ENVS3014 Development Project: Regeneration

Bermondsey Spa Report

Jannat Alkhanizi, Shivani Bhatnagar, Sitian Chen, Zidong Han, Yingke Ni, Janey Lin Zhao

2

Abbreviations used in this report:

BSR Bermondsey Spa RegenerationLP London PlanSC Southwark CouncilSCI Statement of Community InvolvementSP Southwark PlanTRA Tenants and Resident’s Association

3

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION1.1 Background Context 1.2 Angle of Analysis1.3 Research Metholodgy1.4 Framework for Analysis1.5 Aim and Structure

EVALUATION (A): MASTERPLAN OBJECTIVES

2.1 Findings from Masterplan2.2 Policy Framework Analysis2.3 Limitations of Objectives

EVALUATION (B): PARTICIPATION

3.1 Findings from Research 3.2 Community Participation Analysis3.3 Limitations of Participation

CONCLUSION4.1 Overall Conclusion18

14

8

4PAGE

PAGE

PAGE

PAGE

4

The London Borough of Southwark is located in central London, south of the Thames. With a Labour-led council made up of 21 wards, it has an ethnically diverse and young population that is projected to increase.

Southwark has experienced an acceleration of urban regeneration since the millennia. However, a large disparity is still present between the strong economy of wards along the Thames and south with the neglected and forgotten center wards (Southwark Council, 2014).

Fig 1. Location of site within different scale

5

1.1.2 Bermondsey Spa The project is located in Grange ward in the locality of Bermondsey and Rotherhithe (Fig. 1, 2), locally known as Bermondsey Spa. The focus on Spa Road will guide the analysis throughout the report.

As a historical center of trade and industry, economic activity declined in the 1970s and thereafter the place was neglected by council and private industries. Overall, the area suffered considerable poverty and deprivation. The neglect of housing conditions was appalling with overcrowding and unsanitary conditions (Lambert, 2014). The area was then identified as a key revitalisation area due to the proximity to major transport hubs. These two factors fueled the need for regeneration.

1.1.3 Bermondsey Spa Regeneration ProjectThis project was advertised as a residential-led mixed used development. Projected to be a 10-year scheme, work started in 2000 although actual completion was 2014. The vision was ambitious:

Keep the best of the area’s rich heritage while addressing the undeniable need for rebirth

To achieve this goal the aims were to make it an accessible area with an integrated mix of high quality homes, shops, offices, public spaces and community facilities around a spine of employment uses along the railway line (Southwark Council, 2007b:80). Spa road is the anchor for this report as it is the main street with the most significant changes.

Fig 2. Focus street and surrounding area (Google Maps, 2015)

Fig 3. Spa Road: LEFT New Development, RIGHT: Old Neckinger council esate (Zhao, 2015)

6

To evaluate and analyse the residential-led approach, our angle focuses on community prioritisation and involvement while analysing council efforts of:

1.1.4 Key ActorsThis project was initiated and funded by SC, partnering with housing associations. Both affordable housing associations below are social enterprises and that also currently provide the building maintenance.

1.2 Angle of Analysis

* see appendix (A) and (B) for list of contacts and surveys respondents

7

1.5 Aim and StructureEach evaluation will comprise of an identical structure; present findings followed by a critical framework analysis, and assessment of the limitations measured against relevant academic literature.

Policy Framework Literature Framework

Sec. 3.2

Sec. 2.3, 3.2

Sec. 3.3

Sec. 2.2

Sec. 3.1

Sec. 2.2

ReportSection

8

Bermondsey Spa Regeneration was split into three development phases to slowly transition the area and ideally avoid the need to decant tenants around the borough (John Harvard Library, 1999). Chosen sites for this section fall within the medium term of development due to the wide availability of information. However, in remaining sections, analysis will refer to BSR sites overall. Evaluation will chart the objectives progress of each chosen site and the effects of their delivery on the community. Referring to other objectives from policy frameworks, the analysis will conclude by measuring the success of meeting each goal.

2.1.1 Site AnalysisThe chosen sites all have frontages exposed to Spa Road, a street originally identified as an intervention site to create a new backbone for activities to transform it into a high street by providing local employment opportunities (John Harvard Library, 2000). As a residential-led development, the initial guidelines of the project emphasised practices to guarantee community’s satisfaction such as: the no-loss of social housing, elimination of barriers between residents, improving quality of local environment, and the creation of local employment and training opportunities (John Harvard Library, 1999 and 2000).

Fig. 5. Masterplan of Bermondsey Spa Regeneration (Adapted from Southwark Council, 2004)

Short term 2000-2004 Medium term 2004-2008 Long term 2008-onwards

Fig. 4. Phasing every 3.5-4 years. Projected to finish in 2010 but actuality completed in 2014 (Davies and Jonas, 2000)

Evaluation (A): Masterplan Objectives

2.1 Findings from Masterplan

9

2.1.2 Progress of Masterplan ObjectivesThe timeline reflects the objectives of masterplans produced by Hyde-SC partnership between 2004-2008.

Fig. 6. Timeline tracks the site’s progress in setting and meeting development goals by colour-coding each site according to the masterplan

10

Overall regeneration affected the old community negatively and disregarded their needs. Social housing units were either replaced by affordable units (Section 2.3) or by private rent/ ownership units. This can be partly attributed to the economic conditions of 2008 and the austerity measures it dictated on housing provisions (Southwark Council, 2008b).

While 86% of residents felt that the area’s environment has transformed to their satisfaction (The Hyde Group, 2015:8), residents surveys and TRA representative interviews indicated that some components were still lacking. These include communication barriers between new and old residents (Sections 3.1-2) and lack of promised employment opportunities, as evident from the lack of shops and offices on Spa Road and their replacement with private rent units.

2.1.3 Objectives ConclusionThere is a trend of inconsistency in each site’s goals throughout the years, causing an increase of housing units (Site T and G) on the expense of providing facilities and amenities needed for a high street. Due to the change in business uses, there was also a loss for highly valued shops such as a bakery, a butcher, a repairs shop and two pubs. This was in addition to unmet promises of community infrastructure services.

Guiding Project Objectives Met Unmet

No net loss of social housing

✓

Improvement in the quality of the local environment and the public spaces

✓

Creating local employment and training opportunities

✓

No displacement of residents, segregation or barriers

✓

 

11

The Bermondsey Spa Masterplan objectives although lacking an integrated, coherent development approach, were established to maximise the delivery of social and economic benefits. As site specific planning guidance for BSR, the masterplan fits within a broader context of policy framework: local and regional planning policy (SCI, SP, and LP), and supplementary planning guidance (S106 Agreements). Figure 7 elaborates the inter-relationships between different regulations in Southwark at different scales (Southwark Council, 2011).

2.2.1 Hierarchy of Policy FrameworkThis section will evaluate community related policies: affordable housing, and community participation, and assess the link of these overarching guidelines with the BSR objectives.Documents discussed in this section will be of older publications that were influencing guidelines during development.

Fig. 7. The hierarchy of planning policies in Southwark (Southwark Council, 2011)

2.2 Policy Framework Analysis

12

In regards to housing provision, the London and Southwark plans set the following targets for housing supply:

Affordable housing ratio targets were first introduced in LP 2004 in order to achieve the vision of sustainable developments and to tackle housing shortage, deprivation and discrimination (Mayor of London, 2004). A crucial additional housing goal is that local development policies ‘should prevent the loss of housing, including affordable housing, without its planned replacement at existing or higher densities’ (Policy 3A. 12) (ibid:68)

Although the Southwark Plan echoed all these in their guidelines, gaps in meeting affordable housing targets in SP and BSR objectives were significant (Fig. 8) as described in Section 2.1.3.The other area where the SP and LP documents, in addition to SCI provide significant guidance is community participation that focuses on local existing experiences and enhancing consultation and community engagement (Southwark Council, 2008d). These guidelines include:

These guidelines resulted in setting the overall objectives for BSR as discussed in previous section.

Fig 8. Housing targets in development plans and BSR objectives (Mayor of London, 2004 and Southwark Council, 2007b)

13

BSR has for the most part generated consensus about their success as a regeneration project. It has become a model in Southwark, having the highest target of delivering 35% affordable housing in London area (Southwark Council, 2011). Under the pressure of delivering a large number of housing, local council has only addressed one dimension on meeting the target, which has neglected the need for community infrastructure.

From 1970s, community groups were encouraged to take an active role in influencing planning, urban design, development and partnership of the urban development process (Brindley, 2000). However, this was not the case in BSR. Local community had little power to press forward their interest. Instead, SC masked underlying conflicts of interest that placed economic profit over providing infrastructure for the community’s benefit. Spa Gardens was created at the expense of the larger Spa Park that hosted more amenities. Public infrastructures proposed at the first stage of the regeneration were gradually removed from the list and replaced by housing or commercial purpose sites (Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods, 2009 and Livingstone, 2013).

2.2.2 Supplementary Planning Policy

2.3 Limitations of Objectives

14

3.1 Findings from Research

RTPI Good Practice specifies ‘Effective Community Involvement and Engagement’ involves establishing relationships with community groups to enable effective and detailed interactions (RTPI, 2005:4). This approach was underpinned by the Way Forward (DETR, 1997) suggesting a stronger focus on social aspects of urban renewal. The comprehensive approach is re-emphasised in the Urban Task Force report (1999) which advocates successful urban regeneration founded upon strong democratic local leadership and public participation. From interviews and research into tools of community participation within BSR, it was determined that the methods were mainly informative rather than engaging.

To determine the success of community participation within the scheme, interviews were held with Jeremy McGahan- representative for the Bermondsey Spa TRA, and Katrina Hogg- the representative from the Neckinger Estate TRA. Further evidence was gathered through surveys of residents. Participation is evaluated during and post partnership with Hyde Housing.

During the Partnership (2000-2008)

Channel 1: One Stop ShopThis temporary One Stop Shop opened to the public in May 2005 and allowed residents to get updates on progress, hold meetings, and help on enquiries of council services (London SE1, 2005). Residents voiced their opposition against council set objectives for Site T. Communication was possible due to quarterly newsletters (Fig. 9). TRA agreed with providing more housing, but at a lower density though this was dismissed by development. It operated from mid 2005 - late 2009 (Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods, 2009).

Channel 2: Formal Community MeetingsA main channel of community participation was through consultative meetings and information sessions. These were typically held at the Old Town Hall (in Site C), One Stop Shop or TRA building. Old residents were consulted about regeneration schemes at these meetings. Their voices were not always taken into account, but they were kept informed about SLC and Hyde’s own actions.

Post Partnership with Housing Association (2008 - Present)

Challenge 1: Lack of communication channelsPost-partnership between Hyde and SLC, all communication channels to Neckinger TRA were lost as the estate is council owned. Hyde held no responsibility for addressing Neckinger TRA’s opinions on developmental matters and did not reach out to do so. Their last point for consultation with any developmental matters of area ended in 2008 (Hogg, 2015).

15

Fig. 9. Excerpt from Bermondsey Spa Regeneration News (Southwark Council, 2008)

Difficulty arose to construct a community in Bermondsey Spa TRA (Bermondseyspa.ning.com) because the online forum was not utilised for community activities but rather for voicing personal complaints (Fig. 10). New residents TRA have communication with both SLC and Hyde, while old residents TRA cannot formally contact Hyde even as they are part of the spatial community (McGahan, 2015). Therefore, it was difficult to construct a community that could engage and participate fully.

Challenge 2: Removal of community infrastructure The physical spaces for communication were lost as highlighted in section 2.1.3 as council aimed to digitalise services in 2008. It was only after two years of campaigning from locals that a replacement One Stop Shop opened outside the area (Southwark Council, 2012), though it did not contribute to the replacement of space. Moreover, Bermondsey TRA claim efforts by Hyde for providing TRA meeting spaces were minimal, and presented an unpleasant environment that was unattractive to attendees. Some residents surveyed are even unaware of an association (Appendix B).

Fig. 10. Private new residents only forum hosting mostly complaints (Durrant, 2015)

16

Fig. 11. LEFT: Open gardens on Neckinger Council Estate RIGHT: Closed private gardens on Site O Private-Affordable mix housing (Zhao, 2015)

3.2 Community Participation Analysis

One way dialogue Although there were some communication channels, few opportunities were presented for a two way collaborative dialogue to take place. The council released quarterly newsletters which highlighted the progress and changes within the scheme. This method of community participation was effective in communicating updated information but did not allow the community to engage with the reasons for these updates, therefore restricting their participation.

Heterogeneity within the communityIn Urban Renaissance regarding Community Empowerment: “Tying down communities ‘spatially’ … “assumes a homogeneity of interests within them” (Imrie and Raco, 2003:7). Through exploring community as the focal point is good urban practice that contributes towards a successful long-term urban renewal.

In actuality, the spatial area of Bermondsey Spa contains community groups with contrasting interests. There is tension between the older residents and newcomers (2007 onwards). Many older residents have been displaced by being priced out or removal and no replacement of social homes (Hogg, 2015). The new residents do not integrate themselves with the existing residents. Additionally, interaction spaces were separated physically between communities through fencing or members-only public space. This was echoed by McGahan (2015), that the newer residents only get involved when it affects them personally, and otherwise do not contribute.

Wish for stronger engagementBrindley discusses similar situations where “the multi-faceted urban community has diverse and competing needs, but a desire to share the same urban space” (2000:373). Although the old and new residents have an undercurrent of tension, their goals are very much similar. Both TRAs wish to see the area as a safe and inclusive environment. As the interviews and surveys evidence suggest that the Hyde and the SLC could have strengthened relationships between the community groups by offering more opportunities to hold a two way dialogue and provide suitable, equal opportunities for all to fully engage.

17

3.3 Limitations from Participation

Public participation is an essential component of this regeneration project. It was identified that a joint commitment approach should be taken among a wide range of contributors throughout each stage of the project (Davies and Jonas, 2000). In actuality this participation objective was not delivered effectively.

The regeneration only reached a stage of tokenism (Arnstein, 1969). Local council took one-way informing approach rather than two-way communication approach. Throughout the regeneration, residents were informed and consulted periodically through newsletters and meetings but often after a decision has been made, eventually degrading to non-participatory levels after 2008 (Hogg, 2015).

There was no effective online social media platform provided for local residents to offer opinions or feedback if there were changes. Removal of one stop shop further eliminated physical space for any developer-resident interaction. The private community network (Bermondseyspa.ning.com) was only initiated in 2010 by residents themselves and is restricted to new housing development tenants.

Fig.12. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration on Arnstein’s Ladder of Participation (Adapted from Olafsson, 2012)

18

4.1 Overall Conclusion

Social and physical segregation were significant drawbacks after the regeneration. There is no official obligation for interaction between old residents and new residents as management differs. Micro-segregation has emerged with outpricing of original locals and influx of richer residents, changing the local character (Keddie and Tonkiss, 2010). Moreover, community networks were lost due to the displacement of some of the original social housing tenants (Hogg, 2015). There is a change of attitudes, with more privatised space and fewer people willing to contribute to community efforts. Both new residents and old residents claimed that there is less sense of community due to unfamiliarity amongst the community.

SC did not perform well on the advertised residential-led approach, and instead demonstrated a development-led approach. Some of the land with rich heritage were sold by SC for commercial purposes such as the Town Hall and One Stop Shop (Livingstone, 2013). SC did reach their housing target and addressed housing shortage in Southwark to a great extent. However, their overzealous ambition resulted in the lack of amenities, which remains as a long-term considerable problem.

Finally, Spa Road did not become a high street, but rather a common local street. There is a clash of opinions among old and new residents as benefits from regeneration are not enjoyed by all across the whole area. Nevertheless, the silver-lining is that SC has learned residents’ opinions and knowledge is a critical and valued tool for future successful residential regeneration.

Bermondsey Spa Regeneration• 2006 first new residents, 2014 fully complete• Private, Affordable or Shared Ownerships• Maintained by Hyde & Notting Hill Housing• New build, private restricted individual buildings

Neckinger Estate• Completed in 1938, long lasting old residents• Social Housing or Private Ownership (prev. social)• Maintained by Southwark Council• Traditional brick build, open space courtyards

Bermondsey SpaOne neighbourhood, two communities

Fig. 13. One Stop Shop converted into a Sainsbury’s, no incorporation of heritage gates into new site de-sign (Worthington, 2012 and SE16 News, 2014)

References Arnstein, S., 1969. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4),

pp.216-224, Burr, A., 2015. Council Takes No Legal Action Over ‘44 Missing Social Housing Units’. Southwark News.

[online] Available at: http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/council-takes-no-legal-action-over-44-missing-social-housing-units/ [Accessed 15 Jan. 2016].

Brindley, T., 2000. “Community roles in urban regeneration: New partnerships on London’s South Bank” in

City, 4(3) pp. 367-377. Colley, F. 2011. Core Strategy. London: Southwark Council. [Online] Available at:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200210/core_strategy/2114/adoption [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].

Davies, L. and Jonas, D. 2000. Bermondsey Spa Masterplan Draft. Report, [Hardcopy only] Available in:

John Harvard Library, Section: Bermondsey, Metropolitan Borough of: Redevelopment Area. London.

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1997. The Way Forward for

Regeneration. HMSO, London. Digimaps, 2015. Bermondsey Spa Area. [image] Available at: http://digimap.edina.ac.uk/roam/os

[Accessed 25 Dec. 2015].

Durrant, N. 2015. Who do I contact at Hyde nowadays?. [image] Available at: http://bermondseyspa.ning.com/forum/topics/who-do-i-contact-at-hyde-nowadays [Accessed 8 Jan. 2016].

EAN, 2015 ‘Stand up for more social housing’, 35% Campaign, [Online] Available at: http://35percent.org/blog/2015/03/18/stand-up-for-more-social-housing/ [Accessed: 1 Dec 2015]

Hogg, K., 2015 ‘Perspective on Bermondsey Spa development as an older area resident’. Interviewed by

Janey Zhao, Neckinger TRA Hall, 12 December Imrie R., Raco M. 2003 Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy.

Chapter 12: New Labour, community and the future of Britain’s urban renaissance pp. 235-251. The Policy Press, Bristol. Print ISBN-13: 9781861343802.

Google Maps, 2016. Bermondsey Spa. [image] Available at:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Bermondsey+Spa+Gardens/ [Accessed 4 Jan. 2016].

John Harvard Library, 1999. ‘Bermondsey’s Spa Road in Line for Massive Regeneration’ in Anonymous Newspaper Clip, Files number: (711.312), Section: Bermondsey, Metropolitan Borough of: Redevelopment Area.

John Harvard Library, 2000. ‘Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Announcement’ in Beyond Bankside Building

Design in Anonymous Newspaper clip, Files number: (711.312), Section: Bermondsey, Metropolitan Borough of: Redevelopment Area.

Keddie, T., and Tonkiss, F., 2010. “The market and the plan: Housing, urban renewal and socio-economic

change in London” in City, Culture and Society, pp. 57-67. Lambert, T. 2014. A Brief History Of Bermondsey, London. [online] Local Histories. Available at:

http://www.localhistories.org/bermondsey.html

[Accessed 5 Jan. 2016].

Livingstone, R. 2013. Disposal of The Grange (Sites C2 and C4) Bermondsey Spa, London SE1. Agenda Item 20. London: Southwark Council. [Online] Available at: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=3842 [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].

London SE1, 2005. Bermondsey’s one stop shop opens its doors [3 June 2005]. [online] Available at:

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/1596 [Accessed 8 Nov. 2016].

Mapsof, 2015. Blank Map of London. [image] Available at: http://mapsof.net/uploads/static-

maps/boroughs_blank_map_of_London.png [Accessed 4 Jan. 2016].

Mayor of London, 2004. The London Plan, Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. London: Greater London Authority [Online] Available at: https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/past-versions-and-alterations-london-plan/london-plan-2004 [Accessed: 1 Jan 2016]

Mayor of London, 2008. The London Plan, Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London,

Consolidated with Alterations since 2004. London: Greater London Authority [Online] Available at: https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/past-versions-and-alterations-london-plan/london-plan-2008 [Accessed: 1 Jan 2016]

McGahan, J., 2015 ‘Perspective on Bermondsey Spa development as a new resident’. Interviewed by

Janey Zhao and Hebe Ni, Eyot House, 10 December Olafsson G., 2012. Ladder of Citizen Participation. [image] Available at: http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-

arnstein/resources/ladder-of-citizen-participation.gif [Accessed 25 Dec. 2015].

SE16 News, 2014. Sainsbury’s Local in Spa Road. [image] Available at: http://www.se16.com/wp-

content/uploads/Photo-19-11-2014-14-16-40.jpg [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].

Southwark Council, 2004. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Hardcopy only] Available in: John

Harvard Library. London. Southwark Council , 2005. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Hardcopy only] Available in: John

Harvard Library. London. Southwark Council, 2007a. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Online PDF] Available at:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/1100/summer_autumn_2007_newsletter [Accessed: 10 Nov 2015].

Southwark Council, 2007b. The Southwark Plan. London: Southwark Council, pp. 40-90.

Southwark Council , 2008a. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Online PDF] Available at: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/1103/spring_2008_newsletter [Accessed: 10 Nov 2015].

Southwark Council, 2008b. ‘Affordable housing SPD’, [Online] Available at:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/2245/affordable_housing_spd [Accessed 1 Jan. 2016]

Southwark Council. 2008c. ‘Statement of Community Involvement’, [Online] Available at: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/856/planning_policy/1238/statement_of_community_involvement [Accessed 1 Jan. 2016]

Southwark Council, 2011. ‘Core strategy’, [Online] Available at: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200210/core_strategy/2114/adoption [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].

Southwark Council, 2012. Bermondsey One Stop Shop turns Blue. [online] Available at:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/878/bermondsey_one_stop_shop_turns_blue [Accessed 6 Jan. 2016].

Southwark Council, 2014. Southwark Council Demographic Fact Sheet. [online] Available at: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/3772/joint_strategic_needs_assessment [Accessed 9 Dec. 2015].

Southwark Council, 2015. Map of Southwark Localities. [image] Available at: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200519/joint_strategic_needs_assessment/3456/3_factsheets_and_profiles [Accessed 9 Dec. 2015].

Southwark Council, 2016. ‘Section 106’, [Online] Available at: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200152/section_106 [Accessed 1 Jan 2016]

Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods, 2009. Disposal of the Council’s freehold interest

in Site C5 Grange Walk and the One Stop Shop 17 Spa Road, Bermondsey Spa.. Agenda Item 11.London: Southwark Council, pp.1-2. [Online] Available at: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=4789 [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].

The Royal Town Planning Institute and The Consultation Institute, 2005. RTPI Good Practice Note 1:

Guidelines on Effective Community Involvement and Consultation. [Online PDF] Available at: http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/6313/Guidlelines-on-effective-community-involvement.pdf [Accessed 21 Dec. 2015]

Urban Task Force, 1999. Towards an Urban Renaissance: Final Report of the Urban Task Force. E&FN

Spon, London. Worthington, A. 2012. Southwark Council's former One Stop Shop. [image] Available at:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8481/8183024344_51edaf2fbd_b.jpg [Accessed 6 Jan. 2016].

Worthington, A. 2012. The One Stop Shop. [online] Flickr. Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/andyworthington/8183024344 [Accessed 4 Jan. 2016].

Zhao, J. 2015. View Down Spa Road Neckinger Estate. [image].

Zhao, J. 2015. Amisha Court. [image].

Zhao, J. 2015. Bermondsey Spa Gardens. [image].

Zhao, J. 2015. View Down Spa Bolanchi Building. [image].

Appendix A

6 John Phelan john.Phelan@Southwark.gov.uk

Aylesbury, Dulwich, Nunhead & Peckham, Designated officer for the TRA

Southwark Council Hi Shivani, Thanks for this. However, I do not deal with the Bermondsey area, and my remit mostly covers constitutional and governance issues of TRAs. I have passed your enquiry to my colleague, who will be in contact with you shortly. Kind regards, John.

7 Dan Taylor dan.Taylor@southwark.gov.uk

Programme Manager Regeneration

Southwark Council Dear Shivani There is no specific planning framework for Bermondsey Spa so best to look at the Southwark Plan and Core Strategy The headlines are as follows: Two thousand new homes, 40% of them affordable Net increase in social housing Two new health centres An NHS dental surgery and pharmacy New facilities at Salmon Youth Centre 2.5 hectares of re-landscaped open space Secure bicycle parks Car parking including gated car parks New shops, including a Tesco Metro City Car Clubs The best way of getting a breakdown of figures for affordable housing would be to check the planning register and put each of the sites from the masterplan http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200180/bermondsey_spa/1144/bermondsey_spa_masterplan Into the address field below http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/ You could contact a housing association to carry our a survey with someone like Hyde Housing http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/hyde-new-homes-bermondsey-spa-london/7003016.article You could do an interview with the Salmon Youth Centre which was built during the programme We have some research being published soon - Leonna cc'd will send it to you Good luck! Best wishes Dan

8 Leonna Staple leonna.staple@southwark.gov.uk

Project Officer Regeneration North Project Team

Southwark Council Good Afternoon Shivani, Please see attached the summary of the research carried out on the Bermondsey Spa Regeneration. I hope this information is of use to you. Regards Leonna Staple Project Officer Regeneration North Project Team

9 llewelyn Davies london@ldavies.com

General inquiries about Masterplan

Llewelyn Davies No response

10 Paul Drew pdrew@iceniprojects.com

General Inquiries about Masterplan

Paul Drew Design Janey Apologies, but I cannot find the document that was the original Bermondsey Spa masterplan. What I have found is the attached which contains extracts from the masterplan as prepared in 2001. As such, there is no need to call through later. Paul

11 Simon Vevers simon.vevers@hyde-housing.co.uk

New Business and Strategy Director

The Hyde Group (Hyde Housing)

No response

12 Craig Horn craig.horn@hyde-housing.co.uk

Head of Land and Planning

The Hyde Group (Hyde Housing)

No response

13 General 0800 3 282 282

The Hyde Group (Hyde Housing)

Redirected 6 times to different lines eventually said information is confidential

14 Karen Boothe 020 8297 3814 karen.boothe@hyde-housing.co.uk

Community Engagement Officer

The Hyde Group (Hyde Housing)

Called 5 times, too busy but said will answer a list of questions e-mail but never responded. I am currently out of the office. I will respond to your email on my return on Monday 14th December 2015. For all other urgent queries, please email residentengagement@hyde-housing.co.uk or phone the Customer Contact Centre on: 0800 3 282 282 or from your mobile: 0300 1 232 233.

15 info@salmonyouthcentre.org

General inquiries Salmon Youth Centre

Thanks for your email. I am afraid that we do not have the information you require. We have been on our site since 1906. Hyde housing have done major research on the area and are producing a report. Jim Guild Administration & HR Manager

16 Sam Adofo sam.adofo@salmonyouthcentre.org

Director Salmon Youth Centre

No response

17 Sam Holden sam@stephentaylorarchitects.co.uk

Associate Stephen Taylor Architects

Hi Shivani Apologies for not replying sooner I worked on the Bermondsey Spa Site C Masterplan when I was with Glenn Howells Architects (GHA) back in 2005. Unfortunately I don¹t have either a hard or soft copy of the actual document. You might have better luck contacting the London office of GHA directly. The only person who I know still works there from that time is Reinhold Schmaderer, but someone else may be able to access the document in their archive. I hope this helps. Sam

18 Katrina Hogg 07713 245 854

Main Leader Neckinger TRA Agreed for 1.5 hour interview

19 Jeremy McGahan jmcgahan@fsatnav.com

Secretary Bermondsey Spa TRA

Agreed for 2 hour interview