Planning policy notification: Local Development Scheme (LDS) 2017 update

NOTIFICATION OF LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME (LDS) UPDATE

Southwark Council has prepared a new Local Development scheme (LDS). The LDS sets out the timetable for preparing Southwark’s development plan and supplementary planning documents from July 2017 to December 2020. This will replace the previous Local Development Scheme which was published in August 2014.

Since the last LDS, a number of changes have been made to the document. This document now includes:

  • An updated New Southwark Plan timetable
  • A Gypsy and Traveller Development Plan document timetable
  • A new Opportunity Area Framework/Area Action Plan and possible Supplementary Planning Documents for Old Kent Road. These provide additional guidance for the development that is to take place in this area;
  • New SPDs for Householders and Commercial;
  • Updated SPD timetables for Residential Design Standards, Heritage and Affordable Housing;
  • A 3 year review of Community Infrastructure Levy and an updated CIL/S106 Supplementary Planning Document to respond to keep the financial requirements updated;
  • A review date for the Statement of Community Involvement to ensure that the digital by default strategy is taken into account in consultation.

Some supplementary planning documents are rescinded or removed as they are now out of date.

For more information about the LDS as well as the supporting documents, please follow this link.

Should you have any questions about the LDS please contact us by email planningpolicy@southwark.gov.uk ; or by telephone on 0207 525 5471.

 

Kind regards,

Planning Policy Team

Southwark Council

OBVNF Meeting 19 July: NSP53

 Forum Meeting

6.30pm Wednesday 19 July

 Globe House | Corner of Bermondsey Street & Crucifix Lane  

High-rise -v- Heritage
in Bermondsey St/St Thomas St

bvjul1

bvjul2

For the past few weeks at our information point in Globe House we have informed and consulted widely on the Council’s plans for St Thomas St/Bermondsey St.  Unsurprisingly, their high-rise plans are no more popular now than they were when Sellar came up with his original version – the three Shard satellites – in 2010.

Following the consultation the Forum now needs to consider our next steps towards protecting this area from insensitive development.  We have invited the Council to send a representative to the meeting who can explain with some greater accuracy than the hopelessly vague NSP 53 wording, what they are seeking to promote.  Presently they can’t even explain how they worked out the ‘site’ area,  particularly whether it includes demolition of the Vinegar Yard warehouse to make way for high-rise and whether it includes wiping Vinegar Yard itself and the eastern end of Snowsfields off the map as public roads. Network Rail, who own the former St Thomas St car park, and James Sellar, who owns the vinegar warehouse and 40-44 Bermondsey St, have also been invited to attend.

Important on the agenda will be the launch of our planned local list of buildings to be protected and the broader concept of places that go beyond individual buildings and which should be extended a more generalised form of protection.  The ‘placemarks’ initiative, led by BSAP, is currently underway and our subscribers are invited to go to the website and nominate any places of their own for inclusion: www.bermondseyplaces.uk.
.
A provisional list of local buildings of significance to the area’s character will be presented at the meeting, specifically in the St Thomas St/ Snowsfields/north Bermondsey St area.  Further nominations will be welcome and we will be aiming to extend the area of coverage in the coming weeks to the whole of the OBF area – and the original area from which the Council excluded the Forum.

At the meeting we will be considering the preservation of the Vinegar Yard warehouse in the context both of local listing and potentially its designation as an Asset of Community Value [‘ACV’] (a designation established under the Localism Act).  We have written to Simon Bevan, Head of Planning, asking him if he knows of any reason why it cannot be designated as an ACV.  One of the implications of such a designation is that there would arise a community right to buy the building in the event that it is sold by the present owner. If Sellar’s high-rise ambitions do not come to fruition such a sale is likely.

All welcome.

Meeting with proposed Developers of 74-84 Long Lane: Thursday 15 June

Meeting with proposed Developers of 74-84 Long Lane
Thursday 15 June, 7:30pm at
The Boot and Flogger pub 10-20 Redcross Way, SE1 1TA

One of the few remaining buildings of character on Long Lane has been the subject of a ‘consultation’ in relation to a proposal for a ‘co-living’ tower.

At a public exhibition on their proposals at the end of January the developers (or rather their PR team) were less than transparent about their plans.  It was far from clear what treatment they were proposing for the existing Rug Co. building (pictured below).
74ll
We don’t know whether this is the same prospective developers or whether they will be any more forthcoming but anyone concerned to keep anything of the history of Long Lane intact may be interested in attending.

The notice below was spotted in a local Tesco.

tll

 follow OBVNF on Twitter
 unsubscribe 

Protect Council Estates From Demolition

From Elephant Amenity Network

Dear Friend

Consultation on the Mayor’s Guide for Estate Regeneration is due to close on March 14 and a cross London campaign has begun to defend estates facing regeneration – Demolition Watch ; this is the website .

At the moment  there is one major demand being put to the Mayor – that there must  be a ballot of estate residents, to approve any  regeneration proposals. 

 A ballot is an elementary protection of estate resident’s interests and the very least that should be required before any regeneration goes ahead. You can help secure estate ballots by doing two things;

1/by signing this petition;

https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-votes-for-residents-on-estates-facing-regeneration-e38816c6-4a5f-4405-b9b4-bedd946eb9f6

2/by submitting a question to our GLA representative, Florence Eshalomi, to be put to the Mayor at his public question time.  There is a model question below and it can be sent to Florence.Eshalomi@london.gov.uk, asking her to submit it for his question time.

There is little doubt that more and more estates are being lined up for regeneration and we must get effective protection of estate residents in place, so please help.

Regards

Jerry

1) Resident Support

The Mayor has said regeneration should “only take place where there is resident support”. Official Guidance on Estate Regeneration (published December 2016) says that, where the proposals include demolition of tenants and leaseholders’ homes, a vote can be ‘appropriate’ to demonstrate the required ‘majority resident support’.

Does the Mayor agree that;

  • There should be a ballot where it is proposed that residents homes be demolished and,
  • GLA funding and planning approval support would not be made available for any schemes involving demolition without such a ballot?

 

OBVNF Neighbourhood Plan First Draft

Ater a long period in gestation we have now compiled a draft neighbourhood plan for the Old Bermondsey area.  This is the product of our various working groups who have each contributed suggestions in their respective policy areas.  There is considerable further refinement still to be done but the document as it stands will be sent to Southwark Council for comment once we have received any feedback from the local community.  If you have any further suggestions for policies that you think should be included or other comments please let us have them by email to: consultation@oldbermondseyforum.org Our intention is to pass the draft to Southwark Council by Friday 14 October so please let us have feedback as soon as possible.  There will be further opportunity to shape the plan at forthcoming meetings but anything not included at this stage will not go before the Council for their input and thus we will not have any indication on their receptivity to further inclusions.
 follow OBVNF on Twitter

35% Campaign update – Victory for Aylesbury Leaseholders

 https://i2.wp.com/35percent.org/img/london-borough-of-southwark-street-sign3.png

Victory for Aylesbury Leaseholders

Sep 18, 2016 12:00 am

Government blocks compulsory purchase order –

Leaseholders on the Aylesbury estate have won a great victory in defence of their homes, after the Government refused Southwark Council’s application to compulsory purchase their properties.

The judgement is a humiliating blow to the Council, who are found to have not taken reasonable steps to negotiate with the leaseholders and to have not made a “compelling” enough case for the Aylesbury regeneration scheme’s merits.

The Government therefore refused to override the leaseholders’ interests and interfere with their human rights by forcing them to sell their homes. The decision was taken by the Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG), Sajid Javid.

Eleven leaseholders objected to the CPO and gruelling hearings before the DCLG inspector were heard in April, May and October 2015. The leaseholders live in the Bradenham, Chartridge, Arklow and Chiltern blocks – the ‘First Development Site’ (FDS), which was granted planning permission in April 2015. Over 200 leaseholders have been decanted to make way for the scheme to date, only 3 of whom have been rehoused on the Aylesbury. There are around 300 leaseholders remaining on the rest of the estate.

CPO Public Inquiry – Council lawyers(left), Inspector Coffey(centre), Aylesbury leaseholders(right)

In his damning decision, the Secretary of State has said that Southwark has not fulfilled its Public Sector Equality Duty. He points out the majority of the estate (67%) are from black or ethnic minority backgrounds and it is ‘highly likely that there is a potential disproportionate impact on the .. these groups .. who are .. likely to have to move out of the area if the Order is confirmed.’ He goes on to point out the disruption caused to residents’ social and cultural life by the regeneration scheme. The Secretary of State was particularly concerned about ‘uprooting’ children ‘at a vulnerable stage in their development’ and the detrimental impact this would have on their education and future employment prospects.

In the Secretary of State’s judgement, the rehousing options offered to leaseholders would either impoverish them by requiring them to spend all their savings, or leave the area altogether in search of cheaper housing elsewhere. The inspector’s report has this to say about elderly leaseholders in particular: ‘Many of the leaseholders are of an age where they would be unable to obtain a mortgage to make up any shortfall and their future earning potential is limited. The requirement to use their savings and other investments severely limits their ability to choose how they spend their retirement and the use to which they put their savings and investments.’ (Para. 372)

The future must change

While the Secretary of State accepted that the regeneration scheme was viable, Southwark’s development partner, Notting Hill Housing Trust (NHHT) plainly had concerns about the costs even before the CPO decision was issued and has made a whole series of financial demands, which are to be agreed at a Cabinet meeting this coming Tuesday. NHHT is said in the Cabinet report to need more payments from Southwark because of the delay in the CPO decision. However, the Cabinet report was drafted before the Secretary of State’s CPO decision, so the possibility of NHHT coming back for more is real. In the meantime, the payments NHHT is demanding include;

  • £16.8m demolition costs for the First Development Site
  • £0.8m for the demolition of Plot 18
  • £2m to underwrite the cost of Plot 18’s planning application
  • £2m to underwrite the design fees for phase 2

In total the Council is now forecast to spend £52.5m over the next three years on the Aylesbury redevelopment scheme1.

Notting Hill Housing’s commitment to the scheme is also plainly a concern. The report goes on to say that ‘if the scheme has not proceeded in accordance with the DPA (Development Partnership Agreement)’ then ‘at that point all design work will pass to the council enabling the council to market the site’2 – in plain language: if Notting Hill drops out then Southwark takes over and looks for another developer.

The CPO decision is a serious indictment of Southwark’s conduct since the start of the scheme in 1997. It confirms what leaseholders on the estate have always known – Southwark wants to remove them as cheaply as possible and has little concern for how it damages them personally or where they go. This bad treatment goes beyond leaseholders; it takes in the majority of residents on the estate who come from black and ethnic minority backgrounds and whose interests have not been protected as they should have been. On top of this, Southwark’s development partner NHHT is clearly getting cold feet. All in all, the flaws in the regeneration scheme are opening up and Southwark Council should take the opportunity now to consider its whole future.

Footnotes:

1.    See paragraph 17 of the Tues Sep 20th 2016 Cabinet report

2.    See paragraph 13 of the Tues Sep 20th 2016 Cabinet report
Read in browser »

Recent Articles:

Skipton House approved – no affordable housing
Opportunity knocks down the Old Kent Road
Restricted Access – Elephant Park
At fault and unjust – Southwark slammed by Ombudsman

Old Kent Road Area Action Plan – extended deadline

Dear Sir/Madam,

1. Draft Old Kent Road Area Action Plan
2. Preliminary Draft Community Infrastructure Levy
3. Draft addendum to the Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy Supplementary Planning Document
4. Southwark Council’s “Regulation 123” list

Further to our email sent to your on the 4 July about our public consultation on the four documents listed above, we are now writing to let you know that the consultation period has been extended to Friday 4 November 2016. All comments should be received by 5pm on this date.
Where to view the documents

The draft AAP, the proposed changes to the adopted policies map, the preliminary draft charging schedule, the draft SPD addendum, the revised “Regulation 123 List” plan and supporting documents can be viewed at the locations listed below. They are also available to view on our website: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/oldkentroadaap

List of locations where documents are available for inspection:
Council offices (on request), 160 Tooley Street, SE1 2QH
(Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday: 9am to 5pm)
Blue Anchor Library: Market Place, Southwark Park Road, SE16 3UQ
(Monday; Tuesday & Thursday 09:00 – 19:00, Friday 10:00 – 18:00, Saturday 09:00 – 17:00)
Canada Water Library: 21 Surrey Quays Road, SE16 7AR
(Monday – Friday 09:00 – 20:00, Saturday 09:00 – 17:00, Sunday 12:00- 16:00)
East Street Library: 168-170 Old Kent Road, SE1 5TY
(Monday & Thursday 10:00 – 19:00, Tuesday 10:00 – 18:00, Saturday 10:00 – 17:00)
Peckham Library: 122 Peckham Hill Street, SE15 5JR

You can comment on the documents by:
Visiting our Consultation Hub and filling in our online questionnaire (details on the website above) or by sending comments by:
• E-mail: planningpolicy@southwark.gov.uk
• Post: FREEPOST SE1919/14 Planning Policy, Chief Executive’s Department, London SE1P 5EX

Other ways to get involved

We are holding and attending events throughout the consultation period. The next Old Kent Road Community Forum events will be held on:

• Wednesday 14 September 2016 at New Covenant Church, 506-510 Old Kent Rd, London SE1 5BA

We will also be holding an Old Kent Road Young People’s Workshop on Wednesday 7 September from 4.30pm to 7pm at New Covenant Church, 506-510 Old Kent Rd, London SE1 5BA.

You can also join the conversation about the Old Kent Road online.

Please keep up to date by visiting our website to find out about events. If you would like us to attend your local group meeting please contact the planning policy team using our contact details above