Remember Me     Forgot Login?   Sign up  

Share this article

southgate office village redevelopment artists impression

A report issued on 11th November by the Greater London Authority's Planning Team indicates overall approval of the proposal to demolish the existing Southgate Office Village buildings and replace them with a mixed office and housing scheme.

Strategic issues summary

Principle of development: The redevelopment of this site, which is adjacent to the town centre, to provide a residential-led mixed use development is strongly supported (paragraphs 13-15).

Affordable housing: The scheme would deliver 35% affordable housing (by habitable room), without public subsidy, and would qualify for the Fast Track Route subject to satisfying all other relevant borough and Mayoral policy requirements (paragraphs 17-20).

Heritage and urban design: Broadly supported and any harm caused by the proposed development to nearby heritage assets would be less than substantial, which would be outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme, namely the provision of affordable housing units and delivery of modern office floorspace that collectively could act as a catalyst for the regeneration of the town centre (paragraphs 21-30).

Environment: Further information or clarifications relating to overheating, PV provision and passive design is required; contribution to carbon off-set fund to be secured via the Section 106 agreement (paragraphs 31-32).

Transport: Travel plans and detailed design and method statements for all stages of the development are to be secured (paragraphs 33-37).

Recommendation

That Enfield Council be advised that whilst the principle of development is supported the application does not yet comply with the London Plan and draft London Plan for the reasons set out in paragraph 41 of this report. However, the resolution of these issues could lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan and draft London Plan.

As reported previously, Southgate District Civic Trust is opposed to the scheme, which it regards as "overdevelopment" and not "in keeping with the distinctive village feel that Southgate has managed to retain". The GLA report, however, considers that "any harm caused by the proposed development to nearby heritage assets would be less than substantial, which would be outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme".

The section of the report dealing with heritage is reproduced below.

Heritage

21. The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 sets out the tests for dealing with heritage assets in planning decisions. In relation to listed buildings, all planning decisions should “have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”. The NPPF states that when considering the impact of the proposal on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting.

22. As indicated in paragraph 5 of this report, the site is adjacent to the Southgate Circus Conservation Area and in proximity of other listed assets. The applicant has submitted a heritage statement and a townscape and visual appraisal, which consider the proposal’s impact on heritage assets. The proposed development would appear prominently in the background of the Grade II* listed Southgate Underground station and Station Pylons in the view looking north along the High Street. However, the taller blocks proposed would not show directly behind the listed assets whilst those elements that do, appear at a scale consistent with the surrounding built environment including the existing South Point House. It is therefore considered that any harm caused to this asset would be less than substantial. In relation to the Grade I listed Grovelands Park and the listed buildings within, the proposed development would not be visible. Regarding the conservation area, as mentioned earlier in this report the massing is stepped up away from the conservation area; in addition, the existing buildings adjacent to the conservation area such as South Point House reflect a more modern architecture and are taller.

23. The NPPF at paragraph 196 makes clear that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use. Having analysed these assessments and having regard to the statutory duty in respect of listed buildings in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, and the relevant paragraphs in the NPPF in relation to heritage assets, GLA officers consider that any harm caused to the nearby heritage assets, namely the Southgate London Underground station, by the proposed development would be less than substantial harm and clearly outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme, namely the provision of affordable housing units and modern office space that collectively could be a catalyst for the regeneration of the town centre. The proposal would therefore address the requirements of the policies set out above.

Links

Planning report GLA/4410/01

Civic Trust restates opposition to Southgate Office Village redevelopment proposals

Log in to comment

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #4991 02 Dec 2019 13:39
Great intelligent rational and objective response from the GLA. Cutting the rubbish out the N***Y arguments.

35% affordable housing without taxpayer cash subsidising it that's fully policy compliant.
Minimal impact on local "heritate assets" outweigh but dropping a large amount of affordable housing and some decent attractive offices that might encourage inward investment rather than just run-down cheap rubbish.

Typical tosh from the Southgate "We only represent the views of locals so long as they are anti-development" Civic Trust".

I love Southgate but it is NOT a village. I know the V word has become very fashionable of late, based on successes like Marylebone, Highgate etc, but this is Southgate not Muswell Hill. Not even a hint of a village vibe! It's a standard local commercial centre.

See also...

  • 18 May 2020

Has your home environment helped or hindered during lockdown?

The Place Alliance and its partner organisations carry out research into and campaign for improvements to the built environment. They are currently carrying out a survey of how the quality of people's homes and neighbourhoods supports - or fails to support - their lives during lockdown. This short online survey runs until 24th May. Read more

  • 13 May 2020

Planning application submitted for flats at Arnos Grove station

The planning application for construction of 162 flats on the Arnos Grove station car parks has now been submitted. The application has been made on behalf of Connected Living London, which is a partnership between Transport for London (TfL) and Grainger plc, the UK's largest listed provider of private rental homes. The intention is to provide quality homes for Londoners, whilst also generating revenue, which TfL will invest in the capital's transport network Read more

  • 04 May 2020

New report says 'wealth investment' is reducing Londoners' access to housing

A report launched at the end of April claims that there are are an estimated 125,000 homes in London with no-one living in them. It calls for a robust register of residential property ownership and usage and effective regulation of second homes and short-term lets and says that local authorities should be given planning powers and resources to ensure homes are built for residential use rather than as wealth investments. Read more