Lewisham Council are having a consultation about building behind the tower blocks on Dacres Rd
Removing Trees and building 4 new blocks this is in addition of the one already being built on Mayow Rd. This will have a effect on the park visually and possibly damage the trees on the park side if they cut the roots etc during excavations. Please sign this petition. To stop this
Good luck but take it from those of us who objected to the infill development on the Forest Estate it is unlikely you will be successful.
Formerly an embankment for the Nunhead - Crystal Palace railway.
You may wish to contact Ellie Reeves too:
I was brought-up on a council estate in Peckham and I wholeheartedly agree that London boroughs should be looking at every nook and cranny where there is scope to build as many homes as possible for people who desperately need them - and, in my opinion, they should never be sold off.
Obviously, there is inevitably going to be the loss of a play area or a bit of greenery or some trees, but a place like Brenchley Gardens, for instance, has One Tree Hill, Honor Oak Park, Peckham Rye, Horniman Gardens, Coxes Walk and Dulwich Park all fairly close by so, in principle, I would (probably) place more weight on providing affordable and well-run (hopefully) social housing than protecting this particular green space.
There is clearly a desperate need for social housing in the borough, in London and across the country as a whole. Lewisham Council filmed a video about this a few years ago which highlights some powerful stories of families in temporary accommodation:
I live in an estate where infill development is currently being considered, which would increase homes by just over 40%. No-one likes change or the impact of building work, and I personally place a lot of weight on green spaces, but I think on balance the initial plans for my estate look to be a fair approach. It’s interesting that they have proposed a mix of social housing and shared ownership.
That being said, I think we need to careful not to just cram homes in to any space available at the expense of existing residents, their amenity spaces and the environment. We should also be mindful that some areas being considered may have other issues such as ASB problems, and further development should not exacerbate those for the wider community.
We also need to genuinely listen to existing residents concerns. It’s a lot easier for someone who isn’t directly affected by a development to be supportive of them - but if someone wanted to build in your back garden you might feel differently.
Been there - supported it.
Of course.
Personally I think each case needs to be looked at independently and on its own merits, and the Brenchley Gardens picnic area, to me, looked like a good spot to build on as it would just mean flattening the mound and extending the current terrace there. There is an actual park garden along the rest of the road, with Peckham Rye behind and the picnic area is unremarkable in itself. Of course, what ever could be put there has to be in scale and keeping with the area.
But a build everywhere strategy seems short sighted and flawed. Once every scrap of land has been built on, what next? They’ll be no going back either.
And while we have a number of parks around the area, is it right that green space is confined just to those areas? It feels kinda bleak, especially when some of the infill developments are cutting down mature trees to make space.
Of course, there is a real problem to tackle though. The Lewisham housing waiting list is 10,000 people \ families long with waiting times for many years - from: Lewisham Council - Applying for social housing
Some developments will be right, some aren’t, but I find it difficult not to question where the overall strategy is headed.
Whilst some trees and green space is sacrificed in all of these schemes, I haven’t seen one proposal that seeks to take away all of it.
Stanlake Point on Perry Vale, which was strongly contested, still retained a lot of trees and green space.
So, yes, a balanced approach is needed but it seems to me that there are more people who would rather protect four or five trees, which would normally be off-set by other planting in a scheme, than providing 50 homes for maybe 200 adults and children.
There are some fairly intense proposals for building and one local example is along Honor Oak Road, There have already been 5 sets of building projects in the past few years but a further 2 are been put forward:
There are many flats already along Honor Oak Road, some purpose built, some large conversions, so the density of living is not exactly spaced out. Then there are issues of school places, GP facilities (which are pretty limited these days anyway) and so on. These projects are mainly on ‘greenfield’ sites. The residents in the flats on Greystead Road are not entirely enamoured with the idea of another block being built in the bit of green space around the fairly substantial blocks already there.
There is a real difficulty with affordable housing which dates back to the 1980s. The problem is that it needs minimally a London-wide approach and some serious planning rather than walloping up flats in any gaps which can be found from looking on Google Maps.
Do you have any ideas - or are you aware of any studies that could deal with this within the next 5 years, which is probably a timeframe in which local boroughs are being forced to act?
I thought they were mostly on brownfield sites - but I’m happy to be corrected.
I am not a housing expert although I know a number of people who are (and work for other London councils) who are critical of Lewisham. The ‘problem’ partly dates back to Thatcher’s sale of council housing and the subsequent policy to promote home ownership and partly due to restrictions for years on Councils funding housing developments.
I recognise the importance and difficulty of the issue. I don’t think the current plans are well thought through.
Along Honor Oak Road every development has been, or will be, on green space, not previously used land. That’s the jibe I was making in referencing Google maps.
I think the problem is difficult and not solvable through quick fixes.
I agree!
It’s like most things that successive govenments do - it’s all knee-jerk and sticking-plaster stuff.
This is serious S**T which needs firm cross-party commitment for twenty years - but is that ever gonna happen!
On the original topic, there is a petition opposing the development. It has about 2.5k signatures at present:
I’m sorry to keep banging on.
It’s so much easier to build opposition to these things via the power of social media but, conversely, where’s the campaign to support it?
Those needing homes don’t have anyone fighting their corner do they?
So it’s left to the big bad local council to take the flack for trying to do their public duty.
Well I try and report these things neutrally, but there are quite a lot of people in support of these things too - social media seems to work best when you have two polar views sniping at each other. In this case I think the parties are often characterised as the NIMBY’s and YIMBY’s both horrible polarising labels which get in the way of moderate views and sensible debate, in my opinion.
It’s also not uncommon for opposing petitions to be constructed as making them is essentially free on sites like change.org. Search hard enough, and you will find ‘facts’ and groups that support any project or point of view.
That said, when you have the council acting both on planning policy and without opposition, and also running the planning department, it does feel a bit like they might be able to mark their own homework from time to time. Having an active local councillor on the Board of Lewisham Homes could also be questioned.
Don’t get me wrong, homes definitely need to be built, but I think it’s very valid for questions to be asked and the individual plans considered, especially when they are on such a grand scale and affect so many.
I’m sorry if I appeared to criticise you in any way, because that wasn’t my intention. I totally appreciate and respect your input.
Yes - it’s fine and interesting to see other views, don’t worry 
I think where green space is being taken, or in fact for all new development of any scale, it would be nice if we could force in some of the concepts from the amazing Bosco Verticale in Milan - essentially incorporating greenery into the design, and arguably enabling more greenery vertically than you could have on flat ground - plus it looks amazing.
I have been following from the sidelines since posting this.
We agree we need more homes but Lewisham Homes can not look after the ones they have.
I’m sure Many will have seen a video of one of residents home.
This is caused by lack of maintenance caused by shoddy workmanship.residents complain of Drafts
From ill fitted windows Lewisham homes repair by closing up all air vents.no Air=Damp.
And the money they waste must be incredible
New Bathrooms everywhere even if like mine was new on moving in
Most places new kitchens already falling apart or rotted with the Damp
3 years ago every body got a new boiler wether it was needed or not.
2yrs ago every Flat and house across Lewisham got
Beautiful front Doors.choice of style nice door furniture. This yr again everyone is getting a new front door WHY Because Lewisham Homes could not say if the first door was of a fire proof standard
So the original doors thrown in a skip in front of Heathwood Point.
Yet people who have damp or water coming through the walls are asked well what do want us to do.
Window that whistle so loud in the Wind because they don’t fit the Frame.
Extractor fans installed at the time of the kitchen
Bathroom installation no longer being repaired or replaced.
And you WONDER why we don’t want new builds
Because they can not look after what they have got.
I Beleive I read someone said Contact Ellie we thought about it. But when the Mp and local councilor (board Member of LH) go walk about secretly we don’t think we will get much Sympathy.
Lewisham council Had a huge chance to build on the old fire station 234 homes could have been built
Look up the Cabinet meetings regarding that
Sorry this took so long but this protest is more than just about building homes
I think it would be more remarkable if there wasn’t a Councillor on the board of Lewisham Homes!
The idea that Lewisham Council decides what its planning department does because there is no political opposition is way off the mark - it is tightly bound by planning law, and can be overruled by the Planning Inspectorate if the rules are not followed.
It would be nice if someone from Lewisham Homes could find time to respond to specific criticisms.
I’m very much with @Anotherjohn on this, especially when he asks who fights the corner of those needing homes. OTOH, I do have some sympathy for people living in blocks where the freeholder - in this case Lewisham Homes - is taking up that public duty, because few people seem to think we might also do some infilling elsewhere.
I say ‘few’ but they do exist - it’s exactly what YIMBYs are about. It stands for ‘Yes in my back yard’, and if you read what YIMBYs say, it isn’t about cramming more people into ex Council estates, but getting the incentives right for more investment in housing where property owners live - https://twitter.com/londonyimby?lang=en. Yes, the guy who runs that Twitter account is a bit of a Tory, but I don’t hold that against him!
Can someone explain to me why council tenants have a say in the development or re-modelling of housing stock? I’m not trying to be funny or ‘edgy’ but if you live in council property surely you’ve got to roll with the punches compared to private renters.
I’ve seen Bosco Verticale in Milan and it’s amazing.
Not all who live in the council properties are tenants
Some are leaseholders who pay vast amounts of money towards any building repairs. If Lewisham homes says it 1000 pounds for a new front door even if you know it can be bought and installed for less you pay the 1000 pounds because that what Lewisham Homes say it costs there is no best of three estimates. As for the tenants having no say
Or rolling with the punches as you put it. Like you they pay taxes and have the same rights as others.
I’m afraid to disappoint you but serfdom died out yrs ago. If Lewisham homes took care of the properties
And general grounds I’m sure this wouldn’t have been such an issue. But if you are happy to have you’re tax money invested in tomorrow’s slums I’m sure we can withdraw our objections.
There’s always the option of moving away to another area or “fiefdom”. Either way, council tenants pay less in rent than private renters so if you want to level the playing field you’d have to take away more from those who pay more. Isn’t going to happen, and you know it.
Yes it’s a shame Lewisham Homes don’t respond to the criticism raised but not surprising. But since the tenants have started protesting and asking questions it’s amazing what’s been offered regarding refurbishment etc. people may think we are ungrateful wretches
But actually we are looking after you’re
Tax money. Here’s a little joke for you how many men does it take to fix a light fitting (7) and how many men does it take to fix the fixed light fitting (10)
Ask if that’s a fair way to spend your tax money
Whilst I understand the need for more housing, I also think we need to consider the importance of green spaces in the city, for both environmental and health benefits. Just because someone rents from Lewisham Council should they not be given access to green space? Yes the flats are next to Mayow Park, but as a regular user of Mayow I would say that park is very busy already, and likely to be more so once the new nearby flats on Mayow Road are completed.
The London Green Spaces Commission reported last year on ‘the fundamental contribution parks and green spaces make to the physical health and mental wellbeing of Londoners, especially those without their own outdoor space.’ and ‘we need to recognise that parks are part of a wider network of public realm, which includes spaces such as civic squares, streets and green areas in housing estates. London Green Spaces Commission
If anything, I would have thought those green areas should be developed to make them more user-friendly for the residents of the flats, in particular children.
From an environmental perspective, green areas help to reduce the temperatures in urban areas and absorb pollution.
Before we chop down trees for housing I would prefer to see derelict building sites developed first.
I didn’t think you could apply for council housing if your income was above a certain rate anyway, as you would be seen as being able to rent privately even if you couldn’t buy.
The shortage of social housing goes back years doesn’t it, as whatever government has been in, they have promised or given the councils a nudge to build new homes, but they never do.
Hi, where is the petition ? Will definitely sign and encourage my neighbours to too.
