SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Shops & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors Adult Learning Lewisham


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (6): « First [1] 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »
14 Waldram Park Road
Author Message
robwinton


Posts: 335
Joined: Jun 2006
Post: #1
16-02-2008 02:22 PM

I received notice of a planning application for 14 Waldram Park Road today.

It wouldn't be anything of note normally except for two things:

1. They are converting one of the very last houses on this road into 9 (!) self-contained flats with only two car parking spaces

2. It is being carried out by the same people who I believe were responsible for the disaster on Church Rise where the unapproved basement works caused the entire building to collapse

You can see, and choose to comment, the application here

I think Snazzy might have something to say about this too

Find all posts by this user Reply
robwinton


Posts: 335
Joined: Jun 2006
Post: #2
16-02-2008 02:38 PM

In case you wondered which other building I was referring to, it was discussed here:

http://www.se23.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=364

Find all posts by this user Reply
Sandy67


Posts: 48
Joined: Dec 2007
Post: #3
16-02-2008 03:43 PM

so do they think if they provide cycle parking spaces instead of car parking it will make people decide to ditch the car in favour of a bike ???Unsure

i don't think so ... they'll just park the car in front of someone elses house Mad

Find all posts by this user Reply
ForestGump


Posts: 202
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #4
16-02-2008 05:27 PM

If it's the same people from Church Rise, their application is bound to collapse? Rolleyes

Find all posts by this user Reply
robwinton


Posts: 335
Joined: Jun 2006
Post: #5
16-02-2008 07:19 PM

ForestGump Wrote:
If it's the same people from Church Rise, their application is bound to collapse? Rolleyes


Rofl

Actually, not a laughing matter as I wouldn't trust them to get this one right either.

They want to build 3 stories on the side, plus excavate a basement. Would you trust them?

I also noticed the parking issue. 2 spaces for 9 flats that will probably therefore bring at least 9 cars into the area which will have to park on Church Rise. How long till this becomes chargeable too?

Find all posts by this user Reply
ForestGump


Posts: 202
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #6
16-02-2008 09:36 PM

There's an application were I live to convert a house where I live into flats (twice as many than any other conversion) it's just wrong for the size of property. I see they have the 1 'family' flat as required this type of application. Many developers are taking the mickey with the bike stands Another giveaway is mention of the recycle area and liveable roof.

I don't know if is on the back of the Lewisham regeneration but there are lots of these applications being made to cram as many into one property as possible.

The one near me has provision for two cars but they will block access to the bike stand and recycle bins, I guess some developers hope local people won't take an interest.

I used to know someone who lived in one of those houses, she was into reptiles and excotic birds....kept an aligator or crocidiale in a bath for a while.

Find all posts by this user Reply
the_emu


Posts: 10
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #7
19-02-2008 01:10 PM

I had not read the story about what happended to the building on church rise before, but reading it now it is making me so angry.

I can't believe that the council will actually accept another planning application from these people after they destroyed the previous house.

CursingCursingCursing

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #8
19-02-2008 04:03 PM

Cheers for the link Rob. Of serious concern to me too. These guys seem to be chomping through the last great houses of the area.
Interesting to see the same case manager from Lewisham seems to work on all their properties. Not sure if thats just standard practise.

Was really shocked to find that planning concent was given on the basement of 6 Church Rise, some 14 days after the building collapsed....... strange eh.

Either way, I would suggest to anyone in a position to be affected by this development to give it very careful consideration.

The open spaces and gardens of Church Rise and Waldram will be heavily affected, and of course there is the worry that this one might take a tumble too.

Find all posts by this user Reply
robwinton


Posts: 335
Joined: Jun 2006
Post: #9
19-02-2008 04:23 PM

The question is, how do we object in a way that is 'valid' in terms of the planning process. We can simply say we don't trust them. There needs to be a valid reason. I know there are others out there with greater expertise. Can anyone offer advice?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #10
19-02-2008 05:01 PM

robwinton Wrote:
The question is, how do we object in a way that is 'valid' in terms of the planning process. We can simply say we don't trust them. There needs to be a valid reason. I know there are others out there with greater expertise. Can anyone offer advice?


I am currently seeking proper advice on the grounds of an objection. If I get anything I will let you know.

Personally, the low provision of parking, the adjustments to the facia of the building, reduction of garden space, and change to the physical aspects of the building should be of sufficiant importance.

Find all posts by this user Reply
IWereAbsolutelyFuming


Posts: 531
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #11
20-02-2008 08:31 AM

robwinton Wrote:
The question is, how do we object in a way that is 'valid' in terms of the planning process. We can simply say we don't trust them. There needs to be a valid reason. I know there are others out there with greater expertise. Can anyone offer advice?


Unfortunately there is no quick and easy way to object. It is a bit perverse but you really need to know your way around a number of planning policies to write a really good objection. Take a look at the following URL, it might help focus your objections:

http://www.planning-applications.co.uk/objection.htm

There is some other useful stuff on that website which might help too, "rights to light" etc.

Find all posts by this user Reply
IWereAbsolutelyFuming


Posts: 531
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #12
20-02-2008 08:34 AM

p.s. I'm not sure there is much you can make of the developer's performance in Church Rise in your objection. I suspect they have numerous 'successful' developments to offset the problems they experienced/caused there. Still, might be worth including a one-liner saying you are "concerned about the developer's conduct during the Church Rise development".

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #13
20-02-2008 12:52 PM

Cant wait to see them attempt to copy the front elevation for the extension to the left of the front door.

How "original" can they make it?



Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   
Find all posts by this user Reply
IWereAbsolutelyFuming


Posts: 531
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #14
20-02-2008 01:10 PM

I'm sure someone here would have fun doctoring this from Earlsfield Estates:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2410/2073...aff8_o.jpg

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #15
20-02-2008 01:26 PM

I been trying to get on their site for ages!

Very well presented, shame about the workmanship

Find all posts by this user Reply
IWereAbsolutelyFuming


Posts: 531
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #16
20-02-2008 01:40 PM

Something maybe a bit more helpful for Rob...

I've been skipping through the Unitary Development Plan for Lewisham. The reason that these types of development of existing single houses get through the process is that Lewisham has committed to increasing the number of 'housing units' by 11,000-odd by 2016 (including a mix of types from those aimed at single people to families). But one area of the UDP that *might* help you is in Chapter 5 "Housing" and the Part II Policy HSG 8 Backland and In-fill Development. I cant believe that the proposed development would not contravene:

"(e) on a road where additional on-street parking would not be permitted the development would not worsen any (on-street) parking problems;"

I presume that Waldram Park Road, as part of the South Circular, does not allow on-street parking - the side road alongside the house might but the address is Waldram Park Road. 2 spaces for 9 units seems low but might be backed up by TRN 26 on Car Parking provision (which seems to call only for 1 space per 5 units in dwellings with more than 3 units - also some get-out clauses re: Sustainable Living Areas and public transport provision). Actually, this probably isn't much use in an objection after all but I'll post it as it might be interesting to those who wonder how these proposals get through...

Still might be worth making a point of it and that you dont believe that only two cars will be attracted to a site with no on-street parking that potentially houses 13 adults.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #17
20-02-2008 01:46 PM

IWereAbsolutelyFuming Wrote:
Something maybe a bit more helpful for Rob...

I've been skipping through the Unitary Development Plan for Lewisham. The reason that these types of development of existing single houses get through the process is that Lewisham has committed to increasing the number of 'housing units' by 11,000-odd by 2016 (including a mix of types from those aimed at single people to families). But one area of the UDP that *might* help you is in Chapter 5 "Housing" and the Part II Policy HSG 8 Backland and In-fill Development. I cant believe that the proposed development would not contravene:

"(e) on a road where additional on-street parking would not be permitted the development would not worsen any (on-street) parking problems;"

I presume that Waldram Park Road, as part of the South Circular, does not allow on-street parking - the side road alongside the house might but the address is Waldram Park Road. 2 spaces for 9 units seems low but might be backed up by TRN 26 on Car Parking provision (which seems to call only for 1 space per 5 units in dwellings with more than 3 units - also some get-out clauses re: Sustainable Living Areas and public transport provision). Actually, this probably isn't much use in an objection after all but I'll post it as it might be interesting to those who wonder how these proposals get through...

Still might be worth making a point of it and that you dont believe that only two cars will be attracted to a site with no on-street parking that potentially houses 13 adults.


Makes a good angle Smile
The whole road outside it red route, and I honestly dont think Church Rise can take much more parking, certainly not residential anyway.

It all adds up to serious concerns, in my opinon anyway.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #18
20-02-2008 05:49 PM

After speaking to someone who knows a little about the game he offered the following advice...

Quote:
Change (+ or -) in property or land values are not a material planning consideration and thus will not be taken into account.

Mud on the road would if it was to cause some danger but then the planning authority would likely just impose a condition requiring adequate wheel washing facilities for all vehicle leaving the site. In building anything there is always noise, dust and disruption and for that reason the planning process tends not to get involved in such matters except in extreme cases where its likely amenity would be severely harmed for an extended period of time - even then I can't recall permission ever being refused on the grounds of such construction disruption alone. It's more likely conditions would be imposed to govern the construction process, methods and times.

The planning authority is statutorily required to determine all planning applications in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan is usually comprised of a local and regional based plan with the local plan being more relevant to matters of single house developments and extensions. The policies in local plans will vary from council to council so I cannot offer specific comments on this development relative to the policies of Lewisham.

However, in general I see a 3-story house that is being sympathetically extended in a manner that captures an opportunity to create a pleasing symmetry. The existing height and period features of the house appear to be retained and the extension doesn't appear to make it overly disproportionate or bulky. Furthermore, the basement extension has little impact on the external appearance of the property. It would appear that the building is arranged in a row with it's neighbouring properties (16...and I assume 12) and thus the extension would not give rise to harmful overlooking or overshadowing. In short I'd be surprised if this type of extension, which in terms of its size and design to compliment the existing building is very common, would be refused. Matters of parking and plot ratio's may be a consideration though but these are very council specific.

I realize that as this is happening next door to you it's a lot harder to be so accepting. It no doubt appears as a monstrosity that will ruin your life and the value of your home. However, I'm simply stating as an outsider that my first impression is of a fairly sympathetic proposal that doesn't appear to throw up too many planning issues. The best you can do is to put your concerns with the proposal in writing and submit that representation to the Council before the cut off date. Try to be as clear and concise as possible in your letter and don't get too hung up on issues of value, disruption, etc as these things are not going to be considered.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #19
23-02-2008 05:14 PM

Quick question for those in the know...

The planning application notice (yellow paper) which HAS to be posted at the premises... Where should it be?

After weeks without one, the have finally posted it, right next to the front door!!!
Surely it should be on the land on the perimeter of the property where people can see it, and read it without feeling they are trespassing or feeling intimidated.

Find all posts by this user Reply
IWereAbsolutelyFuming


Posts: 531
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #20
24-02-2008 10:47 PM

Snazy Wrote:
Quick question for those in the know...

The planning application notice (yellow paper) which HAS to be posted at the premises... Where should it be?

After weeks without one, the have finally posted it, right next to the front door!!!
Surely it should be on the land on the perimeter of the property where people can see it, and read it without feeling they are trespassing or feeling intimidated.


Not all planning applications are legally required to be advertised by a site notice. Site Notices are required for the following:-

* Applications with Environmental Statement
* Departures from the Development Plan ? Where the Council are minded to approve the application.
* Applications that affect a right of way as defined by the Wildlife and Countryside Act.
* Development affecting the character or appearance of a Conservation Area
* Development affecting the setting of a Listed Building
* Applications for Listed Building Consent or Conservation Area Consent.
* Major development;
-Residential: more than 10 dwellings or sites over .5ha.
-More than 1000 sq.m. of floorspace
-Sites greater than 1ha
-Mineral applications
-Waste Applications [art8(4)]

When one is displayed it is supposed to be "readable by the passing public" but I don't think there is much more detail to that rule so people tend to be quite creative with it.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (6): « First [1] 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Waldram Park Road closed due to fatal accident hillview 1 2,403 26-11-2017 11:52 AM
Last Post: hillview
  Leak on corner of Waldram Crescent and Devonshire Road Jon Lloyd 5 3,608 14-04-2008 06:49 AM
Last Post: admin