Nightclub row scuppers housing plans

Peabody had planned to build the homes on a site near Elephant and Castle in Southwark, and agreed to provide a new venue for nearby Ministry of Sound as part of the plans.

But it has since backed down on its proposal to include space for the popular nightspot, sparking a furious reaction from the nightclub’s owners.

In a letter to Southwark Council, consultants DP9, on behalf of Peabody, wrote: “A number of factors – including legislation changes; and technical complexities relating to acoustic requirements necessary to accommodate the Ministry of Sound – have contributed to the decision my client has now taken not to pursue the new Ministry of Sound within the development proposals.”

The application for the mixed tenure scheme has been withdrawn and fresh plans will be resubmitted, but it is not yet clear what these will consist of.

The site, dubbed the Bermondsey Triangle, sits in land bounded by two roads and a railway line close to Elephant and Castle.

The existing nightclub is not on the site of the proposed development, but a residential scheme in such close proximity would mean it breaches local licensing requirements.

In a letter to Southwark sent in March, Ministry of Sound’s lawyers Foot Anstey branded Peabody’s decision “pathetic”.

It said: “The reason given by Peabody was, in Ministry of Sound’s opinion, pathetic – something to do with acoustic results.

“In Ministry of Sound’s opinion the real reason why the collaboration has failed is that despite Ministry of Sound’s enormous outlay… Peabody has shown itself to be incompetent and completely incapable of delivering a project of this size and complexity.”

It added that it was “simply jaw-dropping” that Peabody could consider not accommodating the club, saying it would oppose any development in “the strongest possible terms”.

Responding, a letter from Dale Meredith, interim executive director of development and sales at Peabody, said including the club in the site would not be viable.

He explained the social housing rent cut had removed £6m in projected income from the scheme.

“This is a new factor, which none of us could have foreseen, and is compounded by our concerns around speculatively investing in such a high-risk and uncertain technical exercise,” he wrote.