REPORTS FROM THE RECORDER
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
PLANNING ADVICE ON
The Riddlesdown Recorder
On Line
Community Page
(Things to do, join and help with)
ABOUT RIDDLESDOWN
ABOUT THE RRA
The Riddlesdown Recorder
RRA AGM Minutes
PHIL THOMAS’ PLANNING REPORT -
As usual, all the planning applications in the RRA area are updated weekly on our website www.riddlesdownresidents. org.uk
There is also a link to the Council’s Planning Department to view all plans and application forms, so you don't need to visit Taberner House to view any application in your vicinity.
Woodland adjoining 108/110, Lower Barn Rd (The Parade of Shops)
Just as the last Recorder had gone to print in September, Taylor Wimpey (who merged
with Laing’s) submitted a planning application for the erection of two two-
As this was obviously a major application in the centre of our area, it attracted a lot of interest. In total, 175 people objected, either directly to the Council or via two petitions that were set up by a concerned local resident.
Briefly, the main points of contention were the large size of the development and the substantial loss of trees and damage to the adjoining Green Belt land. There would be considerable disturbance to wildlife on the site. There would also be an O2 3G mast within three metres of some of the flats and within eight metres of all the flats. Government guidelines say no mast should be sited within 25 metres of residential properties.
There was no parking provision for visitors or deliveries; these would not be able to enter the site because of the gated entrance and would, therefore, either have to park on the bend (yellow lined) which would compromise highway safety, or in the bays outside the shops.
The possibility of flooding of the site was raised, as the highway immediately abutting
the land is subject to flooding and the run-
It was thought, therefore, that some of the proposed properties would flood.
At the end of the three-
The original preliminary discussions with the Planners had been for fourteen flats, each with a car parking space. The Planning Officers decided the revised application was suitable and were recommending that the application be approved. However because Ward Councillor Lynne Hale had made a referral (a referral means that Officers cannot approve the application under delegated authority but that it has to be referred to the full Committee), it was presented to the Planning Committee on 15 November.
Our chairman, Brian Longman, and Councillor Lynne Hale made presentations at the
meeting and, following a long discussion, the Planning Committee rejected the application,
with eight councillors voting against, one Labour councillor abstaining and one Tory
councillor not taking part as he declared a personal interest (the Committee is made
up of six Conservatives -
The application was rejected on the grounds that the development would be an overdevelopment of the site and would be harmful to the Green Belt and nature conservation by reason of the siting and size of the building, the quantity and form of the amenity space and the extent and form of the parking and access arrangements. It was also not satisfactorily demonstrated that the occupiers would not be affected by the existing telecommunications mast to the front of the site. Given that the mast is within close proximity to the building and clearly visible from within the building, it is likely that actual or perceived health concerns would be raised by the occupiers of the building. This decision was clearly a victory for those residents living so close to this site and to the 175 who objected. The Committee would like to thank all residents who became involved, by either signing the petitions or writing direct to the Council.
However, on Monday 19 November, the owners, Taylor Wimpey, commenced some tree felling on the site, despite the planning application being refused four days earlier. Many residents and the RRA contacted the Council, MP Richard Ottaway and Councillors about this. This complete disrespect by Taylor Wimpey, for both the environment and nature conservation, did receive attention at the highest level with senior Council Officers and Councillors, particularly the Planning Committee Councillors. Councillor Lynne Hale also raised a question, about the destruction of these trees at the full Council meeting on 3 December.
Although the site has not been fully cleared, the larger trees have now been felled. The developer may think they have pulled a ‘fast one’ but we understand it has now hardened the attitude of the Council for any future applications.
At the time of writing, no appeal has been submitted by Taylor Wimpey (they have until 15 May to do so) and no new application has been submitted. However, like many people in the area, I always thought this piece of land was owned by the Purley Downs Golf Club and indeed whenever there have been any fencing or overhanging tree issues, the RRA have reported this to the Golf Club and they have promptly carried out any works.
It is of no surprise therefore, to understand that there is now a land ownership dispute in progress. We await the outcome with interest.
A full transcript of the application and correspondence is available to read on the RRA website.
For those of you who may like to watch the Planning Committee meeting, this can be viewed via the Council's website: www.croydon.gov.uk/democracy; follow the link in the centre of the page for webcasting, and then to associated links, webcasts on the right side, then archived council meetings at the top, then go to the Planning Committee 15 November 2007, index points and then click on the second item of the broadcast.
68 and 81 Westfield Avenue
I reported last time on two planning applications that had been submitted for back
land development in this road. The first was at No 81 which was for a second application
for this site, and was for the erection of two semi-
The second location related to No 68 and was for the erection of a two-
Purley Fire Station
An outline planning application was lodged in November for the demolition of the
existing fire station and the erection of a replacement comprising appliance bays
for two vehicles, a three-
30/32 St James Road
Another application has just been submitted for this site, which is on the edge of
our boundary. The previous application in 2005 was for the demolition of two houses
(Nos 30 and 32) and redevelopment in the rear garden of the third (No 34), and the
erection of twelve three-
The Council refused this application.
The application this time is for the demolition of the existing buildings (Nos. 30
& 32) and the erection of two two-
The application directly affects properties in our area, at the top end of Downs Court Road. The Committee again feel that the provision of an access road, very close to one of the most dangerous junctions in Croydon – St James Road and Downs Court Road – is unacceptable and is no different to the previous application; this was one of the grounds for refusal by the Council. We have objected again on these grounds, together with noise and disturbance of the rear car park to surrounding properties. We await the outcome.
Grass verges, shrubs, litter, parking
The Committee have noticed recently how untidy the area has become, particularly
in respect of litter and damage to grass verges, potholes in roads, poor white line
road markings, particularly at junctions and blocked gully grids. We are continually
contacting the Council about the well-
In respect of shrubs on grass verges, these do block/restrict sight lines for some
drivers when emerging from the driveways. This can be particularly dangerous where
there are parked cars, as in Lower Barn Road and Ingleboro Drive. The RRA are not
looking to have these shrubs removed but reduced to a sensible and safe height. The
Council have responded by e-
‘...that the shrubs and hedges in the Riddlesdown area, are all maintained on a regular basis, some being pruned after flowering and the majority being cut as hedges, once or twice a year depending on the species. We have in the past reduced the height of these, at the request of residents due to sight lines being obscured. We would not reduce the height of all the shrubs, as I am sure that some residents are happy as they are, but can do individual ones where they are a problem...’.
If you are concerned about a shrub on a grass verge outside your property and would
like it trimmed, then please contact the Council direct -
If you are one of the commuters who live in the Riddlesdown area and must drive the
short distance to Riddlesdown Station, then please consider where and how you park.
In the last six months, four cars have been ‘written off’ in these surrounding streets
and perhaps if you saw the number of ‘near misses’ by the ever-
Under the Road Traffic Regulations Act, as well as parking on yellow and red lines, there are some other parking offences which are not always known about. They include no parking within ten metres of a road junction, on the pavement (unless signs say otherwise) or on a crossover in front of a driveway, this being particularly applicable where there are grass verges.
It is also an offence to park on a grass verge, which can really churn the grass up and make it unsightly, and to park across and in front of a dropped kerb. A dropped kerb is defined as a pedestrian crossing point at a road junction, and also across a driveway to a house or property. It has been known for traffic wardens to ticket a car parked across a driveway (even if it is your own driveway and your own vehicle) which means a parking fine in the range of £60 to £120 (halved if paid in 14 days). In addition, the vehicle could be towed away by the Council if it is causing an obstruction, which means an additional £200 fine to recover. Wardens do operate on their mopeds daily in this area, so be warned!
And finally...
The RRA is a non-