London SE1 community website

Homes & Pub to be knocked down on Blackfriars Road

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 17 of 18
Tuesday 15 April 2014 2.47pm
boroughpaul, we are heading down the same route.
hhrca we are definitely not looking after "our own" as you put it. I even feel uncomfortable typing that as it sounds wrong to say it, but our government, our councils, those who could do something about balancing things out do nothing as the so called "investments" line their pockets nicely, and furthering themselves makes them feel good. The thinking is short term, quick fix, sound bite stuff, and no one knows what the outcome of this madness will be. I find it scary, to be honest.
Tuesday 15 April 2014 5.59pm
JazzyQ wrote:
... but our government, our councils, those who could do something about balancing things out do nothing as the so called "investments" line their pockets nicely, and furthering themselves makes them feel good. The thinking is short term, quick fix, sound bite stuff, and no one knows what the outcome of this madness will be.

The job of managing planning and development in Southwark looks to me Sisyphean.

It would be interesting to see some concrete examples of what Southwark Council should be doing.
Tuesday 15 April 2014 7.42pm
"avaricious and deceitful" is how Sisyphus is described.
Seems about right to me.

What to do about managing planning and development in the borough might include a long, hard look at what has happened so far and to learn from some of the mistakes.

How about listening to what residents are saying, rather than arrogantly ploughing on with the master plan.
Tuesday 15 April 2014 9.07pm
JazzyQ wrote:
avaricious and deceitful" is how Sisyphus is described. Seems about right to me.

So council staff are avaricious and deceitful, as well as arrogant.

JazzyQ wrote:
How about listening to what residents are saying, rather than arrogantly ploughing on with the master plan.

All you seem to be 'saying' is that council employees are sh*t, when they're not bent. And tall buildings are sh*t, bent or not. The only 'idea' you've promulgated is to build mid-rise, without explaining how to cover the massive loss in public finance that would lead to. Neither do you explaining how the council would go about forcing developers to only build up to 8 or so floors.

So I'll try again. If the council were to listen to residents, what would they hear?
Tuesday 15 April 2014 10.22pm
is "public finance" your only concern?

Thinking only about money is what has got things into this mess.

Forget about money and think about, and listen to people, and think about building homes for those people, not developments for profit.
Wednesday 16 April 2014 8.14am
turtmcfly, there are some really good council staff in Southwark. Good people working hard for our borough. Unfortunately, there are also too many liars and rogues: caught well and truly in a culture of corruption and carelessness. And what I see over a decade is loss of some of the best, and retention / promotion of some of the worst. Which is part of the mess.

The Council selectively hears from selected residents, and some of the best policy has come from residents. And many ideas too. And some of the worst, and residents representatives are also responsible for supporting very poor policy for their own reasons.

The sad truth is that if the Council employees carry on as they have been - overall - then sooner or later it will open the door to a much more nasty bunch of people than critical residents to come and issue redundancies by text.

Sorry - off topic again!

I agree with you about mid-rise though, like it or not, in many of Southwark's brownfield sites mid-rise wont cover the costs and provide enough affordable housing and we'll lose open spaces. That's where Walkie Talkie provides over Shard, one has more open public space around at ground.

JazzyQ - it is sooo much about money because of viability rules under NPPF. Officers must follow the policies etc. Or be sacked. The Council own old "independent" study that showed 35% affordable and 50% of that social homes to rent was toast ages ago. It was done by a consultant paid for by the Council and therefore as usual the answer provided back fitted the story the Council back then wanted. It was then superseded by District Auditor etc. decisions made on an application by application basis.

Why I am not a Council Officer is that I would not last till lunchtime.
Wednesday 16 April 2014 10.43am
hhrca wrote:
turtmcfly, there are some really good council staff in Southwark. Good people working hard for our borough. Unfortunately, there are also too many liars and rogues: caught well and truly in a culture of corruption and carelessness.

Agreed. Don't for a second take me as an avid supporter of Southwark council. Nearly all my interactions with them or their outsourced suppliers has been disappointing. I can't comment on anything other than what I see as jobs-worth dumped-on uselessness though. From my experience with Southwark planning (which was idiotically negative and grim) there are simply not enough staff to properly handle the number of applications.

The point I was trying to make is that to a large degree the council are hamstrung in what they can do. They have targets handed down to them, and have limited legal redress against developers appealing against decisions. Very expensive legal redress at that, although apparently money is not an issue.

Imagine a planning department staffed only by highly competent and conscientious individuals - what difference could they make (that's not a rhetorical question!)
Wednesday 16 April 2014 11.12am
"Planning department" and "highly conscientious and competent individuals" are more than likely contradictions in terms
Wednesday 16 April 2014 1.23pm
boroughpaul wrote:
"Planning department" and "highly conscientious and competent individuals" are more than likely contradictions in terms

Oh come on, that is just wrong. There are some very good individuals, and bad individuals hamstrung by their many ears in the system. They are only able to do the possible hence they are:-

over ruled by inspectors
out muscled financially by the developers
constrained by the planning rules (for them, not for the developers)
unsupported by politicians
underresourced and given only a few hours per application on average
basically unable to do what they want or what they think is the right thing...

Who would be a planner? And I have worked with many. Change the system and it will improve, but not much chance of that with the developers funding the political parties.
Thursday 29 May 2014 7.42pm
Watching BBC London news this evening, and there was an item on property development, "dirty Russian money and Chinese gamblers..." unsuitable skyscraper developments, Londoners being priced out by people who don't live in the flats they buy, but leave them standing empty as investments. Sounds famiiliar?

Peter Wynne Rees was being interviewed by Tim Donovan, the political editor, and suggesting alternatives to what is happening. Well worth seeing on iPlayer, or it may be repeated in the late BBC news tonight. PWR is due to speak to the London Assembly soon. Can members of the public go to these talks?
Current: 17 of 18

To post a message, please log in or register..
February at a glance
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