APPEAL HEARING IS FEB 4th AT TANDRIDGE DISTRICT COUNCIL OFFICES AT 10.00 AM
NOTICE OF AN APPEAL HAS BEEN LODGED 7th OCTOBER 2009, AFTER THE INITIAL APPLICATION WAS REFUSED BY TANDRIDGE.
VISIT THE LINKS BELOW FOR DETAIL. WE WILL UPDATE THIS BLOG WITH ANY INFORMATION AS RECEIVED. THANK YOU EVERYONE.
Oct 11th.
Ref TA/2009/132
http://planning.tandridge.gov.uk/eaccess/Applicationsearch.asp
Formed by residents opposed to a planning application in Old Park Wood, Caterham.
Supported by the War Coppice Village Residents Association and others living nearby.
Archive:
The date for submitting an objection closed on Monday 3rd August. Many individual letters were received by Tandridge and you can see them on their web site. Ref TA/2009/132 at http://planning.tandridge.gov.uk/eaccess/Applicationsearch.asp
The letters make interesting reading and include some additional and important issues, over and above those listed earlier by this site
viz.
- Any removal of trees in the designated site may have an adverse impact on motorway noise that is transmitted to those in Harestone Valley area.
- Any change to the surface of the trackway and local run off from the site may channel additional "Storm" water into Harestone Valley, via the old trackway running towards Caterham School with an adverse effect.
A planning application has been received by Tandridge District Council, for a very large scale house and associated staff accomodation in land known as Ten Acre Shaw, which is part of Old Park Wood. It is in its own site of just over 35 acres ( 13.8 Hectares) of mixed woodland and old downland near View Point and is currently part of the attractive landscape enjoyed by many Caterham residents.
The following extract is from a letter from one of the affected local residents:
This is roughly to west of bridleway from View Point to Upper Harestone. The application TA/2009/132 can be seen at www.tandridge.gov.uk. This is for a very large house, stores, garages and staff accommodation.
The destruction to trees and disruption would be immense. The area would also appear to be fenced off so both public and wildlife will not be able to move freely as they do now.
Unfortunately Tandridge have written to just 4 households in the near vicinity and only just posted planning notices ( Approx 9/7/09)
The letters require objections to be received very shortly. (Now 3rd August09). News is only just seeping out and we were not one of those who received the letter
We are anxious no precedent is established in this vulnerable area and this plot and Old Park Wood do not come under pressure and perhaps be lost. It is within an area of high landscape value, part of the Green Belt and contributes greatly to the character of the area.
We urge you to write and object as individual letters will carry most weight.
A summary of relevant points is below, which could be included in letters to Tandridge, plus information contributed by different people that may be of general interest. A note sent to the Caterham Valley Parish Council asking for their support is attached, who are aware of the planning action and have promised a response.
A petition has been drafted and a version is available here for you to print off at top left of page. Some 150+ signatures have already been collected (3/8)
Co-ordination to be shared and details provided as they happen. We will add an ability to register an eMail address to be kept up to date, with any alerts about important new content.
A summary of relevant points is below, which could be included in letters to Tandridge, plus information contributed by different people that may be of general interest. A note sent to the Caterham Valley Parish Council asking for their support is attached, who are aware of the planning action and have promised a response.
A petition has been drafted and a version is available here for you to print off at top left of page. Some 150+ signatures have already been collected (3/8)
Co-ordination to be shared and details provided as they happen. We will add an ability to register an eMail address to be kept up to date, with any alerts about important new content.
Update Sunday 2nd August
Closing date for letters of objection is tomorrow August 3rd. You can do this on-line if you use the link below and enter planning application TA/2009/132
http://planning.tandridge.gov.uk/eaccess/Applicationsearch.asp
Various petitions have been submitted to Tandridge. We know of at least 150 signatures but anticipate that more have been collected.
Update Tuesday 21st July ( Amended on August 7th after learning that all statutory notification requirements had been complied with)
The Caterham Valley Parish Council met on Wednesday 15th July and heard representations on this issue.
Please now write with any objections to Tandridge Planning Dept by August 3rd.
The consolidated list below has issues to consider using in letters, which brings together earlier information about TA/2009/132 and include any additional ones of your own of course.
The date for responses has been deferred by 3 weeks to August 3rd. It was Monday 13th July but time is short to send a letter to raise issues and this will count higher than signatures on a petition, although that is worthwhile too.
Ref: TA/2009/132
Planning Dept
Tandridge District Council
Station Road East
Oxted
Surrey
RH8 0BT
Dear Sirs
1.As local residents, we would like to draw the District Council's attention to this application. There are already over 80 signatures on a petition objecting to the proposal since 9th July and others to come. As residents we enjoy the amenity of Old Park Wood and Ten Acre Shaw which are currently quite unspoilt parts of the local landscape.
2.The application suggests there has been consultation with local residents and groups. We have been unable to discover anybody who supports this assertion and the overall feedback is to oppose the application. The application also fails to disclose the Golf Course Application that was refused circa 1989.
3. A landowner over whose land access is required has stated he was unaware of the application, and objects.
4. This unusual planning application has been made in the Green Belt locally for a house which is quite out of scale with anything nearby.
5. It is in Green Belt and various other designations apply. We note that the application is for a major private residence, for the benefit of a very small number of potential residents. By allowing this, it would destroy an unspoilt part of the area and risk further incursions later if access and precedent is achieved. Some might see this as the first step in a coordinated plan to erode this parcel of Green Belt.
6. There are existing but unregistered footpaths used by the public that cross the site.
7. The house will be sited to benefit from views high up on the North Downs. It will therefore be visible from many places and despite the statements made in the planning application; it is of a size, scale and construction that will irreparably alter the landscape.
8. Access routes to the site will rely on a trackway, which is not currently used by vehicles. For construction and later access by residents, we are very concerned at what is proposed by way of upgrades to that under S106 or other provision and any change to potential traffic flow in a "no traffic" zone today.
9. Only 4 households have been notified of this. Planning notices went up on 9/7/09 so far as we are aware. On the other hand the proposal will affect the amenity of many.
10. The suggestion that consultation has occurred locally clearly has not been widespread; in fact nobody contacted who lives near the site is aware of any at all.
11. Accordingly we are alarmed at the extent of the impact of this development and although statutory requirements have been complied with, have taken the initiative to make information available as widely as possible. We contend that the building of such a house in green belt requires community wide debate. If PPS7 is to be the justification, we see no merit in either the house, its impact on the landscape, or the creation of access to fragile woodland.
12.We would contend that where green belt rules are to be changed or broken there should be a benefit to the community, but in this case the local amenity will be considerably damaged. The peace of The Viewpoint will be affected, traffic will emerge there in what is currently a wonderful focal point for walkers, and the habitat of the local deer, foxes, badgers and rabbits will be impacted.
* The North Downs Way will be compromised.
* A very pleasant bridal path will become a road and a traffic rat run may develop.
* Even if planning permission were to be granted there is an argument for making the access to the site come from the North West and leaving the current bridleway unaffected.
13. There is a considerable disbenefit to the community but on the other hand the applicant will gain considerable wealth by the awarding of planning permission and the conversion of presently low value land into an extremely high value building plot.
14. The impact is also extremely large for the sake of a single one family dwelling house, although the drawing would indicate that this could easily be converted to a hotel or clubhouse, in the future.
15. The point here is that if there is huge wealth to be created by the granting of planning permission process, then that wealth should go to the community, and so the applicant should be required to pay in some way the difference in value of the plot as it stands and the value when planning permission is granted. Not to consider this route is like handing the applicant a blank cheque.
16. CO2 consideration. To significantly impact 35 acres of prime woodland in what must be the lungs of London for the sake of building one dwelling for one family is just not consistent with responsible climate philosophy.
Despite statements that the house is ecologically advanced, it is clear large tracts of the site would be cleared, otherwise there would be little interest to buy a house in a densely wooded part of the Surrey Hills, without a significant open space and clearings to provide views of the vista from the site's elevated position.
Update Monday 13th July
These initial notes are from a short discussion of potential issues at the War Coppice Village Residents Association meeting on Sunday 12th, contributed by Sandy Patterson. We invite further comment via eMail or by posting a comment.
Second an eMail sent to the Caterham Valley Parish Council, prior to a meeting on Wednesday 15th, to ask for support and ensure they are aware of general concern, a lack of consultation and that a petition and letters of objection will follow.
1. Old Park Wood Issues
Points to consider in deciding action to be taken with Tandridge Planning Department.
1.The green belt is an amenity owned by the local society.
2.Landowners within the green belt must respect the associated rules.
3.It is not in the power of the local planning department to alter or ignore these rules.
4.Where changes of rules are being contemplated then these must be debated in a wider forum than the immediate neighbours, as people from a much wider area will be affected. In this case, consideration is being given to constructing a large private dwelling in the green belt, which is obviously contrary to the rules and will require zonal change.
Notice of this should require community wide notification and debate.
5.Because of the above, questions arise over what process the planning department should apply and whether it is currently acting either properly or in the interest of the community.
6.Where green belt rules are to be changed or broken there should be community benefit.
7.In this case local amenity will be considerably damaged. The solitude of The Viewpoint will be affected, traffic will emerge there in what is currently a wonderful focal point for walkers, and the habitat of the local deer, foxes, badgers and rabbits will be impacted.
The North Downs Way will be compromised.
A very pleasant bridal path will become a road and a traffic rat run may develop.
Even if planning permission is granted there is an argument for making the access to the site come from the North West and leaving the current bridleway unaffected.
8. So there is a considerable disbenefit to the community but on the other hand the applicant will gain considerable wealth by the awarding of planning permission and the conversion of presently low value land into an extremely high value building plot.
9. The impact is also extremely large for the sake of a single one family dwelling house, although the drawing would indicate that this could easily be converted to a hotel or clubhouse.
10. The point here is that if there is huge wealth to be created by the granting of planning permission process, then that wealth should go to the community, and so the applicant should be required to pay in some way the difference in value of the plot as it stands and the value when planning permission is granted. Not to consider this route is like handing the applicant a blank cheque.
11. There is a CO2 consideration here. To put 35 acres of prime woodland at risk, in what must be the lungs of London for the sake of building one dwelling for one family is just not consistent with responsible climate philosophy.
2. Email to Helen Hammer, Chair, Caterham Valley Parish Council. July 12th 2009.
Helen has confirmed the Parish Council are aware and will respond.
Dear Helen
You may be aware of an unusual planning application in the Green Belt locally.
News of it hit the local streets last week and since then there has been much activity. Fortunately one of just four local residents received a planning letter from Tandridge, with a closing date for response of Monday 13th July and passed information to a neighbour.
The application is in 35 acres of Old Park Wood. It is part of land owned by Jack and Peter Harris we understand, who attempted to gain permission in 1989 for a golf course, which was refused.
The current application is for a part of the site and for just one very large 1,800 Sq metre residence, under little used Green Belt provisions for "Exceptional" buildings. This is approximately 10 times the size of a normal 4-bed house.
http://planning.tandridge.gov.uk/eaccess/Applicationsearch.asp ( Ref is TA/2009/132)
As a local resident, I would like to draw the Parish Council's attention to this application. There are already over 50 signatures on a petition objecting to the proposal since last week and others to come. As residents we overlook Old Park Wood, which is currently a quite unspoilt part of the local landscape.
The application suggests there has been consultation with local residents and groups. We have been unable to discover anybody who supports this assertion and the overall feedback is to oppose the application. The application also fails to disclose the Golf Course Application that was refused.
A landowner over whose land access is required has stated he is unaware of the application.
I have assisted to coordinate information and created a web site for an emerging Action Group. The actual membership of that and how it will operate is yet to be decided but this note will hopefully signal that there are real concerns and that objections will come.
A formal letter from the War Coppice Village Residents Association, to which we belong, will follow to both Parish and to Tandridge District Council, once some further consultation occurs. Several people propose to attend the Parish Meeting on Wednesday. I may not be able to attend personally, however I have listed some issues that I would wish to raise.
I will write personally to Tandridge, once the action group has identified the issues it wishes to highlight.
1. An unusual planning application has been made in the Green Belt locally for a house which is quite out of scale with anything nearby
2. It is in Green Belt and various other designations apply. I cannot see that the application is for anything else than a major private residence, for the benefit of a very small number of potential residents. By allowing this, it would destroy an unspoilt part of the area and risk further incursions later if access and precedent is achieved. Some might see this as the first step in a coordinated plan to erode this parcel of Green Belt.
3. There are existing but unregistered footpaths used by the public that cross the site.
4. The house will be sited to benefit from views high up on the North Downs. It will therefore be visible from many places and despite the statements made in the planning application; it is of a size, scale and construction that will irreparably alter the landscape.
5. Access routes to the site will rely on a trackway, which is not currently used by vehicles. For construction and later access by residents, we are very concerned at what is proposed by way of upgrades to that under S106 or other provision and any change to potential traffic flow in a "no traffic" zone today.
6. Only 4 households have been notified of this. Planning notices went up on 9/7/09 so far as we are aware. On the other hand the proposal will affect the amenity of many.
7. The suggestion that consultation has occurred locally clearly has not been widespread; in fact nobody contacted who lives near the site is aware of any at all.
8. The date for responses has, it appears, been deferred by 3 weeks. It was Monday 13th July.
Regards
Chris Windridge
The web site being put together for an Action Group is here:
http://oldparkwood.blogspot.com/
