Application Reference &
Link: 20/AP/0887
Construction of a fifth floor extension to Blocks B, C, D, E and F, a
fourth floor extension to Block A, new blocks H and G and infill units
between Blocks A and B and to the rear of Block F (all 4 storeys) to
provide 60 additional student rooms for the University of Arts London.
The existing main building is four storey in height and there is an
existing three storey block at the rear of the site.
The proposal includes an upgrade of the facades along Flodden Road and
Baldwin Crescent with brick and terracotta, which would certainly be an
improvement.
In principle extending and upgrading an existing building is welcomed,
as it should have a lower environmental impact than demolishing and
rebuilding.
The proposed mansard roof addition to the main building is set back
which will reduce the visual impact. However, it will create the tallest
building in the area which is characterised by 2-3 storey residential
buildings.
Due to the orientation of the existing and new buildings to the North
side there should be limited overshadowing of the adjoining properties.
Only part of the garden of the neighbouring property to the East will be
overshadowed during the second half of the day.
The reason given for this development being necessary is to meet an
increasing demand for self-contained studio accommodation from
University of Arts London. The applicant has not presented a credible
case that the demand for student accommodation is increasing.
The proposal is for a ‘car free’ development and removes the existing
off-street parking and vehicle accessible service areas. The proposal
makes no allowance for students move in/out parking bays, delivery bays
and service staff parking, which should be addressed.
The provision for secure cycle parking appears to be below the
requirements outlined in the draft London Plan and it should be
increased to satisfy demand.
This planning application proposes an increase of 60 studio units in
addition to the 109 existing studio units, which is an increase of more
than 50%. There is a question how this can be appropriate in an area
with a poor PTAL rating of 2.
Although the application has some good points the Camberwell Society
objects to this application based on the above observations and on the
grounds of over-development.