Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Southwark Council is proposing to demolish the Bassano Street garages across from ESPH and build four houses in its place.

Consultation now open for comment, search Southwark planning applications 19/AP/1861. I believe there is deadline of 4th August for comment.

Thanks for heads up, I do recall more in attendance to the evening session I was at.


Can you let me know where this latest info was published please?


As both resident and tenant I am interested in there development, and have been liaising with Southwark regarding the formation of a Project Group. Regrettably most of the liaison is mainly one way.

There isn't anything published yet concerning the meeting on 25th March. I only found out because I contacted them directly. If there is a project group I would be interested in joining this as we are local residents. I will keep you informed when the details are released. I was informed there would be invitations sent out next week.

I received the note saying there would be no project group, again due to lack of interest, and have asked exactly how many are required to form the group as I suspect there would be enough interest.


I too am on Bassano and have received no notifications

Hi Passiflora,

As the then local councillor I was focused on East Dulwich and then wider Southwark.


hi very,

The scheme proposed is an over development for the site. It breaks The Southwark Plan - councils planning bible - ignoring the area Suburban designation. I hope others joining me in seeking to get an appropriately sized scheme that meets the councils own policies.

Bother. I can't make the new April date and nor can former Councillor Rosie Shimell. I will get another Lib dem activist to attend.

Hi Passiflora,

I specifically stated a Lib Dem will be there. Baffled how you have morphed that into no Lib Dem will be there!


Hi geh, gerry,

My understanding is four storey building are now being proposed. Contrary to my original officer discussions.

The current Core Strategy from 2011 p57 states area should remain suburban - https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=2ahUKEwiuvIDRsffgAhWMDOwKHToSCKoQFjABegQICBAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.southwark.gov.uk%2Fassets%2Fattach%2F1675%2F1.0.2%2520DL%2520Core_Strategy_2011.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1_K9P70Ij7_TRp_BgcGLrl

p.78 shows that East Dulwich issei's in the Suburban Density Zone Middle.

Definition of Suburban Density in Southwark can be found on p.79 stating 200-350 habitable rooms per hectare. Sizes of room and outdoor space are requirements. So four storey building there would breach these room range without the excuse of being on top of a station for example.

Southwark Council will argue it's next to the church hall which is high. But of course we wouldn't expect homes to be as tall as churches!


Details of home design and repeat of suburban definition p.8 here -https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/1811/1.0.4.1%202015_Technical_Update_to_the_Residesign_SPD__2011_.pdf

The garages are 0.05 hectare. So that would be 10 to 17.5 rooms 18m frontage = circa 3 x typical Bassano Street homes. So 3 houses wide to deliver those 10 - 17.5 habitable rooms.

3 x houses x 3 bedroom each(1 attic bedroom) would be at the top end of the acceptable range.

I think four-five storey blocks, like tenement blocks in Glasgow and those you can see in part of London (like Battersea) and in many cities abroad (Rome, Barcelona, Paris) are a good use of space. I agree that such density is not good for all parts of Zone 2 but in small pockets it could help the housing situation (as long as the rooms are big enough and well insulated).

hi Nigello,

Where that is the norm what you're suggesting can work well.

But where it would then dominate and overlook others it doesn't work well. Which is why Southwark has policies specifically aimed at not allowing what you've suggested in areas like East Dulwich.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • But I don't think that was what you meant, was it? But he can hardly be held responsible for what somebody else did!
    • But it was under our electoral system in 2019! This must be part of the right-wing media conspiracy that did for Corbyn....;-) Corbyn was very closely allied to Unite and Len....
    • Goose Green Ward Panel Meeting   Date: 24th of July 2025, 7pm Location: East Dulwich Picturehouse | 116A Lordship Lane | London SE22 8HD    Safer Neighbourhoods Team (SNT) will be holding a ward panel meeting at East Dulwich Picturehouse on Thursday 24th July 2025 from 7pm. Please come along to talk about the priorities for the community and how local police can help.  
    • Eh? That wasn't "my quote"! If you look at your post above,it is clearly a quote by Rockets! None of us have any  idea what a Corbyn led government during Covid would have been like. But do you seriously think it would have been worse than Johnson's self-serving performance? What you say about the swing of seats away from Labour in 2019 is true. But you have missed my point completely. The fact that Labour under Corbyn got more than ten million votes does not mean that Corbyn was "unelectable", does it? The present electoral system is bonkers, which is why a change is apparently on the cards. Anyway, it is pointless discussing this, because we are going round in circles. As for McCluskey, whatever the truth of that report, I can't see what it has to do with Corbyn?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...