Lidl refused planning permission
01/06/2016 15:48:00......Posted by Tim Pollard
I am pleased to report that Lidl have today been refused planning permission by Croydon Council for the site of the former Good Companions pub.
Officers have refused the application on two grounds - design (bulk, massing, out of keeping with locality) and continiung concerns about access and highway safety identified with the previous application in 2014.
Officers do not have to take the application to committee where they propose to refuse permission and the referral to committee from a ward councillor (me) was put in to request refusal. Because we alll agree on the outcome, officers have the legal power to refuse permission, which they have duly done.
We are very pleased that the officers have supported the many residents and the councillors on both sides of the Croydon/Surrey border who have opposed this development. The previous scheme was poor in terms of its access and the impact it would have on pedestrian safety and this new scheme is worse. The idea that lorries could exit out onto Tithepit Shaw Lane opposite the primary school just beggars belief.
Now Lidl must decide whether to take this scheme to appeal, as they did its predecessor. We will keep you posted on developments there through this blog. They could, of course, also come back with yet another attempt at a new scheme although given that the highways argument has now been lost on both possible access roads, that seems less likely.
The issue has never been about whether we want or need a Lidl. Many residents feel that another supermarket is superfluous, but we are aware that there are also local residents who would like to be able to shop at a local Lidl and have supported this scheme on that basis. The real issue has always been about whether that piece of land is the right location and whether the serious road safety concerns could be overcome.
Finally a big thank you to the concerned residents and the Surrey & Tandridge councillors Cllr David Hodge (Surrey) and Cllr David Cooley (Tandridge). Together we have got the right decision.
The full grounds for refusal were:
Schedule for Application No:- 16/01097/P
Decision: Permission Refused
Reason(s) for refusal :-
1. The development would be out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area and detrimental to the visual amenity of the street scene by reason of poor design, prominent siting and scale of the buildings and would not respect the existing pattern of buildings, nor maximise the opportunities for creating an attractive and interesting environment and would thereby conflict with the objectives of the NPPF, Policies 7.1, 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 of the London Plan (2015), Policies UD2, UD3, UD12, UD13, UD14 and H2 of the Croydon Plan (2006) Saved Policies 2013 and Policies SP1.1, SP4.1 and SP4.2 of the Croydon Local Plan: Strategic Policies (2013).
2. The development would adversely affect pedestrian and highway safety on the
adjoining transport network by reason of the siting of the access and egress points and the associated traffic and would thereby conflict with the objectives of the NPPF, Policy 6.3 of the London Plan, Saved Policies T2, UD12 and UD13 of the Croydon Replacement Plan (2006) Saved Policies 2013 and Policies SP8.6, SP8.17 and SP8.18 of the Croydon Local Plan: Strategic Policies (2013).