Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A planning application has been made for a new development on Underhill Road:

25/AP/1149|Demolition of existing single storey rear extension, erection of one storey upwards roof extension on existing building and the erection of two five storey rear extensions to create a U-shaped block to facilitate an additional 41 x 1 bed units. Internal reconfiguration works resulting in the loss of 3 x existing 1 bed units (net gain of 38 units), hard and soft landscaping, cycle and refuse storage, pedestrian and vehicular access, car parking and associated works.

https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=SUTHB9KBJUP00

Comments must be submitted by 23rd September 2025.

"2.2.1 The Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) has undertaken a comprehensive consultation process with its residents and stakeholders regarding the proposed development which aims to create 41 additional units and has been designed to address the growing demand for accessible and supportive accommodation for individuals with visual impairments.

2.2.2 The consultation process has been a key part of the planning phase, ensuring that the needs and preferences of current residents are taken into account. RNIB has held several meetings, workshops, and surveys to gather feedback on the design, facilities, and overall impact of the new development. Residents have been encouraged to share their views on various aspects, including accessibility features, communal spaces, and the integration of the new blocks with the existing infrastructure which has directly informed the proposals.

2.2.3 The Applicant also engaged with the local MP, Helen Hayes, and a couple of local councillors at the behest of RNIB tenants to provide new homes to promote independent living for its Blind and Partially Sighted residents"

 

 

Seems like a very sensible and necessary proposal to me.

  • Agree 2

It is supported housing run by RNIB, None of the residents support the new build as some of them would be made homeless with no guarantee of being rehoused in suitable accommodation. The rebuild will be the destruction of a communal lounge and grounds. There is an oak tree in the grounds which is several hundred of years old and has a tree preservation order.

My husband's family used to live at this address and the grounds were gifted to the RNIB by his great aunt (Doctor Grace Batten) on the grounds that the tree is never cut down.

  • Like 2
29 minutes ago, Pugwash said:

It is supported housing run by RNIB, None of the residents support the new build as some of them would be made homeless with no guarantee of being rehoused in suitable accommodation. The rebuild will be the destruction of a communal lounge and grounds. There is an oak tree in the grounds which is several hundred of years old and has a tree preservation order.

My husband's family used to live at this address and the grounds were gifted to the RNIB by his great aunt (Doctor Grace Batten) on the grounds that the tree is never cut down.

Can you explain why some residents would be made homeless if they are building more accommodation?

  • Agree 1

Initially, when all the discussion took place at Bradbury some of existing building was to be demolished which meant that 3 flats would go but these residents would have to wait until new building erected to be housed. No indication has been given as to where people would be placed during building. I am glad that the tree is to remain - Bradbury residents contacted various environmental groups to lobby for tree to remain.

I gather that there is likely to be a question of restricted views to be made by Wood Vale residents as 5 stories is significantly higher than current building. 

Hi,

I went to the council's planning portal to look at the application, and I encourage others to look at it. It looks like a pleasant building, with thoughtful landscaping. as Pugwash said, the big oak would be retained, only two smaller trees are supposed to be cut, one of which is already dead according to the Tree Survey.

It sounds like 38 people in great need of it will gain supported housing thanks to this development, a very positive change. Of course a solution has to be found for the 3 who will need to find other accommodation during the works, but that doesn't seem enough of a reason to oppose the development. The current building is 4 stories, so I would be surprised if one extra storey was considered objectionable, especially considering the big oak stands between the building and the neighbours' back gardens and the fact that the neighbours it's backing onto are all 5 stories houses themselves or only have blank walls facing the building.

In the context where affordable housing is sorely missing, a 100% supported housing development is great news. Personally I've never seen a less objectionable planning request

Edited by ArchieCarlos
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

From what I have gathered from Bradbury Oak residents  I have spoken with, that at a meeting with RNIB earlier in the year, none of the residents were in favour of new build. There is the implication that rent rises are anticipated to help towards building costs. Rent is currently in the region of £300 pw - as with most sheltered housing (council and Housing Association), Since these rents also include maintenance charges, utility charges - Housing Benefit is only applicable to the actual 'rent element' per flat.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm utterly baffled as to why anybody thinks this is newsworthy, let alone worth a front page. The economy has barely grown for 20 years and the housing crisis has been worsening for a similar time period. Note to any journalists on the forum: maybe focus your headlines on important issues.
    • Two wrongs might not make a right. But the two wrongs could at least be of equal value before we get too judgey    paying an estate agent to deal with all of the admin on my to have the estate agent not point out all of the admin  vs Deliberately hacking into an MPs email. And boasting about it (Badenoch)    as for throwing a local estate agent under the bus, when did local estate agents become the good guys?   doesn’t sound like estate agents are being thrown under a bus - they are fessing up. And Reeves doesn’t look to have done anything wrong  yet people will still believe the worst anyway    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/oct/30/rachel-reeves-row-standards-adviser-looking-at-new-infomation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
    • Now who might that be?
    • Harvey and Wheeler in Dulwich Village? Only one I know… How can they offer to apply and never did? Surely; whether they are managing the property or not and with tech been so advanced I would have thought they would have been a couple of e mails sent as a reminder or, is it the Landlord’s responsibility to apply… Rental Law/ Bill has just come  into force  - can’t remember if it was this week or last and have been to busy to read.. However, will as assume it is not individual councils but all councils. Came up on Which on line.. Good point Jen Jen Jen - sure some knowledgable person on here can throw more light than I.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...