Berkeley Homes has applied for a Judicial Review following a Planning Inspector's decision to reject plans to redevelop the Aylesham Centre in Peckham. The developer argues the decision was "clearly flawed" and accuses Southwark Council of "spectacularly failing" to meet housing targets.
Background of the proposals
Last month, Planning Inspector Matthew Shrigley refused Berkeley's controversial plans to bulldoze the 1980s-style shopping centre and build 867 homes, following an inquiry in October 2025. The application was referred to the Planning Inspectorate after Berkeley became impatient with Southwark Council, which had not yet convened a planning meeting to decide on the plans.
The Inspector rejected the appeal on heritage grounds, describing some proposed tower blocks as "out of scale" and "visually intrusive". Southwark Council and housing campaign groups had strongly opposed the plans, raising concerns over Berkeley's 12% affordable housing offer, which included 50 social rent and 27 intermediate rent homes.
Berkeley's response
Rob Perrins, Executive Chair of Berkeley Group, stated: "How can anyone invest in a town centre when policy-compliant plans for allocated sites are refused on the basis of vague and subjective heritage concerns? The fact that this borough is spectacularly failing its housing targets and faces a severe housing crisis appears to count for nothing."
Perrins added: "This follows nine years of engagement with the council and zero objections from Historic England, who are as shocked as everyone else that this scheme went down on heritage grounds. It cannot be right that heritage concerns trump all other policies, including the delivery of new homes, jobs and growth."
Council's stance
In response, Cllr Victor Chamberlain, Deputy Leader and Executive Member of Neighbourhoods, Strategic Planning and Wellbeing at Southwark Council, said tackling the housing crisis is the "utmost priority" for the new Liberal Democrat and Green joint administration. He stated: "The extremely low percentage of affordable housing being offered by Berkeley's Aylesham proposal does not justify the scale of the works and does not provide enough benefit for the local community."
Chamberlain added: "We have heard our residents loud and clearly on this and it is vital that local people shape local decisions. We will be following Berkeley's latest appeal against the Planning Inspector's decision closely."
Arguments for Judicial Review
Berkeley has set out several key arguments for its Judicial Review, including that a joint Design Brief from Berkeley and the council was not properly considered. The scheme also included a new Morrisons supermarket and Section 106 contributions and Community Infrastructure Levy payments totalling £15 million.
Morrisons is backing the Judicial Review, with a spokesperson saying: "We have worked closely with Berkeley over the past five years and their proposals would have delivered a new modern Morrisons supermarket alongside complementary retail, leisure and workspace, creating a substantial number of new jobs. Peckham is now left with an end-of-life shopping centre and a supermarket which cannot be redeveloped."
Why Berkeley appealed to the Planning Inspectorate
Berkeley's plans were due to be heard by the council in spring 2025, but because it had amended parts of its application, the council launched a 30-day consultation period. Berkeley argued the council took too long to make a decision and lodged an appeal directly to the Planning Inspectorate.
A Berkeley spokesperson previously said: "This is a site that has been earmarked for housing for 11 years. Two previous developers failed to come up with a workable project. We have been working with the council, local residents and businesses for four years. After all this time, effort and money, if Berkeley is to build homes, we have no other option but to appeal for non-determination."
Planning Inspector's conclusions
In his conclusions, Mr Shrigley said: "Although the appeal scheme does have some positive design attributes and high order benefits, the elements of harm identified are not outweighed." He noted that even if 35% affordable housing was delivered, as initially pledged, the level of harm "would not be overridden".
When the decision was published in May, former Council Leader Cllr Sarah King welcomed the refusal, calling it "a great day for Peckham". Local campaign group Aylesham Community Action, which opposed the plans, raised over £55,000 to fund a barrister for the inquiry, calling it a 'David and Goliath' battle. Campaigners argued the development would have been "gentrification on steroids", displacing communities and local traders.
Berkeley must now demonstrate an arguable case to secure High Court permission for the Judicial Review.
