Agenda item

REFUSED

Description of application amended to read, “Conversion of an existing dwelling house into 4 flats (3 x 2 bed flats and 1 x1 bed flat) together with a three storey infill extension to the rear over the lower ground, ground and first floors and rear dormer extension.”

The Chief Planner’s representative circulated a report update to Members which referred to page 37 of the Chief Planner’s report and replaced the wording of paragraph 3 under the heading, ‘Amenity Space’, to read:-

“In terms of amenity space adequate private amenity space should also be provided with a minimum of 5 square metres of private outdoor space for 1-2 person dwellings and an extra 1 square metres should be provided for each additional occupant. The basement and ground floor units will have access to private gardens 41.3m2 for Flat 1 and 45m2 for flat 2. Flats 3 and 4 will have separate private provision in the form of balconies of 6m2 for flat 3 and 6.5m2 for Flat 4. It is also noted that there are a number of parks (Westow Park and Crystal Palace Park). It is therefore considered that the provision of amenity space is acceptable at this location.”

The officer recommendation remained as set out in the Chief Planner’s report.

A statement in support of the application from the agent had been received and circulated to Members.

The application proposed to extend a substantial house in a conservation area with bulky extensions at the rear that would not be visible from the road. 

Councillor Auld had visited the site at 2 pm that afternoon and had been unable to park and he referred to Highways original pre-application consultation that one a parking space should be provided per flat equating to a total of 4 spaces and objected to the application.  Councillor Kevin Brooks agreed with Councillor’s Auld’s comments and also objected to the application.

Members were minded that if provision of off-street parking had been proposed then they may not have objected to the application.

Members having considered the report and objections, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED for the following reason:-

1.  No off-street car parking facilities are provided within the curtilage of the site and the proposed conversion of a single dwelling into four flats would therefore generate an unacceptable increase in the demand for on-street car parking and result in congestion, prejudicial to the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety along in the highway. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies T3 and T18 of the Unitary Development Plan.