The Development and Planning Applications Committee of Merton Council is scheduled to consider two planning applications for new residential developments. The committee will also review recent planning appeal decisions.

39 Florence Avenue, Morden, SM4 6EX

The committee is scheduled to consider an application for the demolition of an existing bungalow at 39 Florence Avenue, Morden, and its replacement with two new semi-detached dwellings. The report pack indicates that the recommendation is to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

The proposed development involves the demolition of the existing single-storey bungalow and the construction of two two-storey semi-detached houses, each with accommodation in the roof space. Each dwelling would comprise three bedrooms, a living area, and private rear garden space of approximately 99-104 sqm. Parking for one car per dwelling is proposed within the front garden area, with integrated cycle and bin storage. The application has undergone several amendments during the assessment process, including revisions to internal layouts, external detailing, and parking arrangements.

Concerns raised by local residents during consultation included overdevelopment, harm to local character, loss of light, noise from air source heat pumps, parking and safety issues, cumulative construction impacts, and environmental concerns. Councillors Peter McCabe and Caroline Charles also raised points regarding potential short-term letting, community cohesion, parking pressures, and the cumulative impact of development in the area.

Merton Council officers have assessed the proposal against various planning policies, including those related to housing provision, design, neighbour amenity, transport, and sustainability. The Affordable Housing Officer noted that a financial contribution would be required, and the applicant has signed an agreement to provide this. The Highways Officer raised no objection to the amended plans, subject to conditions regarding car parking, cycle parking, and a construction management plan. The Climate Change Officer requested further clarification on certain aspects of the energy strategy, and the Air Quality Officer noted that the development is considered air quality neutral. The report also details considerations regarding flood risk, sustainable drainage, and fire safety.

70 Christchurch Road, Colliers Wood, SW19 2PB

The committee is also scheduled to consider an application for the demolition of the existing building at 70 Christchurch Road, Colliers Wood, and the erection of a new building comprising two commercial units on the ground floor and nine self-contained apartments on the upper floors. The recommendation is to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

The proposed development involves replacing a two-storey detached cottage with a five-storey mixed-use building. The ground floor would feature two commercial units (35 sqm and 95 sqm) with active frontages, and the upper four floors would accommodate nine residential units: eight two-bedroom flats and one three-bedroom flat. The building's external materials would include brickwork, glazed brick accents, and zinc cladding for the upper sections. Cycle and bin storage would be provided internally. The development is proposed to be car-free, with future occupiers restricted from obtaining on-street parking permits.

Objections from neighbouring properties raised concerns about the building's height, scale, and design, arguing it is out of keeping with the surrounding two to three-storey buildings. Issues related to parking, traffic, waste management, construction disruption, environmental impacts, flooding, and the loss of heritage value were also highlighted. Councillor Stuart Neaverson expressed concerns about the impact on natural light, the loss of character due to the demolition of a historic cottage, parking and traffic in Christchurch Close, and the loss of green space. Transport for London (TfL) Spatial Planning had no strategic comments but provided observations regarding compliance with transport policies and construction practices. An independent review of the applicant's viability report confirmed the scheme's viability and the potential for an affordable housing contribution.

Merton Officers have assessed the proposal against relevant policies, including those for housing provision, affordable housing, design, neighbour amenity, transport, and sustainability. The report notes that the existing building is no longer listed, making its demolition acceptable from a planning perspective. The proposed housing mix includes eight two-bedroom units and one three-bedroom unit, which is considered to provide family-sized accommodation. The standard of accommodation for all units is assessed as compliant with minimum space standards. An affordable housing contribution is to be secured via a Section 106 agreement, with the final figure to be agreed. The design is considered high quality, responding to the context of the site and optimising its potential. Transport for London has been consulted, and the proposal is car-free, with cycle parking provided. The development is considered to achieve a net gain in biodiversity and meets sustainability targets for carbon reduction and water usage.

Planning Appeal Decisions

The committee will also be presented with a report detailing recent planning appeal decisions. This report will inform members of decisions made by Inspectors appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. Two appeal decisions are listed for noting:

• 26 Marlowe Square, Mitcham, CR4 1DT: An appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the conversion of a house into five self-contained flats, with extensions. The appeal was dismissed by the Inspector.
• 13 Brookfields Avenue, Mitcham, CR4 4BP: An appeal against the refusal of prior approval for a single-storey rear extension. This appeal was also dismissed by the Inspector.

The report notes that appeal decisions are final unless successfully challenged in the courts and outlines the potential financial implications for the council if costs are awarded against them in appeal cases.