Planning: Objection of M&S Food in Bell Green

The Forest Hill Society has objected to plans for M&S Food in Bell Green, just as we did when Aldi was proposed for the neighbouring store.

DC/24/134364: Insertion of mezzanine floor in connection with the sub-division of Unit 5B, Bell Green Retail Park, Bell Green SE26

Impact on Local High Streets:

We are concerned that an additional supermarket in this location will pull more people from the existing high streets in Sydenham and Forest Hill. The opening of Savacentre (now Sainsburys) saw a series of closures in the high streets. The creation of Aldi in the Bell Green retail park in 2018 put further pressure on local high streets as a second large food retailer chose to open in this out of town centre rather than in one of the town centres. The opening of a third supermarket in this location will further exacerbate the decline in local district and town centres in this part of Lewisham.

We would refer to government guidelines on town centre development which states that:

The sequential test guides main town centre uses towards town centre locations first, then, if no town centre locations are available, to edge of centre locations, and, if neither town centre locations nor edge of centre locations are available, to out of town centre locations, with preference for accessible sites which are well connected to the town centre. It supports the viability and vitality of town centres by placing existing town centres foremost in both plan-making and decision-taking.

ref: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ensuring-the-vitality-of-town-centres

In this case it is clear that at least one potential site for a supermarket is available in a local town centre (vacated recently by Paddy Power in Forest Hill, which was once a Tesco store), and for this reason the planning department, in applying the appropriate sequential tests, should recognised that this location for a new supermarket is inappropriate at the present time.

 

Contrary to Core Strategy and Site Allocations:

Bell Green is designated as a local hub, which is secondary to the District Hubs (such as Forest Hill and Sydenham). Under the Bell Green specific part of Spatial Policy 4 the floorspace on the allocated site is limited to that which had permission at the time of the adoption of the Core Strategy - specifically to limit impact on adjacent town centres.

The Site Allocations Policy DPD allocates the Bell Green site as SA26 and whilst identifying the need for development clearly identifies a risk of impact on nearby town centres and a need to seek to reduce car dependency. This application is directly in contravention of the site allocation in both these regards. Existing planning permission and designation in the Core Strategy and Site Allocations Local Plan specifically excludes food retail, allowing only for A1 use for non-food retail.

Core Strategy, Spatial Policy 4, June 2011

Bell Green

1. Designate as an out-of-centre retail park within the Council’s retail hierarchy.

2. Limit the floorspace and range of goods sold to that contained in the granted planning permission to protect the viability of adjacent town centres.

Ref:

https://www.lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/planning/policy/Documents/CoreStrategyAdoptedVersion.pdf (page 68)

 

Site allocations local plan, June 2013

SA26: Former Bell Green Gas Works (Phases 2 & 3), Perry Hill Sydenham, SE26 Phase 2: Mixed use business, industrial or warehouse, non-food retail and associated garden centre, restaurant, use of Livesey Memorial Hall as a social club Proposals for this out-of-centre site should be considered in the context of protecting existing town centres within the borough's hierarchy and, allow for comprehensive redevelopment of the site. Proposals should seek to reduce car dependency, improve public transport, cycling and walking access and promote more sustainable forms of development.

Ref: https://www.lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/planning/policy/LDF/siteallocations/Documents/SiteAllocationsAdoption.pdf (pp 91-92)

 

Further Development Management Policy 30 sets out that "the Council require all development proposals to attain a high quality of design". Which is not the case in this application because of the way it:

a) fails to create activity and frontage at ground level,

b) fails to create coherent built form that relates to the local topology,

c) does not make a positive relationship with existing townscape,

d) creates large areas of parking and servicing, and

e) fails to recognise the positive character of the existing gas holders or reflect its

positive qualities in the scheme.

Ref: https://www.lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/planning/policy/LDF/developmentpolicies/Documents/DMLPAdoption.pdf (page 85)

As a result of the issues above, we ask the planning authority to reject this application as being contrary to URB 18d, DM Policy 30, Spatial Policy 4, and national policy on supporting high streets.

We would encourage retailed such as M&S Food to look for suitable locations close to Forest Hill and Sydenham Town Centres for new stores, which we are sure would be welcomed by residents.

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.

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.

Bell Green Aldi Planning Application

An application has been made for an Aldi store to replace the gas holders at Bell Green. You can view details of the planning application on the Lewisham Council website.

The Forest Hill Society has written in objection to this application. Our main reasons for objection were:

• Removal of historical context for Grade II listed Livesey Memorial Hall.
• Impact of local roads and pollution
• Potential impact on town centres including Forest Hill and Sydenham

The full text of our objection can be found here.

If you wish to oppose this development you can send your objection to planning@lewisham.gov.uk or sign the petition that has been created.

Newsletter: Tube Could Come to SE23 (Again)

Following an earlier article on a possible DLR connection Michael Abrahams gives our views on how we could be connected to the Bakerloo line.

The first option for the Bakerloo Line is the Honor Oak Park route. This would be underground as far as Catford Bridge and then join the line at Lower Sydenham. This route has the added benefit of adding new stations in areas with relatively poor train connections (Burgess Park and Peckham Rye Common).

While this could come into conflict with the DLR plans, this is one of our favourites and would relieve pressure on our increasingly crowded existing services.

Option 2 is a less favoured Tulse Hill route.

Option 3 is the preferred route for Lewisham Council. It provides a new underground route to Lewisham from where it would follow the Hayes Line via Catford. It is possible that as part of this route there could be an interchange with New Cross Gate and a new station at Bell Green, so this route could be adjusted to be of benefit to Forest Hill residents.

There are two further routes to which we would like to see consideration given. A route via Crofton Park would be the shortest tunnelling option, extending the Bakerloo line to south of Camberwell, where it would join the existing train line from Denmark Hill, via Peckham Rye, Nunhead, and Crofton Park, to Catford. This would make better use of the Crofton Park line, and allow for a possible extension to Bellingham and Bromley North.

A reliable tube service from Crofton Park would reduce demand at Honor Oak Park and Brockley, which would help slightly with the capacity. Unfortunately an interchange station between the Forest Hill line and the Crofton Park (Bakerloo) line is unlikely.

A fifth option could be best for us. This would loosely follow the 176 route from Elephant & Castle, stopping at Camberwell, Denmark Hill, East Dulwich, Barry Road (either end), Forest Hill, and Bell Green (and possibly beyond). Here it could interchange with the DLR line allowing both lines to go south of Catford without using the same track. This option provides the most interchange options of all routes. It has the potential to make more difference in journey times and options for the largest number of South East Londoners, relieving congestion both on our existing train line and buses. It surely makes sense in terms of regeneration. On the downside the length of tunnelling could be prohibitive.

The DLR and the Bakerloo extensions will significantly improve public transport in South East London. This is a discussion that will continue – please tell TfL and the Society what you think!