Home

For the attention of all local residents

Email your objections to: Planning.representations@merton.gov.uk

Reference No. 20/P3608

Plans to build a large medical centre on Clarendon Road / Courtney Road are now in final consulation. If you live in these roads or nearby, this building will affect your environment, will be in the centre of your residential area, will bring a lot of traffic, and will affect your ability to park in your road. YOU HAVE UNTIL SATURDAY 3RD JULY TO OBJECT .

HOW TO OBJECT:
Email your objections to planning.representations@merton.gov.uk using reference number 20/P3608.

The redevelopment of Merton Vision, 67 Clarendon Road to become a new Medical Facility is still ongoing. Despite over 75% of local residents objecting to the proposal, the planning and development is formally continuing.

Local residents have until 3^rd July 2021 to make their thoughts clear. Since the last ‘consultation’ the plans have been slightly amended and some residents may have seen a letter dated 18 June sent to them regarding this.

Therefore, there is still time to object this development. If you have already informed Merton Council of your opinion, you can still do so again. Outlined below are some discrepancies in Merton Council’s associated documents that can be used in objections against this development.  The more objections the Council receive, the stronger the impact on the final decision.

THE POINTS OF OBJECTION BELOW MAY HELP YOU:

Please feel free to copy, paste & edit /pick and choose to show your views….

1. Residential area:

Merton Council’s associated documents regarding the redevelopment state that the surrounding area is ‘predominantly residential”. In fact it is a totally residential area. No other businesses of this size exist in the immediate vicinity therefore stating that there are others is deceptive/misleading.

2. Traffic and Environment: 

There is legal reason to be concerned about the traffic, parking and environmental consequences in a residential area with a distinctive local character and serious constraints on accessibility with no through traffic or public transport links. These factors appear to contradict local planning policy and strategy (particularly Policy DM C1 of the 2014 Merton Sites and Policies Plan), as well as relevant Mayor of London and national planning policy.

The development will have a detrimental environmental impact  on the whole surrounding area which is currently totally populated by families. The Transport Statement is a cover-up, as the necessary surveys on which is should have been based were not able to take place due to Covid-19 restrictions. As Clarendon Road and Courtney Road are no-through-roads and are only accessed via Colwood Gardens and Fortescue Road, vehicles will constantly use these presently quiet roads as a rat-race to enter and exit the area, therefore creating unacceptable levels of congestion and pollution. Additionally, the increase in noise and disturbance from delivery vehicles and those accessing the building for its services will have a severe impact on the local residents and negatively redefine the road usage.

3. Accessibility:

The Transport Statement states that Colliers Wood Tube Station is a short 2 minutes’ walk away. The truth is that via information from Google Maps, the distance is a minimum 8 minutes’ walk.  Additionally, the Transport Statement concurs that the requirement of bus stops should be a maximum 400 metres from such a facility. The truth is that the nearest bus stop is 450 metres from the site. Taking into consideration patients will be typically older and less mobile, the accessibility of the proposal medical facility is utterly unsuited to many.

4. Parking:

The parking situation is still unclear. Employees of the Medical Facility are demanding) at least seven street parking spaces thus removing parking from the local residents. This has not been satisfactorily communicated to the residents living opposite the facility on Clarendon, Courtney and Fortescue Roads, to whom this will have immediate impact.

If you are interested in being able to park in your road please look at the ‘parking situation’ section at the bottom of this website. It is not a direct discrepancy (which is why it is not in this paragraph) – but it does seem to be a bit of nonsense from our local council, who clearly haven’t checked if their information is correct. Please have a look (see bottom of site).

5. Scale – contravening  Merton Council’s Design Policies (D5.3):

The scale of the proposal shows over development of the site – particularly when compared with the predominantly single storey nature of the existing build. The design is purportedly 2 storey, but the southern elevation drawings clearly show opening roof windows in the pitched roofs facing Clarendon Road. These are indicative of a third storey, which is not shown on the plans but may be the reason for the unnecessarily tall gable ends. These are accentuated by the out of scale floor to ceiling heights of 3 metres or more. The massing and bulk of the building are inappropriate and out of scale with surrounding houses. This is obvious from the elevation showing the adjacent homes in Alphea Close. Virtually all of the properties in Clarendon Road and Courtney Road are traditional terraced houses with a central ridge and front and back roof slopes. The proposals show dominant gable ends with steep pitched sides and are out of character in the area. 

The proposals contravene  Merton Council’s Design Policies (D5.3)
The proposed design is overdevelopment of the site, is out of scale and the bulk and massing do not relate positively to rhythm, scale, density, proportions or height of the surrounding buildings.

The proposed building is meant to be a merging of two surgeries (Colliers Wood Surgery, and Lavender Fields surgery) which have 2-3 doctors each. How can the developers and the CCG justify that the this new building has so many consulting rooms? Is there a plan that has not been communicated or disclosed to the local residents, to also use this building for a raft of different health services, thereby increasing the number of people heading to the site daily? This points to the entire application being a con.

6. Contravening Council and London Plans:

The scheme does not fit with (1) the National Planning Policy Framework 2018 (NPPF), (2) the London Plan, (3) the proposed new London Plan, and (4) the Merton Local Plan (in particular, the Merton LDF Core Planning Strategy 2011 and Merton Sites and Policies Plan 2014).

7. Out of character with the area:

The MertonVision building used to be a school. The building is an eye-pleasing red-brick structure which assimilates seamlessly with the properties opposite it on Clarendon, Courtney and Fortescue Road beautifully. It is one of the few surviving aspects of local character and heritage in Merton. There has been no attempt or communication from Merton Council or developers as to why this building cannot be enhanced in conjunction with its current appearance, rather than being entirely removed and replaced with something this is the complete opposite with what it is and the surrounding terraced red-brick buildings.

8. Transparency:

Local residents have not received any information regarding how many patients at Colliers Wood Surgery and Lavender Fields Surgery have agreed to be moved to this new site. We do not know even if the patients at these surgeries are fully aware of the exact location of the new site and the transport issues concerning it. In January 2019, local MP Siobhan McDonagh did inform a substantial assembly of residents that a public meeting would ensue to allow questions and objections to be raised – this meeting, so far, has failed to happen. Using various excuses (Covid-19, Lockdowns,) it can be fairly alleged that this development is being bulldozed through by manipulating the current national pandemic situation.

9. Location choice:

The site choice and protocol behind the decision for a Medical Facility at MertonVision has been ambiguous. There are far more suitable sites available in the local area which is better facilitated by public transport than this one. Due to the pandemic, unfortunately various local businesses are no longer active thus leaving empty units along the High Street, near to public transport amenities. The Community Centre has been long earmarked for redevelopment by Merton Council – has this idea been actively investigated? Other possible sites include the neighbouring area to Britannia Point – instead of more tower blocks (which residents have equally alarming concerns about) again, opposite the tube and bus stops.

10. Alternative uses of the area

What other possibilities have been suggested for MertonVision to assist their financial situation? Again, this has not been communicated to the local community, nor have they been energetically invited to give opinions and solutions. Could MertonVision share their space with the Community Centre (as the Community Centre has been highlighted for redevelopment)? Is there another charity or charities that MertonVision can invite into the building? Does Singlegate Primary School need more space for Nursery or Reception Classes? MertonVision used to be a school, and currently has an Office, Hall, Classroom, Kitchen and Bathroom facilities and an outside space.

11. Covid-19 and the future of GP surgeries

TFL were recently running a campaign to reduce use of transport and create ‘Low traffic neighbourhoods’ as a way of reducing the spread of COVID-19. Creating traffic in this quiet residential area seems to contravene that idea, and effectively with an increased number of people, increases the resident’s risk of infection to COVID-19 or any other pandemic in the future.

It is also a fact that hospitals and medical centres are high risk areas for COVID-19 infection. It makes no sense with what we have all learned during this pandemic, to place this medical centre in the heart of a residential area.

This project can also be legitimately questioned due to the development that radical changes to primary care during COVID-19 mean that the proposed building has been designed with an outmoded model of primary care in mind. Whilst it is intended to be a transformational new model of primary care, the new practices of GPs that are emerging during COVID-19 indicate that the future of primary care will require much less physical space. It does raise the question of whether investing heavily in a new primary care facility in a time of crisis/severe budgetary constraints (recession or worse and massive state funding crisis) when it might not be fit for purpose and is a controversial use of the site, is entirely the wrong thing to do? How does this fit with post-COVID NHS strategy?

Here are some general points highlighting why MertonVision, 67 Clarendon Road is an inappropriate location for a substantial Medical Facility. Any of these objections are viable and can used in any objection communicative to Merton Council.  For more information to what is seen as a viable objection to a redevelopment of a site, the list below are grounds on which planning permission is mostly likely to be refused (although this list is not intended to be definitive, just a guidance):

•        Adverse effect on the residential amenity of neighbours, by reason of (among other factors) noise*, disturbance*, overlooking, loss of privacy, overshadowing, etc. [*but note that this does not include noise or disturbance arising from the actual execution of the works, which will not be taken into account, except possibly in relation to conditions that may be imposed on the planning permission, dealing with hours and methods of working, etc. during the development]

•        Unacceptably high density / over-development of the site, especially if it involves loss of garden land or the open aspect of the neighbourhood (so-called ‘garden grabbing’)

•        Visual impact of the development

•        Effect of the development on the character of the neighbourhood

•        Inadequate parking and servicing and traffic generation

•        Design (including bulk and massing, detailing and materials, if these form part of the application)

•        The proposed development is over-bearing, out-of-scale or out of character in terms of its appearance compared with existing development in the vicinity

•        The loss of existing views from neighbouring properties would adversely affect the residential amenity of neighbouring owners

•        [If in a Conservation Area, adverse effect of the development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area]

NOTE: Parking situation

We recently used the Freedom of Information act to ask the council two questions about the parking in Clarendon Rd, Courtney Rd, Alphea Close, Fortescue Road & Colwood gardens. We asked (1) How many spaces have the council allocated for each road, and (2) How many parking permits are currently already purchased for people who live in these roads. The reason we asked this was to hopefully get similar figures to both questions so that we could say that the doctors demanding seven on road parking spaces was unreasonable. To our suprise the figures Merton Council sent us on 24th June 2021 was as follows:

Clarendon Road – Spaces 75 – Live permits 56 (therefore 75% spaces used)
Courtney Road – Spaces 69 – Live permits 34 (therefore 49% spaces used)
Alphea Close – has 9 parking bays
Fortescue Road Road – Spaces 79– Live permits 53 (therefore 67% spaces used)
Colwood Gardens – Spaces 26 – Live permits 15 (therefore 57% spaces used)

Does this seem to represent the parking situation to you?

Or could it be that the amount of parking spaces available were worked out many years ago, based on a scenario where small (mini metro) cars are parked six inches from each other, all round the block?

I’m only speculating, but clearly a lot of us have big family cars, and we don’t tend to park six inches from each other. So maybe the ‘spaces’ figures from the council are unrealistic?

All I know is that the average of the council figures above from all the roads except Alphea Close state that we are currently at 62% capacity on parking, and that is clearly not the case if we look outside our front door. An area like Colliers Wood should never be close to 100% capacity. We are not in central London. This surgery could make parking in your own road impossible, and we need to stand up to the council and the developers to ensure this does not happen.