Saturday, August 18, 2007

A Back Garden Too Far

I'm sitting in front of my PC doing some last jobs before I escape the downpour that has just started by going to Spain for a fortnight. Blogging will be off the menu for a while.

In the meantime, I look out of my office window to enjoy the view (thanks to digital photography, you can too.) But I wonder for how much longer will I be able to look out on an unspoilt green oasis. A planning application has just been submitted to build four 3-bed houses in the long narrow parcel of land between the gardens of my neighbours in Salisbury Road and those in Carshalton Park Road. If passed, there will be a 7.5m brick wall just to the right of my garage shown in the photo. Fortunately the plans are somewhat optimistic since they show an access road passing straight through my garage. Suffice to say, I won't be allowing any demolition work.

I hope that neighbours will send their opinions to the Council saying enough is enough. 41% of 'brownfield' development in Sutton is in fact on garden land, well above the national average. This proposal is the thin end of the wedge. Access is poor, irreversible damage will occur to the ecological balance of the area (I have had stag beetles, herons, woodpeckers and jays in and around the garden in recent years) and around 30 householders will be adversely affected. If any local resident is so minded to write, the planning reference is C2007/58001/OUT. You can write to London Borough of Sutton, 24 Denmark Road, Carshalton, SM5 2JG or comment directly here.

12 comments:

David said...

Enjoy Espana and, hopefully, you wont find a Mobile Phone Mast in your back garden one day as well!

Anonymous said...

you never know with these libdems

Edmund said...

I question whether you should be using your public blog to highlight a planning application in your back yard.

Nimby?

timmo said...

Well if you cant use your own blog for that what can you use it for???
I suppose if Paul was selling up his backgarden the cry from Edmund would be "profiteer" or "hypocrite"
Edmund what is your blod site??

timmo said...

Apologies i meant Blog site Edmund

Hand of History said...

Edmund,
Since this so called "public blog" is not paid for by the taxpayer, I sincerely hope that Paul will use it for whatever purpose he thinks fit.
So many blogs these days are government spin disguised as blogs and at our expense.
This blog doesn't cost me a penny and I appreciate the views that are expressed.
Garden grabbing will soon destroy this borough, but I suppose the council likes to pack in as many council tax payers as it can, in order to squander even more money on non-jobs.

Sean Ludlow-Harris said...

What a remarkably puerile comment from 'Edmund'; not to mention the classic and overused 'nimby' name calling.

Tell me 'Edmund' would you want one of these developments in YOUR back garden, and uhm... another point: don't you give a monkeys about the fact that 41% of development is in back garden land???

Nope probably not, seeing as your comments are more for a narrow minded political side swipe.

Scully's blog can be used however he sees fit and hadn't it occured to you that you wouldn't be able to make those comments without the beneficence of this forum?

scully on holiday said...

edmund, there are 32 houses that back onto the proposed development and access road. this equates to maybe 128 people affected by the plan.

as the rules stand, I am not even allowed in the room when the application is discussed so I am at a disadvantage to every other resident. my objection to this proposal is not at odds with conservative national policy, group policy or my own long held principles against inappropriate back garden development. this is a matter of not in anyone's back yard.

Edmund said...

Cllr Scully - fully accept your point. Mr Ludlow-Harris - I am against this sort of development and will back any councillor who votes against it. Just wondered whether Cllr Scully should have used this medium to highlight it.

Hand of History said...

Edmund,
Specifically what are your reasons for questioning the use of a blog to cover such issues?

Sean Ludlow-Harris said...

Edmund,

In that case I am pleased to hear that. Scully has a very clear and consistent line on this and his record is clear and that of his Tory council colleagues.

If you're true to your word, and I have no reason to doubt it, you should back Scully and Sutton council Conservatives.

All I can say is that the positive and effective message from the Tories on the council has not gone unnoticed and I'm relieved someone is socking it to this useless Libdem ruling council. If they were really true to their word why is this borough being wrecked by the developers? It's vritually impossible to see a part of Sutton which isn't being morphed by development.

If so I'm a NIMBY - NOT IN MY BOROUGH YEAH?

spiceboy said...

Maybe Cllr Scully should hire a plane and drape a banner from the back to highlight this issue instead of using his blog.....Ah no good what about the carbon footprint...
Will try and come up with a better medium