DOCSLIB.ORG

Routes 404 and 434 Consultation Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Routes 404 and 434 Consultation Report Proposed changes to routes 404 and 434 Consultation Report November 2019 Contents Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 4 Summary of main issues raised during consultation ................................................ 4 Next steps ................................................................................................................ 4 1. About the proposals ............................................................................................ 6 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Purpose .......................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Detailed description of proposals ................................................................... 7 2. About the consultation ...................................................................................... 11 2.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................ 11 2.2 Potential outcomes ....................................................................................... 11 2.3 Who we consulted ........................................................................................ 11 2.4 Dates and duration ....................................................................................... 12 2.6 What we asked ............................................................................................. 12 2.7 Methods of responding ................................................................................. 12 2.8 Consultation materials and publicity ............................................................. 12 2.9 Equalities Assessment ................................................................................. 13 2.10 Analysis of consultation responses ........................................................... 15 3. About the respondents ...................................................................................... 16 3.1 Number of respondents ................................................................................ 16 3.2 How respondents heard about the consultation ........................................... 16 4. Summary of all consultation responses ............................................................ 16 4.1 Summary of Question 1 ............................................................................... 17 4.2 Summary of Question 2 ............................................................................... 18 4.3 Summary of Question 3 ............................................................................... 19 4.4 Summary of Question 4 ............................................................................... 20 4.5 Summary of Question 5 ............................................................................... 21 4.6 Summary of Question 6 ............................................................................... 22 4.7 Summary of Question 7 ............................................................................... 23 4.8 Summary of Question 8 ............................................................................... 25 4.9 Response to main issues raised .................................................................. 26 2 4.10 Summary of stakeholder responses .......................................................... 28 4.11 Comments on the consultation.................................................................. 37 5. Next steps ....................................................................................................... 38 Appendix A: Consultation questions .......................................................................... 39 Appendix B: Consultation materials and distribution ................................................. 40 Appendix C: Stakeholder lists ................................................................................... 47 3 Executive summary This document explains the processes, responses and outcomes of a consultation on bus routes 404 and 434. Between 9 January and 11 February 2019 we consulted on changes to routes 404 and 434. The main changes proposed were: Divert route 434 to the unserved Cane Hill estate Extend route 404 to Rickman Hill, replacing the 434 Serve the Tollers Lane estate and Shirley Avenue with the 404 We received 602 public responses to the consultation and 9 stakeholder responses. Route 404 - 36 per cent supported or strongly supported the proposals, while 28 per cent opposed or strongly opposed them Route 434 - 32 per cent supported or strongly supported the proposals, while 27 per cent opposed or strongly opposed them The main themes are highlighted below, with detailed analysis in section 4. Summary of main issues raised during consultation Concern about the impact of the loss of the route 434 direct service from Rickman Hill to Purley town centre and Woodcote School Suggestion that route 404 should be extended to Cane Hill instead of route 434 Concern that the roads in the proposed new areas are not suitable for buses (e.g. about congestion, noise, pollution and parking issues) Next steps Following our analysis and consideration of all the consultation responses, we have decided to amend our proposals. The feedback made clear that diverting route 434 to serve Cane Hill would cause significant disruption for the residents of Rickman Hill. Instead, we plan to extend route 404 to serve the Cane Hill estate. It will travel in an anti-clockwise loop via Farthing Way and Brighton Road. 4 We will progress the plans to serve the Tollers Lane estate and Shirley Avenue with route 404. When deciding on the final location of bus stops we will refer to the feedback we have received from residents and users so that they are as suitably placed as possible. Route 404 will get a 30 minute service, including on Sundays. Route 434 will keep its current 30 minute frequency. We will aim to make these changes on 4 January 2020 and will engage with local residents and stakeholders in Coulsdon about these plans in due course. 5 1. About the proposals 1.1 Introduction The Mayor’s Transport Strategy aims to improve the parts of outer London where public transport is insufficient. Recent changes to some underused and inefficient services in central London will now allow for services in outer London to be increased. A development of 650 new homes, the Cane Hill Estate, is being built in Coulsdon. TfL has been working with the London Borough of Croydon (LB Croydon) to provide bus services to the area, some of which is currently more than five minutes walk from a bus route. Some local residents have also approached us requesting new bus services to the parts of Coulsdon which are remote from the network. Around 150 of the homes are currently occupied. It is expected to be fully occupied by 2021. The estate is located next to the A23 with footway access to Coulsdon South station. We also want to improve services in both the western and eastern sides of Old Coulsdon, parts of which are remote from the bus network. 1.2 Purpose Route 404 The proposals would mean the following for route 404: A new service to Rickman Hill, as well as the Tollers Lane estate and Shirley Avenue in Old Coulsdon A Sunday service for the first time An improved service frequency on all days with buses running every 30 minutes Route 434 The proposals would mean the following for route 434: A new service to the Cane Hill estate An improved 20 minute frequency on Monday to Saturday The route would no longer serve Rickman Hill Some existing 434 users in the Rickman Hill area would have to change buses at Coulsdon to make current trips towards Purley 1.3 Detailed description of proposals Overview map: 1.3.1 Route 404 This route currently operates between Coulsdon, Brighton Road and Caterham-on- the-Hill. Under the proposals, it would be extended along the current route of the 434 between Coulsdon and Rickman Hill. The 404 currently runs hourly on Mondays to Saturdays. We propose to introduce a Sunday service and to increase the frequency to half-hourly on all days. 7 On the western side of Old Coulsdon, the route would run through the Tollers Lane estate via The Crossways, Tollers Lane, Lacey Green, following a clockwise loop around Goodenough Way and Ellis Road, then return via Lacey Green, Tollers Lane and The Crossways. The bus routeing on these roads will be the same for northbound and southbound services. Changes to some road layouts would need to be undertaken by LB Croydon so buses can run safely and efficiently through the area. LB Croydon has consulted affected residents separately on this matter. On the eastern side of Old Coulsdon, the route would run via Shirley Avenue instead of the eastern section of Waddington Lane. This would serve a very hilly area and see an increased number of households brought closer to the bus network. Bus stops would be located on both new sections of the 404. 8 1.3.2 Route 434 This route would be diverted away from Rickman Hill and extended from Coulsdon to serve Cane Hill. The central part of the estate is more than 400m from an existing bus service and the whole site is very hilly, which means anyone with restricted mobility may find it difficult to access bus services. At the same time as the route begins to serve Cane Hill, the frequency will be increased to every 20 minutes (instead of every 30 minutes). The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Land at Purley Baptist Church, 1 Russell Hill Road, 1-4 Russell Hill
    Rob Pearson Our ref: APP/L5240/V/17/3174139 Director Your ref: Nexus Planning Ltd Riverside House 2a Southwark Bridge Road London SE1 9HA 9 July 2020 By email only: [email protected] Dear Sir TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 77 APPLICATION MADE BY THORNSETT GROUP AND PURLEY BAPTIST CHURCH LAND AT PURLEY BAPTIST CHURCH, 1 RUSSELL HILL ROAD, 1-4 RUSSELL HILL PARADE, 2-12 BRIGHTON ROAD, PURLEY HALL AND 1-9 BANSTEAD ROAD, PURLEY APPLICATION REF: 16/02994/P 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of Paul Jackson BArch (Hons) RIBA, who held a public local inquiry between 3 and 6 December 2019 into your client’s full phased application for planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings on two sites; erection of a 3 to 17 storey development on the ‘Island Site’ (Purley Baptist Church, 1 Russell Hill Road, 1-4 Russell Hill Parade, 2-12 Brighton Road), comprising 114 residential units, community and church space and a retail unit; and a 3 to 8 storey development on the ‘South Site’ (1-9 Banstead Road) comprising 106 residential units and any associated landscaping and works, in accordance with application ref: 16/02994/P, dated 20 May 2016. 2. On 12 April 2017, the Secretary of State directed, in pursuance of Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, that your client’s application be referred to him instead of being dealt with by the local planning authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Phil Thomas Page 1 of 5 02/06/2016
    Page 1 of 5 Phil Thomas From: "Chris Philp MP" <[email protected]> Date: 17 May 2016 12:47 To: <[email protected]> Subject: Update from Chris Philp MP on Southern Rail, Coulsdon parking, Purley Re-cycling Centre and other issues Dear All I am continuing to work hard on local and national issues as Croydon South’s MP and this email contains updates on some local issues you may find of interest. I have also held 15 street stalls on Saturday mornings on high streets around the constituency in the past 8 months and met with hundreds of local residents. The first item below is about the appalling service offered by Southern Rail. I am hosting a public meeting with them on 24 th May – please do come along if you can. Please also forward this email to any friends, family and neighbours who may be interested. Southern Rail Public Meeting Southern Rail has been one of the biggest issues facing our neighbourhood for some time. The constant delays have plighted commuters and leisure travellers alike. I have been complaining to Ministers, Southern and Network Rail and it is now time for residents to get a chance to hear from the train companies directly. To this end, I am hosting a public meeting on 24 th May at 7.30pm at Purley United Reform Church (in the hall). This is at 906 Brighton Road, Purley CR8 2LN, next to the hospital. There is no parking on site, so people driving are advised to use the multi-storey or the pay & display hospital car park.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report No
    Local Government Boundary Commission For England Report No. 211 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REPORT NO. 211. To the Rt Hon Merlyn Rees, HP Secretary of State for the Home Department PROPOSALS FOR THE FUTURE ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CROYDON 1. We, the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, having carried out a review of the electoral arrangements for the London Borough of Croydon in accordance with the requirements of section 50(3) of the Local Government Act 1972, present bur proposals for the future electoral arrangements for that London borough. 2. In accordance with the procedure laid down in section 60(1) and (2) of the 1972 Act, notice was given on 10 June 1975 that we were to undertake this review. This was incorporated in a consultation letter addressed to the Croydon Borough Council, copies of which were circulated to the London Boroughs Association, the Association of Metropolitan Authorities, the Members of Parliament for the constituencies concerned, the headquarters of the main political parties and the Greater London Regional Council of the Labour Party. Copies were also sent to the editors of local newspapers circulating in the area and of the local government press. Notices inserted in the local press announced the start of the review and invited comments from members of the public and from any interested bodies. 3* Croydon Borough Council were .invited to prepare a draft scheme of representation for our consideration. In doing so, they were asked to observe the rules laid down in Schedule 11 to the Local Government Act 1972 and the guidelines which we set out in our letter of 10 June 1975 about the proposed size of the council and the proposed number of councillors for each ward.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Resident Submissions to the London Borough of Croydon Electoral Review
    Local resident submissions to the London Borough of Croydon electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from residents in Croydon. The submissions from have been collated into one document. They have been sorted alphabetically, by surname. (L-Q) Maureen 2 Levy Colin Hart 1 Anthony 1 Harris Graham 1 Bass Simon Hoar 1 Anne Giles 1 Andy 1 Stranack Margaret 1 Bird Mario 2 Creatura Tim Pollard 2 Brian 1 Longman and Phil Thomas Scott Roche 1 Amy Pollard 1 Anthony 2 Pearson Gareth 1 Streeter Graeme 1 Fillmore Jonathan 1 Cope Lara Fish 1 Luke 1 Springthorpe Mark 1 Johnson Samir 1 Dwesar Sylvia 1 Macdonald Sarah Davis 1 Anthony 2 Pearson Alasdair 1 Stewart Badsha 1 Quadir Chris Philp 1 Chris Wright 1 Croydon 1 Conservativ e Group Dudley 1 Mead Fredeic 1 Demay Gavin 1 Barwell Helen 1 Pollard Jason 1 Cummings Lianne 1 Bruney Luke Clancy 1 Lynne Hale 1 Mario 2 Creatura Michael 1 Neal Mike Fisher 1 Richard 1 Chatterjee Robert 1 Sleeman Sara 1 Bashford Simon Brew 1 Sue Bennett 1 Tim Pollard 2 Yvette 1 Hopley Adam 1 O'Neill Adrian 1 Dennis Andrew 1 Frazer Ann Willard 1 Anthony 1 Sandford Catherine 1 Saunders Cheryl Purle 1 Christopher 1 King Croydon 1 South Labour Party David 1 Cantrell Deirdre Lea 1 Dennis King 1 Derek Lea 1 Diane 1 Hearne Elizabeth 1 Agyepong Fenella 1 Cardwell Gisela 1 James Janet 1 Stollery Jill Kilsby 1 Joseph 1 Rowe Kate Liffen 1 London 1 Borough of Croydon Maggie 2 Jackson Maggie 2 Jackson Martin 1 Wheatley Matthew 1 Taylor Michael 1 Bevington Paul Scott 1 Peter 1 Morgan Phil Reed 1 Philippa 1 Toogood Rita Barfoot 1 Sharon 1 Swaby Sheila 1 Childs Thornton 1 Heath Neighbourho od Association and BLP Toby 1 Keynes While consultation deadlines have prevented many of the organisations from making submissions, they have still taken steps to encourage their local members to respond, highlighting the way the draft recommendations run counter to local identities.
    [Show full text]
  • LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES LONDON LIBERAL PARTY LMA/4445 Page 1 Reference Description Dates MINUTES and PARTY ADMINISTRATION M
    LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 1 LONDON LIBERAL PARTY LMA/4445 Reference Description Dates MINUTES AND PARTY ADMINISTRATION Minutes LMA/4445/01/01/001 Executive Committee minute book 1966-1978 1 volume LMA/4445/01/01/002 Local Government Committee minute book 1965-1970 1 volume LMA/4445/01/01/003 Local Government Policy Sub Committee 1965-1972 minute book 1 volume LMA/4445/01/01/004 Organisation and Election Committee minute 1965-1972 book 1 volume LMA/4445/01/01/005 Finance and General Purposes Committee 1966-1971 minute book 1 volume LMA/4445/01/01/006 Finance and General Purposes Committee 1971-1977 minute book 1 volume LMA/4445/01/01/007 Council minutes, reports, resolutions and 1978 executive notices 1 file LMA/4445/01/01/008 Boundary Sub Committee minutes and 1981 memoranda 1 file LMA/4445/01/01/009 Constituency Campaign meetings minutes 1975-1981 1 file LMA/4445/01/01/010 National Executive Committee correspondence 1979-1981 and minutes 1 file LMA/4445/01/01/011 Party Council meeting minutes 1980-1983 1 file LMA/4445/01/01/012 Treasury meeting minutes 1981 1 file LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 2 LONDON LIBERAL PARTY LMA/4445 Reference Description Dates LMA/4445/01/01/013 Party Council minutes, agenda papers, 1982-1984 correspondence LMA/4445/01/01/014 Executive Commitee minutes, agenda papers, 1968-1981 correspondence LMA/4445/01/01/016 Liberal Agents' Association minutes, agenda 1977-1984 papers, correspondence LMA/4445/01/01/017 Various minutes, agenda papers, 1980 correspondence LMA/4445/01/01/018 Executive Committee minutes,
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the LGBCE: London Borough of Croydon by Chris Philp MP Member of Parliament for Croydon South Friday 28Th April 2017
    Submission to the LGBCE: London Borough of Croydon By Chris Philp MP Member of Parliament for Croydon South Friday 28th April 2017 I am responding to the LGBCE draft proposals for Warding patterns for the London Borough of Croydon published in 14th March 2017. I am writing in my capacity as Member of Parliament for Croydon South. In summary, I think that the LGBCE draft proposals do an excellent job of reflecting the natural communities of Croydon. The draft proposal also adhere strongly to the “Places” of Croydon, as defined by the Council themselves in a previous exercise. I would like to congratulate the LGBCE for the proposals that they have generated. Besides respecting the natural communities and “places” of Croydon, the proposals also respect hard boundaries (such as railway lines) where possible and minimise the splits to natural communities in the Borough. I would also like to emphasise the importance of maintaining Waddon as a three member Ward. It has been in this form since 1977, and has a community coherence as well as historical precedent to it. The more disadvantaged areas of the Waddon estate also benefit from the extra voice being part of a three member ward provides. Waddon as a three member ward is contained within string natural boundaries: the industrial areas to the north-west and west, and the town centre to the north-east. There are some minor modifications which would improve the LGBCE proposals even further, which I have summarised below: 1. Move some roads from Sanderstead to South Croydon The triangle of roads between Carlton Road, Selsdon Road and Essenden Road belong in the new South Croydon Ward not Sanderstead (as proposed).
    [Show full text]
  • Local Election Results 2006
    Local Election Results 4th May 2006 Andrew Teale Version 0.10.1 August 22, 2010 2 LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS 2006 Typeset by LATEX Compilation and design © Andrew Teale, 2006–2010. The author grants permission to copy and distribute this work in any medium, provided this notice is preserved. This file is available for download from http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/ Please advise the author of any corrections which need to be made by email: [email protected] Contents Introduction and Abbreviations6 I London Boroughs8 1 North London9 1.1 Barking and Dagenham.......................9 1.2 Barnet................................... 11 1.3 Brent.................................. 14 1.4 Camden................................ 17 1.5 Ealing.................................. 20 1.6 Enfield................................. 23 1.7 Hackney................................ 25 1.8 Hammersmith and Fulham..................... 29 1.9 Haringey................................. 31 1.10 Harrow................................. 33 1.11 Havering................................ 36 1.12 Hillingdon............................... 39 1.13 Hounslow............................... 42 1.14 Islington................................ 44 1.15 Kensington and Chelsea....................... 47 1.16 Newham................................ 49 1.17 Redbridge............................... 53 1.18 Tower Hamlets............................ 56 1.19 Waltham Forest............................ 59 1.20 Westminster............................... 61 2 South London 65 2.1 Bexley.................................
    [Show full text]
  • BIKING BOROUGH STUDY LONDON BOROUGH of CROYDON Final
    BIKING BOROUGH STUDY LONDON BOROUGH OF CROYDON Final Report July 2010 BIKING BOROUGH STUDY LONDON BOROUGH OF CROYDO N Final Report July 2010 Project Code: CROY -BB Prepared by: DB, CC, MM, MS Position: Various Approved by: DB, CC, MM, MS Issue Date: 5 July 2010 Status: ISSUE Biking Borough Study London Borough of Croydon Contents 1.0 Cycling in Croydon ………………………………..page 07 2.0 Ward Analysis ……………………………………..page 27 3.0 Current Borough Initiatives ………………………page 45 4.0 Cycling Hub Analysis ……………………………..page 60 5.0 Initiatives …………………………………………...page 70 6.0 Funding …………………………………………….page 83 7.0 Evaluation ………………………………………….page 91 8.0 Recommendations ………………………………..page 99 List of Tables Table 1 Cycling in Croydon & London, 2005/08 Table 16 MOSAIC Driver Segmentation by ward location 2010 Table 2 Comparison of cycle trip lengths in Croydon & London, Table 17 Croydon demographic overview 2010 2005/08 Table 3 Cycling frequency in Croydon, 2005/08 Table 18 MOSAIC Groups 1 demographic by ward 2010 Table 4 Cycling frequency by age band in Croydon, 2005/08 Table 19 MOSAIC Groups 2 demographic by ward 2010 Table 5 Cycling frequency by gender in Croydon, 2005/08 Table 20 Infrastructure initiatives Table 6 Cycling frequency by ethnic group in Croydon, 2005/08 Table 21 Smarter Travel initiatives Table 7 Cycling frequency by income group in Croydon, 2005/08 Table 22 Partnership initiatives Table 8 TfL automatic cycle count sites Table 23 Political initiatives Table 9 Potential cycleable trips in Croydon Table 24 Alignment of Infrastructure initiatives
    [Show full text]
  • London Liberal Democrats
    Parliamentary Constituency Boundary Review 2013 London Liberal Democrats 2nd Consultation: Our Response to representations on the Initial Proposals 1. Overview 2. Sutton Analysis 3. Possible alternatives to Academics’ Scheme Parliamentary Constituencies Review 2013 London Region Liberal Democrat Comments on the Response to the initial proposals 1. Introduction 1.1 This is the second submission to the Boundary Commission for England on behalf of London Liberal Democrats in relation to the 2013 Parliamentary Constituency review. As before it extends only to the areas covered by the London European Parliament electoral region and should be read in conjunction with the separate submissions covering the other regions. 1.2 This submission contains our comments on the more than 5,000 representations the Commission received during the first consultation period on the “Initial Proposals”. We will also state what view we have of the submissions submitted by the Labour and Conservative parties. 1.3 However, we regard the most significant single representation by far to have come not from a political party but from Prof Ron Johnson, Dr Charles Pattie and Dr David Rossiter (and which for brevity we call “the Academics’ Scheme”). We were impressed by the way their scheme has been constructed by following an explicit reasoned methodology and reflects the measurable statutory criteria more strongly than the Initial Proposals. 1.4 We consider this representation separately in Part 5 of this submission. Our view is that this scheme provides a substantially better starting point for the new constituency map in London than the Initial Proposals. Inevitably there are a number of locations where we think their proposals can be improved (particularly with regard to local ties) without damaging too greatly their overarching aim of maintaining stability in the constituency map.
    [Show full text]
  • Addiscombe East
    STATEMENT OF PERSONS NOMINATED London Borough of Croydon Election of Borough Councillors Thursday 3 May 2018 The following is a statement of the persons nominated for election as a Borough Councillor for Addiscombe East Reason why no Name of Candidate Home Address Description (if any) longer nominated* ASTLES 5 Gayfere Place, SE25 6DY Liberal Democrats Valerie Barbara BAINS 17 Cheyne Walk, Croydon, Conservative Party Jeet CR0 7HH Candidate BENNETT 2 Mead Court, 66 Outram Road, Liberal Democrats Andrew CR0 6XE EVELEIGH 418 Lower Addiscombe Road, The Green Party Tim Croydon, CR0 7AG GOLBERG 6 Carlyle Road, Croydon, The Green Party Bernice Clare CR0 7HN HENSON 3 Shirley Park Road, Croydon, Labour Party Maddie CR0 7EW LEE Flat 46 Park Hill Court, Conservative Party Joseph Addiscombe Road, Croydon, Candidate CR0 5PJ SKIPPER 30 Edgewood Green, Shirley, Labour Party Caragh Louise Croydon, CR0 7PT *Decision of the Returning Officer that the nomination is invalid or other reason why a person nominated no longer stands nominated. The persons above against whose name no entry is made in the last column have been and stand validly nominated. Dated Monday 9 April 2018 Jo Negrini Returning Officer Printed and published by the Returning Officer, Town Hall, Katharine Street, Croydon, CR9 1DE STATEMENT OF PERSONS NOMINATED London Borough of Croydon Election of Borough Councillors Thursday 3 May 2018 The following is a statement of the persons nominated for election as a Borough Councillor for Addiscombe West Reason why no Name of Candidate Home Address
    [Show full text]
  • BUS SERVICE REVIEW – Comments Received
    BUS SERVICE REVIEW – Comments received Route: 434 – new Sunday service Borough: Croydon Proposed date of change: 31 August 2013 Number of responses: 33 responses (8 stakeholder organisations, 25 from members of the public) RESPONSES FROM STAKEHOLDER ORGANISTATIONS Consultee Comments East Surrey Users Committee Supportive: Strongly support the introduction of a Sunday service on route 434 and at a 30 min frequency. Ask that in any new timetable that if any buses are scheduled to terminate at The Ridgemount Avenue end of the route that they run back in service at least as far as Coulsdon or preferably Purley. As the existing two last buses running as far as Purley has been very useful. Coulsdon West Residents’ Association Supportive: In favour of improvement which will increase residents’ opportunities to use routes 434. Tandridge District Council Supportive: This particular route (434) has already been extended from Whyteleafe Station southwards and it is considered that if the proposed Sunday service was extended further south along Croydon Road to Caterham Valley, this would help to improve the interchange in Caterham Valley with other Sunday bus services as well as train services at Caterham Railway Station with the potential for additional patronage being generated. East Coulsdon Residents' Association Supportive: Seems silly not to have this bus run on a Sunday. I have a Senior Citizen friend who lives off Rickman Hill and would be a great help to her and me and for others. The Rickman Hill area and the roads running off it - as the name suggests - are very hilly and steep and the introduction of this bus has been a great help - the extension to Sunday running would be greatly appreciate.
    [Show full text]
  • Borough Character Appraisal London Borough of Croydon
    BOROUGH CHARACTER APPRAISAL LONDON BOROUGH OF CROYDON - DRAFT 21 September 2015 This information should be used as evidence base for the Croydon Local Plan CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION Aims Of The Document 4 Scope 4 The Sixteen Places 5 Borough Landscape 6 SECTION 2: THE APPRAISAL Addington 8 Addiscombe 14 Broad Green & Selhurst 20 Coulsdon 26 Crystal Palace & Upper Norwood 44 Kenley & Old Coulsdon 50 Norbury 56 Purley 62 Sanderstead 68 Selsdon 74 Shirley 80 South Croydon. 86 South Norwood 92 Thornton Heath 98 Waddon 104 SECTION 3: GLOSSARY 111 2 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 3 This information should be used as evidence base for the Urban Design & Local • Access and movement in the Place – the degree of accessibility to the Place Character and Heritage Assets and Conservation and Places of Croydon policies and open spaces within it and what modes of transport are available. The within the Croydon Local Plan – Detailed Policies and Proposals. information for the Land use, and movement mapping is derived from the Space Syntax IValueL Study 2009 and is reprinted with their kind permission. AIMS OF THE DOCUMENT • Landscape and Open space Character – landscape character and the type The purpose of the appraisals is to identify and analyse the character of the of open space - defined by its statutory planning designation if applicable Places in Croydon, considering a number of key aspects that contribute to the way - Green Belt, Metropolitan Open Land, Local Open Land or Educational these Places are today. This document will form part of the evidence base for the Open Space. Types identified also include play areas, recreation grounds, Council’s Core Strategy determining the spatial vision.
    [Show full text]