Agenda item

REFUSED

Description of application – Demolition of dwellinghouse. Erection of building containing 9 flats, together with access, underground and surface level car parking, cycle parking, bin store, hard and soft landscaping.

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received at the meeting.  A comparative drawing had been received from the agent and circulated to Members.

Ward Member, Councillor Kate Lymer, referred to the Ordnance Survey Map on page 97 of the Assistant Director Planning’s report.  She acknowledged amendments to the application had been made but in her view it was still unacceptable as it would overlook and cause harm to the privacy of neighbouring properties.  Berryfield Close was single lane with no pavements on either side.  In front of properties Numbered 1, 3 and 4 was a car length parking space.  The current dwelling was two-storey with one first floor window that faced those properties and one ground floor window.  The proposed development was for a three-storey building with four ground floor windows and three first floor windows to face the front of the properties in Berryfield Close and looked directly into their bedrooms.  A number of established trees would be removed. Councillor Lymer welcomed the reduction of windows on the north-east elevation but, in her view, seven windows would be intrusive with a loss of privacy and outlook.  She referred to the dwelling on the other side at Pines End and this property would have second floor windows close to them that looked into one of their bedroom windows.  Also, further loss of privacy and overlooking remained at number 2 Asprey Place and numbers 8 and 9 Berryfield Close. The current privacy enjoyed by these dwellings would be compromised, not only by the proposed second floor living accommodation dormer windows, but also by the three roof terraces.  Two of the intended terraces were balconies at first floor level, and the third would be a party terrace at second floor level to serve the proposed penthouse accommodation.  The first and second floor terraces would have side vision screens to two of the terraces.  These side vision screens did not negate the overlooking and loss of privacy from the front of the terraces and the first floor roof terrace had no proposed vision screening.  The roof terraces and dormer windows would look directly into numbers 8 and 9 Berryfield Close and the homes and gardens of number 2 Asprey Place and Pines End and also at a considerable height.

Councillor Lymer proposed refusal on the basis of an unacceptable loss of privacy and overlooking to all of the homes surrounding the site.  The Chairman agreed with Councillor Lymer and seconded permission.

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

1.  The proximity of the development to existing neighbouring residential properties, together with the location and quantity of additional windows and external terraces, would be intrusive and significantly harmful to the privacy amenities of neighbouring properties by reason of overlooking contrary to Policies 4 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan.