The reason that co-op is popular (although I appreciate not popular enough to keep) is due to its easy parking so it’s inportant for the viability of the shop.
I might park my car and go on a hike to get to Dartmouth Road but that’s because they serve me cheese toasties, real ale and sweets! Budgens doesn’t provide the same attraction I’m afraid.
Now that all depends on the Budgens as it is a run as a franchise. Jay’s Budgens in Crofton Park has an amazing stock including Coopers Bake bread and a great range of spices.
Really? There are two possible effects on parking from the introduction of an 89 room hotel:
My assertion is that it is overwhelmingly more likely that it will be option 1 - an 89 room hotel with ZERO parking facilities is likely to have at least some guests (even if it is a modest number, say 10%) who require parking. You are asserting that there will be no effect on demand for parking. So in essence you are saying that NO guests at this 89 room hotel will EVER require parking.
You are making an assertion without providing evidence, just as I did. Unless you can provide evidence, your statement is speculative, by definition. I’m not criticising you for that FWIW - I’d be a massive hypocrite if I did.
And - as a point of order - I didn’t say no guests at the hotel would ever require parking. Just that it wasn’t likely to be an issue.
While I appreciate that quite a few visit the co-op by vehicle, there is also a large number of the customers who visit on foot, commuters to name one group.
Loss of parking will without a doubt have an impact of sorts on the customer base, I don’t think it would be overall damaging to the store.
If others find other places to shop with easier parking, so be it. Those who cannot use their favourite shop any longer, that is sad.
On the flip side, looking at other concerns from other plans. It will also mean no coming and going of vehicles, less pollution from standing vehicles waiting for people to come out of the shop.
There is plenty of genuine Victorian architecture around the area, which will remain, helping keep its identity.
I genuinely feel for those who will directly be impacted by the changes, loss of light on Stanstead Road, as well as any parking issues which arise. Hopefully most of which will indeed be addressed by the Perry Vale car park. Like many other such businesses, off site parking is common, and usually listed on their websites.
I would be curious to see some examples of what those opposed to the appearance would like to see instead.
Hopefully this is just the first draft, and tweaks can be made where required to make it a little easier on the eye.
At the end of the day its appearance is only one part of it, and only really affects those who have to see it day in day out.
I don’t see it having a negative impact on the area, more a positive. Those visiting to see the Victorian architecture will have the opportunity to stay overnight too now.
I think that’s fair to say.
More information on parking from the planning documents:
See also:
It won’t be used by visitors; Lewisham Council will use it as bed and breakfast for homeless families.
In responce to pauline and a few others mentioning that the building wasn’t very creative/ ascetic, I can’t say I’ve ever stayed in a creative holiday inn, It think It’ll serve the purpose most holiday inn’s do. You know what you’re getting, a room and a continental breakfast haha !
It’s not trying to be a lovely long weekend stay hotel like www.artistresidence.co.uk in london/brighton.
It would be nice for us lot “on the wrong side of the tracks” to have visitors come by and for the perry vale car park to serve a real purpose 
Right, a couple of things:
@FaeryCatmother “speculative” means based on conjecture rather than knowledge. It’s not about evidence necessarily. There has been concern expressed that the introduction of an 89 room hotel with no parking facilities would increase pressure on local parking. These concerns are based on the knowledge that people (including hotel guests) own and drive cars and require parking. I don’t think you need evidence to support a hypothesis that some hotel guests will want to park a car. What I was objecting to originally was the dismissal of these concerns with the statement “the clientele are not likely to be driving”: I don’t see how that can be based on knowledge and therefore it is speculative. We see every day in Forest Hill people driving to the area, parking and then commuting into central London, so I don’t see why the hotel guests behaviour would markedly different. While I don’t believe need evidence to support the notion that some hotel guests want to park, this article is indirectly related and discusses how hotels use parking charges as an indirect way of generating revenue and that such revenues were trending up https://www.hospitalitynet.org/opinion/4078902.html
@anon30031319 i don’t understand the concern to be so much about the loss of the coop parking as it is now so much as the loss of the coop parking combined with the introduction of the hotel. I think the coop customer base tends to be largely footfall from local residents. But to lose the parking entirely whilst introducing a business that is likely to have a demand for more parking is the problem.
Thank you @anon5422159 - obviously that is far more authoratative on parking than mine. Demand for 13 cars per night, and it’s pretty obvious where that demand will fall unless there is some kind of affirmative action to compel guests to park in (e.g.) perryvale car park. You only need to take a stroll down Stanstead Rd (the residential part by the Co-op) to see that it is already at maximum capacity for parking.
Quick disclaimer - I don’t even own a car so my objections are not self-serving - I just think it’s ridiculous that no provision is being made for what seems to be an obvious need and that it’s local residents who have to deal with the fallout.
Now take a picture including the phone exchange and the view included in the ‘new guys’ post a few minutes ago.
I am sure there are some nicely decorated wheelie bins on the pavement you could include. I agree we do not want a mini Croydon, but lets be real we do need more spenders in FH. The alternstive is picturesque victorian shops with boarded windiws?
The reality may be that Lewisham Council treats the new hotel as Miriam Lodge V2, as per @InTheNightGarden’s comment.
This is pure speculation, provocative and political too, as is any idea that Forest Hill may become a Croydon. Unlike Croydon, Forest Hill does not have the same transport links or commercial zoning.
So perhaps we can arrange for homeless people to be moved to Croydon?
Indeed @Wynell there is a wide variety of properties down this one section of road. The important thing is to maintain the balance, which I am not sure this new proposal will damage in any way.
As far as appearance goes, I don’t see it as terrible, and as has been said, it is a trademark boring look.
Some of us like modern architecture as well as historic, and I for one appreciate the practical requirements.
Think it is important to separate the genuine concerns of local residents, and the provocative suggestions being made about its future uses, and how the area is somehow being transformed to replicate a different borough which was built in a very different way.
It would be good to hear from a wide selection of local people.
It is not for anyone to judge which views or concerns are “genuine” or not.
Everyone’s views are welcome here.
Speculation based on past trends is absolutely allowed on this forum, and again, it is not constructive to attack each other based on what we deem is speculative or not.
Above all, let’s leave the modding to the mods.
Blockquote
“Right then, there we are, we all signed off on this?”
“Looks great, Simon”
“Excellent design”
“Costs out really well”
“Perfect for the space”
“Lads”
“Brilliant, lets get it off to Planning”
“No, lads, really, hang on”
“OK, Emma, what is it?”
“This is Forest Hill”
“What?”
“Oh”
“She…she’s right…”
“Eh?”
“My god, she is”
“This is not just any old London suburb with its mix of ages and styles, it’s Forest Hill, a uniquely beautiful one with a flawless public realm that atttracts architectural tourism from across the world”
“Yes, I see”
“It seems so obvious now”
“We need to build something unique and astonishingly beautiful, unusual but won’t freak people out, small yet big enough to make it worthwhile…”
“We’ve been fools”
“Back to the drawing board”
Yes it is.
Yes they are.
I see no evidence of non-mods modding - so what’s the issue ?
Exactly. That part of Forest Hill is unfortunately ugly AF…
Yes there are some lovely Victorian buildings, but they all look very run down due to lack of investment and care.
Having a large Holiday Inn will help mark Forest Hill as a “destination” rather than somewhere you just drive through. If other large businesses and entrepreneurs see Holiday Inn investing money and having confidence in the future of Forest Hill, they might be encouraged to do the same…
