Addiscombe residents are celebrating the Planning Inspector’s decision to refuse an appeal brought by developers who want to demolish the Glamorgan pub on Cherry Orchard Road.

Long-neglected, much-damaged: locals accuse the owners of allowing squatters to move in to The Glamorgan, to make it more difficult to restore as a pub

The appeal was brought by Butlers Walsall Ltd after the council’s planning committee rejected their latest redevelopment proposals, which included the demolition of the Glam and building a seven-storey block of flats on the site.

The Glamorgan was a viable business and a lively pub when it closed in 2016, only for it to be bought by property developers. The historic, Victorian heritage building has since been allowed to become derelict.

Hopes that a community-led pub company might buy the building when the council designated it as an Asset of Community Value floundered when the owners “didn’t meaningfully engage with the local community and set an unrealistically high price of over £2million”, according to the Save The Glamorgan Campaign.

The community campaigners who have been fighting against the development scheme for a decade described the latest proposals as a “wholly unsuitable development application”.

And Croydon Council’s planners agreed, the application being rejected last April.

Butlers Walsall took their case to the Planning Inspectorate, where Croydon Council and community representatives, including Labour councillor Sean Fitzsimons, appeared lat week to argue against the scheme.

Inspector B Pattison released their 14-page findings this week: “Decision: The appeal is dismissed.”

The Planning Inspector’s findings delved deep into planning law and restrictions, on a national, regional and local level. You don’t need to do much reading between the lines to sense that the Inspector was unimpressed with much of the case presented on behalf of the developers.

Towering proposal: the plan for the Glamorgan site on Cherry Orchard Road

“It has been put to me that given market conditions, the proposal is now significantly less viable than previous iterations of the development which proposed more residential units. The submitted evidence refers to a ‘perfect storm’ of high construction costs, finance costs and subdued demand that is suppressing housebuilding.

“Whilst I am sympathetic to the appellant’s concerns in relation to these factors, the submitted evidence does not include quantitative evidence which is specific to the appeal proposal before me.” Oh.

And there was this: “During the appeal the appellant confirmed that the viability of the proposal had been re-considered and it was not viable to provide more than 20% affordable housing. Policy H4 of the [Croydon Local Plan] requires major developments of 10 or more dwellings to provide affordable housing through the threshold approach set out in Policy H5. This requires a minimum of 35% affordable housing… The appellant’s suggested 20% affordable housing provision would fall short of the 35% minimum required by Policy H5.” Oh.

The developers had hoped that providing a small basement space as a “bar” in their development would assuage opposition to their scheme. But most objectors saw through that cunning plan.

And although the Inspector appeared to accept the appellant’s arguments that providing homes on brownfield sites is accepted as council and national policy, that was not enough to sway the Inspector’s ruling.

“I have determined that the development would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area, and would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of existing neighbouring occupiers and future occupiers of the proposal…

“I acknowledge that residential development in this location is acceptable in principle and the proposal may be compliant with various other provisions of the development plan. It would also have economic benefits, both short- and long-term, including bringing a vacant site back into use… However, even taking the benefits into account cumulatively, they would not outweigh the harm I have identified.”

Today, Ron Appleby, the chair of Save the Glamorgan Campaign, told Inside Croydon: “We are delighted that the appeal has been dismissed. We fight on to preserve this historic pub for the benefit of the local community, to have it restored and re-open as a traditional public house.

“The population of East Croydon is growing, and the area desperately needs to maintain its key community anchor points, such as the Glamorgan. Saving the Glamorgan from demolition will help knit together this growing new community.”

Read more: Campaign group prepares to battle for Glamorgan’s future
Read more: Glamorgan pub plan shows it is asset of community value

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

• Click here for South London Wine School’s booking page and links to all their events

Inside Croydon – If you want real journalism, delivering real news, from a publication that is actually based in the borough, please consider paying for it. Sign up today: click here for more details

PAID ADS: To advertise your services or products to our 10,000 weekday visitors to the site, as featured on Google News Showcase, email us inside.croydon@btinternet.com for our unbeatable ad rates

• If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com

• As featured on Google News Showcase

• We offer FREE ads to community groups when they have members who are paid subscribers to Inside Croydon

• Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here

• ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: In January 2026, Croydon was named among the country’s rottenest boroughs for an EIGHTH time in nine years, in Private Eye magazine’s annual round-up of civic cock-ups

• Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network