Peabody: Objection of the three Northcote Ward Councillors

2 mins read

Author: Cyril Richert
As the planning proposal for Peabody’s redevelopment is going ahead (with the Council officer recommendation for approval!) and will be seen before the Planning Committee on Wednesday 18th July (@7.30pm, Town Hall – please attend, it is very important), we publish below the letter of objection sent by the Councillors of Northcote Ward.

9th July 2012

On behalf of the three Northcote Ward Councillors, I submit the following comments on the above application:

Although we support the redevelopment of Peabody’s St John’s Hill estate and welcome, for example, the mixed tenure housing that would be created, we are of the view that the application as submitted is seriously flawed. Therefore we believe the current application should be withdrawn so that the issues we detail below can be addressed. If the application proceeds we believe that these issues are of sufficient importance that planning permission should be refused.

a) Traffic – we do not believe the traffic study takes into account the problems currently experienced on the awkward local road network with all its’ restrictions and difficulties. We recognise that there will only be a limited increase in on-site parking, but consider that the proposal would be most likely to lead to a significant increase in visitor and service traffic with consequential implications for the neighbouring roads. This issue may be remedied by the provision of a main vehicular entrance and exit on Boutflower Road  but without a through route to the Eckstein Road entrance and exit.  We appreciate that this would be likely to need significant changes to the layout of the development.

b) The development would require the removal of a significant number of on-street parking places to the detriment of existing local residents and shoppers in an area where parking opportunities are already in exceptionally  high demand.

c) The 550ft/169.5 metre block on the north-western edge of the site alongside the railway, would be highly visible from  St.John’s Hill and would present an unacceptable overbearing perspective. 

d) The massing and design of the 4 storey block on St.John’s Hill makes no attempt to integrate with the Victorian terrace which it adjoins. It makes a poor and thoughtless transformation from existing to new.

e) The development  proposed on the  Boutflower Road frontage is not supported as it prevents the creation of a vehicular entrance and exit at the only location that would not be detrimental to the amenity of existing local residents. [See (a) above]

f) The 4 storey block on the southernmost leg of Eckstein Road does not  respect the scale of the existing buildings opposite, and taken together with the 7 storey block in the centre of the site, would  be seriously damaging to the outlook for residents of that road.

g)The 7 and 5 storey blocks close to the southernmost leg of Comyn Road  would present an overbearing appearance to existing local residents.

h) There is far from sufficient high quality recreational and play space for the 200+ children  likely to reside in the development. Although there are the remote sections of Wandsworth Common nearby, this is unlikely to be appropriate for the wide spread of ages likely to be living on the proposed estate.

We would be grateful if these concern could be drawn to the notice of members of the Planning Applications Committee.

Thank you.

And on behalf of
Councillor Peter Dawson
& Councillor Jennie Brown
Members for the Northcote Ward.

On Peabody’s redevelopment you can also read:

Did you like reading this article? Help us write more!

Clapham Junction Insider (formerly known as the CJAG website) has been publishing local news for over 14 years and remains committed to providing information about the local community and engaging in public interest journalism.

Our goal is to feature a wide range of community campaigns and initiatives, local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, and provide assistance to residents.

We have always been dedicated to these endeavours and have no intention of changing. In fact, we would like to expand our efforts further.

Until recently, all the stories, analyses, and reports published have been made possible with the invaluable help of many volunteers. However, it requires a significant amount of time and effort, and we are frustrated that we cannot do more. There are numerous topics we would like to cover, but we require financial resources to provide regular information.

Therefore, we kindly ask our readers to consider offering financial support to sustain these efforts. Any contributions made will help support community and public interest news, as well as the expansion of our coverage in this area.

2 ways of supporting our project

Do you think what we are doing is helping the community and you want to encourage us to do more? We have set up two ways of supporting our project:

  1. Paypal: For one-off contributions, you can just use your bank card. However if you wish to encourage and support us regularly with a small amount, you will need a Paypal account to set up a monthly subscription. Click here to donate.
  2. Patreon: this is a well-known membership platform that connects content creators with supporters. Mainly, it offers financial tools that let supporters subscribe to projects that give creators a predictable income stream as they continue to create content. Click here to subscribe and support us regularly.

If you do support us in this way we'd be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor.

CJI editor and Clapham Junction Action Group co-founder and coordinator since 2008, Cyril has lived in Clapham Junction since 2001.
He is also funder and CEO of Habilis-Digital Ltd, a digital agency creating and managing websites and Internet solutions.