Lewisham homes proposed infill next to Mayow Park

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.

Meanwhile elsewhere in SE23, though notably Southwark rather than Lewisham:

For those wondering, that area is the picnic area on the mound just behind these signs:

1 Like

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.

1 Like

Of course.

1 Like

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.

1 Like

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:

  1. The block of flats built in Manor Way, off Canonbie above Fairlawn School
  2. The three blocks of flats built in the garden between Tyson Road and Honor Oak Road, behind the Christian Fellowship.
  3. The new houses across the road from Fairlawn School
  4. The development on Canonbie at the junction of Honor Oak Park
  5. The development on Honor Oak Park that runs up to the ‘folly’ at the top of the hill
  6. The proposed development behind Havelock House
  7. The proposed development around the flats in Greystead Road.

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.

1 Like

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.

1 Like

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.

1 Like

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.

1 Like

Yes - it’s fine and interesting to see other views, don’t worry :slight_smile:

1 Like