Agenda item

7.1  The Planning Projects Manager, Alistair Huggett, introduced the report.  In response to questions he explained that the original idea had been for the council to achieve vacant possession, using CPOs, and to hand the land to Network Rail on a commercial basis to build out a viable scheme.  The current proposal was to buy out long leases along the frontage of the site and to develop this for community use, rather than give land to Network Rail.  The chair, Councillor Gavin Edwards, asked whether the community had been consulted on the original proposal.  The Planning Projects Manager clarified that Network Rail had been leading the previous scheme but that the council was leading on the current one which had a different emphasis.  Councillor Catherine Dale asked whether the aim had always been to regenerate the area.  The Planning Projects Manager confirmed that this aim had been set out in the Peckham and Nunhead Action Plan.  There had been a difference of opinion about how to deliver the aspirations it contained.

7.2  Councillor Adele Morris was concerned about how the council could learn from the experience in Peckham in order to ensure that communities in other parts of the borough were able to have their say and be heard.  The Planning Projects Manager responded that the current project was a partnership project involving the GLA, Network Rail, Southern and the council.  To some extent, partners had previously been pulling in different directions but it was possible that GLA funding was now driving the project in one direction.  The Planning Projects Manager wondered if Network Rail had been focussed on viability and the commercial development of the site and whether the council had not queried this sufficiently.  In terms of community engagement, he commented that the community in Peckham had been very well organised and had made use of technology to galvanise local opinion.  Campaigning had worked very well in this case and had led to some very robust meetings.

7.3  Councillor Johnson Situ asked how the council could ensure that, with so many stakeholders and partners involved, the project continued to meet the community’s aspirations.  The Planning Projects Manager stated that he had a very clear steer from the Director of Regeneration to keep to the new approach.  In the past there had been to many conflicting aims and objectives but now all three partners were on board with the reduced aspirations.  Councillor Karl Eastham was concerned that community views were reflective of the entire community in the area.  The Planning Projects Manager explained that the Co-design team had been taken on in an effort to get to the hard to reach parts of the community, including local business, churches and young people.

7.4  Councillor Dale commented that she had looked at the co-design website and was concerned that it might not appeal to everyone, she hoped that there were other methods being used in order to engage with the broader community.  The Planning Projects Manager confirmed that community engagement was a key part of the brief for the Co-design team.  Councillor Tom Flynn suggested that this might be better achieved by taking a flip chart onto Rye Lane.  The Planning Projects Manager agreed and reported that a consultation hub had been set up at the station itself and that people with clip-boards had been in the area as a way of finding out the views of the community.  The team was not just relying on the web and in addition the previous consultant AOC had been retained.

7.5  Councillor Anood Al-Samerai emphasised a wider question of how such issues should be looked at by the committee.  Local residents had only been invited to a previous meeting at which there was an item on Draper House when she had suggested it.  Today the committee was hearing from officers but it was important to hear direct from the community too.  The chair stressed his view that it was important to understand the officer view first.  Perhaps the question was how to structure a review and when to invite the community to attend.  A conversation needed to be had about how the committee should come back to this issue and which groups might be invited at that point.

7.6  The vice-chair, Councillor Rosie Shimell asked the officer whether he was confident that the changes made to the project would ensure that it met the many different interests of the organisations involved and the local community.  The Planning Projects Manager was optimistic but emphasised a key sticking point in that it would not be possible to get all the current traders into the new development.  Hopefully relocation would be minimised and the council was revisiting its equalities report.  He also reported that he would be providing updates to the community council.