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

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.

Planning Application: 62 Sunderland Road

This letter is an objection to the proposal at 62 Sunderland Road - planning application reference DC/16/099620

The Forest Hill Society object to this proposal because it involves the demolition and replacement of an important building within the group of Christmas houses on Gaynesford Road, Sunderland Road and Perry Vale in Forest Hill.  In its own right this house an important non-designated heritage asset.  It is also a key building within the wider group of Christmas Houses on the corner of Sunderland Road and Gaynesford Road. 

The Christmas houses were built by E.C. Christmas (Ted) who was a Forest Hill carpenter, sanitary engineer and builder, who in 1901 started building houses in the Arts and Crafts style between Perry Vale and South Road.  These houses have largely been well maintained and retained their exterior appearance.  They form a notable group of local historical significance.

There have been previous discussions with the Local Planning Authority about designating the Christmas Houses as a Conservation Area.  We believe the group of buildings would justify this status because of its special architectural and heritage interest.   The group of Christmas houses is currently remarkably consistent and complete.  The demolition of this house and its replacement as proposed would not only be the loss of a heritage asset in itself it would also negatively impact on the character and appearance of the wider group of Christmas Houses.

62 Sunderland Road is an intrinsic member of the group of Christmas houses with a character and design entirely in keeping with the surrounding houses.  It was built with an unusual triangular footprint in order to maintain the building lines along Sunderland Road and Gaynesford Road and to relate carefully to the surrounding houses. 

Further to our objection to the loss of the house we also object to the replacement building and the way that it is inappropriate to the site in both scale, design, building lines and built form.  The proposed units also have poor access arrangements with convoluted routes to front doors.

This proposal is contrary to the paragraph 58 of the NPPF in terms of its negative impact on local character and history.  The proposal is contrary to Lewisham’s DM Policy 38 which directs that proposals for demolition of heritage assets will be refused unless it can be demonstrated that these are necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or loss.  No case for any public benefit of this proposal is put forward in this application.

Horniman Butterfly House

Horniman Museum and Gardens have submitted an exciting planning application to build a Butterfly House in the gardens, replacing the park keeper's house at the top of the animal enclosure.

You can view the planning application on Lewisham's website and comment on the application.

We hope to bring you more information on this great new attraction in the new year.

Planning Application: 41a Dartmouth Road

An application has been made for the conversion of part of this site to residential.

You can read the planning application on Lewisham's planning website.

The Forest Hill Society has written to object to this development:
"We believe that dividing the ground floor retail unit to provide access to the upper floors is detrimental to the retail unit because of the reduction of its size and the poor design quality of the frontage. This will affect the future viability of the retail unit at a time when Dartmouth Road is at last coming back to life as a retail area, with promised street development and many small businesses starting up. We do not want to see any of the retail units suffering a reduction in their viability."

Full letter of objection can be read here. 

Planning Application: Bird in Hand Public House

A planning application has been submitted to build a pergola to the side of Bird in Hand pub on Dartmouth Road. The Forest Hill Society has written to the council opposing the details of the application.
You can view the application at on the Lewisham Planning website: DC/15/094390

Text of objection:

The Forest Hill Society’s objection is in relation to five aspects of the proposed development which are described in detail below:
1. Access to the area covered by the proposed pergola and potential for antisocial behaviour;
2. Effects on the amenity of nearby residences, particularly at night;
3.  Design quality and effects on the Forest Hill Conservation Area;
4. Concerns about inherently unsafe design; and
5. Effects on the highway, specifically pedestrian access along Bird In Hand Passage.

1. Access to the area covered by the proposed pergola and potential for antisocial behaviour
The Forest Hill Society is concerned about the potential to access the pergola area directly from Dartmouth Road. There would be a lack of control over this access by the pub staff and the provision of a covered area directly adjacent to Dartmouth Road may attract antisocial behaviour both during daytime and night time.

2. Effects on the amenity of nearby residences, particularly at night
Use of the pergola area (including legitimate use) may have an adverse effect on the amenity of nearby residences, particularly those on Bird In Hand Passage and opposite the site on Dartmouth Road. This would be an issue especially at night. If the Council is minded to grant planning permission for the proposed development, it is suggested that restrictions on its hours of use are imposed.

3. Design quality and effects on the Forest Hill Conservation Area
The Forest Hill Society believes that the design of the proposed development is of insufficient quality with respect to its prominent location on the high street and especially with regard to its location in the Forest Hill Conservation Area. The proposed pergola would be very prominent when viewed from Dartmouth Road and the materials, which are not commonly visible in the conservation area, would be obviously out of keeping with the conservation area. Furthermore, the applicant’s Heritage Statement discusses only direct impacts on the fabric of the public house building and does not discuss impacts on the setting of the broader conservation area.

4. Concerns about inherently unsafe design The design includes a gate that opens outwards over the steps on Bird In Hand Passage. This would appear to be inherently unsafe both for people exiting the pergola area and anyone happening to be on the steps when the gate is opened.

5. Effects on the highway, specifically pedestrian access along Bird In Hand PassageThe Forest Hill Society notes that pedestrian access on the north side of Bird In Hand Passage currently uses the raised platform area and the steps leading downward along Bird In Hand Passage. The proposed development would prevent use of this route. The Forest Hill Society requests that the Council takes a view as to whether this route legally forms part of the highway (even if in private ownership), and whether the safe use of the route by the public should remain a priority. If this route is well used, the Forest Hill Society would like to see access along it retained. However, if it is not well used and does not form part of the highway, the Forest Hill Society would not object on this basis.

The Forest Hill Society would like it noted that this is not an objection in principle to a pergola at the Bird In Hand, and believes that all of the above concerns (with the potential exception of the highway issue) could be overcome through design and management measures. If a future planning application was to be lodged proposing a high-quality design with management measures sufficient to protect the amenity of nearby residences, the Forest Hill Society may support such an application.

26 Inglemere Road - Planning Application

A new application has been made to convert a building to the rear of 26 Inglemere Road to a one bedroom dwelling. The application can be viewed on Lewisham website. (Application number DC/15/93613)

The Forest Hill Society has written with concerns regarding this application relating to:
•    The design quality
•    The quality and legibility of the planning application documentation
•    The planning history of the site
•    Site suitability

You can view the full text here

Planning Applications: Hamilton Lodge and 118 Canonbie

Planning applications have been submitted to turn 118 Canonbie Road and Hamilton Lodge, on Honor Oak Road into hostels for homeless families. This will provide accommodation for up to 100 individuals. Details of the applications can be viewed at: DC/15/91664 and DC/15/91663 

Below is the response from the Forest Hill Society to the planning application:

 

We write on behalf of the Forest Hill Society about the above applications at Hamilton Lodge, Honor Oak Road and Canonbie Road in Forest Hill. This letter relates to both of these applications and should be considered in relation to both of them.

We have no objection to the principle of these applications and understand that short term family accommodation is much needed across the borough for its residents.  However, we are concerned about some of the supporting material with these applications and the quality of the accommodation, and we would like the Council to ensure that what is promised goes on to be delivered.

• We are concerned by the quality of accommodation, specifically the sizes of some of the family rooms and the proximity to shared bathrooms. Whilst we appreciate this accommodation may well be better than much of the available alternative short term family accommodation think that you do need to carefully consider whether it is acceptable for families to live in this way for six months at a time.  There is no provision for communal internal space in either block.

• We do have some concerns about the overall number of bed spaces across the two sites and worry that this is more people than it is sensible to house in buildings of this size.

• The same PTAL rating is incorrectly used for both of the sites as it is based on a single location rather than the specific location of each site. The Canonbie Road Application has a PTAL rating of 2 and this may impact on its acceptability for this proposed use.  

• There is no sunlight and daylight report and whilst we appreciate that this is for a short term use a couple of the rooms look like they would be very dark and we are concerned for the quality of life for those living there for up to 6 months at a time, and particularly children.

• We would like to ensure that any planning permission does actually limit each families stay in the building to 26 weeks as we would be VERY concerned about families living in this accommodation for any longer periods.  This accommodation is not suitable for permanent residential use as it does not conform with policy or the London Housing Design Guide. 

Planning Application: Fairway House, Dartmouth Road

The Forest Hill Society has objected to some aspects of the planning application for the demolition of Fairway House (between Dartmouth Road and the railway line) and replacement with27 flats and employment space. Details of the planning application can be found on Lewisham's website.

Below are the details of the concerns raise by the Forest Hill Society:

Our main concern is that this application does very little to improve the important route along Clyde Vale connecting the train station with Kirkdale and Sydenham.  This route at the moment is inconsistent, poorly defined and in poor condition.  It has the opportunity to provide a really important strategic connection for pedestrians and cyclists in the future and unless this application delivers improvements to this route adjacent and near to the site, and also along its length, it will be a missed opportunity that will not be recoverable.  Many of the future residents and workers on this site will use this route to get to the site from the station and a significant contribution would be justified on this basis.

• The scheme should widen the footway (and potential future cycleway) running next to the railway line, at the moment this pavement is less than the 1.8m minimum which makes it difficult for two people to pass
• The disabled parking space proposed on Clyde Vale should be relocated so as not to prevent easy pedestrian movement along the route
• The scheme should contribute to improved lighting, surfacing and boundary treatments between the site and the railway station, widening this route wherever possible
• The scheme should contribute to improved sewage management to reduce the smell on this pathway
• The highways aspect of the scheme should be designed to anticipate and facilitate future improvements that could be made along this route

We have a number of other concerns about the proposal, including:

• The qualities of the employment space are limited and we are concerned that this means that it is unlikely to work.  The retention of appropriate employment floorspace in this location is very important both because it brings daytime activity but also because there is demand for the right kind of flexible employment uses.  Our concern here is that the particular shape and arrangement of this building means that this is unlikely to be the case here.
• The lack of clarity of the route through the site from Dartmouth Road to Clyde Vale.  This comes about because of the poor positioning of the main block and the complex arrangement of stairs and landscape.
• Poor amenity for the new housing, particularly that in the smaller block
• There is widely reported sewerage and drainage problem along Clyde Vale and we are concerned that this proposal will exacerbate these issues.
• Some of the documents within the application are unclear and it is not clear how they will be delivered/enforced.  This relates particularly to the air quality report and contamination.
• The design quality of the building and particularly its elevations are really not as good as they could be. They are overcomplicated and lack clarity.

Honor Oak Road Covered Reservoir

By Daniel Greenwood (local resident). In November 2014, flyers were circulated to residents around the Canonbie Rd/Tewksbury Lodge area about an ‘illustrative scheme’ to be exhibited for public inspection. Many local residents and members of the Forest Hill Society went along to find out more. We asked Daniel, who attended the presentation, to tell our readers why this site is so significant.

On a sunny Saturday morning last November, I attended a presentation by Thomas Wrenn Homes at The Forest Hill Friends Meeting House to outline proposals to build seven houses on the Honor Oak Road Covered Reservoir site. The Reservoir site is lodged between Canonbie Road, Honor Oak Road, Horniman Drive, and Liphook Crescent. The plans (for an ‘illustrative scheme’) showed the houses to be built on the site, which is, however, designated as a Grade 2 Site of Borough Importance for Nature Conservation. Access to the new development would be created from Canonbie Road. I did not have a chance to speak to Mr. Wrenn — since he was busy answering questions from concerned residents — but spoke to the development’s designer, Andy Smith. I suggested to him that an ecological survey was of the utmost importance, to which he responded by underlining the need for a ‘positive ecologist’ to survey the site.

As someone who was raised in SE23, the green spaces of the local area hold great meaning for me. The Reservoir site is one I never had the chance to visit as a child or teenager but others before me did have the opportunity. The site gets its name from an underground reservoir built into the hilltop of the Tewkesbury Lodge estate, which was formerly part of the extensive Sydenham Common. It was once owned by Thames Water and ceased to function as a reservoir 40 years ago. It was sold at auction in 1995.

An ecological study of Lewisham conducted by John Archer and Ian Yarnham for the London Ecology Unit (‘Nature Conservation in Lewisham’, 2000) noted that the Reservoir site ‘supports some of the most interesting grasslands in Lewisham and is home to several rare plants and invertebrates’. One such plant is the site’s colony of cowslip, which the study described as having ‘all but disappeared from most of London’. The Reservoir site was ‘the only place in Lewisham that cowslips still occur, except where they have been deliberately planted’. The ecological guide also celebrates the literary history of the reservoir; Walter de la Mare (1873-1956) lived on nearby Bovill Road and was inspired by his time at the reservoir as a child to write several poems.

This is not the first time the Reservoir site, a private area with no public access, has been threatened with development. In 1999, the Secretary of State rejected a planning application for housing following a Public Enquiry, due to the ecological value of the site. Residents who attended the presentation were obviously concerned about the loss of valuable space for nature. Some felt that the arguable weakening of planning regulations, through the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework, has offered hope to Mr. Wrenn for building his plans on this precious green space. While Lewisham Council will be conducting updated surveys of their Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) in 2015 and will solicit permission to access the Reservoir site, Mr. Wrenn is under no obligation to give his permission.

Nature in South London — which is not just confined to designated Nature Reserves — is being threatened by a new wave of building (which is not geared towards solving an affordable housing crisis), and the borough’s SINCs are in the firing line. Though no planning application has been submitted so far by Mr. Wrenn’s company, the Reservoir site could be threatened with development once again.

Planning Application: M&Co application by Morrisons

The Forest Hill Society have written to oppose the application from Morrisons Supermarkets to convert M&Co on London Road. Below are the details of our objection:

I write on behalf of the Forest Hill Society to object to planning application DC/14/89770 for alterations to the shop front and side access arrangements at 10-12 London Road, Forest Hill, SE23 3HF. 

We understand that planning permission is not required for the change from the current A1 retail use of this property to the use of the proposed supermarket.  However, this application raises a number of important issues about this proposal that we believe will be detrimental to the function and operation of the shopping area of Forest Hill.  We believe that the Council should be extremely concerned about the highways and servicing impacts that will arise directly from the proposals within this application in that they facilitate a much more servicing intensive use that conflicts directly with the surrounding streets and pedestrian users. No information on servicing, deliveries or refuse arrangements is included with this application.

The proposal in this application includes changes to the side access into this building from Havelock Walk, partly for access to the upper floors but this also gives access to the main store area "for access and means of escape for ground floor retail unit".  We are concerned that this change to the side access may be intended to be used for servicing and for deliveries for the new supermarket and that both Havelock Walk, and this busy stretch of London Road is highly unsuited to this arrangement or possibility.   Another concern that we have is that the new set back doorway onto this edge creates a hidden space and may facilitate crime and antisocial behavior in this area.

No information is provided in this application to explain how the regular heavy servicing necessary for a supermarket use will be accommodated on this busy corner of the South Circular and TFL red route.  The proposed changes to the building to not make it clear how this will work or whether they intend to use the front or side access for servicing.  It is also not clear where deliveries are to be stored before they go on the shop floor.   If the existing service bays are to be used that are along London Road 20m or so away then this will mean trolleying deliveries from this point into the store on a very regular basis.  We would like to understand whether TFL have been asked to comment on the impact this may have on the adjacent bus stops.

No obvious space is provided within the new internal layout for storage, refuse or the other paraphernalia that goes with smaller supermarkets and which if not properly planned for end up on the street causing a nuisance to pedestrians and other town centre users (there is a particular current problem with this at the small Tesco Store on Kirkdale/Willow Way which causes problems for pedestrians and other users as well as looking unattractive). This is one of the busiest and most congested corners of Forest Hill already with bus stops, vehicular traffic, servicing bays, road crossings and many shop units.  This corner cannot cope with the amount of bins that are already located here and any more will cause considerable harm.   At the very least we would expect a planning condition that prevented the locating or storing of trolleys for deliveries or store use, bins or other items outside of the store on the public highway.   The current shop frontage has a set back doorway which at least allows those entering the shop to shelter from the busy street.  The new shop front arrangements do not allow this.

We are of the view that there is no need for an additional cash point in this location as there are at least 5 others within 50m of this point.  This is a busy and narrow area of the pavement given its use and location and this will just add to the congestion.  We would disagree with the applicant's statement that the pavement is wide in this location. 

Our last concern is about the design of the shop front itself and whilst these changes are not extensive we are concerned that they do not enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.  This is therefore a missed opportunity to improve the area and particularly this building which is one of the least attractive in the town centre but in a highly visible location.  

In summary, our objections to this application are:

• Lack of clarity over servicing and refuse proposals and arrangements that come about as a direct result of the proposed changes in this application;
• The purpose of the enlarged side entrance included within this application and its impact on Havelock Walk;
• The design of the new access onto Havelock Walk and the potentially dangerous set back area along the alley way;
• Impact on the street scene of additional servicing vehicles along London Road;
• Impact on access to and the operation of Havelock Walk (which is entirely unsuitable for large vehicles or lorries);
• The missed opportunity to enhance this building and this part of the Conservation Area; and
• There is no need for an additional cash point machine in this location.

We hope that you will be able to refuse this application until acceptable proposals for servicing the new use are established that will minimise any impacts on this important corner of the town centre.  We believe that any servicing proposals should be widely discussed prior to any application being approved so that the traders, shoppers and other users of the town centre can understand their impact and have a chance to comment on them.