Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday, 6 July 2023 and Thursday 20 July 2023 as an accurate record.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 3 August 2023 be signed as a correct record.

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and other registrable and non-registrable interests they may have in relation to any item(s) of business on today’s agenda.

There were no disclosures of a pecuniary interest not already registered.

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.

There was none.

To receive the following presentations on a proposed development:

There were none.

To demolish the existing buildings and erect a development to provide 464 residential units (Use Class C3), with 1,761sqm of flexible floor space (Use Classes E / F1 and Sui Generis) at ground and first floor, public realm, communal amenity and child play space, together with associated wheelchair accessible vehicle parking and cycle parking.

Ward: Fairfield

Jason Balls and James Owens, with the assistance of colleagues delivered a presentation with the support of a 5-minute observation of the project model showcasing the landscape of the proposal. They then responded to Members’ questions and the issues raised for further consideration.

The Members raised the following points and questions:

Principle of development

·       Some Members commented that the proposed development was not centrally located in the town centre, which created a substantial contrast between the height of the development and the dominant streetscape of Victorian structures and lower buildings.

·       3 models of composition were shown to determine the best positioning of the buildings, and the Members were asked to provide their preference.

·       Some Members showed preference for option 1 citing that the smaller building should be placed nearer to the Church to create symmetry with existing buildings and to prevent enclosure of St. Mary’s Church.

·       Other Members preferred the second option of placing the tallest building in the middle as it created a cluster shape which complemented the existing cluster in the area and reduced the impact to the Church.

·       Option 3 was favoured by some Members who found it to have the least impact on the surrounding community.

·       The Members felt that the development should consider the connectivity with The Elms and how it could serve the existing tenants and leaseholders in the area.

·       The Members commented that given the magnitude of the redevelopment and the potential for affordable housing, the consultant residents of The Elms should be part of this scheme.

·       The Members stated that the podium should create a sense of continuation and reflection of the conservation area.

·       The Members asked if the developers had been in consultation with the Diocese and whether they had shared plans with them.

·       The Members questioned the inclusion of lifts in each building.

Design, Townscape and Heritage

·       The Members noted that Croydon had a unique architectural style whereas the projections featured generic city style buildings.

·       The pink/red colours of the brick did not match the characteristics of good tall buildings in Croydon and reduced the ability to keep a distinct town centre.

·       Residents in the area identified taller buildings as part of town centre and not in their community.

·       The Members remarked that the podium should create a relationship with the conservation area or could produce a colonnade effect at the ground level that could create connection to the street.

Approach to public realm, private and communal amenity space, and child play space

·       In reference to disabled parking, the Members noted that extra parking on the roads was not a suitable accommodation as parking should be proximate to residents.

·       The Members showed support for water features but cautioned against the impact of water fountains on resident service charges.

·       The developers were asked to evidence that crime and Anti-Social Behaviour was accounted for in the design.

·       The Members asked for clarification on how the private spaces were defined.

·       The Members questioned whether there was sufficient provision for open spaces, considering the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48/23

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

There are none.

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.

There were none.

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

There were none.

Attached is the list of Delegated and Planning Committee/SubCommittee decisions taken between 4 September 2023 and 15 September 2023.