Southwark Council's Planning Committee (Major Applications) B has refused a housing plan for the Borough Triangle site, citing insufficient affordable housing and significant heritage harm as the primary reasons. The decision, made on Wednesday, September 9, 2026, means a proposed reduction in affordable housing from the originally approved 35.02% to a minimum of 10% will not proceed.
Under the original approval, 35.02% of homes were to be delivered as affordable housing, calculated on a habitable room basis. This equated to 153 social rented homes and 77 intermediate homes, totalling 230 affordable homes. The refused plan proposed a minimum of 10% affordable housing on-site, which would have resulted in a total of 60 affordable homes, comprising 42 social rented homes and 18 intermediate homes.
Officers argued that this significant reduction in public benefit, particularly the loss of social rented homes, did not outweigh the identified heritage harm to the Trinity Church Square Conservation Area. The proposed tall buildings, specifically Blocks A and B, were deemed visually intrusive and detrimental to the character and appearance of the conservation area. The harm was described as 'less than substantial' but at the upper end of the scale. The tallest tower, Building B, would be visible from all sides of the church and along the southern edge of the square, overwhelming the church's spire and appearing overly dominant. This would result in a significant and permanent impact on the character and appearance of the Trinity Church Square Conservation Area, which is largely made up of Grade II listed buildings with the Henry Wood Hall (former church) as its centrepiece.
Objectors, including the Southwark Law Centre and the 35% Campaign, voiced concerns about the failure to meet local housing needs. Councillor David Watson, a ward councillor, was particularly critical, stating the development blatantly puts profit ahead of people.
Arguments against the proposal highlighted the loss of social rented homes, with the housing waiting list in Southwark around 23,000 and having increased by over 20% since the previous discussion of this development.
The applicant, Berkeley Homes, had argued that the reduction in affordable housing was necessary due to challenging economic conditions, increased finance costs, build cost inflation, and new building regulations. Berkeley Homes stated, There's new further new regulations and new taxation coming in through building regulations, which we think means that actually the build cost will only go up more from today.
A viability assessment indicated a projected deficit, which council consultants reviewed and concluded could not support additional affordable housing, although their calculations still showed a substantial deficit.
Despite the applicant's viability arguments, the committee sided with the officer's recommendation for refusal, emphasizing the heritage harm and reduced public benefit. The refusal highlights the council's stance on prioritizing public benefit, specifically affordable housing, over developer viability arguments when heritage harm is significant. The decision to refuse was subject to referral to the Mayor of London and the Secretary of State.
This refusal underscores the ongoing tension in Southwark regarding the balance between delivering much-needed housing and ensuring adequate provision of affordable homes, particularly social rented units, against developer claims of economic challenges. The council's decision suggests a firm line on heritage protection when it conflicts with development proposals that significantly reduce public benefits.
Further details on the planning committee's discussions and the reports considered can be found in the Public reports pack for Wednesday 09 September 2026.