Category Archives: Environment

Opting out of council weedkilling – can we do it?

This is the text of a letter from our neighbour Christina Rogers at no 88.  Everyone in the street should have received a copy through their door this week.


19th July 2020

Dear Fellow Fawnbrakers,

Do you want to opt out of council weedkilling?

At the moment, Lambeth Council sprays glyphosate weedkiller to keep our pavements and road gutters weed-free. As you may know, over the last few years there have been health and environmental concerns about the weedkiller glyphosate. A US court has awarded large damages in a case of lymphoma in a man who sprayed it professionally. A WHO committee has said it’s ‘probably carcinogenic’. There is evidence of an effect on the soil, the water table, and bees and other pollinators, and several European countries have already banned it. Although it hasn’t yet been banned here, Lambeth plan to stop using it in October next year, and they are trying out a range of alternative ways of keeping the weeds down.

One option would be for us to weed our own road and pavements. If there were enough of us, it wouldn’t take long – all you need is gloves and a knife. According to the council webpage if roots and accumulated soil are removed in Spring it takes longer for weeds to grow back after hand-weeding than after weedkiller, so three times a year would probably be enough.

We already have 16 Fawnbrakers who are interested in helping. The more of us there are the quicker it would be for each person to do.

Tell us what you think

So, if you would like to HELP WITH WEEDING, or OBJECT to opting out of spraying, please contact me on 07952-956-551, or drop a note through the door of number 88. To join the what’s app group please give me your mobile number.

The council deadline for opting out is coming up soon so please respond before 31st July.

Christina Rogers @ no.88


 

‘Local History in Lock-down’ talks – first one this evening

The small but excellent team at Lambeth Archives have announced a series of on-line talks delivered live via Zoom.

The first one is happening this evening when Jon Newman, one of the two Archives Managers, will talk about “Why Parks Matter”.  Scroll down for log-in details.

Jon is a first-rate speaker, writer and historian. He will be telling the story of local campaigns in the 19th century to preserve common lands and to create public parks.

 

 

We must all be grateful for the pioneering work of those socially aware and determined campaigners, now that in our crowded city parks and open spaces are even more vital.

Ruskin Park April 2020

Log-in details, as given by Lambeth Archives

Log in tonight, Thursday 16th April at 18.45, by clicking on this link.

Meeting ID: 919 3951 6549. Password: 031172

Otherwise, and perhaps to get a more robust link, email archives@lambeth.gov.uk  now for login details

You do not have to have a Zoom account to join these talks. You will be prompted to download the software once you have clicked on the above link. You can also create an account, but it is not essential. If you are a first-time Zoom user, please allow yourself time to do this before the talk starts.

Onslaught on the twin towers

Plans for the twin tower development proposed for Loughborough Junction, featured in our last post, have been comprehensively rubbished in a formal objection now tabled on behalf of the Herne Hill Society.

The main thrust of the Society’s objection is that a decision to allow the proposed development would go against the Lambeth Plan for new developments, as well as the London Plan and indeed the 2019 National Planning Policy Framework.

This sound academic but demonstrating how the proposal is fundamentally inconsistent with the Council’s own planning guidelines makes it very difficult for the Lambeth planners to give it the green light – though of course there’s no guarantee that they won’t find a way to wriggle out of this.

The draft new Lambeth Plan lays down many requirements that new developments must respect, including the principle that the design of a new development must be a response to the good aspects of the local context and historic character in many detailed ways.

The proposal flouts Lambeth’s own standards

As the Society’s magisterial demolition of the proposal states, the architects have signally failed to meet these policy criteria. “Two towers rising to 29 and 20 stories are not a positive or contextual response to the character of the area. On the contrary, they are wilfully antagonistic to the character, creating densely congested structures with an overbearing presence out of any reasonable scale with neighbouring buildings.”

They go on to say: “The rationale of the designs stems solely from the maximisation of housing capacity on a small site, not from any response to local context.”

Rules for tall buildings

There is more. They note that the London Plan and the Lambeth Plan emphasise that tall buildings require excellent design and should be of “exemplary standard”. But as the Society points out, “the towers stand out for their gross incongruity in the local context not for any outstanding design quality or distinct architectural expression.”

They also flag up the proposed towers’ harmful effect on heritage assets, particularly views from Ruskin Park and Brockwell Park where what is proposed is a “markedly intrusive, permanent alteration to views from the park, one that makes no positive contribution to the park and its local context.”

The proposal’s airily dismissed references to potential bottlenecks in public transport (mentioned in our last post) are also painfully exposed and politely savaged in the Society’s response.

There is more: it’s well worth a read, and shows the importance of having a strong local Society, supported by experts who know their stuff. The upshot is that their demolition of the tower development proposal,  while elegantly written, is comprehensive and enough to make its architects blush. (Don’t count on it.)

Read it all

The full text of the Objection can be read in a PDF found via a new page on the Herne Hill Society’s website, through this link.

A LOOMING FOREST OF TOWERS

Many neighbours (including Fawnbrake Avenue residents plugged into the Fawnbrake Street Party WhatsApp group) have already heard about the plans to erect a massive building sprouting two tower blocks of 20 and 29 storeys at Loughborough Junction, where Herne Hill Road approaches Coldharbour Lane. Yes it’s in Loughborough Junction, but this eyesore would dominate much of Herne Hill too, particularly on the Lambeth side.

The site is bounded by Hinton Road (the short extension of Milkwood Road), Wanless Street (right up against the back gardens of the houses), Herne Hill Road, and one of Loughborough Junction’s many railway viaducts, this one carrying trains to and from Denmark Hill Station.

The proposed new building (it is nominally one “podium building” with two towers superimposed) would offer some employment and retail floorspace, and 170 flats.

Time to send in our comments

Few of us would argue that these two sites  are perfect as they are. Redevelopment is overdue, with the emphasis on more housing accommodation, but with some space for businesses too.

But why the looming towers? The crass unsuitability of such an intrusive development has provoked an unprecedented torrent of predominantly hostile comments on Lambeth Council’s planning site. There is still time for others to lodge their objections. It’s easily done and now is the time, before the website closes for comments. The site can be reached by clicking here.

A host of objections suggest themselves, including the grotesque disturbance of the traditional, mainly low-rise landscape and views around this part of south-east London including from Ruskin Park.

Proposed towers viewed from Ruskin Park

 

 

 

 

 

Herne Hill Society on the case

The Herne Hill Society’s highly expert planning group have already posted  a report, available by clicking here. They are currently  preparing a major, detailed objection to this plan. We will post a link to this when it becomes available.

Meanwhile, this post focuses mainly on the transport issues.

But first … another 16-storey tower looms

What makes things worse is that the proposed development would sit alongside another earlier one, in the pipeline already, featuring a 16-storey tower, on the neighbouring so-called Higgs Estate. This lies just the other side of the same railway viaduct and abuts on to Coldharbour Lane. Lambeth granted planning permission for this development in December 2019. Local societies including the Herne Hill Society and the Brixton Society strongly objected to this application too, but were overruled by Lambeth.

So if the current application were to be granted, Loughborough Junction would “benefit”, as the estate agents say, from three highly intrusive tower blocks – see the picture.

In our view, one’s enough.

The 16-storey Higgs Estate tower (L) – already approved, and the two new proposed 20 & 29 storey towers (R).

Rail transport links? Wishful thinking

What is particularly nonsensical is the claim that the development is well served by public transport.

It is literally true, as the application blandly states, that “The application site is well served by public transport and Loughborough Junction Station, which is within a two-minute walk of the site, offers mainline train services to central London and elsewhere.”

But of course, this ignores, either deliberately and cynically, or unprofessionally, the fact that at critical times of the day (and particularly at morning rush hour between 7:30 and 9:00), the Thameslink trains stopping at Loughborough Junction are already full to bursting – so much so that passengers wanting to board at Herne Hill station, just 2 minutes up the line, often have to wait for several trains to go through before they can squeeze on. No way would the hundreds of additional commuters emerging from the proposed tower blocks be able to struggle on board at Loughborough Junction.

Lies, Damned Lies and Cynicism

A Transport Plan, one of the many supporting documents accompanying the application, concedes that a Lambeth Council study in 2014 already identified, even back then, that “Loughborough Junction … suffers from sharp peaks that contribute to relatively uncomfortable conditions for passengers both within the ticket hall and on the platform.”

Things have undoubtedly got worse in the last six years, and will get even worse when the residents of the 16 stories on the Higgs Estate start trying to get to work. But the authors of the Transport Plan, inevitably delivering what the developers want to hear and have paid for, suggest that people could quite easily walk to Denmark Hill station (already highly congested) via Ruskin Park or to Brixton Underground. We have seen no evidence that the developers or their transport planners have bothered to open a dialogue with the train operators to address these issues. Perhaps because there is no solution?

Raising the very same objections last March to the earlier Higgs Estate proposal, the Brixton Society pulled no punches:

“The present Public Transport Accessibility score is … deceptive, and new residents will experience difficulty if they wish to travel to work in Central London at normal hours. Yet that access to Central London will be the main appeal of this location for purchasers of the sale or shared ownership dwellings within this development. Claims by the applicant that only a few will wish to do so are entirely specious.”

It still went ahead.

Maybe our new neighbours in Loughborough Junction will all resort to cycling? In which case, the cycle shop on Coldharbour Lane might do quite nicely out of it. The rest of us won’t.

Aircraft noise over SE24 is getting worse  – let’s protest!

I guess we’ve all noticed that the noise from flights overhead has worsened in recent years, badly affecting our enjoyment of our homes, gardens and local parks, and disturbing our sleep particularly in the early morning.

This is due to changes which mean that over this part of South London, flights are more frequent and planes are flying lower.

Herne Hill, Dulwich, Forest Hill, Brixton, Camberwell and swathes of south-east London are particularly affected.

 

Changes in recent years mean that we are on a concentrated flight path for arrivals into Heathrow Airport. When the wind is westerly, which is 70% of the time, all flights arriving into Heathrow airport are flying over our area in a concentrated descent approach.

Dulwich and Herne Hill Quiet Skies Campaign

Some neighbours in Dulwich have started a petition and have highlighted this in a post on the Herne Hill Forum website,  but this does not seem to have been well publicised on social media, least of all on Twitter unless I have missed something. The number of signatures so far is disappointing.

We would encourage all readers of this message to visit the petition  site at change.org and sign it.