Labour’s let down on high rise in East Dulwich
Of course I knew it would come. But it has come more quckly than I thought.
One of the key local issues in the the local election campaign the proposed designation of East Dulwich as ’suburban’ in the Council’s main planning document. Designating the area as suburban would mean that new developments would be 2-3 storeys high. The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, objected to our proposed designation, arguing that the area should be categorised as ‘urban’ - meaning that 4-6 storey high buildings could be built.
In response to our campaign East Dulwich residents received a letter from Livingstone in April stating that:
“The Lib Dems have taken a technical planning debate about whether East Dulwich is ‘urban’ or ’suburban’ in order to whip up a desperate scare campaign for the elections.”
The difference between three storeys does not strike me as technical.
Southwark Council’s decision has now been upheld by the Government’s independent Planning Inspector in his report on Southwark’s Plan. Significantly, he noted that Southwark could meet the Mayor’s housing targets without reclassifying East Dulwich and other parts of the borough as ‘urban’.
But the Mayor could still ask the Secretary of State to overturn the decision.
Indeed, City Hall has already written to the Council indicating that an appeal is likely:
“In relation to density zones, the Mayor concluded that he does not agree with the Inspector’s reasons or recommendations on this issue and therefore that he maintains his objection….”
Now I am pretty confident that based on the facts, a Secretary of State would have to agree with the Council and the planning inspector.
But wouldn’t it be nice if the Mayor gave in gracefully?
The position of Labour locally on this issue is laughable. The Councillors who lost their seats in East Dulwich said they agreed with us and that they weren’t afraid to stand up to the Mayor. But when push came to shove, they published and delivered the letters from Ken Livingstone defending his ‘urban’ policy!
They still don’t seem to have grasped that they would be better off representing the views of Southwark people to the Mayor - not representing the views of Livingstone to Southwark residents, regardless of the merits.
Andy Mayer said,
July 3, 2006 @ 3:35 pm
It’s also notable that blogging Southwark Labour Councillor and Deputy Leader, Fiona Colley devotes four pages of entries to recording what happened at that Council Meeting and completely ignored the issue of East Dulwich and Rotherhithe rezoning.
Val Shawcross meanwhile, who is supposed to be the GLA member for this area is off chasing the Labour parliamentary nomination in Streatham, a small part of Lambeth. Has anyone seen her in Southwark recently? What’s her public position on standing up to the Mayor on this issue? What about Tessa Jowell MP? Labour are all over the place on this one.
Office of Tessa Jowell MP said,
July 4, 2006 @ 12:33 pm
Just in case there is any attempt to mis-represent Tessa Jowell’s position on this (heaven forbid). It hasn’t changed since the release reproduced below and has been publicly re-stated on a number of occasions. It is also shared by all Labour representatives locally.
7 December 2004 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TESSA JOWELL CALLS ON MAYOR TO RETAIN SUBURBAN DESIGNATION OF EAST DULWICH AND HERNE HILL
LOCAL MP ASKS KEN TO RETHINK HIS OBJECTIONS
Tessa Jowell today backed the designation of parts of East Dulwich and Herne Hill as ‘suburban’.
The Dulwich and West Norwood MP called on Ken Livingstone to withdraw his objections to Southwark Council’s plans to keep East Dulwich and Herne Hill designated as ‘suburban’ rather than ‘urban’ in its Unitary Development Plan.
In her letter to the Mayor Tessa said:
‘These areas are classically suburban in character and I do feel that the suburban designation is an important one to retain the unique feel of these areas as well as of Dulwich itself.
‘I do hope that you withdraw your objections to Southwark’s decision and allow [the relevant] parts of East Dulwich and Herne Hill to remain as suburban in their designation.
[ENDS]