October 2010

There are also many other useful pieces of local information on the website and a message board to express any views you may have. We have recently added pages on tips and guidelines for Planning Applications in Riddlesdown and also advice on Building Control applications, the Party Wall Act 1996 and noise from building sites.

PLANNING MATTERS

REPLACEMENT MOBILE PHONE MAST IN LOWER BARN ROAD

In late July, an application was submitted to the Council by both Vodafone and O2 to replace the existing 15-metre high O2 3G mast just east of the railway bridge, together with two associated cabinets, to be positioned on the pavement.

We spent some time considering this new application for a combined mast and sounded out some local residents who live close to the site. It was decided in the end that we would not be objecting although we did have some reservations about the application. We had no other contact or comments from any local resident about this application despite the large publicity the Council gave it, but we did raise some of our own with the Council’s Planning Department; we hope these will be taken into account by them when they reach their decision. We also advised all the Councillors for both the Sanderstead and Purley Wards of our views and reasons, and they have all supported our strategy.

For background information, in December 2003 the RRA and many residents did object to the siting of the existing 3G mast by O2; due to the Council’s failure to respond within the 56-day period, O2 erected the current mast by default. However the Council did refuse approval of this application on the basis of ‘a harmful visual impact on the local environment’. O2 ignored this objection. In respect of this new application, the RRA are not aware that anything has changed on the ‘visual impact’ since early 2004.

The proposed mast will be the same height and roughly the same design as the existing one, which we accept has been in place for about six years and does provide a good service for O2 subscribers with a 3G (2100 MHz) service within the immediate area. However the current service for 2G (900 MHz) O2 users is very poor. Likewise 3G and 2G services by Vodafone in this area, at the bottom of the valley, are also very bad. The RRA are a realistic and not unreasonable Association and we realise the current O2 3G mast is there for the benefit of the community. We applaud the decision by O2 and Vodafone to mast share and it also appears, from the documentation submitted by them, that the proposed mast would also include the consolidation of 2G coverage as well as 3G. We accept that the current application is perhaps the best location for a mast, if a replacement has to be erected.

However a factor which we are concerned about is that there is also planning approval to build ten flats on the woodland at the rear of the mast. The Planning Inspector did say in his report on appeal that ‘No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until the telecommunications mast sited on the footway of LBR adjacent to the site has been removed’. The general consensus of local residents appears to be that a mast on the pavement is preferable to a flats development! We asked the Council to consider very carefully the possible consequences of not objecting to this application in view of the proposed flats development, which of course the Council refused originally.

We suspect the Purley Downs Golf Club have made their own representations to the Council about this application, considering this mast on the pavement could scupper their plans for a ‘financial windfall’. As we said in the Recorder in April 2009, the Golf Club sought our help in establishing their ownership from Taylor Wimpey and opposing the flats application and then submitted their own application after we received assurances from them that this would not happen. They are very fortunate that this piece of woodland is out of sight of their golf course and club house, yet it is local residents’ in Lower Barn Road and surrounding streets who will have to live with the consequences of a flats development.

Just prior to the Recorder going to print, we understand that the Council have approved the application, with a stipulation that the mast is to be painted green.

NETWORK RAIL MAST AT REAR OF 91/93 BRANCASTER LANE

Following my items in previous Recorders, we have put further pressure on Network Rail and the Council’s Planning Department to paint the battleship grey control room and antennae green to try and blend in with the tree background. We are now pleased to say that we have heard back from Network Rail that they will be painting the them to match the colour of their mast.

Network Rail were unable to say when this work will be undertaken but hopefully it

will go a little way towards blending in with the background.

PURLEY OAKS RECYCLING CENTRE

I reported last time that a planning application had been submitted for the existing Recycling Centre to be enlarged into the existing Highways Depot at the rear. New additional compactor units and an increase in the number of car parking spaces to try and reduce traffic congestion on the Brighton Road and Riddlesdown Road are proposed.

We did write to the Council in support of this application, particularly in relation to the frequent traffic chaos on the Brighton Road, particularly at peak times. However for some reason, the Council have still not made a decision on this application.

61 MITCHLEY HILL

The owners of this property submitted an application for outline planning permission to erect a detached two-storey house at the rear with attached single garage and formation of vehicular access on to Holmwood Avenue. This proposed new property would be beside 2 Holmwood Avenue. Although the RRA did not object, we understand that Councillors Yvette Hopley and Tim Pollard did so, together with five local neighbours. The matter was referred to the Planning Committee at the end of March, when the Committee decided to defer a decision to allow Officers to study more detailed plans and elevations that had to be submitted by the applicant. The Council in July refused permission on the grounds of a potential loss of a mature ash tree in the street, close to where the vehicular crossover would be and where possible damage to the roots could occur and potentially destabilise the tree. The applicants appealed on 30 July and we await the Planning Inspector’s decision.

62 OAKWOOD AVENUE

Although this site is not within our area, it does abut properties in Riddlesdown Road. Over the last few years, there have been a number of planning applications for some form of development on this site. The latest is for the demolition of the existing building and the erection of four four-bedroom detached houses with garages and the formation of an access road. The Council refused this application and we understand the Planning Inspector dismissed the appeal on

22 July. A new application has just been lodged with the Council to now build three four-bedroom detached houses, with garages and an access road.

BACKLAND DEVELOPMENT NOW RESTRAINED

In relation to the previous two topics, the new coalition Government issued a statement in June that they were tightening up on backland development throughout the country. Riddlesdown and Croydon in general have had their fair share of applications and developers are always looking for sites and areas where development could occur.

The intention by the Government is to decentralise the planning system by giving Local Authorities the freedom to prevent over-development of neighbourhoods and ‘garden-grabbing’. The Government have therefore decided to remove private residential gardens from the definition of previously defined ‘brownfield land’.

They have also decided to remove the requirement upon Local Authorities to have regard to the national minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare density for housing. The previous policy had resulted in Local Authorities not having enough flexibility to set density ranges that suit the local needs in their areas – particularly for family houses. Too much emphasis has been on flats. These amendments now put the power back in the hands of Local Authorities and communities to take the decisions that are best for them, and to decide for themselves the best locations and types of development in their areas.

SEISMIC TESTING IN THE SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH

A planning application was submitted in May for seismic testing at various sites in the south of the Borough. The work is being carried out by TESLA-IMC International on behalf of Alamo Energy and is part of an underground survey of the Weald area. Alamo Energy has acquired licences from the Government to undertake these exploratory works which could open up potential sites for any drilling works. This area is near to the Palmers Wood, Oxted, oilfield which was discovered in 1983.

The Council determined in June that the proposal is a ‘permitted development’ and prior approval was not required. Some residents may notice large vehicles undertaking seismic surveys in our area: from Purley Cross, up Downs Court Road, along Mitchley Ave, Rectory Park up to the Limpsfield Road roundabout. Other roads will include Pampisford Road, Sanderstead Road, Limpsfield Road, Addington Road, Selsdon Park Road, Kent Gate Way, Gravel Hill, Coombe Road and Godstone Road. A detailed information leaflet drop will be undertaken by the company in the local area affected immediately preceding the exploratory work, so that nearby residents are fully informed. Public notices will also be displayed in the local press. The operational hours will be 7.30am - 6pm, Monday to Sunday inclusive, subject to any local restrictions imposed. No artificial lighting will be required.

The survey would be a vibroseis type. Large specialist vehicles will be carrying out the survey for any potential gas or oil deposits. There maybe some traffic disruption as the surveys will be undertaken with the use of Stop/Go lollipops.

Our local geologist, Martin Whitehead, writes: “I’m afraid I don’t know why this survey is being shot (that does not mean use of explosions or guns, it’s just a phrase harking back to when they used dynamite ‘shots’!!). Vibroseis is pretty harmless. It’s a really big truck with a very heavy iron plate underneath it. The plate is lowered every so often to the ground and it is shaken for a few short bursts – this generates a seismic signal that will be picked up further along the line of the survey by geophones. The basic concern for people who live near a survey is: will the vibration damage my property? I believe that this is a very low risk .... and it’s common within the UK as a whole.”

Although we were told this work was planned to be undertaken in July, it is not clear whether anything has happened, as these vehicles have not been seen in the area. Be warned!

RAILWAY WORKS BY RIDDLESDOWN STATION

Some residents may have noticed that Network Rail have created a vehicular access way by the bridge in Lower Barn Road that runs at the bottom of the embankment, parallel with the railway. They have felled some trees. Although this access way runs behind the Brancaster Lane properties, it is on the golf course side. We have made enquiries with Network Rail and the RRA understand that Southern Railway propose to introduce 12-coach trains from December 2011 instead of the current eight-coach trains. In order to run these, some platforms will have to be extended and new transformers installed to cope with the additional power supply required.

We understand that at the moment this work is in the planning stage and we are not fully clear as to what Network Rail are proposing in respect of our platforms and power supply. We will keep residents advised of developments on our website.

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

SALTING AND ACCIDENTS IN COOMBE WOOD HILL

As you may recall, I reported last time about the high number of accidents in Coombe Wood Hill during last winter’s snow. This was because the road had not been salted on a number of occasions and gritters were salting Lower Barn Road instead.

We have had further dialogue with the Council about this and we are told that they revised the gritting schedules in October 2007 and again in November 2009. Full details of this can be found at www. croydon.gov.uk/transportandstreets/rhps/roads/gritting

This web page advises: ‘there are four priority routes that will receive preventative treatment if the duty officer feels that the forecast is bad enough. When widespread ice or snow is forecast, the gritting operations are increased to cover nine primary and secondary routes. Primary routes are to be concentrated on by the gritters, until the routes have received an appropriate number of grit applications to clear them of snow/ice. Once these are free the gritting vehicles will drop onto the secondary routes’.

We have learnt ‘that Coombe Wood Hill is now listed as a precautionary route. It is not however on a primary gritting route but is on a secondary route. Lower Barn Road is not on a precautionary gritting route but is on a primary gritting route.’

Confused? Yes, so am I, and so are some officers at the Council. We have therefore asked them to look again at the route schedules and maybe review their routes for next winter. I must admit I don’t quite understand why Lower Barn Road is not a precautionary route yet Coombe Wood Hill is and vice versa for primary gritting routes! My view is that both roads should be salted as primary routes. As the Council’s own website says, ‘priority is given to steep gradients’ and ‘roads leading to Stations’, both of which Coombe Wood Hill and Lower Barn Road are. It was very apparent during the heavy snowfall/freezing rain on 21 December 2009, when Mitchley Hill and Rectory Park (both primary routes) became impassable because of the buses blocking this road, that many vehicles then came down Lower Barn Road into Brancaster Lane to get access to the Brighton Road etc. so perhaps one shouldn’t be omitted for the sake of the other. We wait to see what the Council do!

PARKING ISSUES IN HONISTER HEIGHTS

We have recently learnt that for some reason the Council’s Traffic Enforcement Officers are targeting vehicles parked at the far end of Honister Heights, close to the junction with Dunmail Drive and Riddlesdown Collegiate. Although the road layout has been like this for 50 years plus, the Council in the last few weeks seem to be targeting it and issuing tickets. There is space at the end to park three vehicles and for some reason the middle of the three vehicles is being ticketed. We understand that some motorists have taken this up with the Council and Councillors.

A ruling was brought in about 10 years ago that a vehicle parked more than 50cm (or other specified distance) from the edge of the carriageway and not within a designated parking space can be ticketed. This, apparently, is the reason why tickets are being issued. If motorists believe they have been unfairly ticketed, then they can appeal to the Council but this must be within 14 days and if the Council still decide the fine is enforceable, then a further appeal can be made to the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service.

The moral of the story is: be warned when parking at the far end of Honister Heights.

However, we believe, although it has not been confirmed as yet, that the Parking Adjudicator’s case of Carr v. LB Haringey has set a precedent. In this particular case there were three road edges and not two, as is normal. As there was some doubt that the vehicle was not more than 50 cm from the end kerb, the Parking Adjudicator wasn’t satisfied that a contravention of the Act had occurred and allowed the appeal. We suggest that anyone who receives a ticket in Honister Heights for this reason should maybe consult this case. We have asked the Council that if they intend to prosecute motorists for parking there, then, by some means, they should make motorists fully aware of the situation and not leave it to an arbitrary decision by the Enforcement Officer to issue tickets.

HIGHWAY MATTERS

We are continuing to have on-going dialogue with the Council on street cleaning, poor white line markings to roads, particularly give-way markings at junctions and on bends, and the poor state of some grass verges and road surfaces. We have had some success and white-lining to many roads has now been renewed. Road-surfacing has also been undertaken to small sections of Ingleboro Drive, Mitchley Avenue, Rectory Park and all of Honister Heights and Westfield Avenue. However we have had very little success over the state of some sections of the grass verges. We are still pursuing this. There are, in particular, bad sections at the bottom of Copthorne Rise and in Mitchley Avenue, close to the post box and bus stop by Lower Barn Road, where, daily, the Royal Mail van parks illegally.

The Council have continued to carry out major cleaning to road gullies and soakaways to try and prevent flooding and this is part of an on-going programme throughout the areas of the Borough that are served by soakaways – most other parts of the Borough have a surface water drainage system which is the responsibility of Thames Water. We shall see whether these works have been successful if we have a wet winter. In respect of the yellow markings to be found painted on the road at the bottom end of Copthorne Rise, these have been put there by the Council’s drainage contractor in preparation for their work cleansing soakaways etc.

I’m sure that many other motorists are appalled by the current poor state of many road surfaces and congestion hot spots, not just in Croydon but nationwide. The Government collects about £48 billion annually from motorists by various taxes, yet only about £4 billion is spent annually on improving road surfaces and a new road infrastructure. Councils on average pay out £53 million in compensation claims and it is estimated that £20 billion is lost to business through congestion each year. Perhaps if the Government and the Councils just had a bit of foresight and filled potholes or made road improvements then these figures would drop dramatically. Let’s hope this new coalition Government gets to grips with this situation, as it’s surely now time for them to justify the billions they receive through various taxes every year!