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. 3. The Secretary of State initially issued his decision in respect of the above application in his letter dated 3 December 2018. That decision was challenged by way of an application to the High Court and was subsequently quashed by order of the Court dated 1 April 2019. The application has therefore been redetermined by the Secretary of State, following a new inquiry into this matter. Details of the original inquiry are set out in the 3 December 2018 decision letter. Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government Tel: 0303 444 3594 Andrew Lynch, Decision Officer Email: [email protected] Planning Casework Unit 3rd Floor Fry Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 4. The Inspector recommended that that the application be approved and planning permission granted subject to conditions. 5. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions, and agrees with his recommendation. He has decided that the application should be approved and planning permission granted subject to conditions. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report. Matters arising since the close of the Inquiry 6. The 2019 Housing Delivery Test results were published on 13 February 2020. The London Borough of Croydon’s score changed from 151% (2018 measurement) to 132% (2019 measurement). As this would not represent a material change to any calculation of LB Croydon’s housing land supply and there was no dispute between parties that the Council could demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply. The Secretary of State is satisfied that this does not affect his decision, and does not warrant further investigation or a referral back to parties. Policy and statutory considerations 7. In reaching his decision, the Secretary of State has had regard to section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 which requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 8. In this case the development plan consists of the Croydon Local plan (February 2018) The London Plan (March 2016) and the South London Waste Plan (January 2012). The Secretary of State considers that relevant development plan policies include those identified at paragraphs 3.1-3.14 of the original Inspector’s report of Dec 2018 as referenced in IR9. 9. Other material considerations which the Secretary of State has taken into account include the National Planning Policy Framework (‘the Framework’) and associated planning guidance (‘the Guidance’), together with the National Design Guide (Oct 2019). The revised National Planning Policy Framework was published on 24 July 2018 and further revised in February 2019. Unless otherwise specified, any references to the Framework in this letter are to the 2019 Framework. 10. In accordance with section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the LBCA Act), the Secretary of State has paid special regard to the desirability of preserving those listed buildings potentially affected by the proposals, or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they may possess. 11. For the reasons given in IR160-167, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that there is nothing in the up-to-date Framework, associated Guidance or National Design Guide to indicate that a different conclusion should be drawn on the meaning and objectives of the adopted policies (IR167). 2 Emerging plan 12. The emerging plan comprises the draft New London Plan and the Croydon Local Plan review, which is at an early stage having gone through its initial consultation. In December 2019, the Mayor issued the “Intend to Publish” version of the emerging New London Plan. After considering that Plan, on 13 March 2020 the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government wrote to the Mayor making a series of eleven Directions to the Plan. The Mayor cannot publish the New London Plan until the Directions have been incorporated, or until alternative changes to policy to address identified concerns have been agreed. 13. Paragraph 48 of the Framework states that decision makers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: (1) the stage of preparation of the emerging plan; (2) the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies in the emerging plan; and (3) the degree of consistency of relevant policies to the policies in the Framework. 14. New London Plan policies which are relevant to this case where changes must be made include policy D3 (Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach). However, details of the way in which the Plan will deliver the aims set out in the Secretary of State’s directions are not yet finalised. The Secretary of State therefore considers that these policies in the emerging Plan carry moderate weight. Other policies in the emerging Plan which are relevant to this case and where no modifications have been directed include D9 (Tall Buildings) and policy H1 (Increasing housing supply). The Secretary of State considers that these policies carry significant weight. Given its early stage of preparation, the Croydon Local Plan review carries very limited weight. Character and appearance/effect of the proposed development 15. The Secretary of State has carefully considered the findings of the Inspector on the character of the area at IR168-171 and then the effect of the development on this from IR172-184. No party at the Inquiry disputed the massing, siting or overall design quality of the proposal for the South site in particular. For the reasons given at IR174 the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that there would be no harm caused to the character or the appearance of the area through the South site redevelopment as proposed. 16. In respect of the Island site, for the reasons given at IR175 the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that there is no dispute as to the benefits of bringing back retail and residential activity to an important part of Purley’s centre, and to the public open space and public realm improvements proposed. He agrees with the Inspector that there is no evidence that these aspects breach any development plan policy or national guidance. 17. With regard to the tower element of the proposal, for the reasons given at IR176–183 the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that there is policy support through allocation for the potential for a new landmark of up to a maximum of 16 storeys’ at the Island site location (IR176). The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector (at IR181) that whilst the tower would be a prominent feature of Purley and would change the character of the town, it would not unacceptably dominate it or the surrounding residential area to the extent that any material harm is caused (IR181), and further that the proposed scheme would positively transform the area with a building of high architectural and material quality (IR183). Therefore, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s overall conclusion at IR208 that the height of the tower element on the island site is in conformity 3 with, and is led by, adopted development management policies for the district centre of Purley. He further agrees that the whole scheme would be of a high quality of design and materials. The development would be beneficial in terms of character and appearance and would greatly enhance the public realm in Purley District Centre, as well as regenerating a long term disused site (also at IR208). 18. Overall the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector; the development would be in accordance with London Plan policies 7.7; Local Plan policies DM15, SP4.5-SP4.10, DM42.1 and national guidance (IR184), the latter which provides support, through allocation, for a landmark tall building in this area. Heritage 19. The Secretary of State has carefully considered the Inspector’s analysis of the impact of the scheme on the historic interest of the Grade II listed Purley Library at IR185-188.