Planning Report – May 2019

Applications

New
Ongoing

Planning Complaints

Additional Matters

14-16 Woodmere Close – Ref: 19/01484/FUL
Erection of 1 two storey dwelling located to rear of No’s 14 and 16 Woodmere Close
New application in the rear gardens of 14 & 16 Woodmere Close adding to the new estate at the back gardens of Woodmere Close. This would be the last one in this series. It is likely to meet all planning policies as all previous applications for this site has met planning policies.

Consultation closes: 31st May 2019
Target Decision: 2nd Jul 2019
• Total Consulted: 28
• Objections: 5
• Supporting: 0

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

Pegasus (18a) Fairhaven Avenue – Ref: 19/01761/FUL
Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of a 3-storey block, containing 2 x 3 bedroom, 6 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 1-bedroom apartments with associated access, 9 parking spaces, cycle storage and refuse store.
Although the proposed development presented is architecturally acceptable, the proposal fails on a number of design requirement Planning Policies which are unacceptable for future occupants for the life of the development.

We objected on grounds of over-development and non-compliance to the London Plan Policy 3.4. The proposed development does not fully meet the minimum space standards as required by the London Plan Policy 3.5. The width of the access drive is unacceptable and fails to meet the requirements of SPD2 guidance.

We also objected to this proposed development on grounds of inadequate parking provision and non-compliance to the London Plan Policy 6.13 and London Plan Policy 6.11. We objected to the proposed development on grounds that it does not meet the 45° Rule on height as measured from the adjacent dwelling ground floor window as required by the recently adopted Supplementary Planning Document SPD2. We objected to this proposed development on significant issues relating to Refuse Storage facilities on grounds that it does NOT fully meet the requirements of Policy DM13.1, DM13.2 on Refuse and Recycling or requirement of BS 5906:2005.

MORA Objection sent: 8th May 2019
Consultation closes: 17th May 2019
Target Decision: 7th Jun 2019
• Total Consulted: 10
• Objections: 20
• Supporting: 0
Councillor Referral: Councillor Richard Chatterjee (23rd May 2019)

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

Sandrock Pub – Ref: 19/01134/FUL
Erection of two storey side/rear extension to The Sandrock Public House and use of first floor as 1 x two bedroom flat for staff accommodation. Erection of a three/four storey building to rear of pub comprising 19 flats (7 x one bedroom, 6 x two bedroom and 6 x three- bedroom flats) with associated car parking, cycle and refuse storage and landscaping.

We objected on the grounds that the proposal is an over-development for the area, which compromises the London Plan Policy 3.4.

The proposed development’s massing and height do not reflect the local character and roof forms of the surrounding locality and does not comply fully with minimum spaces standards for new dwellings or fully comply with the required amenity space standards.

The development does NOT meet the Strategic Policy DM1, and is non-compliant to Croydon Plan Policy DM1. The development is non-compliant to the Croydon Plan Design and Character policies of DM10 and is non-compliant to Policy DM10.4 e).

The proposal’s Refuse Storage facilities do not meet the required capacities for refuse bins and does not give adequate manoeuvrability space for operatives to access and remove refuse and recycling bins safely. The proposal has insufficient car parking space, and there would be major overlooking and invasion of privacy to the occupants of neighbouring properties.

MORA Objection sent: 24th Apr 2019
Consultation closes: 10th May 2019 – Extended to 31st May 2019
Target Decision: 16th Jul 2019
• Total Consulted: 82
• Objections: 151
• Supporting: 0
Councillor Referral: Councillor Jason Cummings (15th May 2019)

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

17 Orchard Avenue – Ref: 19/00131/FUL
Demolition of existing detached house, erection of 2- storey building with further floor of accommodation in roof-space comprising 1 x 1 bedroom flat, 3 x 2-bedroom flats and 1 x 3 bedroom flat, formation of vehicular access and provision of 4 associated parking spaces and refuse storage.


We objected on the grounds that the proposal does not meet London Plan Policy 3.5 minimum space standards for new dwellings and is non-compliant to Policy DM10.4 Private Amenity Space.

SPD2 Para 2.29 requires Height of projection of neighbouring properties should be no greater than 45° as measured from the Centre of the closest habitable room on the rear of the neighbouring property. The projected 45° line is not clear of the proposed structure and thus fails the Policy SPD2 45° Rule.

We also objected to this proposal on the grounds that it does NOT meet the requirements of Policy DM13 or Council Guidance on Refuse & Recycling for New Developments.

The proposal is non-compliant to Policy: Shirley Place Homes para 11.200 & Character, Heritage and Design para 11.202, and the policy Shirley Place Transport para 11.205 has NOT been fulfilled.

MORA Objection sent: 3rd Apr 2019
Consultation closed: 10th Apr 2019
Target Decision: 5th May 2019
• Total Consulted: 33
• Objections: 8
• Supporting: 1
Councillor referral: Councillor Richard Chatterjee (16th Apr 2019)

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

56 Woodmere Avenue – Ref: 19/01352/FUL
Demolition of a single-family dwelling and erection of a 3- storey block containing 2 x 3-bedroom, 6 x 2-bedroom and 1 x 1-bedroom apartments with associated access, 7 parking spaces, cycle storage and refuse store.

We objected on grounds of over-development and non-compliance to the current adopted London Plan Policy 3.4 Optimising Housing Potential due to excessive Residential Density and excessive Housing Density.

The proposed dwelling does not fully meet the required minimum space standards as required by the current adopted London Plan Policy 3.5, on grounds of inadequate parking provision and non-compliance to the London Plan Policy 6.13 and London Plan Policy 6.11.

We also objected on grounds of non-compliance to Croydon Plan Policy DM10.1 and Para 6.37, and that it does not meet the requirements of Policy DM13 or Council Guidance on Refuse & Recycling for New Developments as published by Croydon Council with regard to Refuse Storage Area Capacity. It is also non-compliant to Policy: Shirley Place Homes para 11.200 & Character, Heritage and Design para 11.202.

MORA Objection sent: 8th Apr 2019
MORA Objection (Amended Drawings) sent: 2nd Jun 2019
Consultation Closes: 18th Apr 2019 - Extended to 13th Jun 2019
Target Decision: 15th May 2019
• Total Consulted: 33
• Objections: 28
• Supporting: 0
Councillor referral: Councillor Richard Chatterjee (23rd Apr 2019)

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

32 Woodmere Avenue – Ref: 19/00783/FUL
Demolition of the existing property and the erection of a replacement detached two storey building with accommodation in the roof-space, comprising 7 self-contained flats (2 x 1 bedroom, 3 x 2 bedroom and 2 x 3 bedroom) with 5 off street car parking spaces, bike store, integrated refuse store and site access.


Although the proposed development presented is architecturally acceptable the proposal fails on a number of design requirement Planning Policies which results in an overdevelopment of the proposal for the locality and would not provide acceptable living conditions for future occupants. We therefore objected to this proposed development on grounds of over-development and non-compliant to the current adopted London Plan Policy 3.4 Optimising Housing Potential due to excessive Residential Density of 350hr/ha and excessive Housing Density 116.67 u/ha at a locality of PTAL 1a. without justification.

MORA Objection sent: 14th Mar 2019
MORA Objection (Amended Drawings) sent: 28th May 2019
Consultation Close: 24th Mar 2019 – Extended to 30th May 2019
Target Decision: 16th Apr 2019
• Total Consulted: 42
• Objections: 25
• Supporting: 0
Councillor referral: Councillor Richard Chatterjee (29th Mar 2019)

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

9a Orchard Rise – Ref: 18/06070/FUL
Demolition of the existing house and office and erection of a two-storey apartment block comprising 4 two-bedroom apartments and 5 three-storey three- bedroom houses, together with associated access and parking.

We objected on grounds of non-compliance with Policy DM25 a) as surface run-off is not adequately managed at the source as required by the policy.

We also objected on grounds of it being inappropriate for the location and Non-Compliant to London Plan Policy 3.5 which requires a presumption against back garden development. London Plan Table 3.3 Minimum Space Standards for new dwellings, storage space; London Plan Policy 7.4 Local Character; Croydon Local Plan Policy DM10 – Design and Character at Policy DM10.1, DM10.2, DM10.5 and DM10.8. Also, on non-compliant to Croydon Local Plan Policies DM13 – Refuse & Recycling at DM13.1 & DM13.2; Policy DM23 – Development and Construction; DM25 – Sustainable Drainage Systems and Reducing Flood Risk and DM27 – Protecting and enhancing our biodiversity. The proposed development has inadequate Fire Precautions as Fire Tenders could not gain access to the site. The proposal Lacks an Ecological and Wildlife Assessment Survey.

MORA Objection sent: 10th Jan 2019
MORA Objection Addendum sent: 25th Jan 2019
Consultation Closed: 30th Jan 2019
• Total Consulted: 59
• Objections: 42
• Supporting: 0
Councillor referrals: Councillor Sue Bennett  (25th Jan 2019) & Councillor Richard Chatterjee (25th Jan 2019)
Case Officer Report recommends: Grant Approval
Planning Committee Slot: 21st Mar 2019
Permission Granted: 21st Mar 2019

MORA Stage 1 Complaint (28th Mar 2019) relevant Planning Policies contained in the emerging Supplementary Planning Guidance at Suburban Residential Development SPD2 were NOT adequately considered in the determination of this planning application (Case Number: 4939913).
Stage 1 Response (24th Apr 2019) from Pete Smith, Head of Development Management.
MORA Stage 2 Complaint (1st May 2019)
Stage 2 Response (23rd May 2019) from Shifa Mustafa, Executive Director of Place.
Escalation to the Local Government Ombudsman (4th Jun 2019)

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

20-22 The Glade – Ref: 18/05928/FUL
Erection of 2 x three bed semi-detached dwellings with associated access and pa
rking. Formation of parking areas for 20 & 22 The Glade.


From the development proposal parameters, it can be seen that the Residential Density of the proposed development of the 2 dwellings on the partitioned site rear garden area of approximately 0.037ha (Google Earth Estimate) is ≈ 270.27 hr/ha (habitable Rooms per hectare) which requires a PTAL of between 4 to 6 of the London Plan SQR Density Matrix. If the ranges of PTAL and Density given in the Density Matrix are considered approximately linear over the ranges, they follow the function=mx+c where y= Residential Density, x = PTAL, m=slope (Δy/Δx) and c=y when x=0.

Then: 270.27=75x-100 where x = PTAL = 4.94 i.e. approaching 5 when it should rightfully be 1 or precisely 1a (a numerical equivalent of 0.66). Therefore, the development would be non-compliant to the London Plan Policy 3.4 and would require an increase in Public Transport for this location (which is not planned), without which would cause passenger congestion or greater use of alternative modes of transport which could involve more car journeys (which should be avoided).

The proposed development would be non-compliant to the Croydon Local Plan Policy DM10.4 e) which states: development within the curtilage of an existing dwelling should allow the retained garden after partitioning to have “a minimum length of 10m and no less than half the original or 200m2(whichever is the smaller) of the existing garden area (to be) retained for the host property, after the subdivision of the garden.”

It can be seen from the offered plans, that the retained garden area for no.22 The Glade does NOT meet this requirement.

It is estimated that the Area is approximately 120m2. This therefore does NOT meet the DM10.4 e) required minimum retained garden area of 200m2and is non-compliant to policy DM10.4 e) on garden developments for a retained minimal length of 10m throughout the rear garden width. Also the Boundary fence with No 20 is exactly 10m but the garden is tapered to less that 10m across the width so actually the garden is never 10m deep.

We therefore Objected to this development proposal on the grounds of being non-compliant to the current adopted London Plan Policy 3.4 Optimising housing potential, with respect to Residential Density at PTAL 1a and being non-compliant to the Croydon Local Plan Policy DM10.4e relating to garden development by NOT meeting the required minimum area of 200m2 and that the policy requirement of a minimal length of 10m throughout the width of the retained garden area of the host property at 22 The Glade.

The planning officers  believe that as The London Plan has possibly dispensed with the Density Matrix, they can ignore local density issues – Not realising that there is more to the New London Plan in replacing Policy 3.4 with Policy D6, D2 & D1.

MORA Objection sent: 4th Jan 2019
Consultation closed: 6th Jan 2019
Target Decision: 1st Feb 2019
• Total Consulted: 18
• Objections: 11
• Supporting: 0
Permission Granted: 1st Feb 2019

MORA Stage 1 Complaint (14th Feb 2019) against approval as Non-Compliant on Residential Densities and Back Garden Development Policies (Case Number: 4893951).
Stage 1 Response (5th Mar 2019) from Pete Smith, Head of Development Management.
MORA Stage 2 Complaint (14th Mar 2019)
Stage 2 Response (9th Apr 2019) from Shifa Mustafa, Executive Director of Place.
Escalation to the Local Government Ombudsman (14th Apr 2019) Case ID Number 19 000 971
Local Government Ombudsman Response (24th May 2019) from Chris Upjohn Investigator, Assessment Team
MORA Response to Local Government Ombudsman (2nd Jun 2019)
Local Government Ombudsman Response (3rd Jun 2019) from Chris Upjohn Investigator, Assessment Team

Questions to The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan (16th May 2019)
I have requested Steve O’Connell (GLA Member Croydon & Sutton) to raise the following questions to the London Mayor at the next London Mayor’s Question Time and I understand they have been presented (on 29th Apr 2019) to be added to the list of questions to the Mayor’s Question Time scheduled for 16th May 2019 (10:00am).

My list of questions begin on page 40 of the Agenda – published a week before the meeting (9th May 2019)

Listed Questions not asked during Mayor’s Question Time will be given a written response by Tuesday 21 May 2019.

Further developments are in the June 2019 Planning Report.

Shirley Planning Forum Meeting
An emergency Shirley Planning Forum (SPF) Meeting was held on 2nd April 2019.

The objective was to put pressure on Council Officers to engage with the SPF for the preparation of CLP3.

I submitted two comprehensive documents detailing issues and clarifications required of CLP2 to be considered in the production of CLP3 – One for the Main Policies and the second for DM45 “The Shirley Place.”

Councillor Gareth Streeter was asked to engage with Officers to obtain current status of CLP3 and provide the Shirley Planning Forum with details of any proposed changes from CLP2 to CLP3 and also enquire why there has been no progress on community engagement.

The Shirley Planning Forum has proposed that they engage with the Spatial Planning Team to assist with the evolution of CLP3 and specifically policies which affect “The Shirley Place” and any related Planning Policies.

If we feel that our involvement is not being honoured or adequately fulfilled, we have the option of reverting to producing a Shirley Neighbourhood Plan.

Email received from Steve Dennington (2nd May 2019) Head of Spatial Management Team:

Turning to engagement, the Local Plan Review is an iterative process and includes engagement, although bound by tight deadlines and the resource available. Residents’ Associations (including the Shirley Planning Forum as a group of Residents’ Associations) are one of a number of stakeholders to be included in the development of the Local Plan Review. Alongside other stakeholder engagement, Residents’ Association meetings based on previous north and south meetings are planned (at a point to be confirmed during May to July 2019) to explain what early evidence base assembling is suggesting, changes emerging as part of the Local Plan Review, progress against the LDS, the opportunity to comment at this initial stage and how to engage in the formal consultation in October 2019. Other relevant topic meetings may be used to inform the Local Plan Review. In addition to the above and as part of evidence base assembly, Residents’ Associations in the coming months (likely to be May / June) will be engaged through the Local Green Space Call for Sites and Development Site Call for Sites.

Notwithstanding the above, the Forum remain aware of the opportunity to develop a Neighbourhood Plan for the Shirley Forum area / Shirley Local Plan Place, which would provide the opportunity to directly plan for future growth of the Shirley Forum area / Shirley Local Plan Place.

We need to either be part of the “evidence gathering activity” or we should start in earnest on a Shirley Neighbourhood Plan.

The timetable program of production of CLP3 is set out below:

Evidence gathering: Autumn 2018 – Summer 2019
Preferred and alternative options: Autumn 2019
Proposed submission: Autumn 2020
Submission: Winter 2021
Examination: Spring 2021
Adoption: January 2022

 

DEREK RITSON
MORA Planning

< April 2019 Planning Report June 2019 Planning Report >