Appendix 4 – Consultation Response Are Th E Re a N Y Other K E Y C H a Lle Ng E S Or Opp Ortu Nitie S Not a Lre a D Y Ide Ntif
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Appendix 4 – Consultation Response il with il with 17) advocates advocates 17) - ? to reduce the to to change the to the strategy the strategy? amend: Any comments? Any comments? draft the town centre.the apromote Central)d Streatham to a) a) already identified Central Primary Shopping Area boundary? Primary Shopping Area Central Primary Shopping Area boundaries? Primary Shopping Area Streatham Investment and Strategy? Streatham Growth Investment balanced town centre economy to enable this.balanced economy town centre to Streatham Hill Primary Shopping Area boundary? Shopping Area Streatham Primary Hill other activities such as food and drink, leisure andas and activitiessuchleisure other food drink, ) the boundaries of the two Primary Shopping AreasShopping two Primary boundaries of the ) the (Streathaman Hill Any further comments on the proposal on the comments Any further proposal the draft and set in actions deliver the out objectives bjective and action area number 1 of the draft Strategydraft area of the 1 actionbjective and number Any further comments on the proposal on the comments Any further proposal ii Streatham (page 14) is to change perceptions and better promote perceptions(page and 14) to change better is Are there any other key challenges or opportunities not or key challenges opportunities Are there other any Do you have any further comments on the Town Centre/ comments on the youDo any have further O Do you have any further comments / you suggestions on the Do any have further How do you feel that you or others can help contribute to contribute to youcanHow do you or others feel help that ) the Town Centre boundary to make it fit for purpose; and to make for Town it) the Centre fit boundary Streatham by seeking to attract and retain more visitors to to attractStreatham and seeking retain by diversifying Streatham’s economy, by balancing reta economy,diversifying by Streatham’s i workspace. This action area includes a recommendation areaincludes a to workspace. action This Objective and action area number 2 (pages 15area (pages 2 actionObjective and number ID Comments a) Not aware of any Not really sure what this means in I don't know what I can Would like to understand the : practice. With hood, batch and co do, but I'm willing to proposals for Streatham Hill station. 01 etc, streatham hill has the potential get involved. It is our closest station but to become an eating destination - unfortunately we don't use it for would be good for it to be food commuting. It would be great for the focused line to Tulse Hill to be opened up and run as a thameslink station. Officer N/A High streets across the country are Delivering continued TfL has produced a Business Case Response facing challenges such as growth and positive that was submitted to DfT which increased online shopping and change in Streatham considered the ‘Metroisation’ of behaviour change leading to shifts will depend on South London to drive housing in shopping patterns. Across the collaboration between growth. The Business Case set out country traditional shops (described different stakeholders. that Streatham Hill Station would as ‘A1’ use classes for in planning become part of the London terms) are in decline. The A1 use The Streatham Overground Network and would class designation includes shops, Investment and connect to Clapham Junction and hairdressers, undertakers, post Growth Strategy Crystal Palace. The DfT have not offices, pet shops, sandwich bars, highlights the progressed this. Streatham Hill etc. It excludes cafes, restaurants, importance and need Station is challenged by capacity drinking establishments, hot food for a locally issues with one principal access via take away, offices, etc. representative delivery footbridge causing severe ingress The Draft Revised Lambeth Local group, and therefore and egress issues at peak times. In Plan (2018) proposes that Primary proposes a Streatham addition, the station has a short Shopping Areas should have a Steering Group should platform. Given the strategic minimum of 50% A1 retail. The be set up. It also importance of this station and the 2015 Lambeth Local Plan set the clearly states that local development potential in and around minimum threshold at 60%. So, people should be the station significant potential exists we’re proposing a reduction of 10%. consulted and to support growth through re- This reflects the relative under- engaged as part of the development of this site – this is performance of A1 uses in development and reflected in Objective 5 of the Streatham, as elsewhere. Currently implementation of this Strategy. Streatham Hill Primary Shopping Investment and Area has 49% A1 retail. This means Growth Strategy. This that any planning application for a is to ensure that non A1 use is likely to be refused activity reflects that planning permission even if the use their aspirations and is desirable, e.g. creative spaces, delivers inclusive and workspaces, gyms, etc. sustainable growth. Making the PSA smaller therefore allows planners greater flexibility to approve uses other than A1 retail, addressing the issue of Streatham town centre’s diversity and resilience – objective 2 in the Streatham Investment and Growth Strategy. Existing businesses will not be affected by the proposed boundary change. The proposed amendment will only be relevant if or when a planning application is made. This will also help avoid planning applications on vacant units being refused on policy grounds, even if the use is desirable. Businesses outside the PSA would remain within the town centre boundary. A pilot for a food and drink market, similar to the offerings in Brixton and Tooting has started on Babington Plaza. This is run by the BID on behalf of LBL. Proposed None P16-17 will be amended to insert None None changes the text The proposed boundary changes will have no immediate impact on existing businesses. The impact of this will only be seen should a change of use planning application be submitted. Existing businesses will not be affected. ID Comments The ongoing As the individual who 1. I am concerned While broadly in agreement that the 1 I am not clear why the council is : perception by too came up with the that given the ongoing proposals reflect current not proposing Article 4 direction 02 many new Streatham original "Streatham - pressures from site commercial reality, (i) I would note powers to protect remaining town residents that they from Drivethrough to owners for residential the need to ensure the boundary of centre office uses e.g. at Elgar cannot find Destination" change of use, the the site under Gaumont Square is House above Kwik-Fit and at Crown goods/services/entertai Placecheck initiative case has not been accurately defined, and (ii) there House and adjacent buildings near nment locally and need some fifteen years made for removing needs to be a clear statement on Streatham Station. This has not to look elsewhere for ago, I am very protection for current how applications for take-aways will been explained clearly. these. disappointed that this employment be dealt with. There has been a 2. I strongly support proposals to has been abandoned generating uses at (i) planning history of requests for bring the Streatham Hill Theatre following the delivery the ASC studios site take-away food use particularly on of the Streatham Hub (strip between the parade along Leigham Court back into active use as a creative in its very curtailed Downton Avenue and Rd. Some (not all) such premises hub. form as delivered by Wyatt Park Rd) and have been a focus for anti-social 3. I am concerned that Streatham the council's (ii) the east side of behaviour and there is concern Hill station is once again (some 30 partnership with Gleneldon Mews. If about further proliferation of poorly years after a Unitary Development Tesco. The utter the council believe managed late night uses. Plan suggested it as a supermarket mediocrity of the that employment use site) being identified as a potential design of that project can be protected by redevelopment site that is thought to does not make it a other means this be deliverable before others. Any destination. Any future needs to be redevelopment needs to contend initiatives need to articulated much more with (i) the widespread local desire aspire to a much clearly to reassure to keep the listed 1856 West End of higher standard of existing business London & Crystal Palace Railway architecture and occupiers of these building facing the High Rd (ii) the townscape. sites. clearly stated view of most rail travellers that they want the 2. The removal of the platforms to retain daylight rather Leigham Court Rd than being covered, (iii) the views shoppers car park will that the current undeveloped site be a matter of allows, and (iv) the potential need to concern to many rebuild the 1970s(?) road bridge for businesses as an the gyratory between Drewstead Rd indication that the and Sternhold Avenue which has council may be structural issues that are currently seeking to remove mitigated by a cathodic protection support for short term system. car parking in the town centre. While some of the concerns of businesses are overstated, it is clear that there is still some demand for car parking. 3. I am unconvinced that the car park site behind the Horse and Groom pub should be de-designated as this could be a site where commercial development could be considered before the site is given up to wholly residential uses. 4. I do not believe that the area facing Leigham Avenue underneath The High should be de- designated in addtion to the sub-station area to the East. This site is obviously a continuation of a town centre shopping parade even though the current mix (nursery/GP) is not one requiring town centre protection.