Application Number: 17/P1569                 Ward: Hillside

Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission subject to Conditions

Proposal: Erection of electrical substation and changes to the landscaping to the rear of the building

The Committee noted the officer’s report and presentation. The Planning Manager asked members to note:

·         Environmental Health have not objected but have  added a condition regarding noise

·         The Flood Risk Officer has not objected but has added 3 Conditions that were not presented in the report or in the Supplementary Agenda

The Objector raised concerns including:

·         This sub-station is only 10yards from my property but over 200 yards from the property it serves

·         If the sub-station will produce no noise why have the developers offered me acoustic screening

·         This sub-station would be much better located closer to the highway. It should have 24 hour access from the highway

·         The distance will require additional caballing and more chance of water entering the ducting and outing the supply

·         This area does flood

·         Do not believe the developer when he says there is no other location for this

The applicant made points including:

·         The sub-station is necessary because there is not enough capacity in the local network

·         We investigated suitable locations, but this application is for the only suitable one – there is little space at the front of the new block.

·         We worked with UK Power Networks to provide a unit that is silent and totally safe

In response to issues raised by the objector the Planning Manager said:

·         The cabling will be designed so that water cannot cause power outages

In response to issues raised by Members the Planning Manager said:

·         A condition regarding the landscaping, fencing and trellis around the substation and boundary with the neighbour could be added

·         The condition regarding noise is with regard to noise generated at the Boundary

·         The size of the sub-station meant that it could not be allowed under PD rights

·         We don’t know when the developer discovered that the network could not provide enough power for the new building

Members made comments in support of the application but said that the proposed new condition on fencing, trellis and landscaping should be as strong as possible.

Members made comments against the proposal saying that it was un- neighbourly, and they had difficulty believing that the developers did not realise that they had a problem until this stage in the development. A motion to refuse was proposed and seconded for reasons of un-neighbourliness  and cited policies DMD3 and DMF2

This motion was voted on but was not passed

A vote was then taken on the Officers recommendation to allow, with the addition of the condition on fencing, trellis and landscaping and conditions supplied by the Flood Risk Officer.

RESOLVED

A.   The Committee voted to GRANT Planning Permission subject to the conditions in the Officer’s report and additional conditions from Flood Risk officer and an additional condition relating to landscaping, fencing and trellis work.

B.   The Director of Environment and Regeneration be given delegated authority to agree the detailed wording of the additional conditions

C.   The Conditions provided by the Flood Risk Officer shall be:

Condition: No development shall take place until details of the proposed finished floor levels of the development, together with proposed site levels taking into consideration flood risk to the site, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA, and no development shall be carried out except in strict accordance with the approved levels and details.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future users of the associated development in accordance with Merton’s policies CS16, DM F1 and DMF2 and the London Plan policies 5.12, 5.13.

Condition: No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision of surface water drainage has been implemented in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Before these details are submitted an assessment shall be carried out of the potential for disposing of surface water by means of a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) to ground, watercourse or sewer in accordance with drainage hierarchy contained within the London Plan Policy 5.13 and the advice contained within the National SuDS Standards. Where a sustainable drainage scheme is to be provided, the submitted details shall:

i. provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay (attenuate) and control the rate of surface water discharged from the site as close to greenfield runoff rates as reasonably practicable, and the measures taken to prevent pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters;

ii. include a timetable for its implementation; and

iii. provide a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption authority and any other arrangements.

Reason: To reduce the risk of surface and foul water flooding and to ensure the scheme is in accordance with the drainage hierarchy of London Plan policies 5.12 & 5.13 and the National SuDS standards and in accordance with policies CS16 of the Core Strategy and DMF2 of the Sites and Policies Plan.

Condition: The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as appropriate measures to reduce the risk of flooding to and from the development are submitted to, and approved in writing by, the LPA. These may include raising any water ingress points or apertures and thresholds to the substation building, to ensure it is more resilient to flooding. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the LPA.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future users, and ensure flood risk does not increase offsite in accordance with Merton’s policies CS16, DM F1 and DMF2 and the London Plan policies 5.12, 5.13.