London SE1 community website

Berkeley Homes development at Potters Fields

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 12 of 20
Friday 14 May 2004 9.25am
Just received the following fropm Rachel Knight - the programme officer.

"The Inquiry has needed unexpectedly to adjourn yesterday and for today,
Friday 14 May. Proceedings will resume next Tuesday, May 18."

Apparently it is due to illness and not for any other reason.
Friday 14 May 2004 3.34pm
The way Berkeley Homes case is unraveling under cross examination ,Im not surprised they're off sick.


I've put some extra notes on this web site

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/ican/c1851



Post edited (15 May 04 13:14)
Friday 14 May 2004 3.42pm
I can see the Board Meeting now...

"Listen guys this opposition is getting too much - any suggestions on the next plan of action?"

"Er... we could do a sickie...?"

"Excellent idea - saves us paying another consultant or having another meeting..."

Perhaps not... Ludicrous.
Friday 14 May 2004 4.01pm
Could someone pick up R&M's toys as they appear to have fallen out of his pram.

Chill mate, chill. It's Friday.
Saturday 15 May 2004 8.22am
Re. minutes - from my knowledge of public enquiries, they dont have minutes. This is one of the reasons that well-off large firms that can employ people to be there for the duration are at an advantage over individuals and impoverished community groups. It can be helpful to pick up speakers' "Statement of Case" documents, but these aren't always exactly what is said on the day and, as pointed out, dont contain the cross-examination which is often the most illuminating part.

Ruck and Maul - not on the subject of this thread exactly, but - you talk as though "feeling all at peace with the world" was a worrying and unwelcome state. I recommend you should become a little more familiar with it. Its much nicer - for yourself and everybody else - and doesn't at all stop you from disagreeing with people or having an incisive and perceptive grip on affairs.
Monday 17 May 2004 8.08am
Thank you ever so much for your direction... I am actually extremely chilled 90% of the time but some comments deserve a little ribbing, Friday or not... Being at peace is not unwelcome at all and I certainly am. This forum is not without its share of sarcasm and cynicism - just felt that a little was in order...

Peace brothers and sisters... (!)
Monday 17 May 2004 8.09am

TUMJ

All of the presentations and representations are taken down at a major public inquiry, sometimes in the form of a direct transcript in the case of a major inquiry.

They are for the us of the Planning Inspector who is effectively the "judge" in this context, and are not generally released to the general public.

In the same way that a judge uses the court record to reach a jubdgement or summarise for a jury (depending on the court), the inspector uses his/her notes and the transcript where appropriate to come to their decision.

They are referred to if the planning appeal decision is challenged in the High Court on a point of law (not just because you don't like it!).

Regards,

Loafer
Tuesday 18 May 2004 7.37pm
I attended the in inquiry agian to day

And the sparks were flying

The best bit came at the end

Mr forstick tried to question Mr Brett(of Barton Willmore Planning Paretnership) about a letter from the photographers gallery to Berkeley Homes ,but was repeatedly interrupted and stoped from doing so by the Berkeley spokesman .who claimed the question should have been put to there cultural witness.James Alexander.

It then transpired that southwark council had been asking Berkeley for evidence of who there cultural users might be for some time and had been refused until two months before the inquiry started when Berkeley gave southwark council a confidential letter .

Very Clevely Mr forstick tricked Mr bret into revealing that the conclusion of the confidential letter was that Berkeley was IN NO NEGOTIATIONS WITH ANY CULTURAL USER EITHER AT AN EARLY OR ADVANCED STAGE ,OF NEGOTIATION

Mr Bretts face turned white when he realised what he'd done

Team Berkeley were furious and declared it an ambush

Obviously the letter from the photographers gallery had been stating that because of the inadequacies and deficianys of the Berkeley scheme they couldn't be involved .

Im sorry
It will be a travesty of justice if this scheme gets planning permission

************************************

As I arrived Mr Bret was proclaiming that Berkeley Homes were London's premiere developer in london with massive experience in river side developments ,hhmm I wouldn't shout to loudly about that ,Berkeley witness DR Gilse Worsly an architectural Historian was very critical of most river side developments in London ,obviously forgetting most of them were built by Berkeley homes .

At the start of the cross examination Mr forscdick pointed out that both Berkeley scheme and the southwark plan were mixed use the difference was .the southwark plan
Was better use.

Mr. Brett said he thought Berkeley homes could have there cake and eat it,(by the end of the cross egsamenation the cake was well and truely put back in the fridge)

The word user coursed some disagreement

Team Berkeley accused southwark of trying to put all there eggs one basket with just one cultural user .

Mr forsdick pointed out that as far as the southwark plan was concerned the word cultural user meant more than one user .

Mr Forsdick attacked the Berkeley claim that no large cultural user such as an orchestra or theater would be interested in relocating to the site.by reading out Ken livingstons cultural document that stated that

Many cultural institutions were forced to work in inadequate buildings and some of London's world class institutions are struggling to maintain there programs because of inadequate facilities

The obvious implication of which is that many of them would love to move to a new location.
Especially one as attractive as potters fields .

It was a very hot day after the customary stroll along the rive at lunch time .

Mr. bretts tongue slipped, and he proclaimed that

On a day like this Potters fields will be crammed with people basking in the sunshine ,City hall and more London has attracted more people to the area .

Im sorry
City hall isn't a big crowed puller most people that pass it have either been to the Tate Modern .Borough market or Tower Bridge.

*************************************************
As I was arriving they were discussing educational use of the collage It seemed that southwark councils plan to compulsory purchase the collage for use as a school had been withdrawn (I think)


I've put some extra notes on this web site

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/ican/c1851



Post edited (20 May 04 01:12)
Thursday 20 May 2004 3.59pm
Just waiting for the change of use application to resi... Would make a lovely place to live...

BUT before you all jump on board and give me a moral high ground virtual kicking I would of course rather it were used to educate the children of Southwark. My point is just that some of these old schools make beautiful apartment buildings.
Thursday 20 May 2004 9.17pm
In my opinion the Berkeley presentation didn't go well ,not surprising considering how bad the scheme is,

The Berkeley side have asked for the Architect Ian Riche back to explain how a cultural user could occupy his space ,and they have asked James Alexander back to explain the undisclosed contents of the photographers gallery letter.

Apart from this the Berkeley presentation is complete

Southwark council are now presenting there case

They shouldn't find it difficult

as they are right

Current: 12 of 20

To post a message, please log in or register..
Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions