Appendix 1 - Schedule of Meetings (2) - Southwark Council ...

KING'S COLLEGE LONDONMULBERRY SITEPLANNING APPLICATIONStatement of Community InvolvementAppendices 1-3Prepared byCarvil Ventures LimitedApril 2013

Aerial view with site boundaryImage © 2013 Bluesky

List of AppendicesAppendix 1 – Schedule of meetingsAppendix 2 – Pre-consultation briefing packAppendix 3 – Private viewing invitation letterAppendix 4 – Private viewing invitation listAppendix 5 – Public exhibition invitation letterAppendix 6 – Local Advertisement/flyerAppendix 7 – Public exhibition panelsAppendix 8 – Images of the Public Exhibition modelsAppendix 9 – Public exhibition questionnaire

APPENDIX 1SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS

APPENDIX 1 MEETING SCHEDULEDate Consultee Organisation CommentsMULBERRYCONSULTATION22/4/13 40 people including PaulineAdenwalla, Steve Cornish,Jerry Hewitt, AnastasiaCavours and Jeff Hook22/4/13 Anastasia Cavours, AndreyCherbakov9/4/13 15 people including BarryDuckett (BD)Canada Water ConsultativeForum (CWCF) – publicmeetingChair, Toronto & MontrealHouse ResidentsAssociation (TMRA)Rotherhithe Area HousingForum (RAHF) meeting28/3/13 Simon Hughes (SH) Member of Parliament,Bermondsey & OldSouthwark21/3/13 John Wafer (JW) & IanCooperSenior Land Manger, L&Q25/2/13 Stewart Hayter (SH) Heaadteacher, Alfred SalterPrimary School (ASPS)Overall the response to King’s proposals was positive withquestions being asked about the number of student rooms,proposals to address the monotony of student residence designand future plans for Harmsworth QuaysOverall AC was supportive of King’s proposals. She said that the“proposals looked really impressive” and stated that they wouldget the support of the TMHRAOverall feedback was positive with the forum passing aunanimous motion to support King’s proposals and authorisingBD to write to Southwark development Control accordingly. BDstressed the need fort local jobs and apprenticeships and hopedKing’s would use the Barratt Homes model at site A.Overall SH was happy with King’s proposals. He asked if theMulberry scheme would go ahead with or without the masterplanproposals and was concerned about the level of affordablehousing. He asked whether King’s would be willing to subject itsproposals through a viability testing. In addition to summerschools he suggested holding widening participation schemes.JW expressed interest in providing the affordable housingcomponent of the Mulberry scheme given its future activities atthe Quebec Industrial EstateOverall SH was supportive of the proposals and thought it was themost attractive of all the schemes to have been recently

18/2/13 50 people including SteveCornish (SC), Jerry HewittFiona Colley and Jeff Hookand Paul NobletCanada Water ConsultativeForum (CWCF) - publicmeeting11/2/13 Barry Duckett (BD) Chair, Canada Estate andRAHF7/2/13 David Hubber, Paul Noblet(PN) & Lisa Rajan (LR)6/2/13 Fiona Colley (FC) & StephenPlatts (SP)6/2/13 Pauline Adenwalla (PA) &Jerry Hewitt (JH)17/12/13 Peter John (PJ), EleanorKelly (EK), Stephen Platts(SP) & Simon BevanSurrey Docks wardcouncillorsCabinet Member forRegeneration & Director ofRegeneration, SouthwarkCouncilChair and CWCF memberLeader of the Council, ChiefExecutive, Director ofRegeneration, Director ofPlanning, SouthwarkCouncilpresented. He was comfortable with a retail unit at the corner ofCanada Street and Quebec Way and the height and massing of thebuildings.King’s received positive feedback to its proposals. SC thought thedaytime activity would be “a boost” to Canada Water. The carfreenature of the scheme was also supported as was the lack ofover-looking onto Alfred Salter Primary School. Paul Nobletthought the public spaces were “very welcome” while FC thoughtthis was “the sort of thing the Council wanted to see.”BD thought the proposals “looked good” and “fitted in with thelocality”. He hoped that the scheme would provide local jobsboth during and after the construction phase.Overall the response was “very positive” from all the Surrey Docksward councillors. PN liked the stepped nature of the blocks whileLR thought the public would be interested in the retail offeringOverall both FC and SP were positive about the scheme. FC “couldnot see how anyone could complain about the plans” while SC“remained really positive about the concept.” FC liked the car-freenature of the schemePA stated that the scheme had potential and wanted to see moredetails on facades and overlooking onto ASPS. JH was “personallysupportive” of the scheme.Overall PJ, EK and SP were supportive of the scheme. Specificquestions were asked about the office space and roof gardensshown in the scheme11/12/13 Sir Edward Lister (EL), Fiona Chief of Staff & Deputy Overall EL welcomed King’s proposals and could not see anything

Fletcher-Smith, StewartMurray & Colin WilsonMASTERPLANCONSULTATION12/10/12 Pauline Adenwalla, JerryHewitt, Steve Cornish, JohnWIllsMayor for Policy &Planning, ExecutiveDirector of development &Environment, AssistantDirector Planning, StrategicPlanning Manager, GreaterLondon Authority (GLA)Chair CWCF, memberCWCF, Chair Friends ofRussia Dock Woodland(FRDW), Secretary FRDW22/10/12 Paul Noblet & Lisa Rajan Surrey Docks wardcouncillors10/10/12 50 residents and councillors Bermondsey & Rotherhithefrom Bermondsey & Community CouncilRotherhithe Community meetingCouncil21/9/12 Caroline Pidgeon (CP) London-wide AssemblyMember, GLA24/9/12 30 people including SteveCornish, Pauline Adenwalla& Jerry HewittCanada Water ConsultativeForum public meetingout of line.Walkabout arranged by CWCF and FRDW to advise King’s of issuesof interest to them in Canada Water. SC asked that the sycamoretrees on Quebec Way and Canada Street be retained. Commentswere also made about the poor access onto Quebec Way.Overall LR and PN were supportive of King’s masterplan proposalsthat would bring employment and were car-free. PN thought thestudents would have a stake in the area and create a sense ofpridePresentations provided of local schemes in the areaOverall CP was excited by King’s masterplan proposals. She sawbuilding heights as a key issue but liked the proposals for a heartspaceMasterplan proposals were described as “very encouraging” and“really exciting.” Issues raised about impact on infrastructure andheight of buildings. King’s was encouraged to coordinate with

21/9/13 Barry Duckett (BD) Chair, Rotherhithe AreaHousing Forum20/9/13 Val Shawcross (VS) Lambeth/SouthwarkAssembly Member, GLAother developers.BD thought the masterplan proposals “looked good” and “fitted inwith the locality”. He hoped that the scheme would provide localjobs both during and after the construction phase.VS thought the masterplan proposals provided a “dream solutionfor Canada Water”. Vs thought that challenges would be thequantum and location of the student housing but that cleverdesign could address that.18/9/12 Pauline Adenwalla (PA) Chair, CWCF PA was “very excited” at the masterplan proposals and thought“they could bring all the things the area needed in terms of daytimeeconomy.”13/9/12 Nick Stanton (NS) Chair, Bermondsey &Rotherhithe CommunityCouncil4/9/12 Anood Al-Samerai (AAS) &David Hubber (DH)Liberal Democrat Leader,Surrey Docks wardcouncillor3/9/12 Simon Hughes Member of Parliament,Bermondsey & OldSouthwarkNS thought the masterplan proposals “sounded exciting” andthought residents would like the car-free nature of the scheme.DH saw the masterplan proposals as a “potential winner” andliked the local employment opportunities. AAS thought the keyissue would be the location of the student housing, although shethought the plans sounded “really interesting”.SH emphasised the need for local jobs and social housing. He was“instinctively very positive” about King’s masterplan proposals.

APPENDIX 3PRIVATE INVITATION LETTER

‹Æª¨±Æø¨ª ±¤¨ø¨ª øº⁄ø¥¨ªø ›ø¥º©ª¥¥fiÕ fiøÆ Œfifl flŒflÕ”›” ”—‹‹Æª¨±Æ ± ¤¨ø¨ª ˙ ⁄ø¥¨ª’K ›±¥¥ªª ‘±º±Ì ƺ ¥±±Æ ›ø¨ø¥ ÿ±´ªÏÓ …ª¨± ըƪª¨‘±º± Õ¤Ô Ìœ‹Ãª¥ª±ª Ó ÈËÏË ÍÁÔÌ⁄ø® Ó ÈËÏË ÍÁÔΤø¥ øÚø¥º©ª¥‡µ¥ÚøÚ´µ‹ªøÆ “ªæ±´ÆŒªÊ –´æ¥ ª®æ¨± ± ’K ›±¥¥ªª ‘±º±K ºªª¥±ª¨ ¥ø ±Æ ¨ª ”´¥æªÆÆß Õ¨ª«±´ øß æª ø©øƪ ¨ø¨ ’K ›±¥¥ªª ‘±º± ø 檪 ©±Æµ ± ¥ø ¨± ºªª¥± ø ´ªÆ¨ßÛ¥ªº¨±© ª¨Æª Ø´øƨªÆ ø¨ ›øøºø …ø¨ªÆ ¨± ª¥ ƪªªÆø¨ª ¨ª øƪøÚ ’K ø Ʊº´ªº ø ø¨ªÆÛ¥ø±Æ ¨ª øƪø ¨ø¨ ©±´¥º ¥´ºª ø ª© ºªª¥±ª¨ ± ¨ª ±æªº ”´¥æªÆÆß fi´ª ›ª¨Æª øºÿøÆ©±Æ¨ œ´øß ¨ª ©¨ ¨ªø øªÙ øøºª øº ±Æ±Æø¨ª ªÆª ±ªÙ º±±Æ±Æ¨ ø¥¨ª øº ¨´ºª¨ ƪºª¨ø¥ ø±±ºø¨± ø ©ª¥¥ ø øƵª¨ øº ø±Æºø楪 ±´Ú’˘ Ʊ±ª ¨± ¨øµª ±Æ©øƺ ¨ ¥ø ø¨ ¨ª ”´¥æªÆÆß fi´ª ›ª¨Æª ø ø ƨ øª ±ºªª¥±ª¨Ú –Ʊ±ø¥ ±Æ ¨ ¨ª ¥´ºª ¨´ºª¨ ø±±ºø¨±Ù ¥ª®æ¥ª ©±Æµøª ±Æ ’˘¨øÙ ø±Æºø楪٠¥ª®æ¥ª ƪ¨ø¥ øª øº Ø´ø¥¨ß ´æ¥ øƪø Ʊº ±ª øª ©¨ ¨ª¨ªÚ…ª ©¥¥ æª ±¥º ø ´æ¥ ª®æ¨± ± ±´Æ Ʊ±ø¥ ø¨ ¨ª ›øøºø …ø¨ªÆ ‘æÆøÆßÙ ÓÔ Õ´Æƪߜ´øß Œ±øºÙ ‘±º± Õ¤ÔÍ Èfl“ Ʊ ÔÎÚÛÓÚ ± ÓË ⁄ªæÆ´øÆßÛÔ ”øÆ ÓÔÌ øº ƱÁÚÌÛÔÏÚÌ ± Ó ”øÆ ÓÔÌÚ Ãª ª®æ¨± ©¥¥ ¥´ºª Ì‹ ±ºª¥ ø ©ª¥¥ ø æ±øƺ ºª¨ø¥’K Ʊ±ø¥Ú —´Æ ¨ªø ©¥¥ ø¥± æª ± øº ¨± ª®¥ø ¨ª Ʊ±ø¥ ±Æª ºª¨ø¥ øº ¨± ƪªªß±´Æ ªªºæøµÚ…ª ©¥¥ ø¥± æª ±¥º ø Æø¨ª ª© ± ¨ª ª®æ¨± ± ÓË ⁄ªæÆ´øÆß ÓÔÌ Æ± ÔÓÚÌÛÔÏÚÚ Ÿª ß±´Æ ƪ±´ ª®Æª± ± ¨ªÆª¨ ¨ª ªª ©ª ªÆß ´ ±ª ¨ø¨ ß±´©¥¥ æª ø楪 ¨± ø¨¨ªºÚ ß±´ øƪ ¥ø ¨± ø¨¨ªº ±Æ ©±´¥º ¥µª ´Æ¨ªÆ ±Æø¨± ± ’K ¥ø ¥ªøª ±¨ø¨ ’ÿ´Æªß ø¨ µÚ´Æªß‡æ¨¨ªÆª¨Ú± Úfiª¨ ©ªø ›ø¥º©ª¥¥‹Æª¨±Æ ± ¤¨ø¨ª ˙ ⁄ø¥¨ª

Allies and MorrisonArchitectsM3 ConsultingDeloitte LLPtelephonefacsimileweb85 Southwark StreetLondon SE1 0HX020 7921 0100020 7921 0101alliesandmorrison.com69 Old Broad StreetLondon, EC2M 1QS020 7710 4400020 7710 4401m3c.co.uk66 Shoe LaneLondon, EC4A 3BQ020 7007 9000020 7583 1198djdeloitte.co.uk