Agenda and minutes

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and other registrable and non-registrable interests they may have in relation to any item(s) of business on today’s agenda.

There were no disclosures of a pecuniary interest not already registered.

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

There was none.

To consider the accompanying reports by the Director of Planning & Strategic Transport:

Erection of single-storey rear and side extensions with raised terraces on a pair of semi-detached (part-retrospective).

Ward: Crystal Palace And Upper Norwood

Recommendation: Grant permission

Erection of single-storey rear and side extensions with raised terraces on a pair of semi-detached (part-retrospective).

Ward: Crystal Palace And Upper Norwood

The officer presented details of the planning application and in response to members’ questions explained that:

• The proposed development would remain as two separated houses.
• There was not a suburban design guide on residential extensions, so officers had to rely on DM10 from Croydon’s development plan to provide guidance on the design and character of the development. The single-story rear elements were subordinate and, other than through a small glimpse between 204 and 206, could not be seen from the road.
• The distance from the side of the development at 204 and the ground floor windows of the property at 206 was 8.4m.
• The distance from the side of the development at 202 and the property at 200 was just under 1m, however this distance increased to approximately 3.5m towards the back of the property.
• There was a property at 190 Beulah Hill which had a single story rear extension, which was white render and had roof lights in the roof. This property was three houses down from the site of the proposed development, which is why officers believed that a rendered extension was acceptable.

Christopher Whitehouse spoke in objection to the application, Safraz Gani spoke in support of the application and Councillor Claire Bonham addressed the Committee with her view as the Ward Councillor. The sub-committee began the deliberation, during which they raised the following points:

• 50m was a sufficient distance between windows of the proposed development and its neighbouring properties.
• The implementation of screening could appease adjoining occupiers.
• The height of the rear extension was not in keeping with the character of the area.
• There was concern that the two developments would be used as one property.
• The materials and the design of the proposed development was considered unsuitable.
• The proposed development should have a mix of render and brick at the front of the property and use brick for the rear extension rather than render so that it was in keeping with the design of other properties in the area.
• The rear extension should have a sloping roof to avoid the block-like appearance that the proposed development and to minimise the impact of the height of the rear extension.
• A site visit would not be beneficial as the Members would not be able to see what the development looked like during the site visit, they would be able to see the finished product from the plans in the report.

The substantive motion to GRANT the application based on the officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor Parker. This was seconded by Councillor Fraser.

The motion to grant the application was taken to a vote and carried with five Members voting in favour and one Member voting against.

The Committee RESOLVED to GRANT the application for the development at 202-204 Beulah Hill, Upper Norwood, SE19 3UX.