The Planning Committee of Croydon Council met on Thursday, 8 February 2024, to discuss two significant planning applications. The committee granted permission for a new housing development at 34A, 34B And Rear Of 34 Arkwright Road, CR2 0LL, and received a presentation on a proposed mixed-use development at Spurgeon's College, 189 South Norwood Hill, SE25 6DJ, which will be subject to a future planning application. The committee also noted the weekly planning decisions made under delegated powers.

Planning Application for Decision: 34A, 34B And Rear Of 34 Arkwright Road, CR2 0LL

The committee granted planning permission for the demolition of existing dwellinghouses at 34A and 34B Arkwright Road and the construction of six three-storey dwellinghouses, along with associated parking, access, and landscaping. This decision was made by a vote of 7 in favour, 2 against, with 1 abstention.

The officer's report highlighted that the principle of intensified residential development was acceptable given the suburban character of the area, and that the proposed six four-bedroom dwellings would provide a high standard of accommodation. The design and appearance were considered to draw from the surrounding character, materiality, and would be a positive contribution to the area. A high-quality landscaping scheme with enhanced biodiversity and tree planting was also proposed. Concerns regarding the impact on neighbouring amenity were addressed through careful design, and the access arrangements were scrutinised and deemed not to have an unacceptable impact on highway safety. The provision of 12 car parking spaces was considered acceptable as it would exceed maximum standards but avoid significant impact on parking stress. Suitable planning obligations and conditions were recommended.

During the deliberation, councillors noted that the density and overlooking had improved significantly from previous proposals. The uplift from four to six detached family houses was appreciated, and the hedging would need to be clearly detailed in the landscape plan. Concerns were raised about the safety of the access to the site. The parking provision was appreciated, and a condition was proposed to ensure any future extensions would require planning department approval to avoid overcrowding. The development was considered an underdevelopment by some, who felt the site could accommodate more properties, and that the main road possessed sufficient parking for any overflow. The need for larger detached properties in the borough was acknowledged. However, some councillors felt the reduced density and replacement of dwellings with parking spaces was not ideal. The developer's design-led approach and consideration of feedback on height, scale, and massing were noted, as was the high standard of accommodation.

Patroulla Lorke spoke against the application, and Martyn Avery spoke in support.

Development Presentation: Spurgeon's College, 189 South Norwood Hill, South Norwood, London, SE25 6DJ

The committee received a presentation on a proposed mixed-use development at Spurgeon's College. The redevelopment aims to provide an extension to the locally listed building and a new education building, along with basement facilities for higher education, extensions to the existing locally listed building, and 42 family homes. This presentation was for pre-application discussion, and no decision was made at this meeting.

Reverend Philip McCormack and Ian Fenn attended to present the proposals and answer questions. Councillor Karen Jewitt addressed the committee, highlighting Spurgeon's College as a valued asset to Croydon, a top-rated university with triple gold in the Teaching Excellence Framework, and a generous contributor to local charities. She emphasised that the proposed development would make higher education more financially accessible and increase provision in the borough, supporting the needs of Croydon and improving higher education attainment. The development was also expected to lead to job creation and increased spending in local businesses. Councillor Jewitt warned that if the proposals were not accepted, the college might have to relocate, resulting in Croydon losing a significant asset. She also stressed the extreme need for family homes on the site and noted several key changes made in response to resident feedback, including the provision of a parking space for every property.

Members raised several points for further consideration. Concerns were expressed about the quantum of development, particularly regarding the loss of trees and the impact on remaining high-quality trees, as well as the impact of the massing on the locally listed building and the residential quality for neighbours. The approach to the significant expansion of education facilities and its impact on the viability and provision of affordable housing was also a key discussion point. Members queried the demand for students and the uptake of places, given the lack of on-site student accommodation. The need for a unique university presence in Croydon was highlighted.

Concerns were also raised about Biodiversity Net Gain, the provision of off-site contributions, and the loss of 79 trees. The design approach, elevation treatment, materiality, and public realm, particularly for the education buildings and the arrival experience for students and residents, were discussed. The relationship between residential and education facilities, and access arrangements for residents across the site, were also points of discussion. Finally, transport arrangements, including education parking and the provision of a shuttle bus, were questioned.

Members queried whether the developer would plant mature trees for quicker site boundary formation and expressed concern about the retention of existing trees in new properties' gardens, as future occupiers might wish to remove them. The sufficiency of landscaping proposals was debated, with some members feeling the reduction in the number of houses would constrain the university. Developers were asked to comment on design review panel concerns regarding landscaping. The loss of 79 trees, many of high quality, was a significant concern, with members noting that new trees would be younger. A detailed tree plan was requested before a planning application could be determined. Concerns were also raised about larger trees in gardens potentially being overbearing to occupiers, and the scope to retain Category B trees was questioned. The possibility of protecting trees with a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) was raised, as was how developers intended to use trees for sound barriers given the increased footfall.

Regarding the expansion of education facilities, members asked about student demand and uptake, noting the absence of student accommodation. The need for a unique university presence in Croydon was emphasised. Discussions also touched upon potential collaboration with Housing Associations for grant funding for houses and the redirection of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funds to support such developments. Developers were questioned about their progress in finding a solution for the lack of affordable homes, and concerns were expressed about the absence of affordable housing among the 42 proposed homes. Suggestions were made to offer first homes to younger students, with a concern that a lack of affordable housing could lead to private landlords renting to students.

On Biodiversity Net Gain, members questioned whether the developer had attempted to meet the 10% target and how the wider tree infrastructure in the area could be enhanced. Design approach and elevation treatment, including materiality and public realm, were discussed, with some members querying a listing review and the covering of a sunken quad. Developers were asked to elaborate on proposed elevated walkways and the implementation of a boundary between students and residential areas, as well as the estimated total number of students. The relationship between residential and education facilities and access arrangements were discussed, with members pleased about the allocation of woodland to residents. Transport arrangements, including education parking and shuttle bus strategy, were questioned, as were service charges for the shuttle bus. The adoption or maintenance of the access road by the developer was queried, as was the function of the street layout and the possibility of a car-free site. The widening of the access road and the provision of electrical charging points were also discussed, along with concerns about noise pollution mitigation and parking for overflow cars.

Weekly Planning Decisions

The committee noted the list of delegated and Planning Committee/Subcommittee decisions taken between 15 January 2024 and 26 January 2024.