Maja Hilton (Cllr for Forest Hill ward) has already posted here on the future of the Capitol (but i don't think cllrs will be able to extract much more information about that than is already out there at the moment) and Paul Upex is also on the forum regularly.
These are your Cllrs if you're in FH ward:
http://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/m...&WID=12899

As much as i liked the previous Lib Dem FH cllrs (not impressed by the near invisible Labour one though) i can't say i heard much of any them after the general election and it seemed like there was an awful lot of coasting on previous 'historic' local successes going on in their occasional newsletter, so i'm looking forward to see what Paul, Maja and Peter can do as a new team.

Hello all

I am working on our email update at the moment which covers Hamilton Lodge and my own view regarding Morrisons. I've copied these updates for everyone on the forum below - one is more of an update from Lewisham Council, the other my view regarding Morrisons. I appreciate the points that people have made regarding the future use of Hamilton Lodge as a school, however my views at the moment is that in the short term housing families not in bed and breakfast accomodation should be the priority. I will make enquiries regarding future usage and let you know.

I've not heard anymore than most people regarding the Capitol but will update residents as soon as I do hear anything.

Email team@labour4foresthill.org.uk if you would like to receive our regular newsletter.

Have a good weekend

Cllr Paul Upex
cllr_paul.upex@lewisham.gov.uk


Hamilton Lodge

Lewisham Council purchased Hamilton Lodge on favourable commercial terms. It is now refitting the building to be suitable, for a short period, as a temporary housing solution for homeless families which enables them to live in better circumstances than would otherwise be the case.

This approach involves the Council using its capital resources and buying power to secure better housing solutions and revenue savings at the same time. Works to convert the building will commence shortly and ahead of that happening property guardians (to prevent squatting) are in situ to secure the building. It is expected that by the end of the year the building will house 21 homeless families while a more long term housing solution is sought for them. Over the medium term as housing supply increases, other more permanent uses for the building will be considered and implemented following the appropriate decision making processes.


Morrisons in Forest Hill – Cllr Paul Upex (Forest Hill)

Many people have put in a great deal of hard work over many years to help build the Town Centre and Dartmouth Road area of Forest Hill. Now in 2014 we have an interesting collection of mostly independent shops and a committed group of traders. I admit everything isn’t perfect, but I do think we are on the right track to provide a unique shopping offer within the local area. I am not proposing a blanket ban on supermarkets and acknowledge that many of our residents use and appreciate the convenience that they provide. However it is my opinion, that at the moment, Morrisons moving into the M & Co site is not right for Forest Hill and the local businesses and traders.

At present we have 1 Sainsbury (London Rd) and 2 Tesco Express (beside the Horniman and on Kirkdale) within Forest Hill ward, just outside the ward we have another Sainsbury’s Local on (Honor Oak Rd)and a Co-op (Stanstead Rd). It is my opinion that local residents are well served by the ‘Big Supermarkets’ at present and if we are to attract, support and encourage local businesses to thrive we have to stand up for them and support them. I will be signing the licensing petition put forward by local residents and traders and I have asked the Sustainable Development committee of Lewisham Council ( which I am a member of ) to look at ways in which we can continue to promote, support and offer distinctive high streets across Lewisham.

Geez you wonder how much burden the Forest Hill community has to take on its shoulders for housing people requiring council help and help with various other issues.

Considering we already have Mariam Lodge a 125 bed homeless hostel on Dartmouth Road.

Now Hamilton Lodge.

And I love how the notice says it will only be "Short Term". I can almost guarantee this will be a homeless hostel indefinitely based on Lewisham (and every other councils) track record with keeping up with council housing demands.

Nevermind that the 3 schools in Forest Hill have catchment areas of a couple hundred metres. I essentially have to move out of Forest Hill when I'm thinking of having children because the school I'll probably be allocated to will be a bus ride or 30 minute walk away.



But let's focus on the BIG issues in the community, like trying to stop a business from opening a shop on the high street that meets all legal and trading regulation requirements.

This post was last modified: 01-08-2014 03:46 PM by Chris88.

ladywotlunches - a case of NIMBY me thinks

OK it's a long time coming, but Lewisham ARE building new council homes http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/110369..._30_years/

These people need somewhere safe and secure for the short term, and i'm rather uncomfortable with the idea that anyone would want to deny that to families who've become homeless. Again, this is families. That means children.
If you think the priorities are skewed, you can always stand for election though, eh?!

Jenros, not at all. But I do understand how much pressure the local schools are under to 'bulge' with no space, and having Hamilton lodge almost next to the school has been talked about as a solution before. As a short term housing solution, it will help just 21 families. If it were to expand a school to allow it an extra form each year, this could benefit up to 350 families (not accounting for sibling places)

A school provision there just makes more sense. Whereas putting more families in an area that's already massively oversubscribed will put yet more strain on the schools, at the same time as actually removing a realistic venue for better provision.

This post was last modified: 01-08-2014 09:04 PM by ladywotlunches.

There is plenty of room behind Hamilton Lodge to build a nursery/primary school large enough to properly service the community...

If this was going to just bea temporary solution then a far better short term solution would be to work with the housing association that owns Featherstone Lodge (behind Eliot Bank). There is no expectation that there will be enough housing for everybody in london, so once a site is converted to a hostel it is likely to keep that use for a considerable amount of time. Of course nobody would suggest that we shouldn't care for homeless families, but there is no guarantee that it will remain for families, just as miriam lodge, once it became a hostel for families seeking asylum, needed no change of planning use to take other people, not just families.

In the meantime it would be good to know what the council are doing to alleviate the chronic shortage of school places (and GPs) in Forest Hill ward. These may be minor problems compared to the problems facing homeless families, but I believe they impact considerably more families in the area. (Unless somebody with access to the statistics would care to correct me).

The planning application for this site should be interesting and will give the developer an opportunity to explain the impact on local schools of an extra 21 families, because at present I doubt they would be able to be educated at completely full local schools, although they would probably jump to the top of the waiting list.

Not sure Paul has grasped how much of a schools black hole this area of the ward is. What a wasted opportunity. Time to take a look at some of the great campaigning work Labour councillors in Southwark have done on the primary schools shortage issue – it throws Lewisham very much into relief.

I asked on the SE26 forum what was being done about the pressure on GP services in Sydenham and its environs (in which I meant to include Forest Hill), but received no responses. See here:
http://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11743

What's your concern about alcohol licensing in Forest Hill?

How do you think excluding supermarkets from town centres is beneficial, when for years they've been blamed for the decline of the high street because they based outside of town centres?

Aren't the Tesco Express and the 'Co-Op' actually just petrol stations with a fancy shop?

Isn't M&Co another chain in itself?

How do you believe Forest Hill offers a good shopping experience, when most of it seems to be based on cafes? What are you doing to prevent the high street being only attractive to people who want coffee and cake?

What is your plan to attract more trade and a diverse range of independent shops to create a balanced high street?

What is your plan to make it easier for independent traders to get started in the high street?

The opposition to Morrisons appears to be quite small (but vocal). How do you see yourself as a representative of the community if you only represent a small group of shouty people? How do you represent me?

In terms of a democratic mandate your average local councillor only represents the 1,500 or so locals who actually voted for them.

Talk of them representing the whole community of 25,000 odd is sophistry.

With only one non-Labour councillor in Lewisham, whatever the spin, I think we can all guess the polictial agenda for the next five years.

shaman, why don't you put these questions to Paul in person[/i]. Details of his surgery times etc here: http://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/m...x?UID=1080

That's Honor Oak PARK actually.

The Co-Op site hasn't been a petrol station for many a moon...

Rubbish!

The councillors are elected to represent their whole ward with 3 of them representing roughly 10-12,000 electors. The voting process (and whether you agree with the current system or not is a separate matter) is the way that the public chooses them. No matter who you vote for the person who wins the election is your councillor (why does the forum keep changing the spelling of this word).

It certainly isn't sophistry to claim that the councillor represents the ward that they were elected for.

As for Lewisham being all Labour - that's one of the flaws of the local election voting system where unless it's a close ward one party will take all three seats. It's not a system I particularly like and at local level I'd like to see a more PR based system to get a spread of views on the council.

Because Paul posted his comments on an public forum and so is open to having them challenged in the same forum.

I think Shaman raises some good questions and what worries me about the councillor's original posting was that it sort of suggested that he didn't have any policies and was going to ask his party to discuss the problems in committee. I'd have thought with the election only being 3 months ago he might have had a manifesto that he could have quoted from.

Paul Upex is at least communicating with us in a positive and informative way. And that should be encouraged, even if some (vocal) groups do not agree with all the points he makes.

Agreed. The more the elected representatives engage with the electorate the better.

People may disagree with them on individual policies but may come to respect them for the way they communicate those policies.

It must be in their interest to explain why they do the things that they do so that we can understand their decisions and the constraints that they are working under.

It would certainly increase their chances of being re-elected.

BOTC

Semantics my friend.

I might agree with you if we had independents but we don't.

BOTC is right. Councillors represent the whole ward (and should IMO work with other neighbouring ward councillors for the wider good but that is a whole different story).

I have had good experiences communicating with a local councillor even though I did not agree with their party allegiance. Equally, have had rather unpleasant experiences with another even though their party ought to align more so with my way of thinking. It just goes to show that at a local level, it is the personality that is more important than the party. On that basis, I agree that Paul has made a positive start by posting.