officer recommendation to a vote.

“Officers responded to questions from Members.”

“Further to a discussion, the Chair moved to vote on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application.”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Joanne Simpson moved approval, Councillor Scott Ainslie seconded it, and the resolution was unanimous.

“25/00481/FUL It was MOVED by Councillor Joanne Simpson and SECONDED by Councillor Scott Ainslie…”

Minutes

The decision

Conditional planning permission was granted subject to a Section 106 agreement, with authority delegated to finalise conditions and planning obligations.

“Resolve to grant conditional planning permission subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 containing the planning obligations as set out in this report, addenda and/or PAC minutes.”

“In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within six months of the date of the Committee meeting, delegated authority is given to the Director of Climate Change, Planning and Transport to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a Section 106 agreement providing for the obligations considered necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms as identified in this report, addenda and/or the PAC minutes.”

Minutes