Last week, Cllr Ola Kolade and I attended a Planning Inspectorate Inquiry at Croydon Town Hall, where an Inspector considered an appeal against Croydon Council’s refusal of an application for the formation of a private way through woodland off Longwood Road/Hawkhirst Road in Kenley.
The application seeks permission under Formation of private way pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 6 Agricultural and Forestry, Class E - Forestry Development of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015. The documents relating to the application and appeal can be viewed on Croydon’s Planning Register by searching for 25/02896/GPDO.
Following the Council’s refusal of the application, the applicant appealed to the Planning Inspectorate. The Inspector will now consider the evidence submitted through the Inquiry before deciding whether the appeal should be allowed.
We joined local residents, including Hawkhirst Environment Protection Action and Hawkhirst Road Limited at the Inquiry They raised serious concerns about the application and its impact and had previously submitted an in-depth response to both the council and the Planning Inspectorate.
Concerns raised by local representatives
Ola and I both attended the hearing to represent residents’ concerns. Our MP, Chris Philp, also raised concerns with the Inspector, and we submitted his representations as part of the evidence considered at the hearing.
Chris Philp confirmed his support for the reasons given by the Council for refusing the application. These included concerns that, because of the Article 4 Direction in place, planning permission is required for the proposed access construction arrangements; that there is insufficient evidence demonstrating a genuine requirement for the proposed forestry works; and that there are serious concerns about highway safety, biodiversity and the potential impact on trees protected by Tree Preservation Orders. Chris also raised concerns about the lack of clarity around the proposal intentions.
Concerns about Hawkhirst Road
Ola highlighted that residents are not opposed to legitimate forestry management. The concern is whether the information provided demonstrates that this particular access is genuinely necessary, how it would be used and what its impact would be.
He also pointed out that describing the application as relating to land “on the north side of Longwood Road” can obscure the fact that the proposed access would egress directly to Hawkhirst Road, where residents would experience the most immediate impact.
Hawkhirst Road is a narrow residential road used by pedestrians, children and cyclists, as well as people accessing Kenley Common and the former airfield. Residents have raised concerns about visibility and the potential highway-safety implications of additional vehicle movements.
Ola asked the Inspector to consider these concerns against the relevant policies in the Croydon Local Plan, including Policy DM29, which seeks to ensure safe and suitable access and avoid unacceptable impacts on highway safety.
He also raised concerns about the potential impact on mature and protected trees, including their root systems, and the need to consider the proposal against Policy DM28, which seeks to protect and retain trees of value.
The ecological sensitivity of the site was also highlighted. The woodland forms part of an important natural environment, with concerns around chalk grassland, protected species and habitat fragmentation. These issues need to be considered against Policy DM27 of the Croydon Local Plan and national planning policy, which seek to protect biodiversity and secure opportunities for ecological enhancement.
Is the road actually necessary?
I also made clear to the Inspector that my concerns are not about legitimate woodland management.
I recognised that woodland needs to be properly managed, particularly where trees are affected by Ash Dieback. The question for me is whether the particular road being proposed has been demonstrated to be reasonably necessary for forestry purposes.
The proposed private way would be approximately 150 metres long and four metres wide. The Council’s Statement of Case indicates that the Woodland Management Plan submitted in support of the proposal identifies an alternative, shorter access route.
I therefore asked the Inspector to consider why the considerably longer route now proposed is reasonably necessary when a shorter alternative has been identified.
I also asked that careful consideration be given to the nature of the forestry operations which are said to require a road of this scale, including the type and size of vehicles that would need to use it and how frequently the access would actually be required.
The proposed connection to Hawkhirst Road
Another important issue is the proposed connection between the new private way and Hawkhirst Road.
Hawkhirst Road is an unadopted road maintained at private expense and, from my own experience of the road, is already in poor condition. I asked the Inspector to consider whether its nature and condition are suitable for the type and size of forestry vehicles that the proposed road is intended to accommodate.
I also asked the Inspector to look carefully at the question of whether a lawful vehicular access to the site already exists.
The appellants rely on an existing metal gate as demonstrating that an access is already in place. However, the Council’s evidence sets out the planning and enforcement history relating to that gate and records that concrete blocks were installed in 2016 specifically to prevent vehicular access.
There is therefore an important distinction between the physical existence of a gate and the existence of a lawful vehicular means of access.
The Council’s evidence is that no such lawful vehicular access currently exists. I asked the Inspector to consider whether the proposed development would, in substance, create a new vehicular means of access to Hawkhirst Road, rather than simply formalising an existing lawful access as suggested by the appellants.
Proposed entry point for the road.
Protecting Hawkhirst Woods
Finally, I stressed that this is a particularly sensitive area of woodland.
The site is within the Metropolitan Green Belt, is designated as a Site of Nature Conservation Importance, and contains protected trees.
The appellants themselves acknowledge that constructing the proposed private way will have an impact on trees. I therefore asked the Inspector to consider whether there is sufficient evidence about which trees and root systems would be affected, how the road would actually be constructed, and the nature and size of the forestry vehicles for which the road is said to be necessary.
We will now await the Inspector’s decision.
Whatever the outcome, we will continue to stand up for Kenley’s green spaces and the character of our local area, while recognising the importance of legitimate and responsible woodland management.
