WE OBJECT TO THE LEWISHAM VALE DEVELOPMENT

Signatures 312 total

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, ... 7 › »

1. 1
   Name: Anonymous on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
2. 2
   Name: Kate Bird on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments: This development is NOT in keeping with the local area, and uses as its template Citibank, an ugly, redundant eyesore. The Planning Committee needs to listen to the views of the local people, who are overwhelmingly AGAINST this development.

   Flag
3. 3
   Name: Richard Proctor on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments: Please stop this silly development

   Flag
4. 4
   Name: David Lawrenson on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments: We the undersigned object to the Lewisham Vale development (Ref. : DC/09/71246/X) and call on Lewisham Council to bring forward a plan which provides for the needs of Lewisham¹s residents, does not involve such dense housing in high rise blocks and provides the necessary infrastructure for any additional population brought into the area.

   Flag
5. 5
   Name: Andrew Dawson on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 6
   Name: James MacDonald on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments: We the undersigned object to the Lewisham Vale development (Ref. : DC/09/71246/X) and call on Lewisham Council to bring forward a plan which provides for the needs of Lewisham¹s residents, does not involve such dense housing in high rise blocks and provides the necessary infrastructure for any additional population brought into the area.

   Flag
7. 7
   Name: David Fisher on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 8
   Name: Nick on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 9
   Name: Anonymous on Jun 26, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 10
    Name: Faith McGrath on Jun 26, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 11
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 26, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
12. 12
    Name: Georgina Rhodes on Jun 26, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
13. 13
    Name: Deborah Kennion on Jun 26, 2009

    Comments: When I first became aware of the redelvopment of Lewisham, I remarked how much it seemed to be on the Croydon model. High rise housing is not the answer, no real sense of community, very sixities and very termite.

    Flag
14. 14
    Name: Jane Holmes on Jun 26, 2009

    Comments: Lewisham Council and Tower housing have created an excellent community development so far. We all know what research has to say about the isolating impact of high rise blocks. Please just carry on as you have started

    Flag
15. 15
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 26, 2009

    Comments: As a 20 year resident of Algernon Road I am disappointed that the Council has brought forward a scheme so unsympathetic with the area, especially the Park behind. The scheme is far too dense and of low architectural quality, but the worst aspect of the proposal is probably the overdevelopment and lack of evidence that the knock-on effects on transport, local parking and traffic flows have adequately been examined and taken into account. Unfortunately the Council is pursuing its own agenda here with scant regard for local opinion. We do want a new leisure centre, yes, but not at this terrible cost to the local area.

    Flag
16. 16
    Name: Alex Ayres on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 17
    Name: Andrew Grant on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: We do not need high rise high density in Lewisham. We do not want it to become another Croydon!

    Flag
18. 18
    Name: Andrea Gillespie on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: I am not unhappy with new developments in my area. However, I do object to high rise blocks. People would not generally choose to live in them. They will totally dominate the area. They will be very intrusive in an area which is predominately low rise housing.

    Flag
19. 19
    Name: Sharon Fredericks on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: NO! NO! NO! Cornmill Gardens is a lovely place to live, with the river and green space for young people. Why would you destroy that by building more, esp. a 20-story block

    Flag
20. 20
    Name: Jane Clemetson on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: I also think that there should be sufficient car parking space for all the new residents

    Flag
21. 21
    Name: Pat Williams on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
22. 22
    Name: David Jones on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: No to high rise in Lewisham! If I wanted to live in Croydon I would have moved there. This development just lines the pockets of developers- just who decided on this folly in the first place Lewisham council just play lip service to genuine local objections

    Flag
23. 23
    Name: Helene Pirsch on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: i do not want such a development, which includes high rises. Lewisham can do better

    Flag
24. 24
    Name: David Larkin on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 25
    Name: Ismail Fisher on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments: I think the 24 storey building is ridiculous. They should make one 6, one seven, one eight and one nine storey building for people to liive in.

    Flag
26. 26
    Name: Linda Brookbanks on Jun 27, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 27
    Name: Ian Crosson on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments: We need more affordable homes in this development and proper planning of additional resources- school places and effect on traffic. More money for people and not private property developers.

    Flag
28. 28
    Name: Clare Barrett on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
29. 29
    Name: Martin Powell-Davies on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 30
    Name: Felicity Moran on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 31
    Name: Tory Dunn on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 32
    Name: Carol Wyss on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 33
    Name: Sarah White on Jun 28, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 34
    Name: Hallam, Richard on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
35. 35
    Name: Mark Harry on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 36
    Name: Chris Lee on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 37
    Name: Ray Manchester on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 38
    Name: Simon Hastings on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments: The scale of development is totally out of keeping with the local environment and massing. It is not relevant to say the heights etc relate to the Lewisham Gateway proposals as thesehave not been built, and are very unlikely to be in the next 10 years if at all.

    Flag
39. 39
    Name: Mrs Z Gaffen on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 40
    Name: Mrs Z Gaffen on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 41
    Name: John Rothery on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments: The development should be reviewed in conjunction with the Lewisham Gateway and Thurston Road developments with a thorough traffic and parking impact study.

    Flag
42. 42
    Name: Stephen Lowther on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
43. 43
    Name: John Gaffen on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments: Hands off Lewisham Bridge Primary School, stop trying to make Lewisham look like Croydon and listen to the residence of Lewisham for a Change!

    Flag
44. 44
    Name: Marc Jones on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments: - The local train connections and roads are already overloaded. More than 2,000 extra residents will make things even worse. - The supposed new "green spaces" will not get enough sunlight and eventually will be paved over. - Tall rise buildings are totally out of step with the local victorian housing. - There will be a severe wind tunnel effect. - Not enough local primary school for the new influx of children.

    Flag
45. 45
    Name: Mark Fiander on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 46
    Name: Anita Gwynn on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 47
    Name: Mark Landergan on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
48. 48
    Name: C. Rehal on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments: I do not believe Lewisham Council has sufficiently consulted residents in the local area, nor balanced the environmental and community impacts against the financial rewards for the developer.

    Flag
49. 49
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments: Too densely populated without enough parking and facilities. These big buildings need be outstanding to stand the test of time and they are not.

    Flag
50. 50
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 29, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, ... 7 › »