The IPPF is a planning document that lays out the council’s vision of what Walthamstow will be like for the next 20 years or so. It says what developers can and can’t do in the area – and what bits are likely to be redeveloped. In short, it’s about the most important document you’re likely to see in some time. And once it’s accepted, it will be much more difficult to argue about a new building on your doorstep, or dramatic changes to the town, if they fit with the IPPF.
So we’re asking everyone, please, to take a look at it. We know it looks a bit boring and dull. But it is very important – read it, and respond to it with your objections by 4 April. We’re not planning experts, but if you have any questions that aren’t answered by the council (or you don’t want to ask them, but do want to ask us), email us at mail@fighttheheight.co.uk and we’ll do our best to answer them.
Don't leave it to the politicians to decide what happens in Walthamstow. Please read the IPPF and then make sure you get your objections to this document in by 4th April 2008 to Sam Neal.
In case it helps, these are the things that most concern us (just click on "read more" below). If you think we’ve missed anything, please get in touch urgently!
1. The council ominously hasn’t included housing targets for the “Central” area of Walthamstow. The area that to the council represents “a prime opportunity to increase housing and commercial provision” includes not only the High Street/Hoe Street junction, town square, The Mall, bus and tube station etc. but also residential streets including Cleveland Park Avenue, Westbury Road, Eastfield Road and Priory Avenue. There is no protection in the IPPF to keep these roads as they are. They’re key to Walthamstow’s Victorian, low-rise character. Also, despite more housing planned throughout central Walthamstow, there’s no mention in the IPPF of extra schools, playgrounds or open space.
2. The IPPF talks about a mix of uses and mix of housing for the area. But there are no targets for what mix we’d end up with. We currently have too few family houses and way too many fast food chicken outlets. The IPPF needs proper, enforceable targets for housing and usage mix to deal with problems like these.
3. There’s lots in the IPPF about how new developments should be “compatible with” or “improve their surroundings”, should be “maintained to a high level” etc. How will a council that doesn’t water the grass on the Town Square Gardens during summer keep developers to vague promises like that? We want the council to set a good example and ensure that all of its property in the town centre is maintained “to a high level”, and we want the council to exert pressure on existing landowners and tenants to improve their properties. We also want all ideals, such as those above, to be backed up with enforceable targets and plans to achieve those targets. Otherwise the IPPF is set to be just a load of hot air.
4. Why is the Arcade site still excluded from the IPPF? On the drawings it is included as part of Central area. Yet it is not mentioned anywhere. The council cannot maintain that the Arcade site precedes this framework, as the framework is here, but the Arcade site hasn’t had a planning application yet. The IPPF should include the Arcade site. And the Arcade site’s height should be in keeping with what The Prince’s Foundation/the IPPF recommends for the rest of Walthamstow.
5. This council is poor at consulting residents. Biased questionnaires lead to results that are kept secret and findings that are ignored. For example, the Prince’s Foundation consultation found residents overwhelmingly against highrise development; yet that’s exactly what we’re seeing in central Walthamstow. Consultation is currently a waste of money. We’d like the IPPF to formally ensure that the council must not only consult the residents of Walthamstow about its plans for the town centre, but then actually listen to and act on their concerns.
Thursday, 27 March 2008
Please comment on the council's IPPF
Fight The Height launches!
Do read the news story about us in the Walthamstow Guardian. And please be sure to email all your friends and family about Fight The Height. Today it's 18 storeys for the Arcade site. Tomorrow it could be a tower block overshadowing your street...
[Many thanks to the Walthamstow Guardian for the use of the photo. It was taken by David Edwards and is copyright Newsquest]
Tuesday, 25 March 2008
IPPF story coming soon...
Shape council policy that will affect Walthamstow town centre for years to come with the Interim Planning Policy Framework (IPPF). Don't leave it to the politicians to decide what happens in Walthamstow. Make sure you get your objections to this document in by 4th April 2008 to Sam Neal.
Housing targets gone mad!
We'll post here soon with our full response to the IPPF. But, for starters, look at the housing targets on pages 22-25. The council reckons the High Street/Town Square area alone could get an extra 1,140 new homes. The Central area (including the Arcade site) is also "a prime opportunity to increase housing"; ominously it doesn't even get a number to go with that, so presumably we're talking zillions of flats. And yet they say the West End area (that's west of Palmerston Road, north of the High Street) needs "residential and community developments, in keeping with the existing residential nature and physical scale of the area. It is considered a total of approximately 70 homes could be generated."
We agree with that... but doesn't it also apply to other areas in central Walthamstow? The High Street and the side roads running off it are all typically two- and three-storey, often Victorian, buildings. If you don't want a high rise block landing in your back garden; if you think Walthamstow shouldn't be overdeveloped and overshadowed, then you know what to do... Read and comment on the IPPF by the 4th April.
Wednesday, 19 March 2008
What do we want then?
It's all too easy to take a pop at the plans for an Arcade tower block without putting anything constructive forward as an alternative. So here are some thoughts on what the residents of Walthamstow want in its place:
A development
First and foremost, we do think the Arcade site is ripe for an appropriate development that has the right physical impact on the local area and offers Walthamstow something different. We don't think the site should be turned into a park - we have a park next to the town square. And we don't think it should be left as rubble. But we'd rather it sat as rubble for a couple more years than an unsuitable development be built and sit there for decades!
Height that fits
Previous plans were a maximum height of 7 storeys on the corner of Hoe Street and the High Street. And the Prince's Foundation say 6 to 8 storeys should be the max elsewhere in central Walthamstow. If the council hadn't forbidden them from including the Arcade in their report, we believe they would have recommended a maximum of 6 to 8 storeys for the Arcade too.
A low-rise development with a landmark tower on the corner of no more than 8 storeys sounds reasonable.
Shops not chain stores
We need to think carefully about what Walthamstow could and should offer residents and visitors over the coming years. For example, with the huge Stratford City development just down the road - a shopping destination that will be bigger than Bluewater and Lakeside combined - is there really any point in trying to be yet another me-too High Street offering the same shops as everywhere else?
The council can't wait to open E17's doors to the Starbucks, Pizza Expresses and Navarros of the world. But we think their arrival would just be the kiss of death to our home-grown VK, Mon Dragone and The Windmill. Is that really what we want?
See the New Economics Foundation's report into Clone Town Britain for more on how me-too high streets have killed the vitality and identity of towns all over the country.
Something different
What does St Modwen have in mind for the shoppers of Walthamstow? Primark! No, really, they're in negotiations to be the key retailer in the new development. Now, we're not trying to be snobby. We've got nothing against cheap clothes. We wear cheap clothes! It's just that Walthamstow isn't short of cheap clothes. There are plenty of cheap clothes shops in The Mall and up and down the High Street. And the market has plenty of cheap clothes stalls. If this new development is supposed to be a landmark building that kickstarts regenerations, shouldn't it aspire to give us something new?
Something creative
Countless great ideas came out of our public meeting about the future of Walthamstow, including linking to the EMD cinema, some green/public space, performance/display space, community space, and small shops, bars and restaurants rather than chains. Read more about the ideas that came out of the meeting.
Real community involvement
We want the politicians and planners to start over. And this time to genuinely sit down with Walthamstow residents and let the community decide together what belongs on the site. Sadly the council recently did a big consultation exercise with the Prince's Foundation, but the council excluded the Arcade from the consultation - sad because it's the one site that urgently needed it!
How high is too high?
Here's what Walthamstow residents think is appropriate, and inappropriate, for the Arcade site.
The "12 to 18 storeys" proposed by St Modwen, the council's preferred developer, is definitely too high. The residential properties on nearby streets and the shops along Hoe Street and the High Street are typically 2 or 3 storeys. A ridiculously tall tower block wouldn't just physically overshadow Walthamstow, it would dominate the entire surrounding area. It would loom over Walthamstow's world-famous street market. And it would set a dangerous precedent for overdevelopment that could bring changes all over Walthamstow.
But we accept that some height helps makes a building a landmark. It's just that it doesn't need to be 18, or even 12, storeys to stand out in this location. Residents worked with the previous developers for the Arcade and they agreed on a maximum height of 7 storeys on the corner of Hoe Street and the High Street. And the Prince's Foundation say that 6 to 8 storeys is the most that is appropriate elsewhere in central Walthamstow. If the council hadn't forbidden them from including the Arcade in their report, we believe they would have recommended a maximum of 6 to 8 storeys for the Arcade too.
So we're not just saying no to 18 storeys, we're saying no to 12 storeys too. But start talking about a maximum of 6, 7 or 8 storeys and we're listening.
More than just the Arcade
Fight The Height isn't just about the Arcade. Countless other sites - in Walthamstow and beyond - are earmarked for development... and quite possibly overdevelopment. So if you don't fancy a tower block on your street please join the fight!
Why Fight The Height?
We realise that current planning guidelines, at least until the housing bubble bursts, are in favour of high residential densities. But we don't believe high density has to mean high rise. And that's what the experts say too - like Hank Dittmar from the Prince’s Foundation.
How can we fight it?
We're planning a number of actions to fight the Arcade tower block and fight high rise developments in Walthamstow generally. You don't have to be an activist to join them - some will simply involve sending a few emails. So please join our mailing list - click on the "email us!" link at the top-right of this page.
What the Prince's Foundation really thinks about tower blocks
The Prince's Foundation for the Built Environment was excluded from considering the Arcade when it did its public consultation into the future of Walthamstow town centre. Why? Because the council had already made up its mind what was going there!
But in a recent interview with Property Week Prince Charles and the foundation’s chief executive, Hank Dittmar, speak openly on many issues... and they're very clear on tower blocks:
"Dittmar says the foundation was interested to explore how Walthamstow, in an outer London borough, could meet mayor Ken Livingstone’s target for affordable housing and how greater residential density was compatible with Walthamstow’s Victorian terraced houses.
"Dittmar asks: ‘How can you increase density without sticking people into tower blocks? If you ask Londoners about tower blocks, you find that they are only liked by investors in property.’
"The foundation looked at other boroughs and concluded that the four-storey houses of St John’s Wood or Swiss Cottage and the mansion blocks of Kensington and Chelsea provided density without towers. By developing along these lines, 2,500 homes could be built within a quarter of a mile of Walthamstow station."
We agree 100%. High density developments don't have to mean high rise. And a tower block would not be compatible with Walthamstow’s Victorian terraces. Such a shame then that the council excluded the Arcade from the consultation then. We smell a rat!
Read the Prince's Foundation report
Read what the Foundation thinks about tower blocks
Friends of Queen's Market say we can win... and they should know!
We recently met with Friends of Queen's Market a residents group just down the road in Upton Park that is fighting to save their wonderful, affordable and ethnically diverse market from redevelopment by St Modwen, the same developer that's planning a tower block on the Arcade site. We have lots in common, not least because we fear that the Arcade plans will be really bad news for our own world-famous street market.
FOQM gave us tonnes of advice but most importantly they showed us how collectively a bunch of ordinary residents can successfully fight plans like this. With a load of good old-fashioned campaigning they have got St Modwen on the back foot. It still hasn't submitted a planning application and Asda-Walmart has pulled out of the scheme because of the bad publicity!
Just goes to show what you can achieve if you get organised and fight... Speaking of which, have you joined our email list yet? If not, please click on the "email us!" link at the top-right of this page because we'd like to keep you in touch with news of our own fight.
EMD update and myths debunked
We're not just fighting height... we're fighting for the future of the EMD cinema in the face of the Arcade plans. The cinema issue is still alive - over 300 protestors (pictured) recently demonstrated outside the EMD to oppose council plans for a rival multiplex with a huge £884,000 subsidy in the Arcade development.
Anyone with a brain can see it's madness to build a new multiplex when the beautiful Grade 2* listed EMD cinema is sitting empty just two doors down. Sadly councillors - even those who promised to fight for the EMD - aren't doing anything about it. That's because they have been misinformed. They've been told that the UCKG church, which still owns the EMD, has failed to find a buyer for it. And that the cinema would be too expensive to refurbish. Here's the facts to debunk those myths...
Let's debunk those myths!
Firstly, yes the church still owns the building and has put it on the market twice without selling it. But that doesn't mean they haven't had reasonable offers. In fact we're in touch with not one but two people who have offered seven-figure sums to buy the EMD! One was so serious that he even had a heads of terms agreement signed with a cinema operator to run the EMD. Of course, the UCKG isn't obliged to sell. And considering the church paid way over the odds for the building (£2.8m compared with the £1.5m that a survey said it was worth) there's a danger they might expect to receive a similar inflated sum for it. What's the answer? Simple, the council should use its Compulsory Purchase Order powers to buy the cinema from the church at market value.
Secondly, we dispute the idea that it would cost more to refurbish the EMD than to build a new cinema. The council did commission consultants to research the cost of refurbishment... but we get the feeling that they delivered the answers that they were asked for. We've spoken to a number of experts who say that refurbishment is perfectly viable. Oh and while we're debunking myths, the illegal rave held in the cinema shortly after the UCKG took posession didn't cause any major damage that would affect this.
So what do we think the council should do about it? Far from being anti development on the Arcade site, we believe the site should be expanded - by compulsory purchasing both the HSBC bank building and the cinema - and then developed in a way that suits the residents of Walthamstow as well as council coffers. Rather than piling it high and throwing in a cheap cinema, what we need is a good quality development, that isn't too tall to fit in to the surrounding area, linked to a great new cinema within a refurbished EMD.
What does all this have to do with the Arcade?
Even if you don't think the EMD should be annexed to the Arcade, there's no changing the fact that the two sites' fates are intertwined. The council has agreed with preferred developer St Modwen that if their building includes a 1,400-seat multiplex cinema it will reduce the eventual sale price of the site by £884,000 - this represents a massive public subsidy which the council’s own documentation admits would “effectively equate to an equivalent spend by the council”.
For more info on the EMD, visit www.mcguffin.info
Tuesday, 18 March 2008
Council can't agree over tower blocks
Great story this... at the recent State of the Borough debate the council leader and deputy had a massive disagreement over tower blocks. Council leader Clyde Loakes predictably insisted building tower blocks would give families a great new home. But deputy leader Keith Rayner disagreed, saying "One of my first experiences of Waltham Forest came in 1975 when I was in a tower block that didn't have a lift that worked... The stairs smelt like a public urinal and on the seventh floor, I saw a small four year-old girl cowering by the door. We should not make this same mistake again."
Read the Waltham Forest Guardian story
Video news coverage of council decision to sell Arcade site
Click on these links for a couple of great video news stories - including comments from residents - from when the council announced it was selling off the Arcade site with very few conditions attached and with complete disregard for the excellent ideas that came out of our public meeting.
BBC London story and video clips
Walthamstow Guardian video news
Arcade public meeting
Old news this but worth repeating - and a valuable first proper post to this site because it gives a good idea of what Walthamstow residents want...
On 15 November 2006, Waltham Forest Civic Society and Cleveland Park Residents’ Association held a big public meeting where around 120 residents met to discuss ideas for the future of the “Arcade” site and their thoughts about Waltham Forest council’s proposed sell-off of the site.
Below is a summary of what the local community said they wanted.
What the cabinet should do on Tuesday:
Not sell the site (VOTE: 90+ in favour of council keeping ownership of the site; 6 against)
Defer sale/lease until after widespread consultation with the community (VOTE: 100+ want sale deferred until proper consultation; 1 against)
Develop a proper brief for the sale, withhold freehold/leasehold until building complete, on time (VOTE: 100+ developer should be held to timetable in this way; 1 against)
Choose quality over cash (VOTE: 80+ in favour of quality development winning bid; 0 in favour of it just going to highest bidder)
Honour old commitments (VOTE: 100+ council should honour previous commitments on height/massing of Henry Boot scheme; 0 against)
Secure the EMD's future as a cinema, either by having developer link the two sites or by putting money from Arcade sale into EMD purchase (VOTE: 80+ want EMD/Granada as cinema and linked to Arcade; 1 against)
The most popular uses for the Arcade site:
A cinema, with the EMD/Granada cinema cited as a key location that should be brought back into use and joined to the Arcade site (VOTE: 80+ want EMD/Granada as cinema and linked to Arcade; 1 against)
Some green/public space (VOTE: 80+ in favour of Arcade site redevelopment having some green space; 16 site should only be green space; 11 site should have no green space)
Performance/display space for the arts, theatre etc. (VOTE: 80+ would pay for arts use in Walthamstow regularly; 2 would not)
Community meeting space and social space
Small shops, cafés, bars and restaurants not large chain stores
What next?
This document is being circulated to all councillors and everyone who attended the meeting.
The council cabinet meets on Tuesday 21 November, 7:30pm in the Town Hall. The agenda includes deciding whether to sell the Arcade site.
Waltham Forest Arts Council meets on Wednesday 22 November, 7:30pm in the Town Hall. Cabinet members will make a presentation regarding their decision.
Below is a summary of most of the ideas for the site (both long- and short-term) that came out of the meeting.
Opinions: should the Arcade be sold?
The land belongs to the community, and they should decide what to do with such a key site, not developers (VOTE: 90+ in favour of council keeping ownership of the site; 6 against)
Site should be leased by the council, with it retaining ownership of the freehold for the community
Sale would be "short term thinking" - land prices are rising and due to rise more with Olympics, plus profit is not everything, and once site is sold, it can't be un-sold
Short-term ideas for using the Arcade site while vacant (in descending order of popularity):
Open space (VOTE: 100+ site should temporarily be used as green space; 1 against)
Small workshops/stalls like Spitalfields market, for fashion, arts and crafts small businesses
Farmers’ market
Sports facilities (tennis courts, ice rink etc.)
Play area for children
Allotments
Car park
Nature reserve
What Walthamstow needs (in descending order of popularity):
A cinema, with the EMD/Granada cinema cited as a key location that should be brought back into use and joined to the Arcade site (VOTE: 80+ want EMD/Granada as cinema and linked to Arcade; 1 against)
Some green/public space (VOTE: 80+ in favour of Arcade site redevelopment having some green space; 16 site should only be green space; 11 site should have no green space)
Performance/display space for the arts, theatre etc. (VOTE: 80+ would pay for arts use in Walthamstow regularly; 2 would not)
Community meeting space and social space
Small shops not large chain stores
Cafés, bars and restaurants – with many again mentioning smaller units rather than chains
Eco-friendly buildings – making a statement for the borough, could include an eco-centre/centre for "alternative technology"
Youth centre and/or youth services provision, including play area for older children
Car parking
No tall buildings (VOTE: 100+ council should honour previous commitments on height/massing of Henry Boot scheme; 0 against)
Live music venue/music centre
Small workshops/stalls like Spitalfields market, for fashion, arts and crafts small businesses
A landmark building
An improved post office, library and market
Gym/health club
Sports facilities
Affordable homes
City farm
Other long-term ideas mentioned: the London Butterfly House is currently looking for a home; allotments; better cleaning and maintenance for the area; better consultation of minority ethnicity residents; a farmers' market; an Alfred Hitchock-themed arts/cinema centre; crèche provision; a bowling venue; putting green space on top of building; cutting traffic on Hoe Street to improve green space/site; using a frontage that looks like the building used to (before Arcade), with modern building behind
Other short-term ideas mentioned: putting graffiti art on hoardings by local youth, making a beach (like the South Bank), getting rid of the rats
Read More......
Welcome!
Hi, Welcome to the new blog from a new campaign group Fight The Height. We hope to bring residents of Walthamstow together to fight plans from Waltham Forest council and developer St Modwen to build a tower block of up to 18 storeys on the former Arcade site.
Fight The Height was founded by residents of Cleveland Park Avenue and Cleveland Park Crescent, who have been fighting for a suitable development the Arcade site for years. But we're not a bunch of NIMBYs and we realise that Walthamstow residents generally are opposed to the current plans. So we've decided to broaden this out into a much bigger campaign than just our residents' association.
We'll be posting to this blog regularly. And we'll be organising actions too. So please bookmark this page and please also click on the Email Us! link on the top right of this page to stay in touch. We'd love to put you on our mailing list. And if you have any questions, suggestions for the campaign, offers of help, ideas, etc we are all ears.
Thanks for listening...
