The Hero Of Switzerland

[Gramsci]

The law is written to favour developers, and Lambeth needs to build a lot of houses ( forecast 30k population growth in Lambeth 2018 to 2028 ), that’s at least 1k extra flats/houses per year. ( Assuming each holds 4 which is probably a bit high. )

I suspect the reason it looks like the council officers support the developer is that the council officers will be the ones who end up in court, paying for the lawyers when the developer takes them to court.

Alex

Lambeth needing a lot more homes and the law being written to favour developers are two separate issues.

This is the whole problem with the rise of Neo Liberalism.

Peoples needs get put together with the "this is just how things are. Its unfortunate but that is how it is" line of argument.

Conflating the two issues of need for extra homes and developers is part of the problem.

Not having a go at you here. I think you are a good poster.

 

[Gramsci]

Link didn't work

 

[alex_]

Lambeth needing a lot more homes and the law being written to favour developers are two separate issues.

But they are both your problem if you working in the Lambeth housing department !

I don't think that Lambeth housing are “the developers friend”, they’ve just been dealt a shitty set of cards and are trying to do the best they can.

Trying to avoid being sued by developers and running up legal costs is probably pretty high on their list of priorities as it takes time away from useful work.

Alex

 

[Gramsci]

But they are both your problem if you working in the Lambeth housing department !

I don't think that Lambeth housing are “the developers friend”, they’ve just been dealt a shitty set of cards and are trying to do the best they can.

Trying to avoid being sued by developers and running up legal costs is probably pretty high on their list of priorities as it takes time away from useful work.

Alex

Your are mixing up different departments. Planning and Lambeth Housing are separate.

Also this is not about developers suing the Council. Developers can appeal a decision.

 

[CH1]

Your are mixing up different departments. Planning and Lambeth Housing are separate.

Also this is not about developers suing the Council. Developers can appeal a decision.

Costs can be claimed on an appeal. This used to be used as a threat against councillors on planning committee - particularly in Tescos cases.

Not sure if any costs ever got claimed - or what for. Specialist advice is mentioned, but the cost of an original application is ruled out. Not clear either re cost of barristers - are they specialist advisers?
Claim planning appeal costs

 

[Gramsci]

The law is written to favour developers, and Lambeth needs to build a lot of houses ( forecast 30k population growth in Lambeth 2018 to 2028 ), that’s at least 1k extra flats/houses per year. ( Assuming each holds 4 which is probably a bit high. )



Alex

On housing.

The local plan and London plan give density levels for housing.

This limits the amount of housing on one site.

Lambeth needing more homes and planning policy are separate issues.

This application density was way over what is allowed in the Local plan.

What officers said was that "emerging" policy in the Mayor's London plan was for higher density.

There is a difference between agreed policy and emerging policy. As local, London and national policy undergo revisions , which take time, emerging policy is what will replace agreed policy. But is still under consultation.

In this case the officers gave more weight to emerging policy on density than agreed policy.

Something imo that is questionable.

 

[teuchter]

Is it true that 'emerging policy' is for higher density?

I think when I last looked into this (which was for the Higgs site) there was a draft london plan in progress but the density allowances weren't all that different. I might be wrong though.

 

[Gramsci]

Is it true that 'emerging policy' is for higher density?

I think when I last looked into this (which was for the Higgs site) there was a draft london plan in progress but the density allowances weren't all that different. I might be wrong though.

You could be right.

In the officers report for the meeting they said emerging policy was for higher density.

The officers report put forward the view that planning officers could take a very relaxed view on density. That density limits should not be applied "mechanistically".

I do find statements like this in planning reports to Cllrs on PAC highly subjective interpretations of planning policy.

Its saying yes there are limits on density but as a planner I have special ability to see whether these planning requirements are followed to the letter.

A few quotes from the report the officers wrote for Cllrs

12.3.6 Officers consider that the density proposed is, in this instance, appropriate noting the site’s access to
public transport, local amenities, wider setting and the direction of emerging development planning
policy.

And:

12.3.3 Based on a net residential site area of 0.036ha and 93 habitable rooms, the scheme has a density of
2,540hr/ha or 956u/ha. The scheme would far exceed the nominated density range, but this is a guide
which is not to be applied mechanistically

Not saying you are wrong.

It was one of my problems with the officers report and the PowerPoint presentation they did at the PAC. Plus as CH1 pointed out batting off queries by Cllrs.

I didn't like the way Bristow the head of planning , who attended the PAC, talked to Cllrs who questioned aspect of the Developer application and Officer endorsement of the the application. He talked to them at times like an exasperated adult talking to a child. As though he had to explain the obvious to the child in simple language.

 

[alex_]

Costs can be claimed on an appeal. This used to be used as a threat against councillors on planning committee - particularly in Tescos cases.

Not sure if any costs ever got claimed - or what for. Specialist advice is mentioned, but the cost of an original application is ruled out. Not clear either re cost of barristers - are they specialist advisers?
Claim planning appeal costs

I bet 106 “optimisation consultants” are specialist advisors.

Alex

 

[CH1]

PS I was just deleting loads of planning portal emails when I saw this.
2016 - Secreatary of State Greg Clark blocks Ipswich Council from providing a scheme with 94 units of affordable housing on the site of former Ipswich airport.
20.The Secretary of State considers that despite the high quality of physical design and despite the mix of different tenures of affordable housing, a single cluster of 94 affordable units would conflict with the objective of Policy DM24 to achieve developments in which the affordable units are truly integrated into the market housing. Consequently he also considers that so large a cluster would conflict with the aim at Framework paragraph 50 to create inclusive and mixed communities.

In other words in this case the government cancelled the scheme because no market housing was provided.
Latest news | Planning Portal

This sot of nonsense needs to be challenged at parliamentary level.

 

[Torpid Scorpion]

What became of this? Are we to be gifted with a massive rent-extraction rig drilling into the heart of our neighbourhood, did covid kill the plan, or what?

 

[cuppa tee]

What became of this? Are we to be gifted with a massive rent-extraction rig drilling into the heart of our neighbourhood, did covid kill the plan, or what?

Think I read it got the go ahead but when I spoke to the landlord he reckoned not.

 

[editor]

massive rent-extraction rig drilling into the heart of our neighbourhood

I like your turn of phrase

 

[CH1]

What became of this? Are we to be gifted with a massive rent-extraction rig drilling into the heart of our neighbourhood, did covid kill the plan, or what?

The planning committee minutes are here Agenda item - Hero of Switzerland 142 Loughborough Road (Coldharbour) 19/01481/FUL | Lambeth Council
It was approved subject to section 106.
However depending on the developer's source of funding it might not happen - which may be what cuppa tee is picking up from the landlord.

 

[Loose meat]

From the link immediately above (last para):

In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within six months of committee, to delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in the report, addendums and/or the PAC minutes.

That was decided last September so is well out of time now - does anyone know if the S106 was completed?

 

[CH1]

From the link immediately above (last para):

That was decided last September so is well out of time now - does anyone know if the S106 was completed?

I don't know - but there is likely to be a time limit anyway. That said its possible planning changes coming down the line from Build, Build, Build Boris might make this all obsolete. Maybe more planning oriented urbanites such as teuchter might be able to help?

 

[teuchter]

I don't know - but there is likely to be a time limit anyway. That said its possible planning changes coming down the line from Build, Build, Build Boris might make this all obsolete. Maybe more planning oriented urbanites such as teuchter might be able to help?

No particular insight to offer I'm afraid!
I've also been wondering what the impact of everything that's happened this year will be on the Higgs project.

 

[CH1]

No particular insight to offer I'm afraid!
I've also been wondering what the impact of everything that's happened this year will be on the Higgs project.

Presumably they will be tempted to go back to the drawing board to get more units - and higher blocks.
The situation at Higgs suggests that it is not only private developers who landbank and sit on sites.
LJAG should invite Lord Kerslake for a Zoom meeting to explain what the hold-up is.

 

[teuchter]

If there's a big shift to more home working then I'm not sure that adding more units to expensive-to-build developments whose resale value is based on easy access to central london workplaces is the obvious response.

 

[CH1]

If there's a big shift to more home working then I'm not sure that adding more units to expensive-to-build developments whose resale value is based on easy access to central london workplaces is the obvious response.

Quite so - but if Peabody were trying to self-finance their deveopment in the manner of Your Nu Town Hall some extra units might make their sums add up better - unless they hang about ntil the next property crash, whenever that might come.

 

[cuppa tee]

Gensler to replace Damien Hirst hangout with 13-storey tower

Gensler proposal for pub at the centre of 1990s art movement approved

www.building.co.uk

 

[editor]

Just got an email from Lambeth telling me that the development has been approved.

 

[CH1]

Just got an email from Lambeth telling me that the development has been approved.

From cuppa tee 's article it looks like this was US consultancy inspiration.
As essentially is Hondo's thing - with the fig leaf of a BAME owned architect.
Are we already into the delights of BREXIT and Trumpism in the property market?

 

[cuppa tee]

From cuppa tee 's article it looks like this was US consultancy inspiration.
As essentially is Hondo's thing - with the fig leaf of a BAME owned architect.
Are we already into the delights of BREXIT and Trumpism in the property market?

they have had some high profile clients in the past.....

Projects | Gensler

Discover projects from across Gensler's practice areas and offices across the world.

www.gensler.com

.....will be interesting to see their vision for ye olde estate public house.

 

[CH1]

they have had some high profile clients in the past.....

Projects | Gensler

Discover projects from across Gensler's practice areas and offices across the world.

www.gensler.com

.....will be interesting to see their vision for ye olde estate public house.

Makes me wonder if these people are scraping the barrel doing smaller schemes because the big stuff is either drying up or saturated.

 

[Tw75]

Hero now has metal plates over doors and windows and all outdoor ornaments and plants have gone.

 

[TopCat]

Hero now has metal plates over doors and windows and all outdoor ornaments and plants have gone.

A real shame.

 

[editor]

Hero now has metal plates over doors and windows and all outdoor ornaments and plants have gone.

Really depressing news.

 

[r0bb0]

See what happens, maybe he went on a trip?

 

[editor]

A sad sight

The Hero of Switzerland pub is now closed and boarded up – photo feature

This is the sad sight of the boarded-up Hero of Switzerland community pub on the Loughborough Estate, which is to be demolished and replaced by a 13 storey new development.

www.brixtonbuzz.com