The Lambeth Council Planning Applications Committee met to discuss six planning items, including a new hotel, a temporary rooftop bar, and a new dwelling. Councillors approved applications for a hotel on Wyvil Road, a temporary bar on the roof of Elizabeth House, and a new house on land adjacent to Normandy Road.

10 Wyvil Road - New Hotel

The committee approved the application for the demolition of an existing office building at 10 Wyvil Road and the erection of an 11-storey hotel with ancillary co-working space, pending completion of a Section 106 agreement¹ and referral to the Mayor of London. Councillor Scott Ainslie, Group Leader, voted against the officer's recommendations. Neil Short, Development Director at Stay City, told the committee that the Stay City Group is a family-owned business that intends to operate the building for the long term. He added that the development would transform an underutilised site into a vibrant destination with public access and improved amenities, and that the investment would bring clear economic benefits, including the creation of 140 jobs.

Lisa Hodgkinson, head teacher at Wyvil Primary School, spoke in support of the application, saying that City Grove and Stay City had demonstrated a consistent, transparent, and collaborative approach in engaging with the school. She added that the planned upgrades to the school playground would significantly enhance pupils' play environment and contribute positively to their health and wellbeing.

Tom Fuller, Development Director at City Grove, told the committee that the project is seeking to achieve the highest sustainable credentials, targeting an excellent rating and an EPC² rating of A. During questions, Councillor Saleha Jaffer, Deputy Cabinet Member for Stronger Communities, asked about the social responsibility contributions to the organisations or nearby people. She also asked how the council would monitor these contributions.

Councillor Ainslie raised concerns about the loss of office space and the suitability of another hotel in the area, given the borough's housing shortage. He also raised concerns about the impact on daylight for residents at 12 to 20 Wyvil Road, and said he was unconvinced by the whole life carbon assessments.

Councillor Emma Nye asked about the £15,000 contribution to improvements to the playgrounds and whether that would be thought additionally if architectural advice would be given on how best to spend that for the school. Jason Paulson, one of the main directors of EPR Architects, responded that they had been in contact with Lisa Hodgkinson and her team throughout the process, and that their time is given for free to do those sort of things.

Councillor Ainslie also raised concerns about the sunlight aspect of the school playground, and the impact on the school pupils. Lisa Hodgkinson responded that the school was fully aware of the effects the development would have on daylight, and that in the context of the development, it is a sensible and restrained development.

Councillor Ainslie also raised concerns about the use of rock wool as a method of insulation to prevent the use of over concrete, and asked for assurances around fire safety. Jason Balzer responded that the Grenfell fire used phenolic insulation, and that rock wool is an inert insulation that is approved for fire destruction there.

The committee voted to add an informative to the officer's recommendations around the London living wage on all commercial spaces, including ancillary spaces, if where possible, and also an informative around consulting the school when it comes to the offsite urban greening works.

Mawbey Arms - Hotel and Public House

The committee approved the application for the phased redevelopment and change of use of the Mawbey Arms, including retention of the facade, demolition to the rear of the existing building, and new rear and side buildings to create a hotel and public house. Councillor Martin Bailey, Chair of Pensions Committee, voted against the officer's recommendations.

A planning consultant for Icing Projects told the committee that the property came available on market after the previous school operator couldn't make it viable, and that no other developer was interested in it as a commercial use.

Councillor Nye asked about scooter and cycle bays and how close they are to the location.

Councillor Bailey asked about the special tests, what area was considered, and how it actually stood up that was really nowhere in the cars or about town center location. Chris Watts of CPW Planning, the independent assessor, responded that the search area was based on a one kilometre search from the application site, and that the applicant provided a robust assessment of alternative sites.

Councillor Olga FitzRoy asked what conversations had been had with the school, and whether there was a possibility for doing anything positive on the greening side actually for the school. The planning consultant responded that there had been some discussions with the school, but they've not been particularly forthcoming with any requests.

Elizabeth House - Temporary Rooftop Bar

The committee approved the application for the temporary use of the rooftop and 8th floor of Elizabeth House as a bar for 18 months, including the erection of temporary structures. Councillor Malcolm Clark, Vice-Chair at the Committee, voted against the amended motion.

Jorge Nash, a planning consultant at Jones Lane La Salle, representing the applicant, told the committee that the applicant has a good track record of operating bars of this nature, and that the bar has been designed specifically to manage the impact on neighbours.

Councillor Nye asked about neighbouring developments in the agent of change principle and how that would apply with this being a temporary development. A technical specialist responded that it should be treated the same as a permanent planning permission because the impacts on amenity would be real, even if they're temporary.

Councillor Bailey asked why officers had recommended aligning with the premises license that they were granted at 130, rather than just as the planning authority to set a more permissive condition.

The committee voted to amend condition three on the hours of operation, so that Fridays and Saturdays the planning isn't restrict the premises are opening until 2am.

Land Adjacent To 24 Normandy Road - New Dwelling

The committee approved the application for the redevelopment of land adjacent to 24 Normandy Road for the erection of a three-storey dwellinghouse. Councillors Alison Inglis-Jones, Food Poverty Champion, and Ainslie abstained from the vote.

Christine Harrywood, a solicitor representing the owners of 24 Normandy Road, objected to the application, saying that the application site is immediately next door to number 24, has historically formed part of the garden of 24 and continues to do so, and that the only way into the application site is through the front door of her client's house. She added that the scheme is really for a three bedroom house, and that treating it as a study has meant lower policy requirements, so avoiding recommendation of refusal due to inadequate immunity space, BNG, cycle storage, etc.

Nuno Mera, a resident of 24 Normandy Road, told the committee that the proposal was not assessed against policy Q14, which applies to land, most which was recently used as garden.

Laura Valentine, also a resident of 24 Normandy Road, told the committee that the proposals raise privacy concerns as a new terrace will have direct views of their private garden and into their family bathroom just five meters away.

Councillor Nye asked for clarification about the entrance, and whether the only entrance to the property is through the adjacent property. Jennifer Walsh, the area team manager for Brixton and Clapham, responded that the site is surrounded by a low boundary wall on all sides and there is currently a fence with a gate from 24 Normandy Road, and that there is no access as such off the road at the moment.

Councillor Fitzroy asked for advice on the risk of judicial review. The legal officer responded that as with any planning application, there is always a risk of judicial review, however, the risk falls where an application hasn't been properly assessed.

Councillor Ainslie asked about the overlooking and the slanty windows, and also about the amenity space, the study room, and whether it was a way of circumnavigating certain conditions.

The committee agreed to add an informative that reiterates that this is meant to be a two bed, and that this is how it has been assessed.