The Croydon Planning Sub-Committee met on Thursday 15 January 2026. The committee considered a planning application for a detached dwelling at Land to the Rear of 164 Pampisford Road, South Croydon.

Land to the Rear of 164 Pampisford Road, South Croydon

The committee considered a proposal for a three-bedroom detached dwelling with accommodation in the roof space and a basement level, along with associated parking and amenity space. This application had a complex planning history, with several previous applications for development on the site having been refused, some of which were dismissed on appeal.

The primary focus of the discussion revolved around the scale and massing of the proposed dwelling and its impact on the character and appearance of Barnards Place, a cul-de-sac of two-storey detached houses. While the applicant had reduced the height of the proposed dwelling and adjusted the dormer window compared to previous applications, concerns remained among committee members.

Councillor Lara Fish expressed that while she welcomed the need for family homes and acknowledged the work done by officers and the applicant, she felt the current proposal had not sufficiently addressed the concerns raised in previous refusals, particularly regarding the sheer scale and massing. She specifically highlighted the rear dormer, suggesting it appeared more overbearing than the previous applications and contributed to an overbearing sense.

Councillor Helen Redfern echoed these sentiments, noting that the current proposal was only slightly different to those previously refused and dismissed. She pointed out that the reduction in the main dwelling's height had necessitated a bulky dormer, which made the building appear larger and bulkier, resembling an extra story rather than rooms in the roof. She also raised concerns about the narrowness of Barnards Place and the potential for cars to overhang the pavement, impacting pedestrian safety.

Councillor Sean Fitzsimons also voiced concerns, particularly regarding the parking forecourt depth. He argued that the proposed five-meter depth was insufficient for modern vehicles, including SUVs, and could lead to cars overhanging the pavement, creating issues for pedestrian movement and potentially blocking property entrances.

Conversely, Councillor Humayun Kabir stated that he felt the application had ticked all the boxes and, in his view, met the necessity for development, leading him to support it.

Following deliberation, the committee resolved to refuse the application. The refusal was based on the grounds of size and massing, especially around the rear dormer of the property, and the detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area. Concerns were also noted regarding the adequacy of parking space dimensions for modern vehicles, although the officer advised caution in reintroducing refusal reasons already addressed by a planning inspector at appeal. The committee also noted the absence of a legal agreement for biodiversity net gain exemption, which was a recommended condition for approval.