luxury flats in rye lane, no more bussey - sign the petition!

[bloonoo]

Hi all

Saw this and it made me very sad - if you've ever had a good night out in Peckham or seen something amazing at the CLF Theatre, or you just don't think 'luxury' flats in the centre of Peckham are a good idea, please sign the petition here : https://www.change.org/p/shanali-counsell-southwark-planning-object-to-plans-for-housing-development-at-133-rye-lane-gateway-to-the-bussey-building?recruiter=187238481&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

Southwark planning application: http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=_STHWR_DCAPR_9562425

More info below:

A new scheme is being proposed to create X11 Luxury Apartments at The 133 Rye Lane gateway to The CLF Art Cafe, Bussey Building & Copeland Park. A scheme which will also see the creation of a series of X8 retail stores opening directly into the Bussey Corridor and courtyard + the addition of 2 floors to the 133 Rye Lane Building Roof. Said project making access and egress to and from + the operating of The CLF Art Cafe, Bussey Building & Copeland Park impossible. New scheme will also restrict / prohibit the use of CLF / Bussey outside Courtyard space + the potential loss of up to 700 jobs.

Furthermore 133 Rye Lane proposed extended roof will also directly / negatively affect projects like The Rooftop Cinema Club - as 133 Rye lane extended roof [with balconies] would be at the same height as / metres away from The Bussey Building Block A Roof. Said proposal would also affect the view from Franks Bar and [importantly] would negatively affect The New Peckham Co-Design Solution. The extended roof overlooking and hence potentially limiting uses of the new Peckham square project and it's proposed roof gardens.

There are many more reason that this scheme fails, many caused by the fact that [despite claims to the contrary in the developers proposal] the 133 Rye lane scheme was conceived and designed without discussion or consultation with any of the directly affected parties such as The CLF / Bussey and Copeland Park....... but, and in a nutshell.

We believe that the introduction of residential apartments at 133 Rye Lane [The Gateway to Peckhams Cultural Hub] is fundamentally wrong and will stop dead in it?s tracks Peckhams creative and cultural rise. Heralding the beginning of the end of what makes Peckham so special. A sure sign of the on-set of full blown gentrification.

[Jeremy]

the description is a little unclear. Will there still be access to the bussey building and copeland park from Rye Lane, through the gateway?

[Bluerevolution]

Signed and shared

[Otta]

My impression was that there would be no more Bussey building, or certainly no more club nights.

[Jeremy]

Is that actually true?

I admit it's hard to see how it could work, seeing as people queue for the club through that gateway. But I think we need the facts here, rather than assumptions.

The word "luxury" is not helpful, as pretty much every new apartment building in London is advertised as "luxury".

Unsurprisingly the Southwark planning website is not working so can't see the application.

[Charles Notice]

New scheme will also restrict / prohibit the use of CLF / Bussey outside Courtyard space + the potential loss of up to 700 jobs.

What 700 jobs?

[JohnL]

Can't believe this would even be contemplated.

Signed.

[JohnL]

Not a positive public comment on the application that I can see

One says

Comment submitted date: Thu 12 Nov 2015

I Say HELL NO

[JohnL]

https://thump.vice.com/en_ca/article/are-two-of-south-londons-best-loved-clubs-set-to-close

http://www.factmag.com/2015/11/11/bussey-building-rye-wax-clf-art-cafe-peckham-development/

[LondonMix]

Bloono, can you explain a bit more? I want to support the petition but the plans aren't available on Southwark's website (an error keeps coming up)and your explanation of the problems aren't entirely clear for me. I would strongly push for some affordable flats to be incorporated in overall residential conversion as 11 flats exceeds the threshold for that and will help keep some economic diversity in the area. With that said it would be great if you could answer the questions below:

1. What is happening to Ash Meat and Fish, which is the current retail unit at 133? Is that closing and being broken into 8 small retail units facing Bussey Alley and / or Rye Lane? If they are planning retail facing the alley vs just facing Rye Lane its probably to sell stuff to people going to the Bussey Building / Copeland park. Otherwise, it would make no sense to orient the retail that way as it has no other foot traffic. Can you explain why you think this is going to restrict access to Bussey etc?

2. How do the proposals restrict access and use of the courtyard? Retail facing the courtyard, again, only seems to make sense if you are anticipating heavy foot fall so it wouldn't make any sense for the developer to restrict this in anyway.

3. I love the roof top cinema. Can you explain if the top of the additional two roof levels of the new 133 roof is exactly at the same height as the top of Bussey? If so, when holding an event on the roof of Bussey, wouldn't you still be able to have unrestricted views of London? I'm asking because in your first post you say these are at the same level, which doesn't immediately strike me as problematic for the cinema views (which I love).

4. Can you explain how the multi-story car park is impacted-- isn't it higher than the Bussey building (I can't remember for sure)? Also its further north so this development shouldn't impact Frank's views of London. Also, given that car park and cinema have officially been awarded to someone for redevelopment, it might be more relevant to understand how 133 interacts with the new proposed scheme, rather than what is currently in place there.

5. How is the overlooking you mention going to impact the new station square exactly? Are you saying people won't use the roof top gardens because people in their flats will be able to see them in the public gardens? Is this overlooking only possible from 133 Rye lane if it gets the higher floors or do other buildings overlook the square / proposed gardens already? Why do you think the overlooking prevent the gardens being used?

6. ETA: You've mentioned where the retail is going to oriented but where is the residential access point for the flats? Is that off Rye lane rather than the alley or courtyard? I imagine that's the case but it would be great if you could confirm.

Its always better to actually object to a planning application with things that are not just assumptions and that are also viable issues for planning consideration. Getting people all riled up over points the developer may be able to easily dismiss rather than focusing more keenly on things that can be influenced would be a missed opportunity. I'm not saying that's what you are doing, but its why I'm asking all these seemingly pedantic questions!

Edited for typos. Back to work now.

[Jeremy]

There is a precedent for blocking attempts to build flats next to clubs - e.g. Camden Koko and Ministry. So the petition presumably has a decent chance of changing the outcome.

I wonder if the application contains any proposals for soundproofing, etc? Also wonder if the noise issue can be circumvented with certain measures, i.e. using the roof as the smoking area, exit via copeland road only after midnight, etc.

[LondonMix]

So Jeremy, the fear is that once resi is developed there, the new flat owners will object to the pre-existing night time businesses making noise and have them shut down?

Bloono-- do you know if they have included soundproofing in the design? Have you seen the full application and how they address potential noise issues and complaints?

[JohnL]

Surely it would all close whilst building work was undertaken - a basement excavation. How long would that take ?

74 public comments - all anti now. petition close to 1000.

[siousxiesue]

Signed. Shared

[JohnL]

There is a document called

Document - FACADE SOUND INSULATION ASSESSMENT

"The site is situated in the close vicinity of a busy road to the west, a railway line to the north and a bar/club to the east. A noise survey has been carried out by Apex Acoustics on the north, east and west facades to establish the noise levels incident on the development for the purposes of determining the facade sound insulation requirements.

The noise survey results demonstrate that the site is affected by high levels of noise, with noise from the Bussey Building and associated courtyard to the east being one of the primary sources of noise at the site.

Noise levels from the Bussey Building are highest on the east facade, therefore it is proposed that the bedrooms will be located on the north and west facades where the incident noise levels are lower. Dining/living areas are to be provided on the east facade.

For the west facade, high performance double glazed units are proposed in order to control environmental noise ingress from Rye Lane.

For the east facade, enclosed winter gardens are generally proposed along with a high performance double glazed unit to the living spaces, all of which is predicted to result in internal noise levels that achieve the requirements established with Southwark Council."

** That's only an extract **

[Jeremy]

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> So Jeremy, the fear is that once resi is developed

> there, the new flat owners will object to the

> pre-existing night time businesses making noise

> and have them shut down?

Well yes... I'm reading between the lines and trying to cut through the gumf, but this is probably the crux of it. It wouldn't be the first time.. similar problem potentially facing Canavans too.

[LondonMix]

Jeremy, I found a way to access the documents

http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk/documents/?casereference=15/AP/3666&system=DC

I'm not sure that argument will fly with planning given the developer has addressed it in numerous places in the documentation -- as JohnL's link shows (which is just one of many extracts on the details). They've assessed the noise impact of the rail station and night economy and are insulating accordingly. The sound insulation will be tested by Southwark as part of final occupancy certificate.

I didn't realise from the original post that the building is actually retain a large community space for D1 / D2, which it will need to insulate the residential units from as well.

[LondonMix]

Also, to answer some of my own questions:

1. Meat and Fish is going

2. Residential and community space entrances will be off Rye Lane, not Bussey Alley or the courtyard

3. Retail is oriented on Rye Lane (largest unit), courtyard (second largest), and a few smaller units along the Bussey Alleyway

[DaveR]

"We believe that the introduction of residential apartments at 133 Rye Lane [The Gateway to Peckhams Cultural Hub] is fundamentally wrong and will stop dead in it?s tracks Peckhams creative and cultural rise. Heralding the beginning of the end of what makes Peckham so special. A sure sign of the on-set of full blown gentrification."

This is the real objection it seems. And it's utter b0ll0cks. As is the 700 jobs lost figure, which no-one has sought to justify.

[LondonMix]

I'm reading through the documents at the moment which are extensive and will probably take probably all my lunch hour. I'll reserve judgement until the end.

One thing the Design and Access statement highlighted is all the changes on Rye Lane. Did anyone else realize the 135 Rye Lane (Khan's) has already had a planning application approved to refurbish the entire building and been granted a change of use from a shop to a restaurant!

I had no idea. In a few years Rye Lane is going to be unrecognizable which I know is inevitable but part of me is going to miss its current incarnation. My friends and are were just talking about the potential loss of the cinema and saying we wonder if new people moving to the area can even appreciate any of its sticky smelly charm...

http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

[JohnL]

I heard Khan's was going to refurbish the frontage to the original quality.

Didn't know they were to become Khan's Posh Nosh :)

[LondonMix]

Yes, its a restoration of the original Art Deco facade which is great. Its treated by Southwark as a building derserving of listing so the restoration should be very sympathetic but yes, it won't be Khans as we know it for much longer.

[Charles Notice]

What is not mentioned is that many of those objecting will probably not be around in the next few years when they grow up and move away and the area will be left with the dump that Peckham is now.

Why will people not allow the area to move on?

[Nigello]

In a few years Rye Lane is going to be unrecognizable which I know is inevitable but part of me is going to miss its current incarnation.

Will you really miss the muck, squalor and illegal parking? I won't. I am glad that things are moving and changing. I don't want a bland high street by any means, but I do want basic levels of access and hygiene. I hope the food markets, the independent stall holders, the pound shops and Iceland remain, but I also want more variety of shopping/banking/enertainment options.

Three cheers for the new, independent optician, for example, and for the great little shops in Haldrons Arcade. Boos a-plenty for those shops that litter and block traffic. To justify bad practice so as to champion "coolness" and "vibe" is lamentable and risible at the same time.

[Blah Blah]

Peckham isn't a dump, and even if it were, the answer is not to drive out the small businesses that give it so much character and replace them with more of the same you find everywhere else. Khan's is my favourite store because there's nowhere else like it. There are restaurants on every corner!

I'm suporting the petition because as much as we need housing I don't believe that is the right location for it.