Friday, 25 May 2018

St Mary's Walthamstow Village

Planning Application 180314

The Welcome Centre will have an extension added and converted to 11 flats. The two houses will be demolished and a 3 storey Community Centre with 3 flats above it will be created.

Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites

Dear resident neighbours,

Thank you very much for coming to the meeting at Lea Bridge Station this evening. We are a group of residents who have been in communication with the Council since last autumn when the "Lea Bridge Station Sites" ideas were first put out to the public. We have formed a group named "Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites" and the idea is that we wish to make improvements to the Council's plan for this area. We are just an informal grouping of people who are very concerned at the idea of a Lea Bridge Town Centre being built with the crossroads of Orient Way/ Lea Bridge Road and Argall Way being its nucleus. This email is being sent to seven people on a 'BCC' basis (email address anonymous to everyone except yourself and me).

At the moment we just have an email list of names of our group (currently about 50 people). It would be great if you would also like to join that list. Please just reply to this email and confirm.

We are looking at ways to have a better interactive communication (so that everyone in the group can see emails coming from members and comment on them if they wish). One of our members is looking at a web group page for us to do that.

We would also like to have face-to-face meetings, and one idea is to use the Kukoolala Cafe on Marsh Lane in Leyton Jubilee Park. They have an excellent meeting room there.

The points in green below are the latest update of our "Peoples Plan", as developed after our meeting with the Council last week:

  • the wider housing issues including:
    • the impact of housing targets on our small part of the borough.
    • the 'genuine affordability' and social housing ratios given the physical difficulties of the terrain and ecology issues, and the need to ensure that any developments enhance, and do not detract from, a sense of community.
    • the unsuitability of even higher towers for our neighbourhood (even higher than 97 Lea Bridge Road towers).
    • the unsuitability of site 3 (backing onto the railway/fronting onto Orient Way) as a living space and its blocking of the view westwards towards Lea Valley.
    • the need to redesign the proposed town houses backing onto Elm Park Road and access to them.
  • the need to retain publicly accessible open green space and the retention of 150 semi-mature trees of the Pocket Park designed less than 25 years ago by the Council as environmental compensation for the impact on our neighbourhood of the Orient Way Relief Road.
  • the re-examination of the Council's plans of 1989 for Orient Way to intersect with Lea Bridge Road by means of an underpass, thus solving the major problems of road safety for pedestrians and cyclists and relieving the new Lea Bridge Town Centre of heavy through-traffic. Coupled with re-directing traffic from the western direction of Lea Bridge Road we suspect the logic of this and the necessary funding might need to be considered by regional levels.
  • prior to going out to developers, the placing by the Council of its Design Brief for Lea Bridge Station Sites into a Design Panel of the Arts Council and CABE, the process and results of which would be shared with Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites.

Tonight's meeting at the station with Cllr Simon Miller, and officers Mark Adams and Ana Lopez will give rise to additional points. Importantly we need to ask for early sight of the Council's development brief before it goes out to developers and for it to have very clear specifications of what community benefits (via 'Section 106' funds) that developers will be expected to address.

If all this sounds very technical or complicated then I'm with you! However there are a few of our residents who have some professional background knowledge in architecture, environmental matters, community building, law and accountancy, and there are a few of us who have been round the block a couple of times and know something of how Councils work. Most of all we are local people committed to maintaining and developing our community.

Welcome to the Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites. Please take an early moment to reply to this email and confirm you wish to join the list.

I am holding the communication lines at the moment but we do need extra help.

Many thanks for your interest,

Claire Weiss
Resident E10 7AR

Dear Cllr Simon Miller

On behalf of Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites I would like to thank you, Mark Adams and Ana Lopez for agreeing to the on-site walkabout meeting that was held on Wednesday and for spending so much time with us. Many of the residents who attended had not heard about the Council's proposals for Lea Bridge Station Sites until they received our leaflet through their door letterbox. Some had heard, but not fully understood what the potential implications for our neighbourhood might be.

The timing of the meeting at 6-0pm was appreciated by those who were unable to meet previous weekday afternoon sessions held in the Town Hall, but there were still some who would have preferred a timing after 7-30pm, allowing them to get back from work or to settle children. Perhaps this could please be taken into account next time.

We hope that by spending some time in the environment of Lea Bridge station, with the towers and complex of 97 Lea Bridge Road looming above you and the roar of lorries on Argall Way behind you, that you were able to understand that the prospect of intensifying the residential saturation and massively concretising our small neighbourhood is just beyond most people's reasonable expectations of their role in helping the Council to provide housing for those in most need. 
  • For one thing, that is because the scale of the proposed development is over and above what the Council needs to do to to meet the London housing targets, according to a source we have found. 
  • For another thing, the features of the proposed development do not make for a balance in the communities, which is a part of the life of those who live at the western end of Lea Bridge Ward value greatly. 
  • Given that the intersection of Orient Way/ Lea Bridge Road and Argall Way and green space compensation were created by major public investment of twenty years ago - for the very reason of relieving the rest of Leyton from the heavy industrial through-traffic between the industrial estate and the national road network - we believe strongly that this aspect of the proposed development requires significant further design and investment to accommodate a Lea Bridge Town Centre.

I am rehearsing here some of the major points already put to you and discussed on Wednesday, but residents feel that we cannot emphasise them enough. It's beyond reasonable to expect that such a small area of Leyton, already densely populated, should absorb a massive and ongoing influx of ugly and uncharacteristic buildings where previously there was low-rise industrial and commercial land and publicly-provided green open space. That is why we have formed the Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites in order to communicate to you alternatives and improvements that will avoid our neighbourhood being altered beyond recognition. 

Residents have already had two years of their lives disrupted unreasonably by the noise, dirt, pollution and hazards caused by the construction of 97 Lea Bridge Road estate and this will take another year or more. If the Station Sites proposals go ahead in full then residents, including a whole primary school, will be subject to a further four or five years of such intrusion. Please ask yourself how it can be reasonable that, for instance, a child born here in 2016 will have their first ten years of life spent in close proximity to he pollution of major building sites, the outcomes of which will be significant reduction of quality of life through the loss of open sky space and being overlooked by many windows.

We will be sending you more detail of the improvements we recommend for the Station Sites proposals. It would be helpful, and we believe reasonable and transparent, if you would send us early sight of the Council's draft Development Brief please, prior to release to developers.

Thank you for the acknowledgement below of residents' other concerns voiced to you on Wednesday and your wilingness to convey them to other Council departments. We look forward to receiving the catalogue of issues we have raised about the Station Sites proposals and we note with approval that you intend to reach an agreed record of them with us, especially as you say this engagement with us has shaped your thinking.

Thanks to all three of you for the time spent on Wednesday and for your understanding that robust and forthright views were expressed. These proposed developments would have huge impact on a small neighbourhood.

Kind regards,

Claire Weiss

Tuesday, 22 May 2018

Mayor Funds improvements to Walthamstow Station

Walthamstow Central

Months after getting planning permission for the horrendous Town Centre development there is no communication from Capital & Regional so the Mayor's grand plan for tarting up the station may come to nothing as he is relying on a £1.5m contribution from C&R for the scheme. This will do nothing to deal with the current overcrowding of the Victoria Line as the number of trains is at capacity. The TfL staff at the Blackhorse Point consultation indicated there were some efficiency measure they can implement, but at the end of the day if the trains are running nose to tail there is no more capacity that can be created. With over 12,000 more people moving in to the area the Victoria Line can only get worse and yet TfL want to increase the housing by building on the Blackhorse Road station car park. This is all real madness!

TfL has stopped the completion of the road scheme at the top of Selborne Road but I have still not discovered what the real reason is for a year's delay. All this disruption is just wrecking Walthamstow.

Lea Bridge Station Sites

Subject: Lea Bridge Station Sites
Dear Claire

Thank you for your email outlining your thoughts on proposals for the Lea Bridge Station Sites, on behalf of the Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites. I would also like to thank you and other members of the community for the constructive approach for engaging with the Council on development proposals for these sites and for taking time to meet us back in March.

Apologies for the delay in responding to your email. This was a result of being on annual leave for a number of weeks and also needing to coordinate a response from different team member to some of the points you raised.

We have outlined below the Council’s response to each of the issues brought up in your email dated 30th March 2018 –we hope this provides clarity over some of the issues, and we look forward to discussing this further with you on Friday.

There are clearly lessons to be taken from the approach to engagement as well as the wider planning process around the 97 Lea Bridge Road site.  As said at the meeting, the Council is committed to regular community engagement and to fully and clearly respond to comments, ideas and proposals that are made; our meetings with your group and this email are part of that.

The Lea Bridge Station Sites

The Council is in the early stages of developing proposals for these sites. The purpose of this early engagement is to understand local residents’ and businesses’ views about the proposals and use this to inform the development brief, where possible. A full report of the consultation exercise, which consolidates feedback from all the events and meetings, has been drafted and will be circulated soon.

The next stage will be to start the procurement process for a development partner, which takes around 9 months. We’re planning to issue the tender documents for the sites, including a revised Development Brief, this summer and we would expect Cabinet to select a partner next spring. Cabinet is also due to be considering a report in June on the Station Change process to create a new station entrance process for Site 1.

Once a Development Partner is appointed design proposals will be further developed and the local community will be consulted again at this point. At present, we would anticipate submitting an application for planning during the latter part of 2019.

Turning to some of the specific issues and proposals you’ve raised (set out in italics):

Publically accessible open space/ Pocket Park:

The proposals are to develop the three parcels of land off the junction of Lea Bridge Road, Argall Way, and Orient Way, and this includes the ‘Pocket Park’ on the south eastern section of this junction. The development is to provide much needed housing and commercial and cultural uses in the borough, on land that is within the control and ownership of the Council.

The development also aims to improve placemaking at this important location, next to the recently re-opened Lea Bridge Station. This will also coincide with improvements to the junction as part of the Mini Holland/Enjoy Waltham Forest works.

The Council understands that there are members of the community that do not support development on the Site 2 for a number of reasons, including impact on air quality, biodiversity and flood risk. Since the initial public engagement exercise, the Council have commissioned a number of surveys, including an Arboricultural Survey, Stage 1 Ecological Assessment, and Flood Risk Assessment. This is to enable greater understanding of the risks, seek recommendations for any mitigations and to inform the development brief. We will be happy to share the contents of these with you in due course.

Your specific suggestion to extend the Pocket Park into the left-filter lane to maintain green space has been considered.  The Council has not included this as a specific suggestion in the development brief as we are asking developers to submit their own solutions as part of their application.  However, the Council has included a very clear requirement for the developer to include publically accessible green space (this will of course need to take account of security and access issues) in the development, particularly on Site 2 where the current Pocket Park is located.

As previously mentioned, the development brief also includes a number of key requirements on environmental sustainability; such as low carbon design and construction, rainwater attenuation, green infrastructure (such as green walls, green roofs, street level planting and landscaping, and food growing spaces). 

Divert Orient Way as an underpass to reduce congestion and noise:

The redesign of the Lea Bridge Road/Orient Way/Argall Avenue junction will provide improved pedestrian and cycle facilities, whilst simplifying the junction layout for vehicular traffic within the funding available. The construction of an underpass would have required a considerable land take and would not be a cost effective solution.  The depth of an underpass and proximity to water sources would also have required pumping.

Re-routing away from Lea Bridge Road (the through-traffic travelling between Hackney/north London and the A12) in order to reduce the usage of the eastbound right-hand turn into Orient Way:

We would agree that strategic directional signage plays an important part in the overall management of the Highway Network. As part of the Council’s works on Lea Bridge Road, strategic signage will be reviewed and updated to ensure it is appropriate. Signage from Hackney will also be reviewed and any necessary changes and recommendations will be reported to Hackney Council and Transport for London. As you know, the Mini Holland/Enjoy Waltham Forest works are designed to make the junction better for cyclists and pedestrians and our intention is the redevelopment of these three sites will add further to this.

Height of towers

To meet challenging housing targets, in our case more than 1800 new homes per year for the next 20 years, local authorities need to consider certain sites for higher density development. Due to the proximity of these sites to a well-connected transport node, it is expected that these sites will need to deliver high density housing.

However, the Council understands that there is opposition to taller buildings in this area and a request for an explanation of why the tower on Site 1 has to be taller than the tallest tower at 97 Lea Bridge Road. Therefore the Council are in the process of assessing the viability of the scheme with reduced tower heights of 17 storeys or fewer and assessing the impact on housing provision. The Council will be stressing the requirement for high quality and exemplar design.

Tall buildings can contribute to a sense of place, and a strong emphasis on high quality design is included in the development brief.  Furthermore, the development brief requires the developer to consider microclimate impacts from any development proposals, including overshadowing, wind tunnel affects and impacts on air pollution.

It’s also important to remember that the Mayor of London has significant planning powers in relation developments of this size and height, and will play a significant role in whatever scheme is finally approved.

Waterworks Nature Reserve Visitor Centre

Thank you for your comments on the Waterworks Visitors Centre. As you know, it is currently on the Council’s register of Assets of Community Value and, although this is currently out of scope for these development sites, there is perhaps a potential opportunity for some meanwhile uses at the Centre which we will explore with the Lea Valley Regional Park Authority.

We will also be considering your suggestions for youth services/ community provision on the three Lea Bridge Station Sites.  

Social housing provision

Of Waltham Forest’s annual target of more than 1800 new homes per year, around 1200 of those need to be affordable and the Council are totally committed to providing actually affordable housing on these sites. The latest viability assessment indicates that a proportion of social rented homes on these sites would be viable for the scheme, and therefore we plan to include this as a requirement for any potential development partner. The viability will be reviewed at different stages of the scheme’s development, and off site provision may also assist in some circumstances in increasing the amount of affordable homes.

The Council is also committed to enabling a wider choice of genuinely affordable housing, as reflected in our 2017 Direction of Travel Document and our support for the Mayor’s Housing Strategy Policy 5.3A supporting community led housing schemes. The Council considers that part of Site 2 could be considered for such a community led housing scheme and as such there is a requirement that a component of any affordable housing offer from prospective partners, whether rented or intermediate tenure homes, are offered through a community led scheme, for example, a community land trust.

Live/work spaces

The development brief will include a requirement for potential development partners to consider what non-residential uses can be brought on to the site and for them to engage with potential providers and occupiers as part of the design process. Any potential development partner will be expected to consider the needs of the local economy, the Council’s Economic Development Strategy and Waltham Forest’s role as the first London Borough of Culture, and how these sites relate to this.

Encroachment on MOL

Again, this is out of scope for the development of these sites; however, this issue can be raised as part of the Local Plan Review process. The Council will be responding in due course to the Lea Valley Regional Park Authority’s proposal for the Waterworks Visitors Centre site and part of the current Ice centre car park to be designated for housing. You can find out more information on the Council’s website:

Further dates for meeting:

We would be happy to meet again with you and other members of the People’s Plan for Lea Bridge to discuss these issues in person. As you know we now have a meeting confirmed for this Friday 18 May and a follow-up site visit on Wednesday 23 May. We look forward to seeing you then.

Kind regards,

Mark Adams and Ana Lopez
Strategic Regeneration Team
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the addressee(s). It may contain privileged and confidential information and, if you are not the intended recipient, you must not read, copy or distribute it, nor take any action in reliance upon it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender as soon as possible and delete the e-mail from your computer. E-mail may be corrupted or altered during or after transmission. We accept no responsibility for changes made to this e-mail after it was sent. Whilst we take reasonable steps to identify software viruses, any attachments to this email may contain viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. No liability is accepted for such viruses, and we therefore recommend that you carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any attachments. Information contained in this e-mail may be subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

Dear Cllr Simon Miller

We at Peoples Plan for Lea Bridge Station Sites (PPLBSS) are unimpressed, to say the least, at an unwelcome change in the tone and approach to the very serious matters, that affect our daily lives in Lea Bridge, now displayed in Ana Lopez' response below. This is in the face of our genuine attempts to work with the Council and offer constructive suggestions. Let me remind you of the 2017/18 timeline so far:

October 2017: Lea Bridge Ward Community Forum - the then Head of Planning admitted to there being hard lessons learned over the planning issues connected with 97 Lea Bridge Road
January 2018: Lea Bridge Ward Community Forum - this was reiterated by residents in the light of the December resident engagement exercise re Lea Bridge Station Sites

23rd March: you met with PPLBSS at the Town Hall and at first, to our amazement, you were unaware of the above CWF matters and had to be briefed by the officers. It was clear to us that while there may have been glib words spoken at our Community Ward Forums there had been no proper evaluation of the identified shortcomings in the borough planning regime. In the meantime senior officers had come and gone.

30th March: I wrote to you (see email in thread below) asking for your considered observations on all of this.

1st April: you emailed me as follows (the emboldening is mine):
"Dear Claire,
Thank  you for this and thank you also for the constructive approach for engaging with the Council on our ambitions for Lea Bridge and the three station sites. There is a lot in your email, so my personal thanks to you and your neighbours for the time it has taken to draw this together.
There are clearly lessons to be taken from the approach to engagement as well as the wider planning process around the 97 Lea Bridge Roadsite. As a Council we need to consider how  we provide the necessary comfort that lessons have been learned.
More generally, the point suggestions you raise in relation to the three station sites will all be considered and Mark and the team will look to find a time to discuss the ideas in more detail. We may also include a number of  counter proposals which we consider to deliver the equivalent outcomes in those discussions.
With best wishes
Since then the words and deeds from the officers have simply not been in keeping with your assurances. We have not received any notes of the 23rd March meeting and it took until 19th April for the officers to follow up and say that they were discussing the matters and would be finding a date for the next meeting with PPLBSS. THREE WEEKS later on 8th May I sent a friendly reminder enquiry to the officers.

On 9th May, while it was somewhat encouraging to receive from the officers the options of six possible dates, the suggestion of only one hour was disappointing. After consulting with residents I replied on 11th May to say we felt that one hour was not enough and we requested two meetings, one at the Town Hall and one on site. 

We now hear that tomorrow's date is withdrawn and we are offered a changed time for Friday, together with a refusal to devote more than one hour. This does not accord with your earlier words that the team would find time to discuss our ideas "in more detail". We are still waiting to experience "the necessary comfort that lessons have been learned". Furthermore the response from Highways promised by the officer below has not arrived.

A meeting on site, without a prior roundtable session looking at your team's responses, would be pointless. We therefore suggest that the meeting on Friday 2-30pm is at the Town Hall, but with the proviso that there will be an on site session to follow it - we suggest Wednesday 23rd May at 5-0pm, meeting at Lea Bridge station.

I look forward to the early settlement of these dates in order that all the important matters raised may be discussed cordially.

As a last point, and as a matter of transparency, we would also like to know what meetings about developments in Lea Bridge area have been held in 2017/ 2018 or are being scheduled by you or officers with Mark Greaves and/or representatives of Capital & Country Holdings Ltd.

Thank you for your kind attention,


Claire Weiss

CRATE St James Street

CRATE St.James Street

Using metal containers CRATE intend to create workspaces where the old toilets were in the car park by St.James Street station.

My comments about their consultation:

We were pleased to visit your exhibition about the St James Street CRATE development and would like to make the following points:

1.      The site should have been developed years ago so the proposed Crate workspaces will enhance the area enormously.
2.      There is a large demand for small workspaces in the area and as the new flats come on-stream in the vicinity the demand will only grow. They will also ensure there are work spaces amongst the thousands of new flats being built which will help to create a more balanced community.
3.      The design of the Crates would be enhanced if they were painted in a mixture of exciting colours. This would not only allow the development to stand out but make it look like a modern thriving area.
4.      A public toilet should also be considered as the current one was closed some years ago and has never been replaced. Unlike the top of the High Street there are no public toilets available nearby.

We wish you the best of luck with this development.


New Train Timetables

Dear Adrian,

Of course this being the Barking - Gospel Oak line, nothing is ever straight forward! The other Overground lines' summer timetables have been on the TfL website for a while now, but not the Barking - Gospel Oak timetable! TfL emailed us this afternoon (17/05/2018) saying it would be published tomorrow! Their email was in response to the press release we issued this morning

TfL have now told us that the five peak period relief trains (PIXC-busters) will continue to run but will no longer be shown in the timetable! I don't think that we have heard the last about this and I think that things are going to get worse before they get better!

In spite of the assurances from TfL, BGORUG is investigating a rumour that the five PIXC-buster trains will cease to run after this Friday (25 May). If true, this is completely unacceptable.

Glenn Wallis
Barking - Gospel Oak Rail User Group