And I'm sure the neighbour up the hill will be delighted to see that the development may result in people lurking outside her property - they look decidedly dodgy even in silhouette form - one even has a baseball cap on! (not that there's anything wrong with baseball caps, blah blah blah...!)

Just take a look at all the 3D drawings, especially the colour one and the one from the rear...something of an own goal for the developers.

http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/LEWIS-XSL...mkey=64537

My family live in what would look like the dolls house next door!

Even though there is an attempt to make the neighbouring homes look characterless they haven't managed to mask:
- the massive size of the building,
- the sheer scale of the windows, each the size of a door,
- the overlooking issues particularly into Sydmons Court and the backs of both Canonbie and Netherby Road homes and gardens,
- the loss of views (that's 'loss of amenity' in plannerspeak) to Canonbie Road residents opposite and up the road from the development.

What the 3D drawings do fail to show is:
- the encroached building line at the front,
- an almost doubling of existing building plot size (no comparison drawings),
- the loss of light to habitable rooms to neighbouring homes.

This website is a great opportunity to air our views. Unfortunately our views won't be considered unless they are voiced to Lewisham's Planning Service by 25 October. You can email a letter to Geoff Whitington at planning@lewisham.gov.uk
Let our local residents group (Tewkesbury Lodge Estate Residents Association) and Ward Councillors (Philip Peake/ Alex Feakes) have your comments too.

the below points will form the basis of my objection to Lewisham Planning. copies will also go to Tewkesbury Lodge Residents and Forest hill Society as well as the local councillors.
Feel free to take from it, if you feel appropriate, and you would like to object. I notice that there are currently only two formal objections listed on the planning application. believe we need a few more to prevent this going ahead.

The proposed increase in scale is significant - from 1 family house to 9 flats.
the footprint of the proposed development is almost double the existing, resulting in considerable loss of greenfield area.
Further loss of the existing garden and trees due to the proposed rear carpark
Our garden will be completely overlooked by balconies, dormer windows and patio doors all of which will be able to see directly into our garden
there will be a complete loss of view of clear sky from our kitchen window, replaced by a building 4 stories high from the rear which will dominate the view
Sydmons Court is not designed/built for the increased level of traffic.
proposed carpark and bin area is metres from our back door and back garden and will result in increased noise and odour
I am concerned that the scale of the building over of existing garden will result in increase in water run off down the hill which will directly impact our property
the design and scale of the design is completely out of keeping with the local character
the scale of the building works would cause significant disruption for a prolonged period
the topography of the immediate area would suggest that the building itself would require significant structural development which causing unacceptable levels of risk to the existing buildings
none of the aspects of the proposed developement work to enhance the local character, coherence or identity of the area - in fact they work against
We have stag beetles in our garden and the habitat is very similar to that of the current garden which will be tarmaced over to create the car park. Given stag beetles have protection, or partial protection, under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) and they are a priority species on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan, I would suggest that a full survey of the application site is carried out
I also believe that bats are roosting in the area. I have seen them myself and the Horniman Museum runs bat walks locally. The existing building is a natural roost site and as such I would also recommend a survey.


Some Specific responses to the Design and Access Statement:
there are many statements in the design plan which are inconsistent namely:
1.1 the location of the flatted developments - the numbers atated are incorrect
1.4 majority of housing is 1930's, not post war
1.4 there is currently no access from Sydmons Court
2.1 the removal of garden to enable increased building plot and garden ensure is its unlikely to appeal to famillies
2.1 I disagree that a plot comprising one family house is suitable to provide for nine flats
2.1 building on existing garden and turning more into car park does not constitute making better use of land
2.2 I do not believe that the proposals indicate a building "traditional in appearance and more sympathetic with the existing streetscene"
2.2 I disagree with the statement "the development should be responsive to the needs of the local borough and provide a high quality addition to the neighbourhood."
3.1 The scheme makes no attempt to "stay as close as possible to the exisitng building footprint" and the bulk of the remaining site is being turned into a carpark - hardly landscaping. Further, it makes no attempt to "maintain the relationship with neighbouring properties."
3.1 this whole section makes claims which I believe the plans show to be incorrect in terms of scale, overlooking and access. "The view and outlook from the development remain the same and so does access into the property." This is factually incorrect.
4.1 references to access are again incorrect and whilst orientation and position are the same, there is no mention of the fact that an exising bungalow will be replaced with a 3/4 storey building
4.2 additional lighting and security measures will be intrusive on neighbouring propoerties
5.0 i do not agree that the development is in scale with surrounding buildings - far from it.
6.0 the existing garden is well stocked and an asset to the area - to replace with carparking will not enhance and make more attrctive whilst "encourage use and integration into the natural setting"
7.0 I do not feel that the proposed design "seeks to respond to the site and immediate context with appropriate respect to the existing residential buildings mass, scale and style."
7.0 I disagree with most of the statements in this section

(apols for the formatting - a step to far for a simple chap like me)

You might also add that depending on the time of year and the time of day, the bulk of the proposed building will cause loss of sunlight and hence overshadowing of the neighbouring properties and gardens.

As a resident of Sydmons Court I have only just found out about this. I can confirm that the access road to Sydmons Court is a private road forming part of the freehold to the property. This freehold is owned collectively by the leaseholders of Sydmons Court. I can't at this stage speak for all the leaseholders (12 properties), but I'd risk a small wager they won't be getting access that way.

Bill, what great news to hear. It appears that the applicants really haven't thought this through. Please do submit your objection before next tuesday ( not long I know) indicating the share of freehold situation.

That's made my day!

The Tewkesbury Lodge Estate Residents' Association will be strongly objecting to this application.

I've spoken to Geoff Whitington, the planning officer involved, who has confirmed that the official deadline for submission of comments is now 1 November.

In view of the number of objections received so far, the application has to go to a Planning Committee for consideration - if it is not rejected by Officers first. Before it goes to Committee a 'Local Meeting' would be held to allow the developer and local residents to make their views known.

The availability, or otherwise, of access from Sydmons Court would be a consideration for the planners.

Clearly, it is important for all those with views on this application to make them known to the Council. A simple email via the link on the planning website is sufficient.

As it says on the planning website:

If you would like to comment on this application please send an email to planning@lewisham.gov.uk including the Application Number (DC/11/78485/X), your name, address, comment and reason for interest.

Many thanks to billham for confirmation on Sydmons Court ownership - excellent news. and also to the Tewkesbury Lodge Estate Residents Assoc for getting behind the objections.
Sounds like the objections are mounting up.

I hope you are correct. Would not the council be able to compulsory purchase the approach road. I am not sure.

Why would the Council want to purchase the road Brian? There's nothing in it for them except expense. They aren't building the flats!

Planners have submitted a revise site plan. No longer showing a carpark and bins at rear with access from Symonds Court. Parking is now reduced to 4 cars across the front of the flats on Canonbie.
Whilst this addresses one or two of the issues, the fact remains that this is still a massive over-development of the site.

It may also be worth checking whether there are any restrictive covenants on the land registry title to that property which may benefit adjoining owners. It is not uncommon for there to be some form of restriction on building in a garden, with the benefit of that restriction going to the neighbours.

The planners aren't concerned with that kind of thing as it's not material to them but it gives the neighbours a great big legal stick to beat the developer with.

You would hope that the developer's solicitors would have warned him of such a restriction but it's a pretty big area for solicitors' professional negligence so I wouldn't bet on it...

Surely now if they have revised the plans then the planning process starts again? - they now have new drawings that bear no relationship to the Design & Access Statement nor any other information - this is becoming more of a joke each time! The developer and his architects seem to be responding to comments in a knee-jerk way now, and we will end up with an inappropriate scheme which is still over-developed.

New drawings are at this link:

http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/LEWIS-XSL...mkey=64537

I'm not sure the planning process has to start again for this sort of revision, but the planning officer should be asking serious questions about the design and access statement. He should also be looking for answers as to why there is no analysis of the impact of the building on adjacent properties, particularly no 49, and where any more cars will park now not a single one can be parked on the street in front of the property. Hopefully he is also asking whether this is the right location to allow the building of what are now even less desirable flats - even if they do have a bit more communal garden.

I copy of the Forest Hill Society objection can be read at http://www.freewebs.com/foresthill/plann...nonbie.pdf

This was submitted this morning, prior to the changes to the parking, but most of the concerns still remain.

There are now 4no. 1 bed flats(originally 2), 4no. 2 bed flats(originally 6) and 1no. 3 bed flat but only 4no. parking spaces(originally 9). These desperate proposals contradict the planning application submitted and the Design and Access Statement - surely this is substantially different and should constitute a new planning application so that everyone has the statutory time to comment again...?

It is clear that the developers have got the message that there is no realistic possibility of access via Sydmons Court. From feedback received from Lewisham I think they were intending to try to make use of the access rights which reasonably exist to the electricy sub station on the road - a quite ludicrous proposal I think!!

The change in parking/bin arrangements seems pretty fundamental and, as others have pointed out, changing merely the plans makes the whole application inconsistent. How significant does a change have to be to invalidate the whole thing??

A significant victory for now but I think the majority of the battle remains!!

The revised balance of property types in favour of smaller properties (to allow for the parking at the front), makes this whole development pretty much doomed, and I mean this for the developers themselves.

The area is full of families, attracted to the area by the good schools and the additional space available up on the hill. The views are fantastic, but only worth the walk if you have something great to get to when you get there! 1 bed flats, with little or no access to communal gardens, simply won't sell. The turnover of tenants in existing blocks (and lack of owner/occupiers) is testament to this.

Does anyone happen to know the split of 1/2/3 bed properties in the other blocks on the road?

I think, but can't be sure, that all of the flats in the Barr Beacon block are 2 bed flats - and of course they all have access to a very big communal garden at the back.