Proposed new development on Knapdale Close

Lewisham Homes’ proposals for new houses and flats on Knapdale Close. This might be of interest to people living on Taymount Rise, Elliot Bank, and on the Forest Estate.



There is a Facebook group to campaign against the development of new homes been built on the Forest Estate community greens, we have already stopped Lewisham Homes from building a 8 - 14 storey block of private flats on part of the community green.

While the group is not against the building of new ‘Social housing’ such as on unused garage space (Brownfields Sites), we believe they is alternate sites that could be looked into and avert about the loss of green spaces on the estate, which makes this estate a pleasant place to live and not surrounded by a concrete jungle.


Am i correct in saying that the current proposals will not result in any significant loss of green space?

Despite my general objections to more housebuilding in Lewisham, I think we have to pick our battles carefully.

London has been given a multi-billion-pound windfall from central government in order to build more taxpayer-funded housing. So it’s going to happen whether we like it or not.

Looking at the diagram above, it looks as if this new development (as opposed to the original plan at Elliot Bank) may be built on car park / brownfield space. If that’s the case, then I’d encourage environmentalists like @Ernest_J_Thomason to get behind these new proposals.

Trees and open spaces are nice - and, of course, car owners like to be able to park somewhere - but there is a growing NEED for good quality affordable housing in locations like this in inner London.

How the hell would our existing housing estates have been built if today’s restrictions were in place!

Having been brought up on a council estate this makes my blood boil!

Horniman Park, Dulwich Park, Sydenham Hill Woods/Coxes Walk, Mayow Park, Wells Park for Pete’s sake!

Chop a few trees down where it won’t make a huge difference and build some homes for people in-need instead of having local councils being forced to waste ridiculous amounts of money to so-called ‘house’ them in crappy bed & breakfasts run by greedy landlords.

I wish people would stop putting the block on potentially good housing projects because of a few bats and grass snakes, many of which would find their way in to other suitable habitats nearby anyway (Sydenham Hill Woods/Coxes Walk in this case).

By the way - my rant does not extend to Stanlake Point, where the loss of a valuable play area is under threat.


I would not have minded (and pretty sure many Bampton residents as well) if places with concrete or old buildings taken down, on Bampton Estate as well, and smth new built instead of them without disrupting the green space. The Northmoor is a good exaple or old Brent Knoll School on Mayor road, take those old buildings down and replace them with smth bigger and better without damaging green space. But Lewisham Homes project manager told me they are looking for a “quick fix”. There are a lot of old buildings that need replacing as they cannot be used for living in few years, like a block of flats not far from Gas Works in Bell Green, near Sainsbury’s, called Milverton or smth, it is very old and filthy, it can be taken down and smth bigger and better built instead. Why cant they do that?? Lewisham Council was selling its housing stocks but taking space from people to build housing. I am sorry but i dont get it.

1 Like

The problem is we need trees!! Trees absorb CO2 and produce oxigen for us to breath! Letting take down few trees opens a way to take more and more trees to down and all of us ending up in concrete prison. The housing problem has to be taken outside London. For example, work closely with towns on the seaside. A lot of elderly people would love to live in quiet areas next to the sea shore. Create more housing there for elderly people (like Sheerness or Easbourn) and offer to elderly people to move to those towns, i can guarantee a lot of them will take the opportunity. I know one resident in Standlake waiting to be rehoused outside London for years and still waiting. Secondly, the Midlands are slowly dying, they need people to work there and live, why not to creat good conditions or tax relief for businesses in these areas so it can create work places, people will naturally follow opportunities to earn instead of them coming to London, applying for housing and local government is disparate to build more houses by taking space from people in London. People have to realise that 500 new built homes will create a demand for 1000 home in 20 years time, how can that demand be satisfied in the future??? By building on our heads??? The housing solutions have to be long-term strategic.

1 Like

I really hope that all non-profit organisations that have an opportunity to question local government, will demand to see the proof that all the monies for this particular housing cause will reach their destination and not quietly used by local governors to pay off the debts they created as this is usually the case - patching up holes with fresh subsidies.

1 Like

Please put my comments into some sort of reasonable perspective before lecturing me.

I said, “Chop a few trees down where it won’t make a huge difference…” in the context of -

1 Like

Sorry, i was not aiming at yourself as such, apology if I came across that way, i just took the opportunity to comment on few things that you mentioned but which are in the mind of many people, even in my mind too. It was kind of my thinking aloud.:roll_eyes:

1 Like

It’s a good map and showa where there is plenty of space for housing - not squeezed into existing housing estates (although I’m not entirely against that when done sensibly) and not on the important woodland - but a golf course used by few, kept free of trees and inaccessible to most.

It demonstrates one of the problems in London - golf courses will not be built on but basketball courts will. Admittedly this golf course is apparently a “Site of Importance of Nature Conservation”. But i would far prefer to see a small section of that built on than on Horniman Gardens or Crystal Palace Park.

Think of the house building that could be accomplished (and increased boardroom productivity) if the game of golf was reduced to 15 holes!

1 Like

9 posts were merged into an existing topic: At what point do we acknowledge London is overcrowded?

As a Councillor I may be in a position to vote on this scheme if a planning application is submitted so I will try and not prejudice this by an opinion on the scheme.

What I will say in my layman understanding:
Planning is governed by rules. The presumption is to allow development unless it breaches the rules. Some rules are national and some regional. Regional rules must respect/ not contradict national rules.

I am not aware of the term Green Land. Great belt is something different and is not found in Forest Hill (to my knowledge). So a patch of grass does not mean something can’t be built on.

As a local councillor I see many people would be impacted during development on this site. Access remain an issue which is restricted by topography, narrow wiendy road on a steep hill. (I am not exaggerating). I would be interested in seeing the Traffic Management Statement. For those who have not been at the site, one would wonder how the residents get their normal deliveries, let alone hundreds of construction trucks needed for a build of a few buildings.


As an ex resident of Knapdale close and a regular visitor as my mother still lives on this estate, the proposal is nothing short of a travesty.
Knapdale close is renowned for its quiet leafy surroundings.
The green space which will be effectively dug up to accommodate the new buildings will literally be the last between what small amount will be on Eliot Bank in one direction and in the other direction none.
Knapdale Close currently overlooks the ‘white flats’ as we would call them as children, which are the buildings at the top of Taymount Rise, the neighbour block on Knapdale close and then Worsley House on Shackleton Close.
My point is it’s view is already very bleak and it is proposed to get even bleaker with more concrete being within very close proximity.
The new flats would be where the garages are at the top end of Knapdale Close and over the washing court, car park and the majority of the green area adjacent to that.
Parking is already at a premium in this area and I can’t imagine how they will get half of the machinery down to the close without massively inconvenience the existing residents as the road is so narrow often the bin trucks cannot even navigate their way down to empty the refuse on a Monday. All this and not to mention the condition of the road is already dire (lack of pot hole/resurfacing money!!) it will only get worse - added expenditure to fix this once the new pretty flats are up.
Where is the insight/proposals for cash injections into the existing grounds, buildings, estate management etc.
Both buildings on Knapdale Close communally are in a state of disrepair and have been for years.
Are the buildings stood at Knapdale Close going to brought to standard to meet the same or similar standard of that of the new proposed buildings?
Resident have not been well informed.
Most of the residents are quite elderly and cannot attend planning/objection meetings.
Get that social housing is needed but residents are under the impression that these buildings will be privately owned/sold/rented and that the funds will contribute to social housing elsewhere within the borough.
It is such a small contained space that anything else added to it would just be all consuming. Better to rejuvenate this area as it is the forgotten part of Forest Hill (many do not even know the estate exists).
I urge all who have commented to go and view the estate against what is proposed.
In my mother’s 44 year residency at this address very little has changed and whilst I’m all for nostalgia Knapdale needs an update and a refresh but I believe it does not come in the form of more buildings to this very small space.


Interesting comments! We live in one of the blocks of “White Flats” (which have both been there since the 1930s) and our concerns along with others at the top of Taymount Rise is the fact the new development will overlook and block our light - at one point the block is a mere 15 meters from the back of our building.

I understand that the flats will be for social rent but having spoken to other residents (including those on the Forest Estate) there is a worry about the amount of disruption caused compared to the small amount of housing gained (just 15 flats I understand) is not worth it.


any loss of any trees, regardless of how many others there are nearby, is, in my opinion, not a good idea. In this instance the tree loss seems to be the least of several issues that make this proposal seem less than feasible. Please please please, as many people as possible object on as many allowable reasons as possible.
There are plenty of other places that could be developed first before this proposal.
There are plenty of other places already built that could be bought up to a suitable standard, for less money than new build.
I’ve said it before elsewhere, but in my opinion, if someone is in a room in a B&B then I don’t think of them as being homeless. Other people might do. They themselves might do. But they have a roof over their heads. Maybe the Council should buy up B&B properties, and become a social landlord… oh wait, it already is a social landlord. Maybe they should just invest some money buying up B&Bs, and then rooms would become cost neutral to the council.


Please go ahead and add your comments to the planning application here:

As I sit on the estate as I type, please Register and OBJECT!!!
As I said before, actually spend a few minutes of your time coming to look at the site for the proposal and all the comments against it so far will make absolute sense.

The planning suggests 34 parking spaces… here are already an existing 38 residents most with cars and most with more than one car per property, then wanting to put another 17 flats on this site with no proposals for underground parking for its actual residents takes the accommodation number to 55 flats… just impossible.
I envisage that the majority of the green space and one of the biggest oak trees I have ever seen will be pillaged to accommodate these flats. :woman_shrugging:

1 Like

Can’t stand to see this happen - and all to cram more people into our overcrowded borough.

I’ll comment to object 100%

1 Like

I know Chris!!
As much as it’s emotive for me with years of nostalgia, it is just beyond me that when you see the space they want to build on just how any developer could see the site and think they can get good access to do the planned works or that they would want to eradicate the last of the green space that is there given the cumbersome buildings which already overlook the proposed site.

Please do object.