Showing posts with label crofton park. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crofton park. Show all posts

06 March 2023

Honor Oak and Crofton Park CPZ Consultation

Lewisham Council have been asking residents for their views on their proposals for street enhancements and CPZ across Crofton Park ward.

Details of the consultation can be viewed at https://pclengagement-hub.co.uk/en-GB/projects/stapi , although the consultation has now closed.

The Forest Hill Society wrote outlining some of the concerns we have heard from local residents and members:


We acknowledge that the London Borough of Lewisham has declared a Climate Emergency and is keen to implement changes that will help to deliver on the commitments that were made to reduce the dependence on cars, and their toxic effects, in our area of London.

With this in mind, we would like to raise some points in response to the ongoing consultation that is currently underway mainly in the Crofton Park ward around Honor Oak Park, which is therefore relevant to the members of the wider Forest Hill Society. We are writing to you directly as the format of the consultation does not adequately take note of responses from those who are not directly resident in that area, but we feel that this is very relevant to the work of the Society.

1. We are concerned that the current structure of the consultation could create more problems for the wider area. The selection of a single, limited area between two train stations, but only covering some of the surrounding streets, risks displacing cars onto other local streets and not fixing the issue. In particular, Devonshire Road already has a traffic and a parking issue, and it is on the boundary of the area proposed for the CPZ, and so this is highly likely to be exacerbated. This may also be true on other boundary roads such as Westbourne Drive and Church Rise. We believe it would be unfair to implement any CPZ intervention without completing the consultation in the surrounding areas as well, and to implement all areas at once, if this is to go ahead.

2. We are also concerned that the goals of the Sustainable Streets initiative are incomplete. While we welcome the improvements that might arise from a reduction in cars parking on our streets, this needs to be accompanied by investments in active travel and making streets safer for walking and cycling if residents are to switch away from cars.

We recognise the benefit of better cycle parking provision, more car club bays, clear sight lines at corners and tree cover, but these cannot be done without considering the wider implications of safe cycle routes, traffic calming, reduction of rat-runs, and other interventions to increase green spaces and rain water absorption. We understand that Lewisham is considering these separately under the terms of "Healthy Neighbourhoods" but they are not included in the current consultation. This is likely to cause confusion and duplication if the investments from both programmes are not coordinated. We believe that the two programmes need to be implemented together so that residents get the benefit of better, safer and less congested streets, not simply the disincentive of parking permits and charges.

3. In practical terms, we would like to request that any contracts that are signed with third parties for parking enforcement are made fully transparent. Just like with private parking enforcement, there is the potential for a conflict of interest for a business that is rewarded for issuing fines instead of for achieving the Sustainable Streets goals, and could result in low levels of trust and satisfaction, undermining the Council's goals. It is important that the incentives of all parties are aligned, and transparent, and the revenues raised are similarly reported in a transparent way so that residents can see a direct link between this additional revenue source and the benefits in their own streets.

The Forest Hill Society will, of course, continue to engage with the consultation processes in the rest of Forest Hill in Stage 2, and may expand on these points in that process, but we hope that the above issues will be taken into account in the review of Stage 1.



22 March 2021

Oh, Christmas Tree


By Jason Kee

The festive celebrations may have been muted this past Christmas, but the SE23 (and SE4) communities enjoyed some great festive cheer with this season’s Christmas trees.

The tree decorating in Forest Hill outside WHSmith, organised through the Forest Hill Society, reached new heights in 2020 in both stature and decoration. For the second year in a row, local resident Lee Jackson, of design firm Jackson Morgenstern, designed and decorated the tree creating a flourish of seasonal reds, purples and golds.

However, there was little danger of a repeat of the great Forest Hill Hat Caper of 2019. This time, in the place of a Santa hat, three owls topped the tree and kept a wise vigil over Dartmouth and London Roads and the station’s forecourt. The owls were named “Hoot, Ann and Nanny” through a Twitter poll-beating stiff competition from “Blythe, Mayow, Horniman”, “Owly, McOwl, Face” and “Goldie, Frankie, Mervyn”.

The Forest Hill tree was big this season, but it was surpassed in height by a beautiful specimen on Perry Vale in the ‘Village’. Organised by councillors for Perry Vale ward, the tree’s decorations were kept simple and elegant, with strings of white lights. 

Christmas trees also appeared by Honor Oak Park and Crofton Park stations, and were graciously donated by Crofton Park’s Clickmas Trees. These trees were a real community effort with decorations and lighting provided by local residents themselves. Some may have noted that the HOP tree was topped by a mischievous little elf that had its own Twitter account. @HonorOakElf kept the Twitter followers among us amused with some friendly banter with @tweet_owls, a Twitter account manned by Hoot, Ann and Nanny themselves. 

Despite the absence of lighting ceremonies or carol singing this year, the Christmas trees of SE23 and SE4 brought great joy to kids and adults alike. Thank you to everyone involved in organising these trees during a very difficult time for the community. 

Forest Hill
Image: © Jackson Morgenstern Ltd
Crofton Park
Image: © Jane Martin
Perry Vale
Image: © SE23.life    
Honor Oak
Image: © Nicola Johnson

18 September 2020

The Great Big SE4 and SE23 Raffle



Back in April, when we were under serious lockdown, and virtually all local shops were shut, a couple of local ladies, Amanda Pearce and Nicola Johnson, had the excellent idea to run an online raffle: It would generate income for local business and offer prizes for people to look forward to after lockdown.

In total they sold over £17,000-worth of tickets, with all the money invested in future prizes from local businesses. 

As well as generating income for local independent businesses, it was a great reminder of all the wonderful independent shops in Forest Hill, Honor Oak, Crofton Park and Brockley. With hundreds of people entering the raffle to win random prizes, it was heart-warming to see such community spirit during the toughest of times.

Daily publicity for these businesses occurred via social media and provided information about which shops were gradually able to reopen.

Sadly, not all shops have been able to continue after lockdown, and we have seen a few businesses, such as Rob’s Barbers, not reopening since lockdown, and the Dartmouth Arms closing its doors. 

The raffle, and the shop closures, are an important reminder that local independent businesses only survive if we use them.

Full disclosure: I won a voucher for drinks at Subplot 57, the bar underneath Leaf & Groove that has a newly opened garden space.

11 March 2018

Local Police Patrols on Twitter

Forest Hill, Perry Vale and Crofton Park Safer Neighbourhoods Teams are our local police teams, reporting to Sergeant John Biddle.

As well as working hard to keep our streets safe, they provide regular updates on Twitter (@MPSPerryVale, @MPSForestHill, and @MPSCroftonPark) and on the local forum — SE23.life.

Regrettably, the police have recently reported a rise in house burglaries, thefts of mopeds and thefts of items from vehicles in the SE23 area. Nevertheless, some successes have been achieved in arresting suspected burglars in the local area, as well as dealing with drugs offenses and anti-social behaviour, and working with residents on crime prevention.

At present all three teams are based at Catford Hill police station, but the Metropolitan Police have plans to close this station (as well as the main Catford police station) and deploy officers elsewhere. The current thinking is that the Perry Vale, Forest Hill and Sydenham teams will be relocated to Newlands Park, just inside Bromley Borough, with the Crofton Park team either joining them or being relocated to Lewisham or elsewhere in the borough.

Each ward has a Safer Neighbourhoods Panel that includes representatives from local neighbourhood watch groups, residents’ associations, civic societies, councillors and traders. These panels help set the priorities for the police in their local areas, so that the concerns of residents can be dealt with.

08 November 2016

Southern Rail - Consultation on Cuts to Services

Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) has launched an extensive consultation which sets out proposed changes to the timetable which will be operated by GTR in 2018 following completion of the Thameslink Programme.

These proposals include:
a) Diverting all our East Croydon services to West Croydon - making it take longer to get to Gatwick and other destinations in Sussex.
b) Reducing our peak services to London Bridge to four trains an hour (the same capacity as the rest of the day). These services would be replaced by five carriage Overground trains to Dalston Junction.
c) Increasing services via Crofton Park to four trains per hour

The Forest Hill Society opposes the first two of these changes and supports the third. But it is important that local residents respond to this survey to show the strength of feeling.

Survey responses should be completed at https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/2018timetableconsultation
To help you respond to the large number of questions across all the Southern, Thameslink, and Great Northern Services, we have compiled a list of the nine questions we believe you should answer, with some explanation of each.


Q No.
Our View
Notes
14
We recommend you respond to this based on your circumstances, but in favour of later running services on Friday and Saturday
We support the introduction of late night services from London Bridge or Canada Water. However, early morning services may be important to you.
 
Please mention late night services on Friday and Saturday in the comments section of this question.
17
We recommend you select Yes
This supports services through Crofton Park
29
We recommend you support this
This supports services through Crofton Park
30
We recommend you support this
This supports services through Crofton Park
58
We recommend you select No
These services would replace Forest Hill services to East Croydon
59
We recommend you select No
This makes more services fast on our line rather than stopping at Forest Hill
60
We recommend you select No
Unnecessary duplication of London Overground services to West Croydon.
Enforced interchange at Norwood Junction, a station that has no step free access for interchange (on the way to Gatwick Airport).
61
We recommend you select No
These services world replaces Forest Hill services to East Croydon
67
We recommend you support SN3.1 and reject SN3.8. We also recommend you reject the reduction in peak hour services to London Bridge

06 October 2016

Ward Assemblies

This month ward assemblies will be voting on how to spend money in the local community. Competition this year has been greater than normal, so your vote counts for the projects that you would like to see in the local area.

Forest Hill Ward AssemblySaturday, 15th October, 2pm
Venue: Forest Hill Pools

Crofton Park Ward AssemblyTuesday, 18th October, 7pm
Beecroft Garden School, Beecroft Road, SE4 2BS

Perry Vale Ward AssemblyWednesday, 19th October, 7pm
Venue: TBC

03 November 2014

HopCroft Neighbourhood Forum: First Meeting

Established in July 2014, the Crofton Park and Honor Oak Park Neighbourhood Forum (HopCroft Forum) will lead on pulling together a Neighbourhood Plan for the area to outline the future for Crofton Park and Honor Oak Park.

Starting with blank sheets of paper we would like to hear your views, ideas and aspirations for your Neighbourhood.

If you live or work within the Neighbourhood Area, or even regularly visit then please help us make them reality.

You are invited to Crofton Park Library (by Crofton Park station) at 7pm on Wednesday 5 November 2014, to start the process and hear about what is being planned.

There will be food and drink to help your ideas flow

Get in touch with us on:
Facebook
Twitter
Email: hopcroftforum@gmail.com

17 June 2014

Ward Assemblies

Ward assemblies are an important way to have your say on developments in the local area and are a good opportunity to meet your local councillors.

Crofton Park Ward - Saturday 21st June, 10am, St. Saviour's Church Hall, Brockley Rise (see http://goo.gl/maps/Xj7yQ)
Forest Hill Ward - Sunday 13th July, 1:30pm, Forest Hill Pools, Dartmouth Road
Perry Vale Ward - Tuesday 15th July, 7pm, Rockbourne Youth Club

20 March 2014

Response to Proposed Crofton Park and Honor Oak Neighbourhood Plan Area and Forum



Below is the text of the Forest Hill Society submission regarding the Proposed Crofton Park and Honor Oak Neighbourhood Plan Area. Further details of the proposed forum and boundaries can be viewed on Lewisham council website.

The Forest Hill Society is the local amenity society for the SE23 postcode area which is run by the community for the community and has over 400 members.  It works to make the whole of Forest Hill 'an even better place to live' in a range of ways, including through involvement in the planning system, transport issues, environmental improvements, community events and working with a range of other groups and organisations.  The SE23 postcode area includes the neighbourhood of Honor Oak Park and we have many members that live in this part of the area.

Over the past 3 years the Forest Hill Society have been involved in various workshops, discussions and ideas around neighbourhood planning in SE23 and nearby, including meeting with the Council.  Our current approach is to work positively on ideas for improving key parts of the area that need it most and to see whether a neighbourhood plan is the effective way of achieving change on a case-by-case basis.  The Forest Hill Society is positive about the potential of neighbourhood planning and would like to support and work with any group or community within or around SE23 looking to improve their area. 

In relation to the current applications for the Neighbourhood Plan boundary and Neighbourhood Forum we have a number of concerns and we to object to both applications as they stand at the moment.


NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN BOUNDARY APPLICATION

We are concerned that the boundary does not represent a neighbourhood as it actually functions and excludes many residents who rely on and use key parts of the planned area.  As the proposed area is currently set out, and taken together with the proposed constitution which states that the neighbourhood plan is for the benefit of the inhabitants of the area, this would mean that many people who associate with either Crofton Park or more particularly Honor Oak Park but who do not live in Crofton Park Ward would be excluded both from membership of the forum and more importantly from voting in a future referendum.

"Membership of the Forum is open to those who live or work in Crofton Park Ward and to the area's elected representatives."

In this case the proposed NP boundary reflects the Ward Boundary for Crofton Park Ward.  There is no reason for the Neighbourhood Plan to be this boundary as within Metropolitan areas there are no set rules for how a NP boundary should be set.  We can see that boundaries need to be somewhere but in order to be effective, both in their preparation and their ratification these should reflect functional neighbourhoods or communities.

Our particular concern in this case is that the NP boundary does not reflect the neighbourhood or community of Honor Oak Park as it only includes land to the east of the railway line and not the other half of this community to the west.  This is a problem because one of the key areas that could really benefit from the potential opportunities that neighbourhood planning could secure is Honor Oak Park and the important local shopping centre that is located along this road.  As it stands the boundary would mean that the many residents of Honor Oak that do not live within Crofton Park ward would not be able to influence, contribute to or vote on key changes that might be proposed through the neighbourhood plan for this area.

A key open space (Honor Oak recreation ground) that is used principally by residents of Honor Oak Park is also excluded from the NP boundary.  Other parts of Honor Oak Park e.g. One Tree Hill, are also closely associated with this area but we can see that they also have a wider significance.

There is also a concern that the southern part of the proposed Neighbourhood plan boundary may be functionally part of Forest Hill rather than Honor Oak Park.

At a recent Crofton Park Ward Assembly meeting we understand that residents who did not live within the ward (but who live very close to the boundary) were not allowed to be part of the discussion about the proposed Neighbourhood plan even though they had come along specifically to find out more about it.   It would therefore seem that the NP boundary being following Ward boundaries might actually create more problems than it solves and end up marginalizing residents who would be impacted on by the plan but who don't live within the identified area.

It is interesting to contrast this approach to the NP boundary and forum application with that for Grove Park which is also on your website and which does appear to have covered these issues in some detail.

We would suggest that as an authority it may also be worth Lewisham considering separating the approval of an NP boundary with that of the neighbourhood forum.  This is the approach being taken in at least one other London Borough (Westminster) and it allows the boundary application and debate to focus on whether it covers a functional neighbourhood, before the application is considered about whether the proposed forum membership and constitution is inclusive and appropriate in those specific circumstances and for the approved boundary.

As part of our consideration of the NP proposals for Honor Oak Park and Crofton Park we have spoken with a number of FHS members and residents who live within the proposed NP area and nearby.  It appears to us that this concern about the boundary is one shared by quite a number of local people.

NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM APPLICATION

We are concerned about the wording of the proposed constitution in that it only includes those that live and work in the area and does not take account of the fact that the NP boundary does not reflect a functional neighbourhood and that it is in a complex urban area of overlapping places and functions.  The Grove Park application does at least appear to have considered these issues.

It is not clear how the NP Forum intend to include, work with and take into consideration the views and contributions of people living nearby the NP area and who will rely on, use and feel part of key centres within the NP area on a day to day basis (principally Honor Oak Park local centre).  To some extent this will always be an issue in high density urban areas but is a particular problem in this case because the NP area does not accurately reflect one or more functional neighbourhoods.  

We are aware that there is a duty to consult with neighbouring groups and statutory consultees as part of the regulation 14 consultation set out in the Neighbourhood planning regulations. However, this stage of consultation is too late for any meaningful opportunity for neighbours to influence the vision and objectives of the plan as it is only undertaken once a plan is written and ready to be consulted on.  It is also unlikely that neighbouring residents would be consulted at this stage as the focus is really on neigbouring authorities and organisations.  

In parished areas outside of major cities it may well be appropriate to focus the neighbourhood forum on only those who live or work in the Parish as there is more likely to be lower density, rural or peripheral areas around key areas of focus, such as towns or villages or local centres.  However, in urban areas such as this, with a number of overlapping communities it is important to both consider and reflect how people relate to and use an area, as well as take account of this 'overlap' and propose how to address it in the constitution of the neighbourhood forum.

Unfortunately we understand that whilst the draft constitution says lots of positive things about working with local groups and being inclusive we have concerns that this may not reflect the intention of the some of those in the group when it comes to including groups who operate partially within and also outside of Crofton Park Ward (such as the Forest Hill Society).  We are concerned that any neighbourhood forum needs to be inclusive of individuals and groups who are wholly within the neighbourhood area and also those who operate partially within it too, such as the Forest Hill Society, or who live nearby. 

We would ideally like some assurances, if this application is approved, that the Forest Hill Society, as a key civic group and local stakeholder with members in a large part of the proposed NP area would be able to contribute to the plan and to work collaboratively with the forum.  We think that best way to achieve this is if the Forest Hill Society and other groups are listed in the proposed constitution of the Forum as one of a number of groups that will be consulted with and engaged with as the plan develops, and ideally be involved in Forum meetings.   We would be happy to look to identify Forest Hill Society representatives who are also residents within or nearby to the Neighbourhood Plan area.

We would welcome the opportunity to engage with this forum and have previously made some attempts to do so.  We very much want to work with any Neighbourhood Forum in the development of a Neighbourhood Plan that serves local people and seeks to improve an area.  We believe the spirit of Neighbourhood planning should be about inclusion, collaboration, and a best practice approach to working community issues. We do not believe it should be about the idea of perceived 'exclusive' control of an area by one group.

We hope that the concerns we have about the current proposals are clear to you in this letter. We would be very happy to discuss these with you further if this would be helpful.

07 February 2014

Proposed Crofton Park and Honor Oak Park Neighbourhood Forum


Crofton Park and Honor Oak Park

A local Crofton Park and Honor Oak Park community group has submitted two applications to the Council:
  1. to become an officially designated neighbourhood forum called Crofton Park and Honor Oak Park neighbourhood forum, and
  2. to designate a geographical area as an officially recognised neighbourhood area.


The council would like to hear your views on the proposals, especially  including feedback on the following issues:
  • Does the proposed neighbourhood area boundary shown on the submitted map align with your own understanding of the local neighbourhood? and
  • Do you agree with the purpose and objectives of the proposed neighbourhood forum as set out in the forum’s constitution?

Please email all comments on neighbourhood planning applications along with your full name and address to: planning.policy@lewisham.gov.uk

14 November 2013

Honor Oak Pub to reopen in March 2014 (Updated)

East London Lines is reporting that the Honor Oak pub, on Brockley Rise, will reopen in March 2014.

A statement from Punch Taverns said: "With the Honor Oak currently being closed for trade, we are aware that there may be some concern regarding the future of the pub. We can re-assure the community that we see the pub very much part of the long term future of Punch Taverns and we are planning a £350,000 investment and refurbishment beginning in January with a gala reopening in mid March."

After closing in May, The Honor Oak was the subject of a campaign by the Forest Hill Society to turn the business into a co-operative pub. The co-operative would have required Punch Taverns to consult the group on any sale, giving the community the option to take over the pub before it could be sold to another buyer.

Richard Hibbert, the chairman at the Forest Hill Society, said: “That’s excellent news. A much-loved pub by the locals and one that was very good at one stage. I’m sure it will have a bright future.”
Update: The Forest Hill Society has received confirmation from Lewisham Council that on 13th November 2013 the Honor Oak Pub was added to the council's list of assets of community value.

Now that the property is included on the Council’s list of assets of community value, if the Owner subsequently decides to enter into a relevant disposal of it, it will be required to notify the Council in writing under Section 95(2) of the Act. For the meaning of “relevant disposal” and for when a relevant disposal is entered into, please see Section 96 of the Act.

On receiving notice of a relevant disposal, the Council will then update the entry in the list for the property to reveal that notice has been received, give written notice to the Forest Hill Society (as the community nominee who originally nominated the property to go on the list) and will also publicise the proposed disposal in the locality.