Purley Planning Summary – 1st July 2020
The current volume of planning applications and decisions in the PWRA area can make it challenging to keep up with what is being proposed for our area. Consequently the PWRA Planning Officer now prepares a summary of planning activity in our area so we can more easily track this, and determine the action we will take for new planning applications.
We believe that this will also be useful for members and publish it here so YOU can quickly see what we believe to be the most significant planning matters in the PWRA area, the actions we will be taking / have taken, and enable members to take their own actions (eg objecting or supporting new planning applications).
- 60 Foxley Lane (Ref: 20/01995/LP) Use as children’s care home.
- 1 Smitham Downs Road (Ref: 19/04500/FUL) Comment: Still showing as pending, whilst minutes of the planning ctte of 21st May record that it has been granted. As a general note LBC seem to be getting increasingly slow in updating the planning portal with decisions (This is one example, and 63 Whytecliffe Road (below) is another. Chloramphenicol is used to treat bacteria associated with serious infections caused by gram-positive bacteria http://grandnorthern.co.uk/64264-ivermectin-injection-1ml-price-96796/ and fungi. It says that they have worked with the canadian and german authorities and Bebington mesik ivermectin have learned from their experience. Please note that we do not share or https://finishingtouchcarcare.com/53943-stromectol-3-mg-hinta-65798/ sell your information to any third party companies or organizations. They are a Cremona tab ivermectin price in india mixture of different ingredients that have been approved by the u.s. The following section is based on https://butlerstewart.co.uk/79117-stromectol-prise-gale-5935/ the united states environmental protection agency (epa) guidelines for the calculation of annual emissions for all new vehicles registered in the united states. Notwithstanding the current circumstances, this is something Cllrs might want to raise with officers).
- 63 Whytecliffe Road South (Ref: 19/02109/FUL) Demolition of existing mosque and erection of mixed use mosque development comprising public worship spaces, function areas and one floor of residential use (3 x studio flats) with associated landscaping. Comment: Still showing as pending on the planning portal, whilst the minutes of the planning ctte of 7th May show the proposal as approved.
- 71 & 73 Pampisford Road (Ref: 20/00665/FUL) Demolition of existing dwellings, erection of a four storey residential development of 23 flats with 12 car spaces. Comments: It will be very interesting to see if any subsequent proposals similar to this one are also refused, as the reasons for this refusal are the same / very similar to objections raised about many other planning applications, and yet have been ignored or brushed aside by the current council administration. Reasons for refusal: 1) The proposal, by virtue of its excessive height, mass and overall quantum of development together with the detailed design and proposed external materials represents an unacceptable form of development that would detract from the character of the area (contrary to policies 7.1, 7.4 and 7.6 of the London Plan 2016, Policies SP4 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan 2018 and Croydon Suburban Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2 April 2019): 2) The proposal, by virtue of the removal of existing quality trees and hedges, changes to land levels and insufficient opportunity for and information on replacement planting and landscaping, would have a detrimental impact on biodiversity and trees (contrary to policies SP7, DM10, DM27 and DM28 of the Croydon Local Plan 2018)
- 41 Woodcrest Road (Ref: 19/06036/FUL) Now confirmed as refused.
Significant New Applications
- 39 Pampisford Road (Ref: 20/02280/FUL) Demolition of existing house and erection of 9 flats (2 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed, 3 x 3 bed) with 4 car parking spaces. Comment: This site is next to 37 Pampisford Road which obtained planning consent for 7 flats with 4 car parking spaces in January 2020 (Ref: 19/01886/FUL). This proposal is one storey higher than the consented scheme at 37 and two storeys higher than 41 Pampisford Road! Object based on; Loss of a family home, Overdevelopment of the site with the proposed development significantly increasing the built area of the existing family home and inadequate amenity space for potential occupiers, Detrimental to the amenity of occupiers of adjoining properties (overlooking, noise), Inadequate car parking for a development of the size and scale proposed, resulting in additional on street parking, putting parking pressure on the surrounding area, and increased traffic movements so greatly endangering road safety close to a busy road junction (Christchurch Road).
- 14A Smitham Bottom Lane (Ref: 20/01677/FUL) Demolition of existing bungalow (with roof accommodation) and construction of a two storey building (also with roof accommodation) to the front of the site of 6 flats (2 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed) and construction of 3 x 3 bed terraced housing to the rear of the site. 9 car parking spaces are proposed (ie one per unit). Comment: This property already has an unimplemented consent for 2 buildings of 8 x 2 bed flats from 2017. This proposal comprising a mix of flats and terraced housing is very similar to the development under construction at 20 Smitham Bottom Lane. Furthermore ‘Backland’ development had already been undertaken in this section of Smitham Bottom Lane, in the form of Pivet Mews a couple of houses to the South of this proposal. Nevertheless propose objecting based on; Overdevelopment of the site with the proposed development significantly increasing the built area of the existing family home, and resulting in inadequate amenity space for potential occupiers, Detrimental to the amenity of occupiers of adjoining properties, Inadequate car parking resulting in additional on street parking and risking highway safety on a very busy major road.
- 1A Woodcote Valley Road (Ref: 19/05787/FUL) Change of use and extension of single dwelling to 8 residential units (2 x 2 bed, 5 x 1 bed and a studio in the roofspace) with 8 car parking spaces. Comment: The proposed extensions and alterations, together with the car parking appear to fill almost the entire plot, with no amenity space visible from the plans. Object based on: Loss of a family home, Overdevelopment of the site with the proposed development significantly increasing the built area of the existing family home and inadequate amenity space for potential occupiers, Detrimental to the amenity of occupiers of adjoining properties, Inadequate car parking for a development of the size and scale proposed, resulting in additional on street parking, putting parking pressure on the surrounding area, and increased traffic movements so greatly endangering road safety close to a very busy road junction.
- 93 Downlands Road (Ref: 20/01963/FUL) 2 bed house in ‘front garden’ (which would have had to excavated for this development proposal), with no car parking.
Recently we have seen two requests for public input into development proposals. These are: 1) Network Rails proposals to unblock the so-called Selhurst Triangle and redevelop East Croydon station with two additional platforms, and 2) Croydon Councils proposals for the Purley Way as part of the Local Plan Partial Review. I have looked at the documents made available for each of these proposals.
Re 1) This is a huge project. Whilst it could make a significant positive difference to rail travel in the area it is currently unfunded, will require at least one public inquiry, and, even with what we consider an optimistic timetable, is not anticipated to complete until 2033.
Re 2) At this point Croydon seem to want to collect public views and recollections on the Purley Way. The intent seems to be to use these to guide the development of a ‘master plan’ for the Purley Way. We think we need to see this proposed ‘master plan’ before we could coherently comment or input.