Author: Cyril Richert

Asda’s planning application (2020/3073) was approved last week, by officer’s delegation (which means it did not go before the Councillor’s committee but was just ratified by a planning officer). However it is worth reading the details of the officer’s report, as we discovered that Asda amended their plan to ditch their very controversial idea of replacing all greenery by a porous resin finish.

Amendments: Proposed removal of trees and vegetation to gardens and landscaped areas and replacement porous resin omitted from the proposals. Landscaped areas would either be retained, or existing low lying vegetation removed and replaced with bark mulch and replacement planting.

Therefore it appears that what is approved is only painting the existing white paint elements of the building with a dark grey colour, and refurbishing the clock tower (including fixing of the clocks).

Example of bark mulch ground

However, as we suspected, it is a cost cutting exercise and while existing trees should be retained, some of the lower vegetation should be replaced by “low maintenance ground” covered with bark mulch.

• The part along Falcon Lane /car park should retain existing planting
• The large part at the corner of Falcon Lane/Lavender Hill should only keep the 3 trees but all the other vegetation should disappear and be replaced by bark mulch.
• The green patch beside the post office should be replace by “low maintenance ground cover planting completed with bark mulch“.
• The steps and side-walk should be enlarged to provide a much wider access.

Continue reading →

Author: Cyril Richert

When he declared last year about the environmental ambition of the borough “I know Wandsworth residents will want to help and play their part in achieving that goal“, Ravi Govindia, the leader of Wandsworth Council, was right!

Since our article on Asda wanting to remove all greenery around the premises, including mature trees and thick hedges, we have received several comments including proposal on what instead should have been a good move from the store operator. Continue reading →

Author: Cyril Richert

Asda has submitted a plan to refurbish part of the existing structure and remove the greenery around the car park.

Toward the end of Summer, Asda submitted a planning application (2020/3073) labelled as “alterations”. The proposal consists mainly on:

1. painting the existing white paint elements of the building with a dark grey colour, and refurbishing the clock tower (including fixing of the clocks),
2. all vegetation to be removed and replaced by a smooth finished.

Continue reading →

Author: Cyril Richert

W.RE (W. Real Estate limited), the owner of Arding & Hobbs building at Clapham Junction, as submitted a proposal (p.a. 2020/3421) to redevelop the building.

As far as we see (112 drawing and 90 reports!) there is no difference from the presentation that we had earlier in July. Continue reading →

Authors: Cyril Richert & David Curran

As we confirmed some time ago – Debenhams at Clapham Junction will never reopen. It’s a great shame to lose it, and our sympathy is with our many readers who used to work there. But it raises a very immediate question of what happens next with our local landmark.

The owner of the building is W.RE (W. Real Estate limited). They bought the building a few years ago, expecting that Debenhams would probably depart at some stage. Everything accelerated as Debenhams started to run into financial difficulties last year and asked for rent cuts so they could afford to keep trading. W.RE refused and Debenhams confirmed to us in an email in October 2019 that “the store will remain trading until – at least – 23 June 2020“, although no exit date was set yet. Unfortunately came the Covid19 crisis and the department stores decided comprehensively not to reopen for even a few months (see our previous article for more details).

In the meantime it appears that the new owner was carrying extensive research on future developments, working with architects and consultants on multiple options. As W.RE develop plans for the building’s future they have run a series of public webinars, where they have been commendably frank about their plans for the building. They have also been happy to have detailed discussions with CJAG.

The previous building, in 1890

This is a very important moment for Clapham Junction – it’s our landmark building, and as the largest unit apart from Asda it’s also a flagship part of the trade of the town centre – even in Debenhams’ most troubled stage, having a major store that sold a lot of things here was important in attracting shoppers to the town centre as a whole, and a lot of the smaller and independent businesses nearby benefitted from this.T K Maxx and Boots are understandably popular, but every local town centre has one – but only Clapham Junction had a department store!

If W.RE get this right, Clapham Junction will benefit…  but get it wrong and the problems will be widely felt for many years!  Which is why we’ve been reassured by the frank and open way the developers have engaged so far. They are clearly very conscious of the importance of the building they have bought, and we welcome their commitment to take an approach that makes the most of its potential. In the rest of this article we explore the emerging proposals in some detail, picking out some aspects we know have been especially welcomed, as well as areas where we have concerns.

Continue reading →

Lavender Hill for Me,  a community website working to support Lavender Hill in Battersea, has reported on a proposal to replace an unusually small house which had an unusually large garden on Parma Crescent with a rather larger building housing five flats. The description of the planning application 2020/0906 is:

Demolition of existing building and erection of part two-storey, part three-storey building to provide 5 flats (1x 1 bedroom flat 3 x 2 bedroom flats and 1x 3 bedroom flat) with associated cycle and bin stores.

It proved to be quite a controversial proposal, attracting 44 objections, and not much in the way of supportive comment. As spotted by Lavender Hill for Me, the plans were changed part way through the process – with the side of the building closest to Lavender Hill chopped back somewhat, an the height of the roof reduced slightly as well.

See more detailed on the proposal directly on Lavender Hill for Me’s article and feel free to comment. As usual we will keep you posted on any amendments in the future.