The Unitary Development Plan (UDP) is the statutory document by which Merton's planning department considers applications - when it suits them!  One such policy is to retain job-creating uses on existing commercial sites.  Not an unreasonable policy you may think to keep employment opportunities in the Borough.  If only!

Take, for example, three developments in our neck of the woods.  Recently a planning application was submitted solely for residential development on the Laxtons site in Home Park Road.  This business occupied former purpose-built residential properties and was something of a traffic hazard to the surrounding houses.

At the insistence of the planning department the applicant was forced to change his proposals to include a substantial proportion of offices (or face a refusal of his application).    The reason for this was the policy in the UDP, despite the fact that the majority of local residents preferred the 100% housing option.  The developer was told that the "UDP takes precedence of the views of local people". See previous editions Editor.

Yet only last year the TFL motor works at the rear of the doctors' surgery in Revelstoke Road was approved for 100% residential development.  Although this change of use was supported by many of the neighbours, it was totally against the policy of the UDP.  However, in this case the developer was "persuaded" to contribute a financial sum to Merton's fund to promote industrial development elsewhere in the Borough (i.e. Mitcham and Morden).  The WPRA's suggestion to achieve "planning gain" by getting the developer to finance environmental improvements in the immediate area was dismissed by Merton's planners.

Not only are these two blatant examples of the double standards operating in Merton's planning department, the dreadful development taking place at the bottom of Arthur Road (formerly Colwood Auto Electrics) is a total contradiction of Merton's UDP.  Here we have a prime site that is being redeveloped to contain a substantial proportion of residential use.  Why didn't Merton's planners insist on keeping job opportunities available in a predominantly commercial frontage?

Not only do such perverse decisions make a mockery of Merton's own UDP policies, they do little to improve the economic or physical environment. 

Stephen Saul