> I don't think the threat to MOL has been lifted at
> all in the new plans. Dunno why you think that.
My post indicates "the chatter seems to suggest that it avoids development of MOL"
> And I would question your claim that the DHFC
> being an "important cultural driver" whatever that
> is. It's just a football stadium for goodness sake
> - let's not suggest this is the primary reason for
> residents wanting to stay here or that this is
> what attracts others to want to live and work in
> the area....
Actually what I said was DHFC is an "important cultural and economic driver" The outreach initiatives are well documented, rasing awareness, money and support for sometimes under represented causes - in my view worthwhile.
Added to this is the direct economic benefit to local business, assisting in supporting the vibrant and independent nature of the same, which in fact I do consider to be one of the reasons residents want to stay/move here!
> What we're talking about here is planning
> permission for a large (compared to the mixed
> housing of the surrounding locality),
> every-expense spared design. It's not just that
> the proposed new estate is completely out of
> keeping with the district, but it pays scant
> regard for any consideration to do with parking,
> traffic, access to schools and healthcare.
Parking and traffic will I suspect be considered via the planning process in the normal way, although taking the football club in isolation, my feeling is most supporters walk/use public transport.
Access to schools/heathcare is not within the scope of an individual developer, however contributions towards the same can be raised via S. 106 payments. Last time I looked, East Dulwich had 3 new(ish) schools and a new health centre/hospital under construction.
I agree, perhaps 6 stories is too much, however there are a number of similar scale developments of 4-5 stories throughout East Dulwich - East Dulwich Road, and Lordship Lane to the south
> It proposes a number of 6 storey blocks - although
> the actual height in the existing landscape isn't
> clear from the pics in the submitted plans - but
> looks as if these will loom large above the
> existing estate. And, if we agree that we need
> more new homes in the area, these proposals aren't
> about providing social housing for families -
> which is what's needed around here ie., low rise
> family houses with gardens. Ain't going to happen
> - this is all about money, money, money.
Sadly, it is about money, and if schemes don't stack up, they won't get built. Agreed we probably do need more family homes for rent, but is this the site for them? Southwark are pursuing direct developments of existing garage sites for these uses. The only way that will happen here is if the scheme were to be subject to a CPO, and despite the previous threat, that seems highly unlikely.
> Take a look at 35%'s old blog about the Hadley
Sadly the provision of social housing is now primarily left to the private sector (exceptions as I've noted above)whose primary motive is profit, I don't think its right, the publication of viability assesments does at least open them to challenge which is a good think.
Ultimately stalling the redevelopment of this site which will accommodate the long term security of DHFC and provide new homes will help no one. Ensuring the suitability of the design and scale of the proposals is what the planning system is there to do.