Land Adjacent To Academy Gardens Croydon CR0 6QH

1. 1.The proposed development, by virtue of the absence of any three-bedroom or larger units, would fail to contribute to the borough's provision of family- sized accommodation. The proposed development fails to comply with the strategic objectives of Croydon Local Plan (2018) policy SP2.7.
2. 2.The proposed building, by virtue of its siting, layout, height and poor architectural quality, would fail to respect the existing development pattern of the estate and erode the spacious character that defines the Academy Gardens estate resulting in harm to the character and visual amenity of the area. The proposed development fails to comply with the Croydon Local Plan (2018), in particular policies SP4.1, SP4.2, DM10.1 and DM10.7, and the London Plan (2021), in particular policies D3 and D4.
3. 3.The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not cause harm to the setting of East India Conservation Area. The proposed development has therefore not demonstrated compliance with Policy DM18 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018), Policy HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
4. 4.The proposed development, by virtue of its scale and proximity to 60 Academy Gardens, would result in an overbearing impact on the occupiers of that property. The proposed development would also result in an unacceptable level of overlooking to the rear gardens of properties on Nicholson Road resulting in harm to neighbouring privacy. The proposed development fails to comply with Policy DM10.6 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018)and Policy D6 of London Plan (2021).
5. 5.The proposed development, by virtue of Units 5 and 8 being single-aspect, would provide a poor quality of accommodation for future occupiers and fails to provide appropriate children's play space. The proposed development fails to comply with policies SP2.8 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and policies D6 and S4 of the London Plan (2021).
6. 6.The proposed development has failed to demonstrate that it would not give rise to unacceptable transport and servicing impacts. The submitted Transport Statement was prepared for a different scheme and does not assess the current proposal. The proposed cycle parking and refuse arrangements do not meet current policy requirements. The proposed development fails to comply with policies SP8, DM29, DM30 and DM13 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and policies T2, T4 and T5 of the London Plan (2021).
7. 7.The proposed development has failed to demonstrate that it would not give rise to unacceptable surface water drainage impacts. The submitted Drainage Strategy was prepared for a different scheme and does not include a mandatory 40% climate change allowance. The proposed development fails to comply with policy DM25 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and policies SI12 and SI13 of the London Plan (2021).
8. 8.The proposed development has failed to demonstrate that it would comply with current sustainability policy requirements. The submitted Sustainability Statement was prepared for a different scheme and does not address the requirements of the current development plan. The proposed development fails to comply with policies SP6.2 and SP6.3 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and policies SI2, SI4 and SI5 of the London Plan (2021).
9. 9.The proposed development has failed to secure through an appropriate legal agreement the necessary obligations to ensure compliance with policy in respect of car-free development, including restrictions on future occupiers obtaining parking permits within Controlled Parking Zone EO and a financial contribution towards sustainable transport improvements. The proposed development fails to comply with policies SP8 and DM30 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and policies T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021).

From the council's decision notice.

Postcode

CR0 6QH

Parish

Ashton-under-lyne

Date validated

13 April 2026

Consultation end

15 May 2026

Target decision date

8 June 2026

Applicant

Private applicant

Architect profile

GRANVILLE FORBES ARCHITECTS LTD

Case officer

James Appleton

Documents

42