Bampton Estate, the possibility of a new building next to Standlake Point

bampton-rd
inglemere-rd
windrush-ln

#151

One of the Perry Vale residents got in touch with Councillor John Paschoud and brought to his attention the fact that the consultation period is short and started over the Easter holiday period. Councillor raised the concerns with the planning and the consultation is extended until 26/04/2018 now. We have more time to do research and draft objections. However, neighbours to our estate seem not getting any consultation letters. One council tenant in our block did not receive anything until yesterday, but i got 3 letters so far.


#152

Not sure if this is relevant.


#153

Yes, Mr Portter is on the run to undertake another challenges)) Had enough I think upsetting leaseholders and tenants.


#154

UPD on our press release.

We are approached by newspapers and currently getting in touch with reporters.


#155

Posters are also going out:

The flyers have also been spread on Inglemere road, Bampton road, Witney Path, Fifield Path, Perry Vale, Standlake block (other 2 blocks to do). If our street neighbours did not get any of our flyers, let me know, i will pop in. They have useful information about the grounds for objections.


#156

Press release that went out (courtesy of Dan, the Perry Vale Resident ):

NEWS PRESS RELEASE, 9 April 2018 LAST CHANCE TO SAVE FOREST HILL GREEN SPACE

Angry Forest Hill residents are campaigning against a proposed five-storey development by Lewisham Council on the grounds of the Bampton Estate off Perry Vale. The development, which is expected to house up to 50 new homes squeezed into the site of the estate’s ball park and wooded play area, has been heavily criticised for several reasons including:
● Overwhelming scale and lack of consideration to nearby homes that will be affected
● The permanent destruction of a valuable local amenity for children and families
● Loss of ancient wooded area and wildlife (green woodpeckers, owls, butterflies, stag beetles etc)
● Threat to privacy, increased noise pollution and unwanted rise in local population density
● Concerns over child safety following the building of a new through road and extra parking places
● Complete lack of engagement with the wider community by Lewisham Council

XXX (Kat), resident of Standlake Point, the building nearest to the site, has been gathering support for her campaign on www.se23.life. She says: “Our estate should never have been considered for this massive building project. We’ve been telling Lewisham Homes that our green space is a highly valuable community asset but they’ve ignored us. Squashing new buildings between our block and the houses on Fifield Path will not only deprive residents of their amenity, but will completely change the character of the area. It’s our last chance to preserve our local green space and the much-loved children’s ball court!”

Adds Perry Vale resident Dan XXX: “Although we live next to the estate, we’ve been deemed unworthy of proper consultation by Lewisham Homes. We support the council’s remit to provide housing, but this site is inappropriate for so many reasons. Not only would the proposed buildings block any remaining natural light reaching existing flats and the back gardens of Perry Vale, but with the total loss of the ancient trees and wooded areas, they would be turning a rare local green space into an unsightly urban area complete with all the trappings. Anyone who cares about quality of life in Forest Hill should be appalled by this!”

The campaigners are urging residents to raise objections by the deadline Thursday 26th April to: http://planning.lewisham.gov.uk/online-applications/, quote reference DC/18/106504

Or email the case officer: planning@lewisham.gov.uk (for the attention of Holly Lucas)

Contacts: Kat XXX or Dan XXX


#157

D’ya know what…
The glasses, the hat, the hair all confused me…
But that identical smile…
It definitely had me going there for a minute!


#158

Lewisham’s response to the FOI request is delayed.

The council should have responded promptly and by 9 April 2018.

If the council had a valid reason that would have enabled them to have an extension of time they should have provided notice of this need by now.

Lewisham has a patchy record of of providing responses to FOI’s.

It would be prudent to issue a firm reminder to the council, including a demand that they meet their statutory obligation and provide a response to the request.


#159

Took me an additional month to that of what was expected last time I did one.


#160

Thank you! I will respond today during my work lunch time demanding response or i will be asking for the internal review.


#161

Requested an internal review.


#162

Planning practice guidance

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/planning-practice-guidance

Very useful info that shows how and what should be taken into account when considering planning applications, local plans, etc.


#163

Dear Kat, thank you and to you and everyone else who is not giving in on this.

Do you or anyone else know if any consideration has been given to employing the services of a planning consultant to assist in resisting this application (and I don’t mean to diminish your excellent work in campaigning so far). I doubt the fees would be extortionate in the scheme of things and it may be that a small crowd funding campaign could raise the funds required.

It just strikes me that the playing field is not even given the various consultants LH are using including their planning adviser “bptw planning”.


#164

Hi, thank you for your support. We have few groups working on the objections. We have one strong organisation supporting us, also we have smbd from Town Planning who objected already. We never thought to get paid consultants involved and honestly it never crossed my mind to find one. The problem with consultants is they will give a list of points that will spread across every one. BUT,

"Your objection will have more effect if a number of people write in to object, but do not be tempted to organise a petition; it will not carry any weight and is a waste of time. Also avoid using a ‘standard’ letter. Objectors should use their own words and write, type or word process their letters themselves. Objections will not carry the same weight if they are seen to have been written or produced in a standardised form. "

By having a list of objections prepared by a professional consultant that everyone will use we can fall into the trap of those objections being ignored as being standard thus looking orchestrated. This is our last chance to defend our green space. There will be people, including myself who will research the building proposal documentation and the grounds for objection to ensure they are solid. But we need as many people to object as possible that will give weight to the detailed objections.

I give an example of my findings:


From: planning guidance

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities-public-rights-of-way-and-local-green-space

Open space, sports and recreation facilities
How should open space be taken into account in planning?

Open space should be taken into account in planning for new development and considering proposals that may affect existing open space (see National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 73-74). Open space, which includes all open space of public value, can take many forms, from formal sports pitches to open areas within a development, linear corridors and country parks. It can provide health and recreation benefits to people living and working nearby; have an ecological value and contribute to green infrastructure (see National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 114), as well as being an important part of the landscape and setting of built development, and an important component in the achievement of sustainable development (see National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 6-10).

Related policy:

paragraph 70
paragraphs 73-74
paragraphs 156-157
paragraph 162
paragraph 171
Paragraph: 001 Reference ID: 37-001-20140306

Revision date: 06 03 2014


Obviously Lewisham Homes and Lewisham Council planning officers who are pushing this project completely disregarded that when we will be loosing 45% of our open space forever if this project is given a green light. If we look at the figures: Bampton Estate has 3 blocks = 120 households. Bampton Estate is mainly a family estate. Multiply 120 by 3 and we get 360 appx people living here. Plus adding 50 households = 1 person each. That is appx 410 people on the estate with 45% reduction in space. Do they want to create a prison site here???