Little change for the new scheme for Homebase (following previous refusal)

3 mins read
4

Author: Cyril Richert

elevation-proposal2A new planning application (2016/7356) for the site of Homebase in Swandon Way (Wandsworth town) is being considered. It follows the decision at the end of March 2016 to defer the previous application (p.a. 2015/6608). While the Council’s officers recommended approval for the scheme including a 17 storey tower, it emerged that the developers wanted to review their proposals and consult further.

However on 27 July 2016, the Council decided to refuse planning permission by reason of the height, scale and massing of the station building and its relationship with its surrounding townscape (against the planning officer’s recommendation).

Apparently the 9 months used until the new submission this January produced little effect as the new proposal is more or less the same as previously. As I wrote at the time last year, “it would be wise to confine joy for the present“. With the main difference being the tower to be reduced from 17 to 15 storeys but two other buildings going up to 10 storeys  and 22 additional residential units, the proposal is: “Demolition of existing retail warehouse building and erection of three buildings ranging from 7 to 15 storeys with basement to provide a mixed use scheme including 343 residential units, 597 sq.m. of retail units, 164 sq.m. of Community Use  and 1647 sq.m. of studio/offices, with associated cycle parking spaces and 89 car parking spaces, playspace, landscaping and public realm improvements“.

Current site
Current site
Proposal
Proposal

Thus the height, massing, density, breach of Council’s policy, small amount of affordable housing and more important even, the cumulative effect that nobody amongst developers and Council officers want to consider, is still there!

Massing proposal
Massing proposal: view south

The new proposal received more than 350 objections so far, including those from the Battersea Society, The Wandsworth Society, The Tonsley Resident Association and the Greater London Authority (GLA).

Although the GLA is broadly supporting the scheme in term of impact and considers that overall the proposal will deliver significant benefits with no significant harm (although “the revised proposal will still be clearly visible and will still be clearly visible and will provide a significant new element to the existing townscape“), they strongly challenge the case on affordable provision (the development proposes that 79 units will be delivered as an intermediate product, which equates to 25% affordable housing), saying: “The current offer is unacceptable” and they question the viability assessment.

Embassy Garden buildings
Embassy Garden buildings

The Battersea Society notes that the design as presented echoes that of the Embassy Garden buildings in Nine Elms Lane. However they say that “The height, scale and massing of the proposed buildings are an inappropriate form of development for the site“. They also criticise the inadequate level of affordable units, the proposal being dedicated to more fortunate buyers.

In addition, they note that the request was made for the planning permission to remain in force for 7 years instead of the usual 3 years period, which is showing the uncertainty of the developer’s plan, and the potential construction hell for the local residents to the site.

The Wandsworth Society, reiterating their previous objections (see our article HERE), said: “The location is totally inappropriate for a tower of 15 storeys, in breach of the SSAD guidelines and Local Plan Policies […] We can see no justification for the PAC to approve this slightly revised scheme. The substance of the scheme remains unchanged and the changes are minimal“.

The Tonsley Resident Association, which also presented a petition of 73 signatures, highlighted the falsehoods (or as we say nowadays “alternative facts”) presented by the developers, who claim that trains are not at capacity and 200 extra peak time journeys can be absorbed (you can download the TRA objection HERE, it makes interesting reading on the elements presented by developers to justify their case).

Once again, it seems that the local population is greatly at odd with the plans of officers and planning authorities for their living areas.

The Battersea Society wrote as a conclusion to its objection:

“It appears that neither Wandsworth Council nor TfL are prepared to consider the cumulative impact on public transport and road capacity of the developments already consented in the immediate area but rather assess each application here, in York Road, Lombard Road and Wandsworth Town in isolation, one from another.  […]

The Battersea Society has in the past actively engaged with the consultation process but we begin to feel there is little point in doing so in the future, given that the Council, its officers and developers appear to see approved policies as merely hurdles to be negotiated or ignored.”

The Clapham Junction Action Group cannot say better and is fully supportive of this statement.

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

CJAG website has been publishing local news for more than 14 years and remains committed to providing local community information and public interest journalism.

We aim to feature as much as possible on community campaigns and initiatives, local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents and helping residents.

We've always done that and won't be changing, in fact we'd like to do more. 

Until recently, all stories, analysis and reports published have been made with the great help of many volunteers. However, at the end of the day it cost time and efforts and we are frustrated that we cannot do more: there are many subjects that we would like to cover but we need financial resources to help us providing regular information.

We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and 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.

CJAG News 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.

4 Comments

  1. Planners and officers endulge developers regardless of local opinion and planning guidelines. I know of one 28 storey development where the planning dept. actively encouraged the developer to build higher. There is NO point commenting on planning applications. It has no bearing on the outcome. Such consultations are purely tokenistic.

  2. One of the things which concerns me is the level of pollution which will be held in the area by this development. York Road is already heavily polluted. This development (and others on the Battersea side) will make the situation worse. I can only assume that Wandsworth Council want York Road to overtake Putney High Street as one of the most polluted roads in London.

    • That’s one way of making Putney High Street appear better pollution-wise than it currently does, I suppose . . . .

Comments are closed.