She completely omits that the ‘harm to buildings’ is to listed ones and basically decides that she doesn’t like them anyway so it’s not a great loss.
The situation is more complex than she’ll acknowledge and the article is very one sided imo.
She comes at it from a very ideological pov but when it’s people’s communities it’s more nuanced than that.
I agree we need to think more creatively about creating opportunities for housing and perhaps we should think about what is outside most of our doorsteps. We have 9,000 miles of roads in London and a cry from many people in large houses with wide roads/avenues to create LTNs where active traffic is promoted.
Once a wide road becomes an LTN and traffic ceases, the road no longer needs to be so wide to serve as a public highway with room to park cars on either side. We could repurpose the road for housing with a design that allows deliveries and accessibility requirements. We could change LTNs from being socially exclusive to being socially mixed if we used this opportunity for social housing. It is quite a complicated option, privacy and light amongst other requirements but we need to challenge ourselves.
The other option which you won’t like is to turn part of the LTN roads into allotments freeing up the existing allotments to build houses on.
Back to the Anya Martin article, I found it very unbalanced and the belittling of Lammas Green uncalled for. The photograph of it didn’t do it any justice.
I suspect she’s never stepped foot on the estate or spoken to the campaigners she has such strong opinions about
I think that’s a good idea. I love solutions that make urban spaces more green. A lot of LTN boundaries have planters as simple ways to block roads, but it makes sense to narrow roads and increase greenery. Once LTNs are introduced it may also be advantageous to make some of the roads one-way where possible - allowing for narrowing and wider pavements with grass and flowers and electric charging points (example roads that could be one-way would all the side roads off Garthorne and Grierson Roads).
I’m doubtful that there are many opportunities for building in the middle of roads - they would need to be very wide roads to provide adequate amenity space and prevent overlooking of existing residents’ homes.
Friends of Mais House report that:
“A claim has been issued in the High Court seeking a SECOND Judicial Review of Lewisham Council’s handling of planning approval for the proposed monster Mais House redevelopment on Sydenham Hill. The community is again asking the Court to quash Lewisham’s approval of the Corporation of the City of London’s plans.”
Thank you @Michael
Our full press release, including the saga so far, is here:
05.10.2021 PRESS RELEASE No.11 - FRIENDS OF MAIS HOUSE.docx (948.4 KB)
FRIENDS OF MAIS HOUSE - LATEST NEWS
COURT RULED COUNCIL ACTED ILLEGALLY – BUT LEWISHAM DETERMINED TO DRIVE MONSTER DEVELOPMENT THROUGH
Earlier this year your generosity helped fund a Judicial Review into Lewisham’s grant of planning permission for a massive build on the summit of Sydenham Hill.
Despite success in the High Court, with a Judge ruling that Lewisham Council had acted illegally and urging the Council and the applicant to work with the community on a more acceptable proposal, Lewisham Planners rushed the very same application back before a Planning Committee, which, in a tick box exercise, again granted permission.
Following further legal advice a claim for a SECOND Judicial Review has now been issued in the High Court and served on Lewisham Council and City of London.
The Friends are asking for contributions to their legal fund here:
Read our full press release here:
As followers of the Mais House saga probably know, despite the High Court quashing Lewisham’s previous grant of planning permission, Lewisham rushed the application back before another planning committee - on which some of the earlier PC members also sat - and they yet again approved the same application.
Following legal advice, a claim was lodged in the High Court and now it seems we’re heading for a “rolled up” hearing. This is one where a Judge hears arguments from both sides as to whether to grant a Judicial Review and, if he agrees, will proceed straight to into that JR … very likely on the same day. Different judge this time: Sir Duncan Ouseley.
The Friends of Mais House are immensely grateful for the community’s support and are asking for further contributions to the legal fund here:
Learn more and contact the Friends via
I’m sorry this is still dragging on. When I went to the planning consultation event for the Knapdale Close infill development I was shocked at how officials often talked to and treated residents of the estate who came with legitimate concerns about the impact on their lives and open spaces.
Did you see that people are getting organised across the border in Southwark about similar plans?
Thanks Hannah. I shall share and Tweet about that event.
“Rolled Up Hearing” set for 9th June. High Court Justice Sir Duncan Ouseley will then decide whether to grant and proceed straight to a Judicial Review. We fight on!
Huge thanks to Forest Hill Society and everyone else donating to the legal fund. Your support is amazing.
Friends of Mais House campaign now on FindOthers. High Court hearing fast approaching. Please donate/share/ask questions of FH local election candidates
Forest Hill: Anthony Bays (Con), Mark Bennett (Lib Dem), Peter Bernards (Lab), Krish Brown (Lib Dem), Martin Cox (Green), Sophie Davis (Lab), Billy Harding (Lab), Aimee Henderson (Con), Paul Mahoney (Con), Mike Peters (Green), Julia Rendall (Green), John Russell (Lib Dem).
