Lewisham town centre re-development progress

Lewisham Council's ambitious town centre re-development plan has come a step closer: developers Muse and Taylor Wimpey have secured outline planning consent and signed a Section 106 agreement for the Lewisham Gateway scheme.

The developers have reportedly commmitted £25 million in upfront infrastructure funding as part of the S106 deal. Public funding will include £4.3 million social housing grant and £9 million of single regeneration budget funds from the London Development Agency, Estates Gazette has reported.
The terms of the planning consent require some 20 per cent of the housing created to be social housing, according to EG.

The infrastructure funding will be used to re-route the A20 by removing the major roundabout which currently dominates the area. This will enable developer Land Securities to extend the shopping centre and build 500 flats, a large food store and a department store.

The council has also recently granted a compulsory purchase order for a 4.9 acre site around the high street.

The next step for the council is to open negotiations with Transport for London about the creation of a new 'bus layover facility' on Thurston Rd, the EG report said.

68 comments:

Hugh said...

Short of pulling it all down I don't think Lewisham will ever escape being a Class A Sh*thole.

Excuse the French.

Tressilliana said...

It seems hardly any time since the last time they re-developed the town centre, and guess what, the central feature that time was constructing the giant roundabout to the north and the rockery that is actually a sculpture to the south. It can't be much more than ten years ago all that happened. What an enormous waste of money it now turns out to have been.

Tamsin said...

Where's the link, Nick, to the report you linked to before by the now retired planner/development officer(?) absolutely writing from the heart about the lost opportunitie and the uprooting of good work only shortly after it had been done?

Headhunter said...

Must've been more than 10 years ago, I lived in Catford from Dec 99 til 2002 and even back then I remember people talking about potential re-development and removal of that awful roundabout and it was already looking a bit tatty round there.

Anonymous said...

Tamsin, if you're referring to Ray Hall, his letter is on the lewishamgateway.org website

Anonymous said...

Nick, can you tell me where you got the Land Securities info from and give a link for it?

Last I heard of they were going bust!

Anonymous said...

sorry, I should have asked that question of Kate, as she posted the article (and because 'Estates Gazette' is subscriber only)

Brockley Kate said...

I wrote that piece, not Nick. Does nobody ever notice these things?

The info is from Estates Gazette, as is clearly stated in the piece multiple times. I can't find the article online, think it's behind a paywall.

Anonymous said...

yes, sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry

Brockley Kate said...

I posted before I saw your last comment, anon! Sorry for getting tetchy, but it does really irritate me. To be fair, Headhunter is the worst culprit - he attributes nearly everything I write to Nick, one way or another.

It makes one feel so ... invisible ... [sob]

Anonymous said...

Kate, I am so sorry. Your articles are usually so lovely and Nick normally confines himself to the bitter digs at the oppressed Ladywellites and erection of tower blocks.

Brockley Kate said...

Aw, thanks anon, you are forgiven (if you're the same anon as the one above).
I don't think anyone's ever described any of my work as 'so lovely' before. It's usually 'Oh you write the boring serious stuff, right?' (which to be fair is correct!).

Anonymous said...

yes, same anon. Looking forward to a nice tricky 'i-spy'

Brockley Nick said...

No anon is most certainly not forgiven. And anon, you'll be pleased to hear that land securities is not going bust, in fact they are developing a skyscraper at 20 Fenchurch Street, of which I'm sure you'll approve.

Brockley Kate said...

... oh dear ...


(Haven't had time for I Spy recently, but since you've requested it I will make a point of finding a few in the next few weeks, anon!)

Brockley Jon said...

Just thought I'd chip in - I'm the one who only write articles when I have something to plug! ;)

Anon - Nick and I both secretly want to be Ladywellers. Although that would make us Ladywell Nick & Ladywell - not so snappy. Anyway, I'm not even offically Brockley Jon at the moment, but that's a whole other story for tomorrow night...

Tyrwhitt Michael said...

Land Sec are on a bit of a roller coaster.

They sold their Trillium subsidiary which brought in a fair bit of cash but then declared a record loss.

A rights issue followed to top up the coffers and of course they own oodles of proerty as security.

I think they are a REIT now aren't they?

Tyrwhitt Michael said...

Shouldn't that be Ladywellians?

Brockley Nick said...

I think they're a REIT, yes.

You could say that Lewisham Town Centre is in a REIT state. Arf.

mintness said...

Because the only thing that's stopped me from choosing to live in a new-build chipboard mousehole in central Lewisham until now has been the lack of availability.

Gaah.

Brockley Kate said...

'The Ladywellians' sounds as though it could perhaps be the title of a Henry James novel ...

Anonymous said...

Wednesday 13 May 2009 16.50 BST:

Land Securities, Britain's biggest property developer, trampled on talk of the green shoots of recovery in the commercial property sector today when it reported annual pre-tax losses of £4.8bn – more than four times worse than 12 months ago.

Pete said...

When they do the redevelopment presumably the tower and the multi-story car park will both be staying?

They're two of the worst features of the area and to keep them would probably bugger up any chances of changing the place for the better really.

Headhunter said...

Headhunter's the worst culprit?! Eh? I hardly ever attribute anything to anyone, I just make comments. I don't remember the last time I referred to you, Nick or Jon in any comment I made. Bad day today?!

Brockley Kate said...

Nope, not really, just remember having got quite pissed off by it several times in the past.

Headhunter said...

Well I'm sorry if I have, but I really don't remember. As I said I usually just get into discussions and arguments with anons and other posters rather than refer to any of you 3....

Tressillian James said...

Really BK? In al seriousness does it really matter?

Brockley Kate said...

Apology accepted HH!

TJ - it does matter a little bit when one puts a fair amount of effort into finding out things and writing them up and stuff, only to have your efforts attributed by commenters to someone else (albeit someone who greatly deserves praise for his own efforts!).
It just makes one feel a bit demoralised and invisible, tbh, though I'm sure it's totally accidental and unintentional.

Anonymous said...

Your knowledge of the Ward boundaries is surprisingly lax though HH.

Anonymous said...

I'd still like a bit more info on that Land Securities thing if possible because the "enable developer Land Securities to extend the shopping centre and build 500 flats, a large food store and a department store" makes a radical difference to the plans as they have been shown up until now.

max said...

I entirely agree with the last anonymous, there are serious differences with what until now publicized, a reduction in housing units of hundreds and a top up of public money of £4.3m to meet the cost of social housing, so one wonders what's funded by the section 106 agreement as the infrastructure is publicly funded (£ 9m) and much of the social housing is publicly funded too.
It looks like one of those cases were the costs are met by the public but the profits are enjoyed by the private.

Tyrwhitt Michael said...

We are looking at two different projects here.

Lewisham Gateway is the main development being undertaken by Muse(formerly AMEC Estates) and Taylor Wimpey essentially centred on the current roundabout

Having the development completed will mean that people walking through town to it, will pass through the "dead" end of the existing shopping centre owned by Land Securities.

This will make redevelopment and extension of this end of the centre viable because of the increased footfall past the door of any new shops.

Clear?

Brockley Kate said...

Afraid I'm not able to be of much help on that, all I know is what the EG report said, all of which is in the article.

Could it be possible that there are two aspects of the Gateway development, of which the LandSec figures are only one part?
That might explain the missing numbers.
The other part of it is the Muse/TayWood scheme, I think?

Brockley Kate said...

Ah, while I was typing TM was on the ball. Makes sense.

Anonymous said...

yes, that's crystal clear, but have you just come to that perfectly acceptable conclusion yourself or can you offer further evidence for it?

Bea said...

Ahh - 20 Fenchurch Street - my old office. It is now just a hole in the ground. According to Bloomberg "Land Securities Group Plc postponed construction of the “Walkie Talkie” tower at 20 Fenchurch St." so surprised to read they are going ahead with Lewisham.

max said...

Thanks TM, I see, well this report is extremely foggy.
So, they signed the Section106 agreement and committed do £25m for infrastructure.
What's stopping them from starting works then? TfL agreement on the new bus station? I thought they were in this all along.

Brockley Kate said...

The EG report conflates the two developments, which isn't helpful, but I think that perhaps the 'news angle' is the TayWood/Muse deal, and the LandSec info refers to their general plans, rather than any concrete development in that deal.

max said...

What does the phrase "developers have reportedly commmitted £25 million in upfront infrastructure funding" actually means?

Does it means that whoever wrote the article heard so by somebody that's not in the position to confirm and didn't see any document or official press release either?
I'm puzzled by the word "reportedly".

Brockley Kate said...

'Reportedly' means 'Estates Gazette has reported'.
I have no means of verifying what EG reports.

I believe what EG means is that the council has got the developer to commit to pay £25 million infrastructure costs as part of the Section 106 agreement. In return for this, the council has granted planning permission.

max said...

I see, sorry it was your word, I thought it was part of the EG article.

max said...

Just to explain what makes me suspicious, that instead of saying they reached an agreement and works will start on .... (any date) it says that now they will negotiate with TfL that for years we were told was integral part of the deal throughout all its phases, so there should be no negotiation needed.

Brockley Kate said...

But, Max, the EG report wasn't exactly clear whether that was 'the next step' for the Muse/TayWood scheme, for for the LandSec scheme.

I feel as though I'm having one of those days when you think you're making perfect sense but everyone else thinks you're talking gibberish. Should I just start this one again with a new post?!

TM said...

Here is the article in full.

Bit long winded but make of it what you will.

Lewisham Gateway unlocked at last
Paul Norman 23/05/2009 00:00


The long-awaited regeneration of Lewisham town centre took a step forward this week after key agreements were finalised by the south-east London local authority.

Lewisham council has approved an outline planning application and section 106 for Muse's and Taylor Wimpey's £250m Lewisham Gateway scheme.

The agreements are essential if a series of projects are to proceed, as they put in place a funding package to remove the roundabout on the A20 route that separates the town centre from the transport interchange.

Land Securities' plans to extend its 335,000 sq ft Lewisham Shopping Centre and build up to 500 flats, a large food store and a department store are contingent on the removal of the 15‑year‑old roundabout.

The go‑ahead comes just weeks after the council granted the compulsory purchase order to assemble the 4.9‑acre site for the Gateway scheme near Lewisham High Street, SE13.

The agreements mean that Lewisham has also been able to open discussions with Transport for London about a new bus layover facility on Thurston Road.

Muse/Taylor Wimpey were first selected for the scheme - which includes 150,000 sq ft of shops, 80,000 sq ft of leisure, some offices and 800 homes - five years ago.

It had been scheduled for completion in 2010 but negotiations over infrastructure funding have bogged down progress, prompting fears that the project would be scrapped.

Although details of the s106 were not available, it is understood that the partners are to pay £25m of upfront infrastructure funding.

The scheme will be subsidised by a £4.3m social housing grant and £9m of single regeneration budget funding from the London Development Agency. The consent requires only 20% of affordable housing.

Doug Finlay, Muse project director, said: "There is still a lot to do but these agreements demonstrate how the private and public sectors can work together on regeneration despite the current climate."

fred vest said...

i don't know why lewisham council bothered increasing their affordable housing quota for new developments from 35% to 50% last year, when even prior to the increase they were failing miserably at hitting the 35% target, let alone the new 50% one, and all this in spite of increases in existing and projected needs (which are well above average compared to other london boroughs)

On this one, am i right in saying that £4.3million of public money is being given to a private developer so they can then deliver their obligation on provision of social/affordable housing? even putting that aside though, 4.3 million divided by the20% of the 800 homes proposed, means the private developer is receiving a subsidy of £268,750 for each unit, surely that's nothing like the all in cost that it would cost the developer to build, not even a year or so ago and certainly not now, so are they making a profit out of something that should be a cost to them?

fred vest said...

heh, got my numbers wrong, it's 26,875 not 268,750, same point in principal remains though

angelofthewest said...

For the topographically challenged: can anyone confirm/deny the following. the Lewisham Gateway development will be centered the roundabout and points immediately to its west, where the nasty superstores currently are, I think a Carpeting store and maybe one selling trainers?, on Loampit Vale (north side) between Jerrard and the stations?

and this other extension of the Lewisham shopping centre will take down the victorian buildings immediately south of the roundabout, between Rennell St and Lewisham high street?

thanks!

Brockley Kate said...

Angel - yes I think so, except that I'm not really sure the Gateway development will cover the area to the west of the railway bridge (there's a leisure centre planned for the south side of Loampit Vale but I think that's a separate development). The Gateway development is centred on the roundabout and the area currently occupied by the bus station, which is why they want to move the bus station.

Fred - that's how social housing development works in this country. Average development funding is (very roughly) approx 50% of total cost on average (though it fluctuates wildly within that); in this case it's obviously lower than that, which is where the developer's 'obligation' comes in.

The 50% thing was Ken Livingstone's baby, and BoJo has ostentatiously ditched it since then. BoJo has agreed a social housing target with Lewisham of 1,395 new units (2008 to 2011).

TM said...

Angel

Try this map it might help

http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/Environment/Regeneration/LewishamTownCentreRegeneration/LewishamDevelopmentsMap/

patrick1971 said...

Where is the land that Lewisham Council is compulsorily purchasing? The shops that are going to be knocked down are already boarded up, so presumably already purchased. Is it the site of the bus station that they're compulsorily purchasing from TfL?

A lot of stuff seems to have already happened for this development; shops boarded up and the gypsies moved from Thurston Road to allow for the new bus station, when seemingly funding wasn't even in place nor has all the land required been purchased...

max said...

I was told that recently it was announced at Council that that parade with those boarded up shops will receive some investment for refurbishment actually.
It's a potentially beautiful parade that's been allowed to become an eyesore, it such a pity that they couldn't think of a way to keep it as part of the redevelopment of the area.

Anonymous said...

The Council may have compulsorily purchased some land around the Gateway site but it has also sold, or given away, vast amounts of land in that area as well - much of it to be paved over in one way or another.

TM said...

I've be in those shops, they are only fit for demolition.

Don't forget that the Loampit Vale scheme is currently dead in the water since Lewisham Bridge School was listed.

max said...

Sad to hear that those shops are structurally so bad.

How would the listing of Lewisham Bridge impact on Lompit Vale? They're next door but there isn't any use of Lewisham Bridge's land for Loampit Vale that I know, I may be wrong though.

LewishamLovely said...

that boarded up parade has indeed been compulsarily purchased and is definitely headed for demolition.
i believe they were acquired by the LDA a short while ago.
not sure if there is other land being acquired or if that is the one referred to in the article.
i was also under the impression that the boarded up shop land was part of the gateway apartments development - not intended for land securities to extend the shopping centre. that little road between those shops and the fabric shop is set to become a major road, taking all the traffic that would've gone round the roundabout on to a high street T junction, so i think it will be cut off from the existing shopping centre.

Anonymous said...

Ok Lewisham Gateway is firstly a road scheme that has created a 10 acre site available for development.

The site is north of Rennell Street upto Lewisham station, taking in the derelict shops, the roundabout and bus station.

The bus station will move to the strip of land that used to house the travellers.

There is also a small parcel of land just by the Georgian Terrace by St. Stephens. Back in 2005 a fancy coffee bar was considered for that site.

Lewisham Gateway (North) is due to include pedestrian access to the station & DLR. There were to be shops, bars, restuarants, leisure facilities, a plaza, a 'park' with river views and 800 apartments.

A cinema was hinted at and contact made with interested parties, a well known hotel chain were also in discussion with the developers, as one of the original suggestions was a hotel.

Lewisham Gateway is just one very large element of a number of schemes for the town centre area.

Considering in 2004 building work was due to begin in Jan 2006 I was therefore surprised to see the CPO had only been agreed this year, but possibly the council were being prudent with our money?

Back in Sept 2004 when the chosen developer was announced, it was stated by boths sides the legal agreement would take 2-3 months to sign. Eventually it was signed 18 months later.

Anonymous said...

At the recent Lewisham Central Assembley there was a presentation about the town centre.

Someone astutely asked about the shopping centre and citi-tower, but the council did not mention Land Securities possible intentions.

In Lewisham's UDP mention is made of the potential to regenerate the area south of Rennell Street down to where Lewisham High Street meets Molesworth Street, maybe that should be called Lewisham Gateway (Sarf).

I understand this Saturday a new Poundland is due to be opened in the shopping centre by the actress who plays Fizz in Coronation Street.

Anonymous said...

Loampit Vale: This is the already cleared site opposite Thurston Road, where a 'state of the art' leisure centre and 700ish apartments are to be built by Barratts.

Not sure why it is thought the listing of Lewisham Bridge School makes the Loampit Vale scheme dead in the water?

To be blunt the Lewisham Bridge decision is likely only to affect the education of the pupils of that school.

max said...

About the Loampit Vale development, yesterday was the deadline for submission of objection to the planning application. This is the content of my submitted objection:

"I write here to object to the proposed development at Loampit Vale (Ref: DC/09/71246/X) because of the inadequate size of leisure provision and specifically the swimming pool.

The development is of strategic importance for its sport and leisure component since it's supposed to replace the Borough flagship pool at Ladywell Leisure Centre.
Unfortunately the sizing of this new pool has been determined through a study that is grossly flawed.
The Leisure Needs Analysis commissioned and accepted by Lewisham Council as its policy and that stands at the foundation of this development did not consider the impact on the usage of the pool caused by the developments at the Town Centre themselves, which according to the Council's own estimate stand at 4000 new housing units. It does not account for the impact of the transport interchange and doesn't include any possible usage from outside Lewisham Borough boundaries despite the fact that the border with the London Borough of Greenich is extremely near and the pool will be very accessible to many Greenwhich residents.
This is an enormous underestimate of baffling proportions which means that this strategic development will only be able to deliver a largely insufficient amount of swimming opportunity for the residents of Lewisham within the catchment area of the Loampit Vale pool. This is in real terms a reduction in sport, health and leisure opportunities for this local community.

I ask this authority to reject the plans unless modifies are introduced so that adequate sports and leisure opportunities are provided to the residents of the area.

Anonymous said...

heidi alexander recently held meetings with residents who live close to the gateway scheme. she said land securties had proposed to the council to also run the shopping facilities in the gateway development. the talk of a department store was just that - talk. nothing definite. it was also talked of as if the gateway shopping was not an extension to the existing shopping centre but totally seperate.
does anyone have any concrete info about land securities' proposals for the lewisham centre?

Anonymous said...

I wonder how close 'close' is to the proposed Gateway development?

The effect it will have will be widespread so limiting meetings to those residents that might be geographically close seems like a ploy to minimise any local consultation.

TM said...

I erroniously thought Lewisham Bridge was part of the Loampit Vale scheme but upon review of the plans see that this is not so.

The pool ought to be Olympic size however considering what is happening here in 2012.

Anonymous said...

Re the 'department store' that was dropped about 5 years ago, it would have been at the northern end of the shopping mall facing Rennell Street.

An aerial photo taken in the 1970's shows shops and houses leading right up to Lewisham Station.

Those properties were cleared away and the bus station created.

Now the plan is to put back housing and shops.

Anonymous said...

Short of burying him under the rubble of pulled-down Lewisham, I don't think Hugh will ever escape being a Class A Ar**hole.

Anonymous said...

Hugh hasn't been around much this week - must be on half-term with his mum and dad

Anonymous said...

Lewisham Gateway: I thought I'd check what was approved to start building within 10 years.....

The total built floorspace for the development shall not exceed 100,000 square metres.

The maximum permitted floorspace for each use granted by this permission shall be (all figures Gross External Area):
up to 57,000 m² residential (C3)
up to 12,000 m² shops, financial & professional services (A1 & A2)
up to 17,500 m² office (B1)/education(D1)
up to 5,000 m² leisure (D2)
up to 4,000 m² restaurants & caf├ęs and drinking establishments (A3 & A4)
up to 3,000 m² hotel (C1)
up to 1,000 m2² hot food takeaways (A5)
up to 500 m² health (D1)
up to 200 m² bus layover building and up to 100 m² bus facilities office (sui generis).

Anonymous said...

All these proposals look good on these models they make michael bentine style,They must have loads of them gathering dust,Theres already 2 or 3 sites dotted round lewisham,Some which have been standing empty over two years,I'll believe it when i see it.

hotel in bandung said...

I like this blog, good luck ..! also visit hotel in bandung or nikon digital camera cases

Latest Tweets

Brockley Central Label Cloud

Click one of the labels below to see all posts on that subject. The bigger the label, the more posts there are!