By James Murdoch, Churchwarden in charge of the fund-raising
The Good Shepherd Church has raised more than £8,500 of its £24,000 funding target to rebuild the collapsed church wall on Wantage Road. Many donations, which will be further boosted by Gift Aid, have come from members of the wider local community as well as from church members. If you want to donate click this link https://gofund.me/a2d29be4
The high cost of the rebuild – a total of £44,000 – has surprised us and some donors. In the interests of transparency, this is the reason it’s so expensive.
The church and its boundary wall is locally listed and we have had to respond to conditions imposed by Lewisham Council and Southwark Diocese. The resulting foundation spec is onerous in that we are required to have deeper and wider foundations than in the initial estimates. They must go under the pavement with bridges over the roots to protect the trees. In addition we have been given strict specs for bricks and mortar to match its historic appearance.
The church invited 5 firms to tender obtained four quotes for the work ranging from the £44,000 to £85,000. The bid accepted was the £44,000 one from a local builder. It is perhaps significant that the other local builder declined to bid on the spec that has been imposed on us.
However, in addition to the Wantage section of wall, we need to do essential repairs on the Handen Road section to stop it falling and hope to replace unsuitable modern bricks installed on a short section of wall on Handen Road a few years ago with the old bricks from Wantage Road. This would cost a further £9,000.
As part of the planning process we were required to use a specialist structural engineer, foundations and tree experts, and an architect. The church has provided a total of £25,000 from congregational funds to cover the professional fees and part of the building work, roughly what we had hoped the total cost would have been. As the lowest bid is significantly above that we need to ask for help.
We are also going to grant-making bodies. Unfortunately, most trusts that support churches exclude boundary walls while others require us to have already raised a significant amount, usually 50 per cent. But we persevere.
Artist’s impression of Galliard’s proposed development
London Square, the new owners of Leegate, are aiming to increase the numbers of homes in the development, possibly by as many as 50. Currently there is planning consent for 562 homes, of which 389 would be private and 173 “affordable houses.”
In an exclusive briefing to the Lee Manor Society, London Square’s Development Director Ricardo Rossetti indicated his company is keen to raise the number of units to maximise the return on its investment,
“The advice I gave the board was that if we were to look at providing a much stronger affordable housing offer, there may be an opportunity to improve our returns,” he said.
The firm had originally asked him if he could add another 100 homes, Mr Rossetti told them that wouldn’t be possible, adding “If we are able to find 50, we would be doing well.”
London Square is hoping to increase the number of affordable homes from 35% of the total to somewhere between 38% and 41%. These would be a mixture of rentals and shared ownership. The advantage of increasing affordable homes is the generous grants on offer from the London Mayor. London Square has its own affordable housing arm, Square Roots, but is talking to the Clarion Housing Association which already operates in Lee.
The firm intends to achieve the increase by reducing the amount of commercial space in the development, and by adding extra storeys to the lower rise blocks. There is no plan at the moment to increase the height of the 15-storey tower block on the Lee Green crossroads, but they may remove the planned basement floor.
The other major change the firm envisages is the removal of the proposed first floor podium which would have provided upper storey flats with outside space. This would introduce natural light into an area originally allocated for parking, allowing for the inclusion of more homes. However, it will depend on successfully passing daylight tests.
Mr Rosetti confirmed the development will now have no allocation for parking, except disabled spaces, in line with Lewisham’s stated ambition to reduce traffic in the borough.
London Square wants to move the planned medical centre from the floor to the ground floor, in an area which would have been shops. This will free up first floor space for more homes. It isn’t clear yet what services would be provided in the medical centre; that will be decided by the NHS South East London Integrated Care Board.
London Square now envisages there will be a “basket” supermarket (i.e. for small shops) in the development. It is talking to Aldi and Lidl but so far has no deals in place.
However, it is going to have to amend Galliard’s original plans because of new legislation (post the Grenfell fire) which requires buildings higher than 18 metres to have two staircases. This will mean that the proposed supermarket area would have a staircase in the middle of its floorspace.
Mr Rosetti thinks that new problem, along with what he terms “planning fatigue” was responsible for Galliard pulling out of the development and selling to London Square.
“We’re spending time going back, reviewing their scheme, and trying to improve on what I think is actually a very good base. So now I have inherited this situation and obviously I’m approaching it with fresh eyes. We’re not trying to reopen the application in its entirety, but we would be looking to try and make the commercial units work a little bit harder.”
Current plans for Leegate.
The building schedule it envisages is to start with the South East situated Block B (on the plan it is on the Leyland Road corner). That would be followed by Block A (the 15-storey tower) and finally Block C (South West position) on Burnt Ash Road. They hope it will be all completed within between four and a half and six years. The price of the private housing is expected to be similar to London Square’s development in Woolwich., although at the moment there are no figures for that quoted on their website.
Mr Rosetti confirmed that the planned Community Centre would remain, alongside the ground floor medical centre, although moved to the south-east corner of the central public square in a slightly different position from the original plan. Their plans also include a pub, but it’s understood this is unlikely to be a Wetherspoons replacing the Edmund Halley. Wetherspoons closed it for commercial reasons, rather than because of the impending Leegate development. There will be a half basketball court on the south-east corner, but at the moment there is no proposal for a playground. A mural is planned near the public square
London Square aims to put up hoardings around Leegate within a month. It has started tendering for the demolition and asbestos removal, and is optimistic that work can start within six months and be completed by the end of this year. “In an ideal world, I will get planning consent completed just ahead of the demolition work finishing,” said Mr Rossetti. London Square has already had two preliminary meetings with Lewisham planners but there will need to be many more detailed negotiations.
The original architects Rolfe Judd have been replaced by CZWG. A full-scale public consultation will be held in May, including an exhibition and public meetings which may be held in Leegate itself if it is safe.
London Square has already started boarding up the site, and the graffiti artists weren’t far behind.
Residents have started a petition to save the school crossing Lollipop lady at the junction of Manor Lane and Fernbrook Road, which is mainly used by children and parents at Brindishe Manor School in Leahurst Road.
The petition says the role is at risk because of Lewisham Council budget cuts. It adds ” This junction sees a significant traffic movement especially during the rush hours, with vehicles hurriedly trying to reach the south circular. Despite this intense situation, our Lollipop Lady has been incredibly adept at her role of controlling the flow of cars, vans, trucks buses and cyclists, guaranteeing the safety of those crossing. There are continual vehicle incidents occuring when she is not present. “
