Agenda item

Alterations, conversion of single family dwellinghouse to form 3x selfcontained

flats, reconfiguration of area to front of 8 & 8A St Helen's

Road, demolition of existing side extension, erection of single storey

side/rear extension, rear dormer extension and provision of associated

cycle and refuse storage.

Ward: Norbury and Pollards Hill

Recommendation: Grant permission

Alterations, conversion of single family dwellinghouse to form 3x self-contained flats, reconfiguration of area to front of 8 & 8A St Helen's Road, demolition of existing side extension, erection of single storey side/rear extension, rear dormer extension and provision of associated cycle and refuse storage.

Ward: Norbury and Pollards Hill

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

• The cycle storage was towards the rear of the site and would be accessed via a path alongside the property near the rear garden.
• The previous proposal included a proposal of bulky waste storage, which conflicted with the parking spaces and did not demonstrate that larger 4.8m vehicles could enter and exit the site. The current proposal would move the bulky waste storage so that it was no longer near the parking spaces.
• The single storey side rear extension would be approximately 2m in depth and was considered to be subservient to the host building. The materials used in the design of the side rear extension would also match the host building.
• Given the modest scale there would be no harmful loss of light or outlook to the neighbouring property.
• The greater London archaeological advisory service stated that the scale of the development did not meet the threshold for them to provide a comment on the application. 
• There was a condition which required maintenance for a period of 5 years, over this period landscaping would be established.
• The landscaping condition required details of the hard and soft landscaping to be submitted by the applicant.
• The applicant claimed that they had ownership of the site. If the site was sold then the landscaping responsibilities would be determined based on whether the freehold had been retained following the sale.
• The maintenance condition required planting which had died to be maintained.

Councillor Ben-Hassel spoke in objection to the application, Chris Brady spoke in support of the meeting and Councillor Griffiths. After the speakers had finished, the sub-committee began the deliberation, during which they raised the following points:

• The side alleyway would need adequate lighting and there was a request for this be added as a condition if the application was granted.
• The breaking up of the symmetry of the front gardens was an issue.
• The concerns expressed in the transport officer’s comments on the application regarding the movement of vehicles on and off the site was also considered to be an issue.
• The applicant had made positive changes to satisfy the inspectorate’s previous comments.
• The removal of the balcony on the 1^st floor was appreciated as this reduced the potentially harmful impact on the neighbouring property.
• The ‘no dig’ policy for the front of the property would protect the lime trees at the front of the site.
• If there were any trees lost due to the proposed development, then a condition should be added to ensure that a sufficient number of trees were replanted.
• The local area had a mixture of properties including detached and semi-detached houses, flats and commercial buildings.
• The proposal for the ground floor flat was suitable for a family home.
• The character of the property would be retained.
• The off-street parking arrangement was not ideal.
• The area had a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) rating of 4, with a train station and numerous bus routes close by.
• The removal of the two-storey extension was appreciated.
• Cycle parking had been reduced to provide 6 car parking spaces.
• The car parking proposal had been upheld by the inspector.

The substantive motion to GRANT the application based on the officer’s recommendation and the added conditions for the implementation of adequate lighting in the side alleyway and the submission of a hard and soft landscaping plan which would include replacement tree planting was proposed by Councillor Brew. This was seconded by Councillor Denton.

The motion to grant the application was taken to a vote and carried with three Members voting in favour, two Members voting against and one Member abstained their vote.

The Committee RESOLVED to GRANT the application for the development at 8 and 8A St Helen's Road.