Hi,
A building on the Central Hill Estate behind Christ Church has gone to planning application.  

Please follow the instructions below to object.

The planning application for 3 Highland Road went live on Sept 29th and closes on 26th October.

To object, please go to https://planning.lambeth.gov.uk type 3 Highland Road in the search and click on comment.
The reasons to object are the following:

1)We need more affordable housing. This is high end with an undecided, less than 35%, part that is any form of affordable.
The London Plan, written by the Mayor, states that we need more  affordable housing.  It is mentioned 193 times.

The Lambeth Local Plan talk about using resources wisely to meet housing needs and London's Strategic Market Housing Assessment states that, '65% of new housing must be affordable due to the high levels of housing need.'

Yet according to 6.4 of this planning application, not even 35% of the housing will be affordable.  Society and the environment are paying the price as resources are being used for something that does not provide for the local community.

2) Out of Character
The development is surrounded by two or three storey buildings. This is the only seven/eight storey building in the area. It is six storeys with a roof terrace and a basement. It doesn't suit the Victorian houses or the houses on the estate.
This tower is close to the Upper Norwood Triangle Conservation Area and on the edge of The Gipsy Hill Conservation Area. It is out of character of the area. It is It is too close to the grade II Gipsy Hill Christ Church tower and will affect this heritage and the view.
The heritage of the Central Hill Estate as an example of community housing in the 1970's is also impacted.

3) Homeless Provision Taken Away
This development removes an albeit rundown homeless provision. The application states that there is no longer a need for a residential care home, but does not mention the housing shortage that we live in and the need for temporary accommodation.
Many people find themselves in need of low-end affordable temporary accommodation. If it cannot be provided here, the provision should be relocated elsewhere.

4) Meeting Local Housing Need
If the majority of the homes are not remotely affordable, they do not meet the housing needs of the local area, where the average income of the non-homeowning households is too low to afford these. In a time of environmental degradation, yet again resources are being used to provide commodities and not homes for local people.

5) Light
The building will be imposing for houses close by and block out the light of those in 21 Gipsy Hill.

6) Access / Car Parking
The only access to the site is a narrow road shared by neighbours. In terms of car parking, the application plans will only provide an addition of only two Blue Badge car parking spaces despite increasing the number of homes from 27 bedrooms to 5 houses and 15 flats with 65 bedrooms between them. There will be more services and deliveries and I don't think they are accounted for.
Each household is also to have a car club membership, but it is not stated where this car will be.

The application claims that the site is a high Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 5, which means the area has good public transport links, but Highland Road is actually ptal 3 unlike Gipsy Hill. Even the Transport Statement accepts that people will park in the street and says that it is a PTAL3.
This means that there is more need for the households to have a car, and the Mayor recognises that there could be a maximum need of 0.25 car parking spaces per household.
The lack of car parking spaces will push parking on to the surrounding streets. The Mayor prefers developments to be car-free and Lambeth’s solution to car parking in the area is to consult on a Car Parking Zone. This would only be necessary in some areas because of the increase in building. Eventually, It will also push parking further into other roads.

7) Communal Play area

In the consultation in June, the developers said the play area was going to be communal, for the whole neighbourhood but that has not been mentioned in the planning application this time.

During the initial consultation, It was also expected that there was going to be a twelve week consultation period. This has also not been the case as the consultation closes four weeks after being opened.

Please see the consultation here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSHFW6m5SVU&t=259s