Jump to content

Recommended Posts

local estate agent Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yeah, the trees are coming down....



do you know where the gym driveway will be on that picture? My guess is that it would in the large gap between the houses in Talbot Road, where the white rectangle is currently parked.

Ratty according to the planning appeal (which looks like it has been given)


"It is clear from this that existing trees on the appeal site are mostly not ideal specimens and that some are in a poor state of health. Only a few trees are in reasonable condition. I am informed that the Council had decided not to confirm a Tree Preservation Order on the sit."


See p2 of the doc in the link


http://planningonline.southwarksites.com/planningonline2/DocsOnline/Documents/24873_1.pdf

interesting. The report notes that 'no habitat or ecological study has been provided by the council'.


There are definitely bats living in the greenery around abbotswood road - I've seen them flying through my garden. I don't know if the species if protected, but if it is and there are nesting sites in the trees, then this planning application should not have been approved.


I can provide contact details for a biologist with experience in such matters should anyone wish to PM me. She has dealt with a very similar issue in North London, where a developer wanted to build on a site occupied by a protected bat species.

they do nest in trees (especially in old trees of "poor condition", which are full of holes and hollows). However, it might be too late now, according to the website below:


"Once planning permission has been granted it is unlikely that the presence of bats will stop a development in progress. However if there are good reasons to believe bats are being affected by a development then English Nature should be notified, as there may be grounds for delaying or modifying the project, as the necessary licences and permissions will still have to be obtained. In extreme cases where roost destruction is imminent and if there is tangible evidence that bats are being harmed, the police should be called. Theoretically, even if a council and developer have gone through the above procedures, it may be possible to launch a judicial review to determine whether or not a DEFRA licence has met all three of the necessary conditions. Similarly if councils have failed to take sufficient account of protected species in determining applications there may be grounds for an appeal or complaint to the local government ombudsman."


http://www.surreybats.org.uk/planning.htm

http://planningonline.southwarksites.com/planningonline2/DocsOnline/Documents/17507_1.pdf


According the Habitat and Environment study (commissioned I think on behalf of the devloper) - there aint no bats!


See page 11 in the linked document above


"The trees on site appeared to offer no opporunities for roosting bats"


All the docs for the application can be viewed here:


http://planningonline.southwarksites.com/planningonline2/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeDocs&TheSystemkey=9525284

the surveyor saw no evidence of bat roosts, but I've definitely seen them flying at dusk. It would be easy enough for residents to commission a bat survey from english nature or some other independent body if they wanted to throw a spanner in the works.
This actually seems like a strange place for a gym, since it's a little off the beaten track. Most gyms are on main roads, so they don't have to worry too much about advertising, but I suppose word of mouth (forum) is a powerful medium...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
    • Exactly - a snap election will make things even worse. Jazzer - say you get a 'new' administration tomorrow, you're still left with the same treasury, the same civil servants, the same OBR, the same think-tanks and advisors (many labour advisors are cross-party, Gauke for eg). The options are the same, no matter who's in power. Labour hasn't even changed the Tories' fiscal rules - the parties are virtually economically aligned these days.  But Reeves made a mistake in trying too hard, too early to make some seismic changes in her first budget as a big 'we're here and we're going to fix this mess, Labour to the rescue' kind of thing . They shone such a big light on the black hole that their only option was to try to fix it overnight. It was a comms clusterfuck.  They'd perhaps have done better sticking to Sunak's quiet, cautious approach, but they knew the gullible public was expecting an 24-hour turnaround miracle.  The NIC hikes are a disaster, I think they'll be reversed soon and enough and they'll keep trying till they find something that sticks.   
    • Totally agree with you.  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...