80 nov 2018 - London Forum · 2018-10-31 · Society Page 10 Recent planning initiatives Encouraging developments on Planning Some chinks of light appear amidst the gloom Court of

newsforum Winter 2018 1

In a most important decision the Court ofAppeal ruled in October that ministersmust abide by a published government

policy and give reasons for call-in decisionson planning applications. This includesplanning applications that were not called in– like the highly controversial PaddingtonCube.

SAVE successfully argued that underexisting policy, announced in the House ofCommons in 2001 and restated in 2010,ministers are obliged to give reasons whenthey decline to call in planning applications.This policy was overlooked by civil servantsand ministers since 2014 without apparentexplanation. It means that the Secretary ofState for Housing, Communities and LocalGovernment must now follow his ownpublished advice and give reasons for hisdecisions.

The case was heard in the Court ofAppeal at the Royal Courts of Justice on13th September in front of Lord JusticeSingh, Lord Justice Coulson and LordJustice MacFarlane. SAVE was representedby Richard Harwood QC of 39 EssexChambers and Susan Ring from HarrisonGrant solicitors.

In the judgement written by Lord JusticeCoulson, he said: “Since a promise hadbeen made to operate a particularprocedure then, as a matter of goodadministration and transparent governance,any change to that policy also had to be

announced publicly. It is not a question offettering the future exercise of discretion,but simply making public the decision thatsomething which had been promised andprovided in the past would not be providedin the future. In my view, goodadministration and transparent governmentrequired nothing less. Of course, this didnot happen here because no-one in theDepartment knew that they were changinga promised policy (because they hadforgotten about it)."

Coulson LJ added: “An unequivocalpromise was made, and that unequivocalpromise should have been publiclywithdrawn when (or if) a conscious decisionwas taken no longer to give reasons for notcalling in applications …. For these reasons,I consider that SAVE’s legitimateexpectation case has been made out.”

1 Encouraging developments on

Planning Court of Appeal Victory;A Policy Exchange Report; aWestminster Debate & a newCommission

3 London Forum P E & T news;

The end of PFI

4 The London Forum AGM 2018

6-9 London Forum Open Meetings:

The Aarhus Convention; TheFuture of London’s Town Centres

10 Spotlight on Bromley Civic

Society

12-13 Transport A lovely dream for

HS2 Euston; Crossrail postponed 14 Housing – the narrative unravels

15 Plus ça change

16 Round the Societies

18 Westminster Planning Review

19 News briefs

20 Events and meetings

In this issue

Spotlight onBromley CivicSociety Page 10

Recent planning initiatives

Encouraging developments on PlanningSome chinks of light appear amidst thegloomCourt of Appeal Victory for SAVE: Reasons must be given for Not Calling In Applications.

Issue 80 Winter 2018

newsforumThe London Forum - working to protect and improve the quality of life in London

The London Forum of

Amenity and Civic Societies

Founded 1988www.londonforum.org.ukw

Can you help?

Helen Marcus has edited the Newsforum for 15 years

and would like to retire.

We hope that among our many membersthere may be someone familiar with desktop publishing, who enjoys editing andmight be willing to spare a few hours 3times a year to produce the Newsforum.

It is produced on the QuarkXPressprogramme but that can be changed ifnecessary.

Please contact Helen Marcus or PeterEversden if you are interested to help ormay know of someone who would besuitable.

New Editor for NewsforumMinisters must abide by apublished government policyand give reasons for call-indecisions on planningapplications.

newsforum Winter 20182

Anew Report from the PolicyExchange, Building More, BuildingBeautiful: How design and style can

unlock the housing crisis, with a forewordfrom Secretary of State for Housing Rt HonJames Brokenshire MP, was the basis of anOctober Westminster Hall Debate onBeauty and the Built Environment led byJohn Hayes MP, Conservative, SouthHolland and The Deepings. He proposed themotion that ‘That this House hasconsidered beauty and the builtenvironment’. The Debate, was attended byseveral ministers including the newMinister of State for Housing, Communitiesand Local Government, Kit Malthouse.

Mr. Hayes made three demands

• that every local authority has obligatorylocal design guides with site-specificdesign appraisals for regenerativeopportunities, so that they have to buildin a style that is suitable and appropriateto its particular locale.

• a black list of blight should be drawn upwhich would allow us to demolish manymore buildings of that kind;

• to protect urban green spaces andplaying fields.

Mr Hayes quoted from the Policy ExchangeReport that “most people do not want tolive in glass-covered high-rises or sprawlingconcrete estates. They want homes that arebuilt in traditional styles, such as Georgianand Victorian-style terraced housing, andtree-lined streets.”

John Howell (Conservative, Henley),pointed out the lack of environmentalinfrastructure in the development of newhousing estates. The scale of the housingproblem means that concerns about styleare dismissed as indulgent or evenirrelevant. “Aren’t there more importantthings to worry about?”, we hear people say.The focus of housing policy has been onquantity rather than quality with a“competition across the political spectrumto build the most houses the most quicklyby stacking them high and selling themcheap, regardless of their quality or whatthey look like. That is not good enough. Itshort-changes our countrymen and thegenerations to come. People now veryoften look on development with despair.Frankly, that is the result of successiveGovernments and local authorities of all

political persuasions”Jim Cunningham (Labour, Coventry South)

pointed out that the Parker Morris standardsfor social housing are all gone now. “Even inthe private sector, we very often seehouses that are nothing better than boxes”.

Minister of State’s commitments

Kit Malthouse Minister of State, who iscurrently producing the guidance to theNPPF, made some important commitments.“Critically, we want to build the conservationareas of the future. That is a challenge I haveput to the housing development communityin a number of forums over the past three orfour months that I have been in this job.”New homes and public buildings need to fitin, in the broadest sense of the term. “Weare therefore supporting high-quality, high-density housing such as mansion blocks,mews houses and terraced streets, typicalof the English urban townscape and ruralcontext”, and in particular, the garden square.

Mr. Malthouse recalled Sir EbenezerHoward’s vision of garden cities more than acentury ago. “We are renewing that idea forthe 21st century”. It is a chance to aspirebeyond identikit housing and town centres thatlook like everywhere and nowhere, and set outclear expectations for high-quality placemaking across our country, not only buildinghomes but neighbourhoods. “We are runningworkshops for councillors, to help them tounderstand and to support their role inensuring beauty in the built environment”.“I always stress how design matters atevery level, from planning to communityacceptability: build beautifully and getpermission, build beautifully and sell morehouses, and build beautifully and communitieswill actually welcome developers, rather thandrive them out of town at the tip of a pitchfork.”

He believed that small and medium-sizedenterprises, from self-build to therefurbishment of historic buildings, are part ofthe key to the challenge and is directing thehome building fund towards them.

He said he is aware of the campaign byLondon First and other developers to relaxthe protections for the London views andhas asked his team to update him. “So farthey remain in the draft London Plan. Weshall see where that plan lands.”

John Hayes rounded off the debate witha call to the Minister to make the ambitionof 100 new parks come to life and prohibitdevelopment on the green spaces. Heasked the Minister if he would do the threethings had outlined?

The Debate ended by agreeing That thisHouse has considered beauty and the builtenvironment.

A new Commission

The Policy Exchange report was co-authoredby the philosopher Sir Roger Scruton andformer Labour Mayor of Newham Sir RobinWales. It reiterates many things thatLondon Forum has been saying andparticularly emphasises the importance ofproper consultation with local residents. Itcalls for a new designation of ‘Special Areas ofResidential Character’ to give residentsconfidence that new developments will be inkeeping with existing look and style.

It has now been announced that theminister, James Brokenshire, has appointedScruton to chair a new Commission, 'BuildingBetter, Building Beautiful' to promote betterquality in the design of homes and newcommunities. Many interested parties areconcerned whether the commission will askthe right questions, and both the press and theprofessions have queried the chair's suitabilityto lead such a review, only time will tell.

Council house borrowing cap removed

Further good news came in October whenthe government announced that theHousing Revenue Account borrowing capfor council house building will be removedenabling councils to deliver the councilhousing needed by their communities.Councils in areas of high affordabilitypressure have already been invited to bid fora share of £1 billion extra borrowing. All these reports can be found on the web bytyping in their titles

Beauty for the Built Environment A Westminster Debate; a Report “Building More, Building Beautiful” endorsed bySecretary of State for Housing Rt. Hon. James Brokenshire MP; a new Commission to“tackle the challenge of poor quality design and build of homes and places”; councilborrowing cap on house building removed. Does all this provide some encouragementfor the future? Or will it amount to nothing more than ‘motherhood and apple pie’?


The focus of housing policy hasbeen on quantity rather thanquality ... stacking them highand selling them cheap.Thatis not good enough.John Hayes MP,


London Forum news

The Committee sent in a response to theconsultation on the Congestion charge.The Committee believes that a full

review of the regime is needed, to takeaccount of recent developments, and that amove over time to a more modern roadpricing system might be appropriate. TheCommittee noted the Campaign for BetterTransport’s work on the matter and endorsedAndrew Bosi's draft response to theconsultation about who would pay for theTransport for London (TfL) of the future andthe draft he compiled on the Mayor's SportsStrategy.

As we go to press the Barking/Gospel Oakline improvements were still not running. TfLwere proposing in the longer term to take theservice to Ealing Broadway from the DistrictLine and make it a branch of the PiccadillyLine.The cost of reinstating a rail service toCroxley Green was escalating, and the ideawas likely to be dropped, despite the benefitsit would have for freight; being inHertfordshire it was not among the Mayor’spriorities.

Peter Eversden reported the Forum’sconcerns on the Cycle-superhighway 9(Chiswick) at a meeting of the LondonSociety. It is subject to change followingrejection by local residents and businesses.CS11 (Regent’s Park) had a Judicial Reviewbid by Westminster City Council. CS4 (TowerBridge to Greenwich) is thought to be goingahead.

Planning matters

The Committee agreed that the epidemic ofpseudo-telephone kiosks that were in realityadvertising hoardings must be addressed.The Planning Inspectorate has a largebacklog of appeals against refusals by localauthorities.

The Committee noted that the Mayorrecently had two of his three contentionsupheld against McCarthy & Stone. MrEversden had been engaged in the publicinquiry about the Chiswick Curve, where theGLA had supported the appellant. The Mayorover-ruled LB Hounslow's decision to refusedevelopment on the nearby ex-Citreon site.

On tall buildings, it is becoming clear thata proper analysis of the impact of tallbuildings should give priority to their impacton communities over their impact oninanimate objects.

Open government

On open government, there were worryingsigns that the advances of the past couple ofdecades were being reversed. For instance,Westminster was becoming much morehesitant about publishing details ofconsultees.

Survey of London Forum members

The committee noted the survey ofmembers to be presented for discussion atthe AGM.

Mayor and GLA

Michael Bach and Peter Eversden met JamesMurray to convey the Forum's views ondensity and on the failure of the Mayor toimplement his aspirations for 50% affordablehousing in actual decisions, for example onconstruction above Tube stations.

The Forum has been invited to participatein the Examination in Public of the draft newLondon Plan. Mr Bach and Mr Eversden havedevoted substantial amounts of time inpreparation.

The Committee invited Nicholas Boys-Smith and Yolande Andon (formerly Barnes)to speak on questions of design at the OpenMeeting on 28th November.

London Forum P E & TCommittee John Myers reports

Stephen Plowden, who has died aged 85, wasan internationally respected consultant andacademic chiefly known for his work as apioneer of safe and sustainable transport.

He was a founding member of the LondonAmenity and Transport Association (LATA),which brought together over 70 local societiesin opposition to the Ringway plans in the1970s. Together with LATA chairmanMichael Thomson, they demonstrated thecomplete technical inadequacy of theproposals at a public inquiry under FrankLayfield. LATA later merged with theLondon Forum.

He became a leading critic of poor governancein Britain. He challenged the orthodoxy ofthe 1960s and 70s that transport planningshould provide for unfettered car travel, andwas a key figure in fighting unneeded andunhelpful developments such as the plannedredevelopment of Covent Garden in 1974 andthe HS2 rail link, which he viewed as awasteful and pernicious project.

Stephen Plowden

The end of the Private Finance

Initiative (PFI)

Described by Jonathan Ford in theFinancial Times as “the verymidsummer of financial lunacy”, thechancellor, Philip Hammond,announced the cancellation of PFI inlast month’s Budget.

Since its invention in the early1990s, ministers have handed outcontracts to private entities to buildand operate public facilities, fromsoldiers’ barracks to hospitals, onthe basis of the oft-repeated mantra‘value for money’. “The case for PFIwas always a polite fiction” with noevidence that it is really that muchmore efficient than public sectorbuilding. These contracts havehobbled public finances withGovernment departments tied intolong-term financial commitments,often at more than twice the goingrate - 7-8 per cent returns againstthe 3-4 per cent cost of governmentdebt - sacrificing operational andfinancial flexibility and with nopossibility of redeploying assets orwithdrawing them from use. Thetruth is that “billions [were] fritteredaway” “simply to window-dress thepublic finances” by keeping a tenthof annual capital spending off thenation’s official balance sheet.Ministers overpaid for infrastructurewhile risk was left with government,who have to keep services going inthe case of the private contractorfailing.

Criticised by many over theyears, the latest National AuditOffice report this year noted that thefull lifecycle costs of schools builtusing PFI were 40 per cent moreexpensive, and hospitals 60 percent more than the public sectoralternative. Now at last theChancellor has acted.

This article is based on a comment in theFT 5 November 2018, by Jonathan Ford,a former investment banker at MorganGrenfell, now FT City editor


The London Forum Annual General Meeting


The London Forum Annual General MeetingMinutes of the 2018 AGM of the London Forum Of Amenity And Civic Societies - held6.30pm, 31st October 2018, at 77 Cowcross Street, London EC1 Peter Pickering reports

Present: Peter Eversden (Chairman), andrepresentatives of the Amwell Society,Barnet Residents Association, Barnet

Society, Beckenham Society, Bedford ParkSociety, Brixton Society, Camden CivicSociety, City Heritage Society, ClaphamSociety, Dulwich Society, Ealing CivicSociety, Finchley Society, Friends ofGreenwich Park, Hammersmith Society,Highbury Community Association, HighgateSociety, Islington Society, KensingtonSociety, Kew Society, KnightsbridgeAssociation, Ladywell Society, PengeForum, Pinner Association, Putney Society,Regents Network, Stamford BrookResidents Association, Sydenham Society,Thorney Island Society, Wimbledon Societyand Sam Dunkley (individual member).

Apologies for absence Balham Society,Brentford Community Council, Bromley CivicSociety, Enfield Society, Fulham Society,Highbury Fields Association, IsleworthSociety, New Barnet CommunityAssociation, Positive Plumstead, SouthgateDistrict Civic Trust, Stamford Brook ResidentsAssociation, Seven Dials Trust, StreathamSociety, Wandsworth Society, WestcombeSociety, Marion Harvey (Vice-President),Judy Hillman (Vice-President), Helen Marcus(News Forum editor), and Peter Makower

1. Minutes of the AGM 12th October 2017.

The Minutes of the 2017 AGM had beencirculated in News Forum. The Chairmanasked for any comments. In the absence ofcomments he proposed the acceptance ofthe Minutes. They were agreed, nem con.

2. Chairman’s report.

The Chairman thanked his fellowCommittee members and recorded theForum’s appreciation of Alan Baxter and hisstaff in the provision of office and meetingspace, facilities and valuable networkingopportunities with so many otherorganisations in their building and for theirinterest and support for the Forum’s work.This was the Forum’s thirtieth AGM and thefirst which Marion Harvey, the founder-chairman, had not attended. Two trustees,Derek Chandler and David Lewis, had died;Bill Tyler had retired from being a vice-President; Tony Allen (Treasurer for manyyears) and Helen Marcus were standingdown from the Committee. The Chairmanmentioned particularly Tony’s guidance inmatters of governance and Helen’s

exemplary production of News Forumthree times every year.

The Executive Committee wasstrengthened by the election in 2017 ofAndrew Bosi of the Islington Society, andJohn Myers of the Camden Civic Societywho took over the role of HonorarySecretary following Derek Chandler’s death.Two other people volunteered to join theexecutive committee, were co-opted by thetrustees and were seeking election. Theywere Oliver Bennett of the WimbledonSociety and Paul Thornton of the AmwellSociety. Paul became MembershipSecretary and improved subscriptioncollection and communication admirably.

The Review of the Year in the AnnualReport summarised the work andachievements of members of the LondonForum’s team; there had been more detailin News Forum over the year; he hopedmember societies circulated it widely -using the pdf rather than the paper versionsaved the Forum costs. A new editor forNews Forum was required, though HelenMarcus had volunteered to compile NewsForum for the time being. Besides theAnnual Report and News Forum therewere regular ebulletins; much usefulmaterial on the Forum’s website,especially the ‘New Updates’ pages; andthe Chairman’s postings on Twitter.

The Forum had continued engagementwith the Mayor’s senior officers and withthe Assembly committees and respondedto consultations. All Londoners were facedwith more changes in the planning regime,with a new National Planning PolicyFramework and a draft replacementLondon Plan. There were more proposalsby Government to be introduced orconsulted upon and it continued itsdamaging permitted development policies,reducing the ability of London Councils andcitizens to influence how development iscarried out. The Forum continued tooppose tall buildings in the wrong places.

The draft New London Plan had manychanges from previous versions; the mainones being a much higher housing target,densification of the suburbs, the removal ofthe density matrix and more emphasis ondesign as a decision criterion. That wasperhaps a subjective assessment but hadbeen used by some Planning Inspectors asgrounds for rejecting developers’ appeals.There would shortly be an open meeting on

design, exploring how to avoid harm toneighbourhoods in the face of intensificationof land use. It was important to producedelivery of homes people could affordwithout harming localities and with all therequired infrastructure and public transport inplace. The Examination in Public of the draftNew London Plan would run through the firstfour months of 2019 and required attendanceby the Forum team and much written input.

3. Approval of Annual Report and

Accounts for 2017/18:

The Chairman said that the Treasurer wasnot able to be present; if there were anyquestions on the accounts he would try toanswer them, or refer them to theTreasurer for a response. The Forum’sfinancial position was healthy, with a smallsurplus and there was no need for asubscription increase. There were noquestions. Mr Wood (Beckenham Society)proposed and Mr Luscombe (City HeritageSociety) seconded the approval of theAnnual Report and Accounts for 2017/18);the motion was passed nem con.

4.Appointment of Honorary

Independent Examiner:

Mr Egan was willing to continue, and thiswas agreed.

5. Election of Trustees:

Michael Hammerson and Peter Eversdenwere retiring by rotation and were willing tocontinue. Oliver Bennett and Paul Thorntonhad been co-opted during the year and werenow standing for election. Ian McInnes ofthe Dulwich Society and Stephen Speak ofthe Kew Society had also offered to serve.All had been validly nominated. A motion toelect the five candidates en bloc wasproposed by Ruth Boff (Pinner Association)and seconded by Carol Seymour-Newton(Knightsbridge Association). They wereelected nem con. The Chairman appealed tomember societies to continue to considerpeople who could be nominated to bothLondon Forum's Executive Committee andfor its committee dealing with planning,housing, environment and transport.

6. Other Business:

i) Andrew Bosi asked to be provided withevidence relevant to Transport forLondon’s proposals for cuts to busservices.

The London Forum Annual General Meeting


AGM discussion: the Survey of Members

ii) Tom Ball said the the Forum had beenneglecting its individual members inrecent years and that it should put moreeffort into recruiting and retaining them.Another speaker supported this plea.Paul Thornton said that he had hithertoconcentrated on the membership ofsocieties, but had no intention ofdisfranchising individuals, and wouldsoon turn his attention to this category.

iii) Robert Gurd (Ealing Civic Society) saidthat the last time the London Plan wasrevised his and other societies had putmuch effort into commenting withoutmuch sign that their comments weretaken into account, and their participationin the Examination-in-Public was rather awaste of time. The Chairman said that theLondon Forum had a high profile in theseproceedings and had achieved manyalterations to draft London Plan versionsin the past. The Forum welcomed supportand participation from member societies.If there were matters about which asociety felt strongly it should draw themto the attention of the Forum team.

iv) The Chairman asked if anyone presentwas unhappy with the Forum’s use forcommunicating with them the data theygave when they signed in. No-one was.

Discussion of the Survey of Members

Following the business of the AGM theChairman led a discussion of the results ofthe Survey of Members conducted in June2018; he was gratified that the responserate had been over 50% and at theenthusiasm expressed for News Forum. Asummary of responses had beencirculated in advance of the AGM. Thesurvey questions were taken in order:

1. Importance of the objects of the Forum

Most of respondents considered all of theobjects to be important or very important;high standards of planning and conservationseemed to be the most popular.

In discussion Tom Ball (Thorney IslandSociety) emphasised the need to ‘spread theword’, and regretted the apparent demise ofthe Media Awards scheme. The Chairmanexplained that falling interest amongmembers, shown by reducing entries, hadled to the decision to discontinue thescheme. Robert Gurd (Ealing Civic Society)suggested that it should be tried again.

Concern was expressed at the average

age of members of civic societies. Workingwith schools on, for instance, ‘designing andmaking’, could increase awareness amongparents as well as children. It was clear fromthe experience of the Bedford Park Societyand others that people of working agewere concerned with the same issues astraditional civic societies, but through socialmedia and informal networking. Thechallenge was to harness this concern, whilerecognising that it was unlikely to bemanifested in becoming active in societies,although it might be possible to excite theirinterest in individual projects.

2. Helpfulness of the Forum’s activities

on a London-wide basis to advancemembers’ interests. Each of the choiceswas widely supported. A suggestion wasmade in discussion that the Forum shouldinstigate petitions through 38º.

3. What more London Forum could do

to support the activities or advance the keyinterests of member societies. The Forumalready covers most of the things thatmembers would want. Responsesmentioned in particular protecting greenspaces, open spaces, parks and commonareas; information on what other societieswere doing and their success stories; andprotecting historic lines of sight. Therewere requests for Open Meetings ondifferent days and at different times.

In discussion members expressedconcern at additions made to planningpermissions after approval - “developersbamboozle planning authorities”. Tom Ballsaid that the Thorney Island Society wasstrongly opposed to the large memorialplanned for Victoria Tower Gardens. SamDunkley (individual member), supported byothers, pressed the Forum to campaign morestrongly against the speculativedevelopments that remained empty whiledisfiguring parts of inner London. HansHaenlein (Hammersmith Society) said thatthe new professor of economics at UCLcould be invited to speak at an open meeting.

4. Informing and supporting members.

There was widespread support for all fouroptions, (Updates on legal and planningdevelopments; Briefings on key issues;Provide access to expertise; Escalateissues to various levels of government onmembers' behalf), with slightly less for

‘providing expertise’.The discussion centred on

Neighbourhood Plans (of which there werefew in London), the problems encounteredby neighbourhoods which sought them,and other ways of getting local concernsand ideas into boroughs’ plans(e.g.planning briefs, charettes, etc.)

5. How the Forum could better inform

and support member societies. There was a range of interesting requests,including a monthly newsletter and helpwith insurance coverage. In discussion theChairman emphasised the value of hisTwitter feed, and emphasised the need forthe secretaries, etc., of societies to informtheir own members.

6. Which communications channels

work best for member societies. Of the alternatives offered (Open meetings;Forum website; NewsForum; Twitter; Emailupdates; Direct communication with othermembers) NewsForum and email updateswere found most useful, although therewas widespread support for all channelsexcept Twitter, with which fewer membersare engaged.

The Chairman noted the apparent dislikeof Twitter; he said that it was a veryimportant channel to those outside theForum’s membership; it was not necessaryto participate in tweeting - just readingtweets was a good way of keepinginformed about what was going on andother people’s opinions. Robert Arguile saidthat the Putney Society had a particularmember who was active on Twitter, and hadmore followers than the society hadmembers; Twitter was read by commercialorganisations, who could be moved to replyto comments in tweets. Diane Burridgeasked societies to let her know directly ofimportant matters, and not leave her topick them up from newsletters.

7. What else the Forum could do for

member societies.

Suggestions included a message board ;an an inquiry bureau for local urgentplanning problems, putting similar memberorganisations in touch; and earlyinformation about consultations,encouraging members to respond.

London Forum Open Meetings


MIchael Bach opened the meetingby giving some historicperspective, in particular as it

affects people’s right to have a say. It took a crisis to bring about real change.

The First World War led to council housing;the Second to the planning system;concern over the destruction of heritage tothe Civic Amenities Act 1967 and concernabout communities’ need to have a say intheir future to the 1968 Skeffington Report.Subsequently there had been incrementalchanges in rights of access to information.The Freedom of Information Act 2000 gaverights of access to information held bypublic authorities, obliging publicauthorities to publish certain informationabout their activities; and entitlingmembers of the public to requestinformation from public authorities. ThePlanning and Compulsory Purchase Act2004 required local authorities to produceStatements of Community Involvement toexplain to the public how they would beinvolved in the preparation of localdevelopment documents. 2018 was the20th anniversary of the Aarhus Convention,which provided rights to have wide andeasy access to environmental information,to have a chance to participate in thedecision-making and legislative processand to have judicial or administrativerecourse in case of violations.

The latest crisis was the Grenfell Towerdisaster – not the choice of cladding, notpost-disaster handling, but the long-term“neglect” of local residents excluded fromany say in the future of their housingestates, let alone day-to-day management.This unleashed a demand for a total changein the culture of the local authority, how itgoverns, and how it engages its localcommunities in developing their ownfuture, including co-design of any futureplans for their estates. The need came tobe recognised for a new ‘social contract’ or‘social covenant’ in terms of therelationship between local authorities andtheir communities for a range of publicservices – including planning – citizens’rights and the need for genuineengagement.

In Kensington and Chelsea the post-Grenfell process involved restructuringmanagement, changing the approach togovernance/decision making, revising

priorities – all estate renewal is on hold andany proposals will be subject to workingwith residents – and increasedopportunities for participation. In particularlocal people have been given the right toattend Council meetings and meetings ofthe Executive when key decisions are beingconsidered, find out what key decisions arebeing considered, see reports andbackground papers, inspect the Council’saccounts and make their views known tothe external auditor, and to know how tocontact councillors and council officers.They can speak at Committee meetings atthe chairman’s discretion, and can complainto the Council, the Ombudsman, theMonitoring Officer, the Data Commissionerand the Freedom of InformationCommissioner. But still there are no AreaCommittees or Conservation Area AdvisoryCommittees (though there is participationin Conservation Area Appraisals) and thereis only a five-day window for consultationon Supplementary Planning Documentsduring which time a petition must bemounted and an alternative generated.

There was still a need for a fundamentalchange in style. In 2010 Local Plan proposalshad minimal consultation, which wascriticised by the Inspector. In the 2018 Reviewresidents were still not engaged, localamenities being let to highest bidder – ‘actinglike a property developer masquerading as alocal authority’. Though planning is relativelygood, compared with other business groups,there is no published business plan for thePlanning Department – no consultation on/input to its content or priorities let alonenew initiatives; no forum for publicdiscussion of planning, let alone communityengagement on an area or subject basis;and no real understanding of where weneed to get to, let alone how to get there.

Peter Eversden

Hounslow Council’s Unitary DevelopmentPlan of 1993 was not replaced until 2005,after a lot of pressure. The Inspector whoinquired into the new plan was very positiveas to the community participation, andsince then there have been many planningdocuments, and there is a weekly list ofdelegated decisions, which can get calledto Committee. There is a residents’ forum,which can meet with cabinet members.Hounslow has been transformed.

Hugh Ellis

The TCPA sought a proper place for people inthe planning system, and had initiated theRaynsford Review; its Interim Reportappeared in May, and the final Report wouldappear in November. The Review was findingthat the present planning regime wascompletely unfit for purpose, and almostamounted to simple ‘land licensing’; he saidthat though the London regime wasunsatisfactory it was better than that in therest of the country (for instance, the Mayorsof conurbations outside London did nothave elected assemblies to oversee andscrutinise them). Permitted development,particularly that under which offices could beturned into residential with no control overspace standards etc. or public participation,was a shameful abandonment to privateprofit of the public interest, and positivelyimmoral. He and Mr Raynsford had travelledto other European countries; there weremany in Northern Europe (e.g. Copenhagenand Berlin) which had much better systemsthan the English one; with proper planning inthe public interest, and authorities with awider vision and the necessary powers overinfrastructure. The French ‘Institute of PublicDebate’ might be a model to follow toimprove public participation.

He had personal experience of thegagging of local councils throughconfidentiality agreements by thepromoters of the High Speed 2 railway. TheAarhus convention was ignored.Inadequate resources went to localauthority planning departments, and therewas too little public awareness of thewhole planning system and its purpose; itwas indeed surprising that people werenot more angry with what is going on.Local councillors on planning committeesneeded much more training; they had tojudge when their officers’ advice should bechallenged, and not be frightened intobelieving that they must not have anydiscussions with the public or study anydocuments other than the officers’ reports.In London they had to be prepared to standup to some of the Mayor’s diktats.

The Raynsford Review

This was likely to recommend sharingresponsibility and giving the public muchmore rights, including that of appealing, indefined circumstances, against local

The Aarhus Convention and the RaynsfordReview; Community Engagement in PlanningThe guest speaker at London Forum’s Open Meeting on July 3, 2018 was Hugh Ellis,head of policy at the Town and Country Planning AssociationPeter Pickering reports

authorities’ decisions to grant a planningpermission contrary to their development plan.The planning system needed to be recreatedfrom the bottom up.

Discussion

The discussion revealed the high level ofdisquiet. Mr. Ellis agreed that there is bitteranger and disconnect between communitiesand the planning system.

Mr Bach said that people were regarded bythe development industry as problematic,nimbys, selfish, and with no right to anyinvolvement in the process. Peter Eversden saidthat developers are not delivering the type ofhousing which is needed – merely luxury homesfor overseas buyers, not the affordable housingneeded. Communities are locked out of pre-application discussions. Mr. Ellis agreed that theissue of developer involvement in Pre-applicationdiscussions, and the exclusion of communitiesfrom them, is a major one. At recent meetingswith MPs, he had “never seen MPs so angryabout housebuilders’ conduct”. They are currentlytoo influential, but this is possibly their highwater mark. The fact is that two out of fivehomes built are heavily subsidised – publicsubsidy is supporting it all. The lessons ofderegulating planning are seen in southernIreland, where a huge crash left 400,000 half-built homes despoiling the countryside.

Andrew Bosi asked why is there not morepower to purchase compulsorily houses thathad been built. Mr Ellis saw value uplift as adifficulty.

The Putney Society were unhappy thatexisting housing estates were being handedover to private interests for regeneration; oftenwith a reduction in space standards and amenity.The point was made that the volume housebuilders were of such importance to the nationaleconomy that their interests were bound to begiven considerable weight by the Treasury.

The Charlton representatives said thatpublic participation in planning in Greenwichwas improving. New groups were springing up,with a consistent message, and social mediawere active; all this made the amenity societymovement seem less élitist and nimbyish.Councillors were therefore better armedagainst developers. The national shortage ofplanning officers was a problem (as was thetendency for the Greater London Authority topoach staff from boroughs).



The Future of London’sTown Centres Open Meeting 26th September 2018; Guest Speakers:Rob McNicol Principal Strategic Planner, GLA, and WillFrench of Save Ealing’s Centre. John Myers reports

Michael Bach, Chairman of theLondon Forum Planning,Environment & Transport

Committee, outlined the many changessince London Forum’s last event on towncentres some 5 years ago including thelong-term recession; the growth of on-line shopping; closures of many shops,restaurants, post offices, pubs, librariesetc; increasing business rates andchanges in planning system.

The All Party Parliamentary Group(APPG) on Town Centre Managementwas created in 2010 – it is the secondlargest APPG after the Beer Club! ManyLondon Boroughs had a town centremanager and management team thenbut there are now far fewer resources forthem. The National Planning PolicyFramework (2012) and now 2018 “towncentre first” approach” has beenwatered down, and made change of use,especially to housing, easier; PermittedDevelopment Rights allow change of usewithout requiring planning consent. Agrowing number of areas have BusinessImprovement Districts (BIDs), developedand funded by business for business topay for priorities defined by them. Fewinvolve local residents.

Successive London Plans have beenvery pro-Town Centre but the draft newLondon Plan’s support for for housinggrowth in Outer London could be seenas a further attack on business space.

Some London Borough Local Planshave an Area Action Plan which shouldinvolve public consultation and gothrough an examination. There is alsoscope for neighbourhood plans to focuson the town centre but these require agroup of highly-committed people todrive the project, significant resourcesand staying power for what might bethree years of hard work. Above all, itrequires co-operation from the council,which is not always forthcoming.

Rob McNicol Principal Strategic

Planner, GLA

Mr McNicol has responsibility for towncentres within the London Plan team.

The London Plan states that London’stown centres are central to the lives ofLondoners (para 2.6.1). There is anincreasing emphasis from the Mayor on

the social integration of London, andpublic realm is a crucial part of that. Towncentres are important because of thesocial value that they bring. He noted theGLA’s recent report on high streets.

Town centres over the years haveabsorbed change and new technologies.Town centres are resilient places. Theycontinually change; sometimesdramatically, and sometimes gradually.They responded to the rise of therailways, and then of cars. We have seenhistoric market towns like Kingstonbecome the metropolitan town centresof the 21st century. Enfield town centrehad the world’s first ATM, opened byReg Varney.

The role of the GLA

The GLA is not responsible for planningindividual town centres. That is the job oflocal planning authorities, who knowtheir town centres. The GLA thinks aboutthem in terms of a hierarchy and anetwork. The hierarchy sorts them intoInternational, Metropolitan, Major,District and Neighbourhood towncentres.

The GLA also looks at them spatiallyacross London. The Metropolitancentres are often medieval markettowns that have been around thelongest.

The GLA looks at the health of towncentres, including total occupied floorspace, vacancy rates and other metrics.Mr McNichol showed slides with thenumber of listed buildings per towncentre and employment estimates inMetropolitan centres. Employment hasdeclined in Croydon town centre due tooffice to residential conversions but hasotherwise been fairly stable.

The GLA expects an additional 1.2 to1.6 million square metres of additionalcomparison goods floorspace to 2041,75% of which in International, Major andMetropolitan centres. 60% of Districtcentres are forecast to have surpluscomparison goods floorspace. Thatfloorspace could be used for otherpurposes. That takes into account the riseof internet shopping and the possiblevariance in economic growth. It is alsopredicated on the assumed populationgrowth of London of 2 million to 2041,

7

JInth"Bsugrpanw


The Future of London’s Town Centres (continued)


which is the major driver behind theincrease. He emphasised that this referredto comparison goods floorspace. He notedthat the growth in population is expected tobe driven by an ageing population, inwardmigration from other parts of the UK, birthswithin London and immigration. Peoplewho work in offices in town centres spendmoney there, so it helps to retain them.

Competition from the internet

Currently 19% of comparison goods spendis done online, and it is expected to go upto 27% over the next five years. Others sayit may be higher. He noted that Amazonhave put in a bid to use the Homebasestores in London for their own distribution.

The new London Plan policy has astrong ’town centres first’ approach. It isno good trying to support town centresand create them as sustainable places ifcommercial uses are all disappearing intoother locations that people drive to.

The GLA is encouraging boroughs tobring in Article 4 directions to protect officespace. Rather than convert ugly office1960s buildings to residential, it would bemuch better to redevelop them to provideadditional residential as well as floor space.Mr McNicol showed a few projects tocreate better town centres. He noted thatsome of them may have beencontroversial. He showed a mini-Hollandproject in Waltham Forest to try tointroduce a more cycling friendly towncentre.

He discussed the gyratoryreconfiguration at Archway and showed asquare in Dalston. Very differentcommunities spend time there. It is noisyand boisterous but a vibrant space.

The Mayor’s Good Growth Fund

This is funding a number of schemes: £1.8million on The Spark in Ilford, which includedconversion of a car park into a coveredmarket; Plumstead power station schemeinvolves new shop fronts, wider pavementsand a renovation of the power station;Queen’s Crescent in Gospel Oak will havepublic realm improvements and support forthe market. He said that quite a lot of workhas been done by Camden to support localresidents. The GLA sees town centres bothas part of our past and informing our future.

Will French of Save Ealing’s Centre

Mr French introduced Ealing by showingthe Victorian and Edwardian shoppingstreets and the former house of Sir JohnSoane. The Who first played at the EalingClub. Save Ealing’s Centre (“SEC”) wasformed in 2007 as an umbrellaorganisation.

Over the years there have been manypublic meetings, including a recenthustings with candidates for the generalelection and leaders of the local party. 350people attended. There have been two verysuccessful public inquiries wheredecisions taken by the planning authorityhave been set aside.

The late Sir Peter Hall was an Ealingresident and supported what SEC did. Hesaw London as a city of villages andunderstood the risks from mega malls andinternet shopping.

Is Ealing a Metropolitan centre or a

Major Town Centre?

The debate arose whether Ealing is aMetropolitan centre or a Major TownCentre. The Lyric Theatre had been lost inthe 1960s, and the cinema in the 1970s.The swimming pool behind the Town Hallwas demolished and the pool moved to abrand new out of town, car-dependentlocation. By 2006 they started to questionwhy Ealing was designated as aMetropolitan centre, and have been askingthat at public inquiries ever since.

A regeneration department for the towncentre was created in about 2008

allocating much of it for comprehensiveredevelopment. When Westfield openedthree miles away many brands were lost inEaling town centre.

The New London Plan clearly states thatthe role of individual centres needs to bemanaged and that changes at theMetropolitan level need to be managed bythe GLA via the London Plan. Mr. French isvery disappointed that there has not beenany questioning about that during thecurrent process. It is difficult to raise theseissues and get them to taken seriously.Ealing’s strategy for its centre can only belikened to motherhood and apple pie. It isfull of waffle and means nothing. Theregeneration experts went off to MIPIMevery year, did deals to demolish areas ofthe town centre and built residential on it.The waffle about reinforcing the towncentre has not been borne out. There hadbeen an intention to have a cultural quarter,which has not happened.

A Story of decline

After 14 years since the first London Plan,there has been a steady erosion of towncentre functions in Ealing. There has beenunderinvestment and there are emptyshop units, with an increasing scruffiness.Flats have been selling for eye-wateringamounts but all the retail units are unlet.Ealing library is being reduced in size toone third of its current size. He showed thelast remaining cinema. The post office hasretreated to a poky hole at the back of WHSmith. The last remaining place for liveentertainment was a strip joint and hasnow been closed because the public wereobjecting. The council is trying to sell theTown Hall to be developed as a bespokehotel, catering for weddings and the like.Ealing is becoming a town centre full ofcafés. 6.2% of all units are now cafés, andmore and more are coming.

What is the vision?

Mr French asked what the vision is, andwhat kind of place Ealing should be. He feltthat Ealing has no idea what it wants andthat it has allowed big developers to comein and dictate it. The town centre has inlarge part been acquired by British Landand Berkeley Homes. SEC prepared abetter vision for Ealing to reinvent the town

Ealing’s strategy for its centrecan only be likened tomotherhood and apple pie.It is full of waffle and meansnothing.Will French of Save Ealing’s Centre



centre. The two centres, east and west,are separate. They have only been boundtogether to retain the status ofMetropolitan town centre. They are a mileapart from each other. They should beplanned separately. There is now aneighbourhood plan for each centre but thecouncil did everything it could do toundermine these plans. Highways arebeing planned separately.

In the last few weeks, someone hassuggested developing a Walk of Fame inthe town centre. They managed to gatherBritish Land, St George and others. Itwould include the Rolling Stones, The Who,Sir Alec Guinness, Jimi Hendrix, GeorgeFormby and others. It was extraordinaryhow that encouraged the various interestgroups to meet with the community.

Questions raised

The interesting discussion which followedrevealed different experiences of some ofthese changes, in particular the role ofBIDs

The night time economy

The Brixton Society asked about the nighttime economy. Mr McNicol cited theMayor’s vision for a 24 hour London; hehas established a commission. The LondonPlan classifies town centres in terms ofwhere they stand on the night timeeconomy. Avoiding conflict with residentialneighbourhoods means that care isrequired.

Mr Bach noted the agent of changeprinciple. When people move into an areathat already has loud music, it should be upto the housebuilder to make sure that thehousing is insulated. Mr French noted itwould be better to have a stronger nighttime economy that attracted everyone.

Shopping facilities in stations

The Camden Civic Society asked about thehierarchy of town centres with reference toconcern about problems in Camden wherelarge amounts of new shopping were putinto stations. Mr McNicol said that the planto put lots of shops in Euston was notdriven by its high Public TransportAccessibility Level (PTAL) rating. Manystations have seen more shops addedbecause of the commuter trade. Euston

has a lot of offices in the immediate area.Mr French noted the big worry about

Crossrail is that people will use it to go toother more attractive places.

The Bloomsbury Residents ActionGroup noted that villages need residents:what is happening is making it moredifficult to live in these areas. Transportchanges make the area inaccessible fordeliveries.

Business Improvement Districts

The Islington Society felt that BIDs hadbeen helpful; they are required to improvethe place for the benefit for thecommunity. The Society had requestedrepresentation on the board of the localBID. It is important that the council, theBID and the community are all workingtogether on these things. He asked whatthe speakers felt the role of BIDs might be.

Mr McNicol noted that he was ratherold-fashioned in that he felt that growthand entrepreneurship could be a goodthing. Mr French noted that thecommunity was excluded from the EalingBID, although there had been the recentprogress. Mr Bach noted that a towncentre partnership does not preclude a BID

as a partner, but many BIDs would ratherplough their own furrow. There is often adisconnect between BIDs and thecommunity.

Hero Granger-Taylor of Camden CivicSociety noted that Camden Town had notbeen a success from that perspective. The“stakeholders” from HS2’s perspective donot even include the community.

Shop rents and business rates

The Barnet Residents Association askedabout charity shops, which can afford thehigh commercial rents because of theirsubsidies on business rates, staff costs,VAT and rents.

Mr McNicol noted that the level of rentsis outside the planning system. Theplanning system can set the percentage ofretail frontages. It may be appropriate tohave a different approach to the mix of usethat you have on those frontages.

Mr Bach observed that on his highstreet, primary retail frontages have beentaken over by banks and cafes usingpermitted development rights, displacingshops as a result, which does not bringcustomers into town centres.

The Brixton Society noted thathairdressers are included as an A1 use,which they have seen growing in numberin Brixton.

Michael Coupe asked whether thehierarchy should take into account therange of services available. He observedthat rising property values and resultingrising business rates have been fatal.

Mr French observed that the GLA neverputs pressure on the local authorities to dosomething about culture. It is anaspirational policy but it is hard to discernany hard policies. Mr Bach suggested thatpeople should fight for their cinema, pub,and GP offices. Mr Coupe noted that it isimportant to protect beautiful towncentres.

The regeneration experts wentoff to MIPIM every year, diddeals to demolish areas of thetown centre and builtresidential on it.The waffleabout reinforcing the towncentre has not been borne out.There had been an intentionto have a cultural quarter,which has not happened.Will French of Save Ealing’s Centre

Bromley or Bromleag, in Anglo Saxon,is an historic Kentish hill-top MarketTown now subsumed into London

suburbia. The yellow flowering Broom fromwhich the Town gets its name still growswild on Martin’s Hill two minutes fromMarket Square where HG Wells played as aboy in what he described as, in hisimagination, “one of the greatbattlegrounds in history”.

The Manor was given to the Bishop ofRochester by King Ethelred in AD 862 andremained in possession of successiveBishops right up until 1842 when it wassold to, private businessman, Coles Child.The present Bishop’s Palace, built in 1776(Grade II Listed), replaced the originalmedieval buildings and is now centrepieceof the Council’s Civic Centre. Part of themoat survives and there is also a listedFolly, an Ice House and two PulhamiteRockeries which we were able to get listedafter a Council threat of redevelopment in2006.

The Market Charter was granted in 1205by King John and is still held every Thursday.Originally a livestock market, animals wereslaughtered after sale behind Market Squarenext door to HG Wells birthplace. He recalledin his memoirs “There was a boundary wall,separating us from the much larger yard ..ofMr. Covell the butcher, in which pigs, sheepand horned cattle were harboured violently,and protested plaintively through the nightbefore they were slaughtered. Some wererecalcitrant and had to be treatedaccordingly; there was an element ofRodeo about Covell's yard.“

In the 18th & 19th centuries the RoyalBell Hotel hosted the Mail coaches. In JaneAusten’s Pride & Prejudice Lady Catherinede Burgh says to Elizabeth Bennett “whereshall you change horses? Oh Bromley ofcourse. If you mention my name at theBell, you will be attended to”.

The Jewel in the Crown is the Grade IListed Bromley College built in 1670 as almshouses for the Widows of Clergy from anendowment from Bishop Warner and stillserves much the same function todayexcept retired male clergy are also accepted.

HG Wells was born at 47 High Street in1856 on one side of Market Square. Bertie’schildhood co-incided with rapiddevelopment in the town following thecoming of the railway in 1858. His memoirs

bitterly recall the fields and meadows whichhugged the town where he walked with hismother being ripped up for new dwellings.The family left when Bertie was 13 and henever forgave what happened callingBromley “a suburb of the damnedest”.

He never saw the late Victorianflowering of the town with its fineexamples of buildings by architects of theArts & Crafts movement commissioned byColes Child and newly affluent local tradersmost notably Ernest Newton’s whoseRoyal Bell Hotel replaced the originalcoaching inn in 1898. Chain stores andCivic buildings continued this period ofcivic pride right up until WWII.

Post War demolition

Civic Pride took a dive after the War butapart from bomb damage the townretained much of its fabric until the mid60’s when Owen Luder’s brutalist slab wasallowed to replace the lovely White HartCoaching Inn which had always been theheart & soul of the Town. The destructioncontinued throughout the 70’s as a wholeswathe of the High Street was destroyedfor what the Deputy Secretary of the RoyalFine Art Commission described to me as“the worst piece of new townscape he hadseen in any town in the country”.

The battle for a Conservation Area.

In 1982 The Heart of Bromley residentsAssociation (now Bromley Civic Society)was formed by residents affected in theCouncil’s draft Borough Plan proposals formassive redevelopment of VictorianHousing areas and the Palace lands for aShopping Mall and bypass Road. AsHOBRA’s Conservation Officer it fell to meto challenge the lack of heritage protectionat the 1984 Plan Public Inquiry in adocument dramatically entitled ‘OldBromley – Conservation or Annihilation’

calling for Town Centre Conservation Area tobe designated. It was the first time the Townhad been appraised for its historic contentand contained maps, description and over70 photos. The Chief Planner’s recordedresponse was that it was not Council policyto preserve buildings in the town only toensure new development was of a sensitivescale and using appropriate materials.

The Inquiry co-incided with the demolitionof a 1712 building in the High Street whichbecame the catalyst for action. SAVE, TheVictorian Society and Georgian Group all gavetheir support to our Conservation Areaproposal to no effect. Fortunately wediscovered the GLC Historic Buildings Panelhad concurrent powers of Conservation Areadesignation and, at our request, they did aswift appraisal telling the Council if they didnot make a designation the GLC would.Under threat of what would be a much largerGLC designation the Council quickly made asmall area designation. This was deemed tobe inadequate but Bromley refused to budgeso in October 1985 the GLC made theirown very large designation including all theadjacent Parks & Gardens which had alsocome under threat.

To complicate matters all this co-incidedwith the government resolution to abolishthe GLC and as the deadline loomed duringa planning Inquiry in Bromley it wasrealised that the formal CA designationnotices had not been issued. I foundmyself in a deserted County Hall standingover a lone committee clerk while heprinted the notices and recall rushing intothe planning Inquiry like NevilleChamberlain waving the papers and theGLC designation was finally official.

But the Council declared that afterabolition they would simply cancel the GLCdesignation and revert back to Bromley’sown tiny area. This was thwarted when theGLC Historic Buildings Division wastransferred to English Heritage and Headof Division, Ashley Barker, advised if theCouncil tried to cancel the GLC’sdesignation English Heritage would re-designate. Finally, after two more years ofnegotiation the Council adopted most ofthe GLC Conservation area in 1987. Thuswas the painful and controversial birth ofour Conservation Area and I doubt thatmany areas have received so much expertscrutiny along the way.

10

Spotlight on Bromley Civic Society


Spotlight on Bromley Civic Society The Chair of Bromley Civic Society, Tony Banfield, describes the tremendous battle tosave Bromley’s historic town centre

It has been one battle afteranother to save what is leftof our heritage and to avertharmful development.

The Bromley Civic Society

Contact: Tony Banfield, Chair

email: [email protected]

website: www.bromleycivicsociety.org.uk w


Where are we now ?

Things quietened down and the CAwas clearly having a positive effectuntil 2006 when the move formassive retail-led redevelopment re-emerged with the Council’s TownCentre Area Action Plan focussing onmajor Council owned sites as well asthe huge High Street area designatedSite G; they were intending tocompulsorily purchase it all impactingon the Conservation Area. It was atthis time we decided to re-group as aCivic Society and it has been onebattle after another to save what isleft of our heritage and to avertharmful development. Despite all thisour working relationship with theCouncil as a Development Controlauthority is generally productive. Butthe other Council role as propertyowning developer is anything but andthe same anti- conservation prejudicewe experienced 30 years ago is stillin evidence in all their proposals.

On a day to day basis we aredealing with planning applicationsand I’ve represented the Town onthe Council’s dependent CAAdvisory Panel since 1987 whichdoes have some influence in day today planning applications.

But mostly we are embroiled incampaigning against further harm tothe historic and green environment.Main concerns at present are theproposed ‘Churchill Quarter’ a co-council development 15 storey block

of 410 flats which will tower over theHigh Street & Greens spaces in theCA and is awaiting a decision. It hasnow been classed as Phase One of arecently published Masterplan forSite G in the Area Action Plan,originally for retail development butnow proposed as quarter mile oftower blocks of flats along theridgeline overlooking the beautifulRavensbourne Valley. On the funside, however, we do regular guidedheritage walks around the town insummer and illustrated talks inwinter and enjoy dressing up inperiod costume!

In past times, Bromleyites,lamenting the loss of theirunprotected heritage had to acceptwhat HG Wells called “the shape ofthings to come “ but we do not.Some battles are won and some lostbut the great success of theConservation Area campaign againstthe odds gives us our mantra-“never take no for an answer”.

Circumstances of Birth: founded in 1982 as The Heartof Bromley Residents Association fighting loss of homesand heritage. Regrouped as BCS in 2007 to deal with theemerging Town Centre Area Action Plan.

Biggest Successes: Campaign for a Town CentreConservation Area refused by the Council but backed bySAVE, VicSoc & Georgian Group, designated by the GLCin 1985 and finally adopted by the Council in 1987.Representation on the Advisory Panel for CAs savingmany buildings which otherwise would have been lostwithout the CA designation. BCS has also successfullygained listing for 9 more buildings and local listing statusfor a further 8 buildings in the town.

Biggest Disappointments/Frustrations: 1. Destructivedevelopment proposed by the Council on its own sites. 2.A number of instances where the Council has rightlyrefused permission for inappropriate new buildings oralteration of important buildings but overruled on appeal.

Present Preoccupations: a Council Commissioned 11– 15storey block of 410 flats adjacent to the CA which willdominate the High Street and surrounding public gardens inthe Conservation Area and a, so called, Master-plan forcomprehensive tower block redevelopment of the remainingwest side of the High Street below Market Square. .

Working Details: The Executive Committee meets oncea month and sub groups meet as necessary to deal withspecific issues. A major aspect of our work is raisingheritage awareness through popular guided walks inperiod costume in summer and illustrated indoor talks inwinter.

Special Characteristics: the Executive Committeecomprises 15 regular members most of whom are alsokey members of other community and Friends groups inand around the Town as well as former Council planningand conservation staff. This gives us a wide range ofknowledge and expertise.

Last Word: membership tends to be middle aged or olderalthough walks and talks, especially the popular ‘GhostWalk’, do attract younger people. The main obstacle toour work is the state of the planning system with somuch being granted on appeal, the failure to deal with thedamage done by the Shimitzu High Court decision whichhas seriously stripped conservation area powers down toa minimum and the depletion of Council staffing. Weonce had a well staffed Heritage and Urban Designdepartment and we are now down to one conservationofficer whose role of necessity is severely limited.Consequently, societies like ours are filling the gapswithout the status or authority to be properly heard.

Profile

Bromley CollegeChair Tony Banfield,

Churchill Quarter proposed blocks of flats; below: Bromley Palace

Transport - HS2


A lovely dream for EustonJohn Myers reports

..... pleasantstreetscapes,sympatheticvernacular and amuch better use of theland....overall thismasterplan is farbetter. Squares,colonnades andlayouts to reflect theoriginal Georgianstreetscape seem farbetter judged.

The people-hatingmonstrosity proposed forEuston that I described in a

previous edition of NewsForumcompares very badly with aproposal confected recently byJohn Simpson Architects and theUniversity of BuckinghamSummer School.

In the drawing shown opposite,gone are the blocky high-riseswith no step-backs brutalising theedges of the station and the vastwasted space over the middle ofthe site. Instead we have pleasantstreetscapes, sympatheticvernacular and a much better useof the land.

Individual details may not beyour cup of tea, but overall thismasterplan is far better. Squares,colonnades and layouts to reflectthe original Georgian streetscapeseem far better judged.

The key is a double-deck designin which the HS2 and Network Railtracks sit at different levels. It wasrumoured to have beenconsidered by Arup early in thedesign of HS2 but dismissed forreasons never fully explained.

There are promising signs thatGrimshaw Architects, who aredesigning the new station for HS2,are taking account of thecommunity priorities. We can onlyhope for the same from thearchitects for the developmentsover the new HS2 station and forthe redevelopment of the eastern,Network Rail, side of the station, ifthe latter ever happens.

Crossrail


Crossrail postponed sine dieby Andrew Bosi

On the last Friday in August anannouncement was made that thecentral section of the Crossrail scheme

– the new track – would not open onDecember 9th this year as planned. The newstarting date was to be “Autumn 2019”.

A short delay to a scheme whose route wassafeguarded when Mrs. Thatcher was PrimeMinister may seem relatively trivial in thecontext of the delays endured over thirtyyears. However, it has serious implications forthe Transport for London budget which washeavily reliant on an expected increase inpassenger numbers buoyed by the additionalcapacity the new line would bring.

Of more immediate concern is why a delayof so long was not identified sooner. (Autumnbegins on September 22nd but the CivilService autumn extends well beyond then,rather like the estate agent’s concept ofHampstead). Crossrail officials and politiciansare somewhat evasive about when they knew.Of course they only knew of the Autumn 2019deadline a couple of days before we did. Manypeople on the outside were doubtful of theDecember deadline being met, though wewere expecting a postponement to May 2019.When it was announced in July that some ofthe Network Rail timetable improvementscheduled for December 2018 were being putback to May, there was an ideal opportunity toinclude Crossrail in the list of delayedimprovements. With hindsight, it must havebeen clear at that stage that a May 2019 startcould not be guaranteed.

Questions over the legality of theTfL

budget

Behind this is the question of whether the TfLbudget was legally made. However, thesooner a shortfall can be identified, the easierit is to find savings. We are now faced withsome potentially disastrous cuts to busservices, which if implemented wouldundermine the London Plan objective of 80%of journeys by sustainable means in 2041. Ifthe anticipated growth in population isachieved, bus usage will have to rise: plannednew rail infrastructure and a tripling of cyclingwill not be enough.

Reasons for the delay

Some of the new stations are behindschedule, but this would not prevent trainsrunning. The significant problem is with theincreasingly sophisticated signalling systems

which permit a high frequency service incomplete safety. Crossrail has three differentsystems: the new one on the middle, and theones used on the Great Western and the GreatEastern lines at either end. Getting them totalk to one another has proved difficult. Whenthe DLR was taking over the former NorthLondon line between Stratford and CanningTown, the signalling had a catastrophic effecton the adjacent Jubilee line and it was twoyears before it was fixed. When the Crossrailsystem was switched on for the first time,there was an explosion at Pudding Mill Lane.Ever since then it has been apparent thatCrossrail faced a race against time to meet theDecember deadline and it can now be seen tohave finished a distant second.

Consequences for bus services

To add to the embarrassment, a documentdetailing proposed cuts in bus services leakedinto the public domain in August. The pretextfor these cuts was the anticipated modal shiftfrom bus to Crossrail. A remarkably similardocument, save for the reference to Crossrail,was formally published for consultation amonth later.

Government loan

The government has announced a loan tomeet the additional cost of completing theCrossrail project, the implication being that itwill have to be repaid once the line is open andTfL is receiving revenue. In other words,London will have to meet the cost. Whether amajor world city can survive as the only majorcity without subsidy to its public transportremains in doubt. TfL has now announced thatthe present Chief Executive is to leave afteronly eight months in the post.

HS2

We are now faced with somepotentially disastrous cuts to busservices, which if implementedwould undermine the LondonPlan objective of 80% ofjourneys by sustainable meansin 2041.

Housing


Housing – the narrative unravelsA slew of recent reports contradicts everything that the government (and developers)have said about the housing crisis. Helen Marcus reports

House prices are falling; the numberof new homes being built in Londonhas dropped; and so has the number

of new planning applications in 2018,according to Molior. But this is notsupposed to be happening according tothe argument that the prices are highbecause there aren’t enough houses andthe planning system and nimbys are toblame.

Now the Office for National Statistics(ONS) has even thrown cold water overthe numbers themselves announcing inSeptember that government figures forhousing need were wrong and based onflawed methodology. There will be 1.4million fewer households in England by2041 than originally forecast. Over the last20 years, government predictions ofhousehold need have been consistentlyshown to be incorrect. Alan Holmans wassaying this as long ago as 2013; what a pityno-one paid any attention to him. Newsforum74 Winter 2016).

The ONS is now saying that the numberof households in England will grow by only159,000 a year, not 250,000. But even theirtotal figure of 26.9 million dwellingsnationwide by 2041is suspect: a recentreport about replacing gas and electricitymeters with smart meters quoted a figureof 30 million homes to be covered. Theypresumably must know how manycustomers they’ve got? It would thereforesuggest that there are way more homesalready than the government thinks thereare.

“Drastic oversupply”

More and more commentators arequestioning the whole hypothesis. EdConway in The Times, who made his ownsurvey for Sky News said “Building homeswon’t solve the housing crisis... Inflatedprojections for growth of new householdshave diverted attention from the realproblems”.

Charlie Ellingworth of the buyingagents Property Vision said bluntly in theFinancial Times that there is a “drasticoversupply of prime new homes inLondon” that “is going to get worse beforeit gets better. The poor market conditions incentral London have not come out of theblue”; he asked “So why do developers

seem to be intent on soldiering on?” Moreto the point, when will it dawn onGovernment Ministers that something isnot quite right about the story they’ve beensold? For example sales at theredevlopment of the huge 77 acre Earl’sCourt site for which 7,500 new residentialunits are planned are reported to have sunkto one a week — at which rate it will take140 years to sell them all - it’s difficult tosee the main site being built on any timesoon.

Niccolo Caldararo of the Dept ofAnthropology, San Francisco StateUniversity, took the trouble to write to theFinancial Times in August to say “Morehousing does not lead to affordability;there is a lack of neither housing norbuilding. There is an oversupply and hugesupply of vacant units held off the market.But this is due to the commodification andfinancialisation of the housing industry.”

Property speculators who “flip” homesbuying properties and selling them asquickly as possible simply to make a profithave helped push up prices. The FTreported in September that now prices inLondon have fallen speculators havemoved to the regions and are pushing upprices there.

Gap between prices and earnings

Another key issue behind the housing

crisis in London, pointed out in The Times inAugust, is the gap between prices andearnings; house prices have risen muchfaster than wages. According to theNationwide Building Society house priceshave increased by 30 per cent but wagesover the same period are up only 8 percent. The growth of the housing markethas outpaced the ability of mostconsumers to pay for it. Moreover it is aglobal problem with similar reports comingin from all the major cities.

Help to Buy making things worse.

Meanwhile the government’smisconceived response, Help to Buy, ismaking things worse. Housebuilders aremaking record profits out of it. Henry Pryor,a buying agent, was quoted as saying:“This scheme has been like crack cocainefor builders and you can see it in theirresults. Frankly, it gives them a businessmodel that would be the envy of Mexicancartels. But when the drug is withdrawn,there will be a sting as new-build pricesinevitably correct.” Simon French chiefeconomist at Panmure Gordon was equallyscathing “Help to Buy was economicallyilliterate at its birth and will be cited as suchat its eventual death. Unchecked, its legacywill be a greater, more protracteddownturn when the property marketeventually falls, hurting the very people itwas meant to help”. Reports in The Times,September 2018

But the correction is already happeningand it is the unfortunate new buyers whoare suffering the consequences. TheTimes reported that “Taxpayer cashpouring into the housing market under thegovernment’s Help to Buy scheme iscreating a bubble that risks leaving ageneration of homeowners stuck innegative equity,” “ ... figures show thathousebuilders are using the higherbudgets of Help to Buy purchasers to rampup prices and profits, while young peopleare being left in overpriced homes thatthey will struggle to sell.”

House-builders record profits

And of course house-builders have beenhandsomely rewarding themselves fromthose record profits. Even housingassociation executives are taking huge

The Office for NationalStatistics has announced thatgovernment figures werewrong, with 1.4 million fewerhouseholds in England by2041 than originally forecast.Over the last 20 years,government departments haveused a flawed methodology topredict the number of housesneeded.


Housing

Plus ça change Michael Hammerson and Helen Marcus invite readersto see if they can guess when the following articles werewritten (answers at the bottom of the page)

salaries. At least 179 executives of the50 largest associations receive over£150,000 each with one receiving a £1million package last year.

A former chief executive of theKeynote Housing Group, said: “Someassociations have lost touch with theirwith their tenants, they’ve lost the trustof the people that they’ve worked withover a number of years and are clearlyseen as [being] out of touch with thecurrent housing crisis.”

They have sold more than 1,600social homes at auction over the pastfive years, and it is believed that mostof them end up in the hands ofproperty investors. The Times (July 172018

Yet through it all the siren voicesnever stop, still calling for thedismantling of the planning system andthe destruction of London’senvironment on the basis of theirpatently false premises.

Simon Nunn, of the NationalHousing Federation has called again formore building on the Green Belt andJasmine Whitbread, of London First,together with the global firm NBBJhave added a new threat with a claimthat more homes could be built if thecity’s 13 “protected views” were gotrid of. (Reports and letters, Oct 6 & 8 TheTimes)

However some of these argumentsappear to have at last got through tothe Government. It was announced inthe budget that the the cap on councilborrowing for house-building is to belifted. Let us hope they use it to restockthe desperately needed supply of lowrent homes again.

Swelling the boundaries of the

metropolis with new plans of building.

Population increases, and there must beroom allowed for the new comers. Butpopulation does not increase so as torequire a hundred thousand new housesevery year: nor have the social wants somuch to do with the matter.....

The avarice of professional builders (ofcourse the land-owners have no suchfeeling), conspiring, the houses of thecities and their immediate libertiesbecome comparatively depopulated; themultitudes ... retire in the afternoon to theborders ....

The shops and warehouses of the cityare all in busy occupation; but the upperpart of the houses is generally “to let”.For every three or four of the smallhouses built on the outskirts, it may besafely conjectured that the spaciousapartments of two houses at least, in thecentre of the capital, are left vacant.

The geologists have discovered thatLondon is built in the bottom of a chalkbasin. There is a piece broken out of theside between Kent and Essex to let theThames flow out: but the Hampstead hillson the north, and the Surrey range on thesouth, remain very perfect, and form theonly hope, of an impassable barrier to theunbridled rage of building.

The French law has fixed theboundaries of Paris, and it would be wellfor us if there were some regulation tosecure London from the present wantonspirit of enlargement.. It particularlybehoved Government not to part with anyspace which was at all calculated to betterthe common atmosphere. The Parks werecalled the lungs of the capital. The firstslice taken off will make way for thesecond: reasoning runs fastest in a badseries.

The suffrings of the poor pedestriansare the most to be deplored. People whowork hard six days deserve cheerfulrecreations on the seventh. The Ministersof Government ought to take care not toinflict any suffering upon that defencelessclass.

The Housing Crisis

The question “where shall the Londonpoor live” is attracting the attention of thelegislature. Perhaps no city in the worldhas been so much improved within thelast ten or fifteen years as London.

“Its merchants are princes” and theyhave palaces accordingly; every day seespoor houses cleared out, dirtyneighbourhoods levelled, and magnificentmansions for trade erected. This has beengoing on for years.

At first the poor found it answeredtheir purpose, when turned out of theannihilated streets to go into the suburbsfor a residence; but the suburbs are everyday increasing in value, and builders findthey can make more money by erectingvillas and mansions for the merchants andthe gentry than by building houses for thepoor or middling classes. This increasesthe difficulty of finding dwellings for theworking classes anywhere near theiremployment. Densely-peopled districtsin some quarters of London are becomingstill more densely peopled, and what is tobecome of the increasing population ofmechanics and labourers it is difficult tosay.

And are we, as the metropolisextends, to lose every bit of green fieldthat used to skirt its “stone forest ofhouses”? It would seem so. The ruthlessbuilders are effacing Nature. WeLondoners want room to play as well asroom to work.

Lobbying

Political parties exist to secureresponsible government and to executethe will of the people.

From these great tasks both of the oldparties have turned aside. Instead ofinstruments to promote the generalwelfare, they have become the tools ofcorrupt interests which use themimpartially to serve their selfishpurposes.

AnswersThe Times, August 24, 1825 -Swelling the boundaries.Evesham Journal, March 2, 1861 - The Housing Crisis Theodore Roosevelt, speech, 1912 - Lobbying

Round the Societies


Round the SocietiesA round-up of news from our member societies. By Diane Burridge

Loss of 150 year old timber yard in BelgraviaThe Belgravia Society’s application for the listing of the historicNewson’s timber yard, owned by Grosvenor, has been refused.The facilities and services offered by the timber yard have beenavailable for over 150 years and now will be destroyed for the sakeof two large retail units. At least the Society did all that they couldto try to preserve the unique character of the area.

Clapham Society puts on the pressureThe Victorian pillar box, outside 3-5 Nightingale Lane, wasremoved by the developers of Audley Retirement Villages earlierthis year. This pillar box had stood for many years outside theformer police house which has now been demolished to bereplaced by this retirement village. The Clapham Society with localresidents asked Royal Mail to restore and return the pillar box oncethe building work was completed and this was done. The Societyis now pressing the developers to keep a footpath open so thatClapham South Underground users, and families going to OliverHouse school next to the site, do not have to cross a busy road toget to the station and school.

The Clapham Society’s Common and Open Spaces Sub-committee has continued to encourage Lambeth to balance thelegitimate use of Clapham Common as a space for events (largeand small) with its primary role as a place of calm and beauty for allusers. This Sub-committee is a member of the Clapham CommonManagement Advisory Committee (CCMAC), which came outforcefully against the Winterville Festival being held on the grass in2018, as in 2017. The extensive ground area used is still severelydamaged.

The Clapham Society was able to collect email addresses ofjust under half of all members and obtain their permission tocontact them on matters of interest. This endeavour wasinstrumental in increasing the number of objections from 60 lastyear to 300 this year, whilst almost tripling the ratio of objectionsto supporting comments. Sadly, the Society was not able to stopLambeth voting through a ‘blanket planning’ approval once againfor an unlimited number of events, each attracting up to 5,000people, without the need for planning permission. However, theSociety has come to the conclusion that to effect a material shift inLambeth’s position on events on the Common will require a moreimaginative involvement of the membership in the future.

London’s ‘Protected’ LandThe Campaign to Protect Rural England’s latest report published inAugust reveals the vital importance of Green Belt andMetropolitan Open Land for Greater London’s wildlife andwoodland. Based on analysis by Greenspace Information forGreater London (GIGL) CIC, it presents detailed and up-to-date,borough by borough information on the extent, location andcharacter of Greater London’s designated Green Belt andMetropolitan Open Land (MOL). Almost half (49%) of it is of local,national or international importance for nature conservation; over97% of Greater London’s ancient woodland is in Green Belt orMOL; outdoor sports facilities account for just over a quarter ofMOL and 13% of Green Belt land.

88 Licensed Premises in RichmondNuisance and disturbance continue with some licensed properties,and it was only after the threat of another licence review that Fullersfinally responded to the Richmond Society’s and others’ complaintsby closing their pub for two weeks and installing newmanagement. Hopefully the problems suffered by residents andbusinesses in Church Court for the last ten years will be in the past.

The Society believes that upholding the Council’s CumulativeImpact Policy is essential, whereby the Council would normallyrefuse new or extended alcohol licence applications in Richmondtown. There are now 88 premises already licensed in the town,and alcohol-related anti-social behaviour in Richmond, especially inthe summer with the outdoor use of the town and its openspaces, continues. At a recent meeting with the Police and thecommunity the problems remained unresolved.

Putney Society’s Buildings PanelDelays to agreed developments in the Town Centre are of concern.Plans for a hotel at the ‘White Lion’ site opposite St Mary’s churchwere approved three years ago, but work has still to start. The newhotel that replaced the old Post Office on Upper Richmond Roadremains unfinished, and there has been no update on the rejectedplans for the corner of Putney High Street and Putney Bridge Road.The Putney Society is hoping that the Council agrees that neitherowner gets a consent until they work together on somethingbetter.

Hackney: Portrait of a Community: 1967- 2017To mark the 50th anniversary of the Hackney Society, the Societyhas produced a portrait of the community over the past 50 years.In 1967 Hackney was one of the poorest areas of the capital butcould also boast some of the finest historic buildings, which is whySir John Betjeman was persuaded to become the Society’s firstPresident.

Edited by Laurie Elks, fifty pieces have been commissionedfrom a whole range of authors, who have drawn on their ownexperiences and expertise. The subjects covered range from socialissues such as housing, the question of ‘regeneration’ andeducation, to the cultural, with the demise of dog racing, theopening of Centerprise and the flourishing of the theatre, asexemplified by the Arcola and the Hackney Empire. The darker sideis not glossed over, with a piece on the death of Colin Roach,written by Duncan Campbell, and the riots of 2011, written byHackney MP, Meg Hillier. To buy online: Please note, at over 1kg,this book has a relatively high P&P charge of £4.70 for 2nd class,signed-for delivery.

Notable Tottenham BuildingsThe Tottenham Civic Society has a gallery of photographs ofnotable Tottenham buildings, from grand eighteenth centuryproperties under threat or now restored with the help of EnglishHeritage to the secular and domestic architecture of the latetwentieth century - and all points in between, including buildingswhich have since been demolished. For the archive, please see:Flickr photosite


Round the Societies

Barnet Residents’ Association- constant

vigilance of planning complianceProtecting and indeed improving the appearance of conservationareas is a constant battle. For example, the 189-191 High Street’sreplacement frontage and windows (all modern and plastic) wereinstalled without planning consent. After the Associationcomplained the owners submitted a planning application for a newground floor frontage and to re-install the wooden windows above.The new frontage duly appeared but not the windows. So theAssociation complained again. This resulted in another planningapplication, this time to retain the PVC windows. This applicationhas been rejected, and so the original commitment to re-installwooden windows should now be honoured.

Meanwhile at 230 High Street a modern shop frontage wasinstalled, again without planning permission. So yet anothercomplaint from the Association resulted in the Council demandinga retrospective planning application and this too has been refused.And, proposals to demolish a detached house and replace it withseven flats, included introducing a modern property in an areacharacterised by Victorian family homes, with the garden beingbuilt over. Once developers gain a foothold with such adevelopment it may be used as a precedent to justify similarschemes. The Association are pleased that the planners rejectedthis development also.

Making Enfield Beautiful As part of the Enfield in Bloom scheme, the Enfield Societysponsored the planting of a rose bed and the cost of hangingbaskets in the town centre working with members of the EnfieldTown Business Association. The Society is helping to attractvolunteer gardeners to look after these greening initiatives andplanted containers in the Town and at Southbury Station. TheEdmonton Heritage Trail was also recently relaunched. The EnfieldSociety supported this initiative working with the Council andWest Anglia Community Rail Partnership.

www.dugdalecentre.co.uk/page/enfield-local-history-factsheets

Major events in Finsbury Park- residents’

responseHaringey Council agreed in late October that large scale musicevents could continue to be staged in Finsbury Park, but with newconditions. This park is bordered by Islington, Hackney andHaringey, with Haringey owning the Park and the eventsconveniently being held in an area facing Hackney and Islington.

The Highbury Community Association submitted a detaileddocument to Haringey’s Licensing Sub-Committee objecting tothese major events, which include the Wireless Festival whichattracts 45,000 people, noting the major disturbance that thesehave on the Highbury area from the Park to Arsenal Station.

This licence review had been requested by the Friends ofFinsbury Park of which the Highbury Community Association is amember. The Friends are now deciding whether to appeal thedecision at a Magistrates court and are crowd-funding to supportthis action.

Of great concern to residents in Highbury West is that, with nowarning, Islington Council withdrew their 65 - page submission toHaringey Council on the first day of the two - day Licensing Sub-Committee hearing, 15 October 2018. Islington stated that thiswas done due to Live Nation (the events organisers) agreeing to allthe conditions set out in their submission. The HighburyCommunity Association feel that many of these conditions areinadequate and are now responding to this effect. Councillorsadvised the Association that ‘Islington Council was never seekingtotal revocation of the licence but was asking for criticalimprovements and changes to be made to address residents'concerns’, and that, ‘the Council is committed to working withlocal residents, the operators, as well as Haringey and HackneyCouncils, to closely monitor the full implementation of thesemeasures for future festivals and events in the park.’

Islington’s reaction is in stark contrast to the response byHackney Councillors representing the area adjacent to FinsburyPark. They demanded at the Licensing Review meeting that thelicence for Wireless be revoked.

Of the 18 pages of conditions that Live Nation have to abide by,many are revamped existing ones and others will have minimalimpact. Conditions include: the festival closing at 10pm instead of10.30pm on Sunday; reasonably requesting that performers do notsing or play vulgar, obscene and banned songs (as these can beheard clearly throughout the area including play areas); having oneadditional noise-monitoring location; consideration of the use ofprivate security dogs at the entrances; and encouraging patronsnot to congregate outside the premises after events have finished.What has dismayed the Highbury Community Association is thatthere are no expressions of concern in the conditions set byIslington Council about the importance of Finsbury Park as a parkto Islington residents (which is the most densely populatedborough in the country with the second least amount of openspace).

There is no acknowledgement of the sheer number of majorevents now being held in Finsbury Park: no matter how manycontrols there are, these large events have a major impact on thearea. The noise can be heard everywhere and throughout the Park,and the trucks driving through and around the Park during thesetting up and dismantling of events’ paraphernalia pollute the airand make a very unpleasant atmosphere.

Overall Haringey and Islington Councils do not seem to beconcerned enough about the needs of local children (and others)to have some peace away from noise and pollution – in theirhomes and when in the park, nor the needs of local students andpeople working shifts etc.

The Park is an income-generating venue for Haringey Council,earning £1.3m gross this year. The Highbury CommunityAssociation will continue to support the Friends of Finsbury Park intheir stalwart endeavours to save the Park as a park in thiscrowded inner-city area. Despite the Friends losing a recent legalchallenge, they continue to take on financial burdens to fight for apark. They should be heralded for persistency and tenacity. Oneday, hopefully, they will succeed, and Councils will be ashamed ofthe way they treated our precious, green, open spaces.

w

News briefs


Westminster City Council Planning Review Westminster City Council’s Planning Review and the future of Oxford Street.Issued on 18 October 2018, Westminster Council’s Planning Review is of importance toall Londoners. It appears to signal a shift of attitude towards the role of localcommunities in the planning system

In the wake of the departure of the former chair of WestminterCouncil’s Planning Committee, this review makes a long overduecommitment to “place residents at the heart of the planning

process” and that the “changes proposed in this report will requirea significant culture change for staff and those externally who usethe planning system”. “Residents and others will have the abilityto take a clearer and more proactive role in the planning anddecision making process related to development in their area. Thisincludes Neighbourhood Forums, Amenity Societies and thegeneral public.”

Unfortunately there is little in the report to indicate how this willbe achieved other than the following astonishing paragraph: “Due to the layout and arrangement of the current committeeroom, the attendees and general public at committee felt isolatedfrom the committee members. Large individual screens blockedthe ability to see the committee members and there is a lack ofbasic guidance and information which makes the committeeprocess difficult to understand as an attendee.”

Gifts and Hospitality

Three paragraphs on Gifts and Hospitality, clearly an attempt torectify what had been going on, also give rise for huge concernsimply by the fact that the Council felt the need to write them!

“The review recommends that Councillors and officers onlyattend formally arranged visits and recorded meetings linkeddirectly and specifically to the consideration of planningapplications, pre applications or the development of policy.Attendance at hospitality events is not required to deliver a goodand professional service”.

“The review found no impropriety or failure to follow guidelinesand protocols regarding hospitality. However, the practice ofaccepting hospitality from planning applicants was found to beexcessive and unnecessary. It has become ‘normalised’ incontrast to the practice of most planning services across thecountry”.

“Good practice would be for staff and Councillors to retain adistance from land owners, applicants, agents and communitystakeholders other than through formally arranged visits andrecorded meetings linked directly and specifically to theconsideration of planning applications, pre-applications or thedevelopment of the local plan. This provides independence andserves to maintain trust in what is a public and regulatory service”.A shocking report in Private Eye No. 1481, Oct-Nov 2018, makes alltoo clear what all this refers to.

The report makes seven key recommendations:

1) Improve the openness and transparency of the planning system:- We will record Planning Sub-Committee meetings and makecoverage available post-meeting; - We will live stream Planning Sub-Committee meetings once anappropriate technological solution has been identified andsourced;

2) Make it easier for residents to engage with the planning system:- We will introduce “public speaking rights” at Planning Sub-Committee meetings;

- We will review all our digital content on the planning processand planning decisions, particularly that included on the council’swebsite to improve accessibility for the general public;- We will improve the way we explain planning policies anddecisions to make them easier to understand.

3) To support resident and ward Councillor participation at anearlier stage of the process, for example in the pre-applicationstage of major applications, we will adopt a new approach forcommunicating and engaging their views in proposals.

Increased delegation

That is all very fine but will the next recommendation cancel outany improvements?4) to recommend to the Planning and City Development

Committee to increase delegation and review the call-inprocedures, empowering officers to take more delegateddecisions, in consultation with ward Members as appropriatewithout the need for escalation to Sub-Committee, therebyspeeding up the process. The details of the revised delegationand call in procedures be reviewed and recommended fordecision at the next Planning and City Development Committee

5) To submit a report to the next Planning and City DevelopmentCommittee setting out the detailed proposals for the introductionof public speaking rights. A target date for the introduction ofpublic speaking rights is set for 1 December 2018.

6) To direct the Chief Executive to restate to both officers andmembers their responsibilities in terms of the Council’s gifts andhospitality policies. This will include emphasising the importanceof exercising sound judgement in dealing with all offers of giftsand hospitality. To note that in terms of the planning service, thiswill build on the guidance issued in February 2017 regardingCouncillor meetings with developers on particular schemes.Council officers and elected members involved in the planningprocess must retain a distance from land owners, applicants,agents and community stakeholders, other than at formallyarranged visits and recorded meetings linked directly andspecifically to the consideration of planning applications, pre-applications, or the development of the local plan.

7) To create a new Place-Shaping and Planning directorate whichreflects the ambitious agenda set by the Leader and Cabinet todeliver a City for All, and for the new service to deliver thedirection of travel which will be set out in the emerging City Plan.

The Future of Oxford Street

Westminster City Council is to develop fresh plans for OxfordStreet. It has confirmed that the council does not support the fullscale pedestrianisation of Oxford Street and believes a rethink ofthe whole strategy is now required.

“It was clear through two public consultations and recentcouncil elections that local people do not support thepedestrianisation proposals. But doing nothing to improve thearea is not an option either”

“We are now working on our own proposals to improve theOxford Street district and will share them with residents, businessand visitors for discussion in the early Autumn.”


News briefs

Water: borrowing at customers’ expenseAnalysis published by Greenwich University’s Public ServicesInternational Research Unit, of the 28 years as privatisedcompanies, suggests that much of the borrowing by watercompanies including Thames Water, served only to pay financialreturns to investors. They claim that the largest water companiescould have funded all of their capital expenditure since privatisationwithout taking on any debt. Their policy of borrowing to pay returnsplaced an extra burden on customers. A postgraduate thesis byKarol Yearwood for the London School of Economics found thatcustomers are paying about £53 a year per household to servicethe debt, and shows that the companies could have funded all oftheir operations and investments from customer bills, withouttaking on any borrowing.

Thames Water 5-year business Plan submittedThames Water submitted a five-year business plan to Ofwat inSeptember promising record levels of investment on infrastructure,and reduced leakage. It will cap payouts to investors to “around£20m as we prioritise investment on significantly improving service”.This includes building a new reservoir near Abingdon in Oxfordshirewhich would cost over £2 billion and take 15 years to complete. TheFinancial Times described the plan as a bid to repair its reputation.

Grosvenor Group widens its portfolio The Duke of Westminster’s property group, the Grosvenor Group,has plans to increase its residential development outside centralLondon aiming to create a portfolio of 30,000 homes over the nextfive years, more than three times its current residential pipeline. AlexRobinson, director of development at Grosvenor’s strategic landbusiness said: “We can deliver schools, public spaces andamenities to create places you would want to go and live in.”

Under its new plans, Grosvenor would work as “masterdeveloper”, identifying the development sites on greenfield orbrownfield land, orchestrating the design, planning process andbuild of housing schemes, typically of between 2,000 and 5,000homes, along with their infrastructure. It would then pass individualparts of them on to housebuilders. It is planning to invest £500m ina “build-to-rent” scheme in Bermondsey, and has another twoschemes under way in Cambridgeshire,in partnership with Barrattand Oxfordshire in partnership with Oxford City Council and house-builders Hill and Redrow.

20 new drinking fountains for LondonAt least 20 new water fountains are to be set up in London as partof a plan by the Mayor Sadiq Khan and partners, the #OneLesscampaign, to tackle the issue of single-use plastic. The first fourwere installed in the capital earlier this year, two at Liverpool StreetStation and another near Carnaby Street. London’s BoroughMarket installed its own drinking fountains in 2017.The 20 locations were chosen from a large number of applicants,with £85,000 available to help fund installation – £50,000 of whichcame from the Mayor and £35,000 from MIW Water CoolerExperts, who also provided the fountains.

The Lamppost vending machinesVictorian gas Lampposts that sold cups-of-hot-coffee? You couldn’tmake it up!

Correspondence in The Times recently suggesting thatlampposts might also function as chargers for electric cars elicitedthe most wonderful piece of arcane information: gas lamppostserected in Queen’s Buildings, Southwark, a century ago, produceda gallon of boiled water for a halfpenny, and for another pennysupplied a slab of compressed cocoa or tea with condensed milkand sugar.

Googling this information found that lo and behold it was true!“Pluto Lamps” were early vending machines built into the bases ofgas lamps developed by a company founded in 1896 by H. M.Robinson. They were also known as the “Hot Water SupplySyndicate” or the “Refreshment Lamp Syndicate” evidentlycombining the convenience of a supply of hot drinks with themunicipal task of providing lighting. The first one was installed inLeicester Square and there were a number of others around the city.

It was demonstrated at the Great Exhibition of 1897 as a gaslamp that also included an automatic machine which could dispensequarts of hot water in quick succession, or a halfpenny’s worth ofBeef tea essence, Cocoa, Milk, Sugar, Tea or Coffee, all via enamelvessels secured to the gas lamp by a chain. Cigarettes at four to thepenny and even postcards were offered from other slots.

A few newspaper records of it exist, with the picture, below,such as a report in the Pall Mall Gazette of the 8th July 1898, theSunlight Year Book 1899, and there was a Journal of Gas Lighting,Water Supply & Sanitary Improvement in 1913.

However, it was apparently not a success possibly because thelocals found they could replace half-penny coins with small roundpieces of tin. Over 1,000pieces of tin were foundinside the vendingmachine, according areport into the arrest ofone such thief in the DailyMail of April 6th 1899.

There are 1,500 gaslamps left in London andjust five British-Gasengineer lamplighters leftto light them, of thehundreds who oncepaced the city at duskwith long, lighted polesto spark the gas runningup the iron posts. Thatthese gas lamps havesurvived is partly a tributeto English Heritage,which has protected andrestored them. For more information :

www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2012/10/01/the-victorian-gas-lamps-that-sold-cups-of-hot-coffee/ w

newsbriefsNews and issues of interest and concern to note.

Events for your diary


Dates for your diary London Forum events

www.londonforum.org.uk

Peter Eversden ChairmanLondon Forum, 70 Cowcross Street, London EC1M 6EJTelephone: 020 7993 5754 email [email protected]

Registered Charity Number 1093134

w

For information about the London Forum contact:

Editor Helen MarcusEditorial team Diane Burridge, Peter Eversden, Peter PickeringOriginal design Ross ShawOriginal Spotlight concept Tony AldousPrint Express Printing. Telephone 01733 230 800Published by the London Forum, 70 Cowcross Street, London EC1M 6EJ. Telephone 020 7993 5754

Member societies are encouraged to use London Forum

news in their own newsletters.While the London Forum is concerned that the views written in articles are relevant andhonestly held by the contributor, the opinions stated by individuals may not necessarily be heldby the London Forum Executive, who are not in a position to vouch for their factual accuracy.

newsforum

London Forum news and events

London Forum on Twitter

Don’t forget the London Forum Twitter site.

Stories; updates on the latest news as it comes in; useful webaddresses.Do pass on the address to all your amenity society contacts. Twitter can reach far beyond London Forum's e-bulletin list of contacts.

http://twitter.com/London_Forum NB - note the underscore: _ in the name

w

The Newsforum team would be delighted to

hear from members

Please send us your newsletters - pdf by emailpreferred - so that any items of interest can be

featured in Round the Societies:

[email protected]

London Forum Open Meetings 2019

Save the Dates

Tuesday 15th JanuaryViability assessments for developments, with John Wacher ofthe GLA speaking and leading discussion.

Tuesday 12th February *Afternoon

*NB this meeting is in the afternoon *

Thursday 4th April.

Watch out for emails and consult the website nearer the

time for more information

Meetings are held at The Gallery,

75 Cowcross Street, EC1M 6EJ, (Farringdon station)

All meetings begin with refreshments at 6pm

for a 6:30pm start

Membership renewal

Please keep London Forum's membership system up todate for your society by using the new membership

renewal facility on the web site: http://www.londonforum.org.uk/member_login.php

Do make sure to amend your data so that the right peopleare receiving post and email bulletins, otherwise societiesmight not be kept informed. The way in which members canamend their details is secure, as is the information we hold.

Queries can be sent to [email protected]

w

Delivering Newsforum by email

The Newsforum in PDF form sent by email can be widelydistributed at no cost. It is environmentally more friendly,saving paper, and it also saves London Forum a great dealof expense. If you do not keep your hard copy and feel youcould do without it, please let us know via one of the emailaddresses below, giving your Society name as well asemail address.