Planning Application: Bell Green Gas Works Development

Development of three buildings ranging in height between 5 and 15 storeys with 261 residential units at Land at the Former Bell Green Gas Works, London, SE26

Application DC/23/129814

We are writing to object to the above application on the basis of the following points:

1. The level of affordable housing proposed is wholly inadequate, as currently only 4% is proposed. A development of this size should not be approved without getting closer to or higher than the council target of 35%.

2. The development does not comply with Lewisham’s target housing mixes, with too few family dwellings and a disproportionate number of one bedroom dwellings.

3. The location of the proposed residential buildings are so close to the Livesey Memorial Hall that they threaten the viability of the Hall and sports grounds. The existing use of the rear space as a smokers bar area will conflict with the residential bedrooms which overlook the rear of the Hall, creating friction between new residents and the established community use of the hall resulting in complaints. The Livesey is protected under the Agent of Change principle in the revised National Planning Policy Framework of 2018. The Lewisham Plan quotes it, saying “New noise-sensitive development is situated away from existing noise generating uses and activities, or, where this is not possible, providing adequate separation and acoustic design measures.”

While the Applicant intends to address the Livesey’s potential for noise nuisance issues by making windows facing the Livesey non-opening, the ventilation system does not provide adequate cooling and in combination with a poorly modelled façade providing little shading, overheating in the new apartments is a real risk. We would recommend that consideration is given to planning conditions that would prevent complaints of noise nuisance directed at Livesey Memorial Building caused by poorly situated new housing.

4. The public spaces in the proposals are problematic, with large areas including play areas, overshadowed, poor relationships to buildings and inappropriate planting and cycle parking.

5. There is no improvements proposed to the surrounding pavements, highways or wider public realm which is currently poor and will be vital if it is expected that new residents will make their way to the closest station at Lower Sydenham. Improvements that join up pedestrian access around the site are vital to make this development work well and should be considered as part of any approval process.

6. The application does not contain proposals for contributing to the local infrastructure that their development’s new residents will rely on. In particular we are concerned about the stress that this development (and future neighbouring developments) will place on health services in the area.

7. The Livesey consists of 3 nationally Listed Structures. The Livesey Memorial Hall, its Front Wall, and the Livesey Hall War Memorial are each separately listed Grade II by Historic England. The draft Lewisham Local Plan I c. states that: “Important views, both of and from the listed building are protected”, in developments involving listed buildings, and Application site adjoins the Hall’s curtilage at their western boundary. The views shown indicate that the proposals will adversely affect the Listed Building and Structures.

8. The heights of the buildings have not been adequately justified either by reference to existing buildings in the locality or the Bell Green Vision. Although the Bell Green Vision is not an approved planning document, it gave an indication of potential and acceptable heights for the Bell Green development area, based on criteria. Key to the criteria was the location of a new station on an extended Bakerloo Line, providing the justification for greater densities and more height. Even though this criteria is not met, and will not be for at least the foreseeable future, the Applicant considers that this is justification for the proposals to rise to 15 storeys. This has not been justified in relation to the rest of the Vision’s masterplan area nor in relation to the current townscape. The height of the tower should therefore be reconsidered.

We therefore ask that unless these issues are fully addressed, that the application be refused.

Planning Application: 57 Willow Way

An application for a new mixed-used commercial and residential development on Willow Way has been recieved by Lewisham Council. Below is the objection sent on behalf of the Forest Hill Society.

I am writing on behalf of the Forest Hill Society, regarding the proposed development at 21-57 Willow Way,SE26 4AR, planning application reference DC/22/129789.  This relates to the demolition of the existing buildings and redevelopment of the site with a block of 5-6 storeys, providing employment use (Use Class E(g)) at ground floor and 60 residential units above, with associated landscaping, car parking and amenity areas. 

While we are generally supportive of the provision of employment use and residential units, especially affordable units, in this location, we have the concerns and comments noted below.

This site is an important element of the Willow Way Employment Location, as identified in the emerging Local Plan, and it is unfortunate that there is currently no detailed or agreed masterplan for the wider site, against which these current proposals can be appraised.  The indicative masterplan provided with the Application is not clear on when the works to the public realm, including shared surface and the widening of Willow Way, will take place and how this will be achieved without the loss of area to the sites opposite to the Application Site. A detailed and agreed masterplan would clarify issues such as access and servicing, which are important considerations in the mixing of employment use and residential accommodation on the site. 

The Transport Assessment identifies one loading bay for the use of all three employment uses.  This bay will therefore be used regularly by goods vehicles and we have safety concerns that the location shown, outside of a main residential entrance, may not be suitable and that further thought should be given to the servicing strategy.

Regarding parking related to the development, it is noted that only disabled parking is provided. The Application documents suggest that there will be little demand for parking from new residents, but we still have concerns that without parking controls along Willow Way, car parking, access and pedestrian safety may become an issue. The road is currently consistently parked up with cars encroaching on the footpath, providing poor pedestrian access. This would be exacerbated if residents increase parking demand.

Regarding the massing, we remain concerned regarding the overall height of the proposed buildings which is excessive when compared with the 3 storey buildings in the adjacent Sydenham Park Conservation Area and the recently built 4 storey buildings at each end of Willow Way.  The mezzanine level in the employment use results in a height closer to 6 storeys overall.  We would recommend that the overall height is reduced by at least one storey.

We would ask that the above concerns be considered carefully before the proposals are determined.

Planning Application: Miriam Lodge, Dartmouth Road

Thee is a proposed development at Miriam Lodge, 185 Dartmouth Road, London SE26 4RQ  application DC/21/123657: Demolition of existing annex building ancillary to the hostel at Miriam Lodge 185 Dartmouth Road SE26 and construction of 9 three storey 4 bedroomed dwelling houses together with the provision of cycling spaces at the rear and refuse/recycling storage.

The Forest Hill Society has written to object to this application on the grounds that at least one of the proposed dwellings does not meet adequate standards for the size of unit.

1. The unit in question is the westernmost of the proposed development on the Long terrace, adjacent to the existing substation.

2. Although the Daylight Report by BDLA generally considers that the scheme meets adequate standards, the Report specifically identifies that this unit is deficient in meeting almost all of the daylight standards for most of the habitable rooms.  

3. With its position backing on to the electricity substation, we consider the garden is not of an adequate size for a 4-bedroom house, particularly where it is anticipated that young children/adults will be living there.

We therefore request the application is refused by the council.

Planning Application: Thorpewood Avenue

I am writing on behalf of the Forest Hill Society regarding the proposed development at 88 Thorpewood Avenue, SE26 4BY, application DC/22/128192: The construction of a part one/part two storey rear extension, roof extension to the rear roof slope and installation of rooflights in the front roof slope at 88 Thorpewood Avenue SE26 in connection with the alteration and conversion to provide 3 self-contained flats, together with the construction an outbuilding in the rear garden.

We are writing to object to the above application by virtue of the unsuitable accommodation proposed and the detrimental impact on the Forest Hill Conservation Area.

The proposals do not satisfy the requirements within “Technical housing standards – nationally described space standard” (Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2015) or the London Plan (March 2021). The proposed Flat B does not fit the requirement within the above documents that "a dwelling with two or more bedspaces has at least one double (or twin) bedroom" (Para 10b, Nationally Described Space Standards). Furthermore, even if a double bed was incorporated into the layout, the size of the flat would still not meet the requirements.

Moreover, the Development Management Local Plan (2014) Policy 3 resists the conversion of a single family house to two or more dwellings unless they meet certain critera. The document states that:

"2.13 Family housing (single family houses with three or more bedrooms) is seen as a valuable resource which should be retained in order to meet identified housing need and provide housing choice. Single family houses with fewer than three bedrooms should also be retained in order to provide housing choice."

It should be noted that the dwelling as existing is/does not:

a. adjacent to noise generating or other environmentally unfriendly uses
b. lack of external amenity space suitable for family use.

Therefore, the site is contrary to Policy 3a within the DMLP (2014). It is also contrary to point c within the same policy with reference to the Forest Hill Conservation Area, as per below.

The Forest Hill Conservation Area is characterised by its commercial and retail centre around the railway station and surrounding suburban residential streets and green spaces. The application site forms part of a terrace of houses designed and built by prominent local developer E.C. Christmas. The buildings are representative of developments by Christmas and the period in which they were built and thus make a positive contribution to the character and appearnace of the Conservation Area. At present, there are no rear extensions projections on any of the terraced buildings, thereby allowing the original form and pattern of the buildings to be understood. The submitted Heritage Statement has not assessed the significance of the Conservation Area and how the application site contributes to that significance in line with the requirement set out in Paragraph 194 of the NPPF, although the statement does acknowledge that the terraced buildings have “survived nearly unaltered with the original doors, clay tile roofs and fine leaded windows still in place.”

The proposals include a rear extension which will remove the articulation of the original rear elevation, which has a small projection and catslide roof, thus breaking up the rhythm of the host terrace. The Heritage Statement concludes that the proposals would not have any negative impacts, but this does not address the incorporation of the extension on what they have themselves stated is an otherwise unaltered terrace. The extension would ultimately detract from the character of the host property, terrace and Conservation Area as a whole and result in harm to its significance. The application has not provided any public benefits to outweigh the heritage harm caused, as per Paragraph 202 of the NPPF.

We therefore request the application is refused

Planning Application: 43 Dartmouth Road

43 DARTMOUTH ROAD, LONDON, SE23 3HN, application DC/22/127781: Prior Approval under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class MA of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) for the change of use of the existing ground floor and basement from retail (Use Class E) to a single dwelling (Use Class C3) at 43 Dartmouth Road SE23.

We are writing to object to the above application by virtue of the unsuitable accommodation proposed and the detrimental impact on the Forest Hill Conservation Area.

The proposals do not satisfy the requirements within “Technical housing standards – nationally described space standard” (Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2015) or the London Plan (March 2021). The above space standards do not cater for a 1 bedroom/2 person accommodation over two floors, so this would be subject to the 1 bedroom/2 person requirement. The proposed 45 sqm unit would therefore not satisfy the requirement within both of the above documents of 58 sqm.

The Forest Hill Conservation Area is characterised by its commercial and retail centre around the railway station and surrounding suburban residential streets and green spaces. The commercial core, including the retail units along Dartmouth Road contribute to this area’s character. The loss of a retail unit in this area and the resulting inactivity of its frontage would erode this commercial character and ultimately, the character of the wider Conservation Area.

We therefore request the application is refused.

Planning: Drakes Court, Devonshire Road

DC/22/127093 

The construction of residential dwellings (Use Class C3) together with new play space, cycle parking spaces, refuse/recycling stores and associated landscaping works at Drakes Court Estate, Devonshire Road SE23. | DRAKES COURT, DEVONSHIRE ROAD, LONDON, SE23 3LY

Following the final consultation phase the planning application for the above is now being considered. The Planning Committee of the Forest Hill Society discussed this application at their meeting on 26th July 2022.

We would like to support this thoughtfully considered scheme which is considerate to existing residents and neighbours in scale & design, sympathetic to its context and with a particularly comprehensive & imaginative landscaping plan. The documents and plans in the application were clear and detailed which is not always the case with infill developments. The scheme will provide 8 new quality social rented council homes and substantial improvements to the landscaping & amenity areas.

It is pleasing that comments made by residents and others have been incorporated in the final submission.

However, we do consider it important that the contractors respect the intentions of the plan during the construction. Once large quantities of plant & materials are moved on site, we have unfortunately seen too many ‘non material amendments’ seeking to remove inconvenient trees or RPA’s compromised in some other infill developments.

We feel this plan should be a source of pride for those who have worked hard to develop it, and welcomed by the local community.

Planning Application: Taymount Rise

The Forest Hill Society has objected to the proposal for 20 flats to be built on the site of Green Bank Cottage and Taymount Lodge at the top of Taymount Rise.

Details of the application can be found on the Lewisham planning website (reference DC/21/124859).

Our main concerns for this development are:

1. Proximity and overlooking of existing properties
2. Loss of daylight from existing properties
3. Lack of social housing
4. Parking issues
5. Encouraging Walking / Cycling

 

The full text of the objection can be read here.

Planning Application: 59-61 Dartmouth Road

The Forest Hill Society has written to object to a recent planning application at 59-61 Dartmouth Road

 
I am writing on behalf of the Forest Hill Society regarding the proposed development at 59-61 DARTMOUTH ROAD, application DC/21/121195: The construction of an additional storey at 59-61 Dartmouth Road, SE23 together with an additional storey on the existing rear projection at No. 61, a four storey enclosed stairwell to the rear of No.59 and rear dormers to provide a 5 person HMO, 1x two bedroom and 1x three bedroom self-contained units and all associated works.

Recently we have been made aware of aspects of this application that we cannot support, and we wish to register our objection to this application.

 

The plans and application form state that the first floor of this property is an HMO. There is no record of a previous planning application for this change of use in a conservation area, nor is this property registered with Lewisham Council as an HMO. The application states that there is existing permitted use for C4 (HMO) for 131.7m. We believe this to be inaccurate information that significantly changes the nature of this application.

This planning application should be considered with reference to Lewisham Local Plan DM policy 6

DM Policy 6 - Houses in multiple occupation (HMOs)

1. The Council will only consider the provision of new Houses in Multiple

Occupation where they:

a. are located in an area with a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of 3 or higher

b. do not give rise to any significant amenity impact(s) on the surrounding neighbourhood

c. do not result in the loss of existing larger housing suitable for family occupation

 

The conversion that has already been made (without planning permission) has resulted in the loss of an existing larger housing suitable for family occupation. There have also been numerous reports by neighbouring residents and shopkeepers of anti-social and criminal behaviour in and around the existing HMO.

 

The addition of two units above a poorly managed HMO would make it unsuitable for families due to the existing anti-social behaviour, as a result there continues to be a net loss of family housing on this site, which goes against planning policy.

 

For the reasons set out above, we would encourage Lewisham Council to refuse this planning application.

Planning Application: Mast on the Pavement at the Esso Garage

There has been a recent application to install a 20m high monopole at the junction of London Road and Honor Oak Road, with cabinets on the pavement. Details of the application can be found on Lewisham Council website.

The Forest Hill Society has opposed this application:

We note a number of recent refusals for masts on similar pavement locations in the local area, most recently and locally DC/20/118720 at BLYTHE VALE, BELL GREEN AND PERRY VALE, SE6.

We believe the reasons for rejection of that application are equally applicable to this location that is within the Forest Hill Conservation Area and on an important pedestrian route between Forest Hill station and town centre, and the Horniman Museum.

The siting and appearance of the monopole would give rise to an overly dominant and highly visible development and the proposed cabinets would result in a visually cluttered streetscene out of keeping with local character of the area when viewed from London Road and the Forest Hill conservation area. The siting of the development would narrow the footway with the potential to impact pedestrian safety at a difficult crossing point and junction of the South Circular road.

This junction is not an easy crossing for pedestrians as there is no pedestrian phase on the lights, and the addition of cabinets and masts in this location will further obscure the sight of cars turning the corner on this busy junction.

We welcome the installation of 5G infrastructure around Forest Hill, but this should not increase street clutter and make pedestrian crossings more dangerous. There are a number of more suitable and less prominent locations for such a mast including council owned car parks and we hope that the applicant can work with the council to identify such locations.

[This application was refused by Lewisham Council]

Planning Application: The Cedars, 34 Sydenham Hill

The Forest Hill Society has written to oppose the Planning Application DC/20/118980: The Cedars, 34 Sydenham Hill SE26 6LS, which proposes the construction of a part single/part two storey extension at the rear, terraces at lower ground level and the provision of associated car parking spaces and bicycle storage to provide 11 self-contained flats, together with the demolition of the existing Coach House and the construction of 8 two bedroom cottages and associated landscaping and parking area.

We welcome the principle of converting the main building into residential use and bringing this historic asset back into useful purpose, but have some concerns as to how and which heritage features will be preserved.

The Coach House is original to the 1890’s main building and makes a positive contribution to the Conservation Area in its own right, yet no justification is made to warrant its demolition beyond not fitting in with the appearance of the proposed modern terrace. No argument is made as to its structural soundness or otherwise, no justification advanced as to why it the existing cannot form part of any development plan, even though it is believed to have been in recent use as a single 4 bedroomed house. Again, we would welcome the involvement and report of Conservation Officers in this respect.

The proposed replacement of this single house with a modern terrace of 8 houses represents an increased footprint of some 70%, together with hard standing for much increased parking requirements and turning circle, with the removal of several established trees. The great bulk of this will actually be located in the rear garden plot of the Cedars House rather than the existing footprint of the Coach House.

The materials and design of the proposed terrace do not appear to relate in any way to the main house, failing to match or sympathise with the main house or that location in any way discernable.
The design of a long terrace, staggered down the slope will also form an impenetrable barrier across an important wildlife corridor further separating vital remaining green spaces in this area.

The description of the 8 proposed ‘almshouses’ is somewhat misleading. We are not made aware of any charitable purposes or proposals for social rent. Our understanding is that all will be available at market valuations and there are in fact no proposed affordable dwellings provided in the entire development scheme at all.

You can view the full response here.

Planning Application: 123 Devonshire Road

There has been a planning application for enlargement of existing planning permission on two additional storeys on the site of 123 Devonshire Road. The Forest Hill Society has written to the council recommending rejection of this application. The text of the letter is reproduced below:

DC/20/118644 | The erection of two additional storeys above the existing residential block to provide 6 x 2 bed flats with associated parking and internal refurbishment works with works to the fabric of the building and the provision of a new lift at Woodelm Court, 123, Devonshire Road, LONDON SE23 3LX.

 

I am writing on behalf of the Forest Hill Society regarding the proposed erection of two additional stories to existing residential block at Woodelm Court, 123 Devonshire Road SE23 (ref: DC/20/118644).

 

With regard to the proposed development we have a significant concern regarding this planning application. This relates to the increased mass and general bulk of the proposed top floor.

 

This application aims to increase the volume of the top floor to allow for 3 x 2 bedroom flats rather than the 2 x 2 bedroom flats in the 2017 application.

 

In 2017 the developer applied to add 2 more stories on top of the existing 3 floor block of flats. The plan was to step the new top floor in on all sides which would reduce the footprint giving space for 2 x 2 bed flats. This application dated 13th November 2017, was refused by notice dated 8th February 2018.

 

In February 2019 there was a successful appeal against this decision. However, in the Appeal Decision stated in item 8  " ...... the set back of the top floor would help to reduce its overall massing and general bulk, even with a small overhang of the roof and thus I am satisfied that the development would not have a jarring and incongruous effect."

 

This new 2020 application proposes to enlarge the footprint of this top floor by removing the step in on all sides so the footprint is the same as the floors below thus providing room for 3 x 2 bedroom flats. This implies that the block would now have a "jarring and incongruous effect".

 

We believe that granting an application for an enlarged top floor would be contrary to the judgement expressed by the Planning Inspector in the 2019 Appeal Decision.

  

Based on our above concern we ask that this application is refused.

Planning: DC/19/113252 - Our Lady and St Philip Neri Primary School, Mayow Road

The Forest Hill Society has written to object to the following planning application:

The demolition of Our Lady and St Philip Neri Primary School, Mayow Road SE23 and the construction of 59 flats (24 one bedroom, 27 two bedroom and 8 three bedroom).

The key concerned that we have raised relate to:

• Scale and massing
• Lack of parking provision
• Removal of mature trees from the site

Read full objection here.

Planning Application: Duncombe Hill Green

There has been a planning application for 7 two-bedroom flats on the green space at the junction of Duncombe Hill and Brockley Rise. You can read the full details of the application on Lewisham's website.

The Forest Hill Society has written to object to this planning application with concerns about:

• Loss of Green Space
• Impact on trees with Tree Preservation Orders in place
• Poor quality of design and over-development

The full details of our objection can be viewed here.

Bell Green Masterplanning

The Sydenham Society together with Discourse Architecture are organising a public meeting to discuss ways in which Bell Green could be improved for residents and visitors. The meeting takes place on Wednesday, 6th March at 7pm at The Railway Tavern, on Southend Lane.

Planning Application: All Inn One, Perry Vale

There has been a planning application submitted in 2018 to demolish the All Inn One pub and build a six storey building with pub and hotel. The details of the application can be viewed on the Lewisham website.

The Forest Hill Society has written to object to this development for a number of reasons:

• Scale and massing of the development
• Concern over loss of pub amenity
• Lack of details relating to the new A4 (pub/restaurant) unit 
• Loss of character and heritage value of the pub
• Negative impact on daylight to neighbouring properties

We have also asked for consideration of how the Perry Vale car park might be used and for consideration to be given to an improved crossing point on Perry Vale to service the hotel and local residents.

The full text of our objection can be read here.

Planning Application: Hotel on the site of Coop

A planning application has been submitted to build a Holiday Inn in Forest Hill on the site of the Coop shop at 1 Waldram Park Road. Details of the application can be viewed on the Lewisham Council website.

The Forest Hill Society has written in SUPPORT of this application but with a request to consider certain aspects of parking, servicing, and high-quality design for the development, if it is approved.
 

Full details of the Forest Hill Society submission can be read here.

Planning: Bampton Estate - 50 new homes

Lewisham Homes have submitted a planning application for the construction of one part four/part five storey building to provide fifty over 60s dwelling units. Details of the application can be viewed here.

The Forest Hill Society had submitted an objection to this development as we have concerns on the impact of existing and future residents. Of particular concern are:

• Impact of daylight for existing residents
• Lack of daylight in units in the new development
• Overlooking & Loss of Privacy
• Over-development of the site
• Lack of details for the Northmoor blocks within the Bampton Estate

You can read the full response here.

Planning Application: 4 Dartmouth Road

An application has been submitted for the conversion of a basement below a shop to a one bedroom flat:

DC/17/103834 | Change of use and alterations to the existing basement including provision of lightwells to provide a one bedroom self-contained flat at 4 Dartmouth Road SE23. | 4 DARTMOUTH ROAD, LONDON, SE23 3XU

The Forest Hill Society object to this proposal on the grounds of:

1. Lack of light to the living accommodation;

2. Insufficient provision for emergency egress.

Both these grounds are based on the proposed unit being created in a basement with natural light and outside space being provided by a lightwell that will, in effect, be two storeys deep.

A daylight assessment has not been provided with the application but it is clear that very little natural light would enter the unit.

The existing basement has no natural light and it is proposed to excavate part of the back garden to provide a light well.  The distance between the windows in the living room to the proposed 1-storey high retaining wall appears to be about 1 metre.  Above the proposed retaining wall there currently exists the wall of a 1-storey high building which appears to be set back about 1.5-2 metres.  In effect, a double-storey lightwell would be created.

The kitchen window and external door from the living room lead into an underground passageway which will not provide any light into the accommodation.

There is no provision for an external staircase in the lightwell which means the 'patio area' would not provide a means of emergency escape from the unit.  The only way out is through the unit into the staircase leading to the ground floor.

The proposed unit would provide sub-standard accommodation and the application should be refused.

Planning Application: 62 Sunderland Road

There has been a new application for 62 Sunderland Road (DC/17/103895) which can be viewed on the council website. This follows a previous application for this site which was opposed by the Forest Hill Society and was rejected by the council.

The Forest Hill Society has objected to this application and our detailed response can be read here.

It is our hope that the council continue their work on creating a conservation area in this area, which would protect some of these historic Christmas Houses - including this building.

Challenge launched to create a vision for future development of Forest Hill town centre

PRESS RELEASE

Discourse Architecture*, working with the Forest Hill Society, call for a debate about the future of the area around the station and a challenge to uncoordinated commercial development

A review of opportunities to reconfigure Forest Hill town centre will be presented at Forest Hill Ward Meeting at Sydenham Girls' School at 7.30pm on Tuesday 27 June. In consultation with the Forest Hill Society, Discourse Architecture propose that currently under-used sites around the station should be developed as part of a coordinated vision, which improves the environment for local residents and businesses. They argue that without a new approach unsatisfactory piecemeal development will continue unchecked. As part of their study they have researched the history and development of Forest Hill, from the short-lived canal, which was replaced by the railway, and the three stations of increasing magnificence to the current unprepossessing station, built after bomb damage to the last Victorian station. Discourse Architecture, who include local resident Simon McCormack, Michael Badu and Italian architect Bruno Tonelli, have prepared the proposals out of a sense of frustration that the absence of an ambitious strategy is creating a vacuum and that a once-in-hundred-years’ opportunity to improve the town centre will be lost.

View a map with all the images here.

Ideas include:
- A new main station building on the site of WH Smiths with step-free access to the shortened existing pedestrian underpass
- Reducing parking adjacent to the main station and creating a west-facing parade of shops and cafes with housing above. New buildings will be set back from the South Circular, which will be lined with trees
- Improved parking on the sorting office site at lower ground level, with housing at upper ground level and step-free links to the main station and Forest Hill Pools
- Making a new Perry Vale station entrance with lift access to platform level
- Creating new housing on the triangular site currently occupied by the former coal depot    Consideration of  an alternative approach retaining the Victorian coal depot, perhaps as a market or hub for start-ups
- Making the S Circular end of Perry Vale one-way to promote a better street environment for local people and businesses
- Creating an improved connection between the existing alley and the main station: improved sight lines and possibly some Havelock Walk style studio buildings

Public feedback is invited on the proposals, which can be viewed above, in an exhibition at Forest Hill Library from 28 June to 6 July. It is proposed to incorporate the feedback in a revised proposal that can be taken forward for consultation with Lewisham Council, TfL, Railtrack and other interested parties.

*Discourse Architecture was established in 2016 by Michael Badu, Simon McCormack and Bruno Tonelli to create a platform for people with an interest in the built environment to exchange ideas. Michael and Simon live locally while Bruno is based in Brescia, in Northern Italy. They communicate via email and Skype with occasional face to face meetings. Their work on Forest Hill is unpaid