Response from Southern Railway

Below is the response from Southern Railway to the letter concerning trains to Charing Cross:

The recommendation from the South London RUS – for further investigation around off-peak services to Charing Cross - was done in the context of the new Southeastern timetable for December 2009 (incorporating the high speed service) and the new South Central franchise.

During the development of the Southeastern December timetable it was identified that in order to make it workable there would be significant limitations on the ‘through London Bridge’ pathways available for other TOCs. There are implications for the First Capital Connect service particularly in the peak at London Bridge, and for Southern off peak services to Charing Cross and Waterloo East.

As a result, the Department for Transport did not specify that South Central franchise services should operate through to Charing Cross from December 2009. Subsequent scrutiny of the off peak timetable by Southern has confirmed that it is not possible to run Southern services through London Bridge into Charing Cross given Southeastern’s timetable specification from December.

Carriages:
As you know we use our passenger loading equipment to help specify how many carriages should go on each train and if carriages should be moved to better cover passenger demand. This we did during the current franchise deploying additional carriages to the Sydenham line in the morning peaks for example. We will continue to do this as normal but in general terms there is no reason for us to reduce the number of carriages on this route simply because the service will start and finish at London Bridge rather than Charing Cross.

Loss of Charing Cross Services

Below is the text of a letter sent on behalf of the Forest Hill Society to Southern Railways:

Dear Yvonne,

I read in the Southern Stakeholder Briefing that Southern now intend to stop running direct services between Charing Cross and Forest Hill. On behalf of the Forest Hill Society I wish to express my disappointment at this decision and ask Southern to find ways to reverse this decision before December 2009 when we will lose these services.

In the 2007 draft version of the South London RUS which stated in option 20.4 (p176):
“At present 2 tph direct services operate from Charing Cross to the Sydenham line between around 19:30 and shortly after midnight. These services are very well utilised. On Sundays they operate all day.
Retaining or running additional direct trains to Charing Cross would provide improved journey opportunities for all stations on the Sydenham route and alleviate crowding at London Bridge.”

The final version of the RUS concluded that regarding this option (p145)
“Not recommended for peak services. Further investigation recommended regarding off peak services.”

It is clear that this service, which transports passengers from the West End to South London suburbs, is a well used service at off-peak times. Removing this half-hourly evening service has no practical benefit in reducing congestion or improving journeys for other rail users.

It is recognised that most evening travel in the South London area originates from the West End, not from the London Bridge area. The link from Waterloo East and Charing Cross to Forest Hill provides a convenient service that matches passengers’ travelling patterns. Rather than scrapping these services you should be considering running them all day on Saturday as well as the current Sunday timetable.

The Forest Hill Society is aware that it would not be possible to run these services during peak times, but there is capacity between London Bridge and Charing Cross for the evening and weekend services, as demonstrated by their existence today. Even with the introduction of new services on the South Eastern timetable from Charing Cross, there is still off-peak capacity from Charing Cross that Southern should be utilising for the services via Sydenham.

I would like to ask what further investigations have been carried out into maintaining these off-peak services, as recommended in the RUS? Why have stakeholders not been consulted about this decision prior to the announcement by Southern? And how we can now get Southern to reverse this position before this important service is lost?

I would also like to ask what length the planned services will be from London Bridge in comparison to the services from Charing Cross, as the reduction in the number of carriages on these off-peak services would be another blow to passengers from Forest Hill and our neighbouring areas.

I hope that you will give this issue your urgent and serious consideration so that you can avoid a big disappointment for a large section of your passenger base.

Regards,
Michael Abrahams
Vice-chair, Forest Hill Society

VICTORY FOR FOREST HILL POOLS

We are pleased to report that Mayor Steve Bullock has taken the decision to put the extra money into swimming in Forest Hill. We are now on track to have swimming on the Dartmouth Road site before the 2012 Olympics. The frontage will be retained with a great two pool leisure centre behind.

The Mayor admitted at the meeting that there could have been significant planning problems in building a new leisure centre on Willow Way, a fact that was never mentioned during the consultation. He felt that the additional cost of a pool on the existing site was worth the expenditure compared with the risk of a development on Willow Way being delayed by planning problems. It was also mentioned that if funds were not committed now, a new leisure centre might never be built – public expenditure cuts in the future were a near certainty.

The design is expected to be based on that drawn up by Allies and Morrison and first shown to stakeholders in February this year. A copy of the relevant pictures from the stakeholder presentation is attached. This design really impressed the stakeholders when it was first revealed and it was a major disappointment when it was then revealed that it was unaffordable.

Whilst making the decision, the Mayor agreed to extend the time that the Council would wait for funded proposals from the community for a civic use for Louise House beyond the previous date of November 2009. He also instructed Council Officers to provide some assistance in preparing such proposals. With the Library and Pools site in Civic use, it would be a real shame for Louise House, the building in between, to be converted into housing which has been the Council’s intention. A major effort to develop proposals for Louise House is expected to be the next focus for local community groups now the Pools battle has been won.

The Mayor also said that he had been impressed by the Forest Hill Society proposals that live / work units should be built on the Willow Way site and he instructed the Council’s planners to consider such a use for the site along with any other proposals that might come forward. Any revenues from such a development would offset the additional cost of the new pools on Dartmouth Road. At the moment, the Council is effectively putting a value of zero on the Willow Way site but the Forest Hill Society’s advisors feel that a value of £1.5m is realistic.

This is the best possible result for Forest Hill town centre and for the people of Forest Hill.

This has been a hard fought campaign by the Forest Hill Society and other local groups including Keep Swimming in Forest Hill, Sydenham Society, Tewkesbury Lodge Estate Residents Association, and local councillors.

Particular thanks to Hilary, Penelope, Jeff, Quetta, and Michael from the Forest Hill Society committee who have put a huge amount of effort to getting this result. Without their hard work and dedication it is likely the outcome could have been very different.

Forest Hill Pools - The Third Option

Over the last few years the Forest Hill Society has consistently campaigned for a return for swimming on the site of Forest Hill pools at the earliest possible opportunity.

In May 2009 local residents were given two options to either move swimming into Willow Way, or wait for at least six years to see swimming return to the current site. The Forest Hill Society continued to support the Dartmouth Road site as the best option, whilst recognising that an early return of swimming for vital for the health of Forest Hill residents and Forest Hill town centre.

The report to Mayor and Cabinet now contains a third option which would provide exactly what we ask for; a pool on Dartmouth Road in the timescale of the Willow Way site. We strongly support this option and call on the mayor to support this option when he makes his decision on the 15th July 2009.

We believe that this option would not have been considered without the work of the Forest Hill Society working with other local groups, councillors, council officers, and the mayor. It may be premature, but we would like to thank all those who have worked to return swimming to Forest Hill.

Ewelme Road - Objection to Planning Application

The Forest Hill Society has submitted an objection to the conversion of a semi-detached house into five flats. You can view our submission here.

Forest Hill Society Response to the Pools Consultation

You can read the Forest Hill Society response to the May 2009 pools consultation by following this link.

CONCLUSIONS

5.1 We fully support the Council in a decision to return swimming and public leisure facilities to Forest Hill in the near future.

5.2 We continue to believe that the Dartmouth Road site is the most deliverable and appropriate site for this facility.

5.3 We believe that the recent Consultation supports the need for swimming in Forest Hill and that most people who would make use of the facility believe that this should be located on the existing Dartmouth Road site.

5.4 We would like to see a robust reconsideration of the delivery programme and budget requirements of this project, including consideration of any phasing potential of the development in order to provide a facility that the people of Forest Hill can make use of at the earliest opportunity.

5.5 We would welcome the opportunity to work with the Council to demonstrate the potential for live/work development on the Willow Way site.

Pools Consultation Results

The results of the consultation were presented to the Stakeholders group yesterday evening. You can view the results on the Lewisham Council web site.

Although total numbers are not given we understand that the result is just over 51% in favour of the Willow Way pool in Sydenham (slide 14), although the margin of error makes this a statistical draw and it is difficult to weigh up the differences between schools who may or may not use the pool and individuals who may or may not use the pool.

Of key importance to people in favour of both options is an accessible location (slides 15 and 16). A key consideration for those who voted for Willow Way was that they want to see a pool in the area as soon as possible, and the consultation told them that Willow Way could be delivered faster than the Dartmouth Road pools site.

One clear message (slide 18) is that in all groups people are more likely to visit the site if it were built in Dartmouth Road and the groups who are most likely to go swimming are also those who most preferred the Dartmouth Road site.

Online respondents were the most Forest Hill based group (slide 10), and out of this group a massive 66% favoured the existing site, and an enormous 93% would swim there, compared to only 38% if it were in Willow Way. Taking this into account we believe that the Forest Hill Society has accurately reflected the views of local people and will continue to push for the pool to be built in the Forest Hill town centre, not in an industrial estate in Sydenham.

Please feel free to add your own comments below.

Proof that the Community Can Win - Tyson Road proposal defeated

Written for the Forest Hill Society Newsletter by Cllr John Russell and Cllr Philip Peake

It doesn’t often happen so when the community comes together and wins a significant victory against overdevelopment, we should all take note and learn lessons for the future. When Loromah Estates put forward a planning application to build nine blocks of flats on a backland site behind the Christian Fellowship Centre on Honor Oak Road and to the rear of Tyson Road, local residents refused to accept the odds stacked against them and came out fighting. The Forest Hill Society supported them all the way as did their local councilors, John Russell and Philip Peake. We asked the councillors to explain why this victory matters.

In our short number of years as councillors, we have frequently come up against that bane of local campaigners’ lives: the English planning system. Particularly at Lewisham Council, it is very difficult and rare to be able to defeat a developer’s proposal once it has the support of the Council Planning Officers.

Yet on 31st of March, that’s exactly what we all did at Planning Committee ‘B’ – not just marginally, but entirely: members of the committee voted unanimously to turn down officer advice and reject Loromah Estates’ application to build 74 flats on predominantly ex-garden land between Tyson Road and the Christian Fellowship Centre on Honor Oak Road.

The community, Forest Hill Society, and we councillors can all be proud of ourselves. But celebration should be tempered by caution. Draft documents in the council’s new planning policy – the ‘rules’ committee members have to consider – still allocate the site for 80-odd flats. Loromah may not appeal but instead present another plan: it remains to be seen whether any new ideas will genuinely address local people’s concerns.

Now is a useful time to look and see what happened: just why did the residents, the Forest Hill Society and ourselves working together manage to win this one? We can all learn lessons and apply them to future planning applications.

In this case, the developer was his own worst enemy. In an attempt to maximise profit, his team had introduced a fundamental design flaw. All car movements would have had to go underneath the blocks as there was no space for roads elsewhere. And despite extensive use of public relations consultants, it was clear that the development would not feel like a “woodland glade” after most of the trees had been removed and bat-boxes and green/brown roofs had been used as eco-sticking-plaster.

The obvious flaws created a vigorous residents’ campaign. Three-hundred-and-thirty-five objections must be a record for this borough. Led by Andrew Wood, residents did their homework and fought a very informed and highly effective campaign. The secret to their success was not to object saying “we do not like this,” but in properly studying and understanding the Lewisham Council planning policies and the London and national planning frameworks.

Campaigners were then able to argue from a postion of knowledge, putting together a coherent argument, based in planning law. This is a position which has to be taken seriously. Backed up by the strength of local feeling, residents, FHS and councillors were able to pull this together into an argument that ultimately won over the committee.

It is a powerful example of what local residents can do when working in partnership with the FHS and ourselves in a common cause. We should be proud of what we have done and ready to start again at a moment’s notice when necessary.