The London Borough of Southwark (Elephant and Castle Town Centre) Compulsory Purchase Order (No.2) 2023

On 7 January 2025,  inspector D J Board issued her delegated decision to confirm the London Borough of Southwark (Elephant and Castle Town Centre) Compulsory Purchase Order (No.2) 2023. This order superseded a previous CPO made on 2 February 2023 (the London Borough of Southwark (Elephant and Castle Town Centre) Compulsory Purchase Order (No.1) 2023) and later withdrawn in October 2023, due to alternative relocation arrangements being agreed with two of the objectors which necessitated changes to be made to the earlier Order.

At the opening of the inquiry there were three remaining objectors. Network Rail withdrew during the inquiry and two others, Beset (a tenant to Arch Co and landlord to numerous traders) and Distriandina (a tenant of Arch Co), withdrew after the inquiry closed. Beset and Distriandina secured relocation packages.

Background

Readers may recall the efforts made to regenerate  the Elephant and Castle over 30 years which began with the London Borough of Southwark (Heygate) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 which was confirmed in July 2013. The scheme underlying that Order is built out, forming LendLease’s  “Elephant Park” development on the former Heygate Estate. This  Elephant and Castle Town Centre CPO represents  the final centrepiece of the often controversial proposals  to deliver on the ambitions of the plan led London Borough of Southwark’s “Elephant and Castle Opportunity Area Supplementary Planning Document 2012”. Over this time new development plans have been adopted which have continued to support regeneration.

The Order Land the subject of the Town Centre CPO was required to deliver the redevelopment of the now demolished Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre and other land to the west to deliver a scheme comprising 1,000 homes (35% affordable) , an upgraded northern line tube station entrance, retail, offices (including affordable workspace & leisure/cultural uses), a new building for London College of Communication, access and highway works, public realm and landscaping.

In relation to the new guidance on CPO issued on 3^rd October, after the proofs were submitted and before the inquiry opened later that month, the Inspector commented that  “In terms of fairness the new guidance cannot be applied to the steps taken before it was published”.

After failed CPOs in Barking TC and Windsor & Maidenhead, practitioners may feel comforted by the success of this section 226 Town Centre CPO. What lessons can be learnt?

Lessons Learned

Lesson no 1: Ensure the purpose of the scheme fits in with the development plan

There was no doubt about this.

Yes.

Lesson no 2 : Ensure the Planning Permission is in Place

Here the planning permission was in long since place, partially implemented and indeed added to/varied to accommodate the relocation of objectors.

Lesson no 3: The need for CPO should be plainly demonstrated to be a last resort.

The vast majority of the land interests had been acquired by agreement with the Inspector concluding

“The AA has undertaken extensive land assembly without the need for use of compulsory purchase powers. Considerable steps have been taken to seek to acquire the land and rights by agreement. In particular that there has been extensive engagement with those impacted regarding relocation, mitigation and accommodation works.

There has been constructive engagement with all parties (who are all being professionally advised), this was demonstrated in the evidence presented to the Inquiry. Specifically before starting the compulsory purchase process the developer made genuine attempts to acquire the properties and rights by agreement. This continued and offers were made to all affected parties which the developer considers to be appropriate.  In addition to this the developer explained how it has been prepared to be flexible and innovative in offers made and sought to accommodate the feedback from affected parties

In addition to this the offers have not just been about financial settlements but where necessary sought to consider the mitigation of impacts and betterment for those parties..

Overall, the evidence presented has demonstrated the fair and transparent approach to engagement and negotiation. Where appropriate significant and detailed plans have been put together to demonstrate how relocation and fit out of particular units would be undertaken. In addition to this there has been a significant amount of additional work undertaken to ensure that the existing occupiers can return, where appropriate, or benefit from relocation to another unit within the scheme.”

The taking of these “considerable steps” and the “constructive engagement” of the Acquiring Authority and the developer  resulted not only the eventual  withdrawal of all qualifying objectors but also in the confirmation of this CPO Order.

Despite the best efforts of the Acquiring Authority and the developer CPO powers were still necessary in order to deliver public realm on the East Site, to deliver sound mitigation works for the existing Corsica Studios on the East Site and to enable demolition of the existing London College of Communication building. Additional railway arch units were also needed to use as relocation premises for some of the displaced tenants and occupiers of the scheme.

Objectors

One of the original 11 objectors was Corsica Studios, a nightclub which has been identified as a grassroots music venue in the Mayor for London’s Culture and Night Time Economy SPD. The nightclub was initially envisaged as needing to relocate to one of the arches as it was unable to stay in its existing location due to sound emanating from the premises negatively affecting the amenity of the new residential properties on the East Site. A last minute sound mitigation solution meant that Corsica Studios could continue to operate from its existing premises but in order to deliver this the earlier Order had to be withdrawn and a new one made. The Inspector noted that “extensive work has been undertaken to ensure they can remain in their current premises”.

Conclusion

In confirming the Order the Inspector concluded that there were no Public Sector Equality Duty conduct issues and the duty had been fully complied with. Although there were some minor adverse effects on the occupiers of the impacted land the overall effect of the CPO on the occupiers will be positive due to the accommodation and mitigation measures, the relocation and the availability of compensation.

The Acquiring Authority had therefore put forward a compelling case in the public interest to confirm the CPO which was required for the purposes of delivering the land and rights required to carry out the scheme.

The CPO Inquiry website can be found here should you wish to have a read of any of the CPO documents.