The document evaluates the Bermondsey Spa Regeneration project in London through analyzing its masterplan objectives and community participation efforts. Regarding objectives, while environmental improvements were achieved, social housing targets were not fully met and promised local jobs did not materialize. Community participation was mainly one-way communication through newsletters and meetings rather than collaborative dialogue. Different community groups' interests were not adequately incorporated and new developments created barriers between residents. Overall, the regeneration had shortcomings in comprehensively addressing the community's needs and interests through the planning and development process.

1. ENVS3014 Development Project: Regeneration
Bermondsey Spa Report
Jannat Alkhanizi, Shivani Bhatnagar, Sitian Chen,
Zidong Han, Yingke Ni, Janey Lin Zhao

2. 2
Abbreviations used in this report:
BSR Bermondsey Spa Regeneration
LP London Plan
SC Southwark Council
SCI Statement of Community Involvement
SP Southwark Plan
TRA Tenants and Resident’s Association

3. 3
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Context
1.2 Angle of Analysis
1.3 Research Metholodgy
1.4 Framework for Analysis
1.5 Aim and Structure
EVALUATION (A): MASTERPLAN OBJECTIVES
2.1 Findings from Masterplan
2.2 Policy Framework Analysis
2.3 Limitations of Objectives
EVALUATION (B): PARTICIPATION
3.1 Findings from Research
3.2 Community Participation Analysis
3.3 Limitations of Participation
CONCLUSION
4.1 Overall Conclusion
18
14
8
4
PAGE
PAGE
PAGE
PAGE

4. 4
The London Borough of Southwark is located in central London, south of the Thames. With a
Labour-led council made up of 21 wards, it has an ethnically diverse and young population that is
projected to increase.
Southwark has experienced an acceleration of urban regeneration since the millennia. However, a
large disparity is still present between the strong economy of wards along the Thames and south
with the neglected and forgotten center wards (Southwark Council, 2014).
Fig 1. Location of site within different scale

5. 5
1.1.2 Bermondsey Spa
The project is located in Grange ward in the locality of Bermondsey and Rotherhithe (Fig. 1, 2),
locally known as Bermondsey Spa. The focus on Spa Road will guide the analysis throughout the
report.
As a historical center of trade and industry, economic activity declined in the 1970s and thereafter
the place was neglected by council and private industries. Overall, the area suffered considerable
poverty and deprivation. The neglect of housing conditions was appalling with overcrowding and
unsanitary conditions (Lambert, 2014). The area was then identified as a key revitalisation area due
to the proximity to major transport hubs. These two factors fueled the need for regeneration.
1.1.3 Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Project
This project was advertised as a residential-led mixed used development. Projected to be a 10-year
scheme, work started in 2000 although actual completion was 2014. The vision was ambitious:
Keep the best of the area’s rich heritage while addressing
the undeniable need for rebirth
To achieve this goal the aims were to make it an accessible area with an integrated mix of high
quality homes, shops, offices, public spaces and community facilities around a spine of employment
uses along the railway line (Southwark Council, 2007b:80). Spa road is the anchor for this report as
it is the main street with the most significant changes.
Fig 2. Focus street and surrounding area (Google Maps, 2015)
Fig 3. Spa Road: LEFT New Development, RIGHT: Old Neckinger council esate (Zhao, 2015)

6. 6
To evaluate and analyse the residential-led approach, our angle focuses on community prioritisation
and involvement while analysing council efforts of:
1.1.4 Key Actors
This project was initiated and funded by SC, partnering with housing associations. Both affordable
housing associations below are social enterprises and that also currently provide the building
maintenance.
1.2 Angle of Analysis
* see appendix (A) and (B) for list of contacts and
surveys respondents

7. 7
1.5 Aim and Structure
Each evaluation will comprise of an identical structure; present findings followed by a
critical framework analysis, and assessment of the limitations measured against relevant
academic literature.
Policy Framework Literature Framework
Sec.
3.2
Sec.
2.3, 3.2
Sec.
3.3
Sec.
2.2
Sec.
3.1
Sec.
2.2
Report
Section

8. 8
Bermondsey Spa Regeneration was split into three development phases to slowly transition the
area and ideally avoid the need to decant tenants around the borough (John Harvard Library,
1999). Chosen sites for this section fall within the medium term of development due to the wide
availability of information. However, in remaining sections, analysis will refer to BSR sites overall.
Evaluation will chart the objectives progress of each chosen site and the effects of their delivery on
the community. Referring to other objectives from policy frameworks, the analysis will conclude by
measuring the success of meeting each goal.
2.1.1 Site Analysis
The chosen sites all have frontages exposed to Spa Road, a street originally identified as an
intervention site to create a new backbone for activities to transform it into a high street by providing
local employment opportunities (John Harvard Library, 2000). As a residential-led development, the
initial guidelines of the project emphasised practices to guarantee community’s satisfaction such
as: the no-loss of social housing, elimination of barriers between residents, improving quality of
local environment, and the creation of local employment and training opportunities (John Harvard
Library, 1999 and 2000).
Fig. 5. Masterplan of Bermondsey Spa Regeneration (Adapted from Southwark Council, 2004)
Short term 2000-2004 Medium term 2004-2008 Long term 2008-onwards
Fig. 4. Phasing every 3.5-4 years. Projected to finish in 2010 but actuality completed in 2014
(Davies and Jonas, 2000)
Evaluation (A): Masterplan Objectives
2.1 Findings from Masterplan

9. 9
2.1.2 Progress of Masterplan Objectives
The timeline reflects the objectives of masterplans produced by Hyde-SC partnership between
2004-2008.
Fig. 6. Timeline tracks the site’s progress in setting and meeting development goals by colour-
coding each site according to the masterplan

10. 10
Overall regeneration affected the old community negatively and disregarded their needs. Social
housing units were either replaced by affordable units (Section 2.3) or by private rent/ ownership
units. This can be partly attributed to the economic conditions of 2008 and the austerity measures
it dictated on housing provisions (Southwark Council, 2008b).
While 86% of residents felt that the area’s environment has transformed to their satisfaction
(The Hyde Group, 2015:8), residents surveys and TRA representative interviews indicated that
some components were still lacking. These include communication barriers between new and old
residents (Sections 3.1-2) and lack of promised employment opportunities, as evident from the lack
of shops and offices on Spa Road and their replacement with private rent units.
2.1.3 Objectives Conclusion
There is a trend of inconsistency in each site’s goals throughout the years, causing an increase of
housing units (Site T and G) on the expense of providing facilities and amenities needed for a high
street. Due to the change in business uses, there was also a loss for highly valued shops such
as a bakery, a butcher, a repairs shop and two pubs. This was in addition to unmet promises of
community infrastructure services.
Guiding Project Objectives Met Unmet
No net loss of social housing ✓
Improvement in the quality of the local environment and
the public spaces
✓
Creating local employment and training opportunities ✓
No displacement of residents, segregation or barriers ✓

11. 11
The Bermondsey Spa Masterplan objectives although lacking an integrated, coherent development
approach, were established to maximise the delivery of social and economic benefits. As site
specific planning guidance for BSR, the masterplan fits within a broader context of policy framework:
local and regional planning policy (SCI, SP, and LP), and supplementary planning guidance (S106
Agreements). Figure 7 elaborates the inter-relationships between different regulations in Southwark
at different scales (Southwark Council, 2011).
2.2.1 Hierarchy of Policy Framework
This section will evaluate community related policies: affordable housing, and community
participation, and assess the link of these overarching guidelines with the BSR objectives.
Documents discussed in this section will be of older publications that were influencing guidelines
during development.
Fig. 7. The hierarchy of planning policies in Southwark (Southwark Council, 2011)
2.2 Policy Framework Analysis

12. 12
In regards to housing provision, the London and Southwark plans set the following targets for
housing supply:
Affordable housing ratio targets were first introduced in LP 2004 in order to achieve the vision of
sustainable developments and to tackle housing shortage, deprivation and discrimination (Mayor of
London, 2004). A crucial additional housing goal is that local development policies ‘should prevent
the loss of housing, including affordable housing, without its planned replacement at existing or
higher densities’ (Policy 3A. 12) (ibid:68)
Although the Southwark Plan echoed all these in their guidelines, gaps in meeting affordable housing
targets in SP and BSR objectives were significant (Fig. 8) as described in Section 2.1.3.The other
area where the SP and LP documents, in addition to SCI provide significant guidance is community
participation that focuses on local existing experiences and enhancing consultation and community
engagement (Southwark Council, 2008d). These guidelines include:
These guidelines resulted in setting the overall objectives for BSR as discussed in previous section.
Fig 8. Housing targets in development plans and BSR objectives
(Mayor of London, 2004 and Southwark Council, 2007b)

13. 13
BSR has for the most part generated consensus about their success as a regeneration project. It
has become a model in Southwark, having the highest target of delivering 35% affordable housing
in London area (Southwark Council, 2011). Under the pressure of delivering a large number of
housing, local council has only addressed one dimension on meeting the target, which has neglected
the need for community infrastructure.
From 1970s, community groups were encouraged to take an active role in influencing planning,
urban design, development and partnership of the urban development process (Brindley, 2000).
However, this was not the case in BSR. Local community had little power to press forward their
interest. Instead, SC masked underlying conflicts of interest that placed economic profit over
providing infrastructure for the community’s benefit. Spa Gardens was created at the expense of the
larger Spa Park that hosted more amenities. Public infrastructures proposed at the first stage of the
regeneration were gradually removed from the list and replaced by housing or commercial purpose
sites (Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods, 2009 and Livingstone, 2013).
2.2.2 Supplementary Planning Policy
2.3 Limitations of Objectives

14. 14
3.1 Findings from Research
RTPI Good Practice specifies ‘Effective Community Involvement and Engagement’ involves
establishing relationships with community groups to enable effective and detailed interactions
(RTPI, 2005:4). This approach was underpinned by the Way Forward (DETR, 1997) suggesting a
stronger focus on social aspects of urban renewal. The comprehensive approach is re-emphasised
in the Urban Task Force report (1999) which advocates successful urban regeneration founded
upon strong democratic local leadership and public participation. From interviews and research
into tools of community participation within BSR, it was determined that the methods were mainly
informative rather than engaging.
To determine the success of community participation within the scheme, interviews were held
with Jeremy McGahan- representative for the Bermondsey Spa TRA, and Katrina Hogg- the
representative from the Neckinger Estate TRA. Further evidence was gathered through surveys of
residents. Participation is evaluated during and post partnership with Hyde Housing.
During the Partnership (2000-2008)
Channel 1: One Stop Shop
This temporary One Stop Shop opened to the public in May 2005 and allowed residents to get
updates on progress, hold meetings, and help on enquiries of council services (London SE1, 2005).
Residents voiced their opposition against council set objectives for Site T. Communication was
possible due to quarterly newsletters (Fig. 9). TRA agreed with providing more housing, but at a
lower density though this was dismissed by development. It operated from mid 2005 - late 2009
(Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods, 2009).
Channel 2: Formal Community Meetings
A main channel of community participation was through consultative meetings and information
sessions. These were typically held at the Old Town Hall (in Site C), One Stop Shop or TRA building.
Old residents were consulted about regeneration schemes at these meetings. Their voices were
not always taken into account, but they were kept informed about SLC and Hyde’s own actions.
Post Partnership with Housing Association (2008 - Present)
Challenge 1: Lack of communication channels
Post-partnership between Hyde and SLC, all communication channels to Neckinger TRA were
lost as the estate is council owned. Hyde held no responsibility for addressing Neckinger TRA’s
opinions on developmental matters and did not reach out to do so. Their last point for consultation
with any developmental matters of area ended in 2008 (Hogg, 2015).

15. 15
Fig. 9. Excerpt from Bermondsey Spa Regeneration News (Southwark Council, 2008)
Difficulty arose to construct a community in Bermondsey Spa TRA (Bermondseyspa.ning.com)
because the online forum was not utilised for community activities but rather for voicing personal
complaints (Fig. 10). New residents TRA have communication with both SLC and Hyde, while
old residents TRA cannot formally contact Hyde even as they are part of the spatial community
(McGahan, 2015). Therefore, it was difficult to construct a community that could engage and
participate fully.
Challenge 2: Removal of community infrastructure
The physical spaces for communication were lost as highlighted in section 2.1.3 as council aimed to
digitalise services in 2008. It was only after two years of campaigning from locals that a replacement
One Stop Shop opened outside the area (Southwark Council, 2012), though it did not contribute
to the replacement of space. Moreover, Bermondsey TRA claim efforts by Hyde for providing TRA
meeting spaces were minimal, and presented an unpleasant environment that was unattractive to
attendees. Some residents surveyed are even unaware of an association (Appendix B).
Fig. 10. Private new residents only forum hosting mostly complaints (Durrant, 2015)

16. 16
Fig. 11. LEFT: Open gardens on Neckinger Council Estate
RIGHT: Closed private gardens on Site O Private-Affordable mix housing (Zhao, 2015)
3.2 Community Participation Analysis
One way dialogue
Although there were some communication channels, few opportunities were presented for a two way
collaborative dialogue to take place. The council released quarterly newsletters which highlighted
the progress and changes within the scheme. This method of community participation was effective
in communicating updated information but did not allow the community to engage with the reasons
for these updates, therefore restricting their participation.
Heterogeneity within the community
In Urban Renaissance regarding Community Empowerment: “Tying down communities ‘spatially’
… “assumes a homogeneity of interests within them” (Imrie and Raco, 2003:7). Through exploring
community as the focal point is good urban practice that contributes towards a successful long-term
urban renewal.
In actuality, the spatial area of Bermondsey Spa contains community groups with contrasting
interests. There is tension between the older residents and newcomers (2007 onwards). Many
older residents have been displaced by being priced out or removal and no replacement of social
homes (Hogg, 2015). The new residents do not integrate themselves with the existing residents.
Additionally, interaction spaces were separated physically between communities through fencing
or members-only public space. This was echoed by McGahan (2015), that the newer residents only
get involved when it affects them personally, and otherwise do not contribute.
Wish for stronger engagement
Brindley discusses similar situations where “the multi-faceted urban community has diverse and
competing needs, but a desire to share the same urban space” (2000:373). Although the old and
new residents have an undercurrent of tension, their goals are very much similar. Both TRAs wish to
see the area as a safe and inclusive environment. As the interviews and surveys evidence suggest
that the Hyde and the SLC could have strengthened relationships between the community groups
by offering more opportunities to hold a two way dialogue and provide suitable, equal opportunities
for all to fully engage.

17. 17
3.3 Limitations from Participation
Public participation is an essential component of this regeneration project. It was identified that a
joint commitment approach should be taken among a wide range of contributors throughout each
stage of the project (Davies and Jonas, 2000). In actuality this participation objective was not
delivered effectively.
The regeneration only reached a stage of tokenism (Arnstein, 1969). Local council took one-way
informing approach rather than two-way communication approach. Throughout the regeneration,
residents were informed and consulted periodically through newsletters and meetings but often
after a decision has been made, eventually degrading to non-participatory levels after 2008 (Hogg,
2015).
There was no effective online social media platform provided for local residents to offer opinions
or feedback if there were changes. Removal of one stop shop further eliminated physical space
for any developer-resident interaction. The private community network (Bermondseyspa.ning.com)
was only initiated in 2010 by residents themselves and is restricted to new housing development
tenants.
Fig.12. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration on Arnstein’s Ladder of Participation (Adapted from Olafsson, 2012)

18. 18
4.1 Overall Conclusion
Social and physical segregation were significant drawbacks after the regeneration. There is no
official obligation for interaction between old residents and new residents as management differs.
Micro-segregation has emerged with outpricing of original locals and influx of richer residents,
changing the local character (Keddie and Tonkiss, 2010). Moreover, community networks were lost
due to the displacement of some of the original social housing tenants (Hogg, 2015). There is a
change of attitudes, with more privatised space and fewer people willing to contribute to community
efforts. Both new residents and old residents claimed that there is less sense of community due to
unfamiliarity amongst the community.
SC did not perform well on the advertised residential-led approach, and instead demonstrated a
development-led approach. Some of the land with rich heritage were sold by SC for commercial
purposes such as the Town Hall and One Stop Shop (Livingstone, 2013). SC did reach their housing
target and addressed housing shortage in Southwark to a great extent. However, their overzealous
ambition resulted in the lack of amenities, which remains as a long-term considerable problem.
Finally, Spa Road did not become a high street, but rather a common local street. There is a clash
of opinions among old and new residents as benefits from regeneration are not enjoyed by all
across the whole area. Nevertheless, the silver-lining is that SC has learned residents’ opinions and
knowledge is a critical and valued tool for future successful residential regeneration.
Bermondsey Spa Regeneration
• 2006 first new residents, 2014 fully complete
• Private, Affordable or Shared Ownerships
• Maintained by Hyde & Notting Hill Housing
• New build, private restricted individual buildings
Neckinger Estate
• Completed in 1938, long lasting old residents
• Social Housing or Private Ownership (prev. social)
• Maintained by Southwark Council
• Traditional brick build, open space courtyards
Bermondsey Spa
One neighbourhood, two communities
Fig. 13. One Stop Shop converted into a Sainsbury’s, no incorporation of heritage gates into new site de-
sign (Worthington, 2012 and SE16 News, 2014)

19. References
Arnstein, S., 1969. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4),
pp.216-224,
Burr, A., 2015. Council Takes No Legal Action Over ‘44 Missing Social Housing Units’. Southwark News.
[online] Available at: http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/council-takes-no-legal-action-over-44-
missing-social-housing-units/ [Accessed 15 Jan. 2016].
Brindley, T., 2000. “Community roles in urban regeneration: New partnerships on London’s South Bank” in
City, 4(3) pp. 367-377.
Colley, F. 2011. Core Strategy. London: Southwark Council. [Online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200210/core_strategy/2114/adoption
[Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].
Davies, L. and Jonas, D. 2000. Bermondsey Spa Masterplan Draft. Report, [Hardcopy only] Available in:
John Harvard Library, Section: Bermondsey, Metropolitan Borough of: Redevelopment Area.
London.
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1997. The Way Forward for
Regeneration. HMSO, London.
Digimaps, 2015. Bermondsey Spa Area. [image] Available at: http://digimap.edina.ac.uk/roam/os
[Accessed 25 Dec. 2015].
Durrant, N. 2015. Who do I contact at Hyde nowadays?. [image] Available at:
http://bermondseyspa.ning.com/forum/topics/who-do-i-contact-at-hyde-nowadays
[Accessed 8 Jan. 2016].
EAN, 2015 ‘Stand up for more social housing’, 35% Campaign, [Online] Available at:
http://35percent.org/blog/2015/03/18/stand-up-for-more-social-housing/
[Accessed: 1 Dec 2015]
Hogg, K., 2015 ‘Perspective on Bermondsey Spa development as an older area resident’. Interviewed by
Janey Zhao, Neckinger TRA Hall, 12 December
Imrie R., Raco M. 2003 Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy.
Chapter 12: New Labour, community and the future of Britain’s urban renaissance
pp. 235-251. The Policy Press, Bristol. Print ISBN-13: 9781861343802.
Google Maps, 2016. Bermondsey Spa. [image] Available at:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Bermondsey+Spa+Gardens/
[Accessed 4 Jan. 2016].
John Harvard Library, 1999. ‘Bermondsey’s Spa Road in Line for Massive Regeneration’ in Anonymous
Newspaper Clip, Files number: (711.312), Section: Bermondsey, Metropolitan Borough of:
Redevelopment Area.
John Harvard Library, 2000. ‘Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Announcement’ in Beyond Bankside Building
Design in Anonymous Newspaper clip, Files number: (711.312), Section: Bermondsey,
Metropolitan Borough of: Redevelopment Area.
Keddie, T., and Tonkiss, F., 2010. “The market and the plan: Housing, urban renewal and socio-economic
change in London” in City, Culture and Society, pp. 57-67.
Lambert, T. 2014. A Brief History Of Bermondsey, London. [online] Local Histories. Available at:
http://www.localhistories.org/bermondsey.html

20. [Accessed 5 Jan. 2016].
Livingstone, R. 2013. Disposal of The Grange (Sites C2 and C4) Bermondsey Spa, London SE1. Agenda
Item 20. London: Southwark Council. [Online] Available at:
http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=3842 [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].
London SE1, 2005. Bermondsey’s one stop shop opens its doors [3 June 2005]. [online] Available at:
http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/1596
[Accessed 8 Nov. 2016].
Mapsof, 2015. Blank Map of London. [image] Available at: http://mapsof.net/uploads/static-
maps/boroughs_blank_map_of_London.png
[Accessed 4 Jan. 2016].
Mayor of London, 2004. The London Plan, Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. London:
Greater London Authority [Online] Available at: https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-
do/planning/london-plan/past-versions-and-alterations-london-plan/london-plan-2004
[Accessed: 1 Jan 2016]
Mayor of London, 2008. The London Plan, Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London,
Consolidated with Alterations since 2004. London: Greater London Authority [Online] Available at:
https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/past-versions-and-alterations-london-
plan/london-plan-2008
[Accessed: 1 Jan 2016]
McGahan, J., 2015 ‘Perspective on Bermondsey Spa development as a new resident’. Interviewed by
Janey Zhao and Hebe Ni, Eyot House, 10 December
Olafsson G., 2012. Ladder of Citizen Participation. [image] Available at: http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-
arnstein/resources/ladder-of-citizen-participation.gif
[Accessed 25 Dec. 2015].
SE16 News, 2014. Sainsbury’s Local in Spa Road. [image] Available at: http://www.se16.com/wp-
content/uploads/Photo-19-11-2014-14-16-40.jpg
[Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].
Southwark Council, 2004. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Hardcopy only] Available in: John
Harvard Library. London.
Southwark Council , 2005. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Hardcopy only] Available in: John
Harvard Library. London.
Southwark Council, 2007a. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Online PDF] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/1100/summer_autumn_2007_newsletter
[Accessed: 10 Nov 2015].
Southwark Council, 2007b. The Southwark Plan. London: Southwark Council, pp. 40-90.
Southwark Council , 2008a. Bermondsey Spa Regeneration Newsletter. [Online PDF] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/1103/spring_2008_newsletter [Accessed: 10
Nov 2015].
Southwark Council, 2008b. ‘Affordable housing SPD’, [Online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/2245/affordable_housing_spd
[Accessed 1 Jan. 2016]
Southwark Council. 2008c. ‘Statement of Community Involvement’, [Online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/856/planning_policy/1238/statement_of_community_involvement
[Accessed 1 Jan. 2016]

21. Southwark Council, 2011. ‘Core strategy’, [Online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200210/core_strategy/2114/adoption
[Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].
Southwark Council, 2012. Bermondsey One Stop Shop turns Blue. [online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/878/bermondsey_one_stop_shop_turns_blue [Accessed
6 Jan. 2016].
Southwark Council, 2014. Southwark Council Demographic Fact Sheet. [online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/3772/joint_strategic_needs_assessment
[Accessed 9 Dec. 2015].
Southwark Council, 2015. Map of Southwark Localities. [image] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200519/joint_strategic_needs_assessment/3456/3_factsheets_a
nd_profiles [Accessed 9 Dec. 2015].
Southwark Council, 2016. ‘Section 106’, [Online] Available at:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200152/section_106 [Accessed 1 Jan 2016]
Strategic Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods, 2009. Disposal of the Council’s freehold interest
in Site C5 Grange Walk and the One Stop Shop 17 Spa Road, Bermondsey Spa.. Agenda Item
11.London: Southwark Council, pp.1-2. [Online] Available at:
http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=4789 [Accessed 7 Jan. 2016].
The Royal Town Planning Institute and The Consultation Institute, 2005. RTPI Good Practice Note 1:
Guidelines on Effective Community Involvement and Consultation. [Online PDF] Available at:
http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/6313/Guidlelines-on-effective-community-involvement.pdf [Accessed 21
Dec. 2015]
Urban Task Force, 1999. Towards an Urban Renaissance: Final Report of the Urban Task Force. E&FN
Spon, London.
Worthington, A. 2012. Southwark Council's former One Stop Shop. [image] Available at:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8481/8183024344_51edaf2fbd_b.jpg
[Accessed 6 Jan. 2016].
Worthington, A. 2012. The One Stop Shop. [online] Flickr. Available at:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/andyworthington/8183024344
[Accessed 4 Jan. 2016].
Zhao, J. 2015. View Down Spa Road Neckinger Estate. [image].
Zhao, J. 2015. Amisha Court. [image].
Zhao, J. 2015. Bermondsey Spa Gardens. [image].
Zhao, J. 2015. View Down Spa Bolanchi Building. [image].

22. AppendixA

23. 6 John Phelan
john.Phelan@Southw
ark.gov.uk
Aylesbury, Dulwich,
Nunhead &
Peckham,
Designated officer
for the TRA
Southwark Council Hi Shivani,
Thanks for this. However, I do not deal with the Bermondsey area, and my remit mostly covers constitutional and gove
have passed your enquiry to my colleague, who will be in contact with you shortly.
Kind regards,
John.
7 Dan Taylor
dan.Taylor@southwar
k.gov.uk
Programme
Manager
Regeneration
Southwark Council Dear Shivani
There is no specific planning framework for Bermondsey Spa so best to look at the Southwark Plan and Core Strategy
The headlines are as follows:
Two thousand new homes, 40% of them affordable
Net increase in social housing
Two new health centres
An NHS dental surgery and pharmacy
New facilities at Salmon Youth Centre
2.5 hectares of re-landscaped open space
Secure bicycle parks
Car parking including gated car parks
New shops, including a Tesco Metro
City Car Clubs
The best way of getting a breakdown of figures for affordable housing would be to check the planning register and put
masterplan
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200180/bermondsey_spa/1144/bermondsey_spa_masterplan
Into the address field below
http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/
You could contact a housing association to carry our a survey with someone like Hyde Housing
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/hyde-new-homes-bermondsey-spa-london/7003016.article
You could do an interview with the Salmon Youth Centre which was built during the programme
We have some research being published soon - Leonna cc'd will send it to you
Good luck!
Best wishes
Dan

24. 8 Leonna Staple
leonna.staple@south
wark.gov.uk
Project Officer
Regeneration
North Project Team
Southwark Council Good Afternoon Shivani,
Please see attached the summary of the research carried out on the Bermondsey Spa Regeneration.
I hope this information is of use to you.
Regards
Leonna Staple
Project Officer
Regeneration North Project Team
9 llewelyn Davies
london@ldavies.com
General inquiries
about Masterplan
Llewelyn Davies No response
10 Paul Drew
pdrew@iceniprojects.
com
General Inquiries
about Masterplan
Paul Drew Design Janey
Apologies, but I cannot find the document that was the original Bermondsey Spa masterplan. What I have found is the
extracts from the masterplan as prepared in 2001.
As such, there is no need to call through later.
Paul
11 Simon Vevers
simon.vevers@hyde-
housing.co.uk
New Business and
Strategy Director
The Hyde Group
(Hyde Housing)
No response
12 Craig Horn
craig.horn@hyde-
housing.co.uk
Head of Land and
Planning
The Hyde Group
(Hyde Housing)
No response
13 General
0800 3 282 282
The Hyde Group
(Hyde Housing)
Redirected 6 times to different lines eventually said information is confidential
14 Karen Boothe
020 8297 3814
karen.boothe@hyde-
housing.co.uk
Community
Engagement Officer
The Hyde Group
(Hyde Housing)
Called 5 times, too busy but said will answer a list of questions e-mail but never responded.
I am currently out of the office.
I will respond to your email on my return on Monday 14th December 2015.
For all other urgent queries, please email residentengagement@hyde-housing.co.uk or phone the Customer Contact C
from your mobile: 0300 1 232 233.

25. 15 info@salmonyouthce
ntre.org
General inquiries Salmon Youth
Centre
Thanks for your email. I am afraid that we do not have the information you require. We have been on our site since 19
Hyde housing have done major research on the area and are producing a report.
Jim Guild
Administration & HR Manager
16 Sam Adofo
sam.adofo@salmony
outhcentre.org
Director Salmon Youth
Centre
No response
17 Sam Holden
sam@stephentaylorar
chitects.co.uk
Associate Stephen Taylor
Architects
Hi Shivani
Apologies for not replying sooner
I worked on the Bermondsey Spa Site C Masterplan when I was with Glenn Howells Architects (GHA) back in 2005. Un
either a hard or soft copy of the actual document. You might have better luck contacting the London office of GHA dire
know still works there from that time is Reinhold Schmaderer, but someone else may be able to access the document
I hope this helps.
Sam
18 Katrina Hogg
07713 245 854
Main Leader Neckinger TRA Agreed for 1.5 hour interview
19 Jeremy McGahan
jmcgahan@fsatnav.c
om
Secretary Bermondsey Spa
TRA
Agreed for 2 hour interview