Here's a couple of annoyingly catchy ditties - one about Deptford High Street and the other about our own local hipster hangout Little Nan's Bar - that have come to my notice recently. Thanks to Colin* for the former (*name changed to protect him from the wrath of those subsequently infected by the ear worm).
In this one, the Reverend Casy (featuring Jassah - not the same as the one from the Archers I don't think..) sings about Deptford High Street, over a film shot on the high street last year, which has a few familiar faces popping up here and there.
Reverend Casy has a page on Facebook if you want to know more.
Meanwhile Little Nan's Bar has also got in on the act, as any self-respecting hipster hangout should do, with the launch of a song of the same name by 'New Cross crooner' Rhiannon the Nightmare, filmed in aforementioned cocktail corner and also featuring a few faces I am familiar with, mentioning no names. Here's the link to Rhiannon's Facebook page.
No need to thank me.
THE DEPTFORD DAME
Sunday, 2 February 2014
Thursday, 30 January 2014
Local news round-up
Lots is going on in and around Deptford, as per usual; much more than one blogger alone can cover. Even if that blogger doesn't have a life outside blogging. So here's a brief round-up of all the other stuff you might want to know about that's happening, happened and about to happen in SE8 and around - if you are keen to keep up to date on such stuff, I do recommend you follow our other local bloggers and tweeters, you will get a much broader picture of what's happening.
Thames Tunnel site visit and public hearing
Don't dump on Deptford's heart campaign and Crosswhatfields have both covered two upcoming events which offer the opportunity to protest against the plans to build a tunnel shaft on the green space next to St Paul's Church. The post on Crosswhatfields in particular highlights the impact of traffic from the site - an estimated 140 vehicles per day - and puts it in the context of other developments on Creekside and around, many of which are expected to be in progress at the same time.
The air pollution monitoring tubes that were put up in January are due to be collected and sent off for analysis next week, so we will expect to see information about existing levels of air pollution in SE8 emerging in the near future.
Convoys Wharf application - in safe hands?
With the planning application for Convoys Wharf now due to be determined by the Mayor of London, it's interesting to hear reports from those involved in the campaigns for community projects Sayes Court Garden and the Lenox Project - both of which are linked to umbrella organisation Deptford Is..
I strongly recommend following these websites to keep updated with what's happening with the area's most significant development; indications are that although the mayor's planners seem to be making every effort to resolve the outstanding issues, they are coming up against exactly the same intransigence and lack of imagination that thwarted efforts by our own planners. The mayor originally said he would speed up the decision-making process, suggesting that he would decide in February, but this is looking increasingly unlikely at the moment. The profile of the site has rarely been higher, and as the blogs report, the heritage aspects of the site were raised by local MP Joan Ruddock in an adjournment debate in the House of Commons last week.
Meanwhile the issue of the mayoral call-in, which was exercised again this week on the controversial application for redevelopment of Mount Pleasant Post Office, is discussed in unflattering terms by the Guardian's architecture and design blog. Convoys Wharf gets a mention, but the general thrust of the article is entirely applicable to the situation in SE8.
Deptford Project finally starts construction
My recent post about the second phase of Creekside Village drew comments from the usual moaners about the 'eyesores' of undeveloped land (many of which are just developed into a different type of eyesore) and how the council should 'do something about it'. Naturally I pointed out, in my kindly way, that many of these 'eyesores' of derelict land had already got planning permission, and they only reason they weren't being developed was because the owners were waiting for land values to go up so that they could flog them off to others/make more money out of the residential units!
The Deptford Project is a case in point - it's now nearly two years since planning permission was granted for this site, and it was only this week that there were signs of construction starting; the train carriage was removed and taken to Morden Wharf, another Cathedral-owned site on Greenwich Peninsula, and the obligatory site hoardings were put up around the boundaries. I anticipate the arrival of the usual feel-good photography or local school project decorating aforementioned hoardings.
Other developments in and around Deptford
New hyperlocal site the New Cross blog is doing a great job of keeping an eye on developments west of Deptford, mostly as the name suggests, around New Cross. I haven't had chance to go on there and start slinging in a few comments, but I intend to do so in due course. In the meantime don't let that stop the rest of you - it's great to see someone else focussing on planning, public realm and redevelopment stories in the area, and some of them such as the car park site at the top of Watson Street, and Goldsmiths College redevelopment, are pretty close to home.
If your interest lies east of Deptford, the fertile lands of Greenwich, Charlton and even Woolwich offer some excellent blogs about redevelopment and public realm - in Charlton the proposals for the riverside redevelopment are taxing local campaigners at the moment, not to mention the Silvertown Tunnel. Both schemes seem to have in common dubious claims about the impact on air quality.
And finally..
..on a cheerier note, don't forget the first weekend of the month approaches, which means the Food Fair will be back in Giffin Square on Saturday. It's also Chinese new year and there's no need to go up to Chinatown for the dragon dancers, you will likely see them on and around the high street visiting the many Chinese and Vietnamese shops to offer good luck for the year ahead.
The Albany is also launching its Yam Yam food festival which kicks off with Chinese-themed day on Saturday and runs for six weeks with pop-up restaurants, cooking workshops, culinary tours and other food-related events.
Thames Tunnel site visit and public hearing
Don't dump on Deptford's heart campaign and Crosswhatfields have both covered two upcoming events which offer the opportunity to protest against the plans to build a tunnel shaft on the green space next to St Paul's Church. The post on Crosswhatfields in particular highlights the impact of traffic from the site - an estimated 140 vehicles per day - and puts it in the context of other developments on Creekside and around, many of which are expected to be in progress at the same time.
 |
| (Pic; Don't Dump on Deptford's Heart) |
Convoys Wharf application - in safe hands?
With the planning application for Convoys Wharf now due to be determined by the Mayor of London, it's interesting to hear reports from those involved in the campaigns for community projects Sayes Court Garden and the Lenox Project - both of which are linked to umbrella organisation Deptford Is..
 |
| 'Heart and lungs'; the alternative vision for Convoys Wharf |
I strongly recommend following these websites to keep updated with what's happening with the area's most significant development; indications are that although the mayor's planners seem to be making every effort to resolve the outstanding issues, they are coming up against exactly the same intransigence and lack of imagination that thwarted efforts by our own planners. The mayor originally said he would speed up the decision-making process, suggesting that he would decide in February, but this is looking increasingly unlikely at the moment. The profile of the site has rarely been higher, and as the blogs report, the heritage aspects of the site were raised by local MP Joan Ruddock in an adjournment debate in the House of Commons last week.
Meanwhile the issue of the mayoral call-in, which was exercised again this week on the controversial application for redevelopment of Mount Pleasant Post Office, is discussed in unflattering terms by the Guardian's architecture and design blog. Convoys Wharf gets a mention, but the general thrust of the article is entirely applicable to the situation in SE8.
Deptford Project finally starts construction
My recent post about the second phase of Creekside Village drew comments from the usual moaners about the 'eyesores' of undeveloped land (many of which are just developed into a different type of eyesore) and how the council should 'do something about it'. Naturally I pointed out, in my kindly way, that many of these 'eyesores' of derelict land had already got planning permission, and they only reason they weren't being developed was because the owners were waiting for land values to go up so that they could flog them off to others/make more money out of the residential units!
The Deptford Project is a case in point - it's now nearly two years since planning permission was granted for this site, and it was only this week that there were signs of construction starting; the train carriage was removed and taken to Morden Wharf, another Cathedral-owned site on Greenwich Peninsula, and the obligatory site hoardings were put up around the boundaries. I anticipate the arrival of the usual feel-good photography or local school project decorating aforementioned hoardings.
Other developments in and around Deptford
New hyperlocal site the New Cross blog is doing a great job of keeping an eye on developments west of Deptford, mostly as the name suggests, around New Cross. I haven't had chance to go on there and start slinging in a few comments, but I intend to do so in due course. In the meantime don't let that stop the rest of you - it's great to see someone else focussing on planning, public realm and redevelopment stories in the area, and some of them such as the car park site at the top of Watson Street, and Goldsmiths College redevelopment, are pretty close to home.
If your interest lies east of Deptford, the fertile lands of Greenwich, Charlton and even Woolwich offer some excellent blogs about redevelopment and public realm - in Charlton the proposals for the riverside redevelopment are taxing local campaigners at the moment, not to mention the Silvertown Tunnel. Both schemes seem to have in common dubious claims about the impact on air quality.
And finally..
..on a cheerier note, don't forget the first weekend of the month approaches, which means the Food Fair will be back in Giffin Square on Saturday. It's also Chinese new year and there's no need to go up to Chinatown for the dragon dancers, you will likely see them on and around the high street visiting the many Chinese and Vietnamese shops to offer good luck for the year ahead.
The Albany is also launching its Yam Yam food festival which kicks off with Chinese-themed day on Saturday and runs for six weeks with pop-up restaurants, cooking workshops, culinary tours and other food-related events.
Friday, 17 January 2014
Lewisham strategic planning committee 'rejects' Convoys application
Last night Lewisham Council's strategic planning committee voted unanimously to 'reject' Hutchison Whampoa's outline planning application for Convoys Wharf. They accepted a substantial report compiled by the council's planning department which highlights some serious issues with the application that have still not been resolved, and agreed that as it stands, the application should be rejected.
Why the inverted commas? Although the committee unanimously agreed with the planners' report to reject the application, the fact that Boris Johnson last October called the decision in means that he is now the only person with the legal power to determine the application.
But this is not just a bog-standard redevelopment of a bit of derelict land, it's a massive scheme that has the potential to obliterate the history and heritage of Deptford. Whether or not you consider Farrell's 'new masterplan' to be any improvement on the previous Aedas scheme, it is still saddled with major obstacles to creation of anything ground-breaking; the demand for high density development, the inappropriate massing of buildings, the paucity of public transport infrastructure and the restricted highway access to the site which will cause serious problems for the level of car parking provision they propose.
That's before we even come to the proposed use of the listed Olympia Shed, the 'heart' of the development, in Terry Farrell's words, although it is currently without a beat. Yet none of Hutchison's huge team of highly-experienced, well-paid professionals seem to have the imagination or expertise to resuscitate it.
Although Boris now has all the power, he has absolutely none of the intelligence - naturally I'm using 'intelligence' here in the MI5 sense of the word, I couldn't possibly comment on any other meaning.
Neither do his planners, hence Lewisham's planning officers, who have been dealing with applications for Convoys Wharf and been in meetings with its owners over many years, are acting as advisers to the Mayor's team. The fact that Boris is exerting immense political pressure to get a determination of the application before the end of February is not particularly helpful to anyone involved, I would imagine. As well as being advisers, the council is a statutory consultee in the process,
So it's particularly interesting to read the report that the strategic planning committee approved last night - and this report (with a number of amendments that actually strengthen its recommendations) will be the council's submission to the GLA. Many of the issues that the report raises are the same ones that were highlighted by Lewisham's head of planning John Miller, in his letter just prior to Hutchison Whampoa's demand that the Mayor call in the application last year.
There are two main recommendations, I have cut and pasted below (due to time constraints I haven't interpreted or amended, apologies for all the Unnecessary Capital Letters. Emphasis is mine):
Recommendation A:
Members are recommended to resolve that the Mayor of London be advised that the Council:
Supports the principle of mixed use development of the site in accordance with Policy SSA2 of the Core Strategy
Considers that in its current form the application should not be approved and that amendments should be secured prior to determination in relation to the following matters:
1. Scale, Massing and Relationship with Historic Buildings and Spaces
Reducing the scale and massing of selected development parcels as outlined in the report to achieve an acceptable urban scale and an appropriate relationship of new buildings with historic buildings and spaces, in particular in relation to the Olympia Building, former Master Shipwrights House and site of John Evelyn’s House.
2. Sayes Court Garden and The Lenox
The approach to Sayes Court fails to link the site of the Gardens with the remains of Sayes Court House. The opportunity to link these two historically significant spaces should be fully explored. The Lenox preferred building location is either within the Double Dry Dock or Olympia Warehouse These options need to be explored further, as does the future use of the Olympia Warehouse and an agreement reached on the deliverability of the double dry dock or Olympia Warehouse as options for constructing the Lenox.
3. Building in the Scope for Design Flexibility, Evolution and Innovation
The Design Guidelines should either be significantly streamlined to identify what is essential (mandatory) in terms of providing guidance for reserved matters applications and what is too specific/constraining, or should become ‘for information’ only.
4. Transport Issues
The site has a relatively low level of public transport accessibility and it is essential that car parking is minimised and the opportunity to provide access to public transport, pedestrian and cycle links are maximised. This includes the widening of New King Street to allow for two-way bus movement and improved pedestrian and cycle access and the re-design of the New King Street/Evelyn Street/Deptford High Street junction to provide a direct single all-red phased pedestrian crossing.
5. Community Benefits
Securing appropriate social infrastructure and the maximum possible amount of affordable housing to meet the needs of new residents. There is an identified need for investment in affordable housing and a range of community infrastructure projects directly attributable to the impact of the new development including the need for a new primary school, jobs and training and open space. A number of questions remain about the applicants' assumptions on costs and future values in their viability statement, changes to which could support additional S106 payments and affordable housing. The Council considers that to ensure policy compliance and safeguard amenity, and in addition to any conditions and planning obligations that are imposed or agreed, the following are matters on which clarification and appropriate commitment is required from the applicant prior to determination of the application. The GLA must also satisfy itself that it has the relevant information on which to determine the application.
6. Clarifications, Commitments and Procedural Compliance
Operation of the wharf. Process and timing of reducing the area of the safeguarded wharf. Retail floorspace impacts. Housing mix. Transport Assessment modelling. Car parking management. School capacity. Delivery of projects set out in the Cultural Strategy. Mechanism to ensure a mix of uses is secured across the site. Lifetime Homes Standard, wheelchair and housing design standards. Decentralised energy network connection. CfSH Level 4 and BREEAM ‘Excellent'. Environmental Impact Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment Recommendation
Recommendation (B)
Authorise the Head of Planning to continue to negotiate with the GLA and the applicant to secure the amendments highlighted in this report and to present a further report to the Mayor at the representations hearing ahead of determination of the application, updating the Council’s position in the light of those negotiations.
The Convoys Wharf application now has a dedicated page on the GLA website for those who wish to bookmark it.
Why the inverted commas? Although the committee unanimously agreed with the planners' report to reject the application, the fact that Boris Johnson last October called the decision in means that he is now the only person with the legal power to determine the application.
But this is not just a bog-standard redevelopment of a bit of derelict land, it's a massive scheme that has the potential to obliterate the history and heritage of Deptford. Whether or not you consider Farrell's 'new masterplan' to be any improvement on the previous Aedas scheme, it is still saddled with major obstacles to creation of anything ground-breaking; the demand for high density development, the inappropriate massing of buildings, the paucity of public transport infrastructure and the restricted highway access to the site which will cause serious problems for the level of car parking provision they propose.
That's before we even come to the proposed use of the listed Olympia Shed, the 'heart' of the development, in Terry Farrell's words, although it is currently without a beat. Yet none of Hutchison's huge team of highly-experienced, well-paid professionals seem to have the imagination or expertise to resuscitate it.
Although Boris now has all the power, he has absolutely none of the intelligence - naturally I'm using 'intelligence' here in the MI5 sense of the word, I couldn't possibly comment on any other meaning.
Neither do his planners, hence Lewisham's planning officers, who have been dealing with applications for Convoys Wharf and been in meetings with its owners over many years, are acting as advisers to the Mayor's team. The fact that Boris is exerting immense political pressure to get a determination of the application before the end of February is not particularly helpful to anyone involved, I would imagine. As well as being advisers, the council is a statutory consultee in the process,
So it's particularly interesting to read the report that the strategic planning committee approved last night - and this report (with a number of amendments that actually strengthen its recommendations) will be the council's submission to the GLA. Many of the issues that the report raises are the same ones that were highlighted by Lewisham's head of planning John Miller, in his letter just prior to Hutchison Whampoa's demand that the Mayor call in the application last year.
There are two main recommendations, I have cut and pasted below (due to time constraints I haven't interpreted or amended, apologies for all the Unnecessary Capital Letters. Emphasis is mine):
Recommendation A:
Members are recommended to resolve that the Mayor of London be advised that the Council:
Supports the principle of mixed use development of the site in accordance with Policy SSA2 of the Core Strategy
Considers that in its current form the application should not be approved and that amendments should be secured prior to determination in relation to the following matters:
1. Scale, Massing and Relationship with Historic Buildings and Spaces
Reducing the scale and massing of selected development parcels as outlined in the report to achieve an acceptable urban scale and an appropriate relationship of new buildings with historic buildings and spaces, in particular in relation to the Olympia Building, former Master Shipwrights House and site of John Evelyn’s House.
2. Sayes Court Garden and The Lenox
The approach to Sayes Court fails to link the site of the Gardens with the remains of Sayes Court House. The opportunity to link these two historically significant spaces should be fully explored. The Lenox preferred building location is either within the Double Dry Dock or Olympia Warehouse These options need to be explored further, as does the future use of the Olympia Warehouse and an agreement reached on the deliverability of the double dry dock or Olympia Warehouse as options for constructing the Lenox.
3. Building in the Scope for Design Flexibility, Evolution and Innovation
The Design Guidelines should either be significantly streamlined to identify what is essential (mandatory) in terms of providing guidance for reserved matters applications and what is too specific/constraining, or should become ‘for information’ only.
4. Transport Issues
The site has a relatively low level of public transport accessibility and it is essential that car parking is minimised and the opportunity to provide access to public transport, pedestrian and cycle links are maximised. This includes the widening of New King Street to allow for two-way bus movement and improved pedestrian and cycle access and the re-design of the New King Street/Evelyn Street/Deptford High Street junction to provide a direct single all-red phased pedestrian crossing.
5. Community Benefits
Securing appropriate social infrastructure and the maximum possible amount of affordable housing to meet the needs of new residents. There is an identified need for investment in affordable housing and a range of community infrastructure projects directly attributable to the impact of the new development including the need for a new primary school, jobs and training and open space. A number of questions remain about the applicants' assumptions on costs and future values in their viability statement, changes to which could support additional S106 payments and affordable housing. The Council considers that to ensure policy compliance and safeguard amenity, and in addition to any conditions and planning obligations that are imposed or agreed, the following are matters on which clarification and appropriate commitment is required from the applicant prior to determination of the application. The GLA must also satisfy itself that it has the relevant information on which to determine the application.
6. Clarifications, Commitments and Procedural Compliance
Operation of the wharf. Process and timing of reducing the area of the safeguarded wharf. Retail floorspace impacts. Housing mix. Transport Assessment modelling. Car parking management. School capacity. Delivery of projects set out in the Cultural Strategy. Mechanism to ensure a mix of uses is secured across the site. Lifetime Homes Standard, wheelchair and housing design standards. Decentralised energy network connection. CfSH Level 4 and BREEAM ‘Excellent'. Environmental Impact Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment Recommendation
Recommendation (B)
Authorise the Head of Planning to continue to negotiate with the GLA and the applicant to secure the amendments highlighted in this report and to present a further report to the Mayor at the representations hearing ahead of determination of the application, updating the Council’s position in the light of those negotiations.
The Convoys Wharf application now has a dedicated page on the GLA website for those who wish to bookmark it.
Sunday, 12 January 2014
Creekside Village urban sprawl
After a year or so of respite, signs are that our beloved Creekside Village will soon begin to undergo an element of urban sprawl. Whether it is going to be renamed Creekside Town or Creekside Village-And-Large-Housing-Estate remains to be seen, but at least one parcel of the still-derelict land on the other side of Copperas Street bordering Deptford Creek itself has now been sold to another developer.
The Creekside Village development was originally intended to be about twice the size of what it is today. But while the completed section that towers over Creek Road is in Greenwich borough, the land of the remaining part of the development (Creekside Village East) straddled between Greenwich and Lewisham. In 2007 developer Ampurius Nu Homes Investments was granted permission for redevelopment of the land at the east end of the site in Greenwich, but the application for the Lewisham side has never been approved.
The developer went bust and the land was put on the market last year in four parcels; news is now in that purchaser Essential Living ('specialist developer of homes for the private rented sector') has bought the eastern parcel of land and intends to submit a new planning application for construction of a 17-storey tower next to the Creek.
The apartments will be 'investment grade quality' and other meaningless buzzwords: this bit lifted straight from the press release I don't doubt:
Built to investment grade quality, it will feature a host of on-site amenities, as part of Essential Living’s ambition to transform renting into a lifestyle choice, rather than a stopgap to ownership.
My previous unflattering remarks about Creekside Village have more than once prompted angry responses from residents, but I have no hesitation in repeating them. I feel this architecture has no place in this location (nor in fact do I think it is appropriate for residential buildings, although I realise that's an even more subjective point); its overbearing glass and steel facade totally dwarfs the streetscape on Creek Road and makes it an even more unpleasant place to walk along.
Yes, the development has some elements of public space - the mean little flower beds and water feature on Copperas Street, for example - but it serves its neighbours and community very badly in this respect and the height and mass of the blocks does nothing to break up the monotonous and windy environment to a more human scale.
I am told that there's a strong and active community among the residents, which is at least a positive thing. Not knowing how the internal layout works or how the building is managed, it's difficult to say whether this community spirit is influenced by the building itself, or just a reflection on the community-mindedness of those who live there. I strongly suspect it's the latter, as with any residential block.
Despite the fact that there are many empty units at street level and on the first floor of the blocks, there are vague signs that this situation could improve in the near future. Conversations on Twitter last year suggested that a new deli and cafe would soon open in one of the shop units, although I haven't seen any further signs of this.
In the meantime a planning application was recently submitted to Greenwich Council to provide a space in the block on the corner of Creekside and Creek Road for the Galleon Theatre Company. You may recall that this small but thriving organisation was displaced in a rather unpleasant fashion from the Greenwich Playhouse in favour of backpacker accommodation last year.
Before you get all misty-eyed thinking it's a heart-warming tale of the Creekside Village developer offering to provide cultural space out of the goodness of its heart, let me just point out that this application is a result of the Section 106 agreement for the site development that originally included affordable cultural space (previously intended to be an extension for the Laban Centre). All that's happening here is the developer is attempting to fulfil its legal obligations, although hopefully we will see the benefit of it in due course.
I sincerely hope that the developer continues to find tenants for these empty units, it might do something to alleviate the grim walk along Creek Road.
Unfortunately the news that the new landowner wants to build rental flats specifically for investors will do nothing to improve the community of the 'village'. Unless existing residents keep a close eye on the application, I suspect that Greenwich Council will simply wave it through as they have done in the past. The images I've posted are from the previous planning application - although a new application will be submitted, I suspect the architecture will remain 'inspired by dance' and it will be simply a case of redesigning the internal layout to incorporate the 'on-site amenities' which are essential for 'lifestyle choice'.
The original proposal did at least provide public access to the Creek, and I'll be trying to keep an eye on it to ensure that this is retained, although how pleasant it will be to sit at the base of a 17-storey sheer glass facade remains to be seen.
The Creekside Village development was originally intended to be about twice the size of what it is today. But while the completed section that towers over Creek Road is in Greenwich borough, the land of the remaining part of the development (Creekside Village East) straddled between Greenwich and Lewisham. In 2007 developer Ampurius Nu Homes Investments was granted permission for redevelopment of the land at the east end of the site in Greenwich, but the application for the Lewisham side has never been approved.
The developer went bust and the land was put on the market last year in four parcels; news is now in that purchaser Essential Living ('specialist developer of homes for the private rented sector') has bought the eastern parcel of land and intends to submit a new planning application for construction of a 17-storey tower next to the Creek.
The apartments will be 'investment grade quality' and other meaningless buzzwords: this bit lifted straight from the press release I don't doubt:
Built to investment grade quality, it will feature a host of on-site amenities, as part of Essential Living’s ambition to transform renting into a lifestyle choice, rather than a stopgap to ownership.
 |
| View from Deptford Creek lifting bridge |
My previous unflattering remarks about Creekside Village have more than once prompted angry responses from residents, but I have no hesitation in repeating them. I feel this architecture has no place in this location (nor in fact do I think it is appropriate for residential buildings, although I realise that's an even more subjective point); its overbearing glass and steel facade totally dwarfs the streetscape on Creek Road and makes it an even more unpleasant place to walk along.
Yes, the development has some elements of public space - the mean little flower beds and water feature on Copperas Street, for example - but it serves its neighbours and community very badly in this respect and the height and mass of the blocks does nothing to break up the monotonous and windy environment to a more human scale.
 |
| The 'canyonisation' of the Creek continues |
Despite the fact that there are many empty units at street level and on the first floor of the blocks, there are vague signs that this situation could improve in the near future. Conversations on Twitter last year suggested that a new deli and cafe would soon open in one of the shop units, although I haven't seen any further signs of this.
In the meantime a planning application was recently submitted to Greenwich Council to provide a space in the block on the corner of Creekside and Creek Road for the Galleon Theatre Company. You may recall that this small but thriving organisation was displaced in a rather unpleasant fashion from the Greenwich Playhouse in favour of backpacker accommodation last year.
Before you get all misty-eyed thinking it's a heart-warming tale of the Creekside Village developer offering to provide cultural space out of the goodness of its heart, let me just point out that this application is a result of the Section 106 agreement for the site development that originally included affordable cultural space (previously intended to be an extension for the Laban Centre). All that's happening here is the developer is attempting to fulfil its legal obligations, although hopefully we will see the benefit of it in due course.
 |
| 'Inspired by dance' apparently |
Unfortunately the news that the new landowner wants to build rental flats specifically for investors will do nothing to improve the community of the 'village'. Unless existing residents keep a close eye on the application, I suspect that Greenwich Council will simply wave it through as they have done in the past. The images I've posted are from the previous planning application - although a new application will be submitted, I suspect the architecture will remain 'inspired by dance' and it will be simply a case of redesigning the internal layout to incorporate the 'on-site amenities' which are essential for 'lifestyle choice'.
The original proposal did at least provide public access to the Creek, and I'll be trying to keep an eye on it to ensure that this is retained, although how pleasant it will be to sit at the base of a 17-storey sheer glass facade remains to be seen.
Friday, 3 January 2014
Artist's studio by De Rijke Marsh Morgan
The majority of new developments in Deptford tend to be largely untroubled by any quality architectural intervention. Of course some of our buildings such as the Laban Centre and Deptford Lounge/Tidemill Academy could be argued to be the exception to this rule, but you only have to glance as far as most of Creek Road (in particular the abhorrent Creekside Village), the Seager Distillery, Resolution Way studios and Paynes & Borthwick Wharf to get my drift. Convoys Wharf and other forthcoming developments show no sign of bucking this trend.
But scattered among the detritus that the planners allow to be washed up on the shores of our conservation zone, there's occasionally something to provoke discussion and debate. The latest addition could well prove to be the Marmite of local architecture.
A new artist's studio, designed by De Rijke Marsh Morgan Architects, has just been revealed at the southern end of Comet Street. I suspect its form and function will provoke much discussion, although its location means it may not be seen by a very large audience - you really do have to seek it out.
Its unusual purpose - an artist's studio and nothing more - and appearance - a big asymmetric black box with enormous north-facing roof light and no other windows, looking for all the world like it has just been beamed down into the grubby backstreets of Deptford - mark it out as something a bit different from the multi-coloured cheap-and-not-at-all-cheerful blocks that are springing up in every other space around here. Whether it's different in a good way or not will be open to debate.
The structure is distinctive on a number of levels - firstly it must be some time since Deptford played host to an artist with sufficient income to enable them to commission and build a new building which will serve only as a studio.
The north-facing rooflight is created using the same material as forms the roof of the Eden Project - a special polymer known as Texlon, formed into thin 'cushions' which can be inflated to create a larger area of unsupported roof than with normal glazing or cladding material.
Its asymmetric form includes a lower corner on the north west, intended to minimise the loss of daylight experienced by its neighbour, one of the four terraced houses remaining on Speedwell Street. As well as its odd shape, the building's black cladding and lack of any other windows give it a distinctly other-worldly appearance. Black may prove to be an unfortunate choice of colour, given the number of large birds around here - in particular the herring gull that can often be seen begging for scraps outside the high street fish shops. The fourth photo shows the result of a direct hit by one of our feathered friends, let's hope the cladding is self-cleaning.
Its unusual purpose - an artist's studio and nothing more - and appearance - a big asymmetric black box with enormous north-facing roof light and no other windows, looking for all the world like it has just been beamed down into the grubby backstreets of Deptford - mark it out as something a bit different from the multi-coloured cheap-and-not-at-all-cheerful blocks that are springing up in every other space around here. Whether it's different in a good way or not will be open to debate.
The structure is distinctive on a number of levels - firstly it must be some time since Deptford played host to an artist with sufficient income to enable them to commission and build a new building which will serve only as a studio.
Saturday, 30 November 2013
Want to know the truth about air pollution in Deptford?
As I was writing the title of that post, it struck me that some of you might answer 'no!' to my question, preferring to be happy in your ignorance rather than be faced with the stark facts about what damage local air pollution might be causing you.
That's understandable to some degree, but our corner of SE London is set to experience some very significant increases in traffic in the coming years as a result of the Thames Tunnel construction, a surge in our local population, and the construction traffic associated with building these new developments.
Having independent, irrefutable evidence of the impact this is having on environmental conditions will be vitally important if we are to argue for mitigation or traffic restrictions. Such measurements could also be vital to anyone wanting to judge the accuracy of claims made in environmental impact studies produced by consultants working for major developers. I have frequently questioned the accuracy of transport models created for major developments such as Convoys Wharf, and it is these models that are used to assess the potential environmental impact of a development.
Campaigners against the Silvertown Tunnel in our neighbouring borough of Greenwich carried out an extensive air quality study in the area of the tunnel earlier this year, and published their findings recently. I wrote about the implications for our local area.
These findings revealed shocking levels of pollution already in the area, and raised the question of what would happen if more traffic were to be generated by a new tunnel. Lewisham does measure air quality but on a tiny scale, just four stations in the whole borough - results from these stations can be found here.
Now the campaigners in Greenwich propose to repeat and extend their study, and are keen to get people from Deptford and beyond involved. They are willing to share their experience and enable other groups, campaigners or concerned individuals to access pollution data for their own use.
That's understandable to some degree, but our corner of SE London is set to experience some very significant increases in traffic in the coming years as a result of the Thames Tunnel construction, a surge in our local population, and the construction traffic associated with building these new developments.
Having independent, irrefutable evidence of the impact this is having on environmental conditions will be vitally important if we are to argue for mitigation or traffic restrictions. Such measurements could also be vital to anyone wanting to judge the accuracy of claims made in environmental impact studies produced by consultants working for major developers. I have frequently questioned the accuracy of transport models created for major developments such as Convoys Wharf, and it is these models that are used to assess the potential environmental impact of a development.
Campaigners against the Silvertown Tunnel in our neighbouring borough of Greenwich carried out an extensive air quality study in the area of the tunnel earlier this year, and published their findings recently. I wrote about the implications for our local area.
These findings revealed shocking levels of pollution already in the area, and raised the question of what would happen if more traffic were to be generated by a new tunnel. Lewisham does measure air quality but on a tiny scale, just four stations in the whole borough - results from these stations can be found here.
Now the campaigners in Greenwich propose to repeat and extend their study, and are keen to get people from Deptford and beyond involved. They are willing to share their experience and enable other groups, campaigners or concerned individuals to access pollution data for their own use.
 |
| Tube being installed by Silvertown Tunnel campaigner |
Campaigners against the tunnel shaft which Thames Water wants to sink on Crossfields Green have taken on the organisation of the scheme, and are asking for pledges of money and time in order to get a Deptford scheme under way. The cost of each monitoring tube, including the laboratory analysis, is just £7, which seems a very reasonable price to pay for what could be vital information.
Volunteers are needed to put the tubes up and take them down a month later (they all have to be installed and removed on the same days, the details have to be noted and the locations photographed), and this is planned to happen in early January.
As well as feeding into the case against the Thames Tunnel shaft, the data that is generated will be available for the Silvertown Tunnel campaign, and there's also the opportunity for people to sponsor a tube to measure air quality outside their own homes. Schools may also want to get involved not only to measure the data but also as a project for students.
Full details of the proposed air quality measuring scheme, the dates for involvement and the contact details for getting involved are available on Don't Dump on Deptford's Heart.
From art gallery to hotel to serviced apartments
This was brought to my attention earlier in the year, but now posters outside the former art gallery/hotel building of the Seager Distillery confirm the arrival of new 'serviced apartments' next year.
This is the location of the new *ahem* Greenwich Staycity due to open next May.
You may remember that this (originally rather lovely) building was first earmarked to become an art gallery and six floors of office space; this proposed community/arts and employment use no doubt contributed to lots of warm feelings among the planning committee members who granted permission for it.
Subsequently of course, the developer claimed that there had been 'no interest' in the office space and had been unable to get a tenant for the art gallery, and applied for permission to move the gallery space out of the glorious double-height ground floor space on the A2 to the much pokier and less visible spaces on the Brookmill Road part of the site. This would then enable the developer to convert the building into a 4* 'boutique hotel' for the operator that was interested in leasing it.
Some of us scoffed at the idea that those travelling on a 'boutique hotel' budget would choose a major intersection on one of London's most congested red routes for their stay in our capital city. At last year's Open House event it emerged that the 'boutique hotel' operator had pulled out (if indeed they had ever existed) and the future of the hotel was looking uncertain.
And now the former-art-gallery-former-hotel space will become serviced apartments - essentially private rented accommodation which caters for short stays.
Unfortunately some of us are so cynical that we even suspect this might not be the end of the story.
Serviced apartments is a booming sector of the hospitality industry, according to the website Serviced Apartment News which offers an interesting insight into how the sector works, why it offers a good investment, and the benefits it offers developers. This article in particular reveals how developers are more likely now to retain ownership of private rented developments and team up with operators to let them as serviced apartments. Such units are cheaper to build and fit out than a hotel, and offer 'relatively easy conversion to residential' those in the industry point out.
This kind of statement sets the alarm bells ringing straight away for the cynics.
What's more, to fit out a proposed hotel with serviced-apartments-offering-relatively-easy-conversion-to-residential requires no application for a change in planning use, since serviced apartments come under the same classification as hotels.
The inclusion of a hotel on the site (like the office space that preceded it) had strong potential benefits for the area. People staying in hotels (or working in offices) generally eat and drink locally, use taxis and other local services, and possibly even visit nearby shops - so a reasonable amount of money would be expected to find its way into the local economy - if not Deptford, then Greenwich at least.
With serviced apartments, which include kitchen facilities, this local spend is likely to be much diminished, and with the loss of office space (various applications having already been submitted/withdrawn/refused for the change of use of space in the 'pavilion building' in the middle of the development, also proposed to be office space) the potential benefits for local businesses is further reduced.
Friday, 29 November 2013
Upcoming events in Deptford
Lots going on in the next few weeks folks, as Christmas bears down on us like an HGV towards a cycle superhighway.
Here's a brief round-up of the stuff that's floated across my radar recently:
Friday 6 - Sunday 8 December
Cockpit Arts open studios in Deptford
Cockpit Arts is having its pre-Christmas open studios event at its Deptford site next weekend - a good opportunity to browse the fabulous work of our local designer-makers, and a great place to pick up hand-crafted gifts. Many of the artists produce small items specially for the open studios event, so even if you are on a low budget you may still be able to find something within your range. It's also great to see the skilled work on show and get the chance to talk to the crafters themselves.
Tickets for Saturday and Sunday (11am-6pm) are £3 but it's free entry on the Friday (11am - 9pm) and free to under-15s all weekend.
Cockpit Arts
Saturday 7 December
Deptford Society, the Lenox Project and Giffin Square Food Fair
The new Deptford Society (sign up to their mailing list here) is hosting its first event in Giffin Square, in collaboration with the monthly Giffin Square Food Fair, the Lenox Project and the Deptford Lounge.
In Giffin Square, as well as the monthly food fair stalls, there will be
Meanwhile the Lenox Project and the recently-formed Deptford Shanty Crew will be hosting various maritime and dockyard-themed events in and around the Deptford Lounge.
The Lenox Project will have its restored Saker cannon on show in Giffin Square, with displays about the history of Deptford's Royal Dockyard in the library, and talks from historians and authors Richard Endsor and SI Martin, happening throughout the day.
The Deptford Shanty Crew will be performing some bawdy sea songs and encouraging the audience to join in!
10am - 4.30pm
Giffin Square and Deptford Lounge
Wednesday 11 December
The Goldsmiths Carol Concert
The Goldsmiths Chamber Choir, conducted by Caroline Lenton Ward, Brass Group and, in the evening, Gospel Choir present a programme of Christmas music, with carols for everyone to enjoy. Complemented by candlelight and traditional Christmas readings, all led by the Reverend Adele Rees.
All welcome, no need to book, and both events will be followed by mulled wine and mince pies.
Great Hall, Richard Hoggart Building, Goldsmiths, University of London
Full details: http://www.gold.ac.uk/carolconcert/
Saturday 14 & Sunday 15 December
The Vintage Christmas & Craft Market
Deptfordwives presents the Vintage Christmas & Craft Market, where 'a beautiful selection of hand crafted products from talented designers' will be on sale at the Albany Theatre in Deptford.
The blurb promises: Wonderful and unique handcrafted Christmas presents including ceramics, vintage choice classy items, silver & gold jewellery, decorations, craft, art keepsakes, beautiful leather work, Deptford 'The Sunshine State' Tee shirts and lots more...
10.30am - 4pm
The Albany Theatre
Douglas Way
Sunday 15 December
New Cross Learning's Christmas Extravaganza
All are welcome to New Cross Learning's annual general meeting at 1pm, after which there will be jazz, a puppet show, appearance of Father Christmas and some christmas films - all events are free of charge.
Here's a brief round-up of the stuff that's floated across my radar recently:
Friday 6 - Sunday 8 December
Cockpit Arts open studios in Deptford
Cockpit Arts is having its pre-Christmas open studios event at its Deptford site next weekend - a good opportunity to browse the fabulous work of our local designer-makers, and a great place to pick up hand-crafted gifts. Many of the artists produce small items specially for the open studios event, so even if you are on a low budget you may still be able to find something within your range. It's also great to see the skilled work on show and get the chance to talk to the crafters themselves.
Tickets for Saturday and Sunday (11am-6pm) are £3 but it's free entry on the Friday (11am - 9pm) and free to under-15s all weekend.
Cockpit Arts
Saturday 7 December
Deptford Society, the Lenox Project and Giffin Square Food Fair
The new Deptford Society (sign up to their mailing list here) is hosting its first event in Giffin Square, in collaboration with the monthly Giffin Square Food Fair, the Lenox Project and the Deptford Lounge.
In Giffin Square, as well as the monthly food fair stalls, there will be
- music from music from local steel drum band Heart of Steel
- singing in the Deptford Lounge from Tidemill Academy school choir
- ‘If on a winter’s night a traveller’ performance art from Something Human, based on Italo Calvino’s classic novel
- mulled wine for anyone who joins Deptford Society
- Father Christmas patrolling the streets with a bag of goodies
- a cooking demo outside Codfathers between 11am–2pm
- interactive art installations by Chelsea College of Arts students along the high street and in Douglas Square.
Meanwhile the Lenox Project and the recently-formed Deptford Shanty Crew will be hosting various maritime and dockyard-themed events in and around the Deptford Lounge.
The Lenox Project will have its restored Saker cannon on show in Giffin Square, with displays about the history of Deptford's Royal Dockyard in the library, and talks from historians and authors Richard Endsor and SI Martin, happening throughout the day.
The Deptford Shanty Crew will be performing some bawdy sea songs and encouraging the audience to join in!
10am - 4.30pm
Giffin Square and Deptford Lounge
Wednesday 11 December
The Goldsmiths Carol Concert
The Goldsmiths Chamber Choir, conducted by Caroline Lenton Ward, Brass Group and, in the evening, Gospel Choir present a programme of Christmas music, with carols for everyone to enjoy. Complemented by candlelight and traditional Christmas readings, all led by the Reverend Adele Rees.
All welcome, no need to book, and both events will be followed by mulled wine and mince pies.
Lunchtime: 1pm - 1.45pm
Evening: 6.30pm - 8pm
Full details: http://www.gold.ac.uk/carolconcert/
Saturday 14 & Sunday 15 December
The Vintage Christmas & Craft Market
Deptfordwives presents the Vintage Christmas & Craft Market, where 'a beautiful selection of hand crafted products from talented designers' will be on sale at the Albany Theatre in Deptford.
The blurb promises: Wonderful and unique handcrafted Christmas presents including ceramics, vintage choice classy items, silver & gold jewellery, decorations, craft, art keepsakes, beautiful leather work, Deptford 'The Sunshine State' Tee shirts and lots more...
10.30am - 4pm
The Albany Theatre
Douglas Way
Sunday 15 December
New Cross Learning's Christmas Extravaganza
All are welcome to New Cross Learning's annual general meeting at 1pm, after which there will be jazz, a puppet show, appearance of Father Christmas and some christmas films - all events are free of charge.
More information at http://newxlearning.org/
Sunday, 17 November 2013
Demonstration against the Tideway Tunnel shaft
Campaigners from Don’t Dump on Deptford’s Heart are inviting people to join them at a demonstration against the Thames Tunnel proposals on Thursday.
There will be a public hearing regarding the siting of one of the shafts for the Thames Tunnel at 8.45am this Thursday at the Ahoy Centre in Borthwick Street.
The campaigners want people to join them at a 'fun and friendly public demonstration to Save our Green!'
The press release says; Last Wednesday planning inspectors were left in no doubt that Deptford residents will suffer three years and a half years of misery if Thames Water’s plans to sink a shaft on Crossfields’ Green for London’s so-called ‘super sewer’ goes ahead.
Campaigners from Don’t Dump on Deptford's Heart gave evidence to the first session of the Planning Inspectorate’s inquiry into the controversial Thames Tideway Tunnel at the America Square Conference Centre.
The campaigners were united in their calls for the shaft to be sunk instead in the Thames at Borthwick Wharf, as originally proposed by Thames Water. The Planning Inspectorate has the power to recommend to the Secretary of State whether the £4.2 billion project goes ahead or not. Their decision is expected in late summer/early autumn 2014. The campaigners’ concerns centre on the Deptford spur of the tunnel.
Thames Water plan to sink a shaft on the green space between St Paul’s Church and St Joseph’s primary school. It will be some 46 meters deep and 17 meters in diameter. Spoil from the shaft and tunnelling work will be removed from site by hundreds of lorries, forcing the closure of the whole of the western carriageway of Deptford Church Street.
They say turning Crossfields Green into a construction site would deeply affect the community, particularly school children. The green is right next to St Joseph’s and Tidemill schools, St Paul’s church, the High Street and hundreds of flats and houses, precisely the kind of areas that Thames Water's own Site Selection Methodology says they would avoid.
Aside from the concern that the works will cause noise and disruption to pupils, worshippers, residents and businesses, the campaigners are angry that an alternative site at Borthwick Wharf has been ruled out. The reasons for Thames Water’s switch remain unclear.
There will be a public hearing regarding the siting of one of the shafts for the Thames Tunnel at 8.45am this Thursday at the Ahoy Centre in Borthwick Street.
The campaigners want people to join them at a 'fun and friendly public demonstration to Save our Green!'
The press release says; Last Wednesday planning inspectors were left in no doubt that Deptford residents will suffer three years and a half years of misery if Thames Water’s plans to sink a shaft on Crossfields’ Green for London’s so-called ‘super sewer’ goes ahead.
Campaigners from Don’t Dump on Deptford's Heart gave evidence to the first session of the Planning Inspectorate’s inquiry into the controversial Thames Tideway Tunnel at the America Square Conference Centre.
The campaigners were united in their calls for the shaft to be sunk instead in the Thames at Borthwick Wharf, as originally proposed by Thames Water. The Planning Inspectorate has the power to recommend to the Secretary of State whether the £4.2 billion project goes ahead or not. Their decision is expected in late summer/early autumn 2014. The campaigners’ concerns centre on the Deptford spur of the tunnel.
Thames Water plan to sink a shaft on the green space between St Paul’s Church and St Joseph’s primary school. It will be some 46 meters deep and 17 meters in diameter. Spoil from the shaft and tunnelling work will be removed from site by hundreds of lorries, forcing the closure of the whole of the western carriageway of Deptford Church Street.
They say turning Crossfields Green into a construction site would deeply affect the community, particularly school children. The green is right next to St Joseph’s and Tidemill schools, St Paul’s church, the High Street and hundreds of flats and houses, precisely the kind of areas that Thames Water's own Site Selection Methodology says they would avoid.
Aside from the concern that the works will cause noise and disruption to pupils, worshippers, residents and businesses, the campaigners are angry that an alternative site at Borthwick Wharf has been ruled out. The reasons for Thames Water’s switch remain unclear.
Convoys Wharf - localism inaction?
Barely two years after the Localism Act came into being, recent events in Deptford mean you'd be forgiven for wondering what the hell is the point of this particular piece of legislation.
Shall I give you a quick reminder of its main aims? (I lifted this straight off the Local Government Association website if you need more information):
The aim of the act was to devolve more decision making powers from central government back into the hands of individuals, communities and councils. The act covers a wide range of issues related to local public services, with a particularly focus on the general power of competence, community rights, neighbourhood planning and housing.
The key measures of the act were grouped under four main headings;
In October, Convoys Wharf developer Hutchison Whampoa wrote to the Mayor of London to (somewhat petulantly to be honest, you can read his letter via the Deptford is.. website) demand that the decision on its outline planning application be 'called in' - ie be taken away from the local council and made by the Mayor's office.
Head of Hutchison Whampoa Properties (Europe), Edmond Ho, complained to Boris that his company had been subjected to 'a long pattern of delay and indecision' from Lewisham planners over the last five years, and warned that unless the Mayor took it over, the 'delivery of much needed housing for London' was at risk of further, substantial delay.
The Mayor's planners decided that it was a good idea too, mainly due to the fact that the relationship between the developers and the council's planning department had broken down irrevocably - although they did not elaborate on the reasons for this in their report (available here), and it is a matter of opinion whether this came about because of the 'delay and indecision' that Ho moans about, or whether HW's arrogance and general failure to address any fundamental issues might have played a part.
Let's be clear, this breakdown of the relationship has not come about through a clash of personalities or anything so straightforward - having come into contact with many of the players involved in this process over recent months and years, it is obvious that Hutchison Whampoa's stance is not a welcoming one. People from all sides of the process have remarked on their seeming indifference to any criticism - constructive or otherwise - while some of those working directly for HW have described them as being one of the most difficult clients they have ever had.
HW's arrogance is ably demonstrated by the fact that in his letter in which he demanded that the Mayor call in the application, Edmond Ho claimed that issues raised by English Heritage 'were understood' to have been resolved, and that both the GLA and the Design Review Panel had 'endorsed' the current masterplan. As the details posted on Deptford Is.. make clear, these claims are largely unsubstantiated. In fact I would say Deptford Is.. has been very charitable in its suggestion that Ho was misinformed, or that information was misinterpreted.
Even while writing this post, news reaches me that HW's project manager who has been present at all the public meetings and events for as long as I can remember, is no longer working on the Convoys Wharf development. He may simply have got another job, or been promoted elsewhere, but it's always interesting to speculate on whether other factors are at play, in particular because of the timing of the move.
But to get back the story: the Mayor agreed to call it in and has taken over responsibility for making the final decision on this outline planning application. It is a very unusual step to take before the local authority has made any decision - usually the call-in happens after the decision has been made, and takes place because the Mayor (or the applicant) is not happy with the outcome. To take responsibility away from a local authority which was still trying to work towards acceptance of an application could be seen as premature and inappropriate.
Whether or not Lewisham planners could have reached a position at which they were happy to recommend acceptance of the application is not known, but head of planning John Miller's letter makes it clear that his team had identified the outstanding issues and suggests possible solutions. Personally I don't see anything unreasonable in his assessment of the situation, and while Ho is annoyed that the process has taken so long, to blame the delay entirely on the planners is disingenuous when feedback suggests the slow progress has been compounded by obstructive and unresponsive behaviour on the applicant's part. I'm reminded of the last few minutes of a football match where one team tries to keep the ball out of play just to deny its opponents the chance of any more goals.
And indeed the GLA report notes that Lewisham is not generally lax when it comes to meeting deadlines for planning decisions, which is another point in its favour - indeed we have been practically ushering acceptance of housing schemes straight in through the door. Over the last two years, Lewisham has approved 135% of its target for new housing, and it is 'almost exactly on the three year average' of 'affordable' housing in the capital (although as other bloggers point out, 'affordable' is little more than a meaningless label these days).
There are several ways this could go for HW (and indeed for Deptford), not all of them necessarily bad, since the higher profile of the case should now mean greater scrutiny by a wider audience. On the whole though, it is worrying that the mayor of London saw fit to bow to such pressure from a developer - one which owns some huge areas of Thames waterfront and is involved with some major developments in the capital. These include the old Lots Road power station in Chelsea, also being designed by Farrell's office although with piddling small towers of max just 37 storeys and seen here being marketed via HW's Hong Kong estate agency.
Removing the powers from the local planning authority before any decision had even been taken - and when the borough was working hard to reach a situation where approval could be recommended - strikes me as setting a very dangerous precedent for future schemes, and it creates confusion, particularly with the supposed 'localism' policy of the current government. What's more, while the applicant complained that the process was taking too long, moving the decision making process to a new authority will not speed it up any, most likely the opposite.
In the meantime, some perhaps unintended implications of the call-in have already been seen, with the nationals finally sitting up and taking interest in the story - particularly since it follows hard on the heels of the 'at risk' listing of Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden by the World Monuments Fund which was quite widely reported, and must have royally pissed off HW.
Private Eye's Piloti has written a large article for the current issue which gives a good, if brief explanation of what is a very complex history.
You can read it via the Deptford Is.. post which announces the launch of the campaign's petition via Change.org. The petition, which sends emails to the mayor, his planners, the developer and the architects every time someone signs it, has reached more than 900 signatures in just a week.
I'll try to keep the blog updated as the story develops, although for regular information and the inside goss on the story, I recommend following the Deptford Is.. blog and newsletter which has a lot more information.
Sign the petition
Read the Deptford Is.. post about the call-in.
Read what Private Eye had to say - via Deptford Is..
Blogger Andy Worthington's article kicks off by assessing the claim of 'affordable' housing.
Shall I give you a quick reminder of its main aims? (I lifted this straight off the Local Government Association website if you need more information):
The aim of the act was to devolve more decision making powers from central government back into the hands of individuals, communities and councils. The act covers a wide range of issues related to local public services, with a particularly focus on the general power of competence, community rights, neighbourhood planning and housing.
The key measures of the act were grouped under four main headings;
- new freedoms and flexibilities for local government
- new rights and powers for communities and individuals
- reform to make the planning system more democratic
- more effective reform to ensure decisions about housing are taken locally
In October, Convoys Wharf developer Hutchison Whampoa wrote to the Mayor of London to (somewhat petulantly to be honest, you can read his letter via the Deptford is.. website) demand that the decision on its outline planning application be 'called in' - ie be taken away from the local council and made by the Mayor's office.
Head of Hutchison Whampoa Properties (Europe), Edmond Ho, complained to Boris that his company had been subjected to 'a long pattern of delay and indecision' from Lewisham planners over the last five years, and warned that unless the Mayor took it over, the 'delivery of much needed housing for London' was at risk of further, substantial delay.
The Mayor's planners decided that it was a good idea too, mainly due to the fact that the relationship between the developers and the council's planning department had broken down irrevocably - although they did not elaborate on the reasons for this in their report (available here), and it is a matter of opinion whether this came about because of the 'delay and indecision' that Ho moans about, or whether HW's arrogance and general failure to address any fundamental issues might have played a part.
Let's be clear, this breakdown of the relationship has not come about through a clash of personalities or anything so straightforward - having come into contact with many of the players involved in this process over recent months and years, it is obvious that Hutchison Whampoa's stance is not a welcoming one. People from all sides of the process have remarked on their seeming indifference to any criticism - constructive or otherwise - while some of those working directly for HW have described them as being one of the most difficult clients they have ever had.
HW's arrogance is ably demonstrated by the fact that in his letter in which he demanded that the Mayor call in the application, Edmond Ho claimed that issues raised by English Heritage 'were understood' to have been resolved, and that both the GLA and the Design Review Panel had 'endorsed' the current masterplan. As the details posted on Deptford Is.. make clear, these claims are largely unsubstantiated. In fact I would say Deptford Is.. has been very charitable in its suggestion that Ho was misinformed, or that information was misinterpreted.
Even while writing this post, news reaches me that HW's project manager who has been present at all the public meetings and events for as long as I can remember, is no longer working on the Convoys Wharf development. He may simply have got another job, or been promoted elsewhere, but it's always interesting to speculate on whether other factors are at play, in particular because of the timing of the move.
But to get back the story: the Mayor agreed to call it in and has taken over responsibility for making the final decision on this outline planning application. It is a very unusual step to take before the local authority has made any decision - usually the call-in happens after the decision has been made, and takes place because the Mayor (or the applicant) is not happy with the outcome. To take responsibility away from a local authority which was still trying to work towards acceptance of an application could be seen as premature and inappropriate.
Whether or not Lewisham planners could have reached a position at which they were happy to recommend acceptance of the application is not known, but head of planning John Miller's letter makes it clear that his team had identified the outstanding issues and suggests possible solutions. Personally I don't see anything unreasonable in his assessment of the situation, and while Ho is annoyed that the process has taken so long, to blame the delay entirely on the planners is disingenuous when feedback suggests the slow progress has been compounded by obstructive and unresponsive behaviour on the applicant's part. I'm reminded of the last few minutes of a football match where one team tries to keep the ball out of play just to deny its opponents the chance of any more goals.
 |
| 'Affordable' housing (pink bits) |
There are several ways this could go for HW (and indeed for Deptford), not all of them necessarily bad, since the higher profile of the case should now mean greater scrutiny by a wider audience. On the whole though, it is worrying that the mayor of London saw fit to bow to such pressure from a developer - one which owns some huge areas of Thames waterfront and is involved with some major developments in the capital. These include the old Lots Road power station in Chelsea, also being designed by Farrell's office although with piddling small towers of max just 37 storeys and seen here being marketed via HW's Hong Kong estate agency.
Removing the powers from the local planning authority before any decision had even been taken - and when the borough was working hard to reach a situation where approval could be recommended - strikes me as setting a very dangerous precedent for future schemes, and it creates confusion, particularly with the supposed 'localism' policy of the current government. What's more, while the applicant complained that the process was taking too long, moving the decision making process to a new authority will not speed it up any, most likely the opposite.
In the meantime, some perhaps unintended implications of the call-in have already been seen, with the nationals finally sitting up and taking interest in the story - particularly since it follows hard on the heels of the 'at risk' listing of Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden by the World Monuments Fund which was quite widely reported, and must have royally pissed off HW.
Private Eye's Piloti has written a large article for the current issue which gives a good, if brief explanation of what is a very complex history.
You can read it via the Deptford Is.. post which announces the launch of the campaign's petition via Change.org. The petition, which sends emails to the mayor, his planners, the developer and the architects every time someone signs it, has reached more than 900 signatures in just a week.
I'll try to keep the blog updated as the story develops, although for regular information and the inside goss on the story, I recommend following the Deptford Is.. blog and newsletter which has a lot more information.
Sign the petition
Read the Deptford Is.. post about the call-in.
Read what Private Eye had to say - via Deptford Is..
Blogger Andy Worthington's article kicks off by assessing the claim of 'affordable' housing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)