New Aldi approved in Bell Green

[JGD]

The mural unfortunately ultimately petered out due to the “conservation area” which the station approach resides in. The council were shown the designs submitted for the vote and said they didn’t want any of them really and that it didn’t keep with the “conservation area”.

JMLF is being discrete here. His efforts were exceptional in trying to to keep this moving - even after the "conservation area" consideration began to play a part. He put an extraordinary amount of effort into how the mural could be progressed and how fund-raising was to be conducted.

He has quietly drawn a veil across SydSoc's rebuff of his efforts to secure their support. If you look at his earlier posts you will find his account of how he was advised that he could not expect any SydSoc support whilst the the society was focusing its efforts on the gas-holder issue.

For clarity Annabelle and Pat turned up at the first mural meeting and made clear that they had a project that enjoyed Network Rail support and that this was to paint a mural on the wall opposite the down platform within the station. On finding little support for that option at the meeting, they never attended another.

Again if you look at earlier posts you will find many technical reasons that make their preferred site less than feasible. Location, access and safety management considerations make the painting of a mural at their location costly in both resources and money - even if there was enough possession time available to deliver the painting work.

Annabelle has very recently re-iterated her desire to see the in-station mural site progressed. Neither Annabelle nor Pat have made any realistic comment about "how" their option was to be delivered nor at at what price and how the funding for the higher costs was to be secured.

[TredownMan]

How sad. Is there a link between Syd Soc’s stance on the mural and the council’s opposition, or are they coincidental?

[michael]

The mural unfortunately ultimately petered out due to the “conservation area” which the station approach resides in.

I'm not sure about that. There is a rule relating to conservation areas with article 4 direction that exterior painting is not allow, but it only seems to apply to residential properties, so painting the exterior of other walls would be permitted.

As long as permission from the owner of the property is sought, there is nothing unlawful about a mural around the station area. Some people/councils may not wish to support a mural in certain locations within a conservation area, but they can't stop others from going ahead - if they have the permission of the owner of the wall.

[JMLF]

I did enquire about this - not quite in as succinct terms but although I had full backing and approval of the owners of the wall (Network rail and their affiliates), I was told by the council that as it lays within the conservation area essentially it would be very unlikely to happen/get through the process etc (again, the way they explained/worded that “we would not like any of the designs on the wall, maybe at a push this one” (or something very much to that affect) it went against the whole premise of the scheme and from the info given by the correct people I didn’t want to waste people’s time and efforts (especially artists) in producing thing that were never going to realistically become reality.

[michael]

I'm not sure what 'the process' would be - I don't think it would be the planning process unless you were painting on residential buildings or using illumination. Getting funding from council sources might be a different matter if they don't like your design but other sources of funding can always be found.

[JGD]

I'm not sure what 'the process' would be - I don't think it would be the planning process unless you were painting on residential buildings or using illumination. Getting funding from council sources might be a different matter if they don't like your design but other sources of funding can always be found.

There was no proposal to seek council funding.

The question of what "the process" would be in relationship to the conservation area, can only be answered by council officers. But write and make their requirements clear - they certainly did.

The Forest Hill mural was not subject to such scrutiny or intervention by the authority.

But there I go again - expecting consistency from Lewisham planners.

[JRobinson]

The Forest Hill Mural - if I'm not mistaken, was on the bridge under the railway, yes?
that road is the south circular, and is TfL road, so road owner - TfL, Bridge owner - Network Rail - therefore actually nothing to do with Lewisham at all, at the end of the day, they had little ability to say no.

[JGD]

that road is the south circular, and is TfL road, so road owner - TfL, Bridge owner - Network Rail - therefore actually nothing to do with Lewisham at all

In the case of the Forest Hill mural and for reasons that are not clear, the bridge and a small area on the other side of the road passing under the bridge were added to the Forest Hill Conservation Area Extensions adjudicated in 2010 and published in 2011.

So the comparison being made on here between the two sites and the actions taken by the Council was in their location's relationships to being in or near a Conservation Area. Simply - if the planners deemed that there was a Conservation Area issue applicable to the Sydenham proposal, why did the same principle not apply to Forest Hill ?

And it is undoubtedly accurate to state that JMLF received correspondence from council planners raising the issue of Conservation Area matters about the Sydenham proposal.

Not so much to do with the management of the road or site ownership issues.

[JMLF]

Not to stifle discussion etc but think a lot of this is retreading old ground and isn’t related to the title of the thread so might be good to bring it back to the title and those who wish to discuss the Aldi/Bell Green development?..