PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE 7 October 2010 Item No: 01

UPRN APPLICATION NO. DATE VALID

08/P2724 02/10/2008

Address/Site: Benedict Wharf, [off Hallowfield Way], Mitcham, CR4 3BQ

Ward: Cricket Green

Proposal: Formation of an 'Eco Park' comprising: an extension to the existing materials recycling facility with the provision of new buildings providing a new anaerobic digestion and integrated in-vessel composting facility; a new bulking/waste building; a new office and visitors' centre; water treatment facilities, new weighbridge; alteration of the access from Hallowfield Way, new service road and ancillary infrastructure.

Drawing No’s 2261-PL001 to PL013, 590-01.01 & 02A Design and Access statement; Flood Risk Assessment; Environmental Statement, Planning Statement, Transport Statement and Site Specific Risk Assessment of Potential Bioaerosal Releases; Bioaerosal Monitoring Report; Energy Statement; Report on Mitcham District Heating Potential Loads and Route.

Contact Officer: Tony Ryan [020 8545 3114]

RECOMMENDATION

GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to completion of a Section 106 Agreement, planning conditions and referral to the Government Office for London and the Mayor of London.

CHECKLIST INFORMATION  Is a screening opinion required: Yes  Is an Environmental Statement required: No  Has an Environmental Impact Assessment been submitted – Yes  EIA Press notice – Yes  EIA Site notice – Yes  Design Review Panel consulted – No  Number of neighbours consulted – 213  Press notice – Yes

11  Site notice – Yes  External consultations: Including Environment Agency, Transport For London, Thames Water, Health and Safety Executive, English Nature, Fire Brigade, EDF Energy & National Grid.  Density – Not relevant  Number of jobs created: - Currently 75 staff. - Phase 1: 104 staff [+ 29] - Phase 2 when development is complete: 97 staff [+22].

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is being brought before Committee for Members’ consideration as it is a major and significant scheme, due to the level of response to public consultation and to obtain authority to enter into a section 106 agreement.

1.2 This planning application requires referral to the Government Office for London as it represents a departure from the Unitary Development Plan; involving the use of proposal site 10P for General Industrial [Use Class B2] purposes. The application also requires referral to the Greater London Authority as the proposed use involves the processing of more then 50,000 tonnes of waste throughput per annum.

2. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS Physical Characteristics 2.1 The application site is currently occupied by an operational waste management facility [covering 3.2 hectares]. This facility includes several large industrial buildings [10 metres in height], a two storey office building, and land currently used for informal car parking to the rear [west] and side [south] of the residential properties at 22 to 40 Church Path. The site also includes the access road known as Benedict Wharf and various buildings that make up the derelict Mitchanol Chemical Works site [0.6 hectares] located adjacent to the eastern boundary on the site with Baron Walk and the London Road Playing Fields.

2.2 The Mitcham to Belgrave Walk stretch of the Croydon tramlink marks the south east boundary of the application site; with the tramlink designated in the UDP as a Green Corridor. Belgrave Walk tram stop is located 80 metres from the western boundary of the application site.

2.3 An estate of industrial buildings accessed from Morden Road is located on the opposite side of the tramline; this estate is also designated as an industrial area in the UDP suitable for general industrial purposes [Use Class B2]. Residential properties are located opposite this industrial estate on Morden Road [at the closest point these properties are 65 metres from the application site].

2.4 London Road Playing Fields are located to the east of the application site and designated in the UDP as Open Space, a Site of Importance for Nature

12 Conservation and Green Chain. At the closest point Morden Hall Park [Grade II listed historic park] is located 280 metres from the application site and separated by existing industrial buildings accessed from Morden Road and residential properties in Deer Park Gardens.

2.5 The application site is not located within a conservation area however there are two conservation areas located nearby. Mitcham Cricket Green Conservation Area is to the north east corner of the application site, with the properties at 2 to 20 Church Path located within the conservation area boundary. The southern section of London Road Playing Fields [50 metres in length] is within Wandle Valley Conservation Area; a possible extension to the conservation area would include all of the London Road Playing Fields. A different part of the Wandle Valley Conservation Area is found within Ravensbury Park approximately 140 metres to the south west of the site on the opposite side of Morden Road.

2.6 The public footpath [Baron Walk] running from Church Path to Morden Road separates the application site from London Road Playing Fields. There is a change in ground level in this location with the playing fields at a higher level then the application site and Baron Walk. On the opposite side of London Road Playing Fields and fronting London Road are three, 6 storey residential blocks called Fenning Court, Gedge Court and Baron Court [18 metres high and 115 metres from the site boundary at the closest point] and residential properties in Taplow Court, 120 metres from the application site.

2.7 To the northwest of the application site is a linear shaped site [UDP proposals site 9P] currently in use as a privately run car pound. Further to the northwest are two and three storey residential buildings in White Bridge Avenue [60 metres from the application site].

2.8 The public footpath public [Ravensbury Path] running from Morden Road to Hallowfield Way [via Belgrave Walk tram stop] separates White Bridge Avenue from the car pound. There is a change in ground level in this location with the public footpath and White Bridge Avenue located at a higher level then the car pound and the application site.

2.9 There are four local schools Benedict Primary School [25 metres from the site] located on the opposite side of Hallowfield Way; Melrose Primary School [75 metres from the site] to the north of London Road Playing Fields, Cricket Green School [270 metres] to the north east of the site and Haslemere School 710 metres [0.4 miles] to the north west of the site.

2.10 The site is not found in an area at risk of flooding [1 in 100 year flood zone] or a Controlled Parking Zone [CPZ] and has a moderate Public Transport Accessibility Level [PTAL] of 3; where 1a represents the least accessible areas and 6b the most accessible. The eastern third of the application site, when split north/south is in an Archaeological Priority Area.

2.11 The application site is in a strategic industrial location as designated within the London Plan adopted in 2008.

13 Current Use 2.12 Under the waste management licences issued by the Environment Agency the existing waste management facility can accept up to 329,320 tonnes of material each year [Waste transfer station 275,000 and materials recycling facility 54,320 tonnes per annum].

2.13 The actual quantity of material that the site accepts fluctuates between different years. In the four years between 2003 and 2007 the levels ranged from 201,896 tonnes per annum in 2005 to 279,432 tonnes per annum in 2003 with 223,012 tonnes of material coming on to the site in 2007.

Waste Transfer Station 2.14 The waste transfer station has operated from the site since 1989. This use operates with waste being delivered to the site in small vehicles, including the contents of skips, construction waste, tyres, scrap metal, timber etc. This assorted material is then sorted into different waste streams and transferred into larger vehicles and transported to other sites elsewhere for processing and reuse and disposal.

2.15 The terms of the existing waste management licence issued by the Environment Agency allow the current waste transfer station a maximum input handling capacity of 275,000 tonnes per annum.

Materials Recycling Facility 2.16 Municipal recyclable materials are delivered to the site including drinks cans, paper and plastic containers.

2.17 The existing materials recycling facility separates these mixed recyclables into individual materials prior to dispatch to other external reprocessors or directly to manufacturers to be used to make new recycled products. The materials recycling facility is made up of a series of conveyor belts and a mix of manual and automatic procedures are used to separate the material delivered to the facility.

2.18 The terms of the existing waste management licence issued by the Environment Agency allow the current materials recycling facility a maximum input handling capacity of 54,320 tonnes per annum.

Vehicle maintenance workshops 2.19 The buildings adjacent to the south east boundary were in use prior to April 2008 as a vehicle depot and maintenance facility for the applicant’s vehicles. This facility has now been relocated to an alternative site in the applicant’s ownership. These buildings are currently used to provide additional ancillary storage.

Offices 2.20 A two storey building located adjacent to the site entrance provides 450 square metres of office accommodation associated with the existing waste management facility.

14 Mitchanol Chemical Works 2.21 Vacant two storey industrial buildings are located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site with Baron Walk and London Road Playing Fields and provide 2,250 square metres of general industrial floor space [Use Class B2]. These works were previously in use for the manufacture of chemical products including inks, coatings and resins and this use could recommence on this site without the need for further planning permission.

Land Use 2.22 The application site covering a total area of 3.8 hectares incorporates Unitary Development Plan [UDP] proposals sites 26P [3.55 hectares] and 10P [0.25 hectares].

2.23 The adopted UDP states that waste treatment facilities, traffic management measures and environmental improvements are the Council’s preferred land uses on proposal site 26P. The land is also designated as an industrial area within the UDP as it is considered suitable for general industrial use [Use Class B2]. Proposals site 26P forms the main part of the application site and includes land currently occupied by the vacant Mitchanol Chemical Works.

2.24 The adopted UDP states that business use [Use Class B1 is the Council’s preferred land use on proposal site 10P that is located on land adjacent to Hallowfield Way and residential properties in Church Path. Proposals site 10P is located outside of the UDP designated industrial area [unlike proposal site 26P] however it is currently used in connection with the existing waste management use [Use Class B2].

3. CURRENT PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposal includes an extension to the existing materials recycling facility and provision of new buildings providing a new anaerobic digestion and integrated in-vessel composting facility; a new bulking/waste building; a new office and visitors' centre; water treatment facilities, new weighbridge; alteration of the access from Hallowfield Way, new service road and ancillary infrastructure.

3.2 The applicant intends to develop the proposal in two phases with [further details below].This phasing is necessary to enable the demolition of the vacant Mitchanol Chemical Works buildings [that are now in the applicant’s ownership] and works to remove land contamination that has been left by this previous use.

Phase 1 3.3 Phase 1 would be operational for a two year period and includes the retention of the existing waste transfer station use. During the phase 1 period the waste transfer station would accept up to 210,000 tonnes per annum of waste material [currently maximum 275,000] the materials recycling facility would process up to 80,000 tonnes per annum [currently maximum 54,320].

15 Phase 2 3.4 Phase 2 of the development that would involve the implementation of the remaining elements of the proposal. These elements include an anaerobic digestion and in vessel composting facility that would accept up to 100,000 tonnes of material per annum and the waste transfer station [reduced to operate at 40,000 tonnes per annum].

3.5 The site currently handles an average of 239,586 tonnes of material per annum [maximum of 329,320 permitted] and this would rise to 290,000 tonnes during Phase 1, but drop to below current levels to a maximum handling capacity of 220,000 tonnes per annum when Phase 2 is complete.

3.6 The following table sets out the average annual quantity of material received by the application site between 2003 and 2007, together with the maximum capacity of the site at this time [controlled by an Environment Agency Permit] and maximum capacity of each of the two proposed development phases.

Anaerobic Digestion and In- Maximum Permitted Materials Waste Vessel Tonnes Per Annum Recycling Transfer Composting [by EA licence] Facility Station Facility Totals Existing - [Average 2003 to 2007] - - - 239,586 Maximum currently permitted 54,320 275,000 - 329,320 Proposed Phase 1 80,000 210,000 - 290,000 Proposed Phase 2 80,000 40,000 100,000 220,000

Materials Recycling Facility 3.7 The materials recycling facility building in the north east corner of the application site will be the only existing building retained. The current application includes an extension to this building to provide a modernised recycling facility; a recycling store and to incorporate the existing waste transfer station.

3.8 The current materials recycling building [annotated as building C and D on the submitted plans - Unit 1] measures 33 metres wide by 73 metres long and rises to 8 metres at the eaves and 9 metres at the roof ridge. The proposed extension to this building [annotated as building B] will measure 40 metres wide, 73 metres long; the building has been designed with a curved roof that rises from 11.5 metres at the roof eaves to a maximum height of 14 metres.

16 3.9 The new materials recycling facility will involve the sorting, separation and bulking of material, including newspapers and pamphlets, mixed papers, card; plastic (jars and bottles); ferrous metals and non-ferrous metals. The material is then packed for transfer to other sites for processing and reuse. As part of the development the capacity of the materials recycling facility will be increased by 25,680 tonnes per annum, from 54,320 to 80,000 tonnes per annum.

3.10 The proposed extended materials recycling facility would operate between 0700 and 2300 hours. The use would operate with two 8 hour working shifts but would only accept deliveries within the existing delivery times of 0700 to 1700 hours Monday to Friday and 0700 to 1200 hours on Saturday, and will be closed on a Sunday.

3.11 The building would be constructed of a metallic and green colour coated aluminium composite cladding with colour coated steel insulated overhead doors and a stucco embossed standing seam insulated roofing system.

Waste Transfer Station 3.12 The waste transfer station involves the receipt of source separated recyclable material, the bulking of materials on the application site and then transportation of this bulk waste for processing in other locations. This facility would be located within the materials recycling facility building [annotated as building C and D on the submitted plans - Unit 1].

3.13 The waste transfer station has an existing maximum input handling capacity of 275,000 tonnes per annum. This handling capacity will drop to 210,000 tonnes per annum during phase 1 and fall again to 40,000 tonnes per annum when both phase 1 and phase 2 are complete [see table at paragraph 3.6].

Anaerobic Digestion and Integrated In-Vessel Composting Facility 3.14 The proposal involves the provision of a new anaerobic digestion and integrated in-vessel composting facility. This facility involves the construction of a collection of buildings on the main part of the site [annotated on the submitted plans as E, F, G, H, I, J, K, O and M – Unit 2].

3.15 The proposed buildings include a waste reception area [building E], bio waste storage [building F], green waste storage [building G], bio waste processing building [building H], composting hall [building I], composting tunnels [building J], compost product despatch [building K], and a bio filtration building [building O]. These buildings have been designed with curved roofs, and measure 11.5 metres at the roof eaves to a maximum height of 14 metres.

3.16 The anaerobic digestion and integrated in-vessel composting facility operation would function 24 hours 7 days a week. However the only staff present outside normal operating hours will be those required to monitor the anaerobic digestion process.

17 Anaerobic Digestion process 3.17 The anaerobic digestion facility would be capable of managing up to 100,000 tonnes of material per annum [80,000 tonnes of kitchen/catering waste and up to 20,000 tonnes of green waste per annum]. Green waste consists of biodegradable waste such as grass/flower cuttings, hedge trimmings, twigs and leaves normally collected by local authorities or through private waste management contractors.

3.18 Kitchen/catering waste can be collected from food retail premises, restaurants and hot food take aways. Many local authorities also have separate collections of kitchen waste from domestic properties.

3.19 Upon entering the site the vehicles carrying the food waste would be weighed and then unload material into an internal bio-waste storage area. A loading shovel would feed the waste into a shredder that would carry out the first stage in a process to break it down. A conveyor belt would transport the material to a sieve. The larger particles retained by the sieve would then pass through a second shredder to reduce their size. All the material would also pass under a magnet to remove any metal that would be collected and recycled off site.

3.20 In the next stage of the process, the shredded kitchen/catering waste would pass through a dosing unit which would feed the material by way of a dosing screw into the top of two, gravity fed digestion vessels [annotated as structure M on the submitted plans]. The dosing screw would mix the new material with already digested material taken from the digester and heat the mixture with low pressure steam.

3.21 These digestion vessels sunk into the ground would be 24.5 metres above ground level with an additional 8 metres below ground level] and 15 metres in diameter and the biodegradable material would decompose through anaerobic digestion as it falls through these vessels. Anaerobic digestion involves harnessing the natural process whereby bacteria break down organic matter however unlike landfill this is in the absence of oxygen and takes place in a temperature controlled and sealed vessel.

3.22 The absence of air and temperature [48-55 degrees Celsius] speeds up the decomposition process that takes place as the material falls to the bottom of the vessel. After the materials have fermented in this closed vessel, three outputs are produced biogas [60% methane and 40% carbon dioxide, with other trace gases] a solid residue [digestate] and water. The reuse of these outputs are set out in the following sections below ‘Renewable energy generation’ [biogas];’In vessel composting’ [digestate] and water treatment facilities. [waste water].

Renewable energy generation 3.23 The biogas [mixture of methane and carbon dioxide and small quantities of other gases] produced through anaerobic digestion would be stored on the site in an 8 metre high spherical gas storage tank [structure P on the submitted layout plan].

18 3.24 The proposed four gas engines [Structure Q] measuring 2.8 metres by 1.5 metres by 1.8 metres high would produce electricity by burning the biogas from the anaerobic digestion process. Some of the exhaust gases from this process would be used to produce steam that in turn would control the temperature of the anaerobic digestion vessels; the remainder of the gases would be dispersed through a single chimney [exhaust stack].

3.25 The steam generator would be equipped with a separate burner operating on fuel oil. This burner would be used to produce steam during the start up operation process or when the biogas engines are not running. This burner when in use will produce exhaust gases that would be directed to a single exhaust stack [Structure U] of 1 metre in diameter and 36 metres in height. A flare stack [Structure N] measuring 15 metres high and 1 metre in diameter would burn off excess gas when this occurs, this combustion process would take place internally and therefore no flame would be visible.

3.26 The flare stack would only be operational when there is insufficient capacity within the biogas gas holding tank or if the gas engines are not in operation; for instance when routine maintenance is being carried out.

In Vessel Composting Facility 3.27 The solid residue output [digestate] from the anaerobic digestion process will be mixed with fresh green waste and put in the composting tunnels [annotated as building J on the submitted plans]. After two weeks the aerobic composting process within the tunnels would turn the waste into a compost product that would then be sold commercially. The tunnels would have a controlled airflow and the provision of an air treatment system to ensure that there are no external smells from the building.

3.28 The maximum height of these buildings housing the composting process would be 15.5 metres and 12.7 metres at the roof eaves. On the roof of these building are four stacks. Two of these stacks would be biofilter stacks rising to an overall height of 20 metres that would release air from the composting process that has been filtered to prevent odorous emissions. The remaining two would be air pollution control devices that remove pollutants called acid scrubbers that would rise to a height of 16.5 metres.

3.29 The building would be constructed of a metallic and Pegasus [green] colour coated aluminium composite cladding with colour coated steel insulated overhead doors and a stucco embossed standing seam insulated roofing system.

Ancillary Buildings Water Treatment Facilities 3.30 The waste water output from the anaerobic digestion process would be transferred to the waste water treatment works [building L] where it would be treated before normal disposal in the sewer. The waste water treatment works building is proposed on the south east boundary of the site adjacent to the tramline.

19 3.31 The main part of the waste water treatment works building is 12 metres high with a separate building section of 6.5 metres in height. The whole building measures a total of 43 metres by 32 metres. The building would be constructed of a metallic and Pegasus [green] colour coated aluminium composite cladding with colour coated steel insulated overhead doors and a stucco embossed standing seam insulated roofing system.

New Weighbridge 3.32 A replacement weighbridge building forms part of the development, this building is used to record the weight of waste material entering the site. The new building measures 9 metres by 3 metres and would be 3.5 metres high.

3.33 The building would be through colour render and a hardwearing cladding material called ‘Trespa Metion’ with powder coated aluminium double glazing.

Office & Visitors’ Centre 3.34 The proposed development includes the provision of a new two storey building providing offices, meeting rooms, a canteen and a flexible exhibition space. The building has a linear footprint with the rear elevation adjacent to the Baron Walk footpath. With the proposed oversailing roof included, this building measures 58 metres in length with the width of the building varying from 13 metres to 26.5 metres. With a sloping roof the height of the building also varies from 8 metres at the rear of the building adjacent to Baron Walk and 6.7 metres at the front of the building.

3.35 The facing material for the building will include two types of gabion walling. To the rear [east] and side [north and south] elevations of the building the facing material would include gabion walling consisting of galvanised steel baskets filled with reclaimed stone. To the front [west] elevation of the building the facing material would include gabion walling consisting of galvanised steel baskets filled with reclaimed glass. Other materials on these elevations would be a double glazed curtain walling and window system. The roof of the building would consist of a sedum roofing system and stucco embossed insulated roofing system with support to the oversailing roof provided by circular timber columns.

Employment 3.36 The existing employment levels on the site and those proposed as part of the development are set out in the table below.

20 Anaerobic Digestion and In- Materials Waste Vessel Employment Recycling Transfer Composting Generation Facility Station Facility Drivers Office Totals

Existing - 28 15 - 23 10 75

Phase 1 56 15 - 23 10 104 Phase 2 [complete development] 56 3 24 4 10 97

Supporting Documents 3.37 As part of the application various supporting assessments have been submitted by the applicant as part of the Environmental Statement. After an assessment of the existing waste operation the traffic assessment concluded that due to the reduction in traffic movements anticipated as part of the proposal the impact on traffic and transport would be acceptable.

3.38 The assessment of visual impact, landscape and on conservation areas acknowledges that the proposed buildings will be more visible then existing structures; however states that this would be balanced by the benefits of regenerating this site that currently includes derelict buildings with a improved quality of ‘built form’. The submitted assessments conclude that that the development would have an insignificant impact on local air quality

Submission of Revised Plans and Additional Information October 2009 3.39 The amendments to the original submission included a reduction in the overall height of the digester vessels from 32.5m to 24.5m. The previous cladding of the vessels has been replaced with a new screen and further new vegetated screens or living walls introduced within the site. The roof form of the main buildings has also been amended

4. PLANNING HISTORY. 4.1 The Council’s records list the application site as three separate parcels of land known as A & J Bull, Benedict Wharf Hallowfield Way, Mitcham, and Land RO 22 - 40 Church Path, Hallowfield Way, Mitcham, and Mitchanol International Ltd, 11 Hallowfield Way, Mitcham.

4.2 The site has a lengthy planning history relating to the industrial uses that occupy the land; however, the following applications are most relevant to the current proposal:  Permission granted in May 1980 [MER118/80] for the erection of an extension to the boiler house for new boiler and chimney.

21  Permission granted in December 1981 [MER902/81] for a 2 storey building to form offices, toilets, changing rooms and mess room incorporating a parking area at ground floor level.  Permission granted in October 1987 [87/P1177] for the erection of melting chambers below ground and enclosure above ground.  Permission granted in November 1987 [87/P1306] for the extension of existing covered area adjacent to grinding process unit.  Outline planning permission granted in June 1989 [89/P0557] for the development of a new waste transfer station.  Details pursuant to outline permission 89/P0557] for the erection of a waste transfer station and weighbridge office granted in February 1990 [89/P1312].  Permission granted in April 1995 [95/P0006] for the erection of a paper storage shed.  Permission granted in February 2004 [02/P2186] for the retention of a 2 storey building for use as ancillary office space.

4.3 The land to the north east of the application site [UDP proposals site 9P] was granted planning permission in December 2007 [07/P2535] for the temporary use up until 2010 as a car pound [sui generis]. The use included 6 temporary buildings for office use and ancillary canteen/ changing room use and the erection of lighting columns and CCTV equipment.

5. POLICY BACKGROUND. Adopted Unitary Development Plan [October 2003]. 5.1 The relevant planning policies in the Adopted Unitary Development Plan [October 2003] are: ST1 [sustainable development]; ST3 [mixed uses]; ST12 [development in previously developed land]; ST17 [built environment]; ST19 [natural environment]; ST31 [land use/transport integration]; ST32 [traffic restraint/reduction]; ST.33 [green transport]; ST34 [public transport]; ST35 [parking]; ST36 [community benefits]; NE8 [green corridors]; NE6 [local nature reserves and sites of importance for nature conservation]; NE11 [trees protection]; NE12 [trees; hedges and landscape features]; BE15 [new buildings - daylight, sunlight, privacy, visual intrusion and noise], BE16 [urban design], BE17 [urban design – application of standards], BE22 [design of new development], BE.23 [alterations and extensions to buildings], BE25 [sustainable development], PE2 [pollution and amenity], PE.5 [Risk from Flooding], PE7 [capacity of water systems], PE8 [contaminated, vacant and derelict land], PE9 [waste minimisation and waste disposal], PE11 [recycling points], PE.12 [Energy Generation and Energy Saving], PE13 [energy efficient design], PT1 [local and regional needs [public transport]], RN3 [vehicular access], RN4 [road safety] WC1 [increased walking], WC3 [cycle facilities], PK2 [car parking standards], PK3 [car parking and development], PK4 [management of public parking], PU1 [transport infrastructure and development], LU2 [public transport accessibility], LU3 [transport impact of new development], LU5 [developer contributions], F2 [planning obligations] Schedule 1 [site proposals].

22 South London Waste Plan [currently under preparation] 5.2 The four London Boroughs of Croydon, Kingston, Sutton and Merton are currently working together to prepare a document called the South London Waste Plan. This plan when completed will form part of the Local Development Framework [LDF] documents produced by these four boroughs; with the LDF when complete replacing some current Unitary Development Plan planning polices.

5.3 Public consultation was carried out between the 19 September 2008 and 31 October 2008 that sought the views of residents on the objectives for the plan. These objectives could include 'how much of our waste is dealt with in this area; the distribution of waste management sites, should the plan specify the technologies to be used at each site and how should we monitor the success of the plan?

5.4 Further public consultation took place between 20 July 2009 and 16 October 2009 on potential waste sites to be included within the plan [including the application site] and planning policies. An Examination In Public is scheduled to take place in the early summer of 2011 to assess the waste plan with the publication of the plan scheduled for winter 2011.

5.5 The consultation document advises that planning applications still have to be determined whilst this waste plan is being prepared. The consultation relating to the plan does not relate to individual planning applications [these have separate consultation] but the general suitability of a number of sites for waste management facilities and the policies against which future planning applications will be assessed

The London Plan [February 2008]. 5.6 The relevant policies in the London Plan [February 2008] are: - 2A.1 [sustainability criteria], 2A.10 [strategic industrial locations], 3A.3 [maximising the potential of sites], 3B.1 [developing London’s economy], 3B.4 [industrial locations], 3B.11 [improving employment opportunities for Londoners], 3C.1 [integrating transport and development], 3C.2 [matching development to transport capacity], 3C.3 [sustainable transport in London], 3C.21 [Improving conditions for walking], 3C.23 [parking strategy], 3D.3 [maintaining and improving retail facilities], 3D.14 [biodiversity and nature conservation], 4A.1 [tackling climate change], 4A.2 [mitigating climate change], 4A.3 [sustainable design and construction], 4A.4 [energy assessment], 4A.5 provision of heating and cooling networks, 4A.6 decentralised energy: heating, cooling and power, 4A.7 [renewable energy], 4A.11 [living roofs and walls], 4A.12 [flooding], 4A.13 [flood risk management], A.14 [sustainable drainage], 4A 19 [improving air quality, 4A.20 [reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes], 4A.21 [waste strategic policy and targets], 4A.22 [spatial policies for waste management], 4A.23 [criteria for the selection of sites for waste management and disposal], 4B.1 [design principles for a compact city], 4B.3 [enhancing the quality of the public realm], 4B.5 [creating an inclusive environment], 4B.10 [large-scale buildings – design and impact], 4B.12 [heritage conservation], 4B.15 [archaeology], 6A.5 [planning obligations].

23 London Council’s Air Quality and Planning Guidance [2007] 5.7 The major source of air pollution in London is road traffic with other notable contributions coming from industrial plant, industrial premises, domestic energy production and construction activity. This document provides guidance on the extent of any air quality assessment including weather patterns and background data.

National Planning Policy Guidance Planning Policy Statement 1: Planning and Climate Change 5.8 This guidance states that regional planning authorities and local authorities should promote resource and energy efficient buildings; community heating schemes, the use of combined heat and power, small scale renewable and low carbon energy schemes in developments.

Planning Policy Statement 10: Sustainable Waste Management 5.9 This national planning guidance document advises that the planning and pollution control regimes should operate separately but in a complementary fashion. Pollution control is concerned with preventing pollution through the use of measures to prohibit or limit the release of substances to the environment to the lowest practicable level. It also ensures that ambient air and water quality standards that guard against impacts to the environment and human health are met.

5.10 The planning system controls development and use of land in the public interest and should focus on whether development is an acceptable use of the land, and the impacts of those uses. The consideration of planning applications should purely relate to controlling the development of land in the public interest and should not seek to control processes which are a matter for pollution control authorities [Environmental Health].

5.11 In terms of health, the guidance states that ‘modern, appropriately located, well-run and well-regulated, waste management facilities operated in line with current pollution control techniques and standards should pose little risk to human health’. If detailed consideration of a waste management process and its implications for human health is necessary, this is the responsibility of the pollution control authorities. However, planning operates in the public interest to ensure that the location of proposed development is acceptable and health can be material to such decisions.

5.12 It should not be necessary to use planning conditions to control the pollution aspects of a waste management facility, where the facility requires a permit from the pollution control authority. In some cases it may be appropriate to use planning conditions to control other aspects of the development. These aspects could include transport modes, the hours of operation, landscaping, the timescale of the operations, and impacts such as noise, vibrations, odour, and dust from phases of the development such as demolition and construction.

24 Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control 5.13 Air quality can be a material consideration in the assessment of a planning application. Through close cooperation with the Environment Agency, English Nature and the local pollution control authority [Environmental Health] local planning authorities must be satisfied that permission can be granted on land use grounds taking full account of environmental impacts.

5.14 The overall aim of planning and pollution control policy is to ensure the sustainable and beneficial use of land [and in particular encouraging reuse of previously developed land in preference to greenfield sites]. Within this aim, polluting activities that are necessary for society and the economy should be sited to ensure that adverse effects are minimised and contained to within acceptable limits.

5.15 Opportunities should be taken wherever possible to use the development process to assist and encourage the remediation of land already affected by contamination. Contamination of land may threaten public health and safety, the natural environment, the built environment and economic activities, through its impacts on the users of the land, and on neighbouring users. Land contamination, or the possibility of it, is therefore a material planning consideration in the preparation of development plan documents and in taking decisions on individual planning applications. It remains the responsibility of the landowner/developer to identify land affected by contamination and to ensure that remediation is undertaken to secure a safe development.

5.16 PPS23 Annex 2: “Development on Land Affected by Contamination” gives brief details of the roles of the different parties in the development process, on the relationship between planning control and the contaminated land regime and on the requirements and good practice in dealing with these issues through planning control.

Circular 02/2000, “Contaminated Land” 5.17 The Government’s objectives for contaminated land are set out in DETR Circular 02/2000, “Contaminated Land”. These are: • to identify and remove unacceptable risks to human health and the environment; • to seek to bring damaged land back into beneficial use; and • to seek to ensure that the cost burdens faced by individuals, companies and society as a whole are proportionate, manageable and economically sustainable.

The Waste Strategy for England [May 2007]. 5.18 In May 2007 the Department for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs [DEFRA] published the Waste Strategy for England. The key government objectives outlined in the strategy include:  an emphasis on waste prevention and re-use;  to meet and exceed targets for the diversion of biodegradable municipal waste from landfill;  to increase the diversion quantity of non-municipal waste;  secure better integration of treatment for municipal and non-municipal waste;

25  secure the investment in infrastructure needed to divert waste from landfill  to get the most environmental benefit from that investment, through increased recycling of resources and recovery of energy from residual waste using a mix of technologies.

6. CONSULTATION 6.1 The planning application was publicised by means of press notices, a site notice and individual consultation letters sent to neighbouring properties. In response to public consultation, 155 individual letters have been received from residents objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

Location  Impact on three local schools, doctor’s surgeries and the vulnerable users of these buildings;  The existing use should be relocated to an industrial area or an site outside a town centre;  Mitcham is a residential village not an industrial area;  Other SITA sites are in less dense locations out of urban areas;  No clear information on delivery catchment areas;  Recycling needs to take place, but not of this scale in this area;  This type of application would never be considered in Wimbledon;  The proposal will harm the safety of the adjacent tramline.

Visual Appearance  The anaerobic digestion vessels will cause blight, and affect local quality of life;  The proposal will ruin the aesthetics of the area;  Impact upon the use of nearby open space and Morden Hall Park;  Development out of keeping with the character and appearance of the adjacent conservation area and listed buildings;  The anaerobic digestion vessels will become a modern version of the Brown and Root Tower, Colliers Wood;  The high rise structures will dominate the area.

Traffic and Access  Access roads are not suitable and too narrow;  The additional traffic will damage historic buildings and will result in further structural damage to adjacent residential properties;  Conditions should be attached to any permission restricting HGV access, controlling routes and restricting parking in Hallowfield Way;  HGV traffic will increase on Church Road by over 500 vehicles per day;  Construction and delivery vehicles will cause congestion and accidents;  Prospect of accidents due to narrow pavements and children using local schools;

Environment  The chimneys will result in acid rain;  Mitcham will be dumping ground for England and Europe;

26  The development will impact on the River Wandle;  The applicant says the site is safe, this was said about Chernobyl;  Methane, carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide will damage health;  Levels of nitrogen dioxide will damage health of staff, residents and children;  What about the danger of explosions?  Emission figures do not include emissions from vehicles;  Potential for fire risk.

Amenity  Nuisance will be caused by extension of operating hours till 11pm;  Existing traffic arriving/leaving at 4am;  Increased noise from the process ranging from 70db to 100db;  Increased noise from additional traffic, and the staff car park;  The peace and tranquility of nearby properties will be lost forever;  Lorries parking in Hallowfield Way will cause nuisance;  Additional rubbish will spill from delivery lorries;  Current odours from the site and vehicles will increase;  Development of the Chemical works will displace mice and rats;  Light pollution from security lights;  Loss of privacy from the visitors centre roof garden;  Mental and physical health impact;  This area should be designated a ‘Clean Air Zone’;

General  The proposal is contrary to article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 right to respect for private and family life;  The development will have an adverse impact on property prices;  A similar proposal was refused in Sutton;  Proposal contrary to the controls on normal two storey properties;  Consultation on the application was inadequate;  SITA more interested in business, then residents and has lost sight of community responsibilities;  The development is contrary to London Plan polices 2A.1, 4B.1, 4B.7, 4B.8, 4B.9, 4B.10, and UDP policies BE.1, BE.3, BE15, BE16 NE.2 PE1, PE2, LU.3 and BE19.

6.2 Five petitions containing a total of 634 signatures were also received that object to the proposal on the following grounds:  This site is in a residential area that also contains seven schools and is on the edge of a conservation area.  The height of the proposed structures would be 32.5 metres.  The vehicles delivering waste would have a harmful impact on the area with local roads not built for this level of use.

6.3 Three letters have been received in support of the application on the following grounds:

27  After the site has been developed traffic levels will decrease as waste will actually be treated on site,  There are a lot of positive things with this development  As a nation we should be supporting projects like this for recycling and sending less waste to land fill.  Earlier concerns regarding the development were overcome following attendance at the open day at the site  The development will bring new jobs to this area  Whilst traffic will increase this will only be for short time  It is considered that the digesters are in keeping with the area.  Mitcham residents should welcome this development with ‘open arms’ as it represents investment in the area.  Any initiatives that benefit the environment will be beneficial for all.  The site is ideally located next to a school that will educate these ‘young neighbours’ in the benefits of recycling.  The visitor and education centre will be an asset to the area.

6.4 Public Meeting A public meeting took place on the 19 January 2009 in Vestry Hall, Mitcham that was attended by local ward councilors, residents and the planning case officer. In addition to the points raised in letters the main points raised by residents were as follows:  Although SITA have held several events including open days, there is a link between circulation of their invitation letters and poor attendance  There is a single entrance for lorries to the site from Hallowfield Way.  Lorries smell at present  There should be 500 lorries in and 500 vehicles out however there are disappearing lorries with some vehicles that do not come out  Wimbledon Village – if there were a proposal for a facility there would the Mayor be in favour.  The anaerobic digestion facility reduces the quantity of material that goes to landfill.  Legal controls of expansion - what is to stop the facility getting larger and larger?  Future improvements to efficiency of the site will also increase vehicle movements.  The calculations on traffic has not accounted for coaches for schoolchildren  Decontamination of the site – need for two applications  Nitrogen Dioxide – no gases produced on the site at present  Work has started on the site at 3.45am despite officially the site not opening till 7am  SITA has said that the gases are within acceptable limits - Why is the a chimney of that height required if this is the case?  Monitoring the existing site – environmental health controls  Getting rid of compost – vehicle movements  Gas engines and anaerobic digestion vessels – noise produced on site.  There is a concern over safety – what if the driver of a vehicle on the site has a heart attack when passing the gas cylinder.

28 6.5 In addition to the Council’s statutory public consultation the applicant has undertaken separate consultation with local residents. Following submission of the planning application an open day was held on the 5 and 6 December 2008 with the opportunity for visitors and local schoolchildren to tour the existing waste treatment operation. A summary of the comments received from the exhibition were as follows:  Interested to know that the site would be self sufficient in terms of electricity  The concept behind the proposal was considered good  Interest in the potential for combined heat and power and the local opportunity that this presents.  The visitor centre would be a popular and positive addition to the area  Proposed off site improvements were welcomed  Employment opportunities that the scheme would bring were welcomed.

6.6 Haslemere School Council have submitted a petition of 104 signatures objecting to the proposal on the grounds that the local roads are inadequate for the level of traffic that the proposal will generate with rubbish transported from Wandsworth, Sutton and Croydon. The site is located in a residential area with seven primary schools locally.

6.7 Councillor Ian Munn has stated that planning permission should be refused on the following grounds:  The impact of the proposals on the well-being of the local communities and their environment contrary to London Plan Policy 4B.7  The proximity to, and impact upon the Cricket Green Conservation Area, historic environment and built heritage, contrary to Merton UDP Policies BE.3 and BE.19 and London Plan Policy 4B.9  The visual intrusion on London Road Playing Fields contrary to London Plan Policy 4B.1 and 4B.8  The proximity of residential properties, schools, workplaces, recreation areas in terms of potential air emissions, odours, noise, and vibrations contrary to Merton UDP Policies PE.1, PE.2 and London Plan Policy 2A.1  The design of the principal buildings is bland and uninspiring and the mass and height of the proposed buildings will have an overbearing and negative impact upon the surrounding Public Open Space and the Conservation Area contrary to Merton UDP Policies BE.3 and BE.19 London Plan Polices 4B.9 and 4B.10  The volume of traffic associated with the development and the extent to which this can be controlled contrary to Merton UDP Policy LU.3.  If planning permission is approved conditions should be attached restricting HGV access to the site, controlling the routes of vehicles using the site and restricting the hours that vehicles can park in Hallowfield Way.

6.8 Siobhan McDonagh MP has stated that the proposal will have a detrimental impact on the environment of Mitcham and that this is an inappropriate site

29 due to noise, odours for proposals of this scale. Hundreds of lorries will pass through the conservation area along Church Road every day, proximity to Benedict Primary School, dominate views from around Mitcham and beyond  Completely overlook adjacent green space  The height of the buildings is overwhelming and the overall design is ugly and uninspiring  Proximity to residential properties, schools, workplaces and recreation areas where thousands of people live or work in the immediate area with 400 pupils attending neighbouring schools likely to suffer potential air emissions odours smells and vibrations  Contrary to UDP policies PE.1, PE.2 and London Plan policy 2A.1  Impact on the well being of local communities and their environment London plan policy 4B.7  Proximity to Cricket Green Conservation Area impact upon environment, history and heritage UDP polices BE.3, BE19 and London Plan policy 4B.9  Ugly and unimaginative design of the buildings and chimney towers and their overwhelming size and scale contrary to London Plan policies 4B.9 and 4B.10.  The eyesore it will cause particularly from the London Road Playing Fields London Plan policies 4B.1 and 4B.8  High level of traffic particularity HGV vehicles, how difficult for these traffic movements to be properly controlled much of the extra traffic will have to drive through the conservation area. Merton UDP policy LU.3

6.9 Melanie Hampton - Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Mitcham & Morden [May 2010] objected to the application on the following grounds:  The site is accessed by very narrow streets and past a primary school.  The existing site is not suitable for large lorries as it has a high housing density with young families.  The site is also next to a conservation area with ‘fine Georgian and Victorian buildings’.  The existing smell from lorries is unpleasant for local residents and their children, and it is understood that many parents would not consider the school because of the smell.  Local residents are opposed to any plans for the expansion of this site.  There is a concern for this area generally as it has a high level of social housing and also important historical buildings.  Residents feel that the area has become a dumping ground.  This has been designated as an area which needs regeneration.  we need to encourage conservation of the area and restore a sense of pride that the residents are keen to regain.  The reduction in height of the digestion vessels from 38 metres to 24.5 metres is just ‘tinkering’ as they will still totally blight this area

6.10 Melrose School state that whilst broadly in favour of the proposed development and aware that the quantity of traffic should go down when the development is fully operational, there is still a concern about the increase in traffic during phase 1 of the development. As this is a school for students

30 with behavioral, emotional and social difficulties and the other three schools located nearby there are concerns that this increase and the resulting congestion will increase the chances of a serious road accident.

6.11 Mitcham Cricket Green and Heritage object to the planning application on the basis that the results of the consultation on the South London Waste Plan should be assessed before proceeding with this application. It is considered encouraging that the four boroughs involved in the South London Waste Plan are taking a holistic approach to planning for new management facilities.

6.12 Mitcham Society raise concerns over the scale and design of the buildings; the width of the road access along Church Road; closeness of residents and schools; noise, smells and emissions. It is considered that the facility should be in a more suitable location. The safety and well being of the local community and visual impact have not been considered.

6.13 English Heritage state that following the results of a desk based assessment further investigation should take place in the form of archaeological trail trenches undertaken by a suitably qualified archaeological organisation, the results of this investigation used to inform an appropriate mitigation strategy for the remainder of the site Planning conditions are recommended to secure the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with an approved written scheme for investigation.

6.14 Mitcham Village Residents Association object to the application on the following grounds:  The development is too big and has been poorly designed  The overbearing impact on the Conservation Area  Site is too closer to a residential area and three local schools  Health risks may be associated with the proposal  A heavy and dangerous volume of traffic will use Church Road.

6.15 LB Merton Transport Planning No objection to the proposals, subject to the necessary obligations and conditions. The transport impact associated with the development is considered to be acceptable, given the level of traffic that could potentially be generated by the site under existing waste licences and / or uses. Phase 2 of the proposals will also lead to a reduction in traffic generation when compared to existing levels.

6.16 On-site arrangements are considered to be acceptable and will not lead to any issues associated with queuing on the public highway. Car and cycle parking provision is considered to be acceptable. The proposed highway improvement measures, including the widening of Baron Walk, the improvements to the former Mitchanol works entrance at the end of Church Path and the environmental improvements to Hallowfield Way are supported by officers.

6.17 LB Merton Environmental Health raises no objections subject to the imposition of suggested planning conditions relating to air quality, odour

31 control, material storage, noise, demolition nuisance, ground contamination and hours of operation.

6.18 LB Merton Greenspaces Team state that on the basis that the widening of Baron Walk will not encroach on to London Road Playing Fields, measures to prevent light spillage on to the open space and planning obligations for improvements to the open space there are no objections to the proposal.

6.19 LB Merton Conservation Team Planning Policy Statement 5 [Policy HE9.4] states that where there is less then substantial harm to a designated heritage asset in all cases local planning authorities should weigh the public benefit of the proposal against the harm. Local authorities should take into account the relative significance of the element effected and it's contribution to the significance of the conservation area as a whole.

6.20 An extensive site visit has been undertaken with the applicant that involved a detailed inspection of all the potential viewpoints within the conservation area that would potentially be affected by this development. It is considered that the gateway to the conservation area at the junction of Church Road and Hallowfield Way would be significantly improved by the proposal. The view into the site from Church Path is impacted on by the scheme, however, it is not considered that the development will cause significant harm in this aspect as the existing pylon already forms the backdrop to the view.

6.21 Given that the visibility of the scheme from the conservation area is limited to the above views, in applying the test outlined in Planning Policy Statement 5, it is considered that the public benefits of the scheme and the associated off site environmental improvements, would on balance outweigh any harm that it would cause to the character of the conservation area. The many positive measures have been taken to minimise the impact of the scheme on the adjoining conservation area are also noted.

6.22 LB Merton Regeneration Partnerships state that the proposed increase in the capacity of this existing refuse transfer site to receive and process waste in a manner which is socially and environmentally acceptable is welcomed. It is hoped that every technically feasible and economically viable means of protecting the surrounding communities from potential environmental nuisance arising from the development should be adopted. Moreover every opportunity to harness this important waste processing technology to the economic advantage of local communities should be grasped.

6.23 Environment Agency raises no objections to the development subject to the imposition of conditions relating to the sustainable management of surface water and site contamination.

6.24 The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority No objection to the proposal subject to compliance with the relevant clauses of the Building Acts that ensure adequate access to fire vehicles and water supplies for fire fighting.

32 6.25 Thames Water has no objection to the development either in terms of sewerage or water infrastructure. An informative is recommended relating to water pressure and flow rate.

6.26 National Grid state they have no objection to the proposal

6.27 Health and Safety Executive The proposal is not large enough to require formal consultation with the Health and Safety Executive [HSE] however informal advice has been provided to the applicant.

6.28 The HSE have not objected to the application but have advised the applicant to ensure that relevant separation distances are adhered and if not already carried out there should be a risk assessment in terms of the threat of explosions, gas leakage, internal dust concentrations, vehicular movements on the site and escape routes.

6.29 Natural England state that they are pleased that the proximity of the London Road Playing Fields Site of Nature Conservation Importance has been recognised by the developer. The Bat Survey that has been carried out found a low potential for Bat roosts however further surveys are recommended prior to demolition. The mitigation proposals and lighting recommendations [paragraphs 3.1.4 and 3.1.5] are also supported.

6.30 The roof garden on the visitor’s centre and the improvements to the Hallowfield Way and the Barons Walk footpath are supported. Natural England would like to see a range of native tree species within new tree planting to provide a variety of options and biodiversity potential. Subject to these comments Natural England have no objection to the proposal.

6.31 Mayor of London/Greater London Authority/Transport for London state that for the development to be compliant with the London Plan the following should be addressed: Employment: ensure that initiatives for recruiting unemployed people from the local area are developed; Waste: Provide clarification on the materials separated by the materials recycling facility a commitment to minimise the amount of digestate going to landfill and clarification of which landfill site the residual waste will be sent to; Energy: provide a clear demonstration of energy inputs and outputs from the proposed scheme and the associated carbon dioxide emissions; Design: the design of the fermentation/digestion cylinders in particular should be fully reconsidered and the design points raised in this report addressed; Transport: the applicant should prepare a travel plan, a construction logistics plan and a delivery and servicing plan and provide further information regarding trip generation, car and cycle parking, and pedestrian facilities.

Submission of Revised Plans and Additional Information. 6.32 Following the initial consultation the applicant submitted revised plans and additional information in October 2009. Further open days were held by the applicant on Friday 20 and Saturday 21 November 2009 for residents and interested parties to discuss the revised plans.

33 6.33 These revised plans were subject to further consultation and as a result the a further eleven letters were received objecting to the proposal and making the following additional comments:  The changes that have been made are purely cosmetic.  Heavy industry returning to a predominantly residential area  Vessels are still too high and will dominate the area  Changing the height of the vessels does not reduce their impact  Too many buildings are proposed for a site of this size  Church Road is too narrow  The reduction in the height of the vessels will increase pollution  No doubt promises were made when the existing use was proposed in relation to smells that have now been broken  The application states that the vessels cannot be reduced any further which suggests that the use is not suitable for this site

6.34 A further petition containing 535 signatures was received objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:  The site is accessed by very narrow streets and past a primary school.  The existing site is not suitable for large lorries as it has a high housing density with young families.  The site is also next to a conservation area with ‘fine Georgian and Victorian buildings’.  The existing smell from lorries is unpleasant for local residents and their children, and it is understood that many parents would not consider the school because of the smell.  Local residents are opposed to any plans for the expansion of this site.  There is a concern for this area generally as it has a high level of social housing and also important historical buildings.  Residents feel that the area has become a dumping ground.  This has been designated as an area that needs regeneration.  We need to encourage conservation of the area and restore a sense of pride that the residents are keen to regain.  The reduction in height of the digestion vessels from 38 metres to 24.5 metres is just ‘tinkering’ as they will still totally blight this area

6.35 Mitcham Cricket Green and Heritage The alterations made to the plans will make no significant difference to the effect on the area. The towers are still too high, and the density of traffic is still far too dangerous for this populated area. It is not acceptable that the nearest air quality testing facility is located in Kensington Gore [nr Royal Albert Hall]. This is not good enough for the local area. The area around the SITA site needs regeneration not further degeneration. It is already an impoverished area from a community point of view.

6.36 Mayor of London/Greater London Authority/Transport for London after consideration of the amended plans and additional information the proposed use is consistent with the site designation as part of a Strategic Industrial

34 Location and will support the relevant London Plan policies The proposal also supports London Plan policies in relation to waste management.

6.37 The design of the scheme has been amended and the scheme is now in accordance with relevant London Plan and draft replacement London Plan policies. The development would be subject to an environmental permit that would ensure it is consistent with London Plan policy 4A.19 and draft replacement London Plan policy 7.14 in terms of air quality. There are no strategic concerns regarding noise.

6.38 In terms of energy, further information is required as part of an updated energy statement to demonstrate that the development is consistent with the London Plan in terms of minimising carbon dioxide emissions, prioritising, decentralised energy and incorporating on site renewable energy. A layout plan was requested showing the location of the blue badge parking spaces and further information is required to show that the scheme complies with maximum car parking standards and minimum cycle parking standards.

Public Meeting. A second public meeting took place on the 23 February 2010 in Mitcham Parish Church in Church Road Mitcham that was attended by representatives of the applicant, local ward councilors, residents and the planning case officer. This second meeting included a presentation from the applicant setting out what the proposal involved, local councillors and Melanie Hampton setting out their concerns over the proposal and a question and answer session for residents.

7. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 The main planning considerations relate to an assessment of need for the development, impact on residential amenity [including noise odours, air quality and loss of daylight, sunlight, privacy], impact on adjacent conservation areas and open space, the design, layout, scale and massing of the buildings; highway and transport matters and the extent that the proposal complies with the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and the suitability of recommended s106 obligations.

Principle of the Use 7.2 The application site is in a strategic industrial location as designated within the London Plan that was adopted in 2008. The strategic industrial locations are the preferred locations for industry and exist to ensure that London provides sufficient quality sites, in appropriate locations to meet the needs of the various industrial uses including waste management. Policy 3B.4 of the London Plan states that the Mayor will promote, manage and where necessary protect these areas to allow them to provide a range of industrial uses.

7.3 The application site is currently occupied by an operational waste treatment facility and policy 4A.22 of the London Plan states all existing waste management sites should be safeguarded and that wherever feasible surplus waste transfer sites should be reused for other waste uses.

35 7.4 Policy 4A.23 of the London Plan [Criteria for the selection of sites for waste management and disposal] states that land should be allocated using criteria that include the proximity to the source of waste; the nature of activity proposed and its scale; the full transport impact of all collection, transfer and disposal movements. There is a preference for the preferred designated industrial locations or existing waste management locations. Opportunities should be taken to accommodate various related facilities on a single site and the environmental impact on surrounding areas, assessed particularly in terms of noise emissions, odour and visual impact.

7.5 The Council’s Unitary Development Plan [UDP] was adopted in October 2003 following public consultation and a public inquiry. The UDP designates the application site as an industrial area suitable for general industrial uses [Use Class B2]. The UDP also states that the site should be used for the specific land use ‘waste treatment facilities, traffic management measures and environmental improvements’ [Use Class B2] and B1 Business use [Offices, research and development, light industry appropriate in a residential area]. The lawful use of all the existing buildings and land [including the vacant Chemical works] on the application site is for general industrial use [Use Class B2].

7.6 In conclusion due to the current waste treatment facilities on this site, the designation of this site for waste treatment facilities within the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and support for this use on this site within the London Plan the principle of the current proposal is supported.

Need for the proposed development. Waste Processing 7.7 Within the South Waste Plan Area [boroughs of Kingston, Croydon, Sutton and Merton] 1.1 million tonnes of waste is currently produced annually by business, local services, industry and households. Within the area sixteen sites [excluding landfill] are currently licensed to deal with 700,000 tonnes of waste per year with the remaining waste currently processed elsewhere.

7.8 Policy 4A.21 of the London Plan advises that communities need to take responsibility for their own waste and therefore there should be timely provision of waste management facilities. The Mayor will work to ensure that facilities are provided within London with sufficient capacity to manage 75 per cent of London’s waste by 2010, rising to 80 per cent by 2015 and 85 per cent by 2020.

7.9 In order to meet the requirements of this policy and the predicted increase in the quantity of waste produced, additional facilities will be required in the South Waste Plan Area to process an additional 670,000 tonnes of waste per year or 20 hectares of land for such facilities by 2021

7.10 Policy 4A.21 of the London Plan states that the Mayor will seek to increase re-use, recycling and composting of waste; minimise the transport impacts from the collection, treatment and disposal of waste; and promote

36 generation of renewable energy from waste. The production of energy from waste using new and emerging technologies, especially where the products of waste treatment could be used as biofuel will be considered in preference to any increase in incineration capacity.

7.11 Policy PE.9 of the UDP states that the waste hierarchy should be followed which is in order of preference includes minimisation; re-use, recycling and composting; energy recovery; and disposal. Merton’s Sustainability Criteria and Objectives [Table 1.1 of the Unitary Development Plan] state that waste production should be minimised and waste re-used or recycled where possible; waste should be managed or disposed of as close as possible to source and pollution from waste limited to levels which natural systems can cope without damage.

7.12 In 2008, the applicant commissioned an assessment of food waste supply markets for anaerobic digestion in London. The study assessed current capacity, including the proposed anaerobic digestion facility at 43A Willow Lane Mitcham [ref 08/P0713 committee resolution to approve on the 14 August 2008]. The study found that even after considering the proposed anaerobic digestion facilities in Beddington and on Willow Lane operating at full capacity, there would be a further 132,400 tonnes per annum of food waste that would require processing in South London and that the current proposal will fulfill a proportion of this need.

7.13 The London Borough of Merton currents collects kitchen waste from 40,000 residential properties with this set to rise to 50,000 by March 2011. Around 20% of the waste in an average domestic bin [by weight] is food waste. Food waste is biodegradable and therefore it rots when it is sent to landfill and produces methane. Methane is a greenhouse gas, which is substantially more harmful than carbon dioxide.

Renewable Energy Generation 7.14 Central government policy towards energy is set out in the Energy White Paper [May 2007]. This document states, “individual renewable projects are part of a growing proportion of low carbon generation that provides benefits shared by all communities both through reduced emissions and more diverse supplies of energy…” The government has set a target to see renewable energy making up 15% of total electricity supplies in 2015. The actual percentage in 2006 stood at 6% and therefore a significant number of new facilities are required to meet this policy target.

7.15 In conclusion, there is a need to move away from the use of landfill to more sustainable methods of managing waste. There is a need for more facilities to process waste and for this waste to be processed as close to source as possible. Policy guidance advises that where re-use or recycling of waste is not possible, any remaining material should be minimised and any benefit from renewable energy extracted before final disposal.

7.16 The proposed facility will enable the efficient processing of waste and would provide a source of renewable energy from waste materials with measures

37 proposed as part of as 106 agreement to ensure that this renewable energy provides benefits locally. It is the intention of the applicant to source the waste to be processed within this facility locally, however the actual source of waste processed by the facility will be determined by waste contracts that the applicant obtains through a separate commercial competitive tendering process that takes place outside the planning system.

7.17 The application site has a long history of general industrial uses, it is in an area considered suitable for general industrial uses and is also specifically designated for waste treatment facilities within the Council’s Adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Neighbour Amenity 7.18 Notwithstanding the support for the principle of a waste treatment facility on the application site set out in planning policy, assessment is also required of other areas of impact. The potential impact of the development on residential amenity in the following areas are set out below: aerial emissions, noise, vibration and odours, privacy, daylight and sunlight, lighting, contamination and danger from explosions.

7.19 The existing waste treatment site is bordered to the south by the tramlink line and industrial buildings and to the west by the car pound. More sensitive land uses are located immediately to the north with the side and rear boundary of the property at 40 Church Path and the rear boundary of the properties at 22-38 Church Path shared with the application site.

7.20 A distance of 55 metres separates the application site from the nearest residential property in Whitebridge Avenue across the existing car pound; the nearest residential property in Deer Park Gardens on the other side of the tramline is 120 metres from the site, both located to the west of the application site. To the south in Morden Road the nearest residential property is 60 metres from the site across an existing industrial area and to the east a distance of 120 metres separates the nearest properties along London Road from the site across London Road Playing Fields.

7.21 There are four local schools; Benedict Primary School [25 metres from the site] located on the opposite side of Hallowfield Way; Melrose Primary School [75 metres from the site] to the north of London Road Playing Fields, Cricket Green School [270 metres] to the north east of the site and Haslemere School 710 metres [0.4 miles] to the north west of the site.

Emissions, Air Quality and Odours 7.22 Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control states that the overall aim of planning and pollution control policy is to ensure the sustainable and beneficial use of land [and in particular encouraging reuse of previously developed land in preference to greenfield sites]. Within this aim, polluting activities that are necessary for society and the economy should be sited to ensure that adverse effects are minimised and contained within acceptable limits.

38 7.23 Policy 4A.19 of the London Plan states that boroughs should achieve reductions in pollutant emissions and public exposure to pollution by improving the integration of land use and transport policy and reducing the need to travel. Along with other material considerations, air quality should be taken into account at the planning application stage with formal air quality assessments undertaken where appropriate.

7.24 UDP policy PE1 states that developments that significantly harm air quality will not be permitted. An air quality assessment will be required as part of an application for energy generation projects and for projects within Air Quality Management Areas [see below]. As with all other London boroughs, Merton is part of an Air Quality Management Area.In response to this an Air Quality Action Plan was published by the Council in August 2003 setting out measures to improve air quality such as promotion of greener fuels and meaures to reduce traffic movements.

-Emissions from road traffic 7.25 Emissions from road traffic have been identified as the major source of pollution within the borough and across London. The Mayor of London has also stated that waste transport movements currently account for up to 10 per cent of London's overall traffic movements.

7.26 The submitted proposal when fully operational will result in a reduction in current vehicle movements associated with this site and therefore consequently a reduction in emissions that come from vehicular traffic using this waste treatment facility. This reduction in traffic would be achieved through greater efficiency in the use of vehicles [vehicles currently arrive with a load but depart empty] and the fact that the processing of waste within the new facility will reduce its volume thereby there will be less material to transport from the site.

7.27 The criteria for the selection of sites for waste management and disposal set out in London Plan policy 4A.23 include the proximity to the source of waste and a preference for existing waste management locations. In order to reduce traffic movements associated with waste the proximity principle states that waste should be managed as close to its place of origin as possible with the aim of achieving self sufficiently at a regional level and reducing vehicle movements. As well as the reduction in overall traffic movements, the provision of a waste processing facility in this location would help towards meeting this aim. It is the intention of the applicant to source the waste to be processed locally, however the actual source of waste processed by the facility will be determined by the waste contracts that the applicant obtains through a separate commercial competitive tendering process that takes place outside the planning system.

- Emissions from the proposed waste facility 7.28 The proposed waste treatment facility includes a 37 metre high exhaust stack and a 15 metre high flare stack associated with the production of renewable energy and two 20 metre high chimneys [protruding 4.5 metres through the roof of the compost tunnels, annotated as building J].

39 7.29 In line with UDP policy PE1 an air quality assessment has been submitted as part of the current planning application. The submitted air quality assessment and prediction of air quality impacts has assumed a worst-case scenario in terms of the flare stack [see paragraph 3.27]. The assessment has assumed that the flare stack will operate at all times whilst in reality it would only operate for short periods and a small number of times per year.

7.30 The air quality assessment was carried out using a computer modeling programme recognised by the Environment Agency as suitably robust for assessing this type of proposal and previously used to forecast the impact of various types of development including other waste facilities, power stations and smaller commercial developments. The programme takes into account many different variables including weather conditions [readings were recorded between 01.01.2003 and 31.12.2007], nearby buildings, surrounding landscape and the type of facility proposed.

7.31 The air quality assessment concluded that the impact of all emissions from the chimney would be classed as ‘insignificant’. The term insignificant is defined by the Environment Agency and states that the impact of all emissions averaged over an entire year are lower than 1% of the relevant air quality limit or the impact of emissions averaged over a short period [a single hour or day] are lower than 10% of the relevant air quality limit. These exhaust gases would be similar to those produced by domestic gas boilers and normal road traffic.

7.32 The impact of the filtered air released from the two stacks associated with the compost tunnels was also considered as part of the air quality assessment. It was found that the filtered air would be in line with Environment Agency guidance limits and at a level that would cause “no reasonable cause for annoyance” at any nearby location.

7.33 As well as the application for planning permission the applicant is required to apply for a permit from the Environment Agency. This environmental permit sets out strict conditions under which the facility will be allowed to operate and these will include continuous monitoring of emissions. The site would be visited regularly by the Environment Agency who would have the power to revoke an environmental permit and therefore prevent a facility from operating if the strict requirements of the permit are not met.

-Odours 7.34 It has been stated in public consultation responses that the current facility results in nuisance through the emission of odours. Legislation does not provide any guidance on acceptable or unacceptable odour levels; however they can be controlled under part III of the Environmental Protection Act if it can be shown that they represent a statutory nuisance.

7.35 It has been established that odours may currently come from two main sources, delivery vehicles or the actual operation of the waste processing facility. The existing buildings have been present for some time and are of

40 an open design and therefore do not currently prevent odours from escaping.

7.36 The proposed modern waste processing facility will operate within enclosed buildings that provide greater control over emissions including the use of negative air pressure. A planning condition is recommended to ensure that the doors to the buildings remain closed unless vehicles are entering or exiting. The vessels that contain the anaerobic digestion process are also sealed and therefore would not lead to any odours.

7.37 In conclusion the submitted air quality assessment shows that emission levels from the facility would be ‘insignificant’ and would present minimum or zero risk to human health when compared against guidance from the World Health Organisation and the European Commission. A planning condition is recommended to seek the submission of an Odour Management Plan to ensure adequate management of any odours.

7.38 The impact of the filtered air released from the two biofilter chimneys has been assessed and is considered acceptable. The proposal would result in an overall reduction in the quantity of vehicle trips in terms of the current operation of the application site with a subsequent reduction in emissions. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has been consulted on the proposal and has found the submitted air quality assessment robust and has no objection to the proposal.

Noise and Vibration. 7.39 Policy PE.2: of the UDP states that developments which would have a significant adverse effect on nearby occupiers or on the amenity of the locality by reason of noise generation and disturbance will not be permitted, unless potential pollution or noise problems can be overcome by mitigating measures sought by planning conditions or planning obligations. Potentially noisy developments must be located away from noise-sensitive land uses.

-Noise 7.40 Policy 4A.20 of the London Plan states that boroughs should reduce noise by minimising existing and potential impact of noise both on, from, within, or in the vicinity of development proposals. New noise sensitive development should be separated from major noise sources wherever practicable.

7.41 The application site is within one of the borough's industrial areas as designated within the Unitary Development Plan, with noisier and more intrusive business activity directed to these areas. The application of planning controls over the operation of development in these areas requires weighing the need to safeguard residential amenity against the need to ensure that a development can operate effectively. Such considerations are made against the backdrop that the waste use on the application site has operated historically with no planning controls including in terms of hours of operation or noise emanating from the site.

41 7.42 The environmental statement submitted as part of the application includes a noise assessment that covers both the construction and operational phases of the development. The noise assessment considered the existing background noise levels at sensitive locations around the site [locations in Hallowfield Way, Whitebridge Avenue, Church Path and Broadway Gardens] and the likely noise levels during the construction and operation of the site.

7.43 The noise assessment concludes that during the construction phase there would be a ‘slight to moderate’ temporary increase in noise levels. Measures to ensure that the residential environment of the occupiers of these dwellings is not unduly harmed during the construction phases may reasonably be dealt with by conditions including in relation to wash down facilities and hours of construction.

7.44 In terms of the actual operation of the development various measures are proposed to reduce the potential for noise impact. These measures include acoustic screening to a height of between 2.1 and 2.4 metres along the rear gardens of properties in Church Path. There is existing informal car parking to the rear of properties in Church Path and this will be formalised as part of the current application. The proposed acoustic screen will help ensure that noise from the car parking area does not harm residential amenity. A planning condition is recommended to request details of this screen.

7.45 The applicant has stated that noise insulation will include additional cladding to the retained building, insulated cladding to the proposed buildings, and insulation of noise from fans, measures to prevent noise escape from ventilation louvers and ensuring that access openings to the buildings remain closed when not in operation. The implementation of these measures will minimise the risk of noise nuisance to nearby residential properties and can be controlled by planning condition.

-Vibration 7.46 The results of a specialist vibration study have been included within the submitted environmental statement. The study involved taking readings in two locations, including the rear boundary of the nearest residential property in Church Path.

7.47 The study found an intermittent vibration source was caused by loaded heavy vehicles or vehicles travelling at speed passing over speed bumps on the site access road. The report concluded that this vibration would no longer be present if the speed bump was removed. A planning condition is recommended to seek the removal of the existing speed bumps and the submission of alternative vehicle calming measures on the access road.

7.48 In conclusion and following consultation with the Council’s Environmental Health Officer various planning conditions are recommended to ensure that noise levels are maintained within agreed limits and disturbance is minimised. With the imposition of these conditions the Council’s Environmental Health Officer has no objection to the development. The

42 submitted environmental statement has also been assessed by the Environment Agency and the Greater London Authority who have raised no objections in terms of the any impact on amenity.

Privacy, Daylight and Sunlight 7.49 UDP policy BE15 states that development should provide appropriate levels of sunlight and daylight to adjoining land and buildings. New development should ensure proper living conditions for residents and enjoyment of amenity spaces; they should ensure good levels of privacy and protect amenities from visual intrusion.

7.50 As set out earlier in this report the application site is located in an industrial area and currently occupied by industrial buildings measuring 10 metres in height. The submitted proposal includes new buildings ranging in height from 9.4 metres to 15.5 metres, together with chimneys up to 37 metres in height.

7.51 The closest residential property to the application site is in Church Path. A distance of 18 metres separates the blank flank elevation of this property from the flank elevation of the closest new building on the application site, which is the new offices/visitors centre. With a sloping roof the height of the offices/visitors centre varies from 8 metres at the rear of the building adjacent to Baron Walk and 6.7 metres at the front of the building.

7.52 In turns of directly facing buildings, a distance of 70 metres [across the vehicle access to the site and car parking area] will separate the nearest residential property from building B which will be 11.5 metres at the roof eaves to 14.3 at the top of the curved roof.

7.53 In order to avoid a loss of daylight and sunlight, the Council’s supplementary planning guidance sets out a minimum separation distance of 30 metres betrween directly opposing buildings of these heights. In order to avoid a loss of privacy and overlooking, the Council’s supplementary planning guidance requires a minimum separation distance of 20 metres between directly opposing residential windows.

7.54 In conclusion, with the large separation distances from adjacent residential properties and the orientation of new buildings it is considered that the development will not result in any loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight to adjacent residential properties.

Light Pollution 7.55 UDP policy PE.3 states that development that would have a significantly adverse effect on the amenities of nearby occupiers by reason of light emissions will not be permitted unless the effect can be overcome by mitigating measures; these measures sought through the use of planning conditions.

7.56 As part of the proposal, artificial lighting is necessary to ensure to ensure the safe, secure and satisfactory operation of the proposed waste treatment

43 facility; lighting is also required to enable the use of the adjacent Baron Walk footpath during hours of darkness. In the provision of this lighting the potential impact on nearby residential properties and the wildlife within the London Road Playing Fields needs to be considered.

7.57 It is the intention of the applicant that lighting levels are determined by the activities that are taking place on the site. The ‘full external lighting system’ would only operate during the hours of darkness that correspond with the normal working day as vehicle deliveries would continue during these times. Outside these times a reduced, low-level external lighting system would provide lighting to walking routes and staff parking areas.

7.58 In completing the design of the lighting system the applicant has stated that they will have reference to the recommendations of the “Bats and Lighting in the UK” published jointly by the Bat Conservation Trust and Institute of Lighting Engineers. A planning condition is recommended requesting details of external lighting including measures to ensure that light pollution from any external lighting is minimised, whilst providing adequate illumination to reduce the fear of crime and enhance security.

Contaminated Land 7.59 UDP policy PE 8 states that the Council will encourage the recycling of derelict or vacant land and brownfield sites for appropriate development having regard to the need to treat polluted or contaminated sites, particularly where there is a threat to public safety.

7.60 Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control states that opportunities should be taken wherever possible to use the development process to assist and encourage the remediation of land already affected by contamination. Contamination of land may threaten public health and safety, the natural environment, the built environment and economic activities, through its impacts on the users of the land, and on neighbouring users. Land contamination, or the possibility of it, is therefore a material planning consideration in taking decisions on individual planning applications. The Government’s objectives for contaminated land are set out in DETR Circular 02/2000, “Contaminated Land” and these include seeking to bring damaged land back into beneficial use.

7.61 As well as the current operational waste treatment facility the application site incorporates the former Mitchanol Chemical Works that had vehicular access provided from Church Path. The vacant chemical works buildings covering 2,250 square metres were previously in use for the manufacture of chemical products including inks, coatings and resins [Planning Use Class B2].

7.62 An investigation carried out by the applicant has revealed that before it can be used as part of the proposed waste treatment facility, work need to take place to deal with contamination on the former chemical works site. If planning permission is approved and to allow this clear up operation to take place the applicant intends to build the waste treatment facility in two

44 phases; the extension to the existing Materials Recycling Facility and the clear up operation forming phase one and the remainder of the proposed development forming phase 2.

7.63 In conclusion, the proposed development will bring this vacant and derelict Chemical works site back into use as supported by UDP policy. The development will enable the clear up of this contaminated site thereby removing any threat to public safety caused by these vacant chemical works buildings and land. Planning conditions are recommended that request the conclusions of a site investigation and the method of removing contaminated material.

Danger of Explosions, Potential Fire Risk and Hazardous Substances 7.64 Whilst the proposal is of an insufficient size to require formal consultation with the Health and Safety Executive [HSE], due to the nature of the proposal informal advice was requested by the Council and several meetings have taken place with HSE staff.

7.65 The HSE do not object to the application but have advised the applicant to ensure that relevant separation distances are maintained. In order to comply with other legislation outside the planning system the HSE have advised the applicant of other requirements such as a risk assessment in terms of the threat of explosions, gas leakage, internal dust concentrations, vehicular movements on the site and escape routes. If planning permission is approved the site will also be subject to regular inspections from HSE officers.

7.66 The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority have also been consulted and they raise no objection to the proposal subject to compliance with the relevant clauses of the Building Acts that ensure adequate access to fire vehicles and water supplies for fire fighting.

7.67 The proposal has been assessed against legislation that controls the storage of hazardous substances [Planning [Hazardous Substances] Regulations 2008]. Due to the relatively small scale of the proposal there is no separate consent required under these regulations.

7.68 In conclusion, the statutory bodies responsible for the prevention of fire, explosions and general public safety have advised that the proposed development compiling with separate relevant legislation is acceptable in this location.

Layout, Visual Appearance, Massing, Design and Historic Character Massing 7.69 Policy 4B.10 of the London Plan states that large scale buildings should be of the highest quality design and be suited to their wider context in terms of proportion and composition and relationship to other buildings and streets. Buildings should be attractive city elements when viewed from all angles; illustrate exemplary standards of sustainable construction and resource management, and in residential environments, consider privacy, amenity

45 and overshadowing. UDP policy BE.19 states that in sensitive locations high buildings will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

7.70 The UDP [paragraph 4.83] states that high buildings are generally considered to be those buildings and structures that significantly exceed the general building heights of their surroundings. Within the borough the gasholders in Western Road are 45 metres high, Brown and Root Tower in Colliers Wood is 54 metres high, Crown House Merton Civic Centre 49 metres high. The Parish Church of St Peter and St Paul in nearby Church Road [24 metres high] and the lower of the two minarets at the Baitul Futuh Mosque in Morden [25.5 metres].

7.71 The overall height of the proposed two digester vessels including the equipment on the top of the structures would be 24.5 metres however the main part of the structures would be 20 metres above ground level. These vessels would be substantially lower then adjacent electricity pylons, and located 170 metres from the closest residential property.

7.72 The exhaust stack although 37 metres high would have a diameter of only a metre and it is considered that it would have little visual impact in the context of the site with other high structures in the local area including the electricity pylons that run parallel to the tram line and the adjacent industrial buildings on Morden Road.

7.73 Whilst the proposed development will be higher than existing buildings and will be more visible it is considered that the proposed development will be seen in the context of the existing site use and other tall structures and buildings nearby and as a result will preserve the existing view. The application site when viewed from Ravensbury Park will be seen in the context of the 4 storey Dover House occupied by a self storage use and the industrial area on the opposite side of Morden Road. The proposals would co-exist with existing prominent industrial structures of nearly double the height [i.e. electricity pylons carrying high voltage cables]

7.74 In conclusion whilst the vessels and exhaust stack would will be higher than some neighbouring development, when viewed in the context of other buildings of a similar height and this industrial location the height of the structures is not considered sufficient grounds to refuse planning permission

Visual appearance and Impact on historic character. 7.75 Policy 3A.3 of the London Plan states that development proposals should achieve the maximum intensity of use compatible with local context, and design principles. Policy 4B.1 states that high quality inclusive design should be promoted, development should respect local context, built heritage, character and communities, whilst adapting to and mitigating the effect of climate change. Policy 4B.3 states that boroughs should, work to ensure the public realm is accessible and usable for all.

7.76 Policy 4B.12 of the London Plan states boroughs should ensure that the protection and enhancement of historic assets in London is based on an

46 understanding of their special character, and form part of the wider design and urban improvement agenda, including their relationship to adjoining areas.

7.77 Policy BE16 of the UDP states that development should reinforce locally distinctive patterns of development. UDP policy BE22 states that proposals for new development will be required to respect the siting, height, materials and a high standard of design and where local distinctiveness or attractiveness is lacking that will enhance the character of the area. UDP Policy BE.3 states that development adjacent to a conservation area will be expected to preserve or enhance its setting and not detract from views into and out of the area.

-Historic buildings 7.78 The historic buildings in the local area include the Parish Church of St Peter and St Paul [grade II* listed and located 140 metres to the north of the site] 60 to 64 Church Road [grade II Iisted and 70 metres to the north east of the site]. It is considered that due to the separation distances the development will have no direct impact on adjacent historic buildings. It should also be noted that when fully operational the development will reduce current vehicle levels and therefore improve the environment for local historic buildings.

-Conservation areas 7.79 The application site is not found within a conservation area; however Mitcham Cricket Green Conservation Area and Wandle Valley Conservation Area are located nearby. There are two sections of Wandle Valley Conservation Area close to the application site, and these cover both Ravensbury Park and London Road Playing Fields.

7.80 In assessing the impact of the development on adjacent conservation areas existing buildings and land uses need to be considered and whether the proposed development would preserve or enhance the setting. It should be noted that the application site has been used for industrial purposes for a substantial period of time with the industrial use predating the designation of Mitcham Cricket Green Conservation Area in 1969 and Wandle Valley Conservation Area in 1990 [extended in April 2000 and 2007]. The site is designated within the Unitary Development Plan for industrial use with a waste treatment use specified as the Council’s preferred land use.

7.81 The existing site includes an operational waste treatment works that include a collection of large uniform standard industrial buildings. Along the boundary with Baron Walk and close to Mitcham Cricket Green Conservation Area the site also includes a collection of derelict buildings and structures that were previously used as Mitchanol Chemical Works. With the presence of these buildings the current site has a negative impact on the character of the conservation areas.

7.82 Following discussions with the applicant the original design of the development was revised with the introduction of buildings that have greater

47 architectural detail, add visual interest. as well as the introduction of screening, the revised plans include a reduction in the height above ground level of the digestion vessels. The mass and scale of the proposed buildings are similar to existing buildings on the site and those on adjacent sites.

7.83 In looking at the wider context and the visual impact of the proposal, a number of potentially sensitive receptors were assessed by the applicant including Morden Hall Park, the main Mitcham Cricket Green open space and Church Road, which is part of the Cricket Green Conservation Area. During the consultation process and following the submission of the planning application, a joint site visit took place with the applicant and the Council’s Conservation Officer where it was agreed that there was no significant degree of intervisibility between these sensitive heritage areas and the proposed development.

7.84 The Conservation Officer has stated that the proposal includes significant improvements to the main view of the site from a conservation area that is at the junction of Church Road and Hallowfield Way. The view into the application site from Church Path would also be affected by the proposal however it is considered that the development will not cause significant harm to this aspect as the existing pylon already forms the backdrop to the view.

7.85 Given that the limited visibility of the proposed from conservation areas and the advice given in PPS 5 that the public benefits of a proposal must be judged against any harm that is caused the Conservation Officer has no objection to the proposal.

7.86 After discussions with Benedict School the applicant proposes that a short length of palisade fencing at the westernmost corner of the playground of Benedict’s School could be enhanced as part of a planning obligation with an exercise incorporating public art devised in collaboration with pupils. A planning obligation is recommended as part of a s106 agreement in this respect.

7.87 In conclusion the design and appearance of the existing buildings on the application site have a negative impact in local views. The proposal will replace the existing buildings including the derelict chemical works with a modern waste facility that will represent an improvement to the quality of buildings on the site and the appearance of the site when viewed from conservation areas.

7.88 With the UDP designating this site as a waste treatment facility it should also be noted that the height of the buildings are necessary for the waste treatment operations that are proposed. Any impact from the buildings also needs to be balanced against the regeneration benefits that will be generated from this development.

48 Impact on adjacent open space, and nature conservation Impact on adjacent open space and nature conservation 7.89 The Mitcham to Belgrave Walk stretch of the Croydon tramlink marks the south east boundary of the application site with the tramlink designated in the UDP as a Green Corridor. London Road Playing Fields are located to the east of the application site and designated in the UDP as Open Space, a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation and Green Chain. Morden Hall Park [Grade II listed historic park] is located 270 metres to the west of the site.

7.90 Policy 3D.14 of the London Plan states new development and regeneration should have regard to nature conservation and biodiversity, and opportunities taken to achieve positive gains for conservation through the form and design of development. Boroughs should resist development that would have a significant adverse impact on the population or conservation status of protected species or priority species. Policy 3D.8 of the London Plan states that the Mayor will work with strategic partners to protect, promote and improve access to London’s network of open spaces.

7.91 UDP policy NE.3 states that all developments will be expected to respect and not harm the character or function of the green chains. Policy NE6 states that a proposal likely to significantly affect a site of importance for nature conservation will be permitted only where it can be shown that the reason for or benefits for the local community outweigh the interest or value of the site or any harm can be overcome by mitigating measures. Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation [SINC] are graded as being of metropolitan wide, borough wide, or local significance and London Road Playing Fields is considered to be of local significance. UDP policy NE.8 requires development adjacent to green corridors to enhance their nature conservation value. Policy NE.12 states that a development proposal will be expected to retain, and where possible enhance, hedges and other landscape features of amenity value.

7.92 The application site is an operational waste treatment facility and the current proposal will improve the quality of the buildings on the site and will enable the processing of waste to take place within sealed buildings. Along the boundaries of the application site vegetation currently provides a degree of screening and contributes to the setting. The applicant intends to retain the majority of this vegetation and to protect the retained vegetation during construction work by protective fencing.

7.93 The Council’s Greenspaces Team is responsible for the maintenance of London Road Playing Fields. The Greenspaces Team have requested a s106 contribution towards improvements to the London Road Playing Fields. With the presence of Japanese Knotweed along both sides of the boundary with the playing fields an informative is recommended to ensure that there is a joint operation between the applicant SITA and the Council to ensure the removal this invasive species.

49 7.94 Morden Hall Park [Grade II listed historic park] is located 270 metres to the west, separated from the application site by the tramline and residential properties in Deer Park Gardens. The tributary of the River Wandle in Ravensbury Park is separated from the site by a distance of 175 metres that includes the tramline, the adjacent industrial area, Morden Road, and residential properties. The impact on Morden Hall Park and the River Wandle has been assessed in terms of visual impact and emissions and it is considered that no harm will arise from the proposed development.

7.95 A Bat Survey has found a low potential for Bat roosts however a planning condition is recommended requesting a further survey prior to demolition of the buildings and outside nesting/breeding season.

7.96 In conclusion as the anaerobic digestion process takes place within a sealed vessel and other processing takes place within new buildings, there is no likelihood that there any leakages from the site that would affect adjacent land uses. In the unlikely event of a spillage the topography of the area with the application site at a lower level than land to the east and west will ensure there is no harm to the London Road Playing Fields. The proposed development will have no adverse impact on the nature conservation value of adjacent land. Natural England and the Environment Agency have been consulted on the proposal and raise no objection to the development.

New landscaping 7.97 As part of the application a landscaping scheme has been submitted that includes perimeter tree planting; living walls/screening; ground level amenity planting and a green roof.

-Perimeter tree planting. 7.98 In terms of the perimeter tree planting it is proposed to plant trees along the east and west boundaries of the site and at the site entrance in Hallowfield Way. On the eastern boundary, the trees would be planted at regular spacing alongside the existing Materials Recycling Facility and the proposed extension in order to soften the appearance of the development in views from the west.

7.99 On the eastern boundary trees would be planted alongside Baron Walk to enhance the appearance of this footpath. A planning condition is recommended requesting details of this new planting and protection measures for the retained trees.

-Green roof and living wall. 7.100 Policy 4A.11 of the London Plan states that boroughs should expect major developments to incorporate living roofs and walls with the objective of enhancing biodiversity, minimising water run-off and improving visual appearance.

7.101 The proposed living wall has a construction of composite steel and timber that supports a semi-opaque tensile fabric. The living wall would range from

50 10 to 14 metres in height and would be positioned to screen the proposed development from adjacent land. Climbing vegetation would be planted in a deep topsoil trench along the base of the screen and supported on a system of stainless steel support wires with the aim of cladding the screen in foliage. A planning condition is recommended requesting details of this new structure.

7.102 The office/visitor centre proposals also include a green roof that will provide insulation, sustainable urban drainage and ecological benefits. The green roof would be planted primarily with sedum with species chosen to provide an ‘ever-changing mosaic’ as individual species change colour in response to temperature and as flowering occurs.

7.103 A large area of the site in excess of 2,000 square metres will also be planted with over 20,000 plants with a focus around the site entrance and along site boundaries to enhance the appearance of the site. The proposals utilise evergreen ground-covering species within which there would be taller evergreen accent planting. A proposed hedgerow would wrap around the eastern boundary, the site entrance and alongside the visitor centre.

7.104 As part of an s106 agreement/planning obligations and in order reduce any visual impact from the development it is recommended that a contribution is sought for environmental improvements in the vicinity of the site including improvements to the entrance to the site in Hallowfield Way. A contribution is also sought for improvements to London Road Playing Fields that include a site of nature conservation importance and a green corridor.

Traffic Generation, Parking, Access, Walking and Cycling Principle of the Development 7.105 Policy 3C.1 of the London Plan states that the Mayor will work with boroughs to ensure the integration of transport and development by encouraging patterns and forms of development that reduce the need to travel, especially by car, seeking to improve walking and cycling capacity and accessibility where it is needed. Policy 3C.2 states that the Mayor will and boroughs should consider proposals for development in terms of existing transport capacity, both at a corridor and local level.

7.106 The site has a PTAL rating of 3 [where 1a represents the least accessible areas and 6b the most accessible] and is not located in a Controlled Parking Zone. The site is accessed directly from Hallowfield Way, a local access road, which in turn connects to Church Road, a London distributor road.

7.107 As stated in earlier sections of the report, the facility currently comprises a waste transfer station and a materials recycling facility. In addition it should be noted that the site includes the former Mitchanol Chemical Works [B2 industrial use] and a vehicle depot and maintenance facility [closed in 2008].

7.108 Under the existing waste licences the facility has the potential to process 329,320 tonnes per annum. The facility has been operating well below the maximum level specified by this licence in recent years [223,012 tonnes

51 processed in 2007]; however it should be noted that 279,432 tonnes of material were processed in 2003 and 275,204 tonnes processed in 2004.

7.109 As stated earlier in this report the development proposals will come forward in two phases. As part of the first phase of the development the maximum permitted capacity will be reduced to a maximum of 290,000 tonnes per annum. A planning condition is recommended to ensure that this limit is not exceeded. The second phase of the proposal will result in 220,000 tonnes per annum being processed by the facility. It should be noted that the provision of a anaerobic digestion and in vessel composting facility [as part of phase 2] will mean that the need to export waste from the site is reduced as this process will reduce the mass of material that has been delivered to the site by around 67%.

7.110 Given the level of traffic that could potentially be generated by the site under the existing waste licences and permitted uses [chemical works] and the fact that the proposals will lead to a reduction in traffic generation from existing levels, there are no objections to the principle of the development from a transport planning perspective.

Traffic Generation / Impact -Existing Traffic Generation 7.111 Policy RN3 of the UDP states that development proposals generating or attracting a significant amount of traffic are expected to be located adjacent to London distributor or local distributor roads. Policy RN4 states that the Council will ensure that road safety is a prime consideration. Policy RN7 states that the council will seek to ensure that new development makes adequate provision for goods vehicles. Policy LU.3 states that all development proposals will be assessed for their transport impact on the environment and the transport network; this includes their contribution to traffic generation and impact on congestion and air quality, particularly on the primary road network.

7.112 In accordance with Department for Transport [DfT] and Transport for London [TfL] guidance, the applicant has produced a full Transport Assessment [TA] in order to quantify the impact of the development proposals.

7.113 The potential traffic generation associated with the existing site is controlled by the existing waste licences that allow the processing of up to 329,320 tonnes per annum. It is also important to acknowledge that the site has previously experienced vehicle movements associated with the Mitchanol chemical Works and from the vehicle depot and vehicle maintenance facility. The established national guidance on conducting transport assessments advises that the potential impact of an existing site needs to be considered; particularly when such uses or increases in activity could be introduced without the need for planning permission.

7.114 All waste vehicles that enter the existing waste facility are weighed and the submitted application includes detailed weighbridge data for three full days

52 in July 2007. This information helps to provide a clear understanding of the nature of current vehicle movements that take place to and from the site.

7.115 Evidence has also been submitted as part of the application to illustrate that activity on the site during the month of July was generally typical of 2007 operating conditions. Movements by staff have also been added to the weighbridge data to show an hourly demand profile of vehicle movements associated with the existing facility. The transport assessment shows that when compared with data for 2007 overall traffic levels using the facility were 25% higher in 2003 and 23% higher in 2004. This data emphasising the fact that the site has the potential to be used at a greater intensity under the existing licences.

7.116 The potential of the vacant Chemical works, [B2 general industrial use], to generate traffic has also been considered within the submitted transport assessment. As the site is currently vacant the potential vehicle movements associated with this use if it were brought back into the lawful general industrial use have been considered in line with national guidelines. These guidelines using surveys from comparable sites within a national [TRICS] database.

7.117 In summary, the activity levels in, and the inclusion of the trip generating potential of the B2 general industrial use, would result in around. 750 vehicle movements per day, of which 80% would be undertaken by HGV’s. The morning peak period [08:00 – 09:00] would generate around 60 vehicle movements, whilst the evening peak period [17:00 – 18:00] would experience around 25 vehicle movements. The busiest periods of the day would typically be 12:00 – 13:00 and 13:00 – 14:00 when in the region of 100 vehicle movements would be expected to take place.

7.118 It is important to acknowledge that the traffic generation assessment has been based on surveys in 2007, a year that resulted in the processing of 223,012 tonnes of waste. This is more than 100,000 tonnes below what could have potentially been processed in 2007 under the site’s existing waste licence.

-Traffic generation during Phase 1 7.119 Phase 1 of the development proposals is intended to operate for a three- year period. The capacity of the Materials Recycling Facility will be increased from 54,320 tonnes per annum to 80,000 tonnes per annum whilst the Waste Transfer Station will reduce from a capacity of 275,000 tonnes per annum to 210,000 tonnes per annum. The total waste input allowed at the site will be 290,000 tonnes per annum, rather than the current maximum level of 329,320 tonnes per annum. A planning condition is recommended to ensure that the level of material processed on the site is capped at 290,000 tonnes per annum.

7.120 The site will have the potential to operate more intensively within this first phase when compared to 2007 levels and therefore it is important to consider the potential impacts associated with the existing and proposed

53 uses. The alterations to the maximum capacity of the site will enable the site to process up to 290,000 of tonnes per annum; however this is a maximum level and as happened in 2007 this level may not be reached. In 2007 the site processed 100,000 tonnes less waste than permitted.

7.121 Secondly, whilst the 290,000 tonne limit could potentially result in the processing of 23% more waste than 2007 levels, it should be acknowledged that the site processed around 279,000 tonnes in 2003 and around 275,000 tonnes in 2004, which would mean a potential increase in activity of 4% and 5% respectively if the interim facility was to operate at capacity when compared to these levels. Thirdly, it is should be acknowledged that there will be no operational traffic relating to the former vehicle depot, the maintenance facility or the Chemical Works.

7.122 At the Phase 1 stage the changes in terms of staff numbers will be relatively modest [75 staff increasing to 100 staff]. The changes will be principally down to the inclusion of an additional evening shift associated with the Materials Recycling Facility.

7.123 In order to ensure that the assessment is robust the Transport Assessment has assumed that the site will be fully operational [i.e. will process 290,000 tonnes per annum] and has focused on a comparison with 2007 traffic levels, rather than a comparison of what could potentially take place on the existing site if it was fully operational. In summary, on the basis of this assessment, it is considered that traffic generation over the course of the day could potentially increase by up to 10%, with an increased proportion of trips being undertaken by HGV’s. In real terms, this will be around 75 additional vehicle movements over the course of the day.

7.124 The impact of 75 additional vehicle movements to and from the site over the course of the day must be considered in the context of the fact that Church Road typically experiences more than 1000 vehicle movements in either direction during AM, PM and lunchtime peak hour periods. In summary, the traffic modelling has shown that following the development proposals the junctions within the vicinity of the site will continue to operate efficiently in 2010 and in 2017 [future year assessment]. In addition, in percentage terms, traffic levels on Church Road will increase by less than 1% over the course of the day, and just over 2% during the peak hour [13:00 – 14:00].

-Traffic generation during Phase 2 7.125 As part of the Phase 2 proposals the Materials Recycling Facility. will be retained at 80,000 tonnes per annum, the Waste Transfer Station will reduce from 210,000 tonnes per annum to 40,000 tonnes per annum and a new food and green waste input will be introduced that will process up to 100,000 tonnes per annum. Overall processing will reduce from a maximum of 290,000 tonnes per annum under Phase 1 to 220,000 tonnes per annum.

7.126 It should be noted that as a result of the digestion / composting associated with the food processing element approximately 67% of the mass input material will be lost [through water extraction and decomposition] which will

54 reduce the number of export trips required for this element of the operation. In addition, the new food-processing element could experience some seasonal variation in activity that has been accounted for in the assessment.

7.127 In summary, even accounting for seasonal variations in activity, the Phase 2 operation will result in a reduction in vehicle movements associated with the facility when compared to the levels of activity taking place in 2007. Officers consider that the work undertaken by the applicant in the Transport Assessment using standard and acceptable methods provides a robust assessment of the transport impact issues associated with the proposals. Subsequently, officers advise that planning permission should not be withheld for reasons associated with traffic generation / impact.

Road Safety 7.128 Accident records for the last five years have been obtained. In summary, whilst the Hallowfield Way / Church Road junction has a good accident record, there are junctions within the vicinity of the site that have a history of accidents. However, a limited number of these accidents have involved heavy goods vehicle’s. As the development proposals will not result in a material increase in heavy goods vehicle movements, it is not considered that a reason for refusal relating to the impact upon highway safety could be substantiated.

7.129 It should be noted that a pelican crossing has been introduced to the east of the junction with Hallowfield Way to enable safe and efficient crossing movements on this busy section of road. This is particularly important for parents and children crossing in the morning and afternoon periods.

7.130 The applicant has also undertaken work to investigate whether alternative crossing arrangements across the Hallowfield Way junction could be considered. In summary, it is considered that there is limited opportunity to practically improve the existing crossing facilities across the junction, as a formalised arrangement such as a zebra crossing would need to moved a significant distance from the roundabout junction and, in turn, would not be on the pedestrian desire line. However, the applicant has offered to fund the introduction of waiting restrictions [yellow lines] within close vicinity to the junction in order to ensure that pedestrian visibility at the crossing point is maintained, and larger vehicles can achieve safe and efficient access to / from the roundabout.

Access, Site Layout & Servicing 7.131 Existing access arrangements will be retained during Phase 1. The only material changes at this stage will include the relocation of the existing weighbridge facility and the removal of the speed bumps along the access road and the introduction of alternative traffic calming arrangements. A planning condition is recommended to ensure that details are submitted for approval.

7.132 The implementation of Phase 2 will result in the comprehensive redevelopment of the site and the redesign of the site access and internal

55 vehicle manoeuvring arrangements. Key elements will include the widening of the site access, the provision of two in-bound weighbridges to double the entry capacity, improved pedestrian facilities, a coach parking facility and a one-way circulation system. The changes will be secured by way of planning conditions and are supported by officers.

Car Parking Provision 7.133 Policy 3C.23 of the London Plan states that the Mayor, in conjunction with boroughs, will seek to ensure that on-site car parking at new developments is the minimum necessary and that there is no over-provision that could undermine the use of more sustainable non-car modes. The only exception to this approach will be to ensure that developments are accessible for disabled people. The London Plan also states that on-site car parking at new developments should be provided at the minimum necessary, and that there should be no over-provision that could undermine the use of more sustainable non-car modes.

7.134 UDP policies PK.2 and PK.3 state that the Council will require all developments to provide appropriate levels of parking in accordance with maximum standards subject to impact on traffic management, vehicle movements, safety, and convenience.

7.135 It is proposed that the Phase 1 proposals would be served by the existing car park on the site. Phase 2 would deliver a total of 51 off-street car parking spaces with 10%, or 5 spaces dedicated to disabled drivers. A dedicated coach parking area will also be provided.

7.136 A concern has been expressed concerning nuisance caused by vehicles parking in Hallowfield Way. Hallowfield Way is a public highway with no current restrictions on parking. Should planning permission be approved in order to ensure the future smooth operation of the waste processing plant it is recommended that a financial contribution is requested from the applicant as part of a s106 agreement to fund the consultation and possible implementation of parking restrictions on Hallowfield Way.

7.137 In summary it is considered that the proposed level of car parking provision is acceptable, and will cater for day-to-day parking demand without undermining the use of more sustainable modes of travel.

Walking and Cycling 7.138 Policy 3C.21 of the London Plan states that policies should ensure that safe, convenient, accessible and direct pedestrian access is provided from new developments to public transport nodes and key land uses, plan for improving the safety and security of the pedestrian environment through appropriate lighting levels.

7.139 Policy WC1 of the UDP states that development proposals will be expected to improve pedestrian access through the creation of new or more direct footpaths UDP Policy WC4 states that development proposals will be expected to respect and contribute towards the provision of new cycle ways

56 and links with the existing network. UDP policy WC3 states that new developments including new dwellings will be expected to provide secure cycle parking facilities.

7.140 As part of the development the applicant intends to make improvements to the public right of way, Baron Walk. The work involves improving the physical environment replacing the existing high solid fencing [that currently creates a blind bend] with open fencing and widening the footpath by providing land currently forming part of the application site. The footway on the eastern side of Hallowfield Way currently consists of a wide expanse of tarmac. It is proposed that this area be reduced in size, by removing the main central panel that will be replaced with grass. A new avenue of trees will them be provided within the grass verge. The improvements will be secured via a Section 278 Agreement.

7.141 The development includes the provision of covered and secure cycle parking spaces in four areas of the site that will encourage sustainable travel choices. In summary it is considered that the proposal includes suitable facilities for cyclists and a planning condition is recommended to ensure this provision is made

Travel Plan 7.142 The requirement for a full Travel Plan will be included as a planning condition. The Travel Plan covering all uses within the site will be an essential tool to encourage sustainable travel patterns and reduce the impact of car use associated with the development. The Travel Plan will be required to recommend initiatives to promote sustainable travel behaviour among staff and visitors to the site, in order to mitigate the impact of the development proposals.

7.143 In conclusion there are no transport planning objections to the proposals, subject to the necessary obligations and conditions. The transport impact associated with the development is considered to be acceptable, given the level of traffic that could potentially be generated by the site under its existing waste licences and / or uses. Phase 2 of the proposals will also lead to a reduction in traffic generation when compared to existing levels.

7.144 On-site arrangements are considered to be acceptable and will not lead to any issues associated with queuing on the public highway. Car and cycle parking provision is considered to be acceptable. The proposed highway improvement measures, including the widening of Baron Walk, improvements to the pavements and surfacing at the former Mitchanol Chemical Works entrance at the end of Church Path and environmental improvements to Hallowfield Way are supported by officers.

Training and Employment 7.145 London Plan policies 2A.1 and 3B.11 state that there should be initiatives to create training and employment opportunities for local people during construction and following completion of the building.

57 7.146 The completed development will provide 22 additional jobs. It is recommended that an employment and a training strategy be sought through a planning condition including a provision that additional employment generated benefits local residents.

7.147 In order to support the provision of local employment opportunities from the development in accordance with policy 3B.11 of the London Plan. Submission and implementation of a Construction Training and Local Employment Agreement before commencement of development which shall secure the provision of training opportunities for local people.

7.148 The Agreement should include a commitment to health and safety training for all employees before going on site, employment of certified staff through the introduction of Construction Skills Certification Scheme [CSCS], training opportunities for apprentices to achieve NVQ level 2 qualifications, on site assessment and training [OSAT], enforcement of equal opportunities for all employment opportunities, and recruitment of local labour through positive advertising and training.

Flood Risk, Water and Drainage Issues Ground water 7.149 UDP policy PE.5 states that applicants are required to assess the potential impact that their proposal would have on local flooding and the impact of flood risk to their proposed development. Whilst the application site is not in an area at risk from flooding, in accordance with current planning requirements for major development the application includes a Flood Risk Assessment.

7.150 The Environment Agency has confirmed that subject to further detailed information requested by a planning condition the submitted Flood Risk Assessment meets the requirements of government guidance on flooding [within Planning Policy Statement 25] and that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of flood risk.

Surface water 7.151 Policy 4A.14 of the London Plan states that the Mayor will seek to ensure that surface water run-off is managed as close to its source as possible with the use of sustainable urban drainage systems should be promoted. Policy PE.7 of the UDP states that the Council will seek to reduce water run-off arising from development and will encourage the provision of sustainable drainage systems.

7.152 A planning condition is recommended to ensure that adequate sustainable drainage is provided as part of the development, as well as a requirement that the green roof is provided and retained for the lifetime of the development.

Archaeological Impact 7.153 The eastern third of the site split north to south is within an Archaeological Priority Area. Policy 4B.15 of the London plan states that the Mayor, in

58 partnership with English Heritage and boroughs, will support the identification, protection, interpretation and presentation of London’s archaeological resources. UDP policies BE.13 and BE.14 provide guidance in terms of archaeology stating that the Council will treat each case on its merits and apply planning conditions to ensure that evacuations are carried out to a satisfactory standard.

7.154 The site lies immediately to the north of Mitcham Anglo Saxon cemetery and a number of ditches and pits dating from the 11th century are present to the north of the application site. In response to consultation English Heritage recommend a planning condition seeking further investigation of the site by a suitably archeological organisation.

Departure from the Unitary Development Plan 7.155 The application site [3.8 hectares] includes proposal sites 26P [3.55 hectares] and 10P [0.25 hectares] within the adopted Unitary Development Plan; both these sites form part of the existing waste facility. The Council’s preferred land uses are given within the adopted Unitary Development Plan as ‘waste treatment facilities, traffic management measures and environmental improvements’ [Use Class B2] on site 26P and general business use [Use Class B1] on proposal site 10P.

7.156 Uses within the Use Class B1 [business] such as office uses are considered appropriate close to residential properties as they are unlikely to effect residential amenity. UDP policy directs heavier industrial uses to the designated industrial areas to avoid potential loss of amenity to residential areas.

7.157 Proposal site 10P is an area of land adjacent to Hallowfield Way and residential properties in Church Path. The designation of site 10P as a B1 use was intended to provide a buffer between the B2 uses in the main part of the site and the adjacent residential properties to reduce any potential loss of amenity.

7.158 The proposed new waste treatment facility that covers these two proposal sites will fall within Use Class B2; however the waste use includes ancillary B1 office accommodation that will be located on proposals site 10P. Whilst the application has been treated as a departure from the Unitary Development Plan the proposal is considered to reflect the intention of these site designations with the ancillary office accommodation acting as a buffer between the adjacent residential uses and the main part of the application site.

Human Rights Act 7.159 It has been stated in consultation responses that the proposal is contrary to article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which gives a right to respect for private and family life.

7.160 The Human Rights Act makes it unlawful for public authorities such as the Council to act in a way that is not compatible with the Convention Rights;

59 however a Council would not be acting unlawfully if primary legislation such as Acts of Parliament mean that it cannot act in any other way.

7.161 Planning decisions on the use of land can only be taken in line with the Town and Country Planning Acts and therefore granting planning permission would not contravene the Human Rights Act.

Other Issues 7.162 Planning obligations were attached to a s52 agreement signed in 1989 [precursor to s106 agreements] that was linked to earlier plans for a new road linking Church Road with Morden Road. This road is no longer taking place and a head of term is recommended as part of this proposal to enable restrictions attached to this earlier agreement to be modified.

8. SUSTAINABLITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Sustainability 8.1 London Plan policy 4A.1 states that boroughs should require developments to make the fullest contribution to the mitigation of, and adaptation to climate change and to minimise emissions of carbon dioxide. Policy 2A.1 states that development should secure social environmental and economic objectives, consider the impact of development on natural resources and upon the objective of adapting to and mitigating the effect of climate change.

8.2 The proposal involves a new anaerobic digestion facility; this use can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by capturing methane from the decomposition of organic materials, such as food wastes. In a briefing note prepared by environmental pressure group, Friends of the Earth they state “…much of our biodegradable waste such as food, garden waste, card and paper is sent to landfill, where it breaks down to release methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Anaerobic digestion is a treatment that composts this waste in the absence of oxygen, producing a biogas that can be used to generate electricity and heat. Producing 100 per cent renewable energy from our biodegradable waste helps tackle climate change, instead of contributing to climate change through landfilling and incineration”.

Low Carbon Zone & Renewable Energy 8.3 London Plan policy 4A.3 states that development should meet the highest standards of sustainable design and construction. These will include measures to reduce carbon dioxide and other emissions that contribute to climate change. Policy 4A.5 states that boroughs should identity heating and cooling networks and work in partnership with the Mayor to ensure the delivery of these networks. Policy 4A.6 requires all developments to demonstrate that their heating, cooling and power systems have been selected to minimise carbon dioxide emissions. Policy 4A.7 states that development should achieve a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of 20% from on site renewable energy generation that can include sources of decentralised renewable energy.

8.4 UDP Policy PE.12: energy generation and energy saving proposals for development of facilities that generate energy locally, in particular

60 renewable energy and those that reduce the use of energy and its transmission, will be permitted provided that: there is no demonstrable harm on visual or residential amenities or by way of pollution generation, or it can be demonstrated that benefits contributing to diverse and sustainable energy supplies and to reducing greenhouse effects will outweigh harm arising from the development

8.5 The bio gas produced by the anaerobic digestion facility would be utilised for the generation of renewable energy. It is anticipated that the development would have a gross electricity generation potential of 20 million KWh of which 9.8 million would be reused within the site, thereby contributing 10.2 million KWh to the national grid. The facility would also have the potential to export heat at a quantity in excess of 10,000 MWht per annum that is roughly sufficient for heating 1000 homes.

8.6 The London Borough of Merton is one of ten London boroughs that won support and funding from the Mayor of London and Greater London Authority to create what is called a Low Carbon Zones. Low Carbon Zones are a community led project with the aim of cutting the capital’s CO² emissions. The aim is that these zones provide model examples of how to cut CO² emissions with the aim of a 20.12% reduction in carbon by 2012, and helping towards the Mayor’s target of a 60% cut in CO2 emissions by 2025. Longer-term the ambition is for London to become the world’s environmentally friendly city.

8.7 The London Borough of Merton Low Carbon Zone covering 0.3 square kilometres is located in the Wandle Valley and immediately to the north of the application site [including the Phipps Bridge and Cherry Tree estates]; the area has 993 mostly residential properties and a population of around 2,950. It is the intention to utilise the waste heat that will be generated by the proposed waste facility to heat homes within the low carbon zone.

8.8 The applicant has stated that as part of the proposal they will provide the necessary infrastructure including the pipe work to transport the heat to the site boundary and necessary heat exchange facilities. Should planning permission be approved and to ensure that work is progressed a planning obligation is suggested to set up a working group with the aim of achieving this aim, and to include all relevant parties including Merton Priory Homes who manage a large proportion of nearby residential properties on behalf of the Council.

Environmental Impact Assessment 8.9 The proposals are on a site of more then 0.5 hectares and fall within the scope of Schedule 2 development under the Town & Country Planning [Environmental Impact Assessment] Regulations 1999. After consideration of the site and the nature of the proposals a screening opinion has been issued to the effect that the applicant would not be required to submit an Environmental Impact Assessment in this instance. Whilst not required the applicant chose to submit an Environmental Impact Assessment as part of

61 the proposal, this assessment has concluded that the development will have a low potential impact.

9. CONCLUSION 9.1 The applicant has stated that the proposal will transform this dated waste management site into a modern eco-park. The development has been described as an ‘eco-park’ because all the waste management activity that is proposed on the site is sustainable and education for members of the public will play a key role in the development. The proposal has been supported by the organisations ‘London Remade’ and the ‘London Climate Change Agency’.

9.2 The application site has a long history of general industrial uses, it is in an area considered suitable for general industrial uses and is also specifically designated for waste treatment facilities within the Council’s Adopted Unitary Development Plan. These proposals involve investment in this existing waste management site that has evolved over a period of time and works to clean up the neighbouring Chemical works site with the removal of existing derelict buildings and land contamination to provide a modern well planned waste facility.

9.3 The air quality assessment concluded that the impact of all emissions from the chimney would be classed as ‘insignificant’.The filtered air associated with the compost tunnels would be in line with Environment Agency guidance limits. The submitted air quality assessment has also been considered by the Council’s Environmental Health Officer, the Environment Agency and the Greater London Authority who have raised no objections in terms of the any impact on air quality

9.4 The proposed development will have no adverse impact on the nature conservation value of adjacent land. Natural England and the Environment Agency have been consulted on the proposal and raise no objection to the development.

9.5 Even accounting for seasonal variations in activity, the Phase 2 operation will result in a reduction in vehicle movements associated with the facility when compared to the levels of activity taking place in 2007. Officers consider that the work undertaken by the applicant in the Transport Assessment using standard and acceptable methods provides a robust assessment of the transport impact issues associated with the proposals. Subsequently, officers advise that planning permission should not be withheld for reasons associated with traffic generation or impact.

9.6 The proposal involves a new anaerobic digestion facility that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by capturing methane from the decomposition of organic materials, such as food wastes and will enable the efficient processing of waste and provide a source of renewable energy from waste materials. The proposed development will generate waste heat that can be utilised to provide benefits for the area surrounding this site.

62 RECOMMENDATION GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and planning conditions

Section 106 Heads of Terms 1. Details and the establishment of a working group to ensure that the heat generated by the proposal will contribute towards the objectives of the low carbon zone 2. Financial contribution to improvements to London Road Playing Fields. 3. The dedication of land within the ownership of the applicant to facilitate the widening of the section of Baron Walk adjacent to the site to a minimum width of 3 metres. 4. Financial contribution towards on-street waiting restrictions [yellow lines] on Hallowfield Way and / or highway safety improvements at the junction of Hallowfield Way / Church Road [£10,000]. 5. The modification of the obligations attached to the s52 agreement dated 31 October 1989. 6. Financial contribution towards environmental improvements to the footway on Hallowfield Way; 7. Financial contribution towards environmental improvement to the boundary fence of Benedict school or towards a piece of public art. 8. The developer agreeing to meet the Council’s costs of preparing, drafting and monitoring the Section 106 Obligations

And the following conditions: 1. A1 Commencement of development [full application]. The development to which this permission relates shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason for condition: To comply with Section 91 (as amended) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

2. A7 Approved Plans The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 2261-PL001 to PL013, 590-01.01 & 02A Design and Access statement; Flood Risk Assessment; Environmental Statement, Planning Statement, Transport Statement and Site Specific Risk Assessment of Potential Bioaerosal Releases ; Bioaerosal Monitoring Report; Energy Statement; Report on Mitcham District Heating Potential Loads and Route. Reason for condition: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning

3. A6 Phasing of Development No development shall take place until full details, including plans, of the phasing of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details of phasing, unless any variation or amendments have first been agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: To ensure the development progresses in an orderly manner without undue loss of amenity to the surrounding area and that satisfactory facilities are provided to service all stages of the development.

63 4. B6 Levels Details of the proposed finished floor levels of the development, together with existing and proposed site levels, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development commences, and the development shall be completed strictly in accordance with the approved levels and details. Reason for condition: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area and to comply with policies BE.22 & BE.23 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan.

5. Non Standard Condition [Demolition] Prior to the commencement of any demolition works a method statement outlining the method of demolition, measures to identify and remove any asbestos, and measures to prevent noise nuisance to nearby occupiers shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; with the development undertaken in accordance with the approved method statement. Reason for condition: In the interests of vehicle and pedestrian safety and the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and to comply with policy LU.4 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

6. H.10 Construction Vehicles Wash down facilities Prior to the commencement of the relevant development phase a working method statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to accommodate: Parking of vehicles of site workers and visitors; Loading and unloading of plant and materials; Storage of construction plant and materials; Wheel cleaning facilities; Control of dust, smell and other effluvia; and Control of surface water run-off. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved method statement. Reason for condition: To the interests of vehicle and pedestrian safety and the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and to comply with policy LU.4 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

7. D.11 Hours of Construction Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no demolition or construction work or ancillary activities such as deliveries shall take place before 8am or after 6pm Mondays - Fridays inclusive, before 8am or after 1pm on Saturdays or at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays. Reason for condition: To safeguard the amenities of the area and occupiers of neighbouring properties and to ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

8. K1 Archaeology No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The archaeological works shall be carried out by a suitably qualified investigating body acceptable to the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: In order to provide the opportunity to record the history of the site and to comply with policy BE.13 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

64 9. Non Standard Condition [Site Investigation] In addition to any assessment provided with the planning application and prior to commencement of any development a detailed site investigation shall be completed to survey and assess the extent of potential ground contamination on the site and from the surrounding environment [including any controlled waters], considering historic land use data and the proposed end use with the site investigation report [detailing all investigative works and sampling, together with the results of analysis, risk assessment to any receptors and proposed remediation strategy detailing proposals for remediation] submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority with the approved remediation measures/treatments implemented in full prior to first occupation of any new buildings on the site hereby approved [excluding the materials recycling facility extension]. Reason for condition: In order to protect the health of future occupiers of the site and adjoining areas in accordance with policy PE.8 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

10. M2 Contaminated Land – Remedial Measures If during construction works further contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified and considered the Council’s Environmental Health Section shall be notified immediately and no further development shall take place until remediation proposals (detailing all investigative works and sampling, together with the results of analysis, risk assessment to any receptors and proposed remediation strategy detailing proposals for remediation) have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the approved remediation measures/treatments implemented in full. Reason for condition: In order to protect the health of future occupiers of the site and adjoining areas in accordance with policy PE.8 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

11. Non Standard Condition [Site Investigation] Prior to first occupation of any new building hereby approved [excluding the materials recycling facility extension] a validation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the agreed remediation strategy. The validation report shall provide a full record of all remediation activities carried out on the site including post remedial sampling and analysis, waste management documentation and evidence that the agreed site remediation criteria have been met [including waste materials removed from the site; an audit trail demonstrating that all imported or reused soil material conforms to current soil quality requirements as approved by the Council] and any post- remediation sampling that has been carried out. Reason for condition: In order to protect the health of future occupiers of the site and adjoining areas in accordance with policy PE.8 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

12. Non Standard Condition [Chimney Height] The proposed chimney for the gas turbines shall be a height of 37 metres above normal ground level. Reason for condition: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties and to ensure that there is no significant impact on

65 air quality in the area in accordance with policy PE.1 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003 and policy 4A.19 of the London Plan [February 2008].

13. Non Standard Condition [Acoustic Screening] Details of the proposed acoustic screening to the rear of all properties in Church Path to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority with the approved details in place prior to the commencement of phase 2 operations Reason for condition: To protect the amenities of local residents and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

14. Non Standard Condition [Bay Doors] All delivery/loading bay doors within the development shall be kept closed at all times, except during loading/unloading operations Reason for condition: To avoid the unnecessary breakout of noise from the operation of the units and to protect the amenities of local residents and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

15. Non Standard Condition [Odour Management Plan] Prior to commencement of development an Odour Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved odour abatement system shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plans and specifications before the development hereby permitted commences and shall be permanently retained thereafter in accordance with the approved specifications. The plan should contain the following, detailed plans of abatement plant; manufacturer’s technical specifications for odour abatement plant; details of operational measures to minimise odour and to ensure no discernible odour from the process beyond the boundary of the premises; details of proposed monitoring of odour from the activities carried on the site Reason for condition: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

16. Non Standard Condition [Open Storage] No raw materials [unprocessed organic waste] or processed matter shall be stored or processed in any external area on the site of the premises. Reason for condition: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

17. D7 No Open Storage No goods, equipment, or other materials shall be stacked or stored upon the open areas of the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: To safeguard the amenities of the area and the occupiers of neighbouring properties and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

18. Non Standard Condition [Noise - Plant and Machinery] Prior to commencement of development noise from all plant and machinery required

66 by the use should not increase the background noise (LA90) measured as an LAeq [1 hour] by more than 2dBA when measured at the boundary of the nearest affected residential properties between 0700 hours and 1700 hours and .not more than 2dB[a] L90 [5 min] when measured at the boundary of the nearest residential property between 1700 hours and 0700 hours. The approved measures shall be installed before the plant and machinery is first used and the attenuation measures shall be permanently retained thereafter Reason for condition: In order to safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003

19. Non Standard Condition [Noise - MRF and AD Facility] Any noise from the Material Recycling Facility and the Anaerobic Digestion facility should not increase the background noise L90 [5 min] by more than 2dBa when measured at the boundary of the nearest affected residential properties between 1800 hours and 0700 hours. Reason for condition: To ensure that the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers is not materially affected by noise and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

20. Non Standard Condition [External Lighting] Prior to commencement of development details of external lighting for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The external lighting shall be designed, positioned and angled so as to prevent any light spillage or glare from affecting nearby residential properties and shall be in place prior to first occupation of any residential unit unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority Reason for condition: In order to safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

21. Non Standard Condition [Mesh Screens] Prior to commencement of development full details of the proposed mesh screens including plant species shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. With the approved details in place prior to first occupation of any building unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority The new planting shall be retained and maintained from the time of planting, with replacements for any parts that are dead, dying, diseased or defective, for a period of 5 years. Reason for condition: In order to safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

22. Non Standard Condition [Hours Of Use] The proposed extended materials recycling facility and waste transfer station will only operate between 0700 and 2300 hours. Reason for condition: To protect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

23. Non Standard Condition [Delivery times] Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, deliveries to the site shall only be carried

67 out between the following hours: 0700 and 1700 Monday to Friday, 0700 and 1200 on Saturdays and no deliveries shall be made to the site on Sundays and Bank Holidays Reason for condition: To protect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

24. Non Standard Condition [Traffic Calming] Prior to commencement of Phase 1 a programme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority setting out a timetable for the removal of the existing speed bumps and the provision of alternative traffic calming measures along the site access road. The approved works shall be completed prior to the occupation of any new buildings and retained permanently thereafter. Reason for condition: To protect the amenities of local residents and ensure compliance with policy PE.2 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

25. H4 Provision of vehicle parking The vehicle parking area shown on the approved plans shall be provided before the commencement of the buildings or use hereby permitted and shall be retained for parking purposes for occupiers and users of the development and for no other purpose. Reason for condition: To ensure the provision of a satisfactory level of parking and to ensure compliance with policies PK.2 and PK.3 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

26. H6 Cycle Parking - Details to be Submitted No development shall commence until details of secure cycle and motorcycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and thereafter retained for use at all times. Reason for condition: To ensure satisfactory facilities for cycle parking are provided and to comply with policy LU.4 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

27. Non Standard Condition [Throughput] The facility shall not exceed a combined throughput capacity of 290,000 tonnes per annum as part of phase 1 and 220,000 tonnes per annum when phase 2 is complete with associated vehicular trips not exceeding the total given in the submitted ‘Transport Assessment’. Reason for condition: The impact of the development has been assessed on the basis of this stated throughput and the Local Planning Authority would wish to maintain control over any future increase in the capacity of the site in the interests of amenity and traffic management and to comply with policies LU.1 and LU.3 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003 and policies 3C.1, 3C.2 of the London Plan [February 2008].

28. H8 Travel Plan Prior to the occupation of the relevant phase of the development hereby permitted, a travel plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The travel plan, as submitted, shall follow the current 'Travel Plan Development Control

68 Guidance' issued by TfL and will include: [i] Targets for sustainable travel arrangements; [ii] Effective measures for the ongoing monitoring of the travel plan; [iii] A commitment to delivering the travel plan objectives for a period of at least five years from the occupation of the development; [iv] Effective mechanisms to achieve the objectives of the travel plan by both present and future occupiers of the development. The development shall be implemented only in accordance with the approved travel plan. Reason for condition: To promote sustainable travel measures and comply with policy LU.4 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

29. H12 Delivery and Servicing Plan to be submitted Prior to the commencement of the relevant phase of the development hereby permitted, a Delivery and Servicing Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be so maintained for the duration of the use, unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority is obtained to any variation. Reason for condition: In the interests of the safety of pedestrians and vehicles and to comply with policy PK.3 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

30. H13 Construction Logistics Plan to be submitted Prior to the commencement of the relevant phase of the development hereby permitted, a Construction Logistics Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be so maintained for the duration of the use, unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority is first obtained to any variation. Reason for condition: In the interests of vehicle and pedestrian safety and the amenities of local residents to comply with policies PK.3 and LU.4 of the Adopted Merton Unitary development Plan 2003.

31. Non Standard Condition [Amended Vehicular Access] Prior to the commencement of Phase 2 of the development details of the amended vehicular access from Hallowfield Way to serve the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such works to be completed prior to the first occupation of Phase 2 of the development. Reason for condition: In the interests of the safety of vehicles and pedestrians and to comply with policy RN.3 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

32. Non Standard Condition [Baron Walk Improvements] Prior to commencement of Phase 2 of the development, details of the proposed footway improvement / widening works to Baron Walk shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved works shall be completed prior to first occupation of Phase 2 of the development. Reason for condition: To ensure that the development is adequately served by a variety of different transport modes and to promote walking as a means of transport in line with policies WC.1 and LU.5 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

69 33. Non Standard Condition [Church Path Improvements] Prior to commencement of Phase 2 of the development details of the proposed improvement works to the turning head area on Church Path adjacent to the redundant access to the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved works shall be completed prior to the first occupation of Phase 2 of the development Reason for condition: To ensure that the development is adequately served by a variety of different transport modes and to promote walking as a means of transport in line with policies WC.1 and LU.5 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

34. Non Standard Condition [Hallowfield Way Improvements] Prior to commencement of Phase 1 of the development details of the proposed improvement works to the footway on Hallowfield Way shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved works shall be completed prior to the first occupation of Phase 1 of the development. Reason for condition: To ensure that the development is adequately served by a variety of different transport modes and to promote walking as a means of transport in line with policies WC.1 and LU.5 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

35. Non Standard Condition [Refuse Storage] Prior to occupation of the development details of proposals for the storage of general refuse generated by the use shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be in place prior to the prior to first occupation of any residential unit and maintained permanently thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority commencement of use hereby approved and permanently retained thereafter. Reason for condition: To ensure the satisfactory provision of refuse storage and collection facilities, in order to protect the amenities of the area.

36. B1 External Materials to be Approved Notwithstanding any materials specified in the application form and/or the approved drawings, particulars and samples of the materials to be used on all external faces of the development hereby permitted, including window frames and doors, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works are commenced. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved details. Reason for condition: To ensure a satisfactory appearance of the development and to comply with policy BE.23 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

37. Non Standard Condition [Boundary Treatments] Prior to commencement of development details of boundary treatments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority with the approved treatments in place prior to first occupation of the buildings hereby approved and maintained permanently thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: To ensure adequate security and a satisfactory appearance of the completed development.

70 38. Non Standard Condition [Surface Treatment] Prior to commencement of development details of surface treatment for those parts of the site not occupied by buildings including any parking areas, footpaths, hard landscaping shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of any residential unit and maintained permanently thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: To ensure satisfactory treatment of the site and an appropriate setting to the buildings hereby approved.

39. F2 Landscaping [Implementation] All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any trees which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased or are dying shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. All hard surfacing and means of enclosure shall be completed before the development is first occupied. Reason for condition: To enhance the development in the interest of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy NE.12 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

40. F13 Landscape Management Plan A landscape management plan including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas, other than small, privately owned, domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner. The landscape management plan shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: In order to protect the visual amenities and landscape quality of the area in accordance with policy NE.12 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003.

41. Non Standard Condition [Surface Water] Prior to commencement of development a scheme for the sustainable management of surface water shall be carried out in accordance with details which shall have been previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority Reason for condition: To prevent the increased risk of flooding and attenuation of surface water runoff in accordance with the requirements of the London Plan 4A.14.

42. Non Standard Condition [Green Roof] Prior to first occupation of the office/visitor’s centre building the areas of green roof and landscaping as marked on the approved planning drawings shall be provided and shall be maintained permanently for the lifetime of the development as a green roof Reason for condition: To prevent the increased risk of flooding and

71 attenuation of surface water runoff in accordance with the requirements of the London Plan 4A.14.

43. Non Standard Condition [Recruitment and Training Strategy] Prior to the commencement of development a statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority setting out the recruitment and training strategy for construction and operational employment within the proposed development including details of job advertising and training. Reason for condition: In order to support the provision of local employment opportunities from the development in accordance with policy 3B.11 of the London Plan.

44. Non Standard Condition [Heat Infrastructure] Prior to the commencement of development details of the infrastructure within the site to deliver waste heat from the facility to the site boundary including the pipe routes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and to include a plan showing land to be reserved for this purpose. Reason for condition: To ensure that the development supports the Mayor's Climate Change Mitigation and Energy strategy and to meet the objectives of adopted London Plan policy 4A.7.

45. L7 BREEAM - Pre-Occupation (New build non-residential) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no part of the development hereby approved shall be used or occupied until a Post- Construction Review Certificate issued by the Building Research Establishment confirming that the non-residential development has achieved a BREEAM rating of not less than ‘Very Good’ has been submitted to and acknowledged in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason for condition: To ensure that the development achieves a high level of sustainability and makes efficient use of resources is sustainable and to comply with policies BE.25 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development Plan 2003 and 4A3 of the Adopted London Plan 2008.

-INFORMATIVES: (1) Non Standard Informative The development of this site is likely to damage archaeological remains and the applicant should submit detailed proposals for an archaeological evaluation in the form of an archaeological specification that is in accordance with English Heritage guidelines. Should the evaluation indicate further archaeological work is required the production and approval of a separate Written Scheme of Investigation will be necessary.

(2) Non Standard Informative The applicant is reminded of the necessity to consult the Council’s Highways team prior to commencement of any works within the Public Highway regarding the requirement for approvals and licences.

(3) Non Standard Informative The applicant is advised that the highway works on Hallowfield Way, Church Path and Baron Walk will need to be

72 undertaken by way of a Section 278 Agreement, or an alternative appropriate Agreement.

(4) Non Standard Informative The applicant is advised to contact the Council’s Greenspaces Team to make arrangements to remove the Japanese Knotweed that is present on the site and in the adjacent London Road Playing Fields.

(5) INF 8 Construction of Accesses It is Council policy for the Council's contractor to construct new vehicular accesses. The applicant should contact the Council's Highways Team on 020 8545 3829 prior to any work starting to arrange for this work to be done. If the applicant wishes to undertake this work the Council will require a deposit and the applicant will need to cover all the Council's costs (including supervision of the works). If the works are of a significant nature, a Section 278 Agreement (Highways Act 1980) will be required and the works must be carried out to the Council's specification.

(6) INF 9 Works on the Public Highway You are advised to contact the Council’s Highways team on 020 8545 3700 before undertaking any works within the Public Highway to obtain the necessary approvals and/or licences. Please be advised that there is a further charge for this work. If your application falls within a Controlled Parking Zone this has further costs involved and can delay the application by 6 to 12 months.

(7) INF 14 Demolition Birds and Bats Demolition of buildings should avoid the bird nesting and bat roosting season. This avoids disturbing birds and bats during a critical period and will assist in preventing possible contravention of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, which seeks to protect nesting birds/bats and their nests/roosts. Buildings should be also be inspected for bird nests and bat roosts prior to demolition. All species of bat in Britain and their roosts are afforded special protection under the Wildlife and Countryside act 1981. If bats are found, Natural England should be contacted for advice (tel: 020 7831 6922).

(8) Non Standard Informative The contamination report prepared in compliance with the relevant conditions must include an assessment of the potential risks to human health, property [existing or proposed] including buildings, trees and service lines and pipes, adjoining land, groundwaters and surface waters, ecological systems, and archeological sites and be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.

(9) Non Standard Informative Thames Water will aim to provide customers with a minimum pressure of 10m head [approx 1 bar] and a flow rate of 9 litres/minute at the point where it leaves Thames Waters pipes. The

73 developer should take account of this minimum pressure in the design of the proposed development. Reasons for Approval: The proposed development is designed to make the most efficient use of land and will modern a building of quality architectural design as part of a sustainable development whilst minimising any impact upon neighbouring residential properties. The proposal accords with policies contained in the London Plan [February 2008] and the Council’s Adopted Unitary Development Plan [October 2003] as far as material to the proposals that are the subject of this approval. The policies listed below were relevant to the determination of this proposal:

Merton Unitary Development Plan [October 2003] ST1 [sustainable development]; ST3 [mixed uses]; ST12 [development in previously developed land]; ST17 [built environment]; ST19 [natural environment]; ST31 [land use/transport integration]; ST32 [traffic restraint/reduction]; ST.33 [green transport]; ST34 [public transport]; ST35 [parking]; ST36 [community benefits]; NE8 [green corridors]; NE6 [local nature reserves and sites of importance for nature conservation]; NE11 [trees protection]; NE12 [trees; hedges and landscape features]; BE15 [new buildings - daylight; sunlight; privacy; visual intrusion and noise]; BE16 [urban design]; BE17 [urban design – application of standards]; BE22 [design of new development]; BE.23 [alterations and extensions to buildings]; BE25 [sustainable development]; PE2 [pollution and amenity]; PE.5 [Risk from Flooding]; PE7 [capacity of water systems]; PE8 [contaminated; vacant and derelict land]; PE9 [waste minimisation and waste disposal]; PE11 [recycling points]; PE.12 [Energy Generation and Energy Saving]; PE13 [energy efficient design]; PT1 [local and regional needs [public transport]]; RN3 [vehicular access]; RN4 [road safety]; WC1 [increased walking]; WC3 [cycle facilities]; PK2 [car parking standards]; PK3 [car parking and development]; PK4 [management of public parking];

74 PU1 [transport infrastructure and development]; LU2 [public transport accessibility]; LU3 [transport impact of new development]; LU5 [developer contributions]; F2 [planning obligations] Schedule 1 [site proposals].

The London Plan [February 2008]. 2A.1 [sustainability criteria], 2A.10 [strategic industrial locations], 3A.3 [maximising the potential of sites], 3B.1 [developing London’s economy], 3B.4 [industrial locations], 3B.11 [improving employment opportunities for Londoners], 3C.1 [integrating transport and development], 3C.2 [matching development to transport capacity], 3C.3 [sustainable transport in London], 3C.21 [Improving conditions for walking], 3C.23 [parking strategy], 3D.3 [maintaining and improving retail facilities], 3D.14 [biodiversity and nature conservation], 4A.1 [tackling climate change] 4A.2 [mitigating climate change], 4A.3 [sustainable design and construction], 4A.4 [energy assessment], 4A.5 Provision of Heating and Cooling Networks 4A.6 Decentralised energy 4A.7 [renewable energy], 4A.11 [living roofs and walls], 4A.12 [flooding], 4A.13 [flood risk management], A.14 [sustainable drainage], 4A 19 [improving air quality, 4A.20 [reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes], 4A.21 [waste strategic policy and targets], 4A.22 [spatial policies for waste management], 4A.23 [criteria for the selection of sites for waste management and disposal], 4B.1 [design principles for a compact city], 4B.3 [enhancing the quality of the public realm], 4B.5 [creating an inclusive environment], 4B.10 [large-scale buildings – design and impact]. 4B.12 [heritage conservation] 4B.15 [archaeology] 6A.5 [planning obligations].

75