Perry Vale 66-room hotel on All Inn One site



Can’t find the original topic for this, feel free to amalgamate if you’d like.

As City Walk residents, we all received letters yesterday about plans for the development on the site of the All Inn One on Perry Vale. I know the former owners are on here and I have nothing against the property being sold as they have solid reasons. But what the new developers are planning frankly seems ridiculous for the location.

7 storeys, 66 room hotel, pub and restaurant, refuse stores and “landscaping”. I need to study the plans in greater detail, but already it’s clear this constitutes a threat to the Hindsley Place and City Walk residents in terms of parking problems (which becomes an issue in itself every time JK Banquets have an event); right to light for the affected side of CW; privacy/overlooking issues presented by a seven storey building a road’s width away.

I can’t believe we’re about to get a hotel pop up out of nowhere potentially here AND on the CoOp site (although it’s interesting that the lease on the latter has apparently been extended).

I’m keen that the site stay as a pub of course, I support local business and I am encouraged by our area’s apparent insatiable desire to bring more people into by sticking hotels all over the place. But this site - and yes, living next to it, I’m biased - seems less appropriate than the CoOp space and massively more disruptive.

We’re going to respond as a RA but I’m not feeling confident…

All Inn One – Calling “Time”

There is a related discussion here: All Inn One – Calling “Time”

…but it’s good to have a new topic about the redevelopment. Thanks for sharing this info.


It’s ridiculous. I cannot see why we need one let alone two hotels. And as you mentioned. The south circular is bad enough as it is. Let alone all this extra traffic and parking.
No thought for residents just money money.


On reading the “travel plan” report, it confirms there will be absolutely no provision for car parking within the development, for either staff or guests, with “encouragement” provided for yawn of public transport or cycles.

This utopian vision of a world on bikes is idealistic at best. Of COURSE people should be reducing their use of private vehicles, but it’s jusg ridiculous to pretend that every guest and staff member is going to rock up on a bus or on a bike. There needs to be some parking provision. Even the Hotel/CoOp plan allowed for 8 spaces!


Design and Assess Statement here:

DC_18_108902-DAS-722987.pdf (4.5 MB)


Not sure where all those Porsches are going to bloody park.


looks at least one storey higher than the other local buildings cited in the design and access statement.
There appear to be 3 Porsches in that pic, so things must be looking up for some.

I was surprised that there is an anticipated market for hotel(s) in Forest Hill, but guess it’s a by product of the public transport links to the West End, Canary Wharf and the City. Then I saw this map which seems to show a real lack of hotel/B&B in our area. image


Personally i think a hotel in the area is a much needed thing as there isn’t anywhere half-decent locally for guests to stay. Looks wise the new development is pleasant, in keeping and they have clearly put a fair bit of time and effort in to the design.

That being said if i lived next door I would have a serious issue with the height of it and the parking. Height wise i just think they are chancing their arm with the additional storey as I cant remember it being on previous impressions. Parking wise they may well use the argument that there is public parking over the road and that when combined with the airy-fairy assumption that folks will use public transport it may well be enough to get it through - no matter how ridiculous a concept that actually is.


The daylight/sunlight report within the planning docs is keen to use City Walk’s height as an excuse. It describes the new development as a “mirror development” (in a mirror that adds two further storeys).

It also claims that this building will constitute “more than 20%” reduction of residual daylight to the flats on the Hindsley’s Place side. Anything over 20% is usually grounds for complaint and deemed unacceptable.

BUT - because City Walk currently “enjoys considerably higher levels of light” given the lack of other high rise in the area, they don’t deem this a relevant measure of light disruption. Plus, they blame the “unusually large rooms of 7m depth” in some of the flats on that side of City Walk which mean they will get considerably darker.

So, “you’ve been lucky up to now, the rules don’t apply to us, and your rooms are too large anyway.” Nice.


Porsche and Aston Martin!! :slight_smile:


Here’s the previous version that the developer sent to me:

You can see that in the last month they have added another two floors on top and extended the bulk further back as well. What a pity.


:information_source: moved by a moderator into this topic

I live on Perryvale and have had a letter from Lewisham council regarding a 7 storey building with 66 hotel rooms, a replacement public house and a restaurant… but no parking for any of these guests. Details below. I think it is unwise considering how difficult I find it to park nearby without adding 6 guests. Plus the traffic on Perry Vale gets gridlocked as it is.

I do also feel sorry for those living on Hindsley place in the 2 storey victorian houses as they are being overshadowed on all sides.

What do you think?

All Inn One – Calling “Time”

So disappointing. The All Inn One is a lovely period building too.
It is completely unfair on local residents especially due to the lack of parking.
I will be objecting. I am in Citywalk but feel especially sorry for those living in the houses on Hindsley place it will be a complete invasion of privacy and they will overshadowed on all 3 sides now.


I don’t get the parking argument at all, there is a huge and often under utilised car park almost immediately across the road…Surely this will be the place the vast majority of hotel guests would park - it is certainly where I would park if I were to stay there rather than spending additional time searching nearby streets in the vain hope of a free alternative, and then having to traipse back to the hotel with my luggage just to save a couple of quid…

I can certainly understand the concerns regarding the height of this proposed development, it
may well appear out of place with the surrounding area.


Well my children pointed to me quite a few Tesla and Maserati cars parked on the streets near us.

I do think we could do with some decent hotels in the area. My business struggles to find decent places near us.

I will agree that the second picture looks much more sympathetic to the neighbours.


I agree this does not look at all reasonable. Worth repeating what the proposal says here I think. It seems very poorly written, but perhaps meant to disguise a weak argument?
‘Thus, on balance, it could be possible to consider in respect of the effect of this development upon neighbouring daylight, that retained levels of daylight are in the main reasonable / commensurate to some other urban localities, and any adversity could be considered equitable in recognition of ‘mirror development’; the proposal only seeks an equitable share of the respective daylight following the fairly recent development of City Walk Apartments.’


The hotel on the Co-Op site allowed for no car parking only drop off point, 1 disabled bay and 2 bay taxi rank. There was a meeting held in August where to start with I was the only local resident to show up but was later joined by another.

I gained a lot of traction as a disabled person pointing out it was hard enough to park in the existing disabled bay due to non disabled using it and to be fair the other lady who turned up was is disbelief over the 1 bay proposal.

In principle I do not object to a hotel but having heard the reasoning for it, I think the proposal is barking mad. The only sensible part of this proposal is that there is a car park opposite and not a 1/4 of a mile away.

The idea is people will stay at the hotel and travel into London to places like Canary Wharf for meetings etc. I will also repeat what I said at that meeting, I fail to see why people would want to stay in Forest Hill pay for a hotel and car parking when within a 2 minute walk of Canary Wharf there is a very pleasant Novotel with a roof terrace. The plan and idea needs reworking, people will not travel from West, North or East to stay there when the is better access for them already.


Just to say that the expenses policy of many companies drives behaviour that you wouldn’t expect. For example, the large, corporate company that I work for has offices all over the UK and centrally within London, but thinks nothing of parking colleagues in Zone 6 when they need to stay in London on business, purely for saving money reasons…


I live in the flats on Church Vale next to the All in One and have major concerns about a large 7 storey development outside my home. I feel it will certainly affect the amount of natural light coming into my home and also be a huge invasion of privacy as the rooms on the left side will be able to see directly into my living room. As a night worker I am also extremely concerned about the noise levels as it was awful when City Walk was being built but this will now be happening outside my bedroom and will last at least a year which is a long time to work a night shift with very little sleep in the day time. Also I agree it’s ridiculous to have 2 hotels being built within a few minutes walk of each other.

Also while the design is said to mirror City Walk and be sympathetic to the design it is certainly not going to complement the block on the right hand side, we are just going to lose light, privacy and have a lot of extra noise to contend with.


I am a resident on Perry Vale in the Victorian cottage style houses. My primary concern is living through the construction and who will operate the hotel. This will have an impact on value and the audience who use the hotel. We have only been here for 18months and fell in love with the AIO immediately. Gutted it is going and being replaced by something that will inevitably struggle to retain the warmth and charm of a real ‘local’.

I haven’t been through a process like this before so wondered if there how a collective of residents with concerns can impact such a development? Is this a forgone conclusion at this point?