SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Site Feedback | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Planning Application: Land to the rear of 107 Honor Oak Park
Author Message
alethius


Posts: 3
Joined: May 2012
Post: #1
12-06-2012 04:11 PM

Hello all,

This is my first post. I've just moved to the area, and one week into living here, have discovered that the garden behind the house I live in has had a planning application for 5 houses (reduced from 8!)

There was a previous thread on here remarking on the loss of trees from the same plot of land, despite the fact that they were all covered with TPOs.

Further details below:

http://tinyurl.com/cavbpsp

Does anyone know if there's an action group I can take this to?

Thanks,

Michael

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #2
12-06-2012 05:29 PM

We have also been sent a consulation letter about this. Have yet to study this properly but am inclined to object at first sight. It has some similaritiies to the proposed garden development at 97 Honor Oak Park (with planning inspectorate) in that it is not a brown field development as claimed and falls under the category of backland development I believe.

I imagine the Forest Hill Society will take a view on this as will HOPRA.

HTH

Find all posts by this user Reply
HOPcat


Posts: 40
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #3
13-06-2012 10:19 AM

Hello, Michael,
HOPRA objects strongly to this application - it came out of the blue, although clues were signalled by first, the developer knocking down a lovely old Victorian front wall to build a driveway through from front to back, and then felling trees that were supposed to be protected.
HOPRA has put in its objections to the scheme on, among other grounds, overdevelopment, that virgin back garden land should be kept as it is, that building on it alters the character of the neighbourhood and destroys the local ecology, and that building over land in the area increases the risk of flooding for properties further down the hill.
A previous attempt to build housing on the back garden at no 97 was rejected by the council, and has now gone to appeal. Fingers crossed.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Woody


Posts: 61
Joined: Oct 2006
Post: #4
15-06-2012 01:30 PM

If you look at the proposed layout a very large proportion of the developed area is taken up by the access drive and car parking. The housing units themselves are tiny as are the gardens which are of the absolute minimum size.

See here:

http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/ACOLLATED...261_10.pdf

To me the proposals are unsympathetic, unimaginative and an overdevelopment of what is currently an attractive green space.

The Design and Access Statement also contains the wholly misleading statement that "Attention must be drawn to the fact that the proposed development makes the very best use of a (sic) existing brown-field site".

This is not correct because the site is in fact garden land and I believe that garden land is no longer classed as brown-field for planning purposes.

Check out the post code SE23 3LB on Google maps for a bird's eye view of the site:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?#

It will be interesting to see how the Lewisham Planners respond to this application as their track record on garden grabbing is pretty appalling.

It is probably no coincidence that you will be hard pressed to spot a single reference to "garden grabbing" in any official planning document issued by Lewisham. They prefer to use the phrase “back land development” which is of course far more opaque.

Another worrying factor is that I have never seen the Lewisham Planners consider the cumulative effect that garden grabbing can have on an area. If this development is permitted how long will it be before a similar application is made for the land behind 109 to 111?

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #5
15-06-2012 03:46 PM

Quote:
Another worrying factor is that I have never seen the Lewisham Planners consider the cumulative effect that garden grabbing can have on an area. If this development is permitted how long will it be before a similar application is made for the land behind 109 to 111?


Will be interesting to see indeed as the application at 97 Honor Oak Park is in the same, currently contiguous, garden space:
97 Honor Oak Park Garden Application

This was refused at committee stage:
"The proposal by reason of the design (including location of bin storage) and scale of the development would be out of character with the area and would lead to a loss of a wildlife habitat."

The potential for habitat loss is arguably even worse at 107 as this would bisect the green corridor. Precedent considerations are identical.

This post was last modified: 15-06-2012 03:47 PM by lacb.

Find all posts by this user Reply
alethius


Posts: 3
Joined: May 2012
Post: #6
25-06-2012 11:02 AM

Thanks for your replies.

The land itself has been degraded by the tree felling, but there are still loads of birds - including a green woodpecker, and foxes, and I will see if I can find hedgehogs too. The removal of dead wood and open land would definitely be detrimental to wildlife. One of the most worrying things is that the driveway is narrow and occurs on a bend, so how lorries/trucks and materials will actually get in there is a mystery to me.

I've sent my comments to Lewisham anyway, and given that we live on the ground floor of 107, I hope they'll be taken seriously.

Find all posts by this user Reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Planning application to convert Home Accessories Extra to a coffee shop hillview 8 4,074 22-04-2018 12:35 PM
Last Post: hillview
  Planning application to convert Forest Hill Co-op to a hotel hillview 12 4,380 10-03-2018 01:34 PM
Last Post: Uhuru
  Plans to develop land at Whitbread Rd & adjacent to Honor Oak Park station hillview 3 1,765 05-01-2017 10:03 AM
Last Post: lacb
  Planning application to change Honor Oak Supermarket to a bar nitoda 10 10,044 03-07-2016 07:42 PM
Last Post: HannahD
  Planning Application: 1 Manor Mount Mrjamon 50 29,536 14-12-2015 10:46 AM
Last Post: Londondrz
  The 4 Redberry Grove Planning Application robertlondon 21 17,052 15-09-2015 06:16 AM
Last Post: JRW
  Planning Application: M&Co to become a Morrisons Local? edpaff 141 84,102 09-09-2015 03:42 PM
Last Post: michael
  Planning Application: 51-53 Canonbie Road penfold 88 70,048 02-05-2014 01:04 PM
Last Post: Hunter
  Planning Application - Hindsley Place and Westbourne Drive michael 124 72,598 09-01-2014 12:46 PM
Last Post: Perryman
  Planning Application: 120 Stanstead Road michael 67 44,463 11-12-2013 02:50 PM
Last Post: Mr_Numbers
  Planning Application: 6 Church Rise ForestGump 58 39,881 02-04-2013 04:53 PM
Last Post: Snazy
  Planning Application: 6 Church Rise NewForester 30 24,793 02-08-2012 04:00 PM
Last Post: Snazy
  Planning Application: 27 Shipman Road theirpuppet 50 31,805 07-06-2012 09:25 AM
Last Post: emma
  Codrington Hill - planning application? blushingsnail 1 3,295 24-05-2012 10:02 PM
Last Post: megan
  Planning Application - 113 Bovill Road davidl 7 6,844 21-04-2012 11:06 AM
Last Post: HOPcat
  Planning application: 33 Dartmouth Road Baboonery 16 9,125 29-11-2011 09:41 AM
Last Post: IWereAbsolutelyFuming
  Planning Application: 15 Davids Road NewForester 4 4,137 18-08-2011 07:34 AM
Last Post: notstoppin
  Planning Application: 139 Sunderland Road RobF 48 28,398 04-06-2011 09:00 PM
Last Post: michael
  Planning - 97 Honor Oak Park shiny23 2 3,331 08-04-2011 10:03 AM
Last Post: shiny23
  Planning Application - Next to Baxter's Field michael 8 6,106 22-03-2011 09:44 AM
Last Post: IWereAbsolutelyFuming