Logo for the London Borough of Sutton Take part, take pride
Online Planning Register

London Borough of Sutton Planning Department Council Online Planning - Decision Notice Summary

Planning Application Number: C2017/77482
Site Address: Wandle Trading Estate GOAT ROAD MITCHAM JUNCTION CR4 4HW
Description: Variation of condition 29 (drawings) of planning permission C2016/74653 to amend Phase 2 layout, dwelling mix (from 9 x 1-bed and 17 x 2-bed flats plus 26 x 3-bed and 21 x 4-bed houses (73 units) to 16 x 1-bed and 12 x 2-bed flats plus 45 x 3-bed houses (73 units), design, scale and landscaping, together with Phase 2 details pursuant to conditions 1 (materials), 3 (energy statement), 4 (water efficiency), 20 (landscaping), 21 (soft landscaping), 23 (decentralised energy), 24 (ecology).
Decision Date: 29 September 2017
Decision Type: REFUSED
Temporary Expiry Date:
Decision Level/Committee: DELEGATED. OFFICER DECISION
Conditions / Reason for Refusal: INFORMATIVES.

(1)The proposed development as amended would result in a poor quality street scene by reason of prominent and poorly designed flank walls fronting principal public rights of way through the site and alongside the River Wandle. The development would therefore be contrary to policies 3.5, 7.4 and 7.6 of the London Plan (2016), BP12, PMP2, PMP3, PMP5 and PMP9 of the Sutton Core Planning Strategy (2009), DM1 and DM3 of the Sutton Site Development Policies DPD (2012) and policy 28 of the Draft Local Plan.

(2) The proposed development as amended, by reason of the loss of shared amenity areas from the original approved development, would result in an unsatisfactory provision of amenity space for the occupiers of the affordable flatted block. The development would therefore be contary to policy DM2 of the Sutton Site Development Policies DPD (2012) and policy 29 of the Draft Local Plan.

(3) The landscaping details as shown on drawing MCA 1317/01 and submitted pursuant to conditions 20 and 21 of planning permission 2013/68191 (as amended by 2016/74653) are unacceptable by reason of the proximity of proposed tree planting to proposed buildings and the selection of species adjacent to proposed public walkways which would, when established, be likely to discourage public use of these spaces through safety concerns. In addition, the submitted drawing does not show a clear link between the proposed equipped play areas which are separated by parking spaces. This, in conjunction with the loss of informal play space within the removed communal amenity spaces west of the main access road, results in a poorly conceived amenity strategy for the site, contrary to policies 3.6, 7.3, 7.4, 7.19 of the London Plan, PMP3 and PMP9 of the Sutton Core Planning Strategy, policy DM3 of the Sutton Site Development Policies DPD (2012) and policy 28 of the Draft Local Plan.

(4) The proposed development, as amended, would result in an unsatisfactory allocation of car parking space across the site, notably in respect of terraced units 27-45, giving rise to likely uncontrolled and unsightly on-street car parking, causing highway obstruction and a poor quality street scene. The development would therefore be contrary to policies 3.5, 7.4 and 7.5 of the London Plan (2016), BP12 of the Sutton Core Planning Stategy (2009), policies DM3 and DM22 of the Sutton Site Development Policies DPD (2012) and polcies 28 and 37 of the Draft Local Plan.

(5) The details submitted pursuant to planning conditions 23 (decentralised energy) and 24 (ecology) of planning permission C2013/68191 as amended by planning permission C2016/74653 are not acceptable. Further information is required to demonstrate the potential for the development to connect to a decentralised energy network pursuant to condition 23. Amended details are required in respect of optimising species rich wetland grassland planting and river bank re-profiling measures to optimise water vole habitat alongside the River Wandle.

(6) The proposed refuse strategy for the houses, comprising communal bin stores, is considered to be unacceptable giving rise to potential mis-management of household waste. Houses should be supplied with individual bin stores. As such the development would be contrary to policy 5.17 of the London Plan 2016, policy DM2 of the Sutton Site Development Policies DPD (2012) and policy 29 of the Draft Local Plan.

(7) In the absence of a S106 agreement, the proposal would fail to provide adequate contributions towards affordable housing. This would be contrary to policy DP2 of the Core Planning Strategy, policy DM25 of the Sutton Site Development Policies DPD (2012) and policies 8 and 38 of the Draft Local Plan.

(8) For the above reasons, the proposed amended development is not considered to qualify as a minor material amendment to the original planning permission C2013/68191and a full planning application would be required for these amendments.

() The applicant did seek pre application advice but did not submit the application in accordance with the advice given and despite negotiations during the course of the application the applicant still failed to amend the application sufficiently to comply with relevant planning policies. Sutton Council therefore had no alternative but to refuse planning permission.

(2) This decision is based upon the following documents and drawings:6131-P-001-PO1; 6131-P-S2-010-PO1, -/-011-PO1; -/012/PO1;-/015-PO1; -/016/PO1; -/00-PO6; -/101-PO4; -/102-PO3; -/105-PO2; -/110-PO1; -/111-PO1; -/112-PO2; -/200-PO1; -/201-PO1; -/202-PO1; -/203-PO1; -/204-PO1; -/205-PO1; -/300; -/900-PO1; -/A01-PO3; -/BO1-PO3; -/B01-P03; -/C01-PO3; -/HA-P02; TPP1A; MCA 1317/01; Flood Risk Assessment (Ardent,June 2017); Ecological Mitigation and Management Strategy (SES, June 2017); Transport Assessment and Travel Plan (Royal Haskoning DHV, July 2017); Energy Strategy (Energist London June 2017); Arboricultural Impact Assessment (SES, July 2017); Planning Statement; Design and Access Statement.

Click here to return to: Welcome Screen Search Screen Search Results Details Screen