Agenda and draft minutes

Planning Committee
Thursday, 15th October, 2020 6.30 pm, NEW

Venue: This meeting is held remotely; to view the meeting, please click here.

Contact: Michelle Ossei-Gerning
020 8726 6000 x84246  Email: michelle.gerning@croydon.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

236/20

Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 209 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 8 October 2020 as an accurate record.

[To Follow]

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 8October 2020 be signed as a correct record.

 

237/20

Disclosure of Interest

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions of the Localism Act, Members and co-opted Members of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to register disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and gifts and hospitality to the value of which exceeds £50 or multiple gifts and/or instances of hospitality with a cumulative value of £50 or more when received from a single donor within a rolling twelve month period. In addition, Members and co-opted Members are reminded that unless their disclosable pecuniary interest is registered on the register of interests or is the subject of a pending notification to the Monitoring Officer, they are required to disclose those disclosable pecuniary interests at the meeting. This should be done by completing the Disclosure of Interest form and handing it to the Democratic Services representative at the start of the meeting. The Chair will then invite Members to make their disclosure orally at the commencement of Agenda item 3. Completed disclosure forms will be provided to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion on the Register of Members’ Interests.

Minutes:

Councillor Lelia Ben-Hassel declared that she had previously worked with the projects landscape architect in relation to item 5.2 19/05195/PRE 550 to 550A Purley Way, Croydon, CR0 4RF in her previous workplace.

 

238/20

Urgent Business (if any)

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

Minutes:

There was none.

239/20

Development presentations pdf icon PDF 108 KB

To receive the following presentations on a proposed development:

Additional documents:

240/20

20/00549/PRE 922-930 Purley Way, Purley, CR8 2JL pdf icon PDF 114 KB

Erection of three apartments blocks to provide 149 homes with a maximum height of 14 storeys with alterations to the land levels associated landscaping, continued use of the existing highway accesses and car/cycle parking as well as bin storage.

 

Ward: Purley and Woodcote

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Erection of three apartments blocks to provide 149 homes with a maximum height of 14 storeys with alterations to the land levels associated landscaping, continued use of the existing highway accesses and car/cycle parking as well as bin storage.

 

Ward: Purley and Woodcote

 

This item was deferred to be heard at the next planning committee meeting.

 

241/20

19/05195/PRE 550 to 550A Purley Way, Croydon, CR0 4RF pdf icon PDF 402 KB

Demolition of existing commercial properties, erection of two blocks, a southern block of 8 storeys, and northern block up to 15 storeys, providing 125 homes including 4 live/work units, with car and cycle parking and associated landscaping.

 

Ward: Waddon

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Demolition of existing commercial properties, erection of two blocks, a southern block of 8 storeys, and northern block up to 15 storeys, providing 125 homes including 4 live/work units, with car and cycle parking and associated landscaping.

 

Ward: Waddon

 

Mr Nik Smith from Nexus Planning who are the planning consultants to this development was joined by Mr Dean Thody and Ms Jennifer Robertson from ECE Architecture, Mr Ben Howard from I-Transport, Mr Philip Cave who is the projects landscape architect and Mr Jack Simmons from Stonegate Homes who is the applicant of this development. The developers attended to give a presentation and respond to Members' questions and issues raised for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.

 

The main issues raised at this meeting were as follows:

 

Tall building

·       Some disagreement as to whether it was right for the scheme to come forward now or whether it needed to wait for the Masterplan

·       Some members felt the scheme responds to the Masterplan well and would be appropriate densification, maximising use of the site

·       Visual introduction for what to come in th future so scheme needs to be inspiring

·       Scheme is beyond the upper limit of the density matrix - need to ensure infrastructure can support it 

·       Some members felt the tall building focus should be in the district centres and that 15 storeys would not work

 

Use

·       Merit in and support for co-working space

·       Queried whether similar live-work been successful elsewhere

·       Support for ground floor uses and mix of workspace

·       Positive that it would provide places to live, work and play

·       Some members felt the loss of retail was acceptable, others were concerned about the loss of jobs

·       Questioned whether a nursery could be provided on site

 

Design and elevation details

·       Some members felt the height was appropriate, but consensus was that use of setbacks and material variation need to break up height and mass

·       Some members questioned whether it was a marker building - could it be more innovative or more iconic

·       Lots of discussion on material choice  - some members preferred brick, some liked the terracotta, others felt a mixture was important

·       Design should reference other buildings in the area

·       Support for Art Deco style rounded corners

 

Site layout and public realm

·       Positive that there appears no distinction between the private and affordable housing

·       Decks above parking that provide amenity were generally supported and support for the balcony flexibility

·       Welcome the public realm which is key

·       Landscaping really important in helping mitigate pollution

·       Trees in planters a concern - need to survive

·       Security for residents will be important with car park to rear under deck

 

Level of affordable housing.

·       Percentage should be higher than 30% - policy seeks to achieve 50%

 

Future residents

·       Family mix - lots of 2 bedroom 4 person homes - concerned that there needs to be more genuine family accommodation

·       Communal amenity spaces - need to be of high quality and far away from Purley Way as possible with adequate sunlight

·       Should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 241/20

242/20

19/05194/PRE Citylink House, 4 Addiscombe Road, Croydon, CR0 5TT pdf icon PDF 117 KB

Demolition of the existing buildings. Erection of a part 27/part 13 storey building to provide approximately 494 shared-living units (sui-generis), 77 residential dwellings (C3), flexible (D1/B1) floorspace and retail/cafe (A1/A3) space.

 

Ward: Addiscombe West

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Demolition of the existing buildings. Erection of a part 27/part 13 storey building to provide approximately 494 shared-living units (sui-generis), 77 residential dwellings (C3), flexible (D1/B1) floorspace and retail/café (A1/A3) space.

 

Ward: Addiscombe West

 

Mr Joe Stockton from DP9 was joined by his colleague Mr Sam Hine also from DP9, Mr Alex Springer from Fifthstate who is the developer and applicant, Mr Murray Levinson from Squires and Partners Architects and Mr James Brant from CRM. The developers attended to give a presentation and respond to Members' questions and issues raised for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.

 

At 8:15pm Councillors Paul Scott and Joy Prince left the meeting.

 

The main issues raised at this meeting were as follows:

 

 

Standard of co-living and residential accommodation

·       Members questioned the shared living concept - what is the need in Croydon? 

·       Questioned tenancy periods and affordability

·       How many people would be in the building?

·       General concern about co-living in current Covid19 climate

·       Questioned whether there are national standards for units and kitchen/amenity shared spaces

·       Would there be single gender accommodation opportunities?

·       Members were worried the scheme does not serve families

·       Challenged the amount of outside amenity space

·       Questioned disabled home provision

 

Height and design approach

·       Site is a prominent location - is it eye-catching enough?

·       Some members liked the design and commented that it fits in with local character 

·       Some members did not like design - plain grey concrete tower that does not respect NLA tower

·       Scheme occupies the full extent of site - felt it was too big in the current form

 

Site layout

·       Support for the removal of the underpass

·       With lots of people the pedestrian routes will be key - transportation issues need to be carefully considered

 

Loss of trees

·       Unhappy about the loss of the high quality trees

 

Affordable housing offer

·       Affordability discussion - meets a certain demographic only

 

Other

·       Fire evacuation important

 

243/20

Planning applications for decision pdf icon PDF 148 KB

To consider the accompanying reports by the Director of Planning & Strategic Transport:

 

There are none.

 

Minutes:

There were none.

244/20

Items referred by Planning Sub-Committee

To consider any item(s) referred by a previous meeting of the Planning Sub-Committee to this Committee for consideration and determination:

 

There are none.

Minutes:

There were none.

245/20

Other planning matters pdf icon PDF 104 KB

To consider the accompanying report by the Director of Planning & Strategic Transport:

 

There are none.

Minutes:

There were none.