I still think FH has a lot of merit architecturally largely due to the 1930's influence. There have however been several 'atrocities' over the years not least UPVC mansions in Devonshire Road which looks like an advert for Everest double glazing. I don't think the Berkelely Homes development adds anything but in fact is too overbearing and blocks the long view of the Christchurch steeple from the station platforms and also from further up London Road.

I don't think Jeff's proposals are very good to be honest and need a thorough rethink. It does look like an air traffic control tower. Art is meant to be challenging and thought provoking but at least you can leave the gallery at any time and go home. If you have to look at this building every day I think it will become a little wearing. No no no.

Agree absolutely re the Berkeley site (Forest Hill's very own Berlin Wall) and other similar developments. Its a bit like having a canyon of flats each side of the railway!

I wonder who they appeal to? They are not cheap. Rich young professionals with a train-spotting side-line perhaps?

PART I

Yesterday it all became much clearer to me. I found out who ‘Roz’ is (You have been to my house and I to yours). Suddenly being able to put a face, a personality to the comments made sense to me. Why couldn’t Roz direct her comments to me directly as two people who have worked on the Forest Hill Society? I realised what I find wrong with the ‘anonymous’ postings or at least what was anonymous to me. Baggydave may know who seeforemiles is and they may know who Roz is for all I know .For the uninitiated into this club it left me with a bigger question. Am I really supposed to take seriously all of the comments that are made when I don’t know the background or the expertise or possibly the hidden agenda of that person? In our politically correct world perhaps we are supposed to give everyone’s comments the same credence. I’m sorry to say that I don’t.
We would not entertain this in our daily lives where we would expect our solicitor, plumber, builder to be an expert in the field in which we seek their speciality. Similarly it is like that with opinion. We have all heard ‘Of course he or she would say that because….’

I have spent fourty two years of my life so far making sculpture on a daily basis and since the age of twenty one there has never been a time in my life when I have not been restoring/enhancing or developing a building alongside my sculpture. I have restored listed Georgian buildings, Victorian buildings, built modern studios and restored warehouses. I have spent twenty years building a house in Portugal where every detail has been carefully sourced and painstakingly considered. My house in Portugal has been the subject of many articles.

My properties in Havelock Walk have always been used by Lewisham Council as examples of what is good about Lewisham. My house at no.6 was used for their calendar.

I list some of these things not so much to blow my own trumpet but to start to expand the point that I for one either consciously or unconsciously consider someone’s opinion within a context.
For me making art and buildings is a language. It is a highly developed language. I do not expect people to understand my sculpture without making a huge effort. Like any language if you don’t understand or make an effort you won’t get it. Any subject which tries to push boundaries will be difficult to understand and the people who push the boundaries have no obligation to make it easy for anyone. When this happens you get the mediocre ‘Art by committee’ that we have outside Sainsbury’s, but at least it has butterflies (sorry Roz)
Sometimes people have come in to my studio and said ‘You mean you sell that rubbish’ I don’t take comments like this personally because it usually comes from people who are threatened by something. Something new to them that they don’t understand.

I have no idea what Roz has done in her life to make her an expert on architecture or art, or any of the other critics for that matter. I am sure if I was to tell her that Sir Terry Farrell and Lord Foster support my design she would retort that their work “needs a thorough rethink”.
The saying ‘I don’t know much about art but I know what I like’ would be a much more honest response.

For me a swimming pool isn’t just a place to swim, the design and context is important. I was one of the people who fought to retain the pool where it is and to retain the façade.

The Sainsbury’s supermarket which I think Michael has pointed out as good design. This was the third design which I and others fought to improve on. Sainsbury’s were prepared to give us the absolute minimum.

PART II

I have actually spoken to over four hundred people about my design and I can say that the SE23.com forum is definitely not representative of public opinion in Forest Hill. It is neither representative of the negative comments about my design or the broader issues relating to Forest Hill.

I have devised something which I think will be more representative of opinion in Forest Hill and if I decide to continue to live here I will be trying to implement it.

When I gave my talk to the Forest Hill Society some years ago I had a huge response to the issues which I felt were important to try to change in Forest Hill. I for one have only wanted to live here if Forest Hill makes these changes.

With regard to Hilary’s comment about the wall around my proposed studio in Westbourne Drive. Firstly I felt it appropriate to retain the sense that this was a studio and not just a residential building but also as someone who during my time living at no.6 has had my house set on fire, my secretary abducted and tied up for several hours whilst five thugs ransacked my house. My wife had to avert the eyes of my eleven year old son as two couples openly had sex outside my house a few weeks ago at 5p.m. The entrance to Havelock Walk is a permanent dumping ground. The list of problems and incidents is too numerous to mention. Perhaps I also wanted to put a little distance between my home and the outside world. This is not the green and pleasant land that some think it is and I for one can’t wait for it to change.

I have given some indication of my experience with a few of the things I have done over the years. Perhaps it would be good to know more of the background and expertise of some of the critics.

....and just to add to what Jeff has said.. I agree with you Roz that we have some great architecture in SE23, that is or will never be in dispute, thanks to forward thinking people like Ted Christmas, but the common denominator in all of the examples that so far have been put forward bar a few that Michael suggested are from another era. They come from a time when builders and developers were craftsmen who were interested not just in a profit as we have today but in design, technique and detail. It's not cost effective for a developer or builder today to put the time and energy into creating what they did then so what we time and time again end up with is a milky poor pastiche of a cousin of was done then. With all of the modern methods of construction we have today, new materials and great architects we are missing a real opportunity to make a mark on Forest Hill that in 100 years time will be talked about in the way that you speak about properties from 100 years ago. I offered a challenge to those on the thread to give example of great privately funded modern architecture in SE23 and so far nobody has really taken up the challenge. To be fair since that challenge I have found a few more to add to the few that Michael put forward , but after a bit of research I found that they were well out numbered by bland mediocre boxes that have been built quickly,cheaply and with only enough regard to detail that would have allowed them to get past planning. If he knew poor Ted Christmas would be turning in his grave. Let me suggest one last thing..on google..type in Modern House Melbourne and then look at the image page to see an array of modern buildings, some you will like others you might not but you can't argue that their architecture is stuck in the past! Let's hope that in 100 years time residents of SE23 are not still talking about how great the architecture was 200 years ago!

I don't know anyone on this forum. I simply reacted to seeing a stand set up outside the station with a petition. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have no idea who Roz is, or anyone else here - although I see some familiar faces around FH and wonder if they post here, but that's all. Jeff I don't think my comments were particularly controversial. But I do think it's important to see a range of opinion.

However I do take issue with your stance that apparently one has to have an artistic/design/architectural background to be entitled to express an opinion about something that will be built in the area they live. So if someone doesn't like someone or dares to hold a differing view it means they don't understand it? Perhaps all it means is they don't like it, and are entitled to have a different perception or reaction.

I've already said I'm not particularly bothered about your proposals, just that I hoped despite the petition it would be treated like any other plan and follow the usual application procedures. I'm amazed you even cited my name as one of the critics, as I have quite a balanced view. But I DO have a right to express an opinion about it on a public forum concerning Forest Hill, the place I call home.

I'm sorry that Jeff chooses to take umbrage at criticism from members of the public. I do not and never have puported to be an expert on art but that is not the question or the issue. This thread has asked for comments from local people on a proposed planning application and in my 'role' as a local person I have given my opinion. Its a shame that the right of local people to say what they do or do not like is not accepted without having to provide justification. Unfortunately like many people I neither have a degree in art or architecture so I do not know how to express my views in the manner which you seem to expect. I visit galleries and museums and know what art I like and what I do not like. Its a long time since I became bothered about not having the right words to describe art. That is not my problem to be honest. Things either look ok to me or they don't. Whats more important to me is functionality,being fit for purpose, and appropriateness in its setting.

My view is I think refreshingly simple; I do not like the proposed design. As described previously it looks like its guiding aircraft in to land on Westbourne Drive. I also do not give a hoot about the views of Terry Farrell or Richard Rogers, both of whom have their own critics. They don't live here.

It seems perhaps that I am one of the few people who don't really see why Forest Hill needs a architectural landmark. But it already has anyway- the Horniman Museum. When I went to Barcelona some years ago there was an exhibition on modernism in Europe and the main exhibit happened to be the Horniman- not as you might have expected one of the many gems of Brussels or Barcelona itself.

Having seen the plans I for one am really hoping to see the building built as it looks modern and architecturally interesting, best of luck with the application Jeff.

I have just recieved a private message from Baggydave which I have deleted without reading. If this is supposed to be a forum then surely people should say what they have to say openly. I have not hidden who I am or my comments. If you have something to say Baggydave put it on the forum and don't pretend that by sending me a private message we somehow know each other. I don't know who you are.

Dear Roz,
You obviously did not read my post. I am all for people having their opinion which is why i spoke to over four hundred people. I didn't have to twist their arms to support my application or bribe them. You are very much in a minority,and most were critical of the lack of change in Forest Hill. Take the trouble to go to Lewisham and read some of the comments.I think you should get out and speak to people and find out what the people in Forest Hill think. I guess its time to get the views of the people who have just moved to Forest Hill as well as so many of the people who have waited for Forest Hill to improve. I suppose my reaction to your comments about my application and your desire for us to live like pigs in **** in order to keep the house prices down is to try even harder to change Forest Hill and make it the kind of place i and many others would enjoy living in. We are poles appart on that one.
Have just read some of the debate on the threatened new pound shop. I'm afraid Roz i am completely with Celtic Explorer on that one.Perhaps if the launderette was to become a cafe we could use the long awaited swimming pool as a public launderette. (Just a suggestion for your manifesto 'KEEP FOREST HILL CHEAP AND NASTY')

Thread: Old Blockbuster Site
http://www.se23.com/forum/showthread.php...&pid=34627

If Jeff considers all shades of opinions to be valid why does he castigate and try to publicly humiliate those who dare voice an alternative view of his proposals on a thread that has been set up - in fact by another member of the Forest Hill Society- for that purpose.?

I have just had someone point me in the direction of his comments on the blockbuster thread and its just unbelievable that someone feels justified in launching a fairly vitriolic personal attack on someone else just because they won't support their application and on the majority of Forest Hill'ers for tolerating ( even though they can't do much about it) the arrival of another Pound shop. Frustrating such a venture might be to people who want a more upmarket Forest Hill, these shops are here because they have identified a market. The truth is that incomes remain low in this area in general and people clearly find these businesses meet a need. Apparently also the good people of Forest Hill are ''Clampets' whatever they may be. Unfortunately I have no idea about that reference but I am assuming that its not intended to be flattering.

I said I had no wish to see another fax bureau and the like, but I preferred that to empty shops. This and my wish to portray a realistic picture about expectations of Forest Hill however provokes a response such as 'my cheap and nasty manifesto' and other completely unbelievable commentary.

So Jeff thinks we Forest Hill'ers currently all live like pigs in **** at present. However shabby it might be in parts, I cannot accept that its ****. This is a real disservice to those living in places of real economic decline in this country and elsewhere. Its also a real disservice to FH. And the tone of elitism a real disservice to such an artist of international repute.
Jeff seems to be concerned about the overall image of FH so why does he insist on doing it down all the time? I can appreciate that incidents outside one's home as described by Jeff as taking place at 5pm are not very nice, but does that really justify one building an effective cordon around one's proposed home? Its not an option available to many of us.

Like a lot of people, I like seeing business maintain their presence in Forest Hill particularly those which stay around for a long time. I was some time ago therefore particularly dismayed when Jeff launched an attack on MacKays for installing a new sign without planning permission. This was a business that had been established in FH for many years and one of the few survivors. It did not make sense to me to make a fuss about something so trivial and risk making MacKays think twice about staying here. We needed to be tolerant of minor indiscretions in supporting of such businesses staying here. Other overtly advertised businesses were also the focus of much discontent however whilst not the prettiest spectacle these businesses are what is keeping FH open and economically viable at present. We are not going to get to aesthetic nirvana if we end up with more and more empty shops. But as Jeff says, he and I are poles apart. He wants to create a different type of Forest Hill, others like me are trying not to lose what we've already got.

Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.

George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) Irish writer.

"The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water."
John Gardner

Dear Roz,

Yet again you have not read what I said (and your misrepresenting me is bordering on being libelous).

I will spell it out again. What I said was directed at you Roz, and I said, 'I suppose my reaction to your comments about my application and YOUR desire for us to live like pigs in xxxx in order to keep the house prices down.'

I would urge anyone to read CelticExplorers comments with regard to the debate going on about the pound shop and wider issues which Roz seems to support. Although it is humorous the underlying message is very clear.

I objected to the frontage to Mckays because it was cheap and ugly and as part of the campaign to regenerate Forest Hill it was identified that the shop fronts, shop signs and general clutter of signage was part of the problem. The planning department was supposed to have allocated a planning officer to make sure that future changes met with the standards set out. Since you are so concerned about my planning application, does Mckay fall into a different category where they don't need it? It has already been established that you Roz would prefer to encourage the worst rather than the best either because it will keep house prices down or you are visually blind. The frontage of Stag and Bow or St David's both in my opinion are attempts to care and make a statement, and are really wonderful for Forest Hill. (I guess you would disagree Roz) It is time to support the courage of these people who have invested in Forest Hill and whose input can only help the shops that have stayed loyal to Forest Hill. For my part Roz I want to see change and it is very definitely in the direction of the shops which have opened since the East London Line. It may not have been the right time for these changes in Forest Hill a few years ago but it certainly is now. We need action and with particular attention to the centre of Forest Hill. We get used to the rubish, the filthy pavements, the empty shops, the cheap and overpowering signs. I know there are many people who are desperate for this to be addressed.

Instead of distorting what I have written or ignoring the comments of Celticexplorer why don't you set out your manifesto for no change clearly and concisely so we all know what you mean and stand for. (You never know you might just have a handful of supporters for the Clampit party 'Partners in Grime').

I have held off posting my personal opinion on this application partly because I wanted to hear other peoples' views, and partly because I have found it quite difficult to make a decision about this. While SE23.com is not a perfect way to hear the 'view of SE23' it is a good way to hear some of the different opinion, it has also been interesting to read the comments of some of the people living closest to the site and discussing all the views with the Forest Hill Society planning committee.

These are my personal opinion and not those of the Forest Hill Society planning committee, and I doubt I will not please either side of this debate with some of my comments.

I admire Jeff for his taste and determination and for finding one of the ugliest building in Forest Hill for his proposal. It is a site that desperately needs redeveloping and Jeff has an eye for seeing potential in sites (such as the whole of Havelock Walk). I still disagree with him about £shops and a few other issues but he can't be right about everything

When I first saw Jeff's designs, over a year ago, I was not impressed; the vision of empty containers stacked on top of each other was the first thing that sprung to mind. But that was based on a black and white sketch that gave little indication of Jeff's plans. Looking at the new graphics I can begin to appreciate what Jeff is doing, but this is as much about art as architecture and I don't really feel qualified to talk on either subject (although I will defend the right of people to have opinions without being experts, and for those opinions to be heard).

If I lived next to this proposal I'm sure I would be objecting. Six storeys is out of context with the neighbouring houses, which are themselves out of context with the larger Victorian buildings further down, and the detached houses across the road, and the varying styles of blocks of flats from the 60s - 00s. I share Satchers views on enclosure of the entire front of the site, and I don't think Jeff's personal experiences (nasty though they are) should prompt everybody to build fortresses round their houses. The existing fence round the site is ugly, and I suppose that Jeff's boundary might look a bit nicer, but it will be taller and more imposing on the house to the south. A bit planting could easily remove it from view but there is the consideration of light levels even though the application site is to the north of its adjoining neighbour. I would far prefer a lower boundary to this site.

I am concerned that this 6 storey development may set a precedent for future buildings on this street and neighbouring streets. I think this would be entirely inappropriate as the Berkerley Homes development on Perry Vale demonstrates that even 5 storey blocks can be too tall for most streets. The thin nature of the building (from street view) is very different to most 6 storey buildings which are wider than they are tall (or at least significantly wider than this). I might suggest that it would be better if it were smaller at the top than the base, with more built on the Hinsley Place site to provide the same amount of living accomodation, or to remove the second house on Hindsley Place that is part of the plan. But I suspect that the height it something that is part of making the statement, so it is unlikely to be something Jeff would change in his designs.

I have deliberately left out some of the other concerns that I know neighbours have, but have not voiced on the forum. Since I am not a neighbour it is difficult for me to judge some of these issues, I think they have some valid concerns, and I would at least want to know which windows and balconies would be opaque. I could probably guess, but I don't believe this has been included in the planning application's documentation. But there are other ways that this development will impact the direct neighbours.

More than anything else I would like to see what this looks like when built, as I can't believe that somebody who has the choice to live here would deliberately build a new house for himself that was not to the highest artistic and architectural standards. Had this application come from almost anybody other than Jeff, I would probably conclude that it was a monstrous carbuncle! (what would I know, I'm not even royalty) But it would be extremely foolish to take Jeff out of the equation when trying to judge this application. He has the experience and vision that can make this work and the Lowe Tower could well be a notable part of Forest Hill built environment.

I have to say I'm quite excited about the new building! I didn't read this thread before now as didn't quite click what it was on about. I moved to Waldram Park Road back in December and am chuffed the proposal would be so close. I love Havelock Walk and as the partner of an artist who previously had great success with Open Studios when we lived in York where there was a great artistic community - would love to see futher artistic/studio spaces in the area. I think the building will be great for Forest Hill – a landmark to put us even further on the map and really hope it goes ahead! (Saying that - I'm not living right next door or on the street so it's obvious that the people directly around the building might not be keen but I would imagine Jeff has already addressed this in talking to 400 people!)

Lets start at the beginning.

I responded to a thread asking me for my opinion on a planning application that I did not even know existed. Like everyone else who posted I gave my opinion and joined in the discussion.

The next think I know I have the applicant on this thread making essentially agressive and personal comments about my integrity and practically everything else and getting a friend in on the act. He says he is open to criticism but then look how he treats someone who dares to disagree wth him. Next thing he seems to be actually suggesting that it is me who is being libellous!

This is nothing more than cyberbullying and frankly an attempt to undermine and belittle anyone who dares to expresses an alternative view about this planning application and the way forward for Forest Hill. I find the comments made inciteful of hatred and derision. There is robust discussion on a forum like this then there is a fine line after which you have something close to a campaign of harassment. I have myself taken advice and am considering further action of my own if this persists.

I wasn't aware a launderette = 'cheap and nasty'
It's a local service that some people need and it's a comment that really does speak volumes.

I don't always agree with Roz but I do in terms of the way anyone daring to question the design has been treated on this particular thread.

I've already made up my own mind regarding the aesthetics vs practicalities: If it's wanted and there are no serious objections, then obviously there's a good chance it will get the go-ahead.

ah come on Roz...relax a bit...reading back though your posts you've used some pretty strong words yourself...quote "Faceless" "plonked" "aggressive" "hostile" "dead" "negative" "c section" "hoot (preceded by ‘don’t give a )" "castigate" "attack" "Clampets" and "and"