Council officers are sending the Love Walk care home development plans back to a planning committee for the third time. Paola Totaro recaps
Regular readers will recall that this story dates from late 2022, when the owners Mission Care first announced their intention to redevelop the home at 10 Love Walk, a site on the boundary of the Camberwell Grove Conservation Area. Their plans included three times as many bedrooms. Inevitably, this meant a much larger building.
More than 140 objections were lodged but, in November 2023, councillors granted approval. A judicial review claim followed, based mainly on allegations that the council had breached its duty to consult Historic England and take account of its views. In February 2024, the High Court gave permission for a judicial review. The council then consented to the decision being quashed by the court.
The applicants modified their plans, reducing the height of the Love Walk frontage and making other detailed changes, but without a significant reduction in the number of rooms. Again, there were more than 140 objections. These included one from Southwark Pensioners Action Group (SPAG) which had commissioned an expert report from the leading specialist in dementia care at Stirling University. He rated the dementia design quality at 38 out of 100.
The revised application went to the committee on 8 September 2025. We reported on that meeting in our last issue (CQ 226). After several hours of discussion, the committee held an “indicative vote”. This went against the application by four votes to three. The councillors then held a closed session, then voted six to one in favour of approval. Relying on legal advice, they decided that permission should be granted, subject to a new condition, devised at the secret session, which has been referred to as “the P7 Condition”. This required detailed design changes, to be approved by planning officers. That decision, and the way the meeting was handled, caused concern to objectors. In November one of
these, supported by other residents, sent a solicitor’s letter warning of a legal claim.
In a response on 28 November, the council said it disagreed with all the challenge grounds. However, it added: “Council officers have in any event been reflecting on matters and intend to take the matter back to Committee”. The reason given was that “the P7 condition raises issues … which need to be discussed, in particular … whether a permission can give with one hand by the grant, take with the other by condition.” The letter advised the objector that on return to the committee “all the matters raised by your letter will be considered, along with anything else”
