Planning application · Croydon
26/00609/FUL.
Land Adjacent To Academy Gardens Croydon CR0 6QH
Full / Other Planning at Land Adjacent To Academy Gardens Croydon CR0 6QH, received 27 Feb 2026 — refused on 4 Jun 2026 (delegated, Joe Sales).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationCroydon profile →
Refused
Outcome
4 Jun 2026
14 wks
Decision time
6 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
42
Documents
42 linked
18
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Croydon planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Erection of a part 3/4 storey building comprising 9 self-contained flats with associated amenity space, cycle storage and refuse storage.
Reference
26/00609/FUL
Type
Full planning permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
CR0 6QH
Ward
Council
Received
27 Feb 2026
Validated
13 Apr 2026
Target date
8 Jun 2026
Decision date
4 Jun 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/00609/FUL
Type
Full planning permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
CR0 6QH
Ward
Council
Received
27 Feb 2026
Validated
13 Apr 2026
Target date
8 Jun 2026
Decision date
4 Jun 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Croydon portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 4 Jun 2026, delegated decision by Joe Sales — 14 weeks from submission (6 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
27 Feb 2026
Application received
13 Apr 2026
Application validated
8 Jun 2026
Statutory target date
4 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Joe Sales
27 Feb 2026
Application received
13 Apr 2026
Application validated
8 Jun 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
4 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Joe Sales
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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).
In reaching this decision the Local Planning Authority has sought to work in a
positive and pro-active manner based on seeking solutions to problems in the
following way:
To assist applicants the Local Planning Authority has produced policies and written
guidance, all of which is available on the Council's website and offers a pre
planning application advice service. The scheme does not comply with guidance
and no pre application discussions were entered into. The Council is ready to enter
into discussions with the applicants to assist in the preparation of a new planning
application via the Council's Pre Application process. The Local Planning
Authority's suggested improvements were not adopted by the applicant. The Local
Planning Authority delivered the decision in a timely manner.
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
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
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.
Show all 9 rows
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
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
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
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
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
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).
In reaching this decision the Local Planning Authority has sought to work in a
positive and pro-active manner based on seeking solutions to problems in the
following way:
To assist applicants the Local Planning Authority has produced policies and written
guidance, all of which is available on the Council's website and offers a pre
planning application advice service. The scheme does not comply with guidance
and no pre application discussions were entered into. The Council is ready to enter
into discussions with the applicants to assist in the preparation of a new planning
application via the Council's Pre Application process. The Local Planning
Authority's suggested improvements were not adopted by the applicant. The Local
Planning Authority delivered the decision in a timely manner.
Policies cited
DM18HC1DM10.6D6SP2.8DM10S4SP8DM29DM30DM13T2T4T5DM25SI12SI13SP6.2SP6.3SI2SI4SI5T6T6.1
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
18
In support
0
Total comments
19
Objections
18
In support
0
Total comments
19
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.