Planning Atlas
Planning AtlasMertonCricket Green ward22/P2358
Planning application · Merton

22/P2358.

MARY TATES COTTAGES, 14 Cricket Green, Mitcham, Surrey, Merton, CR4 4LA

Full / Other Planning at MARY TATES COTTAGES, 14 Cricket Green, Mitcham, Surrey, Merton, CR4 4LA, received 1 Aug 2022 — refused on 30 Nov 2022 (delegated, Leigh Harrington).

MertonCricket GreenCR4 4LA22/P2358
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationMerton profile →
Refused
Outcome
30 Nov 2022
17 wks
Decision time
9 wks over the 8-week target
Conditions
not captured
33
Documents
33 linked
3
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Merton planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application

What is it?

ERECTION OF 5 X DWELLINGHOUSES AND A COMMUNAL MEETING SPACE ON LAND TO THE REAR OF MARY TATE COTTAGES. CREATION OF A NEW PEDESTRIAN OPENING WITHIN THE EXISTING BRICK WALL TO THE WESTERN BOUNDARY AND DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE EASTERN AND SOUTHERN BOUNDARY WALLS.

Reference
22/P2358
Type
Full Planning Permission
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
CR4 4LA
Council
Received
1 Aug 2022
Validated
5 Oct 2022
Target date
30 Nov 2022
Decision date
30 Nov 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Reference
22/P2358
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
CR4 4LA
Council
Received
1 Aug 2022
Validated
5 Oct 2022
Target date
30 Nov 2022
Decision date
30 Nov 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Documents

What was filed?

Document
Published
View
Delegated Report..pdf
Sustainable Build Statement.pdf
Proposed Elevations 01.pdf
Heritage Statement.pdf
D and A Statement.pdf
Proposed Ground Floor 02.pdf
Historic England
Proposed Sections CC and DD.pdf
Proposed Sections AA and BB.pdf
CIL Form 01.pdf
Delegated Report..pdf
Sustainable Build Statement.pdf
Proposed Elevations 01.pdf
Show all 10 rows
Heritage Statement.pdf
D and A Statement.pdf
Proposed Ground Floor 02.pdf
Historic England
Proposed Sections CC and DD.pdf
Proposed Sections AA and BB.pdf
CIL Form 01.pdf

Documents open on the Merton portal. View the application page ↗

Decision

What happened?

Refused on 30 Nov 2022, delegated decision by Leigh Harrington — 17 weeks from submission (9 over the 8-week target).

Timeline

Date
Event
1 Aug 2022
Application received
5 Oct 2022
Application validated
30 Nov 2022
Statutory target date
30 Nov 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Leigh Harrington
1 Aug 2022
Application received
5 Oct 2022
Application validated
30 Nov 2022
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
30 Nov 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Leigh Harrington

Why it was refused

Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development by reason of its design, appearance and siting would: i) represent an unneighbourly form of development that would be visually intrusive and overly dominant resulting in material harm to the amenity of neighbouring land users, ii) fail to provide a well-designed development that would provide a high standard of residential accommodation for future occupiers, contrary to London Plan 2021 Policies D3, D5, D6, HC1 & H13, polices DM O1, DM D2 & DM D4 of Merton Sites and Policies Plan 2011, Policy CS14 of Merton's Core Planning Strategy.
2
The applicant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposals would not have a negative impact on trees in the vicinity of the site contrary to Merton Sites and Policies Plan 2011 policy DM 02.
3
The applicant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposals would provide adequate and workable refuse facilities on site contrary to London Plan 2021 policy D6
1
The proposed development by reason of its design, appearance and siting would: i) represent an unneighbourly form of development that would be visually intrusive and overly dominant resulting in material harm to the amenity of neighbouring land users, ii) fail to provide a well-designed development that would provide a high standard of residential accommodation for future occupiers, contrary to London Plan 2021 Policies D3, D5, D6, HC1 & H13, polices DM O1, DM D2 & DM D4 of Merton Sites and Policies Plan 2011, Policy CS14 of Merton's Core Planning Strategy.
2
The applicant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposals would not have a negative impact on trees in the vicinity of the site contrary to Merton Sites and Policies Plan 2011 policy DM 02.
3
The applicant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposals would provide adequate and workable refuse facilities on site contrary to London Plan 2021 policy D6
Policies cited
D4CS14D3D5D6HC1H13

Public response

Measure
Count
Objections
3
Objections
3
People

Who is involved?

Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place

What affects it?

Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.

Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)

No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.