Update - 8 October 2018
The new application, ref. No. DC/18/108282, made on 27 July 2018 for the demolition of the building at 50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley BR1 4JW and the construction of 2 two-bedroom maisonettes and 2 four-bedroom houses, together with associated landscaping and the provision of refuse stores, car parking and cycle spaces, has been granted. The following are said to be available:

5 October 2018 Decision notice
12 September 2018 QC opinion

The “Letter from fire brigade” is actually a letter to the London Fire Brigade from BBS Building Control. The QC opinion was sought on the applicant’s behalf and considers whether the access way would provide sufficient access for a fire emergency vehicle. Unsurprisingly, it concludes that the proposed scheme is acceptable in terms of fire safety, in particular on the issue of fire emergency vehicle access.

Update - 9 
August 2018
The appeal on the refused application, ref. No. DC/17/100897, for the demolition of the building at 50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley, BR1 4JW and the construction of 2 two-bedroom maisonettes and 2 four-bedroom houses was dismissed on 19 June 2018.

A new application, ref. No. DC/18/108282, was made on 27 July 2018 for the demolition of the building at 50 Ashgrove Road and the construction of 2 two-bedroom maisonettes and 2 four-bedroom houses, together with associated landscaping and the provision of refuse stores, car parking and cycle spaces. The following are available on the file:
  • Application form
  • Sustainability statement with appendices
  • Design note
  • Attachment summary
  • Marketing report with appendices
  • Supplementary marketing information
  • Condition report with appendices
  • Archaeological assessment part 1
  • Archaeological assessment part 2
  • Transport statement
  • Arboricultural impact assessment with appendices
  • Planning statement with appendices
  • Proposed site plan and cross sections
  • Site location plan
  • Phase 2 site investigation
  • Design and access statement
  • Design and access statement appendix 9 – submitted drawings
  • Design and access statement appendix 8 – pre-application version
  • Vegetation for extensive biodiverse green roofs
  • Wildflower blanket biodiverse green roof – Bauder website extract
  • Existing plans and elevations
  • Existing site survey
  • Extensive biodiversity green roof maintenance procedure
  • Proposed green roof plans, sections, details and specifications
  • Proposed houses plans sections and elevations
  • Proposed maisonette flats plans sections and elevations
  • Proposed site lighting drainage block plan and materials
See in particular the planning statement. Addressing the points from the dismissed appeal, the developers argue as follows:

1. Access
In regard to the suitability of the width of the accessway, the Inspector noted that with the proposal to use imprint paving to distinguish between an area for pedestrians and vehicles, the width of the access road should not be considered insufficient as to warrant withholding planning permission on these grounds.

In regard to the ability for a fire appliance to turn on site and exit in forward gear, the Inspector was unconvinced that this could take placed [sic] and therefore dismissed the appeal on this basis. This revised application outlines how this issue has been addressed and is in accordance with BS9991:2015.

2. Employment Land
The Inspector agreed with the appellant’s case demonstrating that the loss of the B1 and B8 use was justified and acceptable in regard to planning policy. The quality of marketing evidence and length of time the site had been marketed was considered suitable and it was agreed that on the basis of the information submitted, the application met the requirements of Policy CS5 and DM11 and should be considered acceptable in principle.

I [sic] was also noted that the Written Ministerial Statement 2016 which sets out that tariff style contributions should not be sought from small scale development, constitutes the most up to date planning policy and should be given material weight. Accordingly, there is insufficient evidence to support the Council’s requirement for a payment to be made to mitigate the loss of employment floorspace.

3. Living Conditions
In regard to noise generated by users of the refuse collection point located along Ashgrove Road, the Inspector agreed with the appellant that this would not lead to a significant source of noise or disturbance for residents at 48 Ashgrove Road. Accordingly, the position of a refuse collection point in this location is considered acceptable.

The new dwellings are also proposed with the inclusion of sprinklers in order to address previous concerns over fire safety.

Update - 22 June 2018

The appeal, reference APP/C5690/W/17/3189975, on the refused application, ref. No. DC/17/100897, made on 28 March 2017 for the demolition of the building at 50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley BR1 4JW and the construction of 2 two-bedroom maisonettes and 2 four-bedroom houses, together with associated landscaping and the provision of refuse stores, car parking and cycle spaces, has been dismissed. The appeal decision is available.

The development would not provide a safe and suitable access for a fire emergency vehicle contrary to Policy 3.5 of the London Plan (2016); and DM Policy 30 and DM Policy 33 of the LP which amongst other matters seeks to ensure appropriate layout and access arrangements with a proper means of access and servicing. It is would also be at odds with the transportation aims of the National Planning Policy Framework.

A full statement of case was submitted, but never did become available on the files of Lewisham Council or the Planning Inspectorate.

Update - 7 May 2018

We have just been notified by Lewisham Council that an appeal, reference APP/C5690/W/17/3189975, was received on 23 November 2017 on the refused application, ref. No. DC/17/100897, made on 28 March 2017 for the demolition of the building at 50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley BR1 4JW and the construction of 2 two-bedroom maisonettes and 2 four-bedroom houses, together with associated landscaping and the provision of refuse stores, car parking and cycle spaces.

A full statement of case has been submitted, but is not available on the files of Lewisham Council or the Planning Inspectorate.

Update - 10 August 2017

We have asked Lewisham Council on various occasions to notify us via e-mail about new search results for planning applications, but they always fail to do so. Maybe this makes life easier for them, as our residents do not get to hear about planning applications until it is too late to do anything.


A typical example is a new application, ref. No. DC/17/100897, made on 28 March 2017 for the demolition of the building at 50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley BR1 4JW and the construction of 2 two-bedroom maisonettes and 2 four-bedroom houses, together with associated landscaping and the provision of refuse stores, car parking and cycle spaces. The following are available on the file:

  • Decision notice
  • 50 Ashgrove Road proposed site lighting drainage block plan and materials.
  • T105 – Track 3A - car into and out of parking space 1:100@A3
  • Green roof specification
  • Green roof vegetation details
  • Green roof maintenance
  • Proposed green roof plan and section
  • Archaeological assessment report
  • Application form
  • Marketing report appendix 8 – condition report
  • Archaeological assessment report
  • Condition report
  • Marketing report
  • Marketing report appendix 7 – commercial details
  • Proposed maisonette flats plans sections and elevations
  • Sustainability statement
  • Road site location plan
  • Transport statement
  • Arboricultural impact assessment
  • Arboricultural appendices
  • Tree protection plan appendix
  • Tree survey plan appendix
  • Phase 1 PRA report
  • Planning statement
  • Existing site survey
  • Existing plans and elevations
  • Proposed site plan and cross sections
  • Proposed site lighting drainage block plan and materials
  • Proposed houses plans sections and elevations
  • Design and access statement appendix 8 – pre-application version
  • Design and access statement appendix 9 – submitted drawings
  • Phase 1 PRA report
  • Design and access statement

See especially the planning statement, the design and access statement, and the decision notice dated 3 August 2017. The application was refused for the following reasons:

  1. The principle of residential use cannot be determined as the application fails to sufficiently justify the loss of the established employment site, contrary to Core Strategy Policy 5: Other employment locations (2011), and DM Policy 11 Other employment locations of the Development Management Local Plan (November 2014).

  2. The accessway into the site, by reason of its length and limited width would fail to provide sufficient space for two vehicles to pass, whilst the width of the pedestrian footpath would be inadequate. Subsequently, the proposal would create potential pedestrian and vehicular conflict, and would fail to provide sufficient access for a fire emergency vehicle, contrary to Policy 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing Development of the London Plan (adopted March 2015, incorporating March 2016 Minor Alterations), Policy 14 Sustainable movement and transport of the Core Strategy (2011), and DM Policy 29 Car parking, DM Policy 30 Urban design and local character, and DM Policy 33 Development on infill sites, backland sites, back gardens and amenity areas of the Development Management Local Plan (November 2014).

  3. The proposed waste and refuse storage provision for the 6 proposed dwellings, by reason of its design and location is likely have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the occupiers No. 48 Ashgrove Road though noise and disturbance contrary to DM Policy 32 Housing design, layout and space standards, of the Development Management Local Plan 2014.

50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley - 24 January 2015
Local residents will be pleased to know that the proposal to convert old buildings at 50 Ashgrove Road, Bromley BR1 4JW (the old Masons Scaffolding yard) to residential dwellings has been refused at Appeal. Details of the Inspector's decision can be found here.

In conclusion:

  • The appeal site is approached over a narrow, single track roadway with no separate footway. It provides insufficient space for two vehicles to pass and for the provision of pedestrian refuges, or for bin storage in a location to meet the requirements of the Council’s refuse service and for access by emergency vehicles.
  • National policy [states] that: “Plans and decisions should take account of whether safe and suitable access to the site can be delivered for all people …
  • For all of these reasons, the potential conflict between vehicles and pedestrians and concerns regarding the storage and collection of waste provide justifiable reasons why prior approval should not be granted.