Got a message from Commonplace yesterday but didn’t believe it. Let’s hope Einstein’s definition of Insanity is proved correct and they don’t get a different result by doing the same thing over and over again.
1 Like
Sadly that’s often how planning works I fear. It’s an often aggressive and undemocratic system
1 Like
Yes, my heart sank. It would be unbelievable that this could happen if the world were sane - especially at such short notice. But this is Kafka Towers at work here. Masses and masses of confusing documents have been added to Lewisham’s website in the last few days and probably more to follow. Sigh.
Still up to their old tricks. I read one one of them they claimed the east side of Lammas Green was not as architecturally notable as the other sides in an attempt to devalue the harm (despite it being built in the same style by the same architect at the same time).
The whole thing is so unbecoming of them to put it mildly
1 Like
Received a ‘consultation’ questionnaire today about Drakes Court development (junction of Devonshire Road and Ewelme Road. Work has clearly already begun there, so is there really any possibility that the consultation is meaningful rather than a tick-box sham?
1 Like
If Grainne wants to stand as an independent councillor in Forest Hill, I can guarantee her at least one vote.
4 Likes
I worry that a lot of councillors hold this ideological need to combat perceived ‘NIMBYism’ at any cost.
And that can be seen here in this completely aggressive and uncompromising approach by Lewisham Council.
What they can lose sight of is that the many council residents fighting for the right to green spaces and community preservation (and in this case respect for much valued listed buildings), are not privileged career ‘NIMBYs’. They’re ordinary, often working class people who deserve not to be crammed in and concreted over. They deserve green spaces as much as those lucky enough to own private gardens.
Infilling estates is all well and good but it has to be done responsibly. And can’t be at any cost to those living there. There has to be more understanding and compromise and less bully-boy tactics.
4 Likes
Neighbouring Southwark Council are infilling aggressively too – here’s the Green Party’s take on it and a list of those green spaces that are under threat. Alas, what’s sauce for the Southwark goose is usually sauce for the Lewisham (and Lambeth) gander, three of the absolutely worst boroughs for planning.
1 Like
Here we go again …
Less than 24 hours to go now. Feeling completely swamped by the avalanche of 41 new documents and 250 page Case Officer Report at such short notice.
1 Like
Good Luck Mary.
The arrogance displayed by our Council is utterly astounding but it seems that’s what happens when there is no Opposition.
1 Like
Planning Application has been approved for Mais House after this was referred back to Lewisham Council by the High Court.
— Alan Hall 💙 (@alan_ha11) June 29, 2021
I advocated for the local community and disability campaigners.
#SE26 pic.twitter.com/3pEZIHzULN
Were any adjustments made to the application?
1 Like
I don’t have the right words this morning. This is shattering news for our area, our environment and community.
Enjoy the trees and the precious wildlife that relies on them while you can.
@CllrAlanHall spoke eloquently under standing orders. Resident Helen Kinsey passionately and our QC Richard Harwood was firm, thorough and clear in setting out the wrongs of this application and its process.
But despite all that, despite 211 and still counting objections and only one letter of support, despite the strong objections from the Council’s own consultees including the Conservation Officer and the Design Review Panel, despite powerful letters of objection from MPs Helen Hayes and Shadow Attorney General Ellie Reeves, only one Committee member - @CllrStephenPenfold - had the courage to try to do the right thing.
There was no debate. There were some questions, but just as I thought a Committee discussion was going to start, @CllrKevinBonavia moved a vote in favour. Having done so, he made a speech in support of the application. CllrStephenPenfold tried to explain why he wanted to vote against and this might have kicked off a discussion, but the Committe Chair John Paschoud wouldn’t let him speak, instead calling on Cllr Olurotimi Ogunbadewa who, in his first words in the meeting, seconded Cllr Bonavia’s motion
The vote 5:1 in favour. Only Stephen Penfold voted against.
Shameful.
1 Like
Nope.
An article on the other side of the fence for this development, but I felt it was worth sharing for the debate it may trigger around the many infill developments being considered in the area by Lewisham Council:
3 Likes
Thanks for sharing this, completely agree with the sentiment expressed. We have an affordable housing crisis and a desperate need for new affordable homes in this borough and across London. Where do we expect to make up the shortfall if not looking at in-fill development.
1 Like
But of course, it’s not true what they’re claiming. It’s either deliberate mischief making (some might think it defamatory, as the campaigners are most emphatically NOT against an increase in social housing on the estate) or maybe it’s a product of sloppy research. Whatever the case, I’m not going to waste my time responding to these Yimbys (not of course that it is their backyard) as they have their own agenda.
As the Judge said:
“156. In my view, the submissions of the IP [Interested Party: that is the applicant, the City of London Corporation] lost sight of the fact that, in the main, the objectors were not opposed to the redevelopment of the Site in order to upgrade the existing social housing and increase the number of residential units. The Claimant’s objection related to the inappropriate height and scale of the new buildings, which would harm the setting of the Grade II Listed buildings and the Conservation Area."
For anyone interested, this is a balanced report:
And this is interesting:
1 Like
I’m fairly sure that if the developers had continued with the plans for the 12-storey development of 145 units, Lewisham would have granted permission. I don’t personally think that this would have been appropriate for the site, but YIMBYs should have been opposing this development as not large enough! Instead they remain silent on backing the over-development they claim to favour and then criticise those who object to too developments that impact their quality of life.
But the bigger missed opportunity is not in these relatively small schemes, where local residents argue whether there should be 145 or 110 or 90 units, but in schemes such as Lewisham Gateway where 1,000 homes were built with no social housing.
Or another scheme was Churchwood Gardens (off Tyson Road), where the developer was able to argue (after planning approval and inspector’s report for a scheme that included 25% social housing) that there should be no social housing because it would not be profitable enough for them.
It is these failures of the planning system to deliver social housing over many years that now puts pressure on all amenity space in existing social housing (usually flats with no or little outside amenity space) to be built on. This won’t bother those YIMBYs who usually live in comfortable homes and possibly have nice allotments safe from the developers, but will impact the residents of social housing who they slur as NIMBYs for wanting adequate daylight and bit bit of useful amenity space for their families.
It may well be time to consider classifying allotments (and at least some small areas of Green Belt) as ‘brownfield’ spaces so that it is easier to develop housing on these sites rather than infill in existing social housing. Allotments benefit few people and are sometimes in places where some social housing could be built with less impact to local communities. And let’s not get started on former gas works that get turned into single storey retail warehouses rather than housing - what a waste.
4 Likes
Ooh @Michael don’t rattle my cage on allotments. I’m all in favour of allotments, but I believe they should be allocated to people who don’t have their own gardens.
1 Like
I can understand that point of view but look at the description of Grange Lane allotments:
“The soil here is mostly heavy clay. In winter it can be waterlogged and in summer it can be baked and cracked. It takes lots of digging and organic matter to keep the soil workable and productive.”
http://grangelane.org/
Wouldn’t this site be better used for the community by building housing? For every individual who has the opportunity to grow their own fruit and veg, a family could have a home. I know allotments are lovely, but I’m not sure that public land in cities should be used for “hobby-farms” (I’ll probably get into trouble for using such a term).
Of course this is nothing compared to the land use of an 18-hole golf course - would a compulsory reduction to nine holes really be a disaster? The problem is that these are privately owned whereas allotments are public land (but with protecting legislation). I’m happy to be convinced otherwise but I think it is important to think creatively about opportunities to provide social (and non-social) housing in London and the surrounding area and recognising that if we are to build then we need to consider all possible options rather than just the easy options that impact the poorest Londoners most.
1 Like