Bermondsey Square development

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
yas
Tuesday 23 May 2006 9.15pm
I've been watching the Bermondsey Square development proposals for a number of years, petitioned for what I believe are the right reasons (loss of charm, characteristic with supposed Conservation area, light, view of green spaces for all those around, etc.) and visited architects to see the plans on display. In any event, despite all this, it appears the proposal has been approved for a 10storey building (down from 12 from original plan).

Personally, I am disgusted. We pay substantial council tax but at the end of the day, our say has very little influence.

Who is approving these plans? Do they really want the South of Bermondsey street area to be sky-scrapper central? Do they have any idea?! This council has some serious issues with planning permission. My colleagues who live north of the river struggle to get a conservative built... But we are at the other extreme. Given the track record of greedy developers in the area, the council should challenge on our behalf.

Hooray for the archaeologists! I live in hope that they will recommend no building be built at all on this site and the market can grow back to what it used to be before everyone was scared off. And then I woke up...
Tuesday 23 May 2006 9.34pm
Well lets just say that "pay for play" is not restricted merely to Tony Blairs cabinet.

Anytime you have these situations of politicians looking for money and real estate people who have money, its pretty obvious what will happen. Especially as electorates rarely make the councils pay the price at the polls for this stuff.
Tuesday 23 May 2006 10.23pm
I say let them build , the whole area could do with a boot up its arse. I have lived in the area for 20 years and can honestly say that it has gone from strength to strength . It's an area I am proud of and welcome change. You can please some of the people sometime etc etc
Wednesday 24 May 2006 6.49am
I wonder if they consulted the people who live opposite in the small block? ten stories looming would block out a lot of light if you are on the ground floor....how many stall spaces have been lost in the market...where are they all now...where are they all going to be when this sanitised version of a market is finished?
Wednesday 24 May 2006 6.58am
I initially thought like you Jan, but after talking to some of the antique traders I discovered quite a few of them welcomed the "gentrification" moves to attract new people to the area. Let's face it, it's been getting quieter there every year, even before the building work began. I mourned the loss of open space at Spa Park but the newer smaller space is far more attractive. If the development is handled well I feel it is generally positive for the area.
Wednesday 24 May 2006 7.16am
jerry the Spa Park did look okay..i passed it this morning, did wonder about the new sloping roof though...ideal new climbing frame..wont be long before kids think it's a new skateboard run!
Wednesday 24 May 2006 8.46am
When there was an open day this winter, the archaeologists explained that they were actually employed by the developer. So I don't know how biased they are...
Wednesday 24 May 2006 11.56am
connie wrote:
When there was an open day this winter, the archaeologists explained that they were actually employed by the developer. So I don't know how biased they are...

I think you'll find that the archaeologists ("Pre Construct Archaeology" - see their web site) are completely unbiased. This company was formed to take advantage of the legal requirement that developers now have to get such investigations done before building can commence. Just a pity that it is only done AFTER full planning permission...

I think the ones to blame are the archaeologists from 1960-ish who hypothesized a size for the Priory based on just a single corner (NE of the TBR/Abbey St lights). Of course they guessed too small. If they had got it more right - that the Priory was a far bigger and more important building than realised - then perhaps the council would have been a bit more reluctant to grant permission?
Wednesday 24 May 2006 12.51pm
The archeologist said that much of the site was destroyed when the Petrol station was built in the 60s. Bring on the new development I say- the architects have an excellent track record on sensitive developments . Who preferred it as a car park anyway?

To post a message, please log in or register..

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from: