A further update following all the activity before Christmas as we raced to respond by the appeal deadline of 14 December.

Firstly, a brief recap: As feared and expected, Southwark Metals submitted an appeal against Lambeth’s decision to refuse their application:

Application:
Demolition of all existing buildings and structures and the provision of a new building and associated hard and soft landscaping in respect of the use of the site as a metal recycling and management facility.

Reason for refusal:
The proposed development will result in an increase in traffic on Windsor Grove, a relatively narrow access road that also serves 58 residential properties. The likely level of additional vehicular movements, including HGV movements, generated by the development will result in an adverse impact on the character of Windsor Grove, and on the amenity of pedestrians and cyclists using that road and of those residents living adjacent to it. Taking account of the criteria set out in London Plan policy SI 8E and other relevant matters, the NPPF when read as a whole and as a matter of planning judgement the Council has determined that the adverse impact on character and on amenity is not outweighed by the benefits of the proposed development.

The #ScrapTheYard campaign group reconvened, held a series of meetings to decide its best response, and submitted comprehensive further representations for submission following sterling work by Rob Andrew. 

Submissions were also made by Windsor Close residents (following a door to door survey with campaign support), Windsor Centre businesses (a business response petition), Helen Hayes, MP (a written response also signed by all eight local Labour Councillors), Ward Councillors (many produced individual responses - incl. Cllrs Matthew Bennett, Fred Cowell and Pete Elliott, and groups such as Knights Hill Councillors also made submissions), Royal Mail (a response as an Interested Party), Parents of Kingswood School (lower) (a group submission), and many individuals (there was a huge burst of social/WhatsApp activity on the final day with lots of feedback confirming individual responses had been made).

The Appeal is expected to be heard over the period 1-11 March 2022. This is being planned for a hybrid meeting: limited in person attendees and held online.

The campaign employed an acoustic consultant to produce a report and attend the hearing. The Planning Inspector may ask him to speak and has confirmed if this is the case, it will be on the first day. The costs of employing the consultant will need to be found (see below)

What’s Next?
The Appeal: there is nothing more to do on the campaign response until closer to the Appeal date when we will need to ensure we are as prepared as we can be. Nearer the time an attendance plan/rota will be made to ensure the campaign completely fills all the seats available - whether virtual or real.
Fundraising campaign: no fundraising planned as yet, pending outcome of the Appeal.
Communications and publicity: approach to be discussed on activity for the period January and February.