Another major Mantle Road development planned
Developers have submitted plans to convert the skip yard next to Brockley Station in to a large mixed use development, which would mirror Jude Court. The proposal is for:
The design statement adds:
A bridge will be built over the ‘Thames Water corridor’ allowing the residential units to span the entire site and leaving access for any future maintenance to the sewer. Balconies and sunspaces will be located off accessible rooms, providing private amenity spaces for the residents and creating visual interest to the east and west facades. The commercial space is flexible and could be split down into separate units according to the demands of the prevailing market trends.
This would extend Mantle Road's retail offer, complementing the space recently occupied by Nisa and the London Print Shop. It is the latest in a string of new developments (proposed or under construction) clustered around Brockley Station, to take advantage of the enhanced transport links created by the East London Line.
The proposal could have significant upsides for Brockley.Jude Court took an age to materialise, but has improved Mantle Road, bringing light and life to what was previously a dark and scary approach to Brockley Station. A mixed use development like this is a smarter use of space next to a train station and a primary school than a skip yard is.
74 comments:
Wot no station entrance? Why don't Lewisham make an S106 contribution towards step-free access a planning condition.
This and the new box next to it are too high.
Looks like a new high street is developing on Mantle Road - hopefully it's a few retail units and not just a big one. It would be really great if a restaurant / bar or cafe opened up along the street to generate more activity along there.
I hope there's going to be another Nisa at the bottom, two just isn't enough.
No - too big, boxy and ugly!!!
Excellent plan, I live in Ladywell so I don't give a bugger what they sling up in Brockley!
I kinda like it. But think the retail units would be better as small office accommodation as opposed to shops. The footfall there is just too low for shops to do well...
Don't mind 'boxey', it would be an improvement on the brownfield dereliction. From a superficial look on the outside the materials look a little cheap and flimsy on the existing developement. Hope the new one is better.
Not in my back yard
I guess this is what happens when a generation of kids brought up playing with lego go on to become architects.
Awful as usual.
Typical of what we have come to expect of new buildings thrown up around here.
As far as I'm concerned money for improvements to the station; westside access and step free access should be mandatory seeing as this development appears to have been brought about by the transport improvements.
I think it's ok - not really that different to other stuff going up around London. We are gonna get density around Brockley station and it's gonna be higher than 2 level houses - that's normal in transport hubs.
@Mb 15.45 - Jude Court looks like it's falling apart already. The cladding is warping, wide gaps are opening up and you can see bare wood underneath. It looked cheap during construction, and the cost- and corner-cutting are beginning to tell.
@MB - I agree, based on those renderings, the materials look cheap and they should not be allowed to get away with that.
Step free access at the station is already budgeted for and will happen.
Improved west side access lighting etc was (I thought) supposed to be delivered as part of the Jude Court . Don't know what happened there.
I'd like the S106 to include money for landscaping outside the front (where the cars are parked in that picture) and to brighten up the underside of the Mantle Road railway bridge (lighting installation maybe).
@Nick
Is that under the Access for All money? I heard a dark rumour that Brockley had slid off the list?
Yes, I've not heard that rumour personally, and indeed someone claimed on this site yesterday that they'd heard TfL people say it was going to happen post-Olympics, but that is also just rumour.
As far as I know, it is budgeted for and will happen.
Hopefully the Brockley Cross Action Group have some kind of input / say on this development, like they have been involved with the other pending development on the MOT site ...
What is the "Thames Water Corridor"?
After the council allowed the poor finishing on the tea factory, that mdf eyesore and now this there is little reason to have any hope.
Personally I will lose the last of the green view of the hill and line of sight TV so even worse than for most of you.
Ugh another huge, hideous, cheap looking block with no parking provision.
All these high density housing blocks near stations, flood the surrounding area with cars. Leading to increased calls for CPZ's which is obviously what the council want anyway.
I went to Zagreb on a stag do. Wonderful baroque architecture in the old town and ugly large communist blocks that looked like this everywhere else...
Just Sayin'
Brockley is going to be scarred forever by these monstrous developments. Whilst all Nick talks about is putting some lights under the bridge. What a joke.
Actually the more I think of it this may the start of me looking to move elsewhere. Probably cheered a few of you up. [Ed CPZ/one of the more patronising Anons]
Hopefully someone in the council has some regard for the quality of these buildings that are being built right next to the station (ie in the very centre of Brockley) and pulls the developer into line.
I'm not against development there. But I think thye can do much better.
"Brockley is going to be scarred forever by these monstrous developments."
This little part of Brockley was already scarred. Brownfield land; disused, ugly buildings; dark, deserted streets and a skip yard. Despite its faults, Jude Court has been a big improvement for the area. It also houses lots of people - including some BC readers. So that's nice.
"Whilst all Nick talks about is putting some lights under the bridge. What a joke."
No, I'd like a better design, commitment to high quality materials and improvement to the public realm (including a better lit underpass).
Is it just me who only bothers to skim read a post once the anon says "what a joke" "this is an absolute joke" what a bunch of jokers"?
Why the vomit inspired colour scheme?
With this, Jude House and the one opposite it, and the one which will presumably go on the empty spot where the pub used to be, plus the one where the MOT garage is. That makes five tall pretty ugly buildings within spitting distance four of them next to each other. This isn't what I moved to Brockley for, this wouldn't happen in East Dulwich. I'll be able to see this new building from my bedroom and it's already depressing me. Very sad, it's changing Brockley for the worst.
I thought the issue was that SE4 was becomming too much like east dulwich with the enormoprams, cafes and twee delis? I can't keep up.
I hope this brings the CPZ in the area. There are nearly 500 new flats planned near the station on both sides of the railway.
Time to move out of Crapley
Once again the cheap quality we are used to, no change then!
Jude court has brought far more plus points than negative. I use that Nisa now more than any other shop in Brockley and I don't see why this new development won't be a good thing too. Nick is right in saying that this side of the tracks was dark and scary not long ago - Jude court has done a lot to improve and this development will improve it further.
Looks a bit uninspired.
Re the sewers, click on the map - it'll be the bit running from Nunhead through Brockley - it's a biggish main-line sewer.
The two massive ones (Southern High Level and the Effra Branch run under the end of my garden and under my neighbour's house, as we found out when we built an extension. IIRC they are about 3m diameter. This one seems to be a link off the main SHL.
http://www.sewerhistory.org/images/bm/bmm3/1930_bmm315.jpg
A colourful schematic hiding what is otherwise a fairly bland and boxy development. This would not be too bad (everywhere needs background buildings) but the scale is such that it will be quite prominent.
The overhang next to the retail units is also way too low and will create a fairly oppressive feeling walkway.
Also, more flats? When do we start building affordable (not in the social housing sense) family accommodation.
Come on people... It's a piece of land next to the rail. More shops and street activation is a good thing ... More people in brockley = more demand for new restaurants and bars, more frequent trains etc. I agree the design could be further improved and some landscaping and street gentrification should be included so let's lobby for that. It's nice that brockley is growing up and becoming an exciting hub in
London.
Anon, you are right.
We should welcome the development in principle and try to change the bits we don't like. I have responded to Lewisham as follows:
Comment -
- I support the principal of development for resi/commercial mixed use.
- I object on the ground of design.
- Ground floor level could have more windows to improve visual interest and overlooking
- The walkway next to the shops will in my view create an oppressive space. This could be resolved by lifting the height of the overhang.
- More could be done to reduce the mass of the facade. Suggest setting back the top floor.
- More could be done in terms of landscaping,
- The quality of materials appears cheep and nasty looking and could be improved. In particular the yellow brickwork is a really poor detail.
Others may wish to do the same. It's just a quick email.
That's a pretty good summary
So... what's the best way to make our views known? (I broadly agree with the Anon 21:05)
This M & D Enterprises Ltd -the applicant, are they anything to do with Regenter B3 by any chance? You know, the company that we paid lots of money to, to develop the site whilst they 'refurbished' our homes. If it is, and they have the same standards, then it will be all looking the same as Jude Court pretty soon.
This development appears to be another which is completely out of character with the Brockley environment. Thankfully, I live within in the conservation zone of Brockley and have a vantage which reflects the true character of London. If a development such as this appeared outside my window, I too would be forced to up sticks and move to Catford. The Lewisham council should be ashamed.
"Dark and scary"? We like dark and scary in Brockley.
what london needs? another block of souless flats, made of paper thin walls, and painted ghastly "funky" colours,
It should be of a far higher quality.
This isn't good enough architecture I'm afraid.
It's quite funny, the responses we're seeing here are quite similar to the Victorian responses to their own contemporary architecture. They were the mungs and nimbys of their day, and they were as wrong then as they are now.
Yes this is where the old Pinnacle Housing office used to be, where they masterminded the destruction of hundred's of council houses and flats. Lets hope it is not them who do the building! It looks awful anyway adn i think it would be dated within about one year
Also, please drop the mung!
I welcome further high quality development on the westside of the station. This area was deserted and derelict looking before and more than a little scary at night.
More commercial units and people can be no bad thing on that stretch of road.
I think it is important to repond to the consultation and will echo anon's comments (21.5) when i do.
Not sure when the development of the land behind St Norbets Road (further along the train tracks) is due to commence?
Looks like the westside will be a building site for sometime to come but hopefully will better for it in the end.
Surely any resi development is better than a skip yard...
Yes but how will it affect the value of my nearby 4 bedroom Victorian house, bought for a song 10 years ago?
Have any of the people complaining that this is scarring Brockley for the worse actually been past the site? At the moment it's a huge ugly fence/wall. Is this the Brockley character you so want to preserve???
Agree that better materials should be used and the top floor pulled back a bit to reduce the effect of leaning over Mantle Road. Also seems a crying shame that they can't include a station entrance given that they have to leave the arch for the sewer. But generally this is a positive thing.
We must all want something new on that site, just not 5 stories high and badly thought out.
It's not a huge ugly wall, it's just a brick wall, which I walk past everyday. How can a five storey vomit coloured building be anything but bigger and uglier!
I quite like option 2 on the attached doc, which steps bak the uper floors a bit and presents a more interesting shape.
I guess this is the best we can hope for in the way of development. But they they really are fugly.
They've just taken off the hoardings on the new storey they've added above the shopping parade with Broca Food on it, it's clad in beige concrete, completely out of keeping with the 30's brick building. We're stuck between 2 conservation areas but it seems anything goes Westside. Depressing.
@Anon - really? If you want to send me a pitcure I'll run that as a story.
I agree that it is not in keeping with the original struture but this is how the plans indicated that it would look.
Does the BXAG have a opinion on the recent and proposed westside developments?
Starting to look like moving to Brockley was a bad idea after all. Cheapshitflatsville morelike.
You moved here based on the understanding that no cheap flats were ever built in Brockley?
And on the strict condition that the skip yard would remain a skip yard forever? It's an interesting view of Brockley you have, when swapping a skip yard for homes and shops is a deal breaker.
I welcome a development on the site and agree that it's better than a skip yard. However I don't think that should be used as an excuse for dull and uninspiring design like this. I think the Westside is really missing some green space, similar to the common which makes the Eastside of the station so pleasant. I know for developers space is at a premium but surely they can add in some landscaping / green space? Or how about a green living wall? Or something more like this: http://consulting4architects.com/2009/07/20/editt-tower-%E2%80%93-singapore-goes-eco-friendly/
Though obviously not as high! I'm not a designer but is it too much to hope for a something a bit more imaginative. Also agree the walkway with the overhang looks oppressive.
I'm ambivalent about these new developments, quality issues aside. The area will certainly be less scruffy, but could end up feeling more impersonal and anonymous, and there will be significantly less sunlight due to the taller buildings.
Not sure visitors will get a particularly good first impression.
As an architecture student I think it is hideous and looks like badly assembled bunch of boxes, with no sense of proportion or scale that somebody has vomited over.
The two boxes nearest us in that view look like they'd be perfect for a gym, no?
"As an architecture student I think it is hideous and looks like badly assembled bunch of boxes, with no sense of proportion or scale that somebody has vomited over."
A considered critique. First year?
Anonymous 09:01
Ad hominem attacks on individual posters don't make a case. Especially as the proposal is exactly as described: bulky, vomit coloured and lacking in any merit whatsover except to the developer who wants to cram in as many cheap units as they can for as large a profit as possible. It is hideous.
A good development on the site would be an improvement. As far as this proposal is concerned the scrap yard wall is better.
It's possible to agree that this is a shit design whilst appreciating that high-density residential development is appropriate for the site.
Has anyone noticed that the application has been made for the commercial as one single large unit,for A1 use with the trading times being 8am-11pm, 7 days a week.
This can only be another supermarket.
A multiple, Sainsbury's? Tesco's.
Do we really need another supermarket now that we have Nisa on the Westside? This would cause damage to our local shops. Does anyone share these concerns
Grist to the mill of Aske's application to open a new primary school on their Pepys Road site. There are bound to be a few children in the new flats, and that means some of the families who can now get into John Stainer will have to look elsewhere.
Also, what's likely to happen to the derelict industrial land to the south of this site?
Looks alright to me. They could probably get away with an additional storey too, if it was set back.
I'm all for a CPZ in Brockley on the west side of the railway. It would be a great way of reducing air pollution.
This is very last minute, I know, but I've just found out that we only have until today if we want to make any appeals about this project. If, like myself, you think it could be improved upon, and you happen to read this in time, please send an email ftao Monique Wallace to planning@lewisham.gov.uk, quoting reference: DC/12/79567/FT and the address: 6 MANTLE ROAD, LONDON, SE4 2EX.
The official deadline for appeals is 5pm today (18th April), but they did say they may consider more appeals sent beyond this date up to the decision date in mid June.
So far only 3 appeals have been put in against the application, which may either mean that people don't mind about this being built here, or else people just don't know how or can't be bothered to.
Anyway, thought I'd let people know.
I'm emailing now. It is too high and likely to be finished with similarly shoddy materials tos Jude.
too high??
Yes, the plans are too high... Just this evening I saw a lovely sunset from around the Barge and in Coulgate St and realised that a lot of it would be obscured if this block was built as planned. It will really reduce the light in an evening that hits Coulgate street and the centre of Brockley and darken the whole area. Go look for yourself.
plasterer croydon
It's a good idea, one that countless other people have no doubt had, but not been able to implement due to RENT CONCERNS. The concept does have some problems though related to properly rendering the different content for example now I get to lose my font and my color of my document, I guess maybe that is fine but who decided theirs was better, just for the common man?
Post a Comment