We now have an RSS News Feed. If you install the Google Destop (requires Windows Vista/XP/2000 SP3+ or Mac) and a news reader gadget such as OneFeed, you can have the very latest Lewes Matters news in real-time on your desktop!
And the following feed is for the latest forum posts...
The Jam factory - 2007/04/17 13:48I have a friend who has a unit at the jam factory. I have learnt a number of things that are quite fascinating. When a developer starts attacking people who have actually bought his properties, then you know he has problems. Councils are notoriously supportive of developers, yet in this instance even the Council have turned on him. I understand that Councillors in Southwark were, however, surprisingly enthusiastic despite what is clearly an absolute mess.
Mr Style cannot simply wipe this 7 year disaster away by saying that Southwark Council don't appreciate the genius of his architectural vision. they don't have to, they are public servants. Not everyone shares his views, and that is why there is a legal process.
Perhaps Mr Style could tell us what he would do differently to avoid us all similar expense, and misery. Or should we just accept what he says, that he, his advisors, investors, and the bank know what is best for us?
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
charles style
Re:The Jam factory - 2007/04/17 16:00sascha, we obviously have a very different viewpoint from the residents which I have to say is unfortunate. Some of them have been saying and continue to say that the site of Block E , which has been the subject of a revised planning application for a self contained affordable housing block should in fact be given to the existing residents as additional amenity space. We have provided evidence that the construction of this block, does not infringe the rights of existing residents for daylight and sunlight, that the development is not over dense and that there is already sufficient amenity space in the scheme to satisfy all the planning guidelines set down by Southwark Council. We have been trying to get this resolved by Southwark Planning for nearly four years, during which time the planning personnel dealing with the application have changed six times. But each time it appeared to be resolved the residents have applied for it to be dealt with either by The Government Office for London, the Ombudsman or the Court, on each occasion the onus has been put back on Southwark Council to deal with the planning applications submitted. As this is likely to go to committee shortly we all hope it can be resolved once and for all. It is not for want of trying on our part. It is absolutely imperative that there not be a repetition of this here in Lewes and we will work with Lewes District Council planning department to ensure that all planning applications are entirely backed up and that the officers are totally clear as to what is the nature and scope of the applications and that they are administered in such a way that there is no repition of this situation which has not been in the benefit of anyone. I think it fair to say that mistakes were made both by Angel Property and Southwark Planning and I believe this has been admitted. The residents viewpoint is obviously that they wish to see this additional amenity space, however as there was already a planning consent in place on the land on which they wish to have this "residents garden" at the time they purchased their flats and prior to that there was a large warehouse building on this land we feel that their continued insistence on this is having a very seriously detrimental effect on our ability to complete the scheme. The new affordable housing block has been designed to provide exactly the mix and standard of affordable housing that the Housing Association and the Housing Department require and is self contained which means it's managment will be easier and more affordable for the Housing Association. The planning application has been subjected to extremely close scrutiny, two independent daylighting studies have been carried out and the density and provision of amenity space provided in the development have been checked by Southwark Planners who will be making their recommendations to the Planning Committee shortly.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
charles style
Re:The Jam factory - 2007/04/17 16:01sorry , sashka I spelled you name wrong.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
sashka
Re:The Jam factory - 2007/04/17 16:32What I want to know is what have ANGEL learned from THEIR mistakes, that will not be repeated. Of course it is up to Southwark to resolve the problem, as they are the planning authority. But what did ANGEL contribute to the mess that you might now regret?
Blaming Residents at the Jam Factory, however few it may be, is ridiculous. they did not submit your plans, or choose to build something that was not actually approved, niether do they work for Southwark. You are now talking about a much bigger development in Lewes, which could easily be subject to similar irregularities. What is going to stop you from squeezing in too many flats into a a building approved only in outline. How did you manage to squeeze enough parking in to match the extra flats? Or did you not bother, causing additional chaos?
Are you now going to continue blaming Lewes residents too, for being rightly concered?
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
charles style
Re:The Jam factory - 2007/04/17 22:17Sashka, it is incorrect to say that we have built more flats than consented, we have been consented a total of 178 flats at the Jam Factory and have built 171, The original parking allocation was for 155 spaces, we later got consent for 206 spaces and have actually built 185 spaces, so there is sufficient parking but not too much. We have also got consent, based upon the original consent for a further 5 flats and 19 live work or commercial units in Block E. So I do not accept your contention that we have built more flats, live work or parking than consented. However, if anything is to be learned from the situation at the Jam Factory it is that it is preferable to get an outline planning consent first and follow this up with a detailed consent, as this allows the planners to confirm that all the details are correct before construction commences. In the case of the Jam Factory I feel what should have been an outline planning application was treated as a detailed planning application with reserved matters, i.e. we had to submit the plans and elevational details on a block by block basis, and as the planning officer, who was later fired, did not seem to be clear as to how to administer this we got into a situation where we have had to submit a new retrospective planning application for the development of blocks A, B, C and D and new detailed planning applications for the second phase blocks D and E. This has been done at the request of the planners. I realise that this all seems irregular and it is not an ideal situation but we have done all we can to get this situation sorted out with Southwark Planning whilst at the same time having had the Jam Factory residents trying to block the planning applications for the final phase because they have decided that they should have the land on which we intend to build the affordable housing for additional amenity space for themselves. The affordable housing is being moved from one block to another at the request of the Housing Association. We do not think there is any reason to believe that the planning applications in Lewes will be administered badly, nor do we think that we have actually breached any planning regulations at the Jam Factory. Southwark have taken legal advice on this and if we had I have no doubt there would have been enforcement action taken against us. We have made mistakes but we feel the development of the Jam factory actually provides some of the best loft flats in London, is a stunning design, has a thriving live work community and has encouraged the regeneration of what was a very run down area. All the people who bought there have done exceptionally well as they were able to buy their flats and live work units in an area that we were instrumental in putting on the map. The values of their flats have almost certainly exceeded the growth of more conventional flats. We are very keen for Southwark Planning to finally get this situation resolved at the planning committee which we expect will be within the next month or so.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
David Burke
Re:The Jam factory - 2007/04/17 23:57Dear Charles,
178 is not the number of units Angel was originally permitted to build. That is the whole point.
In 2000 Angel was given permission to build 154 units across the whole of the Jam factory site. Of those, 24 were to be affordable housing in Block D. Angel then built 147 units, and sold them at market rates, in only the first three blocks (A,B and C).
An application for changes to Block D, dated 2002, was not explicitly tied back to the original consent of 2000. You feel this allows you to add the units in the new Block D to the overall total. The permission granted was vague, and you are determined to make the most of it.
Similarly, you have no reason to complain about Southwark's planning officers treating your original application as one for full consent when it should have been treated as outline. Instead of building the four storey Block D described in the consent, you have built five and a half storeys.
And then you decided to move all the affordable housing to Block E - the last building, which is yet to be started. Southwark must decide on your new building knowing that your anticipated revenue is largely in place and that no affordable housing has yet been delivered. You seem in a strong position to negotiate.
What if you had just built the 154 units with 24 affordable in a four-storey Block D, as originally approved in 2000? Would you be having all these problems? No. Even the 90% of Jam Factory residents who recently signed a petition against your plans could not have taken a complaint this far. There would be nothing to enforce nor for a judge to review.
Where are we now, in Lewes? Is our situation similar to that of Southwark's in 2000?
When Southwark Council gave you planning approval in 2000, was that a "master plan"? They seemed to think it was. You must have felt it was something that could be changed later. What you have built at Jam Factory is very different from what was approved in 2000. What you propose for its Block E is different again.
Were residents at the time shown 3D models? Does it matter now?
Southwark allowed you to develop Jam Factory in "phases", whereby they did not have detailed elevations of what would be built at the time they granted planning permission. Would you say your exhibition in the Town Hall requires a similar faith from Lewes residents? If someone else owns the land, presumably it does.
Phased development at the Jam Factory led to what the head of planning admitted were "serious planning errors". How can Lewes residents be sure your master plan will not change between phases?
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
Dear site visitor at IP address 38.103.63.61. We were forced to make it necessary for you to register and login before making forum postings because of the constant flood of unwanted and often abusive material that was being uploaded by anonymous spammers from all over the world. I'm sure you know the sort of stuff - viagra ads and the like - what a bore! But you can of course read the postings without logging in, and in any case it only takes a couple of minutes to register - you're not losing your privacy, but you're keeping out the spammers. So do please register and continue using the forum - we need your input! Thanks, Lewes Matters Admin.
