The Town Hall meeting was chaired by John Paschoud. There was myself and another neighbour and we had a chance to have our say to John and the planning officer (Miheer Mehta). Main points were noted. No one from the developers or owners, although there was an unaccountable man whose name I did not catch, who said nothing. We bumped into him afterwards in the street making a mobile conversation to someone about how the meeting went. So I think he was spy: crude, unaccountable and ineffective I thought.
Since then a deadly silence...
Still miss the tree, though.
This development was approved last night by the planning committee despite the small gardens and overlooking issues.
The owner of the site mentioned he had read comments on this site which in part led to the change from four flats to two houses, which was certainly an improvement on the original plans.
Yes. I did my rhetorical best to persuade them not to allow it. I think we would have settled for a compromise of one house (not two) but the system does not encourage compromise: it is accept or reject. I think we may have fallen victim to the time of night (it was getting on for 10pm) and the placing: the committee had just deferred one application and then rejected another (both unusual apparently). They had just had about 45 minutes of bullying from council officers over this, with the vote even being retaken for the record (although it had been perfectly clear to me had been decided).
What was interesting is that objecting and arguing does have effects: on Tyson Road it has led to the saving of more trees and more thought given to the wildlife, on the land near 29 Shipman Road it has led to a reduction from four flats to 2 houses. It seems as if you might not win but you can get some change and compromise. The process is better for people taking an interest.
I have just been alerted to all this. I have young children and regularly cross the junction between Shipman Road and Siddons Road with them. It is a nasty corner with cars often coming up to the junction and swinging round into Shipman Road without stopping. Was any mention made of this during the objections? My objection would be to cars coming in and out of the site, if this is to be allowed (although it hardly seems possible that you could allow for off-road parking, given the already crowded space).
I believe that they have to prrovide enough off street parking for the number of dwellings they intend to build. Either way you have to contest it. They always go for more expecting to be beaten down to what they really want.
As michael reported in post #43, planning permission has already been granted for this development. You can see the full plans for the two houses on Lewisham's website. The reference is
DC/10/74983/X.
According to the conditions
The development hereby permitted shall include secure parking provision for cycles
so unfortunately, any vehicles will be parked on the street. Government policy on Transport can be found in PPG13, but cycling is to be encouraged for journeys of less than 5km. The policy that required councils to limit the number of parking spaces allowed in new residential developments and set high parking charges to encourage the use of alternative modes of transport was deleted in January. Further guidance is given in the Manual for Streets, but this is non-binding.
Does anyone know what's happening with this development? It's been lying dormant for a good few months, possibly since last year.
It has indeed been inactive for about a year now.
The owner has another planning application to demolish the garage and extension next to the house (57 Siddons Road) and build a new end of terrace unit that will have 2 flats. Probably waiting until permission is granted and then do all the building work at the same time.
http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/LEWIS-XSL...mkey=65465
That explains it. Thank you for your answers.