Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Horden Cherry Lee’s Croydon tower rejected

  • 3 Comments

Croydon Council has thrown out plans by Horden Cherry Lee for a 34-storey build-to-rent tower that included an 11-storey screen to shield it from existing homes

The local authority’s planning committee acted in line with a planning officer’s report in refusing consent for the Canterbury House proposals.

The planning report cited a number of reasons for refusing the scheme – which was backed by developer Croydon Investments – including the impact of the screen, the small size of proposed flats and the effect on Croydon’s skyline.

It quoted a review by the council’s place review panel, which concluded ‘the scheme is not of the quality and standard that Croydon needs and expects’.

The review added: ‘The panel remains unconvinced about a significant number of aspects of the scheme as submitted and presented, and does not consider it to be exemplar design in any aspect.’

The planning application proposed 296 homes in a tower next to an existing 12-storey residential building on the site.

But planning officers were scathing about the proposed frosted-glass sight screen, which would stand just 4.5m away from windows.

Their report said the privacy screen represented ‘poor design’ when assessed against national and local planning policy.

It added: ‘The detrimental visual and urban design impact of the screen is further exacerbated by the significant amount of inactive frontage at ground level directly below the screen and to the east of the proposed Phase 2 tower which, together with the bin storage areas, creates a hostile public realm.’

In addition, the council said it was not happy with the size of the ‘micro’ flats proposed, which a Greater London Authority report said were all below London Plan space standards.

The place review panel voiced concern that kitchens in the flats were not ‘big enough, or sufficiently well designed, to cook a healthy meal in’.

Historic England said the proposals had the potential to cause harm to the setting of nearby heritage assets, and recommended further assessments before planning was granted.

According to the planning report, the developer had promised to submit amendments to the scheme, but none had been forthcoming.

It said: ‘Officers consider that the time provided to respond has been proportionate and reasonable, particularly in light of the matters of principle including environmental and amenity concerns, consistently highlighted to the applicant since the council issued its pre-application advice in February 2017.’

Horden Cherry Lee declined to comment. The agent listed on the application was contacted for comment.

  • 3 Comments

Readers' comments (3)

  • The comment about the kitchen design not allowing the cooking of a 'healthy meal' is weird. Would it work if you were making an unhealthy meal?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • No images of the interiors of the 'microflats', so it's difficult to guess what triggered the reference to 'healthy meals', but it would be very interesting to know what lies behind this comment.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Phil Parker

    This is a planning regime in disarray. Planning Committee is split along party lines and lurches from one bad decision to the next under an overbearing chair who clearly doesn’t get much satisfaction from his day-job.

    Results in projects like 1 Lansdowne Road by CZWG being waved through. Even the Chinese Government has the good sense to realise that stupid shaped buildings are the result of lazy architects and lazier planners and have put a stop to it. Croydon still hasn’t learnt its lesson.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.