Purley Planning Summary – 1st June 2020

Purley Planning Summary – 1st June 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).

Applications Granted

135 Foxley Lane (Ref: 19/05838/FUL) Demolition of a garage and erection of 5 bedroom dwelling
with associated parking, refuse store, cycle store and landscaping.

Comment: We had supported this proposal

1 Smitham Downs Road (Ref: 19/04500/FUL) Whilst I believe the application for 9 flats was granted
(indeed I have seen the draft Planning Ctte Minutes saying this), the Planning Register (at time of
writing) is still showing the application as pending.

Applications Refused

2 More Close (Ref 20/00770/FUL) Construction of 2 x 1-bedroom houses to the front of No. 2 More
Close after the sub-division of its front garden.

Comment: The main reasons for refusal are – The proposal would inhibit the delivery of the previously approved development of No.2; The proposed
scale, layout and design would represent a poor quality scheme out of character with the area; The
proposal would severely impact car parking in the area with its lack of parking provision, and loss of
parking for the approved development of No.2. The auctioneer, who identified nejm ivermectin himself only as tom, was busy with a new seller, a man who had approached him and offered a price to his cattle—a thousand dollars per animal. It is also an excellent oral treatment for all types of herpes, ringworm, genital stromectol 3 mg hinta Country Club warts, and other problematic cuts, scrapes, and burns. If you think there might be a drug-drug where to buy ivermectin for dogs interaction, we must tell you to let your healthcare professional know. The drug may be purchased over the counter and is recommended for the el hed ivermectin for head lice uk treatment of animals with sarcopt. Neurontin sklice lice treatment 100mg capsules are taken once a day as a single dose on an empty stomach. Inadequate cycle parking, Poor design for bin
storage, Removal of TPO protected trees, and Inadequate drainage are also given as reasons for
refusal.

9 – 11 Whtyecliffe Road South (Former Police Office opposite Purley Station) (Ref: 20/00865/FUL)

Comment: There is permission to change the use of this property from offices to residential
(19/06061/GPDO). This later application is to construct a light well at the front of the property to
enable its basement to be converted in to a flat. It has been refused as: i) the light well and
associated brick boundary would be detrimental to the character of the street scene and would
result in a visually intrusive and incongruous form of development that would fail to reflect the
prevailing character of Whytecliffe Road South (!!?), and ii) Poor quality living environment for the
future occupiers of the basement flat.

41 Woodcrest Road (Ref: 19/06036/FUL) Whilst I believe the application for 8 flats was refused
(indeed I have seen the draft Planning Ctte Minutes saying this), the Planning Register (at time of
writing) is still showing the application as pending.

Significant New Applications

93 Downlands Road (Ref: 20/01651/FUL) Two storey side extension to existing detached house to
create a new 4 bedroom semi-detached house (with the subdivision of the land / garden of the
existing detached property). One off-road car parking space per house.

Comment: Propose a neutral stance.
Devinder Bains, the Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator for Downlands Road, who wanted
our support in objecting to both planning applications now in play for the property, and who I
quoted from in my note, thanks us for objecting to the 1 bed house proposal (below), and asks us to
reconsider our neutral stance on this one, as: The owner of the adjoining house is concerned that
the value of his house will be adversely affected, there is concern that the long term objective of the
applicant is to create an HMO, there is concern that still set a precedent for further developments
infilling spaces between houses. Value is not a planning consideration per se, and the other reasons
are conjecture, and so I would not propose changing our stance. However the wider committee may
feel otherwise….

93 Downlands Road (Ref: 20/01963/FUL)
Comment: This is a revised version of the previously
refused proposal (19/05671/FUL) to dig out the existing front garden of this property to build a 1
bed single story house in addition to the existing property (with no on-site car parking for either
property). We had objected to this earlier proposal. We have objected to this revised proposal,
based on:- Out of character with surroundings / Incongruous design, Lack of amenity space for
occupants, No car parking provision.

60 Foxley Lane (Ref: 20/01995/LP) Use as children's care home.

Comment: Ascent Fostering (based
in Wallington) are applying for a Lawful Development Certificate to use the property as a children’s
home for ~6 children (Planning Use Class C3(b). No alterations are proposed for the property.
Planning history across the Borough shows that Croydon have agreed to LDC’s in similar situations.
As an LDC is being sought no comments can be made through the planning portal, and if we wished
to comment we will need to write in.

126 Foxley Lane (Ref: 20/01950/FUL) Change of use of the former White Lodge Nursing Home from a
care home to a single family dwelling.

Comment: Earlier in the year this property obtained planning
permission for a change of use to a 10 person HMO (19/05884/FUL). Subsequently a planning
application (20/01174/FUL) was submitted to demolish this and the next door property at 1
Woodcote Drive to construct 41 flats. This latter application has yet to be determined (we have
objected). Now we have an application to reconvert the property to a single family dwelling. Perhaps
an indication of how ‘soft’ the market for flats has become!!

172 Foxley Lane (Ref: 20/01830/FUL) Demolition of existing family home and erection of 9 flats (3 x 1
bed, 4 x 2 bed, 2 x 3 bed) in a 3 storey building, with 9 car parking spaces.

Comment: 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 resulting in inadequate
amenity space for potential occupiers, Design out of keeping with the locality and surrounding
townscape, as a result of its massing, form (incl height), and overall appearance, Detrimental to the
amenity of occupiers of adjoining properties, Inadequate car parking resulting in additional on street
parking, putting parking pressure on the surrounding area, and increased traffic movements greatly
endangering road safety.

14 Oakwood Road (Ref: 20/01625/FUL) Demolition of existing detached family house and erection of
20 flats (6 x 1 bed, 12 x 2 bed (of which 3 will be social housing), 2 x 3 bed) with 20 car parking
spaces (in a basement).

Comment: If reviewing the documentation for this application note there is
appears to be an error relating to car parking – the Application Form says 0 car parking, whereas the
plans show 20 car spaces (of which 2 are disabled spaces). 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 resulting in inadequate amenity space for potential occupiers,
Design totally out of keeping with the locality and surrounding townscape, as a result of its massing,
form (incl height), and overall appearance, Detrimental to the amenity of occupiers of adjoining
properties, Inadequate car parking resulting in additional on street parking, putting parking pressure
on the surrounding area, and increased traffic movements greatly endangering road safety.

31 Oakwood Avenue (Ref: 20/01763/FUL) Construction of two storey 4 bed house (with 2 car
parking spaces) on land at rear of 31 Oakwood Road which fronts on to Selcroft Road. Comment:
The garden of 31 Oakwood appears to extend through to Selcroft Road (between numbers 22 and 26

Selcroft Road). The proposal intends to use the portion of garden fronting Selcroft Road for a new 4
bed detached house. Propose a neutral stance.

11 Russell Hill (Ref: 20/02117/FUL) Demolition of existing family home erection of 8 flats (2 x 1 bed,
4 x 2 bed, 2 x 3 bed) with 8 car parking spaces. Comment: Notwithstanding the granted and the
already implemented planning consents for flats in Russell Hill, 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 resulting in inadequate amenity space for potential occupiers,
Design out of keeping with the locality and surrounding townscape, as a result of its massing, form
(incl height), and overall appearance, Detrimental to the amenity of occupiers of adjoining
properties, Inadequate car parking resulting in additional on street.

One Comment

  1. 126 Foxley Lane (20/01950FUL)

    I spoke to the applicant Andrew Hollins who is a planning consultant. He informed me that the owner is simply “hedging his bets” with this reconversion back to a family dwelling. He still intends to pursue the 41 flats application “with vigour” – a horribly out-of-character construction. Please object again if you have the chance

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *