Hillcrest Estate development

[JRW]

The decision made by Lewisham's planners to not commission an Environmental Impact Assessment on the proposed Hillcrest Estate development is causing concern. The decision breaches the Mayor's Plan as the site is ancient woodland (part of the Great North Wood), an important wildlife habitat, and the land's potential instability due to the presence of underground streams.

Meanwhile, Lewisham Council has ignored a proposal to develop their land in Willow Way, and other available land at Bell Green. If you are concerned about the environment, please sign this petition.

https://www.change.org/p/planning-lewis ... m=copyLink

[OnCrestOfHill]

Good to see someone speaking out about this. Designated site of importance for nature conservation, part of the great north wood matters to me. Also the community centre, from which the community have been sadly locked out.

[TredownMan]

These are council houses, for 22 homeless families. Of which there are now more than one thousand in this borough.

This isn't pristine woodland or rolling parkland being destroyed - it's a number of trees, many substandard, within the existing boundaries of the estate.

I really mean no offence but "long-standing residents" who are very comfortably housed, beyond the wildest dreams of most, spending their free time time and energy to deny a place to live to their fellow citizens does not show Sydenham at its best.

As for the call to send people to Bell Green to be housed on the beloved gas works - is that some sort of elaborate wind-up?

[Tim Lund]

These are council houses, for 22 homeless families. Of which there are now more than one thousand in this borough.

This isn't pristine woodland or rolling parkland being destroyed - it's a number of trees, many substandard, within the existing boundaries of the estate.

I really mean no offence but "long-standing residents" who are very comfortably housed, beyond the wildest dreams of most, spending their free time time and energy to deny a place to live to their fellow citizens does not show Sydenham at its best.

As for the call to send people to Bell Green to be housed on the beloved gas works - is that some sort of elaborate wind-up?

You may feel this doesn't show Sydenham at its best, but a more relevant question is whether this is an effective way to campaign. Take this point about the "land's potential instability due to the presence of underground streams". If the land really is unstable, and this has been inadequately dealt with in the professional advice paid for by Lewisham Homes, it is likely to affect not just any proposed new build, but also the existing buildings in the area. Should existing residents be worried? I wonder if the problem extends to Longton Avenue? Is this already impacting property values there?

If instead this turns out to be groundless, does it undermine the credibility of the campaign?

[TredownMan]

If instead this turns out to be groundless, does it undermine the credibility of the campaign?

That would indeed raise very substantial questions about the campaign, which I why I expect the basis for the claim will be set out clearly in due course.

[Growsydenham]

Quite a misleading petition. e.g. of those 43 trees, 38 are ranked Cat C meaning low quality /short life span. I assume the petition makers knew this so they should have included it as they're not ancient woodland.

[michael]

I'm interested to understand whether any of the developments planned are on the land marked as 'Site of Importance for Nature Conservation' or whether these areas are just beyond the boundaries (which seems to be the case on the planning application submitted).

For me, it is really important to protect recognised sites of Importance for Nature Conservation, and to extend these where appropriate. But it is also important to find opportunities to build housing, particularly social housing, where it is appropriate.

I look forward to understanding more on these plans before I decide on whether I should sign the petition.

[John H]

Where exactly is "Hillcrest Estate"?

[Tim Lund]

Just trying to track down some more of the stats given in this petition

Lewisham has an appallingly low percentage of greenness - 14% compared to the London average of 20%. Why are you building on an already beautiful green space?

According to GiGL - Greenspace Information for Greater London

14.7% of the borough is actually Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation



so if gardens are added, the figure for green open space is going to be something between this and 22.2%, the figure of open space overall, including amenity space

There's a whole lot more about Greater London here

http://www.gigl.org.uk/keyfigures/

although that will include large areas of Green Belt in outer boroughs such as Bromley

[stuart]

I note the petition is headed by a photo of a Green Chain Walk signpost. Deliberately misleading as the Green Chain does NOT pass through Hillcrest Woods. It skirts it presumably because there is no public access or its not worthwhile.

The whole thing stinks which is presumably why so many who one would expect to support this do not.

Stuart

[Sydenham]

My understanding is that the Green Chain Walk does go through the Hillcrest estate and woods - there's a sign on Sydenham Hill (near Bluebell Close) as well as on Wells Park Road (near the old Upper Sydenham station).

Quick link (of someone who walks rather than official Green Chain website) also backs up that Hillcrest Woods is on official Green Chain walk - http://www.bertuchi.co.uk/gcw11.php

Would appreciate someone confirming this with correct sources for information.

Lewisham Homes, the aspirant developer, also refer to the Green Chain Walk in this recent status report: http://www.bertuchi.co.uk/gcw11.php

As I have previously discussed its a shame that our planning system is so binary - making objectors appear either for or against any particular scheme. Very difficult with the present system to suggest small changes which is often all that is required to make a scheme palatable and good for all.


One of the major challenges with this proposed development is that the designers are from Edinburgh - when I met them at one consultation they were not aware of the area - its design from a distance. Not good.

[stuart]

My understanding is that the Green Chain Walk does go through the Hillcrest estate and woods - there's a sign on Sydenham Hill (near Bluebell Close) as well as on Wells Park Road (near the old Upper Sydenham station).

Quick link (of someone who walks rather than official Green Chain website) also backs up that Hillcrest Woods is on official Green Chain walk - http://www.bertuchi.co.uk/gcw11.php

The official site begs to differ. The GCW goes through Sydenham Wells Park and up Wells Park Road. I don't know where the sign they use (do you?) in the photo is but if you check out the official Green Park sign outside the woods - it directs you AWAY from them. See:

https://goo.gl/maps/H31PMc8kjcL2
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/green-chain-w ... ion-11.pdf

Stuart

[Growsydenham]

Yes, why didn't the petition creators show instead with a picture of the dilapidated garages that are going to be built on for this site? Or use pictures of the actual trees that will be affected by works instead of conjuring an image of majestic ancient woodland?

I don't see how the authorities can listen seriously to a petition if the information people are being asked to base their signature on does not accurately and fairly reflect the plans. Anyone can gather 500 signatures on the internet in protest at something if you use tabloid distortion tactics.

[michael]

There are signs of the Green Chain Walk in the Hillcrest Estate:
https://goo.gl/maps/EQxnabRu11J2
https://goo.gl/maps/kc32pAfXLtq
https://goo.gl/maps/aWeQpHponi52

The route is shown on Lewisham council's map at http://www.cartogold.co.uk/lewisham/map.htm

[Wells Park News]

Hillcrest Estate is off Westwood Hill with high rise buildings built on parts of the Great North Wood, it would not be allowed not to be built nowadays. It is part of the Green chain walk from Crystal Palace to Sydenham Hill woods. It is known as SINC area which stands for Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. Just because there is ivy and hawthorn bushes etc growing many think it is untidy, do check out that this actually is good habitat for wildlife. There is a lovely map on a large Noticeboard in Sydenham Wells Park which is part of the Green chain walk.
The roads are narrow there are too many cars and no one can turn a car around once you are in on Vigilant Close you have to reverse back out...Lewisham Homes have not a good record for taking away rubbish or keeping the buildings in good order so that's what will happen again. London is going to be the first National Parks City which has backing of our London Mayor. People and Nature are better (http://www.nationalparkscity.london)
The Green Chain Walk in Hillcrest Woods is listed: greenchainwalkhillcrestwoods website http://www.wildlondon.org.uk

[Growsydenham]

Hillcrest Estate is off Westwood Hill with high rise buildings built on parts of the Great North Wood, it would not be allowed not to be built nowadays.

Indeed.

Which is why the Attlee government was able to tackle the post-war housing crisis and provide decent homes for all, and yet – for all the technology and capital available to us – we still have hundreds of families living in conditions that would shame the Edwardians.

[Tim Lund]

I'm interested to understand whether any of the developments planned are on the land marked as 'Site of Importance for Nature Conservation' or whether these areas are just beyond the boundaries (which seems to be the case on the planning application submitted).

What's the planning reference, or is there some other link you could provide?

OK - think this is it

https://planning.lewisham.gov.uk/online ... CAPR_94507

also this

https://planning.lewisham.gov.uk/online ... CAPR_95503

[Tim Lund]

The roads are narrow there are too many cars and no one can turn a car around once you are in on Vigilant Close you have to reverse back out...Lewisham Homes have not a good record for taking away rubbish or keeping the buildings in good order so that's what will happen again.

FWIW, here's the Transport Statement, which has a whole lot of stuff about managing the parking on the estate

https://planning.lewisham.gov.uk/online ... 671215.pdf

It's probably not going to convince the sceptics, but it provides some numbers, and and evidence that Lewisham Homes are aware of the issues

[dogkennel]

If you're not too familiar with planning application, the Design and Access Statement provides a good overview and context - and a good balanced view of the proposals, and images, as part of a wholesale renewal of the public realm of the estate with a sensitive response to the matters of SINC etc.

https://planning.lewisham.gov.uk/online ... 671195.pdf

Page 7 does concede there are impacts on parking and trees, but sets out significant mitigation.=, and that Lewisham Homes are working in conjunction with Lewisham Council for affordable new homes etc. At P 96 says how they've met with London Wildlife Trust etc. There's other measures to enhance access to the Green Chain.

So I'm not quite sure where all the potentially misleading comments from those promoting the petition are coming from.

I'll be pleased to say I'll write to support the application. One of the many overarching principles of high-rise living was to have open space / parkland in between. I know it's nowhere the same here, but schemes such as the Alton estate in Roehampton applied these sort of principles well.

[Larky]

JRW always seems to come up with misleading facts on all topics on this forum