We just wanted to update you on the news that Merton’s planning application committee has granted permission for the 9 storey block at Wimbledon Chase Station.

Merton has failed to identify enough sites for housing

Council planning officers had recommended permission being granted because “Merton currently does not have a five year supply of deliverable housing”.

The need to provide a “five year land supply” is an obligation on Councils in national planning rules to have identified enough sites for potential development to meet housing targets.

Merton’s political administration has failed to secure this and as such, it undermines the Council’s ability to refuse planning permissions and win planning appeals against developers.

However, despite this planning permission can still be refused “where the adverse effect of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits” and this is what both myself and councillor Victoria Wilson argued.

Our arguments that the application should be refused

We argued that the Committee should consider and weigh up 4 points:

• If the Government approves the Council’s new planning rules, it will have a 5 year land supply.
• Residents will be affected by the inappropriate heights, bulk and massing of the development, it will significantly reduce light for nearby houses and flats and more than half of the new flats themselves will be “single aspect” – ie only having windows on one side – this is against local planning rules as they are difficult to keep cool. All these issues were recognised as contrary to local planning rules.
• Whilst it’s great that the Council eventually negotiated some affordable housing (12 flats) it can be difficult to find housing associations to take on such small numbers in a block. And if that happens, the development will still go ahead.
• Despite what the developer and the Labour councillor in charge of transport were saying, the application does not ensure or provide step-free access to the station. The engineering plan is welcome, and may help the train company’s application for Government money, but nothing’s guaranteed and the planning committee shouldn’t vote thinking this was about step-free.

Two local residents, Daphne and Vanessa, spoke powerfully against the application, reflecting the nearly 200 people who’ve been in touch with us about this proposal, raising a number of arguments.

The final vote, which was hugely disappointing, was as follows:

• In favour: Cllrs Mundy (Chair, Labour), Bhim, Whelton, Butcher, Manly, and Johnston (Labour)
• Against: Cllrs McGrath (Vice Chair, Lib Dem), Hicks (Lib Dem) and Cllr Foley (Merton Park Residents Association)
• Not voting: Cllr Barlow (Conservative)

Saturday working

Cllr Simon McGrath managed to ensure a condition that noisy works would not be allowed on a Saturday (under normal rules they’re allowed between 8-1pm on Saturdays).

Next steps

Planning permission remains valid for 3 years. We do not currently know when it is intended that building will start, but we will keep you updated.

If a provider can’t be found to take on the 12 affordable flats this won’t prevent the development. In that instance the developer comes back to the Council, and will likely be asked to enter into an agreement to make a financial contribution instead.

There may be a consultation on the extension of controlled parking on nearby roads to Saturdays – more details to follow.

Although residents of the new building would not be allowed to get local parking permits (except those with blue badges), Cllr Manly argued that those in the affordable housing flats should be able to.

We have concerns about this, housing tenure seems a very odd way to distinguish – but even the Council was unsure of the practicalities and is looking into it.