Forum Topic

Demolition of  68 Perryn Road

The council have apparently nodded through permission to demolish one of the finest houses in Perryn Road.  This has only just come to light, even the owners of the adjacent properties were not consulted.  There is a token "drive by" inspection of the property by the planning department at 12.30 pm tomorrow - Saturday.  Anyone interested in showing support will be welcome to come and shake a fist at the council planners!  Councillor Kate Crawford will be in attendance.

Kathleen Chapple ● 5845d16 Comments

According to Ealing planning services, the owners of adjacent properties were consulted. See the list at:http://www.pam.ealing.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=124978Were the notices not sent out?

Ian M Green ● 5845d

According to an immediate neighbour the letters were only sent after the decision had been taken to demolish.

Kathleen Chapple ● 5845d

Why do they want to do this? Is it to extend Pridaux Place straight through into Perryn Road?

David Wright ● 5845d

From the link I posted: "Construction of part single storey part two storey dwelling-house with living accommodation at roof level (following the demolition of the existing property), summer house/storage in rear garden and front boundary wall/railings: provision of off car parking for two vehicles".Also, if you click on the "Click here" hyperlink on that page, you will find 29 documents for your delectation. Enjoy!

Ian M Green ● 5845d

i smell a rat. i tried to purchase this property and time and again was fobbed off. appointments were made and cancelled at the last minute. i didnt even get a chance to make an offer.this went on for months. then in a blink of an eye, property sold, planning to demolish granted.how very convenient.

peter savick ● 5845d

No decision has yet been made, the application will be considered at the Planning Aps meeting on 22/9.Planning officers recommend approval. They consider the proposed demolition and new build acceptable in planning terms.I have not studied the plans so have no view but there is no reason why someone should not develop the site, it is not in a conservation area.Why the 'smell a rat' comment and instant objection to change. There have been 23 comments on the proposal so consultation must have taken place.You can see the Planning report at http://www.ealing.gov.uk/services/council/committees/agendas_minutes_reports/regulatory_committees/planning_committee/25may2010-23may2011.htmlThe pdf is a site plan.

Iain Muir ● 5845d

There's an interesting case on the Putney forum.  House in a conservation area. Planning permission to demolish a side extension.  The entire house has been demolished.Thread is now almost 200 replies.  Suspicions and accusations.   8 Lower Common South -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -    -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -      West Putney Ward CouncillorSteffi SUTTERS (Conservative)Committees - Education and Children's Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Planning Applications Committee-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -    -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -        Topic: :Re:Re:Re:Goings on at 8 Lower Common South Forum HomePosted by: Steffi SuttersDate/Time: 06/06/10 11:55:00My  husband’s practice were retained to obtain  planning consent  and to produce building control drawings for 8 Lower Common South but were not retained as architects for site works.  We played no part in the decision to totally demolish the house  and  only found out what had happened  ourselves last week.  I can therefore add little to this thread.   

Fred Bray ● 5845d

Fred, thanks for the link, I read most of the thread, enough to learn that LB Wandsworth Planners/Councillors are outmanovered by developers and perhaps Ealing are not as bad as some thought. To summarise, house in conservation area demolished without consent, many months later plans for replacement house approved with no penalty to owner!. Extra excitement as tory councillor (on planning committee) has architect husband involved 'at some early stage' with the property. Deserves to be in Private Eye and possibly has been!Illustrates that the problem is mainly with planning law rather than borough inaction, I think....

Iain Muir ● 5845d

If someone is interested in a property but does not get to make an offer, and then someone else buys the property, I think he has a right to feel something is wrong.  I had a slightly similar experience, viewed a property with an agent who took time to draw my attention to only the bad points of the flat, to the point that I felt something was odd.  Some months later we learned that his girlfriend who also worked for the agents had purchased the flat.

Maggie Dodge ● 5844d

The planning committee of Ealing council stopped at 68 Perryn Road only after Councillor Kate Crawford instisted that they did, otherwise it would have been a straight drive past.  The Committee spent approximately 40 minutes talking to local residents and viewing the property from the rear via the next door neighbour (many thanks for allowing 20+ people through her house).  I hope all this effort will result in the planning committee rejecting their officers' decision to allow demolition and rebuilding.

Kathleen Chapple ● 5843d

On what grounds, as a matter of (purely academic) interest?

Ian M Green ● 5843d

Is sheer bloody mindedness one of the categories?????  I do hope so.

Kathleen Chapple ● 5843d

Its being done as tax loophole scam.Beacause of this, a perfectly fine house is being knocked down with all the disruption that causes to local residents.Yes mr green, all that to make a quick buck.There is a tax incentive to KNOCK IT DOWN its as simple as that.Should the same fate present it itself on you're doorstep hope that caring people will come to you're aid.

peter savick ● 5843d

Can you explain how this loophole works?I can see that demolition costs can be offset and that vat savings are made on new build but you must be thinking of something more......

Iain Muir ● 5842d

I Googled :-demolish house vat  buildSo, . . .  rebuild bigger a larger house, perhaps include underground swimming pool/s,  reception area/s, snooker room etc. £ £ £ £Try doing that with plasterboard and polyfilla!Alright for some  :o(

Fred Bray ● 5842d

The supposed loophole is still not explained, unless the house was in such bad condition that it would cost a fortune to repair, which seems unlikely.

Ian M Green ● 5842d