Luxury tower in Peckham

[jules b]

I know this is slightly ?off patch? but as many people who use the EDF live,shop,work,visit or grew up in Peckham, I think it?s still relevant: A tower of 20+ storeys is planned for the Aylesham Centre site, and while I think towers have their place (Canary Wharf, New York etc) I don?t think they are appropriate for Peckham for many reasons, including the impact on the conservation areas, the views, and perhaps most importantly that I don?t believe a luxury tower looming over us will do anything for social integration and harmony, or for the streetscape below.

There are better ways to create the high density housing we need for families in particular.

There?s a petition against the Aylesham tower at https://goo.gl/LXXRQE

Please do sign it, and pass it on.

Sadiq Khan has said that towers shouldn?t be foisted on communities that don?t want them, so we have to show him and Southwark Council that WE REALLY DON?T WANT TOWERS.

[sillywoman]

Signed.

[hazelnunhead]

Signed.

[alice]

All luxury or some social ?

[Blah Blah]

This has not got to planning stage yet. It is just a proposal by the company drawing up plans to redevelop the site. It is also worth remembering that there is a high rise tower block of council housing 100 meters from this site, so the idea that a single tower block is out of place is probably not true.

It is better to wait for the final plans to emerge and work on a proper objection based on more solid reasoning when then planning application looms, as no doubt Peckham Vision will do. Proportion of the development, as well as affordability of any housing can then be properly scrutinised based on actual plans.

[TE44]

Another fire in tower block manchester.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/live-updates-large-fire-apartment-14095782.amp

[jules b]

It is highly unlikely that there would be any affordable housing in the tower as those flats would be able to be sold for a lot (perhaps just in the lowest floors over the bin stores!). It is part of a larger scheme that would hopefully have affordable housing in it. The developers are saying they intend to put affordable housing in if finances allow it, and in my view that is the only argument for a tower: ie that if the developers make lots of money, they will have to provide more affordable housing (elsewhere in the development). However I don?t think it is worth all the harm a tower can do for a small number of affordable flats. There are much better ways to create the sort of housing we really need(like family housing) by using mid-height, high density housing ; 4-6 floors maybe.

[TE44]

Housing that encourages community is needed, consultation should be open to community participation, communication that is not just about

getting through legal hoops but actually trying to come together with the people whose community is being redeveloped.

[Blah Blah]

The mayor has set his intentions clear that targets of 35-50% affordable have to be met and we have a Labour council who also should take note that at Party Conference, Corbyn made it clear that residents should have a full say in regeneration and be taken notice of. Ok so this is a retail space, but there still needs to be pressure put on developers using the 'viability' argument to get out of building the kind of housing the area needs most. There are thousands of households on the council waiting list in this borough and I wonder how many are being currently housed in temporary B&B. Of new builds, year on year, net figures show that market rate private property has become the main type of building while homes for social rent have steadily declined (and gone into negative figures over the last two years) since this Labour council took over. There are FOI figures that illustrate this point and those figures should be used to demonstrate to the planning committee that any home building without a meaningful percentage of social homes should be rejected.

[dc]

There?s a tower (Witcombe Point) about 150m away with 20+ storeys. I?m not arguing the rights and wrongs here, but if people are seeking to oppose this on planning grounds by suggesting that it is totally out of keeping in the local context that, in itself, surely makes the argument a non-starter?

[jules b]

dc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There?s a tower (Witcombe Point) about 150m away

> with 20+ storeys. I?m not arguing the rights and

> wrongs here, but if people are seeking to oppose

> this on planning grounds by suggesting that it is

> totally out of keeping in the local context that,

> in itself, surely makes the argument a

> non-starter?

You?re right, there is one 20 storey building nearby, however all the rest of the area are 2-7 storeys. One tower is enough (too much!), the last thing we need is to turn Peckham into another Lewisham.

[JohnL]

dc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There?s a tower (Witcombe Point) about 150m away

> with 20+ storeys. I?m not arguing the rights and

> wrongs here, but if people are seeking to oppose

> this on planning grounds by suggesting that it is

> totally out of keeping in the local context that,

> in itself, surely makes the argument a

> non-starter?

If it changes the view substantially from Franks or the Bussey there is a reason to object. Would actually impact my view but not much - can still see the London Eye and St Pauls from mine and they'd have to build a wall to stop that :)

[Blah Blah]

I think providing much needed affordable housing is more important than one tower block and the view. Franks and the Bussey are not the owners of London's skyline and it is ridiculous to give them such preference. Personally, I think one tower would be fine. Two or three, not. And it does not have to be 20 storeys high. It can be 15 etc. The whole development can at least match the height of nearby buildings, most of which are at 3 storeys. More important is that the tower meets fair targets on the homes the area needs, not the homes the developer can profit most from. We are in a capital city, which is growing and building up is going to be the only solution if we are going to be able to house the workers we need.

[dc]

All valid points I?m sure, but I sincerely doubt that there is anything in planning guidance - national, regional (the London Plan) or local (the Southwark Plan - currently being updated) - about either ?not wanting to be like Lewisham? or any requirement to ?protect the view from Franks or the Bussey building?. So those are not grounds, per se, on which an application can be refused.

[natty01295]

Its not Right for Peckham

Low rise is best!!!

[jules b]

-- moved topic --

[BrandNewGuy]

A great overview of the grimness of Lewisham's recent developments. Peckham take note.

https://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/lewisham-the-notopian-future-of-london/10015443.article

[fishbiscuits]

The density of housing concerns me. But I'm not so convinced by the arguments about social cohesion.

Every new block of flats going up in London is described as "luxury". That doesn't necessarily make them so. The petition claims the flats will cost over ?1 million... on what evidence?

[jules b]

dc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> All valid points I?m sure, but I sincerely doubt

> that there is anything in planning guidance -

> national, regional (the London Plan) or local (the

> Southwark Plan - currently being updated) - about

> either ?not wanting to be like Lewisham? or any

> requirement to ?protect the view from Franks or

> the Bussey building?. So those are not grounds,

> per se, on which an application can be refused.

Currently the planning policy for this site has not been adopted as part of the ?New Southwark Plan?. Hopefully the Council will listen to what the vast majority of the community seem to want, and change its proposed Site Specific policy for this site (currently in its final phase of consultation). Sadiq Khan did say that towers should not be put in communities that don?t want them. This is why the petition was set up: to give voice to what has been the overwhelming response of people in a number of workshops, meetings, polls, questioning on the street, studies by students etc.

[Jim1234]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Surely we need high density housing to fix the housing crisis.

[Blah Blah]

It is the only way to fix it unless we want to requisition privately owned empty property, stop foreign ownership, stop ownership of more than one home, control rents in the private sector, end right to buy and a whole raft of other levels of interference that would be unpopular, and build on the green belt. We have to be sensible about the problem and the solutions. One tower block in that location is hardly going to bring the world crashing down.

[Eileen]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A great overview of the grimness of Lewisham's

> recent developments. Peckham take note.

> https://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/lewisham-the-notopian-future-of-london/10015443.article

This is a useful article, thanks for posting the link. Here is an extract from it:

""[What is happening in Lewisham] makes clear three things:

First, that the result of a numbers game is always going to be grim, with any sort of attempt at character and liveliness being fairly irrelevant. Second, expecting that ?more? will mean any help for anyone other than the already affluent, is optimistic. Here, council housing was actively erased from the site, and for all the involvement of the housing associations, this place will not even make the tiniest dent in Lewisham?s council waiting list. Third, the new vernacular, so long as it coexists with a developer-driven urbanism which sees spaciousness as so much wasted, unrentable space, means little more than politesse curtain-walled over plutocracy. If the New Lewisham is anything to go by, New London will consist of high-security, high-rise dormitories, built right into the inner city?""

So it's appropriate to ask if this is the right kind of approach to seriously attempting to meet the huge need for social and low cost housing in Southwark and London. The current approaches which are fuelling the pressure for tall towers are not in fact meeting that need. Housing waiting lists are growing not being reduced by the kind of housing being built.

[Abe_froeman]

How many floors are there in the car park and the Bussey building?

[Eileen]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> How many floors are there in the car park and the

> Bussey building?

In the Bussey Building, there are 4 floors and the roof level, which is taller than the former multi storey car park. That has 10 car park 'levels', and standing on the Bussey roof you look down on the multi storey in front.

[Abe_froeman]

So both are also high rise buildings!