Read on Twitter
Town Planning Tweets Klaxon!!!Today the inquiry into the 8 Albert Embankment site started, and this is why you should care!
8AE is the former HQ of the London Fire Brigade. They moved out in 2006, and have since left this piece of prime, central London real estate to rot, wasting tens of millions of pounds, odd isnt it? Why would they do that?
Simples, The @LondonFire have become obsessed with the idea that they can cash in on high-rise, luxury housing led development.
For years they tried and failed to build towers of luxury housing on the site engaging various vulture developers along the way - Well done comrades!
For years they tried and failed to build towers of luxury housing on the site engaging various vulture developers along the way - Well done comrades!
You can read the sorry history of the previous failed attempts by the @LondonFire to become a developer of luxury homes here: http://www.ourcity.london/case-studies/8-albert-embankment/
Now, those of you who know anything about the London crap development scene must be asking yourselves, how have the @LondonFire managed to fail to build luxury housing in central London - there is literally piles of this crap all over the place.
The problem is that their site is completely inappropriate for tall buildings. It is in the views of the Westminster World Heritage Site, it has two grade II listed buildings on the site, and it is designated employment land.
There is also a mid-rise council estate next door which will see its daylight conditions devastated by tall buildings put just a few meters away. All of this has made planning permission impossible to get, and the @LondonFire plans get continually refused permission.
Any normal organisation would learn from their mistakes, come back with a more appropriate form of development and take the money. But no, the Fire Authority doubles down and ends up coming back with proposals for even more, even taller buildings. Shear madness, or is it?
Property developers in London know they are sitting on an appreciating asset. Even if they sit on their arses and let the buildings rot, they make money. They can then put in planning application after application hoping that one day one of their absurd schemes might slip through
At 8 Albert Embankment, they have almost got away with it. After years of refusing planning permission, councillors and officers finally relented and gave permission for 4 tall towers on the site.
As a result, every single window on the neighbouring estate block will see significant reductions in daylight. The Grade II listed building will be substantially harmed as it will be dwarfed by the towers appearing behind it.
The decision by Lambeth to back the scheme has led to some bizzare contradictions. When the last tall buildings scheme was considered for the site the council opposed the scheme at a planning inquiry. Lambeth hired a barrister, Matthew Reed, to make their case.
Matthew has turned up again at this inquiry, again advocating for the council, who now support the new scheme. I wonder what made him change his mind? I really hope he is charging a hefty fee.
The council's heritage officer at the last inquiry strongly argued against the imposition of tall buildings and the impact it would have on the settings of listed building and conservation areas. He now turns up to say he finds even taller buildings acceptable! WTF is going on?
What is going on, is that we are watching in real time the collapse of standards in the planning industry.
The point of town planning is to allow communities to participate in guiding the development of their area through the creation of local plans.
The point of town planning is to allow communities to participate in guiding the development of their area through the creation of local plans.
For planning to work, it requires all to attempt to stay true to an honest interpretation of the planning regime, not simply an interpretation which maximises profit for the developer regardless of the impact on the wider community.
Developers have always paid their advocates and consultants to put the best gloss on their case, but things have degenerated beyond spin to the point that no one seems to care what the truth and reality of the matter is.
The danger is when public authorities start to be so accommodating to developers that they are prepared to argue their case for them, even if this completely contradicts their previous, published views on an issue. When this happens who is left to protect the public?
The answer in this rare case is the planning inspector. 8 Albert Embankment has been called in by the Secretary of State, taking the decision out of the hands of @lambeth_council. My hope is that in this case, he continues to uphold planing law, and throws out this scheme.
Then finally, we can hope that the comrades at @LondonFire give up their absurd aspirations to become luxury property developers and try to build something useful for the community they live in.
