Yeah, the cynic in me - and the actions of the developer so far - lead me to suspect that your Option 2 is the more likely.
After nine months of waiting for the appeal on the fencing, and presumably even longer to go through the actual development application, I can only begin to imagine the condition of the ground behind the fence, as I very much doubt the developer will be taking any steps to keep the place tidy.
At which point he’ll make the claim that the ground is severely neglected and in a poor state of repair, so there’s no visual amenity left to be preserved - and surely it would be better to have a residential development on the site than a piece of wasteland…
The developers have already flouted planning rules with the fence. With an enforcement order in place, and under appeal for that land… I would hope that is grounds for the council to delay consideration of the planning application the developer’s has submitted.
Everyone opposed to this should object (using the link above), and if possible lobby their local Councillors. The TPOs are a major obstacle for the developer, but objections will let the planning committee know the level of local opposition.
It might be the other way around because developer can’t take the proposed flats to appeal until after the application has been refused. Hopefully, it’s been validated now and the council will be making their determination within 8 weeks.
I’ve just received an update via change.org as I’d signed the original petition.
The planning application appears to have 7 comments so far, of which 6 have been classed as objections (I believe) link here to Lewisham Application page. If you wish to write against, or in support of this, or otherwise, best to do so fairly soon.
One key bit from the update linked to above is a public meeting next Thursday at 8pm at the Ackroyd Centre, extract from link above:
We’re also holding a public meeting on 11 April 2019 at 8pm at the Ackroyd Community Centre, Ackroyd Road, SE23 1DL - local councillors, our planning lawyer and architect and the rest of the campaign team will be on hand to update you and take any questions, so please come along if you can!
The SaveDuncombeHill Group have also put some put some publicly available documents together to help people with comments link here and in the petition link above and also here again. . If you have any question on the doc they have said they can be emailed saveduncombehillgreen@gmail.com .
Let me make clear none of the above is my work, all the work of others involved in the campaign, and as I said detail in the various links.
The @ForestHillSociety have put a short and succinct objection to the planning permission and published it on their site today:
It’s a good example for anyone else that wishes to add to the volume of objections, and also makes the astute observation that the 3D renders of the proposed development include at least one of the protected trees that is absent from the site plan.
The developers seem to be appealing against the enforcement notice for the erection of the fence. I assume I got a letter as I objected to the planning application- or have the council mailed all local residents? Does anyone understand the grounds for objection made by the developer (attached) and I assume ‘making your views on this matter to the planning inspector’ relate to the fence or is it the wider planning application too?
In addition to @anon93536262 reply, the council letter also mentions damage to the roots of the TPO’d trees as a concern.
The purpose of the letter seems to be to invite further public comment to resolve the appeal, asking for either written comment on triplicate, or emails.
@Suze would you be able to post the full letter here, including the 2nd page which gives the details of how to respond correctly?
So the easiest thing to do is to email teame2@pins.gsi.gov.uk, quoting APP/C5690/C/19/322410 and state your views on this matter, which is the planning enforcement notice for the errection of the fence without prior planning permission (i.e. not the planning permission for building flats on the land itself).
The full enforcement notice this relates to is here:
I can’t make head or tail of Lewisham Council’s Planning portal - has any Tree Preservation Order [‘TPO’] been granted yet? And the construction proposal to build a 3/4 block of flats is deemed ‘Registered’ [not ‘Decided/Refused’].
I understood that Lewisham Council also decided that the ongoing site hoarding had to be removed by the owner of the site - what enforcement is Lewisham Council currently taking, since it’s still there?
Who can local residents contact Lewisham Council to put ongoing pressure to ensure that the hoarding is removed asap?
So the planning application for the flats is DC/19/111251.
It currently has 129 comments, all are objections and none in support. It’s unclear when a decision will be made, but the Contacts section of the portal has the relevant council details.
The Tree Protection Orders were issued have been confirmed and can be found on the planning site too, though copies of the TPOs are here and here in case you are interested in which trees are protected:
Finally an enforcement notice was served for the removal of the fence (a full copy of which is linked in my reply above this one), but it has been taken to the Planning Inspectorate for appeal by the new landowner. Lewisham council have written to a number of people asking them to provide the Planning Inspectorate with comment to help come to conclusion on the enforcement notice. This can easily be done by email, as detailed in my previous reply.
I will write in support of removal of the fence. Prior to doing so, what I fail to understand is how a publicly accessible space [as it was for years] with open access and public bench seating, could be then fenced off.
I presume that London Borough of Lewisham/Glendale had accepted an ongoing responsibility in the past to maintain the Green, as it was never overgrown. Lewisham Council normally accepted an ongoing maintenance role when public access is accepted by an ongoing, private land owner [regardless of a change of land ownership].
In the case here, there was a fully instated, publicly accessible path and public seating.
Have you requested from Lewisham Council/Glendale to confirm that they maintained the Green until it was fenced off and whether, or not, a public footpath exists, which runs through the it to link Duncombe Hill to Brockley Road? I think this is the most obvious, additional legal way to prevent any development.
Yep - a terrific job to ensure TPO’s on pretty much all the trees in the ‘Green’ by those involved.
I noticed about a week ago that the site is still effectively ‘open’ to the public, due to one of the hoarding boards removed on Duncombe Hill. Legally speaking, that’s good news, in my view.
It is absolutely essential now to request from Lewisham Council [under a Freedom of Information request] for a response on the following:
Did London Borough of Lewisham maintain this site until it was fenced off?
If so, provide local residents with a copy of the original agreement made between the London Borough of Lewisham and the relevant landowner of the site under which the London Borough of Lewisham agreed to maintain the site.
Did the London Borough of Lewisham instate the publicly accessible pathway linking through the site from Duncombe Hill to Brockely Rise and/or the publicly used park benches?
Was the London Borough of Lewisham responsible for maintaining the same publicly accessible pathway and/or the same publicly used park benches?
Does the London Borough of Lewisham accept that there is a publicly adopted path running through the site from Duncombe Hill to Brockley Rise? If not, then why not?
I’ve never written to Lewisham Council under a Freedom of Information request before. However, if the above reads well, then I will do so. Just tell me who to address it to and I’ll get onto it.
Obtaining prove that Lewisham Council maintained the site on the understanding that the public would benefit indefinitely from use and free access will effectively bind the new owners of the site on the same terms and ensure the success of removing the hoardings.
I think the path and bench you may be thinking of are actually outside the area that’s been sold and fenced off. There’s a picture of the area at the very top of this topic, and the fence is also outlined in the enforcement notice. You can also visit the actual site and see if you are passing.
The land registry does, and the records are already posted further up this topic. It’s worth reading top to bottom as many questions are already asked and answered.
I’ve read the whole post and visited the site today.
The useful Land Registry download doesn’t appear to include a section relating to ‘Restrictive Covenants’, which could really help. If there is a negative restriction relating to building on the Deeds to the plot. If this Land Registry page is available, then someone post it up. Otherwise, a search of the title deed is required [if anyone can assist!].
There is no information presented in relation to what appears to have been Lewisham Council’s clear acceptance in the past to manage the whole site [including the footpath/benches] with a previous, private landowner. As such, the whole of the ‘Green’ included a local authority ‘adopted’ path and fully accessible open space for all. I believe it would be useful to contact either Peter.Maynard@lewisham.gov.uk or Vince.Buchanan@lewisham.gov.uk [Lewisham Greenscene Managers] and request a copy of any Lewisham Council agreement to manage an ‘open and accessible’ green space on behalf of a private landowner, which may back up a position that the ‘Green’ should be kept as open space, accessible to all. This information would also show just how long the ‘Green’ has been an open space
Given the urgency of the current planning application, then a reasonable, timescaled response of 5 working days should be requested prior to applying for the same under a Freedom.information@lewisham.gov.uk application having contacted the relevant department without response.
Any thoughts on the above as an additional way to effectively block the development?
