London SE1 community website

Thameslink 2000 @ Borough Market & Blackfriars

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 9 of 17
Friday 27 October 2006 12.25pm
Campaigners will be collecting signatures by the main entrance of the market tomorrow (Saturday) 10-11am and 12 noon-1pm.

Editor of the London SE1 website.
Subscribe to our SE1 Direct weekly newsletter.
Sunday 29 October 2006 2.23pm
This weeks Southwark news makes depressing reading, but I'm glad the campaigners are going to continue there fight against this, in the meantime the market should look into commandeering the whole of Stony street and Clink street.
Monday 30 October 2006 7.38pm
With the likely construction of the Thameslink Viaduct over Borough Market et al, I can't help but have concern for the numerous small businesses that will be adversely affected - perhaps to the point of extinction. The macro economic arguments for the project predict economic gain for London and SE1. But on a micro scale, what of the unique business community and it's culture that might well be lost permanently in the process?
Tuesday 31 October 2006 10.12am
kenwick has a point - the macro is good, but on a micro view it is a disaster.

The market is an international destination. Yes, really- it's in all the foreign guidebooks.

Equally it was voted "best day out in London" in the last year. It's importance now is far greater than in 1997 when the plan was devised.

And as Jacjie and others say, E & C will be a blank page- an opportunity to get the infrastructure absolutely right.

GAHHH
Tuesday 31 October 2006 9.55pm
phoenix wrote:
kenwick has a point - the macro is good, but on a micro view it is a disaster...
...And as Jacjie and others say, E & C will be a blank page- an opportunity to get the infrastructure absolutely right.

Ironically there are many similar "micro" problems with the E&C development.
Monday 6 November 2006 5.54pm
Its Good that the Save Borough Market campaigners collected 400 signatures in two hours,
But I hope they continue , if they did they could collect tens of thousands,
It's a shame they didn't start this earlier.
Wednesday 8 November 2006 9.23am
Pay attention mr salt - the original petition, organised several years ago, raised over 10,000 signatures. A table was set up in the middle of Borough Market itself, with information and petition forms to sign. Unfortunately, these days the BM Trustees would not tolerate the petitioners invading their 'territory' because they withdrew any opposition to the viaduct proposals. They seem to think [misguidedly, in my view]that the works will pose little threat to the continued success of the market.
Wednesday 8 November 2006 12.15pm
In The Southwark new it said network rail have said the new market hall would create views of Southwark cathedral from Borough high street.

What do they mean by that I thought any demolished buildings were to be replaced, and the green dragon court replacement was a brick building,
Wednesday 8 November 2006 11.37pm
Having looked at the decision letter, I was equally perplexed. I wasn't aware of any drawings for a new "glazed market hall" at public exhibitions of Network Rail's proposals, nor do I remember any stories on this site about such a proposal a year ago.

However it appears that it went before Southwark's Planning Committee in September 2005. To their credit,they resolved that if was left to them, they would turn down the application.

...Southwark officers' report
(including some astonishingly complacent advice from English Heritage on the impact on Borough High Street conservation area.
... Minutes of meeting


Joint DfT/DCLG Decision Letter wrote:
Borough Market and surrounding area

40. The Inspector noted that whilst the Thameslink 2000 scheme in the area had not changed significantly since the first inquiry, there were now proposals for replacement buildings on the sites that would be left after the demolitions arising from the construction of the Borough High Street bridge and viaduct. Significant changes in circumstances since the first inquiry included the introduction of the congestion charge, which had reduced traffic flows on Borough High Street by around 15%, and the continued growth of Borough Market, which was busier than at the time of the first inquiry (IR18.8.1-18.8.10; IR19.10).

41. Taking account of the changes in circumstances, the Inspector considered that the proposed works would have no significant effect on traffic and pedestrian flows or on the operation of the Market (IR18.8.4). In his view, the re-location of traders closest to the works and the implementation of PEMS would ensure that the risk of contamination was not significantly greater than at present; and the increased popularity of the market would make it more capable of continuing to operate successfully during construction than at the time of the first inquiry (IR18.8.10; IR19.11).

a) 11-15 Borough High Street (Applications TL5 and TL26)

42. The Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector, for the reasons set out in IR18.8.21-18.8.23, that the proposed replacement building for 11-15 Borough High Street is an appropriate design quality for its setting. They therefore consider that the proposal complies with PPS1 objectives of ensuring good quality design. Given this, the Secretary of State for CLG agrees with the Inspector's conclusion that as there would be an acceptable replacement building, conservation area consent should also be granted for the demolition of 11-15 Borough High Street.

b) 16-26 Borough High Street (Applications TL9, TL15, TL29)

43. For the reasons set out in IR18.8.26-18.8.27, the Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector that the design of the rear of the retail/office building proposed in application TL9 ignores the small scale character of the area which is more pronounced on that side of the building. They do not consider that the proposed conditions put forward by the applicant would rectify this. As such, they consider that application TL9 would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area, contrary to PPG15 and local plan policies, and that planning permission should be refused for it (IR18.8.27).

44. For the reasons set out in IR18.8.28-18.8.32, the Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector that the alternative glazed market hall proposal comprised in application TL29 would be in keeping with the character of Borough High Street, and that it would enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and protect the setting of the nearby listed buildings, in accordance with PPS1, PPG15 and development plan policies. They consider that the proposal would contribute a modern element to the many styles of building on this important approach to the City (IR18.2.29), and that it would act as a signpost to Borough Market for people approaching from London Bridge Station and the east (IR18.8.30). They also consider that the proposal would create welcome new views of Southwark Cathedral (IR18.8.31). The Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector, for the reasons set out in IR18.8.32, that a failure to provide a small section of roof which is outside the site boundary would not have any significant impact on the overall proposal.

45. For the reasons given in paragraph 44 above, the Secretary of State for CLG agrees with the Inspector that, with an acceptable replacement building, it is appropriate to grant listed building consent for demolition of 16-26 Borough High Street (IR18.8.33).


c) 2-4 Bedale Street (Applications TL4 and TL14)

46. The Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector, for the reasons set out in IR18.8.35-18.8.37, that the proposed building to replace that currently on 2-4 Bedale Street is of appropriate design quality for their settings, and that it would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the setting of nearby listed buildings (IR18.8.37). As an acceptable replacement building is in place, the Secretary of State for CLG considers that listed building consent should also be granted (IR18.8.37).

d) 6-8 Stoney Street, 1-13 (odd) Park Street, Borough Market Roof and 20 Southwark Street (Applications TL3, TL13, TL19, TL23, TL24, TL25)

47. The Secretary of State for CLG agrees with the Inspector that, in the absence of any new evidence since the first inquiry, there is no reason to differ from the recommendation in Chapter 47 of the report into the first inquiry that listed building consent should be granted for applications TL13 and TL19 and that conservation area consent should be granted for applications TL23, TL24 and TL25 (IR18.8.38)

48. With respect to planning application TL3, the Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector that the proposed beer garden and sculptural gates would be acceptable, and that the gates and the staircase would contribute to the richness and variety in the area and maintain the building line (IR18.8.39).

e) Conditions and Agreement for Borough Market Proposals

49. The Secretary of State for CLG agrees with the Inspector that two additional conditions should be attached to Applications TL14, TL15, TL24 and TL26 (IR18.8.42). The Secretaries of State agree that it is important that there should be acceptable proposals for replacement of any demolished buildings in this area, and that these proposals are implemented (IR18.8.40). They note that, by the close of the inquiry, Network Rail and LB Southwark were well advanced in concluding an Agreement whereby Network Rail would not commence demolition of existing buildings until all relevant interests had been acquired and it had entered into a Section 106 Agreement to substantially complete the replacement buildings within an agreed period of time (IR18.8.40). The Inspector recommended that no consents should be granted until the Secretaries of State had received a copy of the completed Agreement (IR18.8.41,IR18.8.43; IR19.11; IR19.14).

50. Since the close of the Inquiry, the Secretaries of State have received a draft Agreement and, as mentioned in paragraph 13 above, they invited comments on this Agreement. They subsequently received a copy of the executed Agreement dated 11 October 2006. This Agreement contained changes from the version on which Parties were invited to comment, and the Secretaries of State are satisfied that these changes do not affect the substance of the Agreement or their overall decision and do not raise any new issues which require a further reference back to Parties. The Secretaries of State are satisfied that this Agreement, will secure the delivery of the Section 106 Agreement which is annexed to it, and that the planning obligation contained in the s.106 Agreement and relating to the Borough Market area will ensure that the schemes for replacement buildings are implemented within a reasonable period of time (IR18.8.41).

51. For the reasons set out in paragraphs 49 and 50 above, the Secretaries of State are satisfied that the replacement buildings being proposed are acceptable, and that their construction within a reasonable period of time will be secured by the completed Agreement.


f) Other matters

52. For the reasons set out in IR18.8.45, the Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector that, in the context of paragraph 3.17 of PPG15, the reference to "benefits to the community" which might outweigh the harm caused by demolition should be interpreted as benefits to the wider rather than local community. In that regard, Thameslink 2000 is a major transport project that would affect an extensive area of the country. Even if the interpretation of paragraph 3.17 should be confined to benefits to the local community, the Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector, for the reasons set out in IR18.8.46, that the local community would receive substantial benefits from the scheme that would outweigh any harm.

g) Conclusion on Borough Market and surrounding area

53. For the reasons given above, the Secretaries of State agree with the Inspector that with the exception of the retail/office proposal for 16-26 Borough High Street (TL9), the replacement building schemes would at least preserve, and in some instances enhance, the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the settings of nearby listed buildings. Whilst the Inspector considered that the design of the proposed retail/office building at 16-26 Borough High Street was unacceptable, as it would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, there was an alternative proposal for a glass and steel Market Hall on this site which he considered to be acceptable. The Secretaries of State agree.

54. The Secretaries of State are satisfied that the proposed works would not give rise to unacceptable impacts upon traffic or pedestrian flows or on the operation of Borough Market. They are also satisfied that there are now acceptable replacement proposals for all the sites where demolition would take place; and that the Agreement which has now been concluded will ensure that such replacement buildings will be substantially completed within 3 years following demolition (or such longer period as the Council may allow), in order to avoid unsightly gaps in the Conservation Area.

55. Although the concentration of demolition and replacement in a small area would have a significant impact on the area, this would in the Secretaries' of State view be offset by local benefits as well as the wider benefits of the overall Thameslink 2000 project. They conclude that the benefits would outweigh any harm (IR18.8.13-IR18.8.49; IR19.10-19.11).
Thursday 9 November 2006 12.14am
The full decision letter and related documents are on the Department for Transport site:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_about/documents/divisionhomepage/613239.hcsp

The inspector's report has finally migrated over to the new DCLG website:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/pub/873/InspectorsReport_id1503873.pdf
Current: 9 of 17

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