Appendix 5: Issues and Options Consultation Summary Report Consultation Report Core Strategy Issues and Options – Initial Report February 2010 Contents Page Introduction Representations count Summary of representations Workshop and meeting summaries Imagine Croydon Core Strategy questionnaire Kingston University consultation exercise Croydon 2040 school game Social networking feedback Introduction Published in July 2009, consultation on ’Imagine Croydon: Core Strategy Issues and Options Initial Report’ took place alongside the Sustainable Community Strategy Vision consultation. This enabled the Core Strategy team amd Local Strategic Partnership to combine efforts on a joint consultation. Consultation period: 17/07/09 – 30/09/09 Breakdown of formal representations received: • 12 representations received online via the consultation portal • 73 representations received by post and email • A further 390 Imagine Croydon questionnaires were returned which incoporated Core Strategy questions. A total of 262 attended the following events: • 3 workshops on specialist fields (flooding, urban agriculture and hosuing) 46 attended people. • 3 workshops for council staff, 34 attended. • 3 Central library lunch time drop in events, attended by 50. • 5 area based drop in surgeries, attended by 30. • 8 meetings with key stakeholder groups ranging from residents and business. associations to the Chairs and Vice Chairs Neighbourhood Partnerships, attended by 87. Alternative methods of consultation: • Social networking sites, such as Facebook and Myspace, garnering 28 responses. • The Imagine Croydon “Croydon 2040” game involved 15 secondary school teams and a team from Croydon College. This exercise engaged approximately 150 young people providing their views on issues associated with the Core Strategy. • Collaboration with Kingston University planning students helped deliver bespoke engagement exercises at the “Croydon 2040” awards ceremony engaging the 13 secondary schools teams in attendance. This engaged approximately 100 pupils discussing Core Strategy topics. • A video recording of the Imagine Croydon workshops and vox pox events was carried out and an edited video of comments were uploaded onto the Imagine Croydon YouTube. Representations count 1. Options for Growth 262 2. Croydon Metropolitan Centre 107 3. Climate Change, Energy, Green Buildings, Flooding & Water 104 4. Crystal Palace & Upper Norwood 92 4. Green Grid (inc. MGB/MOL, Urban Agriculture, Biodiversity) 92 5. Homes 78 6. Quality Public Realm, Heritage & Conservation 69 7. Spatial Aims & Objectives 66 8. Transport & Movement 64 9. Norbury 56 9. Purley 56 10. Business, Industry & Employment 46 10. South Norwood & Woodside 46 11. Community Facilities (inc. Health & Wellbeing) 40 12. Culture & Leisure 39 13. Coulsdon 25 14. Addiscombe 24 15. Education 22 16. Delivering the Spatial Strategy (inc. SA and Monitoring) 21 17. Setting the Scene (Context, Demographics, Drivers) 20 18. The Sub-regional Context 16 19. South Croydon 15 20. Waste 14 21. Waddon 12 21. Addington 12 21. Broad Green 12 22. Kenley 11 23. Shirley 9 24. Introduction (inc. 'What is this document for?' & Timetable) 7 25. Thornton Heath 6 26. The Places of Croydon - Introduction 5 27. Sanderstead 4 28. Selsdon 3 Summary of representations Setting the Scene • Delivery of affordable new housing in the borough particularly for young people is supported • Developments on large rear gardens should be encouraged. • Adults with learning disabilities should be provided with far more opportunities to develop their skills. • Housing in the form of one to two bedroom flats should be made for the people with learning and disabilities in area near their immediate families • Support for the wider incorporation implications of Croydon Tramlink. • Support for the importance of overall health and well being; ‘A Place to Belong’ could include objectives to improve the health and well being of the borough, and reduce health inequalities. • The council needs to recognize the needs of all the people of Croydon and not just the wealthy influential and powerful residents • The disabled seem to have been ignored/forgotten as regards the provisional aims and objectives • CMC has been identified as an opportunity area in the London Plan, but there are issues over transport capacity, climate change and flood alleviation/amelioration • Supportive of the proposals to develop Croydon as a destination for business, visitors, conferences, exhibitions and hotels, and as a place for developing opportunities for skills and life chances; • Supportive of the aim of providing new orbital and east-west connections and the proposals for educational development • The Green Belt and open space should be protected; including public access at Kenley Airfield is supported. • Support the Objective to ‘make Croydon a sub-regional cultural centre and deliver a stronger range of facilities’ • Support the aim of attracting university facilities to the Metropolitan Centre: without this, no serious claim can be made to Third City status • Agree that the community will have to live in a more sustainable manner and deal with issues associated with climate change • If there is to be growth for housing it must supported by an improvement to the infrastructure i.e. schools, health, policing, libraries, roads, transport etc • Supportive of Croydon’s objective to extend the range of business activities. • The proposal to demolish the Swimming pool in Purley is unacceptable • Requiring SBD design and physical protection standards in every new build should further reduce the long- term e crime figures on this borough • Some new green space was of poor quality and little use; More public space required and emphasis should be on improving the pedestrian experience around Croydon through pavement materials, furniture, lighting, signage etc • In order to encourage investment in jobs, overall there should be increased training and learning opportunities for young people in the Borough. • Support the aim of attracting a university campus to the Borough • The process of identifying sixteen places across the borough and in turn presenting distinct objectives for each is supported. • The CS may benefit from some further clarity between the varying roles of district centres and local centres. In addition, it should also recognise the important role that local and district centers play in providing local employment and business opportunities across the borough • Where development sites are allocated outside town centers, it is essential that sustainable transport improvements are identified to mitigate any adverse impact on the road network. Funding and delivery mechanisms of such improvements should be detailed in the CS • Support proposals that seek to develop a more diverse economic / business base within the Borough • Support for the co-location of facilities Options for Growth • Concentrating residential housing in the centres of our major towns is likely to become largely dormitory housing for young, single commuters and there is plenty of this type of housing already • Should be more affordable housing for younger people in the community, which should include houses as well some flats to be dispersed evenly throughout the borough • Provision should be made for the housing needs of disabled people so that they can live independently near their families • The choice between Concentrated Growth and Dispersed Growth is unhelpful for solving the Borough’s additional housing needs. The southern corridor does not afford sufficient space to accommodate all of these housing needs and is generally inappropriate for family accommodation. • The east - west connections and the A23 road are inadequate for current demands. A compromise between the two Options is therefore required whereby the Borough’s southern districts take on the main responsibility for family housing. • The centre of Croydon needs to be maintained as a commercial and business town as well as for retail shopping. Development of this central area can be addressed by providing new additional housing and community facilities. • In the present climate of unemployment there should be specialist training via a local college for youths and skills training for older people. Skills such as bricklaying, carpentry, electrical, plumbing should be available locally • Sound spatial strategy should also incorporate a limited release of land from the green belt, with good public transport accessibility • Backland development should be actively encouraged for new housing • Option 1 t will not deliver the growth agenda in a sustainable manner. • The dispersed model of growth will lead to a loss of economic competitiveness and will not be sufficient to meet future housing needs. • Disagree with Option 1 as there would be a dilution of funding which would benefit no-one- there needs to be a balance between both Options • Dispersed growth would probably have the least effect on our open spaces but could mean more lost back gardens. • Dispersed growth is the best way forward for Croydon as it would fuse the area together with the village idea as each area becomes more successful it will grow and blend into the whole while retaining its uniqueness. • Option 1 is the better choice to ensure less pressure put on one specific area in the borough, which could in turn lead to increased congestion and stress on amenities. • Support Option 1 – Dispersed Growth as Option 2 would limit the development potential of future sites not within the proposed