23/03465/FUL - 34A, 34B and Rear of 34 Arkwright Road
Dear Croydon Borough Council,
With regard to the above application, the submitted Planning Statement (McConnell Planning Ltd) includes the following:
"There is a clear and established access drive to the site that ... has recently been considered capable of accommodating a larger number of dwellings within the site than is currently proposed" (6.7), and
"It should be noted that a similar access arrangement was proposed for the previous applications for 19 and 9 homes and accepted by the Council." (6.40)
The submitted Design and Access Statement (Addo Design Ltd) includes the following:
"Access and turning within the site was confirmed as acceptable with the previous two schemes, 21/01208/FUL (19 APARTMENTS) and 22/04130/FUL (9 HOUSES), following in depth pre- application engagement with the highways team at Croydon." (p.6)
+++ Please provide COPIES of all/any information regarding the 'in depth...engagement' with the Council's Highways (and/or Transportation) Teams, during the Council's consideration of planning applications 21/01208/FUL or 22/04130/FUL or any associated pre-application stage.
NOTE: The information provided should include (but not be restricted to) that which shows that the Council HAS accepted the access arrangements proposed for those previous applications, and HOW and WHEN those 'approvals' were given.
Yours faithfully,
Stephen Whiteside
Dear Croydon Borough Council,
By law, the authority should normally have responded promptly and by 22 November 2023 at the latest.
Please provide all the information requested, without further undue delay.
Yours faithfully,
Stephen Whiteside
Information Team Croydon
Digital Services
Assistant Chief Executive Directorate
Bernard Wetherill House
7th Floor, Zone B
Croydon
CR0 1EA
Contact: Information Team
[Croydon Borough Council request email]
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email. If
you have a processing request, please ensure you quote that reference in
your emails to us.
Dear Stephen Whiteside
Freedom of information request - FOI/8717
Subject: EIR - 34A, 34B and Rear of 34 Arkwright Road???????
Your request is being considered and you will receive a response within
the statutory timescale of 20 working days, subject to the application of
any exemptions. Where consideration is being given to exemptions the 20
working day timescale may be extended to a period considered reasonable
depending on the nature and circumstances of your request. In such cases
you will be notified and, where possible, a revised time-scale will be
indicated. In all cases we shall attempt to deal with your request at the
earliest opportunity.
If we are unable to provide you with the information requested we will
notify you of this together with the reason(s) why, and details of how you
may appeal.
Please note that the directorate team may contact you for further
information where we believe that the request is not significantly clear
for us to respond fully.
Kind Regard
Information Management Team
Croydon Digital Services
Assistant Chief Executive Directorate
7th Floor, Zone B
Bernard Weatherill House
8 Mint Walk
Croydon CR0 1EA
Information Team Croydon
Digital Services
Assistant Chief Executive Directorate
Bernard Wetherill House
7th Floor, Zone B
Croydon
CR0 1EA
Contact: Information Team
[Croydon Borough Council request email]
Dear Mr Whiteside,
Please accept our sincerest apology in the time it has taken for us to get
back to you. Unfortunately your original request was not picked up in
error, hence the delay with your response. I can confirm I have escalated
the request and have made the service aware that a response is required
ASAP.
We aim to get a response sent out to you as soon as we receive the
information requested.
Once again we apologies for our error and any inconvenience may have
caused. Thank you for your kind patience, it's much appreciated.
Kind regards,
Information Management team
Dear [email address],
I now expect to receive the information within 10 working days.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Whiteside
Dear Croydon Borough Council,
I have now complained to the Information Commissioner about this delay.
Yours faithfully,
Stephen Whiteside
Information Team Croydon
Digital Services
Assistant Chief Executive Directorate
Bernard Wetherill House
7th Floor, Zone B
Croydon
CR0 1EA
Contact: Information Team
[Croydon Borough Council request email]
Dear Stephen Whiteside
Request FOI/8717
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
Your request has been considered under the provisions of the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004. Please accept our apologies for the delay in
responding to you. Specifically, you have requested the following
information:
"RE: 34A, 34B and Rear of 34 Arkwright Road
With regard to the above application, the submitted Planning Statement
(McConnell Planning Ltd) includes the following:
"There is a clear and established access drive to the site that ... has
recently been considered capable of accommodating a larger number of
dwellings within the site than is currently proposed" (6.7), and "It
should be noted that a similar access arrangement was proposed for the
previous applications for 19 and 9 homes and accepted by the Council."
(6.40)
The submitted Design and Access Statement (Addo Design Ltd) includes the
following:
"Access and turning within the site was confirmed as acceptable with the
previous two schemes, 21/01208/FUL (19 APARTMENTS) and 22/04130/FUL (9
HOUSES), following in depth pre- application engagement with the highways
team at Croydon." (p.6)
+++ Please provide COPIES of all/any information regarding the 'in
depth...engagement' with the Council's Highways (and/or Transportation)
Teams, during the Council's consideration of planning applications
21/01208/FUL or 22/04130/FUL or any associated pre-application stage.
NOTE: The information provided should include (but not be restricted to)
that which shows that the Council HAS accepted the access arrangements
proposed for those previous applications, and HOW and WHEN those
'approvals' were given".
Please see attached. We have removed names and contact details of
individuals as this would be disclosing personal data to you. The General
Data Protection Regulation 2018, renders such data exempt from disclosure
by virtue of Regulation 12(3) of the Environmental Information Regulations
2004 (“EIR”) read with the provisions of Regulation 13.
It is important to remember that when information is released under the
Environmental Information Regulations 2004, it is considered released to
the wider public. Any such disclosure of personal information would not be
compliant with the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulations
2018.
The Council publishes Access to Information requests and responses on its
online Disclosure Log. (Any request included within this log will be
anonymised appropriately)
To view the Council’s Disclosure Log, please visit our website available
here:
[1]The Freedom of Information (FOI) Act | Croydon Council
(disclosure-log.co.uk)
If you are dissatisfied with the way the council has handled your request
under the Environmental Information Regulations you may ask for an
internal review. This should be submitted to us within 40 working days of
this response. You can do this by outlining the details of your complaint
by:
Email: [2][Croydon Borough Council request email]
Writing: Information Team
London Borough of Croydon
Bernard Weatherill House
3^rd Floor - Zone E
8 Mint Walk
Croydon CR0 1EA
Any requests received after the 40 working day time limit will be
considered only at the discretion of the council.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely
Croydon Council
References
Visible links
1. https://croydon.disclosure-log.co.uk/
2. mailto:[Croydon Borough Council request email]
Dear Croydon Borough Council,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Croydon Borough Council's handling of my FOI request '23/03465/FUL - 34A, 34B and Rear of 34 Arkwright Road'.
The information provided consists of a 'combined' document, made up of the following .....
1. pp 1-3 'Highways Response' to Vong. (11/11/22) 22/04130/FUL
2. pp.4-7 Images of waste bins etc. NO DATE, NO APP No
3. p.8(part) email Vong to Mary Toffi. NO DATE, NO APP No
4. pp. 8(part) -12(part) email Chartwell to Vong. (17/11/23) NO APP No (assume 23/03465/FUL)
5. pp.12(part)-13 Vong to Chartwell. NO DATE, NO APP No ( re waste and refuse comments)
6. pp.14-18(part) REPEAT of (4) above. But this time NO DATE (still assume 23/03465/FUL)
7. p.18(part) Vong to Chartwell (25/10/23) NO APP No (assume 23/03465/FUL)
8. pp.19-22 NO NAMES NO DATE, NO APP No [re transportation (?) and waste]
9. pp.23-25 Mary Toffi to Vong. (28/11/22) NO APP No (assume 22/04130/FUL)
+++ Please confirm accuracy of assumptions made with regard to items 4, 6, 7 and 9.
(NOTE: If assumptions in 4,6 and 7 are correct, those documents are irrelevant to this request)
+++ Please explain the relevance of items 2, 3, 5 and 8. (Please add dates and/or relevant planning application numbers)
Items 4 and 6 contain the following:
"…this is the third application on the land. Both the previous schemes … were deemed acceptable to Mary in relation to the refuse truck access and strategy for collection . ... we went through this with the last scheme and I issued you correspondence between ourselves and Mary confirming she was happy and the access was agreed. ..."
+++ That correspondence between Chartwell and "...Mary confirming she was happy and the access was agreed" is obviously relevant to this request. Please provide copies of same.
+++ Items 4 and 6 refer to several drawings (nine, I think) which do not appear on the planning portal under planning application 23/03465/FUL. Please provide copies of same.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2...
Yours faithfully,
Stephen Whiteside
Dear Mr Stephen Whiteside,
Further to your email dated 12 December 2023, in which you requested an
Internal Review of the Council’s response to your request for information
made under the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR), I have now
concluded this review and I am able to reply as follows.
In your request for Internal Review, you asked the Council to reconsider
your request as you believed that you had not been provided with the
information requested.
In your request for information dated 24 November 2023, you requested the
following information:
"RE: 34A, 34B and Rear of 34 Arkwright Road
With regard to the above application, the submitted Planning Statement
(McConnell Planning Ltd) includes the following:
"There is a clear and established access drive to the site that ... has
recently been considered capable of accommodating a larger number of
dwellings within the site than is currently proposed" (6.7), and "It
should be noted that a similar access arrangement was proposed for the
previous applications for 19 and 9 homes and accepted by the Council."
(6.40)
The submitted Design and Access Statement (Addo Design Ltd) includes the
following:
"Access and turning within the site was confirmed as acceptable with the
previous two schemes, 21/01208/FUL (19 APARTMENTS) and 22/04130/FUL (9
HOUSES), following in depth pre- application engagement with the highways
team at Croydon." (p.6)
+++ Please provide COPIES of all/any information regarding the 'in
depth...engagement' with the Council's Highways (and/or Transportation)
Teams, during the Council's consideration of planning applications
21/01208/FUL or 22/04130/FUL or any associated pre-application stage.
NOTE: The information provided should include (but not be restricted to)
that which shows that the Council HAS accepted the access arrangements
proposed for those previous applications, and HOW and WHEN those
'approvals' were given".
The Council responded to you on the 11 December 2023, and provided the
following response:
“Please see attached. We have removed names and contact details of
individuals as this would be disclosing personal data to you. The General
Data Protection Regulation 2018, renders such data exempt from disclosure
by virtue of Regulation 12(3) of the Environmental Information Regulations
2004 (“EIR”) read with the provisions of Regulation 13.
It is important to remember that when information is released under the
Environmental Information Regulations 2004, it is considered released to
the wider public. Any such disclosure of personal information would not be
compliant with the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulations
2018.”
In your request for an Internal Review dated 12 December 2023, you stated
the following:
“The information provided consists of a 'combined' document, made up of
the following .....
1. pp 1-3 'Highways Response' to Vong. (11/11/22) 22/04130/FUL
2. pp.4-7 Images of waste bins etc. NO DATE, NO APP No
3. p.8(part) email Vong to Mary Toffi. NO DATE, NO APP No
4. pp. 8(part) -12(part) email Chartwell to Vong. (17/11/23) NO APP
No (assume 23/03465/FUL)
5. pp.12(part)-13 Vong to Chartwell. NO DATE, NO APP No ( re
waste and refuse comments)
6. pp.14-18(part) REPEAT of (4) above. But this time NO DATE (still
assume 23/03465/FUL)
7. p.18(part) Vong to Chartwell (25/10/23) NO APP No (assume
23/03465/FUL)
8. pp.19-22 NO NAMES NO DATE, NO APP No [re transportation (?)
and waste]
9. pp.23-25 Mary Toffi to Vong. (28/11/22) NO APP No (assume
22/04130/FUL)
+++ Please confirm accuracy of assumptions made with regard to items 4, 6,
7 and 9.
(NOTE: If assumptions in 4,6 and 7 are correct, those documents are
irrelevant to this request)
+++ Please explain the relevance of items 2, 3, 5 and 8. (Please add
dates and/or relevant planning application numbers)
Items 4 and 6 contain the following:
"…this is the third application on the land. Both the previous schemes …
were deemed acceptable to Mary in relation to the refuse truck access and
strategy for collection . ... we went through this with the last scheme
and I issued you correspondence between ourselves and Mary confirming she
was happy and the access was agreed. ..."
+++ That correspondence between Chartwell and "...Mary confirming she was
happy and the access was agreed" is obviously relevant to this request.
Please provide copies of same.
+++ Items 4 and 6 refer to several drawings (nine, I think) which do not
appear on the planning portal under planning application 23/03465/FUL.
Please provide copies of same.”
On receiving your request for an Internal Review, I contacted the Head of
Development Management, Planning & Sustainable Regeneration, who has
provided additional information in answer to the issues raised in your
Internal Review.
For the sake of clarity issues that you have raised will be responded to
in turn below:
“The information provided consists of a 'combined' document, made up of
the following .....
1. pp 1-3 'Highways Response' to Vong. (11/11/22) 22/04130/FUL
2. pp.4-7 Images of waste bins etc. NO DATE, NO APP No
3. p.8(part) email Vong to Mary Toffi. NO DATE, NO APP No
4. pp. 8(part) -12(part) email Chartwell to Vong. (17/11/23) NO APP No
(assume 23/03465/FUL)
5. pp.12(part)-13 Vong to Chartwell. NO DATE, NO APP No ( re waste and
refuse comments)
6. pp.14-18(part) REPEAT of (4) above. But this time NO DATE (still
assume 23/03465/FUL)
7. p.18(part) Vong to Chartwell (25/10/23) NO APP No (assume
23/03465/FUL)
8. pp.19-22 NO NAMES NO DATE, NO APP No [re transportation (?) and
waste]
9. pp.23-25 Mary Toffi to Vong. (28/11/22) NO APP No (assume
22/04130/FUL)
+++ Please confirm accuracy of assumptions made with regard to items 4, 6,
7 and 9. (NOTE: If assumptions in 4,6 and 7 are correct, those documents
are irrelevant to this request)”
Item 4 and 6 regarding the email dated 17 November 2023 (23/03465/FUL)
The comments from the Chartwell group are provided in response to
officer’s comments and questions. These are still being reviewed, and have
not been formally accepted.
Item 7 regarding the email dated 25 October 2023 (23/03465/FUL)
These are the comments received directly from waste officers which have
been forwarded onto the applicant. Items 4 and 6 (above) are in also in
part a response to these.
Item 9 regarding email dated 28 November 2022 (22/04130/FUL)
These are comments received directly from the Highways Officers as part of
the previous application 22/04130/FUL.
“+++ Please explain the relevance of items 2, 3, 5 and 8. (Please add
dates and/or relevant planning application numbers)”
Item 2 Images of waste bins (23/03465/FUL)
These provide confirmation of the size and type of bins.
Email regarding email dated 13 December 2023 (23/03465/FUL)
• Request from Planning Officer to the Highways Officer provide further
comment and review the information received by the applicant in email
dated 17 November 2023 in which the applicant is responding to
comments received from highways officers in respect of Item 8.
Item 5
• Please see response regarding Item 7 above.
Item 8
• Comments of Highways Officers dated 13 October 2023.
“Items 4 and 6 contain the following:
"…this is the third application on the land. Both the previous schemes …
were deemed acceptable to Mary in relation to the refuse truck access and
strategy for collection . ... we went through this with the last scheme
and I issued you correspondence between ourselves and Mary confirming she
was happy and the access was agreed. ..."
+++ That correspondence between Chartwell and "...Mary confirming she was
happy and the access was agreed" is obviously relevant to this request.
Please provide copies of same.”
• It is understood that this refers to the Highways Response
(22/04130/FUL) that has been provided to you.
“+++ Items 4 and 6 refer to several drawings (nine, I think) which do not
appear on the planning portal under planning application 23/03465/FUL.
Please provide copies of same.”
• At the time of writing these are still under review and have not been
accepted as formal plans.
If you are not content with the outcome of the Internal Review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely,
Howard Passman
020 8726 6000 ext. 27103
Resources Directorate
Legal Services Division
12th Floor
Bernard Weatherill House
8 Mint Walk
Croydon CR0 1EA
Council services, online, 24/7 www.croydon.gov.uk/myaccount.
Please use this web site address to view the council's e-mail disclaimer -
http://www.croydon.gov.uk/email-disclaimer
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now
Stephen Whiteside left an annotation ()
The only information provided in the COMBINED redacted.pdf (11.12.23) that is RELEVANT to the ‘previous applications’ (21/01208/FUL or 22/04130/FUL) is held in the following:
• Item 1 (pp. 1-3) - Highways Development to Development Management case officer, Hoa Vong (11/11/22).
• Item 9 (pp.23-25) - Transportation Planner (Mary Toffi) to Vong. (28/11/22)
Both items relate ONLY to planning application 22/04130/FUL.
As far as I can see, the only information held in those Items which might be seen as any form of ACCEPTANCE by the Council of “a similar access arrangement … proposed for the previous applications for 19 and 9 homes …" is held in Item 9, where Mary Toffi states that “… The highway changes were previously approved and do not change with this application and there are fewer cars with the houses than the flats previously proposed. …“.
HOWEVER, Ms Toffi’s email also includes that "Fundamental issues need to be addressed prior to any permission granted. ... Refusal would be recommended on DM29 & 30 highway safety due to internal layouts of parking requiring excessive number of long reverses manoeuvres for vehicles to enter and leave in forward gear. ....”
NB – To describe Mary Toffi as a Highways Officer is misleading. Ms Toffi is a Principal Transport PLANNER in Strategic Transport, a team that reports (like Development Management) to the Head of PLANNING and Sustainable Regeneration (Heather Cheesbrough).
Please also note that the response from ‘Highways Development’ (Item 1) includes the following:
“… The details supporting the access and parking arrangement [sic] are considered unacceptable. …. The proposal to narrow the central island on Arkwright Road to enable vehicles to turn right from the access road onto Arkwright Road is consider [sic] unacceptable and unsafe. Narrowing the island could encourage vehicles to turn right into the site from Arkwright Road which is also considered unacceptable.
It is the opinion of highways that the island should be extended, and signage used to prevent vehicles turning right and only enable vehicles to turn left and follow the one way working of the highway layout.
Details of how the island is designed needs to be agreed between the developer and highways before highways can agree to this application. Until this agreement has been reached highways will consider this application to be unacceptable. …”
So NOT acceptable ... and potentially UNSAFE. Definitely NOT approved!