Borough and Bankside Community Council

Planning Agenda

Date: Tuesday October 14 2008 Time: 7pm Place: Charles Dickens School, Lant Street, SE1 1QP

1. Welcome and introductions 2. Apologies 3. Notification of any items which the Chair deems urgent 4. Disclosure of Members’ interests and dispensations 5. Minutes of the previous meeting 6. Development Control Items Planning Applications for Decision: 6.1 1-3 Silex Street, London SE1 0DW 6.2 82 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LL 7. Non-Development Control Item 8. Closing comments by Chair

1

Map of meeting location: Charles Dickens School, Lant Street, SE1 1QP (entrance in Toulmin Street) 2

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Borough and Bankside Community Council Membership Lorraine Zuleta (Chair) Mackie Sheik (Vice Chair) Danny McCarthy Tim McNally Adele Morris David Noakes Carers’ Allowances If you are a Southwark resident and have paid someone to look after your children, or an elderly dependant or a dependant with disabilities, so that you can attend this meeting, you may claim an allowance from the Council. Please collect a claim form from the clerk at the meeting. Exclusion of Press and Public The following motion should be moved, seconded and approved if the Community Council wishes to exclude the press and public to deal with reports revealing exempt information. “That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of information as defined in paragraphs 1-15, Access to Information Procedure Rules of the Constitution.” Transport Assistance for Disabled Members of the Public Members of the public with a disability who wish to attend Community Council meetings and who require transport assistance in order to access the meeting, are requested to call the meeting clerk at the number below to give his/her contact and address details. The clerk will arrange for a driver to collect the person and provide return transport after the meeting. There will be no charge to the person collected. Please note that it is necessary to call the clerk as far in advance as possible, at least three working days before the meeting. Wheelchair access Wheelchair access to the venue is available through the main entrance to the hall For further information, please contact the Borough and Bankside Community Council clerk:

Tim Murtagh Phone: 0207 525 7187 E-mail: tim.murtagh@southwark.gov.uk Council Website: www.southwark.gov.uk

If you require a large print copy of the agenda, please telephone 020 7525 7187. Language Needs If you want information on the Community Councils translated into your language please telephone 020 7525 57514. To inform us of any special needs or requirements, such as transport or signer/interpreter, please telephone 020 752 57514

3

Bengali Kendi dilinizde Toplum meclisleri hakkønda bilgi almak için 020 7525 7514’nolu telefonu arayønøz. Özel gereksinimlerinizi bize bildirmek için 020 7525 7514’nolu telefonu çeviriniz.

Turkish Haddii aad doonayso warbixin ku saabsan qoraalka Kawnsalkada Bulshada oo ku turjuman af Soomaali fadlan tilifoon u dir 020 7525 7514 Si aad noogu sheegto haddii aad leedahay baahi gaar ama wax gooni kuu ah sida gaadiid, af celiyaha dadka indha la’ fadlan tilifooni 020 7525 7514

Somali

Chinese

Se voce quiser informações nos conselhos comunitários traduzidas em sua língua por favor ligue para 020 7525 7514 Para-nos informar de quaisquer necessidades especiais ou requisitos , tipo trasporte, linguagem dos sinais/ intérprete, por favor ligue para 020 7525 7514.

Portuguese Si vous désirer avoir l'information sur les Conseils de la Communauté (Community Councils) traduite en votre langue téléphonez SVP au 020 7525 7514 Pour nous informer de tout besoin ou condition spéciale, telles que le transport ou le signataire / interprète, téléphonez SVP au 020 7525 7514 French Si precisa información traducida a su idioma, sobre los concejos del Comunidad (Community Councils) por favor llame al número de teléfono 020 7525 7514 Si tiene necesidades o requisitos específicos, como es el transporte especial o un intérprete, por favor llame al número de teléfono 020 7525 7514

Spanish Lati bẽre fun itumọ irohin nipa Council agbegbe re (Community Council) ni ede abini rẹ, jọwọ pe telifoonu 020 7525 7514.

Yoruba

4

Borough and Bankside Community Council Planning meeting Minutes of meeting held on Monday September 1 2008 at 7.00pm (to be confirmed at the next Borough & Bankside Planning meeting) Cathedral School, Redcross Way, London SE1 1HG PRESENT Councillors Tim McNally (In the Chair), Danny McCarthy, Adele Morris, and David Noakes. Also present: Becky Baker, Susannah Petit, Michael Tsoukaris planning officers Suzan Yildiz, legal officer Tim Murtagh, community councils development officer 1. Introduction and welcome by the Chair The Chair welcomed Council Members, residents and officers.

2. Apologies There were apologies from Cllrs Sheik and Zuleta. 3. Items of business, which the Chair deems urgent There was an addendum report and minutes of the previous meeting were circulated. 4. Disclosure of Members’ Interests and Dispensations There were none. 5. Minutes of previous meetings Members agreed the minutes of the planning meeting held on July 15 2008 as an accurate record of the proceedings, subject to a name error in the apologies paragraph. The chair signed the minutes.

5

Borough & Bankside Community Council Planning meeting – July 15 2008 Page 2 Recording of Members’ votes Community council procedure rule 1.9 (3) allows a Member to record her/his vote in respect of any Motions and amendments. Such requests are detailed in the following Minutes. Should a Member’s vote be recorded in respect of an amendment, a copy of the amendment may be found in the Minute File and is available for public inspection.

The Community council considered the items set out in the agenda, a copy of which has been incorporated in the Minute File. Each of the following paragraphs relates to the item bearing the same number on the agenda.

6. Development Control

RESOLVED:

1. That the determination of planning applications, or formal observations and comments, the instigation of enforcement action and the receipt of the reports on the agenda be considered.

2. That the decisions made on the planning applications be subject to the conditions and/or made for the reasons set out in the attached reports unless otherwise stated.

3. That where reasons for the decision or condition are not included in the report relating to

an individual item, that they be clearly specified.

Item 6.1 38 – 40 GLASSHILL STREET, LONDON, SE1 0QR Proposal (08-AP-1541) Demolition of existing commercial buildings (subject to the existing facades to Glasshill Street. The Almshouses and Kings Bench Street) and the redevelopment of the site for a mixed use building of part two, part three and part five storeys, to provide office space (Use Class B1) at ground and first floor, and 8 residential flats above (3 x two bedroom and 5 x three bedroom). The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. The objector made a statement. Members asked questions of the objector. The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant. Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted.

6

Borough & Bankside Community Council Planning meeting – July 15 2008 Page 3 Item 6.2 36 GLADSTONE STREET, LONDON, SE1 6EY Proposal (08-AP-1398) Renovation of existing dwelling including removal/replacement of internal walls, erection of three storey rear extension, external alterations and erection of mansard roof extension. The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. The objector made a statement. Members asked questions of the objector. The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant. Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted subject to an additional condition that details of the lower ground floor treatment of the existing partition wall be submitted to and approved in writing. Item 6.3 SOHO WHARF, CLINK STREET, LONDON, SE1 9DG Proposal (08-AP-1487) Formation of new restaurant entrance on Clink Street to be used for limited hours during the day (amendment to planning permission 07-AP-2048 – Change of use of part of ground floor from entertainment/corporate hospitality to restaurant (Class A3), installation of new lift and external alterations to the external facades, minor alterations to existing entrances and replacement of existing windows). The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. The objector made a statement. Members asked questions of the objector. The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant. Members then discussed the proposal.

7

Borough & Bankside Community Council Planning meeting – July 15 2008 Page 4 RESOLVED: That the item be deferred to the next/future meeting. Item 6.5 THE RAKE PUBLIC HOUSE, 14 WINCHESTER WALK, LONDON, SE1 9AG Proposal (08-AP-1507) Retrospective change of use from café (Class A3) to bar (Class A4). Installation of new front windows, new front and rear doors and construction of decking platform at ground floor level to provide external seating area. The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. There were no objectors present. The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant. Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted subject to recommended conditions. However, condition 6 is to be deleted with an informative added instead. Item 6.6 THE SOUTHWARK ROSE HOTEL, 43 – 47 SOUTHWARK BRIDGE ROAD, LONDON, SE1 9HH Proposal (06-AP-2188) Erection of part three-storey/ part four-storey rear extension to existing hotel to provide 21 new bedrooms, three seminar rooms and ancillary hotel facilities. The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. The objector made a statement. Members asked questions of the objector. The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant.

8

Borough & Bankside Community Council Planning meeting – July 15 2008 Page 5 Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That planning permission be deferred pending further information. Item 6.7 46 – 48 WEBBER STREET, LONDON, SE1 8QW Proposal (08-AP-1611) Redevelopment of the site with a mixed use scheme, part 6 storeys (at front) and part 4 storeys high (at rear) comprising 9 flats (4 x one bedroom, 3 x two bedroom and 2 x three bedroom) and 1297 sqm of office space (Class B1) at basement, ground, first and part of second floor level, together with landscaping and cycle storage. The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. The objector made a statement. Members asked questions of the objector. The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant. Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted subject to the recommended conditions and section 106 and additional conditions contained in the Addendum report. Item 6.8 EMPIRE SQUARE LAND BOUNDED BY LONG LANE, SOUTHALL PLACE, STERRY STREET, LONDON, SE1 4NL Proposal (08-AP-1182) Application for the use of the Pavillion building (which currently has A1 or A3 use) for alternative Class A1 (retail), Class A2 (financial & professional service, not including betting offices), Class A3 (restaurant & Café), or Class B1 (office) use. Use of part basement for Class A1, A2, (not betting offices) A3, or B1 purposes. The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. There were no objectors present.

9

Borough & Bankside Community Council Planning meeting – July 15 2008 Page 6 The applicant made a statement. Members asked questions of the applicant. Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That delegation be authorised to officers to grant subject to the recommended conditions, subject to there being no new material issues being raised in any representations which are received on 2 September 2008 (last day of the consultation of the period). Item 6.4 1 – 3 SILEX STREET, LONDON, SE1 0DW Proposal (08-AP-0224) Change of use of existing 2nd and 3rd floor (loft) storage areas to create 20 single person flats to be used for Student Housing Accommodation. The planning officer introduced the report. Members asked questions of the officer. Members then discussed the proposal. RESOLVED: That planning permission be deferred pending further information on access for the disabled. 7. Epilogue

The Chair thanked everyone for attending and contributing to the meeting.

The meeting closed at 12.18am Chair: Date:

10

Item No. 6.

Classification: Open

Date:

Meeting Name: Borough & Bankside Community Council

Report title:

Development Control

Ward(s) or groups affected:

All within Borough & Bankside Community Council

From:

Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods

RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That the determination of planning applications, or formal observations and

comments, the instigation of enforcement action and the receipt of the reports included in the attached items be considered.

2. That the decisions made on the planning applications be subject to the conditions

and/or made for the reasons set out in the attached reports unless otherwise stated. 3. That where reasons for decisions or conditions are not included or not as included

in the reports relating to an individual item, they be clearly specified. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 4 The council’s powers to consider planning business are detailed in Article 8 which

describes the role and functions of the planning committee and Article 10 which describes the role and functions of community councils. These were agreed by the constitutional meeting of the Council on May 23 2007 and amended on January 30 2008. The matters reserved to the planning committee and community councils Exercising Planning Functions are described in part 3F of the Southwark council constitution 2007/08. These functions were delegated to the planning committee.

KEY ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION 5. Members are asked to determine the attached applications in respect of site(s)

within the borough. 6. Each of the following items is preceded by a map showing the location of the

land/property to which the report relates. Following the report, there is a draft decision notice detailing the officer's recommendation indicating approval or refusal. The draft decision notice will detail the reasons for any approval or refusal.

7. Applicants have the right to appeal to the First Secretary of State against a refusal

of planning permission and against any condition imposed as part of permission. If the appeal is dealt with by public inquiry then fees may be incurred through employing Counsel to present the Council's case.

11

8. The sanctioning of enforcement action can also involve costs such as process serving, Court costs and of legal representation.

9. Where either party is felt to have acted unreasonably in an appeal involving a public

inquiry or informal hearing the inspector can make an award of costs against the offending party.

10. All legal/Counsel fees and costs as well as awards of costs against the Council are

borne by the Regeneration and Neighbourhoods budget. EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES ON THOSE AFFECTED 11. Equal opportunities considerations are contained within each item. SUPPLEMENTARY ADVICE FROM OTHER OFFICERS Strategic Director of Legal and Democratic Services 12. A resolution to grant planning permission shall mean that the Head of Development

Control is authorised to grant planning permission. The resolution does not itself constitute the permission and only the formal document authorised by the Committee and issued under the signature of the Head of Development Control shall constitute a planning permission. Any additional conditions required by the Committee will be recorded in the Minutes and the final planning permission issued will reflect the requirements of the Community Council.

13. A resolution to grant planning permission subject to legal agreement shall mean

that the Head of Development Control is authorised to issue a planning permission subject to the applicant and any other necessary party entering into a written agreement in a form of words prepared by the Strategic Director of Legal and Democratic Services, and which is satisfactory to the Head of Development Control. Developers meet the Council's legal costs of such agreements. Such an agreement shall be entered into under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or under another appropriate enactment as shall be determined by the Strategic Director of Legal and Democratic Services. The planning permission will not be issued unless such an agreement is completed.

14. Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended requires the

Council to have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations when dealing with applications for planning permission. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 provides that where, in making any determination under the planning Acts, regard is to be had to the development plan and the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

15. The development plan is currently the Southwark Plan (UDP) 2007 adopted by

the council in July 2007 and the London Plan (consolidated with alterations since 2004) published in February 2008. The enlarged definition of “development plan”

12

arises from s38(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Where there is any conflict with any policy contained in the development plan, the conflict must be resolved in favour of the policy which is contained in the last document to be adopted, approved or published, as the case may be (s38(5) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

16. Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 introduced the concept

of planning obligations. Planning obligations may take the form of planning agreements or unilateral undertakings and may be entered into by any person who has an interest in land in the area of a local planning authority. Planning obligations may only:

1. restrict the development or use of the land; 2. require operations or activities to be carried out in, on, under or over the

land; 3. require the land to be used in any specified way; or 4. require payments to be made to the local planning authority on a specified

date or dates or periodically. Planning obligations are enforceable by the planning authority against the person

who gives the original obligation and/or their successor/s. 17. Government policy on planning obligations is contained in the Office of the Deputy

Prime Minister Circular 05/2005. Provisions of legal agreements must fairly and reasonably relate to the provisions of the development plan and to planning considerations affecting the land. The obligations must also be such as a reasonable planning authority, duly appreciating its statutory duties, can properly impose, i.e. it must not be so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have imposed it. Before resolving to grant planning permission subject to a legal agreement Members should therefore satisfy themselves that the subject matter of the proposed agreement will meet these tests.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

Background Papers Held At Contact Council Assembly Agenda May 23 2007 and Council Assembly Agenda January 30 2008

Constitutional Support Services, Southwark Town Hall, Peckham Road SE5 8UB

[relevant Community Council officer] 020 7525 ----

Each application has a separate planning case file

Council Offices Chiltern Portland Street London SE27 3ES

The named case Officer as listed or Gary Rice 020 7525 5447

13

APPENDIX 1 Audit Trail Lead Officer Deborah Collins, Strategic Director of Legal & Democratic

Services Report Author Ellen FitzGerald, Principal Planning Lawyer (NZ Qualified)

Constitutional Support Officer Version Final Dated March 21 2008 Key Decision No CONSULTATION WITH OTHER OFFICERS / DIRECTORATES / EXECUTIVE MEMBER Officer Title Comments Sought Comments includedStrategic Director of Legal and Democratic Services

Yes Yes

Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods

No No

Head of Development Control No No

14

ITEMS ON AGENDA OF THE BOROUGH AND BANKSIDE CC on Tuesday 14 October 2008

1-3 SILEX STREET, LONDON, SE1 0DW Full Planning Permission

Site Appl. Type Reg. No. 08-AP-0224

TP/1443-1 TP No. Cathedrals Ward

Officer Susannah Pettit

Change of use of existing 2nd and 3rd floor (loft) storage areas to create 20 single person flats to be used for Student Housing Accommodation.

Proposal Recommendation Item 1/1 GRANT

82 BOROUGH HIGH STREET, LONDON, SOUTHWARK, SE1 1LLFull Planning Permission

Site Appl. Type Reg. No. 08-AP-1447

TP/1140-82 TP No. Cathedrals Ward

Officer Donald Hanciles

Erection of two additional floors and a first floor and four storey rear extension together with removal of the front elevation wall (to be remodelled) and part conversion of existing 4 storey (plus basement) commercial building to provide commercial floor space in the basement and at ground floor (Class A2) and offices (B1) on the first floor and 6, one bedroom and 1, two bedroomed flats located over the 2nd to 5th floors

Proposal Recommendation Item 1/2 GRANT SUBJECT TO LEGAL AGREEMENT

CCAgenda.rpt 15

Scale 1/1250

Date 19/8/2008

1-3 Silex Street

Claire Cook© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. London Borough of Southwark.OS Licence (0)100019252

16

Item No

1

Classification OPEN

Decision Level BOROUGH AND BANKSIDE COMMUNITY COUNCIL

Date 14 October 2008

From HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

Title of Report DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

Proposal (08-AP-0224) Change of use of existing 2nd and 3rd floor (loft) storage areas to create 20 single person flats to be used for Student Housing Accommodation.

Address 1-3 SILEX STREET, LONDON, SE1 0DW Ward Cathedrals

PURPOSE

1 To consider the above application, which was deferred at the Borough and Bankside

Commuinity Council meeting, for the reason set out below, on 1 September 2008. It had been referred to the Community Council due to the number of objections received.

RECOMMENDATION

2 Grant Permission with conditions and legal agreement to secure no parking permits for future occupiers of the proposal.

BACKGROUND

3 4 5 6

Reasons and responses to why the application having been deferred Determination of the application was deferred for further information on access for people with disabilities The applicant has submitted a further Access Statement. It states that the development will comply with part M of the Building Regulations as reasonable provision shall be made for people to gain access to use the building and its facilities. There are areas where the proposal would deviate from the recommendations in Part M and these are addressed in the applicant's Access Statement. A stair lift is proposed rather than a through floor passenger lift taking into account the intervention that would be required to the proposed building, namely alterations to the existing concrete floors in the building, and having had regard to the low level of likely usage. In these circumstances a lift is not considered to be a practical option and a stair lift would be a more feasible option. In relation to emergency egress the applicant proposes that this should be addressed within the occupiers fire escape management strategy which would need to be approved under the Building Regulations before the property is occupied. There is no car parking associated with the development and a bay cannot beaccommodated on street due to the narrow width of Silex St. To allow for disabled (wheelchair) access a parking bay would normally be required. This makes the development generally unsuitable for wheelchair users, but not impossible as some

17

7 8 9 10 11

users may have alterative transport options to a private car such as 'Dial a Ride' operated by Transport for London. The applicant has specified that alterations to the front entrance would be required to provide a level threshold to the street, including alterations to the front doors to provide a ramp arrangement, and their view is that the only practicable way of achieving this would involve works to the pavement including part of the ramp and landing arrangement being constructed over the footpath. Such works are not normally acceptable as they would obstruct pedestrian access. A chair lift would be an acceptable option inside the building but the works required to the exterior would be unlikely to be acceptable in relation to pedestrian movement. In the circumstances, it is considered that the applicant has explored the provision of inclusive access to the building but in the circumstances the constraints of the existing building would preclude the provision of wheelchair accessible units. The provision of a stairlift should therefore not be insisted upon. The Access Officer was re-consulted on, and commented as follows; "It is not a legal requirement of Part M to install a lift for such a proposal. The decision to install a lift is a commercial decision taken by the developer. Site constraints and the nature of the existing building remove the necessity for a lift." The recommendation remains to grant consent subject to the recommendation previously tabled. The previous report is attached as an appendix. Appendix

Item No

Classification OPEN

Decision Level BOROUGH AND BANKSIDE COMMUNITY COUNCIL

Date 1/09/2008

From HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

Title of Report DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

Proposal (08-AP-0224) Change of use of existing 2nd and 3rd floor (loft) storage areas to create 20 single person flats to be used for Student Housing Accommodation.

Address 1-3 SILEX STREET, LONDON, SE1 0DW Ward Cathedrals

PURPOSE

1 To consider the above application, which was deferred at the Borough and Bankside

18

Commuinity Council meeting of 1 September 2008. It had been referred to the Community Council due to the number of objections received.

RECOMMENDATION

2 Grant Permission with conditions and legal agreement. BACKGROUND

3 4 5 6

Site location and description The application site (Garavi Gujari House) comprises a four storey warehouse building located on the south side of Silex Street (where the main entrance is) it also has a frontage facing Boyfield Street. The ground and first floors of the building are in use as Garavi Gujarat printing company. This includes a printing area on the ground floor, (B2 use) and associated offices (B1) on the first floor. The upper two floors, to which this application relates, are currently vacant, although their most recent use was as associated storage for the printers. The applicant claims that the upper floors have been vacant for a period of approximately 8 years. There is an area of approximately 30sqm to the eastern end of the site, which is currently used for parking for the printing office, and refuse storage. Surrounding uses are residential blocks of flats, of similar heights to the subject building. There is a nearby large residential development under construction, detailed below. The site is located within the Borough and Bankside Opportunity Area, Central Activity Zone, and Borough and Bankside Action Area. The building is not listed, neither is the area a conservation area.

Details of proposal

7 The application seeks permission to develop the top two floors of the building to form 20 student flats. There would be shared bathroom and kitchen/sitting areas on each of the two floors. Each bedroom would measure approximately 20sqm and would have a window. Access to the units would be from Silex Street, and there is one entrance at either end of the building. There is no lift. There would be cycle parking for 22 cycles, 3 x 250L wheelie bins, and 3 x 50L bins for recycling, in a fenced off area to the existing parking area. The density of the scheme has been calculated as follows; Habitable Rooms: 20 Site Area : 0.038 ha 20/0.038 = 526 HR/Ha

Planning history

8 06-AP-2439: Planning permission was granted on 30/03/07 at 1 Silex Street for the change of use of existing disused storage loft (use class B8) to yoga centre (Use Class D2). 07-AP-1151 was granted on 11/09/07 for Variation of Condition 2 of planning permission dated 30 March 2007 [LBS ref: 06-AP-2439 for the change of use of

19

existing disused storage (use class B8) loft to Yoga Healthy Living Centre (use class D2)] to allow extended hours of use to between 10.00am to 8.00pm Monday to Friday and 10.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays with a maximum attendance of 50 on Monday to Friday and 35 on Saturday.

Planning history of adjoining sites

9 05-AP-0495 was granted on 21/2/06 (with legal agreement) Demolition of existing buildings on the site bounded by Southwark Bridge Road/Webber Street/Belvedere Buildings (excluding 98 Webber Street & adjoining electricity substation) & erection of a mixed use development comprising commercial (office/light industrial uses), and alternative retail, financial/professional services and/or restaurant, snack bar or café uses, & 164 housing units within new buildings of lower ground & part 3 storeys (fronting Belvedere Buildings) & part 4 to part 8-storeys (fronting Southwark Bridge Road/Webber Street), and basement car parking (31 spaces) with vehicular access from Webber Street, & cycle store, refuse store & landscaping/amenity space.

FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION

Main Issues

10 The main issues in this case are:

a] the principle of the development in terms of land use and conformity with strategic policies. b] The acceptability of the proposal in terms of quality of accommodation.

Planning Policy

11 Southwark Plan 2007 [July]

Policy 1.4 Employment sites outside the Preferred Office Locations and Preferred Industrial Locations Policy 1.5 Small Business Units Policy 3.1 Environmental effects Policy 3.2 Protection of Amenity Policy 3.3 Sustainability Assessment Policy 3.4 Energy Efficiency Policy 3.5 Renewable energy Policy 3.6 Air Quality Policy 3.7 Waste Reduction Policy 3.9 Water Policy 3.12 Quality in Design Policy 3.28 Biodiversity Policy 4.1 Density of Residential development Policy 4.2 Quality of Residential Accommodation Policy 4.3 Mix of Dwellings Policy 4.4 Affordable Housing Policy 4.7 Non Self Contained Housing for Identified User Groups Policy 5.2 Transport Impacts Policy 5.3 Walking and Cycling Policy 5.6 Car Parking Policy 6.2 London Bridge Opportunity Area Policy 7.4 Bankside & Borough Action Area SPD/SPG

20

Draft Residential Design Standards SPD Jan 2008

London Plan 2004 Policy 2A.4 The Central Activities Zone Policy 2A.5 Opportunity Areas Policy 3A.1 – 2 Housing Policy 3A.5 Housing Choice Policy 3A.6 Quality of new housing provision Policy 3A.8 Definition of Affordable Housing Policy 3C.22 Improving conditions for cycling Policy 3C.23 Parking Strategy Policy 4A.3 Sustainable design and construction Policy 4A.4 Energy Assessment Policy 4A.7 Renewable Energy Policy 4A.19 Improving air quality

Planning Policy Guidance [PPG] and Planning Policy Statements [PPS] PPS1 Sustainable Development PPS3 Housing PPG 24 Planning and Noise PPS25 Flood Risk

Consultations

12 Site Notice: 01/05/08

Site visit: 15/05/08 Present: Amrish Patel (agent), Mr K. Solanki (applicant) Susannah Pettit (case officer) Press Notice: N/A

Internal ConsulteesAccess Officer Traffic group Environmental Protection Waste Management Planning Policy Statutory and non-statutory consultees Environment Agency

Neighbour consulteesOFFICES LINGFIELD HOUSE LANCASTER ESTAT LANCASTER STREET LONDON SE1 0RW EFLAT 14 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD GROUND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR AND PART SECOND FLOOR 1-2 SILEX STREET LONDON SE1 0DP PART SECOND FLOOR 1-2 SILEX STREET LONDON SE1 0DP 92 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0QN FLAT 1-24 (inc) BROOKWOOD HOUSE LANCASTER ESTATE WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RJ FLAT 1-33 LINGFIELD HOUSE LANCASTER ESTATE LANCASTER STREET LONDON SE1 0RW FLAT 1 MATHIESON COURT KING JAMES STREET LONDON SE1 0SA FLAT 1-24 (inc) ALBURY BUILDINGS BOYFIELD STREET LONDON SE1 0SB FLAT 1-12 (inc) CLANDON BUILDINGS BOYFIELD STREET LONDON SE1 0SD FLAT 1 -16 (inc) GIBBINGS HOUSE LANCASTER ESTATE KING JAMES STREE LONDON SE1 0DL TFLAT 1-32 (inc) MATHIESON COURT KING JAMES STREET LONDON SE1 0SA FLAT 1-12 (inc) 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 15, 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0R DFLAT 16 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 18 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 19 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 20, WATERLOO MANSIONS 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 21 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 22 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD

21

2 SILEX STREET LONDON SE1 0DP 59A WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RF PART THIRD FLOOR NORTH 1-2 SILEX STREET LONDON SE1 0DP PART THIRD FLOOR SOUTH 1-2 SILEX STREET LONDON SE1 0DP ALBURY BUILDINGS BOYFIELD STREET LONDON SE1 0SB CLANDON BUILDINGS BOYFIELD STREET LONDON SE1 0SD GIBBINGS HOUSE LANCASTER ESTATE KING JAMES STREET LONDON SE1 0DL MATHIESON COURT KING JAMES STREET LONDON SE1 0SA LINGFIELD HOUSE LANCASTER ESTATE LANCASTER STREET LONDON SE1 0RW BROOKWOOD HOUSE LANCASTER ESTATE WEBBER STREET LONDON S 1 0RJ EGATEWAY TRAINING CENTRE 66 LANCASTER STREET LONDON SE1 0RZ 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 12A 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD FLAT 12B 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0R DFLAT 17 59 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RD STOPHER HOUSE 90 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RE FLAT 1-60 (inc) STOPHER HOUSE 90 WEBBER STREET LONDON SE1 0RE Flat G 3 Dunnage Crescent London SE16 1FJ Re-consultation N/A

Consultation replies

Internal Consultees

Access Officer: There is no passenger lift in the proposal and it is proposed to be "car free" therefore it is not required to have wheelchair accessible accommodation units. Traffic Group: No car parking has been offered as part of this scheme, I understand that the existing car park is used by the premises on the ground floor and do not form part of this application. The applicant is willing to enter into a S106 to exempt all occupiers of this development at a cost of £2,750. I have concerns with the cycle storage provision. In order to access this area, you must enter via the refuse store, this is not ideal and as such, should be looked at again. The doors to the cycle store open inwards which may be detrimental to user safety and hinder the use of the first three stands. Environmental Protection Team (EPT): The scheme would appear to meet all aspects for which EPT would like to comment. If this fell into the category of HMO we would be concerned at the lack of commmon / recreational facilities, although this would be available in University accommodation close by if this is fully to be taken up by the target user group. Waste Management: The 20 student flats would generate in the region of 733 ltrs of residual waste and 419 ltrs of recyclates, as opposed to 1500 ltrs of residual waste and 1000 ltrs of recyclates for 20 standard 1 bed flats. Planning Policy: "The letter received with this application from KCL should state that the educational establishment will make use of the proposed student accommodation. It is recommended that further clarification is sought from KCL to confirm that this will be the case. The development proposed is within Flood Zone 3 and therefore a flood risk assessment is required to be submitted with the application. Environmental Performance In order to comply with policy 3.1 I would check with the applicant that the environmental effects of the proposal have been considered and that no material adverse effects on the environment will ensue. There is no reference to the energy efficiency of the development. In accordance with Policy 3.4 all developments must be designed to maximise energy efficiency and reduce energy consumption. I would seek clarification that the energy efficiency of the proposal has been considered. Policy 3.5 states that planning permission will not be granted for development unless it incorporates renewable energy technology and design where this would not adversely affect the viability of the development. There is no evidence submitted with the application that the use of renewable technologies has been considered. I would

22

recommend seeking further investigation into the potential for use of renewable technologies in this proposal." Statutory and non-statutory consultees Environment Agency: No objections to the proposal.

Neighbour consultees5 Waterloo Mansions, 59 Webber Street: Objection on the grounds that the traffic in the road has already been put under pressure by the numerous developments the Council have already approved within the immediate proximity. The noise pollution has become horrendous. The services in the area cannot support more people. I cannot bear any more bulldozers or cement mixers ruining my life. There are already two developments in my street, isn't that enough? The noise and traffic from them has proved to be bad enough for me to consider selling and moving home. 20 Stopher House: Objection on the grounds that there would be a possible increase in noise, and there are already noise issues with existing student accommodation in the area. There would be extra traffic created, and extra parking would be required. There are rarely free parking spaces for existing resident permit holders. 20 Waterloo Mansions, 59 Webber Street: No objections in principle, however, would like the Committee to take the following points into account. - how will additional traffic be accommodated without danger? - local residents have encountered problems with noise in the way of late night parties, shouting and electronic music from the relatively new student residence in Pocock Street. How will the university guarantee no further noise nuisance if this proposal goes ahead? Re-consultation N/A

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

13

Principle of development The principle of developing the site away from B use classes (employment) is acceptable. The applicant has demonstrated sufficient attempts at marketing the site. Evidence submitted is as follows;

− Copy of front page of advert from London Office Guide (summer 2004) advertising 1 Silex Street as “2 studio suites, one open plan and the other partitioned with a darkroom that can be converted into an office. Both have good natural light with skylight and windows to two sides.” £16.75 psf.

− Schedule created by the applicant showing when emailed requests to advertise the property were sent to estate agents, and details when requests for help were submitted to estate agents.

− Summary created by applicant which states that the property has been vacant for 4 years or so, and that the effort of the company has been to get the property rented out on lease. Methods of advertising the property are described as ‘appointing Estate Agents; advertising on property websites, displayed To Let sign on premises, attended walk in enquiries, over the phone and in person, approached interested parties personally, and showed flexibility in approach and in terms and conditions for letting out.’ The summary states that despite viewings, nothing came of them. Estate Agents used were Edwards Estate Agents (where there is an advert running at time of writing), and Kalmars Properties.

− The property was also advertised on Hooper Naylor Friend website, (for £12

23

14 15 16

psf., and egpropertylink.com. There is also evidence that the property was advertised on Loot.com.

− The applicant has also supplied a letter from Kalmars Commercial dated 25/05/05, summarising a meeting and confirming the instruction to market the site.

− A letter from Edwards Commercial Agents dated 16/06/05, confirming instruction to market the site, and stating that the fee would be 10% plus VAT of the first year's income per lease, and 10% plus VAT on rent reviews.

− A letter from Hooper Naylor Friend dated 20/2/06 confirming the instruction to market the property and a copy of the advert.

In summary, it would appear that a convincing attempt to dispose of the property for business use has been demonstrated and the proposal therefore complies with policy 1.4 which requires 24 months convincing marketing to have been carried out before the B use can be altered to other uses. In terms of demonstrating a local demand for student housing, the applicant has supplied the following;

− A letter dated 23 April 2008 from London City College, stating that there is a serious shortage of affordable student accommodation in the Waterloo area, and that the university would be happy to discuss a long term agreement for the proposed units.

− Email from Dave Woodland (Kings College London – Accommodation) dated 28/04/08, stating that there is currently a shortage of accommodation at the Waterloo campus, and he would be pleased to discuss a management lease offer for the 20 units, for the year 2008-2009 at a rental rate of £185 per week, excl. charges and RPI.

- Letter from London School of Law, (part of KCL) stating that they would be willing to consider undertaking available units. The proposal is also in accordance with the guidelines in the Draft Residential Design standards Supplementary Planning Document (paragraph 4.3).

17

Environmental impact assessment None required.

18 19

Impact of proposed development on amenity of adjoining occupiers and surrounding area It is not considered that the amenity of the area would be adversely affected by the proposal. The area is typically vibrant and in close proximity to colleges and central London services, making it an ideal location for student accommodation. There are residential blocks of flats in the surrounding streets. The area is relatively quiet despite its central location and high density. The proposed scheme would have a density of 544 Habitable rooms per hectare, and this is below the lower parameter for the Central Activities Zone (which is set at 650). Calculation as follows;

Total non-residential floorspace: 808m2 (NR) Residential Habitable Rooms: 20 (HR) Density Calculation: D = (NRsqm/27.5) + HR/Ha

D= (808/27.5) + 20/0.0404 = 544 habitable rooms per hectare It is accepted that the introduction of student flats in the building would increase activity in the area somewhat, but the upper floors of the building are currently vacant, so the introduction of a new activity would increase localised noise. However it is not considered that the proposed use would increase the noise and disturbance levels

24

20 21

unreasonably, particularly considering the urban location of the site. In terms of the objection regarding disturbance from building works and site traffic, these issues fall outside the areas of control covered by planning legislation. However, the only works would be taking place within the building, as such, minimal disturbance would be inflicted outside. The works would require input from the Buidling Control team, and Building Regulations would control hours of operation of building noise, control of dust etc. In terms of amenity for the future residents of the site, each of the study bedrooms has a floor area of approximately 20sqm. There are no minimum floorspace standards in the Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance 2008, stipulating how large a study bedroom in a hall of residence should be. However considering that the kitchen and bathroom facilities are shared, 20sqm is considered adequate. The ceilings in the building are particularly high, being industrial height storeys, therefore this would create an added feeling of space. There are 2 communal wash areas (one on each floor) and 2 communal kitchen/dining rooms. The proposal is considered to meet policy 3.2 Protection of Amenity due to the fact that the increase in activity in the area is expected in an urban location, and the use is considered to be an appropriate one for the Central Activity Zone.

22 23

Impact of adjoining and nearby uses on occupiers and users of proposed development The presence of the printing workshop on the ground floor has been considered. However, at the time of site visit, the printing press was unable to be heard from the 2nd or 3rd floors. Despite the site visit being held at a peak time of performance during the day, due to its location on the ground floor, and the buffer of first floor offices between this and the 2nd floor proposal area, and also the thick industrial floors, the press was unable to be heard. It is considered pertinent to add a condition to require a Noise Survey to be undertaken, in the instance of any additional equipment being used on the ground floor, which may increase noise levels unreasonably. It is therefore considered that the proposal is in accordance with policy 3.2 Protection of Amenity.

24 25

Traffic issues There is a small area to the east of the site which is currently used as parking for the occupiers of the printing business. The applicant has confirmed that no parking would be available to the prospective students occupying the site, and this is secured by the inclusion of a legal agreement to exempt the future occupants of the site from applying for and obtaining car parking permits within the surrounding Controlled Parking Zone. This addresses concerns in relation to parking, raised in consultation with residents. Cycle parkingConcerns from the Transport Group have been addressed, the applicant has provided clarification on the layout of the cycle area, a sliding door would allow access without conflict with the cycle stands. Subsequent conversations with the transport group have revealed that the proposed cycle storage area shown on drawing ARP/ST/08/21 rev E, is convenient, secure and weatherproof. implementation as shown should be required as a condition of any consent granted. Waste Management

25

26 The applicant has amended plans since the Waste Management Officer commented, and there is now an acceptable solution on terms of storage and capacity for storing waste. The applicant also forwarded a Waste Management Strategy. Compliance with the Strategy should be required as a condition of any consent granted. This is in accordance with policy 3.7 Waste Reduction.

27

Design issues There are no external alterations proposed to the building, therefore no adverse impact is envisaged to the design of the host building, or the appearance of the surrounding street scene.

28

Impact on character and setting of a listed building and/or conservation area There are no listed buildings or conservation areas within the vicinity that are likely to be affected by the proposal.

29

Planning obligations [S.106 undertaking or agreement] A contribution of £2,750 is being sought from the applicant for an amendments to the Traffic Management Order to reflect an exemption of the future residents of the site from obtaining parking permits.

30 31 32 33

Other matters Energy EfficiencyThe applicant states in a letter dated 29/02/08, that the proposal is to use a central micro CHP unit for heating and electricity. The existing windows will be replaced with double glazed e-glass, and prior to work, a SBEM calculation as part of BuildingRegulation part L compliance certificate will be issued. It is considered that a condition should be added to ensure that any external alterations be subject to planning control, as no elevational drawings have been considered as part of this application. Flood riskThe site falls within a flood risk zone 3, and as such a flood risk assessment was submitted with the application. The proposed scheme meets the Planning Policy Statement 25 sequential test and the Exception test. The proposal site is located on previously developed land and there are strong sustainability reasons why the site should be reused. It has good access to public transport and is capable of providing student housing on a site which has been identified as meeting a local need. It is within the Borough and Bankside Action area which is recognised within the Southwark Plan as being an area of intense development interest for a variety of land uses; and where retail, office, residential, culture and tourism uses should be protected and enhanced. For these reasons, it is considered that the Exception Test is met in relation to the development of this site within a high probability flood risk zone. The Environment Agency has confirmed that they have no objections to the proposal based on the Flood Risk Assessment submitted by the applicant, subject to conditions on floor levels and an evacuation plan which are recommended if consent is granted. Subject to the evacuation plan condition the scheme would be in accordance with Policy 3.9 Water of the Southwark Plan and with PPS25 Development and Flood Risk. The floor level condition is not considered necessary to impose as the plans show the development to be at 2nd and 3rd floor levels.

26

34

Conclusion The proposal is acceptable for the reason that sufficient evidence has been supplied, pertaining to both the extent of marketing of the site, and the requirement for student housing in the area. The proposed units would provide an adequate standard of living for students.

COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT

35 In line with the Council's Community Impact Statement the impact of this application

has been assessed as part of the application process with regard to local people in respect of their age, disability, faith/religion, gender, race and ethnicity and sexualorientation. Consultation with the community has been undertaken as part of the application process.

a] The impact on local people is set out above. b] The following issues relevant to particular communities/groups likely to be affected

by the proposal have been identified as potential problems with parking and activity in the area.

c] The likely adverse or less good implications for any particular communities/groups

have been also been discussed above. Specific actions to ameliorate these implications are the inclusion of a legal agreement to secure a payment of £2,750 towards amending the Traffic Management Order so that future residents are unable to apply for parking permits.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS

36 The currently vacant upper floors of the building would be brought back into beneficial

use, and much needed student accommodation would be provided.

LEAD OFFICER Gary Rice Head of Development Control REPORT AUTHOR Susannah Pettit Planning Officer - Development Control

[tel. 020 7525 5405] CASE FILE TP/1443-1 Papers held at: Regeneration Department, Council Offices, Chiltern, Portland Street

SE17 2ES [tel. 020 7525 5403

27

RECOMMENDATION

This document shows the case officer's recommended decision for the application referred to below. This document is not a decision notice for this application.

Applicant Mr K. Solanki

GG Property Ltd Reg. Number 08-AP-0224

Application Type Full Planning Permission Recommendation Grant Case

Number TP/1443-1

Draft of Decision Notice

Planning Permission was GRANTED for the following development: Change of use of existing 2nd and 3rd floor (loft) storage areas to create 20 single person flats to be used for

Student Housing Accommodation.

At: 1-3 SILEX STREET, LONDON, SE1 0DW In accordance with application received on 28/01/2008 and Applicant's Drawing Nos. ARP/08/02 rev A , ARP/ST/08/21 rev E, Flood Risk Assessment (undated) Response document - 'Comments in response to email of 15/5/08' dated 21/4/08 Subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the end of three years from the date of this permission. Reason As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended

2 Prior to commencement of the use hereby approved, a Noise Survey including appropriate mitigation measures, as appropriate, in accordance with PPG 24 Planning and Noise, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and any details approved thereto shall be implemented prior to occupation and retained as such thereafter Reason: In order to ensure that noise levels audible within the student accommodation hereby approved, remain acceptable in accordance with policy 3.2 Protection of Amenity of the Southwark Plan 2007.

3 Prior to the occupation of the site for the use hereby permitted, an evacuation plan covering flood evacuation and escape routes, in house warning system, signage within and outside the buildings, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved works and the evacuation plan shall be implemented in full from the date that the building is occupied. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the development in accordance with PPS 25 Development and Flood Risk and Policies 3.2 Protection of amenity and 3.9 Water of the Southwark Plan 2007.

4 The refuse storage arrangements set out in the 'Comments in response to e-mail of 15/5/08 dated 21/4/08 including the Waste Management Strategy which is described, and as shown on Drawing No. ARP/ST/08/21 Rev E shall be implemented before those use hereby approved is commenced, and the facilities provided shall thereafter be retained and shall not be used or the allocated refuse/recyclables space used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of the Council as local planning authority. Reason In order that the Council may be satisfied that suitable facilities for the storage of refuse will be provided and retained in the interest of protecting the amenity of the site and the area in general from litter, odour and potential vermin/pest nuisance in accordance with Policies 3.2 'Protection of Amenity' and 3.7 'Waste Reduction' of the Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007.

5 The cycle storage facilities as shown on drawing ARP/ST/08/21 Rev E shall be provided before the use 28

hereby approved is commenced and thereafter such facilities shall be retained and the space used for no other purpose without prior written consent of the local planning authority. Reason To ensure that satisfactory safe and secure bicycle parking is provided and retained for the benefit of the users and occupiers of the building in order to encourage the use of alternative means of transport and to reduce reliance on the use of the private car in accordance with Policy 5.3 Walking and cycling of the Southwark Plan 2007.

Reasons for granting planning permission. This planning application was considered with regard to various policies including, but not exclusively: a] Policy 1.4 Employment sites outside the Preferred Office Locations and Preferred Industrial Locations,

Policy 1.5 Small Business Units, Policy 3.1 Environmental effects, Policy 3.2 Protection of Amenity, Policy 3.4 Energy Efficiency, Policy 3.5 Renewable energy, Policy 3.6 Air Quality, Policy 3.7 Waste Reduction, Policy 3.9 Water, Policy 3.12 Quality in Design, Policy 3.28 Biodiversity, Policy 4.1 Density of Residential development, Policy 4.2 Quality of Residential Accommodation, Policy 4.7 Non Self Contained Housing for Identified User Groups, Policy 5.2 Transport Impacts, Policy 5.3 Walking and Cycling, Policy 5.6 Car Parking, Policy 6.2 London Bridge Opportunity Area, Policy 7.4 Bankside & Borough Action Area of the Southwark Plan [July 2007].

b] Policy 2A.4 The Central Activities Zone, Policy 2A.5 Opportunity Areas, Policy 3A.1 – 2 Housing, Policy 3A.5 Housing Choice, Policy 3A.6 Quality of new housing provision, Policy 3A.8 Definition of Affordable Housing, Policy 3C.22 Improving conditions for cycling, Policy 3C.23 Parking Strategy, Policy 4A.3 Sustainable design and construction, Policy 4A.4 Energy Assessment, Policy 4A.7 Renewable Energy, Policy 4A.19 Improving air quality of the London Plan [2004].

c] PPS1 Sustainable Development, PS3 Housing, PPG 24 Planning and Noise, PPS25 Flood Risk Planning permission was granted as there are no, or insufficient, grounds to withhold consent on the basis of the policies considered and other material planning considerations.

Informatives

This planning application does not grant permission for external works to the building, such as alteration of windows. The applicant is advised that further planning permission is sought for any such external alterations.

The flood warning and evacuation plan should make it clear to occupants that in the event of a flood (breach of the tidal defences) they should remain in the building at the higher floors (ie 2nd to 3rd floors) and not evacuate the building (unless advised to by Authorities).

29

Item No.

2

Classification OPEN

Decision Level BOROUGH AND BANKSIDE COMMUNITY COUNCIL

Date 14/10/2008

From Head of Development Control

Title of Report DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

Proposal Erection of two additional floors a first floor extension and a four storey rear extension together with removal of the front elevation wall (to be remodelled) and part conversion of existing 4 storey (plus basement) commercial building to provide commercial floor space in the basement and at ground floor (Class A2) and offices (B1) on the first floor and 6, one bedroom and 1, two bedroomed flats located over the 2nd to 5th floors (08-AP-1447)

Address 82 BOROUGH HIGH STREET, LONDON, SOUTHWARK, SE1 1LL Ward Cathedrals

PURPOSE

1 To consider the above application which is for Community Council consideration due

to the number of representations received. RECOMMENDATION

2 Grant planning permission subject to conditions and a S106 agreement to secure

funds to change the existing Traffic Management Order to prevent future occupiers of the building from obtaining residents parking permits.

BACKGROUND

Site location and description 3 4 5

The application property comprises of a four storey mid terrace building located to the northern end of Borough High Street near its junction with Union Street. The site is currently vacant and has been for some time. It was last used as offices with an employment letting agency on the ground floor. The area is mixed in character with commercial, retail and residential uses. The application building is adjoined to the north and south by six and seven storey buildings with set backs at sixth and seventh floor level. The site is within the Borough High Street Conservation area, Preferred Office Location, Archaeological Priority Area, the Borough and Bankside Action Area and the Central Activity Zone. The site is also within a protected shopping frontage and a major town centre.

Details of proposal 6

The proposal under consideration is for the erection of two additional floors, an extension over the existing ground floor extension at first floor level and a four storey

30

7 8 9

rear extension, together with removal of the front elevation wall (to be remodelled). The proposed fifth floor is set back from the front elevation by 1.1 metre, the fourth floor is level with the existing front elevation. The extension to the rear is staggered at second and third floor levels to reduce the impact on adjoining properties but also to provide outside amenity areas for the flats. The proposed front elevation will be provided with a modern elevation, with glazed metal powder coated windows with brick and cladding detailing. The rear elevation window will be clad in a light weight render. The proposed terraces will comprise of decking with glass and steel balustrades. Further details of the materials will need to be conditioned. The proposal also includes the part conversion of the existing commercial building to provide commercial floor space in the basement and at ground floor (Class A2) and offices (B1) on the first floor. The existing floorspace comprises of 249 square metres (Class A use) and 225 square metres (Class B1 Use), the proposed comprises of 278 square metres (Class A2) and 216 square metres (Class B1) a loss of 9 square metres of office space. Six, one bedroom and 1, two bedroomed flats are also proposed and located over the 2nd to 5th floors. Amenity areas are to be provided in the form of outside terraces. Cycle, recycling and refuse storage is to be provided in the existing basement. Amendments were made to the proposed scheme with regards to the treatment of the front elevation. The changes involved adjustments to the fenestration to unify the upper floors and change of materials from tiles to a combination of brick and cementious board cladding combined with powder coated metal window frames.

Planning history 10 11 12

Planning permission was granted in April 1998 for the change of use of the ground floor from office to catering employment agency (Class A2). Advertisement consent was refused in August 2003 for the display of internally illuminated fascia sign on the ground floor of the building. An application for conservation area consent, reference 08-AP-1448, was submitted for consideration. However this was withdrawn as the application was not required as the proposal does not constitute substantial demolition.

Planning history of adjoining sites 13

Planning permission was granted in February 1990 for the erection of a single storey rear extension at 78-80 Borough High Street.

FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION

Main Issues

14 The main issues in this case are:

a] the principle of the development in terms of land use and conformity with strategic policies. b] transport impacts c] the impact on the character and appearance of the Borough High Street Conservation Area.

31

d] the impact on the amenity of adjoining occupiers in terms of outlook and sunlight/daylight infringements

Planning Policy

Southwark Plan 2007 [July] Policy 1.3 - Preferred Office Locations Policy 1.7 - Developments Within Town and Local Centres Policy 1.9 - Change of Use Within Protected Shopping Frontages Policy 2.5 - Planning Obligations Policy 3.2 - Protection of Amenity Policy 3.7 - Waste Reduction Policy 3.11 - Efficient Use of Land Policy 3.12 - Quality in Design Policy 3.13 - Urban Design Policy 3.16 - Conservation Areas Policy 3.18 - Setting of Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas and World Heritage SitesPolicy 3.19 - Archaeology Policy 4.2 - Quality of Residential Accommodation Policy 5.3 - Walking and Cycling Policy 7.4 - Bankside and Borough Action Area Within the Central Activities Zone

London Plan 2004 London Plan consolidated with alterations since 2004 (Feb 2008) 3A.3 - Maximising the potential of sites 3B.2 - Office demand and supply 3B.3 - Mixed use developments 3C.1 - Integrating transport and development 3C.2 - Matching development to transport capacity 3C.3 - Sustainable transport in London 3C.17 - Tackling congestion and reducing traffic 3C.21 - Improving conditions for walking 3C.22 - Improving conditions for cycling 3C.23 - Parking strategy 4B.1 -Design principles 4B.5 - Creating an inclusive environment 5B.1 - The strategic priorities for Central London SPDSPD Residential Design Standards (adopted September 2008)

Planning Policy Guidance [PPG] and Planning Policy Statements [PPS] PPS1 - Delivering sustainable development Planning Policy Guidance Note No. 3 'Housing' - The Government is committed to maximising the re-use of previously developed land and empty properties.....in order to promote regeneration and minimise the amount of Greenfield sites being taken up for development. PPG 13 - Transport PPG 15 - Planning and the Historic Environment PPG 16 - Archaeology

Consultations

32

Site Notice: 26 June 2007. Site visit unaccompanied at date of posting site notice. Subsequent site visits 30/07/2008 were accompanied by the applicants in order to assess the proposal from the rear and also with adjoining occupier at 80 Borough High Street to assess potential impact on the adjoining property. Press Notice: 27 June 2007

Internal Consultees Traffic Group Access Officer Environmental Protection Archeology Statutory and non-statutory consultees Environment Agency Transport for London Neighbour consultees

Front and Rear 229-231 Union Street London SE1 0LR Part Ground Floor 125, 125, Ground front, Basement, Ground Rear, First, Second, and Third Floors 127, 127, Basement and Ground Floors 131, 131, Zenith House 133-135, 141 Borough High Street SE1 1NP 76, Basement, ground, first , second, third, fourth, fifth 78-80, 78-80, Basement and Ground, First , Second and Third floors 82, 82, 84, 84-86, 88, 90, 92, 94, Borough High Street SE1 1LL 1B Maidstone Buildings Mews SE1 1GD 1 and 2 Kentish Buildings 125 Borough High Street SE1 1NP

Re-consultation As above

Consultation replies

Internal Consultees

Traffic Group - no objections subject to funds being secured through a S106 agreement to prevent future occupiers from applying for parking permit. Access Officer - no objections subject to access and doorways complying with part M of the Building Regulations. Environmental Protection - no objections, comment that the guidelines quoted of 55 dBA for outdoor noise levels being acceptable to prevent community annoyance in line with PPG 24 and WHO guidelines. Archaeology Officer - No objection subject to conditions Statutory and non-statutory consultees Environment Agency - no response Transport for London - no objections subject to a car free agreement and minimum cycle storage provision.

Neighbour consultees

33

80 Borough High Street (commercial property) - no objections in principle concerns in respect to the impact on the appearance of the building and conservation area, raised concerns on non material planning grounds about noise and disruption to pedestrian and vehicular traffic on Borough High Street. Also concerned about means of escape which runs through the application site. Turkish Bank, 84 Borough High Street - raised concerns on late consultation and non material planning grounds in respect to emergency rights of access through the application site and noise during construction works. Nico Ltd 78 Borough High Street - object on grounds of light infringement. Also objected on non material planning grounds with regards to health and safety for pedestrian and vehicular flow on Borough High Street and noise during construction works. Stiles Harold Williams - raised objections as managing agents for 80 Borough High Street on the grounds of light infringement, the design of the proposed front elevation not in keeping with Southwark's architectural heritage being in a conservation area and the residential use being inappropriate in a commercial area. Also raised issues on non material planning grounds with regards to the existing means of escape through the application building, health and safety, noise and disturbance during construction. Southwark Cyclists - request that a condition is imposed on any permission granted for provision of 130% secure cycle parking for permanent residents and 30% for employees and a further 20 cycle spaces should be provided within 50 metres of the site. Re-Consultation Stiles Harold Williams - raised objections as managing agents for 80 Borough High Street on the grounds of light infringement, the design of the proposed front elevation not in keeping with Southwark's architectural heritage being in a conservation area and the residential use being inappropriate in a commercial area and potential loss of amenity for future occupiers of the development. Also raised issues on non material planning grounds with regards to the existing means of escape through the application building, health and safety, noise and disturbance during construction.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

15 16

Principle of development The proposal involves erection of two additional floors and a first floor extension and a four storey rear extension to provide a mixed use of commercial and residential. The location of the application property in a Preferred Office Location means that Policy 1.3 of the UDP is applicable in this instance. The policy states that "within these areas, development of sites or floorspace with an establish employment use will be permitted, provided that the proposal would not result in a net loss of office floorspace in Class B use". Although the proposal results in the loss of nine square metres of floor space which is technically contrary to policy, this is considered negligible, given the relatively small amount of floorspace concerned. However, as this is a small area and the amount of overall commercial floorspace is increased by twenty nine square metres, this will not have an impact on job opportunities within the Borough, and is likely to increase them. Given that the ground floor was last used as an employment agency (Class A2), and the fact that the application site is within a Town Centre location means that Policy 1.7 (170 ii & iv) is applicable in this instance. The Policy states that within the centres, the LPA will permit developments providing a range of uses, including retail and services, leisure, entertainment and community, civic, cultural and tourism, residential and employment (Class B1) uses, where the following criteria are met.

34

17 18

Section 170 (ii) states that the proposal should not harm the vitality and viability of the centre and (iv) Any floorspace currently in A Class use should be retained or replaced, unless the proposed use provides a direct service to the general public and the proposal would not harm the retail vitality and viability of the centre (where the proposed site is located within a protected shopping frontage, the proposal should comply with Policy 1.9. The proposal accords with this policy in that the ground floor would be retained for A2 purposes. However, taking into account the requirements of Policy 1.9, the proposal is acceptable in that it would not result in the loss of an A1 use. The introduction of residential use combined with a net increase in the commercial floorspace raises no policy issues notwithstanding that there is a very marginal shortfall in the office space which is compensated for by the overall increase in the total commercial floorspace, and that the A2 use is retained on the ground floor thus maintaining the active frontage.

19

Environmental impact assessment A formal EIA was not required taking into account that the site was previously developed and taking into account the impacts of the development in this context.

20 21

Impact of proposed development on amenity of adjoining occupiers and surrounding area The proposed development would be unlikely to have a negative impact on adjoining properties in so far as potential light infringement, loss of privacy or loss of outlook are concerned. Given that the application site is a mid terrace property that is currently lower by two storeys, than the adjoining buildings, infilling the gap which is between flank walls of the adjoining buildings by additional floors would have no detrimental impact. Although the ground floor of the adjoining property is served by roof lights to the rear, this is adjacent to the first floor extension at the rear. Given that the area of the ground floor in question is used for commercial purposes and the fact that the proposed development is increased by only one storey at this end it is unlikely that this would reduce the light levels into the ground floor of the adjoining property. Furthermore the roof light is unobstructed as the extension proposed will still allow adequate light into the building from above.

22 23

Impact of adjoining and nearby uses on occupiers and users of proposed development It is not envisaged that there would be any amenity issues for future occupiers of the development notwithstanding the location of air conditioning units along the southernboundary of the adjoining building at no. 84 Borough High Street. The fact that these units are relatively distant from the proposed residential units, a noise assessment was submitted in support of the application. The noise report confirms that noise levels expected at around 25dBa with open windows to the rear west facing units is below the acceptable standard of 30 dBa as set by the World Health Organisation. With regards to the outside terrace the expected ambient noise levels including the air conditioning units would be at an acceptable level of 33bDa which is marginally higher than the recommended level set by the WHO. With regards to external noise, the advice contained in PPG 24 'Planning and Noise' and the WHO state that general daytime noise levels of less than 55 dBA Leq are desirable to prevent any significant community annoyance. The recorded noise level taken at 53dBA is below the required

35

standard indicated in PPG 24 and WHO and in the circumstances is considered acceptable in this instance in so far as the outdoor terraces to the flat are concerned.

24

Traffic issues The proposal makes no provision for off street car parking which is mainly due to the constrained nature of the site with the existing building covering the entire site area. However, the lack of car parking provision is acceptable in this instance as not only is the application site within very close proximity of London Bridge that offers a variety of public transport, but is also located on a red route and a CPZ where parking restrictions are rigidly enforced. Transport for London raise no objections to the proposal on the basis that a car free agreement is sought and that the level of cycle storage meets with their standards, 10 in this case. The Traffic Group also raise no objections to the proposed redevelopment but request that funds are sought to amend the existing traffic order restricting future occupiers from applying for parking permits. The proposal also makes provision for secure cycle parking which would be located in the basement area and accessible by lift and staircase.

25

Design issues The main issue in so far as design is concerned is the treatment of the Borough High Street elevation of the building with regards to the existing facade and the additional floors proposed. The aim of the proposal is to recycle as much of the existing structure and simplify the internal layout. The aim of the proposal in so far as the front elevation treatment is concerned is to remodel the street elevation to create a modern face that will reflect the new interior layout. In order to limit the load on the existing building, the rear elevations would be cladded in a light weight render system. The treatment of the front elevation would result in the fenestration being adjusted to unify the upper floors whilst creating a more robust shopfront. The materials proposed include a combination of brick and cementious board cladding combined with powder coated metal window frames.

26

Impact on character and setting of a listed building and/or conservation area The application building is not adjoined to a listed building and as such there is no impact. However the building is within the Borough High Street conservation area and it is considered that the elevational changes proposed to the front of the building in particular will not have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area. It should be borne in mind that the treatment of the front elevation is formed by the existing structure and in the circumstances the appearance of the proposed front elevation in so far as the detailing is concerned is dictated as such.

27

Planning obligations [S.106 undertaking or agreement] The proposal is subject to a S106 agreement to secure funds, £2750.00, to change the existing Traffic Management Order preventing future occupiers of the development from applying for residents parking permits. The applicants have agreed to make this contribution which will be secured by a legal agreement.

28

Other matters Quality of residential accommodation The proposal comprise a mix of 6, one bedroom and 1, two bedroom flats. All of the proposed units comply with the Council's adopted SPD in so far as floorspace standards are concerned. Although two of the one bed flats have a combined living/kitchen/diner of just under the required 24sqm (22 and 23sqm), this on its own

36

29 30 31 32 33 34

would be unreasonable to withhold consent. The one bed flats have been designed with a single aspect east/west facing whilst the top floor flat has dual aspect east/west. Only the west facing flats and the top floor flat has been provided with outdoor amenity space in the form of private amenity space, which is due mainly to the constrained nature of the site. With regards to refuse storage the proposal makes provision for commercial and domestic storage which would be located at the basement level. Density The proposed development notwithstanding the fact that it is an extension to an existing building achieves a density of 1523 habitable rooms per hectare. Whilst this is in excess of the upper limit of 1100 hrh for the site's location for new development, it should be borne in mind that the proposal would not be harmful to the character of the area nor would it give rise to loss of amenity for nearby occupiers especially given that the bulk of the extension involves infilling a narrow gap between the flank walls of the adjoining buildings. The erection of the additional floors to provide a mixed use scheme is informed by the character of the area in so far as building heights are concerned, predominantly 5 to 7 storey. The proposed development is in keeping with the character of the area with regards to its bulk, mass and height. Although the proposal involves adding extra floors on top of the existing building in addition to a part two, part four storey rear extension, the development would be lower than the adjoining building to the south and a whole storey lower than the adjoining building to the north. In addition, the proposed development achieves a good standard of living accommodation and in the circumstances, given the constrained nature of the site, is considered acceptable on balance. Archaeology The application site falls within an archaeological priority zone and therefore the proposal must have regard to Policy 1.9 of the Southwark Plan. Although no details of mitigation measures has been submitted this can be secured by condition as suggested by the Archaeology Officer who raises no in principle objection to the proposal. Consultation The adjoining occupiers at 84 Borough High Street, Turkish Bank (UK) Ltd raised issue with the fact that they received notification of the application late, 30 July 2008, and would request their right to reply within the statutory response time of 21 days from the date of the letter. The application could not therefore be determined before 21 August 2008. In addition, adjoining occupiers were re-notified on 06/08/2008 following submission of supplementary acoustic information in support of the application. No further comments were received from the occupiers at 84 Borough High Street. Concerns were also raised about possible noise disruption and cleanliness during the construction phase as well as health and safety issues. Whilst these concerns cannot be ignored, they are issues which cannot be controlled under planning legislation as these issues are governed by other legislation under Environmental Health and Health and safety. An informative will be imposed on any permission granted advising the applicant's of the Council's Code of Construction Practice which police and ensure development proposals are carried out within the stipulated guidelines.

37

35

Means of Escape The adjoining occupiers also raised concerns about their secondary means of escape which is currently arranged through the application site. This remains unaffected as the means of escape from the adjoining buildings are retained within the proposed development.

36

Conclusion In conclusion, the proposal raises no fundamental issues in so far as the principle is concerned and in relation to the details of the scheme, subject to conditions, and for these reasons it is considered acceptable. Although the proposal makes no provision for off street car parking, this has to be considered against the merits of the proposal including location within a Town Centre and in relation to highly accessible public transport as well as the constrained nature of the site which on balance is considered acceptable.

COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT

37 The proposal would not result in any significant impact on local people to warrant a

refusal of planning permission in this instance. 38 There are no particular communities significantly affected by the proposal 39 There are no significant adverse implications on the community as a result of the

proposed development. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS 40

The application property is located in a highly sustainable location that would deter future occupiers from being dependent on the private car and would also bring into productive use an otherwise vacant and redundant building.

LEAD OFFICER Gary Rice Head of Development Control REPORT AUTHOR Donald Hanciles Senior Planner - Development Control

[tel. 020 7525 5428] CASE FILE TP/1140-82 Papers held at: Regeneration Department, Council Offices, Chiltern, Portland Street

SE17 2ES [tel. 020 7525 5403

38

RECOMMENDATION LDD MONITORING FORM REQUIRED

This document shows the case officer's recommended decision for the application referred to below.

This document is not a decision notice for this application.

Applicant Whitebay Properties Ltd Reg. Number 08-AP-1447 Application Type Full Planning Permission Recommendation Grant subject to Legal Agreement Case

Number TP/1140-82

Draft of Decision Notice

Planning Permission was GRANTED for the following development: Erection of two additional floors and a first floor and four storey rear extension together with removal of the front

elevation wall (to be remodelled) and part conversion of existing 4 storey (plus basement) commercial building to provide commercial floor space in the basement and at ground floor (Class A2) and offices (B1) on the first floor and 6, one bedroom and 1, two bedroomed flats located over the 2nd to 5th floors

At: 82 BOROUGH HIGH STREET, LONDON, SOUTHWARK, SE1 1LL In accordance with application received on 10/06/2008 and revisions/amendments received on 16/07/2008 01/08/2008 11/09/2008 and Applicant's Drawing Nos. HW-171 P010 Rev A, P011 A, P012 A, P013 A, P014 A, P101 B, P102 B, P103B, P104 B, P114 B, P115 Planning Application Submission April 2008 (Written Statement) Flood Risk Assessment Design and Access statement Subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the end of three years from the date of this permission. Reason As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended

2 Samples of the materials to be used in the carrying out of this permission shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any work in connection with this permission is carried out and the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with any such approval given. Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied as to the details of materials in the interest of the appearance of the building in accordance with Policy 3.2 'Quality in Design' of the Southwark Unitary Development Plan.

3 The refuse storage arrangements shown on the approved drawings shall be provided and available for use by the occupiers of the dwellings before those dwellings are occupied and the facilities provided shall thereafter be retained and shall not be used or the space used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of the Council as local planning authority. Reason In order that the Council may be satisfied that the refuse will be appropriately stored within the site thereby protecting the amenity of the site and the area in general from litter, odour and potential vermin/pest nuisance in accordance with Policy 3.2 'Protection of Amenity' and 3.7 'Waste Reduction' of the Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007.

4 The cycle storage facilities as shown on drawing HW-171P101 rev B shall be provided before the units hereby approved are occupied and thereafter such facilities shall be retained and the space used for no other purpose without prior written consent of the local planning authority. Reason To ensure that satisfactory safe and secure bicycle parking is provided and retained for the benefit of the

39

users and occupiers of the building in order to encourage the use of alternative means of transport and to reduce reliance on the use of the private car in accordance with Policy 5.3 'Walking and Cycling' of the Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007.

5 Condition 5 No development shall take place within the proposed development site until the applicant, or their agents or their successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological evaluation works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, which has been submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. Reason: To ensure that the archaeological evaluation undertaken to an appropriate standard, that the archaeological interests of the site are appropriately managed, that any findings are appropriately disseminated, that any recovered artefacts are conserved and that the information is archived in accordance with Policy 3.19 'Archaeology' of the Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007.

6 Condition 6 No development shall take place within the proposed development site until the applicant, or their agents or their successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological mitigation works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, which has been submitted to the planning authority and approved in writing. Reason: To ensure that the archaeological mitigation works are undertaken to an appropriate standard, that the archaeological interests of the site are appropriately managed, that any findings are appropriately disseminated, that any recovered artefacts are conserved and that the information is archived in accordance with Policy 3.19 'Archaeology' of the Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007.

7 Condition 8 Within six months of the issue date of the completion of site works the applicants will supply an assessment report detailing the proposals for post-excavation works, publication of the site and preparation of the archive. Reason: To ensure that any findings are appropriately disseminated, that any recovered artefacts are conserved and that the information is archived and the project is published in a suitable way. This will be demonstrated by the production of a document following the guidance of Management of Archaeological Projects II (MAP II assessment report) in accordance with Policy 3.19 'Archaeology' of the Southwark Plan (UDP) July 2007.

8 Reasons for granting planning permission. This planning application was considered with regard to various policies including, but not exclusively: a] Policies 1.3 'Preferred Office Locations', 1.7 'Developments Within Town and Local Centres' 3.2

'Protection of Amenity', 3.11 'Efficient Use of Land', 3.12 'Quality in Design' 3.13 'Urban Design', 3.16 'Conservation Areas', 3.18 'Setting of Listed Buildings, Conservatioon Areas and World Heritage Sites', Quality of Residential Accommodation' 3.19 'Archaeology' and 5.3 'Walking and Cycling' of the Southwark Plan [July 2007].

Planning permission was granted as there are no, or insufficient, grounds to withhold consent on the basis of the policies considered and other material planning considerations.

Informatives

1 At least 6 months before the occupation of the new buildings or units of accommodation hereby permitted you are advised that you must obtain the Council's approval for the numbering and naming of buildings and the naming of any new streets created by the development. Application forms can be obtained from the Street Naming and Numbering service at the Council's Regeneration Department, Council Offices, Chiltern, Portland Street, London SE17 2ES (Tel: 020 -7525-5403).

2 The developer should consult the Environment & Leisure Department to agree how the Council's Code of Construction Practice will be applied to the proposed development. Please contact the Pollution section, Chaplin Centre, Thurlow Street, SE17 (tel: 020 7525 5000).

40

3 You are advised to consult the Council's Senior Archaeology Officer for more detailed advice on the

implications of the redevelopment of the site. The officer can be contacted at the Regeneration Department, Council Offices, Chiltern, Portland Street, London SE17 2ES (020 7525 5448)

41

DISTRIBUTION LIST MUNICIPAL YEAR 2008/09

BOROUGH & BANKSIDE COMMUNITY COUNCIL Original held by the Community Council Team; amendments to Tim Murtagh

(Tel: 020 7525 7187)

OPEN COPIES OPEN COPIES To all Members of the Community Council: Cllr Lorraine Zuleta (Chair) 1 Cllr Mackie Sheik (Vice-chair) 1 Cllr Danny McCarthy 1 Cllr Tim McNally 1 Cllr Adele Morris 1 Cllr David Noakes 1 Libraries 6 Local Studies Library 1 Press: Southwark News 1 Evening Standard 1 South London Press 1 Amma Boateng (legal officer, Town Hall) 1 Constitutional Support Officer 23 OTHERS Geoffrey Bannister LBS Audit Manager 2nd Floor, Central House, Town Hall 1 EXTERNAL MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT Simon Hughes M.P 1 Community Action Southwark 1 8th floor, Hannibal House Elephant and Castle London SE1 6TE

Sue Page Bankside Residents Forum 1Irwin House, 118 Southwark Street London SE1 0SW Borough Commander Southwark Police Station 323 Borough High Street London SE1 1JL 1 Valerie Shawcross 1 GLA Building City Hall Queen's Walk London SE17 2AA TRADE UNIONS UNISON Southwark Branch 1Roy Fielding, GMB/APEX 1Mick Young TGWU/ACTS 1Tony O’Brien, UCATT 1 TOTAL DISTRIBUTION 50 Dated: October 6 2008

42