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 applications info
Author Message
koza


Posts: 39
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #1
15-06-2008 07:40 AM

how can i find out more about design proposals for forest hill? if there are any

some years ago i went to a public consultation with, i think, Levitt Bernstein landscape architects displaying a number of different and strangely radicle options. since i have heard nothing.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #2
15-06-2008 08:32 AM

You can search planning applications here. http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/lewis-xsl....pgesearch

This usually has plans etc when the application is in full swing.

Find all posts by this user Reply
pattrembath


Posts: 16
Joined: May 2005
Post: #3
15-06-2008 08:58 AM

Llewellyn Davis were the consultants employed by Lewisham to assist in drawing up the Forest Hill Urban Design Framework which became part of Supplementary Planning Guidance in March 2003 for all planning applications in and around Forest Hill Town Centre.

Find all posts by this user Reply
nevermodern


Posts: 653
Joined: Feb 2007
Post: #4
15-06-2008 09:37 AM

I think this is the link to the PDF file for the UDF.

http://www.se23.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=37

Find all posts by this user Reply
FNicoll


Posts: 9
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #5
15-06-2008 08:12 PM

Speaking from experience Lewisham Planning do not respect the UDP or planning framework, when they want to push a development through so what difference does this make. Lewisham planning & Lewisham council have become a rogue council, making decisions that only take into consideration the bottom line of the developers and quite frankly not considering the local population.

Find all posts by this user Reply
baggydave


Posts: 384
Joined: May 2004
Post: #6
17-06-2008 11:55 PM

Would Private Eye or other investigative journos be interested, I haved my suspicions.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #7
18-06-2008 10:54 AM

F Nicholl

See you are a fan of the council then
Suggest you e mail one of your local councillors. Not sure whether you are in FH Ward or Perry Vale , but know all 3 councillors in PV very helpfull

Find all posts by this user Reply
FNicoll


Posts: 9
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #8
24-06-2008 07:59 PM

The local ward councilors gave us support at the planning committee meeting which granted approval to a scheme to build 4 houses on land beside Capitol Pub.

Even with their support the development got approved. The plan did not meet the UDP, so the whole process was a farce to push through the developers proposal.

Your spot on, I do not believe in the Planning Application process. Especially not Lewisham Council, in my view they are a rogue Council who believe they are above the guidance and framework put in place

Find all posts by this user Reply
koza


Posts: 39
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #9
25-06-2008 10:00 AM

FH needs a clear design strategy to provide improved pedestrian visibility and access, not a just a UDP, how much more are we prepared to wait before they start to invest in the this forgotten ward. i am happy to help move things forward, but what can we or i do?

Find all posts by this user Reply
junegapi


Posts: 106
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #10
30-06-2008 11:04 AM

I suspect that Forest Hill will remain a disjointed villlage until the South Circular is diverted into a tunnel starting below FH station road bridge and finishing on Dulwich Common. Pigs will fly first.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #11
30-06-2008 11:33 AM

Back in the 80's there was as plan to tunnel from The Grove Tavern to The Railway Telegraph.
I remember going to a meeting with our then MP , John Maples.
I think cost sank the idea.

Find all posts by this user Reply
koza


Posts: 39
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #12
30-06-2008 12:28 PM

...and during those times, from what i heard, they were also suggesting to take down the shops on the side of sainsbury's.

still i don't think it needs to go as far as that, creating lines of sight and wider crossing points for pedestrians that are logical to that will do. people what to get out of the station door and see the bus their after, and cross the road without having to elbow someone else. at the moment we cross all over the place on cramped islands.

Find all posts by this user Reply
prc


Posts: 21
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #13
30-06-2008 12:56 PM

Quote:
Speaking from experience Lewisham Planning do not respect the UDP or planning framework, when they want to push a development through so what difference does this make. Lewisham planning & Lewisham council have become a rogue council, making decisions that only take into consideration the bottom line of the developers and quite frankly not considering the local population.


I don't work for Lewisham before anyone starts, but I would be interested to see any evidence that you have of this.......examples of applications etc etc. Accusations need to be backed up with the right evidence, otherwise its libellous....

Find all posts by this user Reply
ForestGump


Posts: 202
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #14
01-07-2008 08:05 AM

Well...having taken up reading planning applications, I also looked at officer's reports.

Two properties of similar type both planning similar changes. For one property its report said the application went against part of the UDP policy and recommended planning permission not be granted.

The report for the other property made no mention of this UDP policy and recommended granting planning permission.

Find all posts by this user Reply
prc


Posts: 21
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #15
01-07-2008 09:11 AM

If that is the case and it is that obvious, then this should be reported to the Local Government Ombudsman......

http://www.lgo.org.uk/

Find all posts by this user Reply
baggydave


Posts: 384
Joined: May 2004
Post: #16
01-07-2008 11:17 PM

They maybe inconsistent at the best, and could be incompetent at the worst, and possibly lots of stuff in the middle. And perhaps no better or worse than other local authorities. As we dare not risk libel on this site (a fair point) there is a good chance that we should use 'allegedly' in all similar accusations.

This perhaps maybe possibly not a scientific bit of research but generally have we seen a lot of support for LBL??

Anything in Private Eye Rotten Boroughs?

Find all posts by this user Reply
ForestGump


Posts: 202
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #17
02-07-2008 08:58 AM

I think the planning department would prefer the word 'flexible' in place of 'inconsistent'.

-------
Last August there was an article about Lewisham under the 'Rotten Boroughs' heading.

Find all posts by this user Reply
FNicoll


Posts: 9
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #18
02-07-2008 07:42 PM

Trouble is the Ombudsman can not overturn a decision for Planning permission. They are a bit of a waste of time in this case then.

Find all posts by this user Reply
prc


Posts: 21
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #19
03-07-2008 08:10 AM

They may not be able to overturn a decision but they can review the case and place a hefty fine on the Council, which would get into the press and would not be a great portrayal of the Council and should get them to act more responsibly.

It is often one rogue officer rather than a whole department.....

Find all posts by this user Reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  School applications deadline OakR 1 1,425 15-01-2015 01:00 PM
Last Post: OakR