London SE1 community website

Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre to endure

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 9 of 16
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.33am
So where is the 'adjacent land' they'll supposedly be expanding the shopping centre into?
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.34am
Thanks James.

I've read the report and I'm no less furious. They now propose to extend the shopping centre, selling public pavement* to pay for it. The shell will be retained, with residential building built on top.

There is no reference to dealing with Walworth Rd, the station, the north roundabout or the arches. There will be a new consultation, but that is little more than a kick in the face as the previously consulted upon master-plan has been binned.

The insurmountable compulsory purchase challenge of the previous scheme don't prevent Southwark council from compulsory purchasing other property to sell to St Mogdens.

We're going to get a bigger shopping centre and less public space, when we were promised the exact opposite.

We're going to be locked into this, with no discussion with residents, no democratic mandate and no masterplan.

The meeting is on Tuesday at 4pm, I intend to attend if at all possible.

(* Notably they have used a pre-south roundabout land ownership plan for the deal, I hope that gets corrected)
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.35am
bobcourt wrote:
So where is the 'adjacent land' they'll supposedly be expanding the shopping centre into?

On the plan here
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.41am
Thanks, I didn't see that before.

What a joke. Looks like this will be a drive-thru shopping centre only.
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.45am
All it would take to reassure people, if what is planned is good, is one render.

I'll sing their praises if they come up with something good, but I'm furious that the council can discard of the masterplan without presenting their alternative first.
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.45am
To be fair, the report makes clear that not all of the marked pavement is likely to be sold, just whichever bits of it are required for access to the new building(s).

Editor of the London SE1 website.
Subscribe to our SE1 Direct weekly newsletter.
Tuesday 10 May 2011 11.50am
But the report doesn't make clear what is proposed, so all we know is that public space that was supposed to get larger, will get smaller.
Tuesday 10 May 2011 2.44pm
I am totally baffled by this pig's ear. The pavements around the shopping centre are anyway pretty grim, but we need them for a)the bus stops and b)getting to the crossways if there are not going to be any more underpasses. I simply cannot see where the logic is. Furthermore if they are now going to make a soaring residential building where Hannibal House is, the lack of sunlight and the wind tunnels are going to be horrific. SURELY there is some sort of consultative body. As one who spent many an hour in many a committee room thrashing out the original plans, I am incensed that we are being ridden over roughshod and left out of the process altogether.
Tuesday 10 May 2011 3.17pm
Oh look, there's plenty of public realm here! - maybe that's why there is no cycle path!
Tuesday 10 May 2011 4.01pm
Lend Lease's consultation proposals, and the council's proposed "reference group" is on the agenda at this Friday's Leisure and Scrutiny subcommittee meeting (5pm at 160 Tooley St (LBS offices), and members of the Elephant Amenity Network is going to be speaking about what we'd like to see (agenda and reports pack is here, including the Elephant Amenity Network's submission and Lend Lease's proposals.) Please come along if you can to see what happens and to make your views known.
Current: 9 of 16

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