URBAN DEVELOPMENT REFORM ORGANISATION

​

ON THURSDAY NIGHT, the London Borough of Lewisham gave approval to a 16-skyscraper megaproject that will change the landscape of London forever. The project, called ‘New Bermondsey’ by controversial British Virgin Islands-registered first-time developers, Renewal Group, promises 3,500 homes across on area barely larger than a football field. Several of the proposed skyscrapers have the potential to exceed the height of the 41-storey Gherkin tower which dominates central London. A panel of six Lewisham councillors forming the borough’s Strategic Planning Committee unanimously approved the hybrid planning application. Councillors raised concerns about air quality, population density, the risk of the project becoming a ‘ghost town’ and infrastructure collapse—all of which were rebuffed by the borough’s planning officers. The two planning officers assigned to the project appeared to be reading out parts of Renewal’s own marketing documents as a basis for their almost total approval of the proposals.

 

The small but robust band of local residents and businesses opposing the project stood little chance. Gabriella Kardos, an artist who owns Rollins House, a former Spitfire factory set to be squashed between two skyscrapers, chose to adopt a careful position. ‘I am in favour of development. This area needs it. But why does this development have to be so big, so oppressive? And why must it lead to the demolition of so much of the area’s heritage?’ Ms Kardos was referring to the last remaining Victorian buildings in the area which were approved for demolition at this meeting.

 

Terence Williams, an experienced designer who runs the area’s longest-running creative business, found himself without hope. Mr Williams is freehold owner of a plot of land which found itself in the centre of a proposed public square under the plans. No planning concerns raised by UDRO on his behalf were taken into account by the Strategic Planning Committee. In particular, Mr Williams alleged 17 years of discriminatory action by Lewisham Council, whom he accused of unfairly favouring Renewal’s ‘megalomaniacal’ development proposals at the expense of his own—despite his ownership of the land he intended to sensitively deveop. Mr Williams pointed to evidence of corruption and improper relationships between Lewisham Council and Renewal, including the fact that Lewisham mayor David Sullivan founded Renewal while he was still in office. Mr Williams also pointed to an unlawful refusal by Lewisham to even consider his planning application. When his application was eventually considered, it was swiftly dismissed due to uncertainty caused by Renewal’s plans—despite the financial superiority of a rival property developer being an invalid planning consideration. UDRO also understands that there there may be other evidence of corrupt and improper dealings between Lewisham and Renewal.

 

Neither Ms Kardos nor Mr Williams have been consulted at all in the last 12 years about the development which threatens their home and workplace respectively. This is a clear breach of planning law requirements of consultation, and breaches a previous 2015 order by Lewisham Council that Renewal consult these two stakeholders before re-submitting plans.

 

UDRO Chief Executive Sami Kardos-Nyheim said:

 

‘Tonight was very difficult. On the one hand, we future-proofed the protection given to a historic former Spitfire factory—the building owned by Ms Kardos. However, nothing we tried could protect Mr Williams’ land, located in the middle of what the developers claim will be a public square. While we encourage public space in urban development, the problem with this proposal is that it actually leaves open the option for that public square to be filled with a brand-new building should the developers wish to build it at a later point—thereby undermining the entire basis for demolishing Mr Williams’ property. Mr Williams forms the core of this area’s rich creative community. His role in this community, along with 17 years of his unlawful treatment by Lewisham, 15 years of intimidation by Renewal, and simply non-existent consultation of Mr Williams by the developers, makes his defeat tonight a complete miscarriage of justice that must be remedied immediately.’

 

UDRO official statement on this matter:

 

Ensuring the so-called ‘New Bermondsey’ project respects the law, good practice and principles of fairness and sustainability is now this organisation’s top priority. No one else is stepping in to scrutinise what should be the country’s most talked-about development project: someone needs to step up. The fact that such a consequential project was approved in the space of a couple of hours one late evening in a municipal town hall, with barely five minutes of consideration, demonstrates fundamental problems with our planning process. Where is the justice for Mr Williams? He has been treated in a discriminatory way that does not only breach fundamental principles of planning law, but human rights and administrative law more widely. What is it to own property if it can be snatched from is owner by a more financially-potent and politically-connected rival? Renewal can be assured of one thing: UDRO will not stop until Mr Williams gets justice.

​