Consultation hub

• Should Bellingham Estate be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Lee Green be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Silk Mills Path be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Lewisham Town Centre be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Loampit Hill be designated as an ASLC?

Lee Green received 2 responses. Both agreed it should be designated as an Area of Special Local Character.

Silk Mills Path: 3 out of 3 respondents supported Silk Mills Path’s adoption as an ASLC and agreed with the proposed boundary. Comments praised its architectural character and historical significance.

Loampit Hill received 4 responses, all supported Loampit Hill’s designation as an ASLC. 3 respondents agreed with the proposed boundary, while one felt it should cover a larger section of Loampit Hill. Respondents emphasised the need for period-style street lighting and traffic control.

Bellingham Estate received 3 responses, all of which supported Bellingham’s designation as an ASLC. 2 respondents agreed with the proposed boundary, while one suggested including the green play area beyond the rail bridge into the boundary. Comments focused on protecting green spaces, improving planting, tackling fly-tipping, and enhancing Randlesdown Road.

Lewisham Town Centre: 2 out of 2 respondents supported Lewisham Town Centre’s designation and agreed with the proposed boundary.

Lee Green: Officers revised the ‘Opportunities’ section to add tree planting and river management, while traffic issues were referred to the Highways team.

Silk Mills Path: No changes were made to the Statement of Significance. 

Loampit Hill: Officers revised the ‘Opportunities’ text to add perio lighting as an enhancement should funding become available, and traffic concerns were referred to the Highways team. Additional comments highlighted the area’s architectural quality and unique views, which have been incorporated into the revised Statement of Significance.

Bellingham Estate: The ASLC boundary was chosen to reflect the historic layout of the original London County Council cottage estate. Officers revised the ‘Opportunities’ section to add planting improvements, and fly-tipping concerns were referred to the Environmental Health team.

Lewisham Town Centre: No changes were made to the Statement of Significance.

• Do you agree with the selection criteria?
• Should Hall Drive be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Charleville Circus be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Kirkdale be designated as an ASLC?
• Should Rockbourne Road be designated as an ASLC?
• Should these roads be designated as ASLCs?
• Should Sydenham Ridge be designated as an ASLC?

74.1% of respondents supported the proposed selection criteria. Some respondents found terms like “high quality” and “etc.” vague or subjective. Others felt the criteria were too restrictive or missed areas of interest.

87.5% of respondents supported Hall Drive being an ASLC. Residents praised the architectural diversity, green spaces, and community character. Corrections were suggested to descriptions of building types and historical details.

71.4% of respondents supported Charleville Circus being an ASLC. Some praised its distinctiveness and history, while others expressed concern about planning restrictions and parking.

85.7% of respondents supported Kirkdale being an ASLC. Respondents highlighted the area's historic buildings and community value. Suggestions included expanding the boundary and addressing urban realm issues.

62.5% of respondents supported Rockbourne Road being an ASLC. Residents appreciated the greenery, community use of benches, and historical context. Some were unsure of the designation’s practical impact.

66.7% of respondents supported Woolstone & Hurstbourne Roads being an ASLC. Some questioned the uniqueness of the area and suggested other roads were equally deserving.

76.2% of respondents supported Sydenham Ridge being an ASLC. Strong support with calls for Conservation Area status. Detailed feedback included historical, ecological, and boundary suggestions.

• Selection criteria: Officers clarified definitions, removed vague terms, and added references to Historic England and NPPG guidance to improve clarity and robustness.

• Halll Drive ASLC: Officers updated architectural descriptions and corrected historical references as suggested by respondents, revised the Statement of Significance, and incorporated detailed feedback from the Hall Drive Residents’ Association.

• Charleville Circus ASLC: Officers clarified that ASLC designation does not impose new planning controls. Officers incorporated historical data from a One-Place Study and addressed concerns about threats and opportunities. The FAQs, explaining that the ASLC designation will not entail any additional planning controls, will be uploaded with the ASLCs on the Council website.  

• Kirkdale ASLC: Officers clarified existing protections for adjacent areas, added tree planting and urban realm improvements to the opportunities section of the Statement of Significance, and referred traffic concerns to Highways.

• Rockbourne Road ASLC: Officers added social value of benches, historical context (e.g. WWII bombing), and planting opportunities to the Statement of Significance. Clarified the non-regulatory nature of ASLCs.

• Woolstone & Hurstbourne Roads: Officers clarified that similar areas are already designated Conservation Areas.

• Sydenham Ridge ASLC: Officers expanded the ASLC boundary to include Sydenham Wells Park and the full Sydenham Hill Estate. Added detailed historical, ecological, and topographical information to the Statement of Significance. Updated photos and maps in Statement of Significance.

We asked business ratepayers within the borough for their views on our proposed budget for 2023-24, as business rates are a key contributor to our income budget. Business rates help support local services including street lighting, waste collection and public parks. We laid out the Council’s seven Priorities and asked ratepayers to tell us what was most important to them, as well as asking what they thought we were doing well and what needs improvement.

• There is a good level of business support offered to its businesses and that the north of the borough had good public transport links, safe streets and school streets. People are able to live locally and avoid long journeys to reach work and leisure facilities. 

• There is support for increasing street safety and public transport, and a strong desire for a reduction in graffiti. 

• Business rates should be reduced generally and there should be more access to grants. You suggested that new businesses should be entitled to 100% relief in the first year and then a sliding scale for the next five years to enable the business to be established. The benefit of this being that the business would be better able to benefit the wider local community and create and protect jobs.

• The consultation was taken to the Council meeting on Wednesday 1^st March 2023.

• The Council recognises the difference between the north and south of the borough in terms of infrastructure provision and continues to work collaboratively with Transport for London and other partners to secure investment, to ensure that both capital and service delivery provides for all of our residents across all wards. 

• The Council’s Active Travel Fund, as part of its planned capital programme, seeks to increase the number of safe streets and school streets, and will work closely with Transport for London to improve public transport accessibility where possible. As part of the pressures funding for 2023/24 there is specific additional funding being made available to tackle fly tipping and ensure that the Council can continue to tackle and enforce against all types of antisocial or illegal activity on our streets. 

• Business Rates are governed by legislation, in particular the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Whilst we appreciate the comments in terms of the charges and applicable reliefs for new businesses, the Council are solely responsible for the billing and collection of Business Rates, not the setting of these.

• Tackling antisocial behaviour: Please provide your views on our proposed Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) here.