Agenda item

It was decided at the meeting that the ‘closed documents’ on Peckham town centre and Peckham projects could be made available to the public.

The documents were tabled to the public present and will be published as such.

6.1  Simon Bevan, Interim Head of Planning and Transport, referred to the report published with the papers; ‘Town Centre good practice’, and said that officers had looked at four town centres that might be comparable to Peckham.

6.2  The chair commented that Brixton was the most obvious and the nearest to visit, as it was in neighbouring Lambeth Council, and the committee agreed. Members said that they would be interested in finding out how Lambeth had engaged with big potential partners, such as Morrison’s. Alongside this members commented that would like to find out how crucial transport was for successful regeneration and identify any barriers to developing projects.

6.3  Members discussed the East London line and noted that this will potentially link Peckham with the tube. Members noted that looking at how other boroughs have engaged with TfL would be useful. In the past officers have reported that finding the right person is very important as the organisation is very complex. Members thought it would be worthwhile to look at successful models of working with TfL, for example partnership work between Network Rail,  TfL and rail providers.

6.4  The Interim Head of Planning and Transport reported that providers work on a shorter timeframe; however Network Rail has longer term infrastructure responsibilities. Network Rail own Peckham Rye station and related landholdings. Members asked how engaged Network Rail is with he council and officers reported that it took 3 years to agree in principle the opening up the square in Peckham, however investment is still needed to deliver the scheme. The committee wondered if they had ever attended a scrutiny meeting and resolved to invite a Network Rail representative next administrative year.

6.5  Members commented that they would be interested to see if Peckham features in their investment plan and commented furthermore that it would be worthwhile for the committee to look at the five year plans of both TfL and Network Rail.

6.6  Members noted that Wandsworth had managed to make the case for the extension of the Northern Line and stated that it would be interesting to understand how TfL had been persuaded and how private investment had been leveraged in.

6.7  Members emphasised that successful regeneration of Peckham is tied up with the broader vision of Peckham and work is currently being undertaken on this through the Peckham and Nunhead Area Action Plan. It was agreed that the briefing for Community Council members  should be circulated to members of the committee.

6.8  Members commented that we need to think about the issues such as the railway arches and the danger of development driving out small independent business.

6.9  Jeremy Pilgrim, Property Development Manager, commented that Network Rail have both operational and commercial responsibilities. The redevelopment of Peckham square by Network rail is dependent on its economic viability, either by leveraging in additional funds or rentals rising to a viable level; presently the frontage is quite low value.

6.10  The Property Development Manager introduced the ‘closed’ papers circulated to members; briefing them on opportunities for using the council’s existing land and buildings to encourage development. He explained that some of the plots may become available, but they are not necessarily all on the market, and that this is the sensitivity, however he advised that the papers can be openly published. The scrutiny officer undertook to make these available to the public.

6.11  The Property Development Manager explained that the adverse economic market means that banks are still reluctant to lend money , alongside this the current cutbacks in government spending have reduced investment in housing, and as a result of this development such as Wooddene are unlikely to go ahead.  He reported that housing and commercial investment go hand in hand.

6.12  Members suggested going back to partners such as Network Rail, Morrison’s and TfL, and stated that this needs to been done on the back of the Area Action Plan. Any available funding should be offered as an inducement.

6.13  Members commented that the Area Action Plan has been slowed by the discussion around the tram and the location of the depot. Officers confirmed that even if the tram plan was resurrected the depot would not be in Peckham, however as the tram is not being actively pursued this should not hold up the plan.

6.14  A member commented that the Tax Increment Financing could be explored as a cash injection to kick start regeneration and deliver the Area Action Plan. Officers commented that there are opportunities; one is the Enterprise Action Zone that perhaps Peckham might form.

6.15  Members commented that a catalyst is need for the area, at a neighbourhood level Bellenden as seen a renaissance. In initial investment in the streetscape has seen the growth in quality independent outlets.

RESOLVED

There will be a visit to Brixton town centre before the next meeting.

The Community Council briefing for members on the Peckham and Nunhead Area Action Plan will be circulated to the committee.

The committee decided to review Network Rail plans and then invite representatives to a meeting next administrative year to discuss progressing transport regeneration opportunities and Peckham Rye station in particular. 

TfL plans will be reviewed and they will be invited to meet the committee next administrative year.