Only 6 days left to object to the plans for Convoys Wharf

So, how do you help Mr Pepys to save Deptford's Royal Dockyard? 

The Mayor of London is 'keen' to hear your views about Convoys Wharf! 
Email graham.clements@london.gov.uk before 20 March 2014. Quote the application reference DC/13/83358 and include your name and address.

OR SIGN THE PETITION!

If you have previously written an objection to Lewisham Council, there is no need to write again to the Mayor of London. You can, however, make comments on the very slight changes to the application that have been agreed by the developer in talks with the GLA. These changes are so minor you might want to write to say that they're welcome but it's just not enough!

For those who wish to object in general, here's some notes taken from Lewisham Council's report on the application, plus a couple of policy points from the Mayor of London's London Plan, which you might want to use (in no particular order):

SCALE & MASSING 

• The Mayor of London's London Plan states:

Policy 7.7:

Tall and large buildings should
•  generally be limited to sites in the Central Activity Zone, opportunity areas, areas of intensification or town centres that have good access to public transport
•  only be considered in areas whose character would not be affected adversely by the scale, mass or bulk of a tall or large building
•  incorporate publicly accessible areas on the upper floors, where appropriate (not offered in this application)

Tall buildings should not
•  affect their surroundings adversely in terms of microclimate, wind turbulence, overshadowing, noise, reflected glare, aviation, navigation and telecommunication interference
•  should not impact on local or strategic views adversely

General comments
• the buildings, and especially the towers, are too tall
• the density and number of units proposed is too high
• this site has terrible public transport links (in reference to London Plan's guidelines on tall buildings above)
• the tall buildings are out of scale with the surrounding area
• this proposal does not incorporate publicly accessible areas on the upper floors
• locals will lose satellite TV throughout construction and after (to be mitigated by being offered FreeSat)

• English Heritage note: “the cumulative impact of the three tall buildings within the proposal is at odds with London Plan Policy 7.12D.A which states that panoramas should be managed so that development fits within the prevailing pattern of building and spaces and should avoid a canyon affect on strategically important landmarks...the view that the impact of the three towers within the Blackheath Point and Greenwich Panoramic Views is dramatic and contributes towards a potential canyon effect.”

• Lewisham Council required a reduction in scale and massing on some of the proposed buildings, especially in relation to the historic buildings and spaces which they consider "overbearing in a number of locations and views"; Lewisham's Design Panel called the towers 'monolithic' 

NB: Minor revisions to the application have now been made that allow for greater flexibility at the design stage, plus a reduction in the heights of one of the blocks, but those towers will still be there.

The image below shows the Seager Tower on Deptford Broadway with the proposed 48-storey Convoys waterfront tower superimposed beside it. No, the Convoys building isn't nearer, they are side by side, that is the size it will be compared with the 26-storey Seager Tower – almost twice as tall, and twice as wide. (Click to enlarge)

Here's the architect's illustration which shows the new Paynes & Borthwick tower in the foreground of the proposed development. The foregrounding makes the waterfront tower look only twice as high, when in fact when pictured side by side it is three times as high (click to enlarge).

 

Here's the proposed waterfront tower side by side with Aragon Tower on Pepys Estate.

HISTORY & HERITAGE
 
• Deptford Royal Dockyard is an historic site worthy of international recognition that goes back 500 years: founded by Henry VIII in 1513, it was the most significant royal dockyard of the Tudor period, and central to the development of the British Royal Navy for the next 350 years

• It is strongly associated with several of Britain's most famous people: Henry V, Henry VIII, Elizabeth 1, Charles II, Capt James Cook, Sir Francis Drake, Sir Walter Raleigh, Nelson, Samuel Pepys, John Evelyn, William Bligh, John Rennie (and other famous engineers)...(see end of post for more detail on ships and people) 

• The World Monuments Fund has placed the site on its 2014 Watch List because it's endangered by insensitive redevelopment. See their statement on Deptford Is... here.

• The Mayor of London's London Plan states:

Policy 7.9:  Heritage-led Regeneration

Strategic
A  Regeneration schemes should identify and make use of heritage assets and reinforce the qualities that make them significant so they can help stimulate environmental, economic and community regeneration. This includes buildings, landscape features, views, Blue Ribbon Network and public realm.

Planning decisions
B  The significance of heritage assets should be assessed when development is proposed and schemes designed so that the heritage significance is recognised both in their own right and as catalysts for regeneration. Wherever possible heritage assets (including buildings at risk) should be repaired, restored and put to a suitable and viable use that is consistent with their conservation and the establishment and maintenance of sustainable communities and economic vitality.

• Many of the significant above and below ground remains are being ignored by the developer: inter-related heritage assets include a scheduled ancient monument, six listed buildings and structures, and a further structure under consideration for listing, in addition to the dockyard archaeology uncovered during recent investigations – but all except the Grade II listed Olympia Shed will be built over.

General comments:
• The plans do not go far enough to reflect the heritage assets
• The relationship between the river and the Olympia Shed is unacceptably restrained
• The scale of buildings around the Olympia Shed and its setting is wrong
• Failure to reference many of the dockyard features
• No feasible or sustainable use of the Olympia Shed is provided
• The treatment of the Double Dry Dock is ‘unimaginative and disappointing’.
• The archaeology on site should result in a reduction of the density

• The historic significance of the dockyard is classified as high under National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidelines; NPPF paragraph 131 states “In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality…”

• English Heritage "remain concerned that the overall scale of the development is such that the opportunity to create a distinctive sense of place which responds to the outstanding historic legacy of the site has not been realised"

• English Heritage believe "the overall scale of the scheme, including the tall buildings, will cause harm to the significance of designated and undesignated heritage assets"

• English Heritage remains concerned that "the proximity and massing of the feature buildings and 14 storey riverside block create a dominating scale around the listed building [Olympia Shed]...The narrow glimpsed view fails to make the best opportunity of this prominent and centrally located heritage asset...the current proposal would appear to represent the most restricted view.”

• The Council for British Archaeology says “Currently, the proposed development of the site is considered to be at the cost of a proper historic appreciation, and is therefore unacceptable.”

• Lewisham Council says “there are parts of the site where historic connections and layouts have been lost or ignored...and more detailed aspects of the proposed layout fail to respect the underlying heritage assets or the location and setting of key buildings..."

• Paragraph 7.4 of the London Plan states that local people “should have access to a…built environment that reinforces a strong, unique local history and character.”

• Local heritage project Build The Lenox CIC should be accommodated in the Olympia building along with a Deptford Dockyard Museum; this is a better use of the listed building than shops and boutiques

• The Great Basin should be reinstated so that Build The Lenox can have a home port and be a venue for visiting ships; buildings infringing on the footprint of the basin should be altered, but will benefit from a larger waterfront

• Local heritage project Sayes Court Garden CIC should be fully accommodated on the site and their aims to create a John Evelyn Centre of Urban Horticulture fully supported, with more adequate surrounding space given to a new building so that a green area is created that joins the archaeological remains of John Evelyn's Sayes Court Manor House with the present Sayes Court Garden

See also the report from Deptford Is...here

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

General comments in local objections:
• The element of Social Housing proposed on the site is NIL
• The affordable housing allocation is only 14%
• The affordable housing includes shared ownership and would not be affordable to local people on incomes of £20K pa or less
• Housing units are likely to be marketed at a starting price of £300,000 for a studio and the wider Lewisham community is not likely to see any benefit whatsoever from this.
• Restrictions on units sold abroad and on the number sold as buy-to-let investments are required in order to stop the local rental market from seeing mass rent increases and more local people being priced out of the Borough
• A percentage of affordable housing should be by the River Thames to avoid ‘class distinction’.
• More family housing is needed to make the development sustainable

NB: This latter point is partly addressed in the minor revisions made since the application has been with the GLA to slightly increase provision for affordable rented units and provision of family-sized affordable rented units. Lewisham Council were challenging the developer's formula for 'viability' – more realistic 'growth' assumptions [property values] "would allow for more affordable housing...to be increased from the applicant's present proposals."

TRANSPORT

The application includes parking for at least 1800 cars. See Deptford Is... reports here and here.

General points raised by local objections:
• The use of misleading figures to ‘manipulate’ traffic statistics by including side streets with lower usage than Evelyn Street, plus misleading statistics for traffic on New King Street
• Existing bus journey times will be considerably lengthened
• Potential for bus and DLR overcrowding
• Rail capacity has been overestimated and the increased use of Deptford Station in recent years has not been accounted for
• Cumulative impacts on the road have not been assessed
• Construction impacts have not been assessed properly
• The potential for nuisance and disturbance during the construction period, including for homes ‘downwind’
• Parking for construction workers will infringe on local parking
• HGV traffic and the impacts on surrounding residents and safety for children on local roads
• Condition of local roads already poor
• Removal of parking spaces on New King Street unacceptable
• A CPZ will be unavoidable
• Access would be on to Evelyn Street, which when combined would greatly increase traffic and cause future gridlock
• All heavy traffic will have to be diverted along a route of Grove Street and Oxestalls Road and past the local Deptford Park School, causing hazardous air and noise pollution
• More effort should be put into using the river for material access rather than by road
• Parking provision for over 1800 cars on the site, without counting service vehicles, will add to vehicular congestion on the A206 which is already a very heavily trafficked road

• In Lewisham Council's report, Transport for London concluded that further assessments need to be made in order to comply with the London Plan.

• Lewisham Council said, "Given the scale of development and predicted vehicular movement to/from the site there will be a significant increase in traffic, both vehicular and non vehicular, on the local highway network, and modelling of key junctions by the applicant has highlighted potentially significant and unresolved capacity issues. These would be exacerbated if the London Mayor’s Cycle Superhighway scheme on Evelyn Street is implemented as this will reduce capacity..."

“….TfL acknowledge that when they come to look at the detail it may throw up impacts which have not been identified so far and that it cannot accept on the network. They also note that the extent of that risk is yet to be determined… [Lewisham] Officers have serious concerns with this approach and leaving matters for resolution after the outline application has been approved. ..[The GLA and] TfL must ensure that the impacts are fully assessed and understood before the case is determined.”

NB: We have not had time to read up on whether these very obvious transport issues have yet been reviewed, but there is certainly no modification in the 'minor revisions' that relates to the number of car parking spaces.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT

• [the] impact on existing infrastructure…will place an unacceptable burden on existing services such as utilities providers, water supplies and sewerage

• Thames Water states in its consultation response: “With the information provided, Thames Water has been unable to determine the waste water infrastructure needs of this application. The existing water supply infrastructure has insufficient capacity to meet the additional demands for the proposed development."

• Thames Water had not been furnished with the finer details of “the points of connection to the public sewerage system as well as the anticipated flow (including flow calculation method) into any proposed connection point”. So they had not been able to determine the impact of the proposed development on the existing water and sewer system

• Local objectors and Lewisham Officers “remain concerned that daylight/sunlight impacts have not been properly assessed” 

MORE HERITAGE... 

• Over 300 ships were built or refitted at Deptford; warships include HMS Neptune and HMS Colossus, which fought under Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar

• Refitted ships include HMS Endeavour, HMS Resolution and HMS Discovery used by Capt James Cook, as were HMS Discovery and HMS Chatham captained by George Vancouver, and William Bligh's HMS Bounty and HMS Providence

• Privateer Sir Francis Drake was knighted here by Elizabeth 1 in 1581 after his circumnavigation of the globe in the Golden Hind, which was moored for exhibition in Deptford Creek until the 1660s

• Explorer Sir Walter Raleigh had the Ark Raleigh built at Deptford; the ship was purchased by Elizabeth I and renamed Ark Royal; Raleigh laid his cloak before Elizabeth at Deptford

• Diarist Samuel Pepys, Secretary to the Admiralty and Master of Trinity House, initiated and oversaw Charles II's 1677 shipbulding programme here (including the Lenox)

• John Evelyn, diarist, author, horticulturist, inventor and founding member of the Royal Society,  lived here in Sayes Court Manor; his ideas formed the basis of the National Trust, and much of Deptford Dockyard was given by Evelyn to the Admiralty at a peppercorn rent as long as a ship lay on the stocks: with no ship in the dock, the yard actually belongs to Evelyn's descendents

• Tsar Peter the Great learned about the latest technologies in shipbuilding here in 1698 – because Deptford Dockyard was the "cradle of the Navy" and the 'Cape Canaveral' of its time

• Deptford was the first of the royal naval dockyards to have a wet dock or basin: where John Evelyn carried out the first diving bell experiments, where Cook hoisted the pennant on board the Endeavour in 1768, where Bentham built the dry dock in 1802 with Edward Holl, where in 1814 John Rennie rebuilt the basin entrance with the latest caisson gate technology, where Capt Sir William Denison built the slipways to the basin with slipway covers built by George Baker &Sons, where George Biddel Airey tested the effect of a ship's magnetism on navigation instruments...

Johnson's London – a millionaire's playground

Crossfields residents receive constant reminders from the government about how big a discount they can get if they buy their flat. The frequent flyer from the Department of Communities and Local Government comes through the door with regularity, whether you're a tenant or already a leaseholder. Bigger discounts than ever before are now available for Right To Buyers as the Tories push through their evil plan to get rid of 'social housing' altogether. What possible incentive can there be to build more social housing when tenants can buy their properties after only five years?

Meanwhile, the Bedroom Tax is forcing some unemployed social housing tenants into private housing since there are no one-bedroom flats available for those single occupants currently living in two-bedroom homes whose housing benefit has been cut. If they can find a landlord who will take DHS claimants, the private rent is likely to be at least twice as much (£250pw) as their council rent (£110pw), a bill which the council tax-payer and local authority will foot and from which private landlords will profit. Continuing low rates on buy-to-let mortgages has landlords increasing their property portfolios and enjoying record yields on higher rents, and profits from rising house prices.

Add to this the total lack of affordable housing being built, whilst Boris Johnson boasts about meeting housing targets. The Financial Times reports that Bozo promised 55,000 new homes between 2011 and 2015 but only 20,684 are being built. The London Assembly reports that he's recently opted to 'clear London's backlog of housing need' over 20 years – instead of the 10 years he initially proposed.

In the news today, we hear that nine London boroughs have joined forces in a legal challenge against the Mayor's plan to relax 'affordable rents' rules, to be heard in the High Court today and tomorrow. Presently, boroughs have been able to cap social housing rents within new developments (what little there is) to around 40% of 'market rent'. Bozo wants to raise that cap to 80%. That is the percentage that has defined 'affordable housing' for a while now, and for most Londoners, this is still unaffordable. Lewisham set its cap at 50%. Lewisham is not one of the boroughs taking Boris to court. When Lewisham sells off its housing stock next year to a reconfigured Lewisham Homes Housing Association, new tenants may well find themselves paying 80% of market rent.

Speaking from a developer's conference in Cannes yesterday, Bozo announced that he'll be selling up the last couple of development sites owned by City Hall, with only a third available for affordable rented housing. And he wants to launch a 'state-backed housing bank' that would offer cheap loans and guarantees to private developers to get homes built more quickly and reduce the risks for his builder mates.

The news today from the same Cannes property conference is that Bozo's team want to allow house bulding to go ahead without planning permission in certain parts of London. Deputy mayor for housing, Richard Blakeway, said the mayor was "particularly interested" in exploring the potential to "build markets" in certain zones by offering tax incentives to both "investors and consumers". The Mayor could use his compulsory purchase powers to acquire land for private residential use, at the expense of any borough's strategies to achieve a balance of uses (such as employment zones and community uses). These changes to the London Plan are said to be designed "to encourage boroughs to support private rented housing".

The London Assembly has also recently questioned the Mayor about his stripping of London boroughs' right to make planning decisions by using his power to 'call-in' large planning applications. He has already 'called-in' five schemes in the past year. In many cases, Bozo has been 'calling-in' applications before the local authority in question has even had a chance to examine them. (See also the Deptford Dame's latest post).

Darren Johnson, Green Party Assembly member, said, "The recent acceleration in the number and speed with which the Mayor is taking over planning decisions from boroughs...puts developers and investors before local democracy". The Assembly's motion (agreed by 16 votes to 5 against) listed 11 applications – including Convoys Wharf in Deptford – and said that on many decisions, the Mayor has ignored legitimate borough concerns about issues such as inappropriate density and very low targets for affordable housing.

This isn't new. In 2009 in Tower Hamlets, when there were 23,000 people on the housing waiting list, the council refused planning consent for the 74-storey Hertsmere Tower in Canary Wharf because it didn't include enough provision for affordable housing. But a few months later, Boris Johnson overturned the council's decision and Hertsmere is set to accommodate over 700 luxury apartments, some marketed in excess of £10m each.

Here's Boris at the Cannes property conference in 2012, announcing his new 'architecture, design and urbanism' panel for architects, which was to hand out £30m worth of work over the following three years. There's Terry Farrell, second from left, one of those appointed to the panel and the architect employed by Convoys Wharf developer Hutchison Whampoa.

As any fool can see, there has been an enormous amount of new housing being built in London, especially locally. Like many of these new developments, Convoys Wharf has a minimal amount of affordable housing (down from 35% to 14%, and social housing from 4% to zilch). As the Deptford Dame pointed out back in November, another site owned by Hutchison Whampoa – Lots Road in Chelsea – is already being marketed via their Hong Kong estate agency. (See also the BBC film "London's Property Gamble").

Darren Johnson says, "London's property market is only serving the super-rich, leaving crumbs for ordinary Londoners, who have to rent overpriced homes on insecure tenancies or move out of the city altogether". A new industry has even built up around helping developers avoid building affordable housing and paying Section 106 to local authorities (the bribe – or money paid by a developer that is  supposed to benefit the communities in which the development is sited). (Click to enlarge).

The Evening Standard reported yesterday that the number of skyscrapers in the capital is set to double. Meanwhile, Chinese investment in the UK is forecast to triple this year. Boris is busy signing up business deals with Chinese investment consortiums wanting to turn London into a replica of Hong Kong – with a focus on construction projects of all kinds. Meanwhile, Hutchison Whampoa has been busy selling off its luxury properties in Hong Kong since the Chinese state are bringing in 'cooling measures' – described as 'a tough stance on reining in an overheated market' (in other words a 'bubble') – with new rules on the sale of new homes, and stricter rent controls – the opposite of here, in fact. 

Boris Johnson's London is a playground for millionaires. Of course Bozo doesn't want to take over Cameron's job. While Cameron has only a year left to decimate the lives of millions of ordinary people across the country with austerity measures whilst rewarding bankers, Bozo has over two more years to promote and implement their hideous Tory agenda across the capital.

Convoys Wharf update (and the Deptford Sea Shanty)

Local shanty group, the Deptford Shanty Crew, have recorded a special Deptford song that tells the story of how the historic Deptford Royal Dockyard is about to be buried under an uncaring developer's plan to build 3500 luxury flats. Click on the YouTube logo to read the lyrics in full.

The decision on the developer's application is now "in the hands of the London Mayor" and Boris has promised to decide very soon (originally by the end of February, now postponed to the end of March). But it's not looking good for Deptford's heritage or Deptford in general.

Crossfields residents were recently sent a letter from the Greater London Authority (GLA) Planning department, requesting comments on very minor changes to the developer's masterplan. Please don't ignore this letter, but use it as an excuse to object to the scheme in general! A Crossfields resident who has already written an objection has received a reply from the GLA Planners which states:

Thank you for your representations to the Mayor of London with respect to proposed development at the Convoys Wharf site in Deptford. The Mayor has asked me to respond on his behalf. The issues you have raised will be taken into account, and your comments (along with all other representations made on the case), will be made available to the Mayor when he comes to consider the case.

I can confirm that the Mayor is mindful of the historic importance of this site, and is committed to securing a well-designed scheme that would deliver benefits for Deptford, as well as for the rest of London. To this end the Mayor has instructed his GLA officers to work closely with the Council when negotiating on the case - to ensure that local priorities are appropriately considered and addressed as part of the determination of this application.

Planning negotiations associated with this case are currently ongoing, however, the Mayor is currently undertaking public consultation until 20 March 2014 on a number of minor revisions to the scheme. Further information is available on the GLA website here: www.london.gov.uk/priorities/planning/public-hearings/convoys-wharf.

In due course the Mayor will hold a public Representation Hearing, before considering the full details of the case, and deciding whether or not to grant permission. Further information, including the date for the hearing, will be made publically available on the GLA website here: www.london.gov.uk/priorities/planning/public-hearings/convoys-wharf. 

But in reality, there is very little of the "historic importance of the site" that is being saved, and the GLA appear to not be listening fully to either Lewisham Council's recommendations or those of English Heritage and the local heritage projects, Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden. The projects are still waiting to meet with the developer and are still marginalised in the plans. The GLA still does not recognise the full potential of the archaeological findings on the site and seem quite happy to let the developer build over and bury forever the significant and recoverable 'below ground' remains.

The 'Representation Hearing' referred to in the GLA letter above will allow only 20 minutes of public representation! So it is important for locals to write to the GLA (or sign the petition) as soon as possible. Email mayor@london.gov.uk (or graham.clements@london.gov.uk) and see guidelines from the Deptford Is... campaign here. This needs to be done by 20th March.

The Lenox Project wants to build their ship in the Olympia Shed but the developer still wants the Grade 1 Listed building (the only surviving 'above ground' building) to house boutique shops rather than anything meaningful relating to the building's history (such as shipbuilding!). The project also requires the re-instatement of the old Basin in front of the Olympia building, but this historic body of water is currently re-designed as a small shallow pool incapable of holding boats or ships. The Sayes Court Garden project requires more of the land due to be occupied by giant blocks of flats in order to restore the footprint of John Evelyn's original gardens.

Dame Joan Ruddock, as patron of both local projects, recently wrote to the Deputy Mayor Sir Edward Lister. She is not allowed to converse with Boris himself, in case he becomes prejudiced (even though one of his advisors is Sir Terry Farrell, the developer's architect). Joan said:

Although both projects have gained the support of the developer, neither is being given the opportunity to properly reflect the archaeology and history appropriate to their design. This failure makes both potentially unviable. 

The Lenox has a unique potential to create a tangible link to Deptford's history; to directly connect the Olympia Building to its heritage, and – by recreating a basin in front of the building – to re-establish its historic links to the river. 

Hutchison Whampoa...have proposed limited-term accommodation for the ship [7 years maximum] on the protected wharf [north of the site and reserved for other uses such as cargo handling]. Critical factors to enable the project to thrive are proximity to the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich, easy access for visitors, a future legacy for the site that perpetuates its heritage, and a permanent home for the ship and the Dockyard Museum...

The Sayes Court Garden has been developed to expose the John Evelyn heritage, in a collaborative venture with the National Trust...

...We were delighted with Hutchison Whampoa's proposal to expose the archaelogy of the [John Evelyn's] Manor House but their current proposal to 'capture' it within a large block bears no relationship to its historic setting and orientation. This design would divorce the archaeology from the open space which gives it meaning...

Hutchison Whampoa announced a record increase in their profits at the end of March. Due to their increased 'investment' in Europe, their net profits had risen 30%, yet they still insist Convoys Wharf cannot be 'viable' (profit making) if they provide more affordable housing, or make space for more of Deptford's heritage.

So please get writing!

Chorus:
And it's [stamp] sell her off to a big business man
there goes Deptford's dockyard
there goes our history and our land
way off in the hands of the London mayor

Convoys Wharf update – Lewisham Council and Dame Ruddock respond

The fight to save Deptford's immense heritage on the site of Deptford Royal Dockyard from the owners of Convoys Wharf (Hong Kong developers Hutchison Whampoa, owned by the world's 8th richest billionaire, Li Ka Shing) is gathering momentum, as local campaigners work to influence Boris Johnson and the GLA, who, at the developer's request, took over control of the application from Lewisham Council in October 2013. Boris has promised the developer that he will make a decision by the end of February.

Lewisham Council is now a Statutory Consultant on the application, and last week their Strategic Planning Committee voted to reject it in its present form and back their planning officers in their continued negotiations with the GLA and developer. They want important amendments to be made before the application is approved. The Council thoroughly support the local heritage projects Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden, who have yet to secure the right conditions on the site or a full commitment from the developer. See Deptford Is... for a brief digest of Lewisham's proposals and amendments.

Yesterday, Deptford's MP Dame Joan Ruddock spoke on record to Ed Vaizey (Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries) in an "adjournment debate" in the House of Commons. She presented the history of the site and asked Mr Vaizey to bring his influence to bear on the matter of its sensitive redevelopment in relation to the heritage assets and the local heritage projects. Vaizey, who had taken advice from English Heritage to prepare for the debate, thanked Ms Ruddock for bringing the site to his attention and offered his support.
See the half hour debate here or here.
Read the transcript published here.
Read Deptford Is... for a summary.

Also see our analysis of this application and its owner here.

Convoys Wharf update – sign the petition!

Last week the decision on planning permission for Convoys Wharf was taken out of Lewisham's control when the Mayor of London stepped in at the developer's request.

Now that locals can no longer make their objections to the application, local campaigners Deptford Is have set up a petition to give a voice to the community so that we can let Boris know that we don't want this. 

PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION AND SHARE THE LINK WITH FRIENDS.

See Deptford Is... and local papers. Also read this week's Private Eye (click on the image below).

BACKGROUND INFO

Heritage versus housing

Deptford's MP Joan Ruddock, in response to the Boris decision to "call in" the application, has described the site as "a heritage jewel in London's crown". The site is also of international significance, which is why the World Heritage Fund saw fit to include it on their Watch List for 2014-2016.

Boris's glib soundbite to news reporters was that "London needs more housing". Don't be fooled by the notion that London's housing crisis can be solved by the building of 3000 more luxury flats.

Originally, the percentage of "affordable housing" in new developments was set at 50% by Ken Livingstone. But most developers now claim that their sites are not "viable" (= massive profits) unless they deliver affordable housing at below 15%. In the Convoys application it is 14% – an extra 500 units at 80% market rent (still not affordable to the people who keep this city running), bringing the total to an impossibly dense 3,500 units.

It is also feared that, like other major new housing developments, the units will be sold off-plan to foreign investors before going on the market in the UK. Overseas investors currently earn enough from the rise in property values they needn't even bother renting their units out to those who can afford the high rents.   

The developers and Boris

It's feared Boris will look favourably on this application, despite the GLA's own reservations to it in their report to Lewisham Planning (in particular from Transport For London).

The developer is Chinese conglomerate Hutchison Whampoa, one of many holding companies owned by the 8th richest man in the world, Li Ka Shing. He also owns major utilities in water and power (ie, UK Power Assets who run much of the National Grid and London's power), fracking (via Husky, causing community uproar in Canada) and telecoms (3G and others – and they're currently being 'investigated' by the EU on their recent purchases of telecoms in Ireland and Italy), as well as major British container ports (see June 2013 post).

Boris Johnson has recently been courting Chinese trade. David Cameron is due to visit China next month "on a trade mission" and Li Ka Shing has been spotted in and out of No.10.  Boris is also mates with Rupert Murdoch. (Thanks, Transpontine). Having sold the site to Hutchison Whampoa, News International has a profit share in the sale of the 3000 luxury flats planned for the site.

And this week the PM launched the Regeneration Investment Organisation Advisory Board (RIO), "an inward investment body" with the aim of raising billions of pounds from overseas trading partners to "fund urban regeneration projects". Sky News reports, "Its remit has been borne out of a frustration expressed by many major overseas investors about the bureaucracy and complexity of finalising major deals in the UK". Like Hutchison Whampoa, for instance, who accused Lewisham Planning of making "unrealistic demands" and "unreasonable and unwarranted requests" that would damage their profit margins.

Lungs for the City
 
The application proposes to build over almost every inch of the historic site, which was founded in 1513 by Henry VIII as the home of shipbuilding for the Royal Navy (the Royal Dockyard that, along with Woolwich dockyard, preceded the grandeur at Greenwich).

To get an idea of the density, have a look round the development at New Capital Quay. That's 1000 flats with a ground space a third of the Convoys site. Imagine that x3. To get an idea of heights, look at the tallest tower at the new Renaissance development in Loampit Vale – that's 24 storeys, half the height of the 48 storey tower proposed at Convoys (the other two being 38).

Convoys also contains the remains of Sayes Court Garden, where John Evelyn's innovative horticultural theories were developed and  which led to the founding of the National Trust. It was his theory that trees are the lungs of a city.

Considering the latest reports by the No To Silvertown Tunnel campaign, in which it was revealed that pollution levels at the end of Deptford Church Street on Creek Road have been breaching European limits for nitrogen dioxide for more than eight years, his advice is worth remembering more than ever. (Thanks, Deptford Dame).

Especially since Hutchison's plans include parking provision for 2000 cars (all housed in the giant blocks of housing units) that will cause ever greater pollution and congestion on Evelyn Street. The only public transport will be a diversion of the 199 bus and a Thames clipper, putting greater strain on existing services. And don't forget the ten years of construction traffic.

In an ideal world, the entire Convoys site should be planted with trees just to make up for the new IKEA being planned to go on the site the award-winning Sainsbury's eco-building at Greenwich peninsula, which will draw in traffic from miles around to unprecedented levels. (Thanks, 853 blog).

But Hutchisons were arguing over the necessity of widening New King Street to accommodate the bus making a two-way journey.

A people's history

The history of this site is amazing – it features loads of important historical figures (Drake, Raleigh etc), was the launch pad for some fantastic scientific discoveries (Cook, among others), and was built and designed by many celebrated pioneers in engineering and shipbuilding (Rennie, Penn etc), as well as being a place where ordinary people who worked in and around the dockyard have fantastic stories to tell (female shipwrights, black and Asian sailors), that were never recorded by Samuel Pepys who ran the yard for Charles II.

So much of Deptford's history has been buried and ignored (perhaps because of the shame of slavery), it is bursting to come through and speak to us. The site is monumentally multi-cultural – with links all over the world – as much as Deptford is now.

The archaeology

Many of the site's surviving below-ground structures (docks) will be buried under dense 12 storey blocks and 38-48 storey towers. The one remaining above ground structure, the Olympia Shed, will be overshadowed and hidden from view by the buildings closely surrounding it. You'll only be able to glimpse a small part of it from the river. Hutchisons were rejecting English Heritage's demands to open the view up.

The plans have been opposed by English Heritage, the Council for British Archaeology, the Naval Dockyard Society and other heritage bodies – not forgetting, of course, the local people who will have to live with ten years or more of building works and construction traffic.

The public space provision in the present application is laughable – a thin strip on the riverside and two strips on the sites of an historic dock and slipway, which are only not being built on because they're "protected". They could actually be listed by English Heritage, but not until the full archaeology report made by a commercial arm of the Museum of London which (had to be) commissioned by the developer has been published. It hasn't been published yet, despite the archaeology work being long completed – although not as thoroughly as it could have been (there is, according to Deptford Is, areas of the site yet to be uncovered).

English Heritage have recently listed the remaining walls on the site (including the river walls), which must make it the longest length of listed Thames wall in London. Meanwhile, with no full report, the archaeology of the site is not "fully understood". It would therefore be premature for the Mayor of London to make a decision until this report is published.

Local campaigners have emphasised the heritage of the site and how it can open up a tourism strategy for Lewisham, bringing in visitors from Royal Maritime Greenwich. Unfortunately, the owner of the site is so fixated on the simple formula of selling luxury waterfront residential units that it cannot envision the advantages of owning a site of world heritage – and the capital value that would add to a smaller number of units.  

Deptford Is are also advocating that an area on the site designated by the Greater London Authority (GLA) as a "protected wharf" (to be used for river business, very often simply cargo) should be developed as a Maritime Enterprise Zone incorporating boat building and repairs and other associated marine business that is presently lacking in this part of the Thames and which would bring great employment opportunities.

But this is strongly opposed by the developer, who will more than likely lobby the GLA, with Cameron, Osbourne and Johnson's help, to change the designation so that it can build even more luxury flats.

If you care about Deptford, you must sign the petition! This application must be opposed so that a better proposal can come forward – one that combines housing with a full appreciation of the site's heritage.

Update 18 Nov:  also see the Deptford Dame's take on the Mayor of London's new role in the process.

 

World Monuments Fund puts Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden on their "Watch List"

Local campaigners Deptford Is... were excited to be part of this BBC London News report which went out on Friday and Saturday last weekend. It was available on iPlayer afterwards for only a very short period, so lots of people took to recording the iPlayer output (which accounts for the buffering in this recording)...

The publicity centred around the announcement last week that the World Monuments Fund had included Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden on their list of places to watch, which also includes Venice and Syria among other places around the world which they consider are under threat.

In this case, the threat comes from Chinese developers Hutchison Whampoa, who want to build 3,500 flats on what is now known as Convoys Wharf. 3,000 of those flats will be luxury apartments sold off-plan to overseas investors. Their latest application is presently with Lewisham Council, to be decided early next year.

Dr Jonathan Foyle (CEO of WMF-Britain) said: "2013 is Deptford’s 500th anniversary, and today the site awaits residential redevelopment. Yet Deptford’s most imminent threat comes from the failure of existing proposals to fully acknowledge and respect the heritage assets that the site has to offer. Incorporating the extensive archaeology and combining this with unique public spaces has the potential to strengthen Deptford’s local identity whilst securing this lost piece of the Thames jigsaw. It would also improve awareness of the little-known existence and overlooked history of the dockyard and gardens on a national stage."

The campaigners were particularly pleased at how the news team reported the story, but we noticed a a couple of inaccuracies that could have misled the viewer. The BBC team said there would be 3,000 "homes", rather than "3,000 luxury homes plus 500 at 80% of market rent". This gave the impression that the problem with London's housing shortage would be helped if building went ahead, which is certainly not the case.

And as we have pointed out before on this blog, Hutchison's present masterplan is misrepresented by this image, which was used in the broadcast:

In fact, the site will not be as "green" as this. Nearly all these areas will be private gardens above carparks, so most of the site will be private, as follows:

Still, at least they got most other details right, unlike some local newspapers, and the Deptford Is... team must be congratulated for their work in raising the profile of the incredible history of the site which led to the World Monuments Fund's listing.

We wonder how the Chinese would feel if Barratts went over to China and built a massive private luxury development on the Great Wall of China?

Deptford on telly!

We just got a ''newsflash'' from Deptfordis about the Convoys development's appearance on BBC television news.  Apparently it's only available to see before 6:59pm this evening (Sat, 19 10 13) so if you can, have a look here.  I'm sure it will find its way onto Youtube but for now....

Deptford Anchor spotted, among other things...

This is where the Deptford Anchor is, and where it will probably stay.

It's in the Oympia Shed at Convoys Wharf, courtesy of Hutchison Whampoa. Covered in cobwebs and pigeon shit. Why?

The council officer in charge of regeneration of the high street told us over a month ago that it will probably end up being 'part of a new development' – so here it is, in the hands of the least likely people to care about the history and heritage of Deptford, but who have probably got the best security.

The anchor's safe here, that's for certain. This place is so secure that visitors to London Open House at Convoys Wharf on Saturday had to SIGN IN with an exact time, and stay within the bollards and not stray off-piste or else they'd get a severe telling off, and then SIGN OUT with an exact time when they left.

That was apparently due to Health & Safety, yet not every visitor was given the flyer that carried the disclaimer that Convoys Wharf Properties and Hutchison Whampoa had absolutely nothing to do with you breaking your leg crossing the massive blue electrical cable that crossed the bridge to the pier where you could buy coffee and tea (and not much else) off a sole trader for £2 a hit and imagine what it would all be like when built.

Probably not very nice, since the imaginary tall buildings behind you might triple the wind factor on the pier. Oddly, we tripped ungainly on the electrical cable cover, which was exactly where the outgoing and incoming Directors of Hutchison Whampoa Properties European Division (Messrs Benyon and Hayden) spent most of their time on site....both armed with cameras, taking pictures of each other to pass the time on their trip hazard watch.

The signing in and out for visitors was probably very useful for Hutchison & Whampoa to claim they had completed yet another public consultation and be able to give figures, whilst manipulating all the actual consultation they did.

For instance, they asked visitors what we would like to happen in the Olympia Shed as though they had no ideas of their own. They did have some ideas, but as we understand it, English Heritage have firmly suggested the fabric of the building cannot be interfered with too much, although this wasn't fully explained. This is almost the only bit of the site they are not allowed to build on (so far), but now they've been told they can't turn it into the glass palace they envisaged last time round.

They intend to make a profit out of it somehow, so God knows why they were asking Open House visitors, who may be less likely to offer up the sort of ideas that could come from others less interested in architecture, such as a duplication of the Millennium Dome (cinemas, music venues, restaurants). Open House visitors might have chosen more heritage-related ideas, but we shall never know, since even when you put your name down just to be updated, you never are.

Here's a grumpy Henry VIII looking to get arrested...

 

Bill came over from London Open House at the Master Shipwright's House to have a gander and frighten the developers. (For a report on Open House at the Master Shipwright's go to Deptford Is...). Bill was part of the original campaign against excessive redevelopment at Convoys that began as soon as the previous owner Rupert Murdoch began putting in plans, that culminated in 2005/6 with Murdoch selling the site to Hutchisons. Deptford Is... are continuing Bill's and others' work through the Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden projects.

Here's a NEW misleading model of Terry Farrell's masterplan for the redevelopment of the Royal Dockyard of Henry VIII that was on show at Convoys Wharf. Note the weird disappearing 48 storey building which for some reason is totally see-thru and almost invisible. Do they imagine we will not note its presence when it is built? 

The other two 38-storey buildings are about seven times the height of Crossfields. This is not about providing more much needed housing for London. These are luxury homes. Are there not plenty of them already?

Deptford's FUTURE gets a preview at London Open House weekend at TWO venues

At the Waiting Room coffee house this afternoon some contractors acting as representatives of Convoys Wharf S.A.R.L. (a company registered offshore to avoid tax and legislation) AKA Hutchison Whampoa, popped by to put up a poster about their London Open House day.

After they'd gone, the cafe's lovely proprietors added their own hand-written flash "Check out the development that will affect your area".

It's very kind of Hard Hat to tell us about this, after all, they didn't have to. Surely they don't really want us locals to come to their open day anyway cos otherwise they'd have done a bit more than put up  a poster up in a coffee house.Why not leaflet our doors, surely they could afford that, what with their owner, Li Ka Shing, being the 8th richest billionaire in the world.

Take heed. This may be the last chance you, Deptford citizens, will get to physically view the models that accompany the proposals for Convoys Wharf which currently reside with Lewisham Planning and are due to be decided by the end of this year. (There is still time, then, to add your comments, despite the premature deadline given earlier this year). Please do! Tell them how deceptive their models are! Tell them what you feel!

There will be an Open Day at Convoys Wharf this Saturday 21st September, 11am-5pm. You can go onto the actual site (something you're never allowed to do at any other time) and view the plans concocted by the architects Farrells (the same Terry Farrell who created the MI6 building at Vauxhall, aha). The plans have not changed much since the last exhibition which we reported on in March (see bottom of this post for more Convoys related posts), and you can still view the plans in the Deptford Lounge or online.

But this is an opportunity to get on the site and IMAGINE the 12-18 storey buildings, topped by the 48-storey tower that is accompanied by two 38-storey towers. For reference, the nearest tall building is the new one at Paynes & Borthwick Wharf right next door. That's 18 storeys. If that's not tall enough for you, there's Aragon Tower further down at Pepys Estate, that's 28 storeys (whilst Eddystone & Daubeney are 24). So! twice the height! IMAGINE!

Imagine being surrounded by buildings like we are on Crossfields but with every building being two to three times as tall and then also, nine to ten times as tall. And only 14% of them being "affordable".

Find it on the Open House website here. It seems to have disappeared from the 'Lewisham' listings (which includes Lewisham Arthouse, Glass Mill Leisure Centre and 8 more), so don't search for it by borough! Find it in our own special section: Deptford.

MEANWHILE...RIGHT NEXT DOOR...ALSO PART OF LONDON OPEN HOUSE

Master Shipwright's House

Find it here (listed under Greenwich and Deptford). Sat & Sun, 10am – 4pm
NB: Access may be restricted at Watergate Street by gas works being done for Paynes & Borthwick Wharf. Access also possible via Deptford Green. All complaints:
United Construction.

Next door to the Convoys Wharf site is the 16th century building (later modified in 1708) that was once part of the King's Yard and overlooked the Double Dry Dock. Both were built in 1513 on the orders of King Henry VIII to create the Royal Naval Dockyard which went on to build ships for war and empire (and empire-related piracy), as well as science and exploration, that made Deptford an amazing hub of industry and technology, of making and manufacturing, for four hundred years.

The Master Shipwright oversaw the ships being built in the Double Dry Dock. If you want to know why the building was separated from the yard, come and visit. There'll be plans and photos on show, plus some extras – because this year is the 500th anniversary of Henry VIII's founding of the Royal Dockyard. 

On Saturday at the Master Shipwright's House, there will be cannon fire on the hour and costumes in the morning, historians and artists who love Deptford, the actors from Horrible Histories will be on call – and to complement the masterplan delivered by Convoys Wharf next door on the site of the King's Yard, there'll be presentations by the locally grown projects that have found a way to bring Deptford's heritage into the 21st century, namely Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden, both of which look to the future whilst taking inspiration from the past, and which, they believe, have a road map that the developers and council should start taking seriously as an alternative to the profit motivated luxury flats plan.

The problem is that Hutchisons (for short) want to sell off individual parcels of land and these home grown projects (Lenox and Sayes Court) really don't fit with that, especially since they need to be situated on the tiny and only bits of open public space left that won't be built on. Both projects have the blessing of English Heritage and the National Trust, but are Hutchison's listening?

If you believe in history that lives in the present, rather than in road names and the names of luxury towers, come and visit the Master Shipwright's House. If you visit the Convoys Wharf exhibition first, why not go on to the Master Shipwright's House and tell them what you thought. And vice versa.

See the Deptford Dame for a review of the last time this building was part of Open House (2010).

Here is a great resource for the government's Made In England campaign durind the Olympics, and number one is Heritage. King Henry VIII. How on earth can Deptford Dockyard be left out of this?

Also see:

June 20: crossfields.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/convoys-wharf-update-planning.html
June 23: crossfields.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/convoys-wharf-update-is-hong-kong-model.html

Convoys Wharf update: is Hong Kong the model for Deptford New Town?

This is Hong Kong. It's where Convoys Wharf site owner, Hutchison Whampoa Ltd (HWL) are headquartered. The owner's plans for Deptford are not dissimilar to this view of China's major capitalist service economy (which is one of the most densely populated areas in the world).

With the proposal for three towers in north Deptford, one at 48 storeys (158m) and two at 38 (156m), Hutchisons intend to compete with Canary Wharf and the City of London for the tallest buildings in London, despite Deptford not being in any way a financial district. Though not quite as tall as Canary Wharf's three central buildings (One Canada Square, HSBC and Citigroup), the proposed Deptford waterfront building will be taller than Barclays' world headquarters (156m).

As a residential-only building it could be the third tallest in the UK after the soon-to-be-finished St George's Wharf Tower at Vauxhall (49 storeys, 181m) and the 75-storey residential tower planned for the Isle of Dogs (presently on hold).

SO, WHO ARE HUTCHISON WHAMPOA?

Hutchison Whampoa Ltd (HWL) are an investment holding company whose main shareholder is Cheung Kong Holdings. The chairman of both is Li Ka Shing. His son Victor Li is Managing Director and Deputy Chairman and the set up has been compared to Rupert and James Murdoch, from whose empire our little bit of Deptford was bought. News International retains a profit share in the sale of the luxury homes proposed.

This month, Li Ka Shing is 21st on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index (Murdoch is 77th), and his biggest company, Hutchison Whampoa Ltd, posted revenue last year of over US$50 billion. Europe has become the main source of income for HWL, with its revenue in the region reaching US$21 billion, 42% of its total.

Both billionaires are in and out of bed with each other investment-wise. One example is the story of London teenager Nick D'Aloisio, whose app 'TrimIt' made Apple's 'App of the Week' and attracted $300,000 in investment from Li Ka Shing's venture capital firm, Horizon Ventures, after a tip off from Murdoch's soon-to-be-ex-wife Wendi Deng. With further investment from News International (as well as Stephen Fry and Yoko Ono), D'Aloisio went on to sell the app as the more refined 'Summly' to Yahoo for $30m.

That's the sort of good news story that the developer should be promoting, as part of their marketing for Convoys Wharf as a future centre for Technology, Media & Telecommunications (TMT), and their aim to expand the City across the water into Deptford, promoting both the hi-tech businesses that they are so good at investing in, and filling their expensive apartments with the people that work in that industry.

Obviously, if that was the stated intention, we'd immediately clock on to the fact that they were creating a New Town Bubble. Such honesty might be welcomed, but instead this agenda has had to be disguised as something that pertains to Deptford, so that the bubble can be seen to integrate into the area, and not be percieved as the gated community (or compound of gated communities) it is ultimately designed to be.

To expand the mythology, they have managed to include the Telecommunications Industry under the umbrella of 'Creative Industries' so that they can link their aims to what is already here, so that Regeneration can be seen to take place.

In the Cultural Strategy document of Hutchison's planning application (which reads like an estate agent's brochure) it says: "In providing temporary space for seeding new enterprise (and) by locating creative and TMT enterprise and R&D at the heart of the scheme's vision from the outset...Convoys Wharf clearly has the potential to create an environment that can successfully support the kind of creative industries businesses that would in turn attract the TMT residents that are envisaged as the engine of the development, as well as TMT companies more broadly."

Deptford's reputation for contemporary art and design practice is undoubtedly part of the Goldsmiths and YBAs-of-yore myth. Goldsmiths now attracts much of its income from international (mostly Japanese) students who pay £18K+ a year in fees, based on the YBA rep. Laban is so grateful to exist it is happy to be overshadowed by any residential towers that come its way (more are promised at Creekside Village, and Laban has already voted to be completely overshadowed, just so it can get another theatre).

But for heaven's sake, every London borough and UK town has a 'thriving arts community', some more than others, because artists (and theatre companies, and film-makers and designers) will exist where rents are cheap. Although some web-based design companies are now designing apps for mobile phones, surely the activities of Deptford's arts and performance practitioners and cottage industries are strange bedfellows for telecommunications and mobile phone technology.

The lead architect of Hutchison's new planning application, Sir Terry Farrell, said "I think this is the equivalent of Hoxton or a Shoreditch of the South". Perhaps the old man was confusing his latest development in Shoreditch (another tower) for this one. What happened in Shoreditch was a disaster for the local community, where rents soared in a vision initiated by an estate agent and backed by the Council (and the London Plan) in the name of Regeneration.

Convoys Wharf is only a little bit different. There is a big empty space to fill with a bubble culture of TMT that will bear no relation to its surroundings, and before that, a load of property to sell off-plan to investors who don't give a toss about cultural strategies. The only way Deptford's present Creative Industries will be involved is in the potential use of temporary cheap space whilst the new culture is being built. As long as rents stay low outside the bubble, we could happily continue as we are, and doing whatever we like, daring the suits to come downtown to get dirty. But estate agents and greedy private landlords will make sure rents rise until Lewisham Council has fulfilled its dream of Deptford as a dormitory town for City workers, whilst the ageing population living close to the site will end their remaining years accompanied by the endless sounds of banging scaffolding and the noisy engines of construction lorries and cement mixers.

Reflecting on the past, one might see a parallel with the Naval dockyard facilities that grew up around the site in the 16th-19th centuries and the Navy's own little bubble. Except that all the toffs were in Greenwich. The workers and artisans and skilled workers and medium ranking officers had Deptford. That's why you won't find their history in Greenwich. Ask also why the history of slavery and the heritage of Black and Asian peoples right here in Deptford, is not recorded in Greenwich and has been wiped out of Deptford's history by successive embarrassed left wing councils.

Ultimately our new Chinese masters know they will be repeating history by rebuilding a Deptford New Town, to be serviced by Deptford Old Town, but that's about as near as Hutchison Whampoa want to get to the history of this site.  

So, ANYWAY, what experience do Hutchisons have of integrating into and regenerating communities?
 
Their property division has only ever dealt in luxury residential property and hotels (see below), so the chances are low to nothing.

Here are the core areas of their business: 

Ports and related services: Hutchison Port Holdings operates across Europe, the Americas, Asia, the Middle East and Africa and is the largest port operator in the world. In the UK it owns London Thamesport on the Isle of Grain, Harwich International Port, and the Port of Felixstowe. Their subsiduary Myanmar International Terminals Thilawa (MITT) is involved in trade with the military junta in Burma. Presently, ongoing striking dockers at Hongkong International Terminals (HIT) are paid less now than they were in 1995 and work in appalling conditions.

Property and hotels: Hutchison Whampoa Properties Ltd develops and invests in real estate, with office buildings in Hong Kong, Beijing and Shanghai, luxury residential properties in the UK, and with Cheung Kong Holdings as Habour Plaza Hotel Management (International) Ltd operates and manages hotels in China and the Bahamas.

Telecommunications: HWL owns the "3" brand, plus mobile, fixed-line, broadband and international connectivity services in eleven countries around the world. A subsidiary, INQ, manufacture mobile phones. HWL is presently looking for majority control in a merger with Telecom Italia, Italy's biggest wireless carrier, and reportedly plans to buy have bought O2 Ireland (whilst Murdoch's Sky has just bought O2 UK).

Retail: As A.S.Watson & Co (ASW) HWL's retail arm operates in Asia and Europe, as the world's largest health and beauty retailer. Most notably in the UK, it owns Superdrug and The Perfume Shop. Retail interests also include supermarkets, consumer electronics and airport retailing.

Energy: Cheung Kong Infrastructure (CKI) has its finger in transportation, energy, infrastructure materials and water. The Energy division includes a 34% interest in Husky Energy Inc, one of Canada's largest energy-related companies, with a focus on oil and gas exploration and extraction, pipelines, storage and processing, plus retail outlets all over Canada. Husky works with Gasfrac and  is involved in the potentially harmful and controversial process of "fracking" for shale gas (banned in France, Bulgaria and the Canadian state of Vermont, since it generates massive volumes of toxic water and huge piles of debris, and has been blamed for triggering two tiny earthquakes in northwest England).

With an interest in Hong Kong Holdings, CKI is the sole electricity supplier to Hong Kong Island, as well as an investor in the UK, China, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. In the UK, CKI already owns UK Power Networks (the electricity transmission network in London and the South East), gas distributor Northern Gas Networks, and a 50% stake in Seabank Power. Last year, CKI bought British gas distribution company Wales & West Utilities and New Zealand's waste management firm Environ.

Water: Hutchison Water are involved in desalination, water treatment, waste water treatment, water reuse and water technologies. New to the market, they intend to be the leading company in the production and treatment of water. They have a 49% holding in the Sorek desalination plant in Israel, the largest of its kind in the world, and own Kinrot Ventures, investors in water and Cleantech technologies. In 2011, CKI bought Northumbrian Water (which includes Essex & Suffolk Water). In the process, CKI sold Cambridge Water to HSBC to avoid competition issues. It still has a 4.75% stake in Southern Water.


On the evidence...

Anyone who understands the world of investment will be unsurprised and possibly uncritical. Conglomerates and billionaires own the planet, and where would we be without someone to invest in us, as Camoron is probably wont to say?

Thames Water is owned by an Australian-based consortium Kemble Water. When they were owned by German company RWE nothing got repaired. Private equity took over and look at us now, overdue repairs of Victorian pipelines causing massive inconvenience to all over London, done, thank you, suburban gardens no longer flooded with tampons, thank you, all done on massive borrowing and no tax to be paid amid much scandal and staff layoffs and director pay-outs, and now with £4bn borrowing to build the Tideway Tunnel, totally underwritten by the taxpayer. The Chinese Investment Corporation, among others, have a snack in it. Hutchisons aren't the only foreign investors in town. Of course.

Meanwhile, one can only hope that Hutchison's proposed new buildings at Convoys Wharf will surely be highly energy efficient, to make up for the damage Li Ka Shing's investments and businesses are doing elsewhere.


CONCLUSIONS ON THE EVIDENCE

When a company this size puts in a planning application that purports to bring prosperity to a deprived community, and claims that it has 'talked to', 'consulted with' and 'listened to' that community 'via its grass roots organisations', you should know it has not done any such thing.

Only now are they talking about temporary uses for the site, whilst for the past ten years the entire space has been off-limits and thoroughly secured. Community use could have been managed during this time but there was no inclination to engage from the developer.

They have refused to step down from the massive density and to create more affordable housing, lest they lose their profit margins. Talks with the planners have resulted in high-to-medium height buildings being reduced, by increasing the heights of the taller buildings. Buildings marked on the application as "feature buildings" are simply those tall buildings which have been advised by Farrells to have rounded corners, since the site would otherwise be a total wind tunnel.

Most of all, the developer has steadfastly refused to listen to any arguments about preserving the heritage of the site in any meaningful way.

Through interpreters and consultants, they have arrived at a premature but palatable version for the Planners that pretends to talk about about regeneration, but nothing can disguise their real intention to make as much money as possible, with absolutely no regard for anyone in Deptford.

Further notes:

Meanwhile, Lewisham appears to be reneging on its Core Strategy policy once again, as it did recently with Faircharm Trading Estate. In Appendix 1 of the Convoys' Wharf Delivery Strategy (CW012, p.33), we noted the following:

Core Strategy Policy Strategic Site Allocation 1 (Requirements for strategic site alllocations)

2. The Masterplan will need to be submitted as part of an initial outline or full planning application. If the applicant submits an outline planning application then this should be accompanied by a full planning application for Phase 1 of the strategic site.

The application DC/13/83358 is for Outline Planning 'with all matters reserved'.  What does that mean? Against Lewisham's Core Strategy, there is no full planning application for Phase 1. That's why we have no idea what the buildings will look like. (Because they will be sold off to other developers asap).

Yet Deputy Mayor ("look into my eyes, my eyes, my eyes, not around my eyes") Alan Smith has been going round telling local campaigners that Lewisham will pass it.