A new planning application has been submitted to Lewisham for the redevelopment of the Greyhound site (ref: DC/09/72790). It is not yet available in an electronic version on Lewisham Council's website as there is a backlog of applications at the Town Hall. The period of public consultation has therefore not officially begun.
However a model of the development and the planning documents have been made available by the developers in the Gallery of Kirkdale Bookshop for anyone interested in commenting on this application when the consultation period does start.
The Sydenham Society welcomes the fact that the apartment block to the rear of the Greyhound has been reduced by one storey in this revised proposal and that the Spring Hill elevation has been retained and raised by one storey to partly compensate. The Society will be considering the proposals in detail and will be submitting our comments to Lewisham in due course
The Greyhound, Cobbs Corner
-
Pat Trembath
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 10:54
It has got housing, not as much as in previous plans, but it does have a square with trees and plenty of retail, some of which could be cafes or bars.
There is no way anything will be developed on the site without housing Eagle; the sums just wouldn't add up.
I have looked at the model in Kirkdale Bookshop and examined the detailed plans there and I think it is an exciting development that could do a lot for that area nd the whole of Sydenham. They have reduced the height of the flats, which may appease the Parkhill Gardens people, and the plans for the pub look very intersting with one wall of the pub fully tiled on the outside.
Will be interesting to see what type of retail outlets they attract and I would hope that at least one retail unit will be for community use or let to a social enterprise.
Hope it goes ahead as planned.
There is no way anything will be developed on the site without housing Eagle; the sums just wouldn't add up.
I have looked at the model in Kirkdale Bookshop and examined the detailed plans there and I think it is an exciting development that could do a lot for that area nd the whole of Sydenham. They have reduced the height of the flats, which may appease the Parkhill Gardens people, and the plans for the pub look very intersting with one wall of the pub fully tiled on the outside.
Will be interesting to see what type of retail outlets they attract and I would hope that at least one retail unit will be for community use or let to a social enterprise.
Hope it goes ahead as planned.
simon wrote:It has got housing, not as much as in previous plans, but it does have a square with trees and plenty of retail, some of which could be cafes or bars.
There is no way anything will be developed on the site without housing Eagle; the sums just wouldn't add up.
I have looked at the model in Kirkdale Bookshop and examined the detailed plans there and I think it is an exciting development that could do a lot for that area nd the whole of Sydenham. They have reduced the height of the flats, which may appease the Parkhill Gardens people, and the plans for the pub look very intersting with one wall of the pub fully tiled on the outside.
Will be interesting to see what type of retail outlets they attract and I would hope that at least one retail unit will be for community use or let to a social enterprise.
Hope it goes ahead as planned.
DITTO
I looked at the plans today and thought they looked great.
I don't think Sydenham is overcrowded, but we have had this debate before in other threads.
I think, as long as the plans stay true to high specifications in the plans, will be great. My only slight reservations is over the tiled wall around the back. These looks fantastic in Portugal, Spain and Latin America on the outsides of buildings, and great on historic buildings in the UK on the inside.
Plans for moving the tiles from the drinking corridor to a room inside the pub look fantastic, as do the new squares and planting. Love the green and brown roofs too.
I hope this goes ahead.
I don't think Sydenham is overcrowded, but we have had this debate before in other threads.
I think, as long as the plans stay true to high specifications in the plans, will be great. My only slight reservations is over the tiled wall around the back. These looks fantastic in Portugal, Spain and Latin America on the outsides of buildings, and great on historic buildings in the UK on the inside.
Plans for moving the tiles from the drinking corridor to a room inside the pub look fantastic, as do the new squares and planting. Love the green and brown roofs too.
I hope this goes ahead.
Seifer: This is purely my understanding here.
I believe that all new developments must conform to 'mixed use'. I should have researched this but I'm keen to understand it also so will put my interpretation down and those in the know can put me right.
Planning will only be approved for developments that offer accomodation to a broad spectrum. Councils are no longer building Local Authority Estates and instead are focusing on Public Private Partnerships. These PPPs are, in short, working with housing associations to ensure that low-income families and key-workers or FTBs (yourself) can part buy/part rent or just rent. This equates to about 30%. If there's an obscene shortage of accomodation the Local Authority can take up to 20% for council tenants...although this is an extreme measure as councils prefer the flexibility of B&B here. The rest is given over to private purchasers. These private-purchasers can actually be 100% if the developer wishes but mostly is about two-thirds.
?
Just as a side note and without meaning to reignite the debate over whether or not Sydders is over-crowded (I think it isn't). Out of the 14 'Inner' London Boroughs, Lewisham is 12th in terms of population density. By this I mean we are pretty much the LEAST densely populated. Kensington and Chelsea is the MOST populace with 13,609 per sq km. We have 7,220 per sq km. Funnily enough only two Inner LBs beat us and that is (bizarrely) Newham with 7,013 and CityofLondon with 2,694.
It's a bit of a cheat to include the City if you ask me.
I believe that all new developments must conform to 'mixed use'. I should have researched this but I'm keen to understand it also so will put my interpretation down and those in the know can put me right.
Planning will only be approved for developments that offer accomodation to a broad spectrum. Councils are no longer building Local Authority Estates and instead are focusing on Public Private Partnerships. These PPPs are, in short, working with housing associations to ensure that low-income families and key-workers or FTBs (yourself) can part buy/part rent or just rent. This equates to about 30%. If there's an obscene shortage of accomodation the Local Authority can take up to 20% for council tenants...although this is an extreme measure as councils prefer the flexibility of B&B here. The rest is given over to private purchasers. These private-purchasers can actually be 100% if the developer wishes but mostly is about two-thirds.
?
Just as a side note and without meaning to reignite the debate over whether or not Sydders is over-crowded (I think it isn't). Out of the 14 'Inner' London Boroughs, Lewisham is 12th in terms of population density. By this I mean we are pretty much the LEAST densely populated. Kensington and Chelsea is the MOST populace with 13,609 per sq km. We have 7,220 per sq km. Funnily enough only two Inner LBs beat us and that is (bizarrely) Newham with 7,013 and CityofLondon with 2,694.
It's a bit of a cheat to include the City if you ask me.
Greyhound Cobbs Corner
Somehow I don`t think London City Rich Boys will be rushing to buy a flat in Sydenham just yet!!
-
Trawlerman
- Posts: 318
- Joined: 17 Sep 2009 13:56
- Location: Sydenham
Re: Greyhound Cobbs Corner
Funny you should think that as I know quite a few of them who are here already [should I have whispered that?].angela53 wrote:Somehow I don`t think London City Rich Boys will be rushing to buy a flat in Sydenham just yet!!
With the impending 'ELL' giving better Docklands access and of course L.Bridge already being one of the main termini for the City itself I think you'd best steal yourself for even more Hooray Henrys!
BTW I'm not saying I am one but they are here and will be here in increasing numbers once we smarten our High St up etc...whether you like it or not.
-
biscuitman1978
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: 16 May 2006 20:14
- Location: Chislehurst; previously Sydenham
Thought it might be helpful to clarify a few things here...
When an application for planning permission is submitted, it is up to the local planning authority (Lewisham in the case of the Greyhound site) to determine it in accordance with the development plan 'unless material considerations indicate otherwise'.
In other words, it is up to Lewisham to decide whether the proposed development is consistent with the development plan and, if it is, whether there are any other relevant issues or reasons (material considerations) which might in fact justify the refusal rather than the grant of permission. Conversely, if the proposed development isn't consistent with the development plan, it is again up to Lewisham to decide whether there are any other relevant issues which might justify permission being granted.
The development plan in this case is formed of the London Plan (http://www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan) and the Lewisham Unitary Development Plan (UDP)(http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/Environment/ ... pmentPlan/).
Where there is a conflict between the two, the most recently published (or 'adopted' to use the technical term in relation to the Unitary Development Plan) prevails.
Note that the current London Plan will be replaced, and all are welcome to comment on the new draft - see http://www.london.gov.uk/shaping-london/
Likewise the UDP will be gradually replaced by a new Local Development Framework - see http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/Environment/ ... Framework/ Again, comments are being (or will be) invited.
For those who have general concerns about overcrowding, lack of infrastructure, high density development or whatever it may be, now is the time to comment!
'Material considerations' is a bit more tricky. The best thing I can do is point you in the direction of http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents ... 147396.pdf (paras 11 to 16).
Note that most applications for minor development will be decided by a planning officer at the local planning authority, but larger or controversial applications are decided by a planning committee made up of councillors. The committee considers a report by the planning officers, which will recommend the grant or refusal of permission, but the committee may reach a view which differs from the officers.
Just to complicate things further, some very large applications are referred to the Mayor of London, who has the power to direct the local planning authority to refuse the application. And in some, very limited circumstances, the Mayor of London can also direct approval.
On some of the specific points:
- Ulysses isn't quite right to say that 'all developments must must conform to 'mixed use''. Mixed use development is broadly encouraged, but not necessarily in all cases.
- On the affordable housing issue, the London Plan and Lewisham UDP indicate how much 'affordable housing' should be provided as part of proposed residential developments (or mixed use development including residential). But there is no hard and fast 'rule' - the proportion needs to be negotiated taking into account the particular financial circumstances of the site. There's no point in making the developer provide vast amounts of affordable housing if doing so would make the scheme unviable - otherwise the site will simply lie derelict. On occasion that may mean that no affordable housing is provided as part of the development. Note, by the way, that there are two broadly two types of affordable housing: 'social rented' and 'intermediate'. The latter includes things like shared ownership properties.
Finally, if you need advice on planning you can always instruct a planning consultant (see http://www.rtpiconsultants.com) or if you can't afford to pay a consultant you can ask for free (or at least affordable) advice from Planning Aid for London (http://www.planningaidforlondon.org.uk).
When an application for planning permission is submitted, it is up to the local planning authority (Lewisham in the case of the Greyhound site) to determine it in accordance with the development plan 'unless material considerations indicate otherwise'.
In other words, it is up to Lewisham to decide whether the proposed development is consistent with the development plan and, if it is, whether there are any other relevant issues or reasons (material considerations) which might in fact justify the refusal rather than the grant of permission. Conversely, if the proposed development isn't consistent with the development plan, it is again up to Lewisham to decide whether there are any other relevant issues which might justify permission being granted.
The development plan in this case is formed of the London Plan (http://www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan) and the Lewisham Unitary Development Plan (UDP)(http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/Environment/ ... pmentPlan/).
Where there is a conflict between the two, the most recently published (or 'adopted' to use the technical term in relation to the Unitary Development Plan) prevails.
Note that the current London Plan will be replaced, and all are welcome to comment on the new draft - see http://www.london.gov.uk/shaping-london/
Likewise the UDP will be gradually replaced by a new Local Development Framework - see http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/Environment/ ... Framework/ Again, comments are being (or will be) invited.
For those who have general concerns about overcrowding, lack of infrastructure, high density development or whatever it may be, now is the time to comment!
'Material considerations' is a bit more tricky. The best thing I can do is point you in the direction of http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents ... 147396.pdf (paras 11 to 16).
Note that most applications for minor development will be decided by a planning officer at the local planning authority, but larger or controversial applications are decided by a planning committee made up of councillors. The committee considers a report by the planning officers, which will recommend the grant or refusal of permission, but the committee may reach a view which differs from the officers.
Just to complicate things further, some very large applications are referred to the Mayor of London, who has the power to direct the local planning authority to refuse the application. And in some, very limited circumstances, the Mayor of London can also direct approval.
On some of the specific points:
- Ulysses isn't quite right to say that 'all developments must must conform to 'mixed use''. Mixed use development is broadly encouraged, but not necessarily in all cases.
- On the affordable housing issue, the London Plan and Lewisham UDP indicate how much 'affordable housing' should be provided as part of proposed residential developments (or mixed use development including residential). But there is no hard and fast 'rule' - the proportion needs to be negotiated taking into account the particular financial circumstances of the site. There's no point in making the developer provide vast amounts of affordable housing if doing so would make the scheme unviable - otherwise the site will simply lie derelict. On occasion that may mean that no affordable housing is provided as part of the development. Note, by the way, that there are two broadly two types of affordable housing: 'social rented' and 'intermediate'. The latter includes things like shared ownership properties.
Finally, if you need advice on planning you can always instruct a planning consultant (see http://www.rtpiconsultants.com) or if you can't afford to pay a consultant you can ask for free (or at least affordable) advice from Planning Aid for London (http://www.planningaidforlondon.org.uk).
Re: Greyhound Cobbs Corner
This is exactly my thinking, although I have yet to read the rest of the thread, further commentary pending..Ulysses wrote:Funny you should think that as I know quite a few of them who are here already [should I have whispered that?].angela53 wrote:Somehow I don`t think London City Rich Boys will be rushing to buy a flat in Sydenham just yet!!
With the impending 'ELL' giving better Docklands access and of course L.Bridge already being one of the main termini for the City itself I think you'd best steal yourself for even more Hooray Henrys!
BTW I'm not saying I am one but they are here and will be here in increasing numbers once we smarten our High St up etc...whether you like it or not.
-
Pat Trembath
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 10:54
The Greyhound planning application (DC/09/72790) is now "live" and formally out for consultation. Comments about any aspect of the proposal should be made to planning@lewisham.gov.uk by 8 December .
For anyone interested in looking at the details the developers have provided a design statement and a model of the development which are available at Kirkdale Bookshop during shop opening hours.
For anyone interested in looking at the details the developers have provided a design statement and a model of the development which are available at Kirkdale Bookshop during shop opening hours.
I think the designs look great and the removal of a storey makes a big difference to the overall aesthetics of the design. I really hope this goes through and gets built now.
Page 8 of this (large document!) contains a good illustration:
http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/ACOLLATEDOCS/50824_3.pdf
All the planning docs as posted by Pat are stored:
http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/LEWIS-XS ... mkey=58160
Page 8 of this (large document!) contains a good illustration:
http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/ACOLLATEDOCS/50824_3.pdf
All the planning docs as posted by Pat are stored:
http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/LEWIS-XS ... mkey=58160
Thanks for the link to that document Gaz (all 50 mb of it!).
Having looked at what the plans are on the pdf and popping into Kirkdale Books to look at the model...I'm all in favour.
I especially like how the Minton tiles (or 'drinking corridor' as they term it) will be recycled within the proposals.
Julwz, Falkor and I might well be the last Sydenham residents (as in just average punters on the street with no official link to anything) to see the Minton tiles after I blagged us in a few years ago by sweet-talking the landlady. It's right and proper that people should be able to appreciate them again as they are so impressive.
I am finding myself dreaming somewhat of what the businesses underneath the flats will be...and whether or not the Greyhound will become a Pizza Express or somesuch!
Having looked at what the plans are on the pdf and popping into Kirkdale Books to look at the model...I'm all in favour.
I especially like how the Minton tiles (or 'drinking corridor' as they term it) will be recycled within the proposals.
Julwz, Falkor and I might well be the last Sydenham residents (as in just average punters on the street with no official link to anything) to see the Minton tiles after I blagged us in a few years ago by sweet-talking the landlady. It's right and proper that people should be able to appreciate them again as they are so impressive.
I am finding myself dreaming somewhat of what the businesses underneath the flats will be...and whether or not the Greyhound will become a Pizza Express or somesuch!
-
blue&whitewizard1991
- Posts: 46
- Joined: 23 Jul 2008 18:32
- Location: Lawrie Park Road
Could someone with a knowledge of planning and construction, give me an appreciation of what the timetable for the Greyhound development might be if this gains approval.
The planning application letter appears to suggest final decesion by Feb 2010. Assuming a positive outcome, does this mean work can commence immediatley or are their other stages that I'm unaware of?
The planning application letter appears to suggest final decesion by Feb 2010. Assuming a positive outcome, does this mean work can commence immediatley or are their other stages that I'm unaware of?