102 flats for Loughborough Junction!

[prunus]

Walking along Coldharbour Lane yesterday I noticed a pink planning notice on a lamppost outside the Warrior - thinking it might be news about the redevelopment I read it and blow me if someone isn't applying to demolish ALL the industrial buildings along Belinda Road and to build an 8-story block of 102(!) flats.

From Lambeth's Planning site:
"In outline, the demolition of existing industrial buildings and the erection of an eight storey building comprising 102 flats (siting and means of access to be determined)."

Is this a good thing? I can't decide. My initial reaction was 'that's a lot a lot of flats', but then again more people should be good for the area - more support for local businesses etc.

How big is 8 stories anyway?

Does anyone know anything more about this?

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Walking along Coldharbour Lane yesterday I noticed a pink planning notice on a lamppost outside the Warrior - thinking it might be news about the redevelopment I read it and blow me if someone isn't applying to demolish ALL the industrial buildings along Belinda Road and to build an 8-story block of 102(!) flats.

From Lambeth's Planning site:
"In outline, the demolition of existing industrial buildings and the erection of an eight storey building comprising 102 flats (siting and means of access to be determined)."

Is this a good thing? I can't decide. My initial reaction was 'that's a lot a lot of flats', but then again more people should be good for the area - more support for local businesses etc.

How big is 8 stories anyway?

Does anyone know anything more about this?

Are they luxury flats?

 

[fanta]

Are they luxury flats?

Dear God I do hope not. We only want slummy flats round here!

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Dear God I do hope not. We only want slummy flats round here!

Quite right

 

[hatboy]

I've seen the plans for the Warrior and it's an attractive development including restoring the pub as a proper local named again the Warrior. 102 flats behind will have to include a proportion of social housing. And Belinda Rd needs improvement.

I wouldn't worry too much about this.

 

[prunus]

Are they luxury flats?

Ho ho! I expect so "Sandwiched picturesquely between the London Bridge-Victoria and Clapham Juntion-Blackfriars high-level railway lines, with views across the bustling thoroughfare of Coldharbour Lane, famed for its vibrant streetlife, this eight story block of penthouse suites will be ideally suited for today's high-fliers."

 

[Fuzzy]

Dear God I do hope not. We only want slummy flats round here!

the application is in outline with only siting and access being determined at this stage. that means that they are only seeking approval for the principle of the use of the site, where the blocks will be located on the site and they will be accessed. it will mean that further submissions will be made that will seek a determination for what they are going to look like. the figure of 102 flats is a guide to what they reckon they can get on the site. it may go up in the future. at this stage they will only get outline planning permission if they sign up to an agreement to provide affordable housing which should amount to about 30% of the total number of units if possibly not higher thanks to mr livingston.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

yes, any development of 14 dwellings or more must have a proportion of social housing - I thought Ken was pushing for something more like 45% but I may be wrong.

It sounds like an acceptable scheme - we need to look at brownfield sites such as this for housing, instead of concreting over the countryside.

 

[lang rabbie]

And Belinda Rd needs improvement.

I wouldn't worry too much about this.

What about the jobs of people currently employed on site?

And will small local businesses be able to operate underneath the viaduct arches once there are neighbouring residential properties?

I don't think Lambeth should be emulating Southwark planners' approach in the Imperial Gardens case

 

[fanta]

I wouldn't worry too much about this.

I'll try not to.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Ho ho! I expect so "Sandwiched picturesquely between the London Bridge-Victoria and Clapham Juntion-Blackfriars high-level railway lines, with views across the bustling thoroughfare of Coldharbour Lane, famed for its vibrant streetlife, this eight story block of penthouse suites will be ideally suited for today's high-fliers."

You missed out edgy

 

[prunus]

I've seen the plans for the Warrior and it's an attractive development including restoring the pub as a proper local named again the Warrior. 102 flats behind will have to include a proportion of social housing. And Belinda Rd needs improvement.

I wouldn't worry too much about this.

I wasn't worrying particularly - I think it's got to be a good thing as you say. I was wondering if anyone knew for instance if it was a private/housing association development, or maybe keyworkers (King's Hospital is just up the road after all), or if anyone knew what the council/BAF thought about it.

102 flats is less than 10% of the size of the Loughborough Estate, so in perspective it's not that large.

More customers for the reborn Warrior! (sunman?)

 

[jenstar]

Loughborough Junctio

does this mean that the proposed development at the green man is not happening? i thought the two developments were happening in conjunction or not at all

 

[guinnessdrinker]

What about the jobs of people currently employed on site?

And will small local businesses be able to operate underneath the viaduct arches once there are neighbouring residential properties?

I don't think Lambeth should be emulating Southwark planners' approach in the Imperial Gardens case

don't start me on Southwark planners, they don't even tell you about planning applications, sometimes.

 

[pinkmonkey]

Ho ho! I expect so "Sandwiched picturesquely between the London Bridge-Victoria and Clapham Juntion-Blackfriars high-level railway lines, with views across the bustling thoroughfare of Coldharbour Lane, famed for its vibrant streetlife, this eight story block of penthouse suites will be ideally suited for today's high-fliers."

If they put up a billboard with a poster of young hetero. clean cut couple laughing as they play fight over a toothbrush in their luxury bathroom, you've got your answer.

 

[Fuzzy]

don't start me on Southwark planners, they don't even tell you about planning applications, sometimes.

local authorities have a duty to advertise the fact that a planning applicaiton has been submitted on a site. this involves them putting up a site notice and putting a notice in one of the local papers and possibly the london gazette (for some reason which i'm not sure about). Local authorities do do neighbourhood consultations by writing to those neighbours that they think will be affected by the proposals. if you live half a mile away from a small rear extension to a house across a busy road, you cant legitimately say you will be affected by the development and that you should have been consulted. on the other hand if there are large scale proposals then the council will normally advertise the fact and you can always go and look at the weekly lists of planning applications that are submitted which most councils put on their web sites.

 

[guinnessdrinker]

local authorities have a duty to advertise the fact that a planning applicaiton has been submitted on a site. this involves them putting up a site notice and putting a notice in one of the local papers and possibly the london gazette (for some reason which i'm not sure about). Local authorities do do neighbourhood consultations by writing to those neighbours that they think will be affected by the proposals. if you live half a mile away from a small rear extension to a house across a busy road, you cant legitimately say you will be affected by the development and that you should have been consulted. on the other hand if there are large scale proposals then the council will normally advertise the fact and you can always go and look at the weekly lists of planning applications that are submitted which most councils put on their web sites.

the reason I said what I said was that I got involved in fighting an application. the first time it had to be withdrawn because it was a crap project with valid objections from more than 3 objectors. the first time around, they had told most of the closest neighbours that they had to consult. when a second amended application came back, they did not tell anybody (having made that mistake first time around) but their website claimed they did, with a full list of addresses that they said they had written to. but nobody actually got any letters. but I am so sad that I actually read planning application pages.

 

[Fuzzy]

the reason I said what I said was that I got involved in fighting an application. the first time it had to be withdrawn because it was a crap project with valid objections from more than 3 objectors. the first time around, they had told most of the closest neighbours that they had to consult. when a second amended application came back, they did not tell anybody (having made that mistake first time around) but their website claimed they did, with a full list of addresses that they said they had written to. but nobody actually got any letters. but I am so sad that I actually read planning application pages.

that is a bit shit of the council i agree. dont worry GD there is nothing wrong with taking a healthy interest in planning matters.

 

[guinnessdrinker]

that is a bit shit of the council i agree. dont worry GD there is nothing wrong with taking a healthy interest in planning matters.

basically, I found that planning officers work with the developer to present an 'acceptable' project in terms of planning law and don't like it when pesky objectors are in the way. the whole thing has been an experience and I have a new area of interest.

 

[Fuzzy]

basically, I found that planning officers work with the developer to present an 'acceptable' project in terms of planning law and don't like it when pesky objectors are in the way. the whole thing has been an experience and I have a new area of interest.

it is a common problem. unfortunately if the site in question has a specific allocation in the Unitary Development Plan then it is quite hard for those that may be affected by the development to stop it. as you say in in terms of planning law the development may be acceptable but in reality it may blight those affected by it. have you heard of the planning aid service? qualified planners provide their services free of charge for community groups to use to either facilitate or prevent inappropriate development.

 

[sun man]

I wasn't worrying particularly - I think it's got to be a good thing as you say. I was wondering if anyone knew for instance if it was a private/housing association development, or maybe keyworkers (King's Hospital is just up the road after all), or if anyone knew what the council/BAF thought about it.

102 flats is less than 10% of the size of the Loughborough Estate, so in perspective it's not that large.

More customers for the reborn Warrior! (sunman?)

Cheers, more customers for the Warrior would be great. And for all the other businesses around the area that are suffering at the moment. Work is still due to start in mid-August for the the two pubs.

I went to see the plans for this development and it clearly states on the application form and in sketch on the plans that all these proposed units are to be allocated as "affordable housing".

Belinda road used to have about 15 terrace houses on each side owned by the council. These were demolished in about 1975 to make way for a Waste Transfer station and a Scrapyard.

It's not acceptable that fireman and Police officers etc. have to travel from miles outside of London to get to there job. This scheme provides a good solution to the problems that Belinda road currently faces.

Best of luck!

 

[aurora green]

Personally, I'm not convinced by the idea of cramming more and more people into such an already overcrowded area. I realise that brownfield sites have to be developed and that is good, but honestly, around here we've just had a quite large new estate, (behind Styles gardens) built, resulting in a massive influx of new people to the area, who proberbly have little connection to the area.With no new community fasilities, yet more people it feels to me like the notion of community doesn't really stand a chance. How can we meet each other and get to know each other, if there are no meeting points.
It just seems too convienient to stick everybody around here, close all the pubs, demolish the community centre...and leave us all to it.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

I went to see the plans for this development and it clearly states on the application form and in sketch on the plans that all these proposed units are to be allocated as "affordable housing".

Affordable to whom? Someone on benefits? Someone working on the checkout in Tesco? Or a middle clas family with two kids? I'd be interested to know if there is an actual definition of "affordable".

"Affordable housing" is also not the same as social housing for council tenants. This is what we need more of - stuff in the public sector, not the private sector - to reduce the waiting lists.

I got a free Lambeth newspaper (courtesy of The Voice) through the letterbox yesterday. Buried inside it said Lambeth Housing had received £54m this year for housing improvements. Anyone know how it is being spent?

 

[lang rabbie]

Only last year, Lambeth was proposing a £10million redevelopment of Belinda Road as part of the creative industries agenda...

Brixton Creative and Cultural Industries Project Plan & Progress Report March 2003

Loughborough officers group and planning department
considering plans for £10m redevelopment of Belinda
Road, an environmental grot spot in the area.

 

[THE WARRIOR]

I think that the housing should contain a mix of affordable housing (Housing Associatoin at subsidised rents), shared ownership and private, and not just affordable as it should be hoped that the private housing would not be their to subsidise the affordable, but to allow some section 106 money to improve the infrastructure in the area. Otherwise such developments whilst providing welcome use to brownfield land, could become a drain on already overloaded services such as Doctors, Schools and the 08.28 to Blackfriars! As Sunman has pointed out, additional residents will enable other commercial services such as shops and bars to invest and improve. This should be so for all new development - as it is important to create a balanced mixed community

 

[Fuzzy]

I think that the housing should contain a mix of affordable housing (Housing Associatoin at subsidised rents), shared ownership and private, and not just affordable as it should be hoped that the private housing would not be their to subsidise the affordable, but to allow some section 106 money to improve the infrastructure in the area. Otherwise such developments whilst providing welcome use to brownfield land, could become a drain on already overloaded services such as Doctors, Schools and the 08.28 to Blackfriars! As Sunman has pointed out, additional residents will enable other commercial services such as shops and bars to invest and improve. This should be so for all new development - as it is important to create a balanced mixed community

spot on the warrior. a lot of councils do not want 100% affordable housing schemes as they feel that those in need of housing are stigmatised by living in housing developments that are 100% affordable. Councils wish to see tenants of RSL properties included in teh bulk of developments rather than being put in the shit block at the back next to the railway line.

you raise another good point as well in terms of S106 agreements and payments. if a scheme is 100% public money it does not leave much scope for council's to request additional planning gain from the developer. most new housing developments require a payment for additional educaiton provision arising out of the development especially if the local schools cannot accommodate the additional children that will be resident in the new houses.

 

[charcol]

I got a free Lambeth newspaper (courtesy of The Voice) through the letterbox yesterday. Buried inside it said Lambeth Housing had received £54m this year for housing improvements. Anyone know how it is being spent?

I don't know the exact figures off the top of my head, but much of the money has to be spent on meeting the government's requirements for the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. You can find more information here.

There will also some investment in security systems and environmental improvements on estates, which the government bizarrely (IMHO) decided to omit from the decent homes stanrd requirements.

 

[Ol Nick]

I got a free Lambeth newspaper (courtesy of The Voice) through the letterbox yesterday. Buried inside it said Lambeth Housing had received £54m this year for housing improvements. Anyone know how it is being spent?

Getting the free newspaper was nice, wasn't it. Isn't Lambeth (the place) great. As for the money. There are lots of signs ouside estates these days claiming repairs are being carried out.

I went to a place near Brighton last week called "West Norwood" and they were spending Lambeths "Major Repairs" money even there. The sign claimed the cash came out the Two-Jags Prescott's back pocket. (Although not in so many words.)