Planning Committee 27/04/2016 Schedule Item 01

Transcription

1 Ref : Address: Ward: Proposal: PP/2015/ Birch Grove, Acton, W3 9SP South Acton Conversion of property from three to five self-contained flats (2 x studio and 3 x 2 bed), including erection of single storey rear extension, first floor side extension, loft conversion to habitable accommodation, bicycle and refuse storage and front fencing / landscaping. Drawing numbers: Existing: Rev B, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Design Squared Proposed: Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev B, Rev B, Rev B, Rev B, Design Squared Reports and Supporting: Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, February 2016, Design Squared Type of Application: Full Application Received: Application Valid: Amended Plans Received: Report by: Stuart Ardlie Recommendation: Grant subject to Conditions, Legal Agreement and Community Infrastructure Levy Executive Summary: This application is for a residential development to convert three flats into five flats, with associated extensions and external alterations, which is located within the Creffield Conservation Area. The principle of residential use of the site is considered acceptable as the proposed development would make a contribution to the housing stock within the borough and is considered to be of a suitably high quality of design so as to preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Therefore the principle of additional units within this location is acceptable and compatible with surrounding uses. Page 1 of 18

2 Some of the key issues involved with this application are the character and appearance of the development in relation to the Creffield Conservation Area, its impact upon neighbours residential amenities and the quality of the accommodation proposed. It is considered the proposal would be a suitable development that would relate in a satisfactory manner to neighbouring development and the wider Conservation Area. There would be minimal change to the subject building frontage and the development is considered acceptable in this regard. In addition the design of the development is considered to minimise impacts on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and would provide for acceptable living conditions for future occupiers. It has been established in this instance that the proposal would actually facilitate the reinstatement and refurbishment of the original features of this building to the benefit of this conservation area. The development is considered an acceptable proposal that would not have detrimental impacts on the character and appearance of the general area or the neighbouring properties. It is considered the proposal is suitable with regards to density, design, its relationship with neighbouring properties and integration with the surrounding Conservation Area. The proposed development would be acceptable in terms of landscaping, transport and accessibility, environmental pollution and refuse facilities. Consequently, this application is recommended for approval subject to suitable conditions. It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the aims of the relevant policies of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013, Ealing Core Strategy (2012), The London Plan (2015), Relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance, the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and emerging planning policy documents. It is therefore recommended that planning permission should be approved with conditions, subject to a legal agreement. Recommendation: Grant subject to Conditions and Legal Agreement That the committee GRANT planning permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to secure the following: i) Restrictions put in place to prevent the future occupiers of Flat 1 and Flat 3 from applying for on-street parking permits within the Controlled Parking Zone; and ii) Payment of the Council s reasonable legal and other professional costs incurred preparing and completing the Legal Agreement. AND subject to the following conditions: Conditions/Reasons: Time Limit 1. The development permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). Page 2 of 18

3 Approved Plans 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing title number(s): Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev A, Rev B, Rev B, Rev B, Rev B, Design Squared Reason: For the avoidance of doubt, and in the interests of proper planning. No Balcony 3. No part of the roof of the extensions shall be used as or altered to form a balcony, roof garden, roof terrace or similar amenity area. Reason: To protect the living conditions of occupants of nearby properties, in accordance with policy 7B of the Adopted Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), policies 1.1 (g), 2.1 (c) and 2.10 of the Adopted Core Strategy (2012) and policies 7.4 and 7.6 of the London Plan - consolidated (2015). Refuse and recycling storage areas 4. Refuse and recycling storage areas indicated on drawing reference Rev A and Rev A shall be provided and brought into use prior to the first occupation of the development permitted and retained thereafter. Reason: To protect the living conditions of occupiers of the area and in the interests of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policies with policies 3.5 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management Plan 2013, policies 1.1 (e) of the Adopted Ealing Development (Core) Strategy and The London Plan (2015) policy Cycle Parking 5. A minimum of 8 cycle parking space shall be provided onsite as indicated on drawing reference drawing reference Rev A and Rev A and brought into use prior to the first occupation of the development permitted and retained permanently thereafter. The cycle parking facilities shall only be used by the residents of the development hereby permitted. The residential cycle storage areas shall be secure, sheltered and adequately lit. Reason: To provide adequate facilities for cyclists, in accordance with policy 6.9 of the London Plan Lifetime homes standards 6. The approved residential dwellings shall be designed and constructed to meet Approved Document M (Volume 1: Dwellings), Part M4 (2)(Accessible and adaptable dwellings) of Building Regulations 2015, or other such relevant technical requirements in use at the time of the construction of the development. Reason: To ensure that the development is adaptable, flexible, convenient and appropriate to the changing needs of the future occupiers, in accordance with policies 3.5, 3.8 and 3.9 of the London Plan 2015; and policy 1.1(h) of Ealing Development (or Core) Strategy Page 3 of 18

4 Materials 7. All external materials to be used in the development shall match the appearance of those of the existing premises and those as described on the planning application form and approved plans. Reason: To ensure that the materials harmonise with the surroundings, in accordance with Policies 7.4, 7.6 & 7.8 of The London Plan (Consolidated 2015)) and Policies 7.4, 7B & 7C of Adopted Ealing Development Management Plan Document (2013). Informatives 1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in the Adopted Ealing Development Plan, the Adopted Development (Core) Strategy, the London Plan and to all relevant material considerations including Supplementary Planning Guidance: National Planning Policy Framework (2012) 6. Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes. 7. Good quality design. 10. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change 11. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment 12. Conserving and enhancing the historic environment. London Plan - Consolidated (2015): 2.6 Outer London: Vision and strategy 2.8 Outer London: Transport 3.3 Increasing housing supply 3.4 Optimising housing potential 3.5 Quality and design of housing developments 3.8 Housing choice 3.9 Mixed and balanced communities 3.14 Existing Housing 5.1 Climate change mitigation 5.2 Minimising carbon dioxide emissions 5.3 Sustainable design and construction 5.6 Decentralised energy in development proposals 5.7 Renewable energy 5.9 Overheating and cooling 5.10 Urban greening 5.12 Flood risk management 5.13 Sustainable drainage 5.14 Water quality and wastewater infrastructure 5.16 Waste self sufficiency 6.1 Strategic approach 6.3 Assessing the effects of development on transport capacity 6.5 Funding Crossrail and other strategically important transport infrastructure 6.9 Cycling 6.10 Walking 6.11 Smoothing traffic flow and easing congestion Page 4 of 18

5 6.12 Road network capacity 6.13 Parking 7.1 Building London s neighbourhoods and communities 7.2 An inclusive environment 7.3 Designing out crime 7.4 Local character 7.5 Public realm 7.6 Architecture 7.8 Heritage Assets and Archaeology 7.13 Safety, security and resilience to emergency 7.14 Improving air quality 7.15 Reducing and Managing Noise, Improving and Enhancing the Acoustic Environment and Promoting Appropriate Soundscapes 7.21 Trees and woodlands 8.2 Planning obligations 8.3 Community infrastructure levy Supplementary Planning Guidance /Documents Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment The Mayor s Transport Strategy London Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance March 2016 Sustainable Design & Construction The London Housing Strategy Adopted Development (Core) Strategy 2012: 1.1 Spatial Vision for Ealing (a), (b), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k) 1.2 Delivery of the Vision for Ealing 2026 (f), (g), (h) 2.1 Realising the Potential of the Uxbridge Road/Crossrail Corridor (a), (b), (c) 2.10 Residential Neighbourhoods 5.4 Protect the Natural Environment Biodiversity and Geodiversity 6.4 Planning Obligations and Legal Agreements Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document Optimising Housing Potential 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing Development 5.2 Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions 5.10 Urban Greening 5.12 Flood Risk Management 6.13 Parking 7.3 Designing Out Crime 7.4 Local Character 7A Amenity 7B Design Amenity 7C Heritage 7D Open Space Creffield Conservation Area Management Plan 2007 Creffield Conservation Area Appraisal 2007 Page 5 of 18

6 Other Material Documentation Interim Planning Policy Guidance / Documents SPG 3 Air Quality SPG 4 Refuse and recycling facilities SPG 10 Noise and vibration SPG Sustainable Transport SPD 4 Residential Extensions In reaching the decision to grant permission, specific consideration was given to the impact of the proposed development on the amenities of neighbouring properties and on the character of the surrounding area as a whole. The proposal is considered acceptable on these grounds, and it is not considered that there are any other material considerations in this case that would warrant a refusal of the application. 2. To assist applicants in a positive manner, the Local Planning Authority has produced policies and written guidance, and offers and encourages a comprehensive pre-application advice service, all of which is available on the Council s website and outlined in a 24 hours automated telephone system. 3. Construction and demolition works, audible beyond the boundary of the site shall only be carried on between the hours of hrs Mondays to Fridays and hrs on Saturdays and at no other times, including Sundays and Bank Holidays. 4. The applicant is advised that Ultra-Low NOx boilers with maximum NOx Emissions of under 40 mg/kwh should be used for the flats hereby approved. Site Description The site is located on the west side of Birch Grove directly opposite the intersection with Layer Gardens. The site itself if roughly rectangular and has a site area of approximately 341m 2 and has a relatively flat topography. The site forms the southern half of a two storey semi-detached two storey Edwardian building. The buildings features include front bays, oriel window, a prominent gable end with ornate bargeboard, detailed dressing over the main door, butterfly ridge tiles and Flemish bond red brickwork. The front of the site consists of a hard paved area that is used for car parking. The site is currently divided into three self-contained flats: - Flat 1: Ground floor flat located at the front of the building. Configured as a 1 bedroom two person flat with separate living and kitchen. - Flat 2: Two storey flat located at the rear of the building. Configured as a 1 bedroom two person flat with separate living and kitchen and sole use of the rear amenity. - Flat 3: First floor flat located at the front of the building. Configured as a 1 bedroom two person flat with separate living and kitchen. The site is not listed, but, is located within the Creffield Conservation Area. More broadly the properties along Birch Grove are predominately arranged as semi-detached with wide interspaces between them and generous front and back gardens, noting the broader area also contains some detached dwellings. They are generously proportioned, mainly two-storeys with bay windows with many containing ornate detailing and oriel windows. Page 6 of 18

7 The Proposal Conversion of property from three to five self-contained flats (2 x studio and 3 x 2 bed), including erection of single storey rear extension, first floor side extension, loft conversion to habitable accommodation, bicycle and refuse storage and front fencing / landscaping. The application was required to amend the proposal to delete the side facing dormer to the main roof form, delete roof lights to front roof slope, improve internal layout and to provide full details of fencing and landscaping within the front setback of the site. As these elements resulted in a reduction in the overall scale of the scheme no re-consultation was undertaken in accordance with Council s policy. Relevant Planning History Application Number P/2006/5265 PP/2014/5246 Development Description Decision Date Conversion of house into three self-contained residential units together with parking provision. Deconversion of property incorporating three flats into single family dwellinghouse, roof extension to rear Grant with Conditions 25/09/1989 Grant with Conditions 05/02/2007 Conversion of three flats into single family dwelling, roof extension to side of rear outrigger roofslope; part single part two storey rear infill extension; single storey rear extension; and the installation of four rooflights (two to the Grant with front roofslope Conditions 15/12/2014 The submitted drawings and site inspection carried out by planning officers revealed that the building is currently configured as three separate units in accordance with ref: dated 25/09/1989. It is noted that Council granted conditional consent through ref: P/2006/5265 on the 5 th February 2007 and ref: PP/2014/5246 on the 15 th December 2014 to convert the site into a single family dwelling. It would appear that neither of these consents were implemented. Consultation: Public: The original consultation from this application incorrect described the existing use of the site as a house of multiple occupancy. As detailed in the site history above, the building is currently configured as three separate units. To correct this issue the proposal was re-consulted by way of a site notice and public advertisement on 22/01/2016, with the consultation period expiring on 12/02/2016. During all consultation periods a total of 44 objections were received, noting the majority are pro-former. A summary of the issues raised is provided below: Page 7 of 18

8 - Overdevelopment - The provision of two additional units is too intensive and will negatively impact on the Creffield Conservation Area as it is not in keeping with the surrounding housing. This includes the significance of this dwelling as one half of a semi-detached building. Comment: A detailed assessment of the Creffield Conservation Area is provided within the body of the report. This assessment concluded that the works would in fact improve the external appearance of the building to the benefit of the conservation area, with the works limited to the rear of the site. - Side dormer to main roof form Impact conservation area. Comment: The amended proposal deleted the side dormer to the main roof form and the rooflights to the front roof slope. - Second floor extension Impact light and privacy Comment: A detailed conservation assessment and impact assessment is provided within the body of the report. The assessment found that the proposal would not unreasonably impact on the conservation area or the amenity of the neighbouring properties. - No indication of materials to be used. Comment: The proposal will maintain and reinstate the original materials which front Birch Grove. A condition has been included within the recommendation that all external materials to be used in the development shall match the appearance of those of the existing premises and those as described on the planning application form and approved plans. - Significant internal works which will destroy the character of the house and give rise to party wall issues Comment: The impact of construction work on the existing party wall are not a planning consideration. Internal works after the conversion would not require planning permission unless it is a listed building, however they would not affect the character of the house as its external features and design would be maintained. - Noise from increase in occupants Comment: The property is not presently a house and is already converted into flats. The reconfiguration to provide five flats is not considered to give rise to any acoustic impacts beyond those of the existing or those expected within this residential environment. - Increased traffic and parking Comment: The proposal will retain the two existing onsite car parking spaces, within the front setback of the site. A traffic and parking assessment is provided within the body of this report. Council s Traffic Services Team raised no objection to the proposal. In order to mitigate concerns raised about the additional demand for parking space, the applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 106 agreement to restrict parking permits for the additional residential units created. Page 8 of 18

9 - Increased refuse Comment: A refuse storage area which is capable of meeting the needs of the future occupants has been provided within the front setback of the site. The structure itself is screened by the existing and proposed landscaping and front fencing. - Increased demand on public utilities Comment: The proposal is seeking a modest increase in intensity on this site, with a nominal increase in the overall floor area. As such it is considered that the proposal would not place an unreasonable burden on public utilities. - Insufficient garden space for 5 flats. Comment: Flat A and B at the ground floor each have amenity spaces at the rear of the site. The site is located within a walkable distance (approximately 650m) of Ealing Common. A detailed amenity assessment is contained within the body of this report. - No provision for cycle storage Comment: The amended plans include the provision of a 6 cycle storage spaces within the front setback of the site, with the exception of Flat A which has provision for two spaces within their amenity area. This requirement will be secured through a condition contained within the recommendation of this report. External: Consultee Comments Officer Response Creffield Area Conservation Advisory Panel Objection A) Overdevelopment B) Insufficient garden space C) No provision for vehicles, bicycles and refuse D) Unsightly side dormer E) Chimney removal A detailed conservation assessment is contained within the body of this report. Internal: Consultee Comments Officer Response Transport Services No objection Proposal suitable for car free development with the reinstatement of kerb and gutter. The developer would be required to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement preventing residents from obtaining parking permits. A section 106 agreement restricting residential parking permits for Flat D and E has been agreed in principle by the agent. This represents the uplift component of the development. Require 8 cycle parking spaces within front forecourt. Compliant cycle parking has been provided. The location of 2 spaces at the rear is necessary on conservation grounds. The rear cycle parking area is for the Page 9 of 18

10 sole use of Flat A. The side path had adequate width to provide access. Regulatory Services (Pollution Technical) Environmental Services (Refuse) Planning Policies: Site is not affected by transport, commercial or aircraft noise. Recommended stacking of rooms. Conditions pertaining to building emissions. Space required for wheelie bins. Traffic services have now clarified that the forecourt would be suitable for two vehicles, utilising the existing vehicles crossover. No noise conditions are included or required within the recommendation as the Building Regulations require vertical and horizontal insulation of all newly created flats to ensure that noise impacts are mitigated and attenuated to achieve compliance with the standards set by the Building Regulations. Informatives included within the recommendation of this report. Amended proposal incorporates refuse storage area within forecourt. Provision for 30 litres of storage for recyclable waste provided within kitchen areas of each dwelling. Please see informative section above for a full policy list Reasoned Justification/Remarks: This proposal has been assessed against the relevant policies of the Adopted Development (Core) Strategy, the London Plan - Consolidated (2015), the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013 and Interim Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents. The key issues in the assessment of this planning application are: The principle of the proposal; Density; Design and Appearance in conservation area Impact on nearby properties; Quality and layout of the proposed living accommodation; Traffic and Parking; Environmental Health; Refuse & Recycling; Community Infrastructure Levy; and Lifetime home standard. Page 10 of 18

11 A detailed assessment of the proposal is set out as follows: The Principle of the Proposal Increasing the current housing stock is an important strategic objective for the London Borough of Ealing, supported by London Plan policy 3.3. London Plan policy 3.4 aims to ensure that development proposals achieve the maximum intensity of use compatible with local context. The site is located within an established residential area, characterised by predominantly semi-detached residential buildings. The site is considered to be a suburban area, however, it does have urban characteristics being located within a walkable catchment of both Ealing Common Underground Station (approx. 550m) and a number of local neighbourhood shops including a supermarket. The principle of additional residential units in this area is acceptable, subject to compliance with the relevant policies and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework, Adopted Ealing Development (Core) Strategy, the London Plan 2015, the Ealing Development Management Plan 2013 and Supplementary Planning Guidance/ Documents. In this instance, it is not considered that the proposal would amount to inappropriate development for the reasons outlined in this report. Density The area has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 4 which is identified as being a Very Good level of accessibility. It is considered that the site is located within a suburban location defined by Table 3.2 of the London Plan (2015) which is demonstrated by the site s location and policy 3.4 of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan which states that Appropriate density ranges in Ealing will normally be: Central in Ealing Metropolitan Town Centre, Urban in Acton, Greenford, Hanwell and Southhall Town Centres and Suburban in the rest of the Borough. The resultant density on site would be as follows: Units per hectare: 1/ ha (site area) x 5 (number of units) = 147 units per hectare Habitable rooms per hectare: 1/ ha (site area) x 8 (habitable rooms) = 234 habitable rooms per hectare Table 3.2 of the London Plan indicates that on suburban sites of hr/unit and with a PTAL of 4 the acceptable density range will be u/ha and hr/ha. These figures illustrate that the proposed development would result in a density of units that is slightly above the guidance, but, would comply with the recommended habitable room density levels according to the London Plan standards. Notwithstanding this, the main thrust of London Plan policy 3.4 is to ensure development should optimise housing output for the different types of location, whilst taking account of the local context, design and transport capacity. Density is not the determining factor as to whether a development is acceptable. The potential for additional residential development is better considered in the context of its bulk, scale, design, sustainability, amenity and the desirability of protecting and enhancing the character of the area and Page 11 of 18

12 the relationship with neighbouring sites and retained development on this and neighbouring sites. These matters are discussed in detail in the remainder of this report. Design and Appearance in Conservation Areas Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that that as here, with regard to applications relating to land or buildings within a conservation area, special attention must be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area. The National Planning Policy Framework (2012), section 12, paragraph 134 states that: Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. However this needs to be considered in the context of section above and so it is not a simple balancing exercise given that special attention must be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area. Policy 3.5 of the London Plan 2015 provides that housing developments should be of the highest quality internally, externally and in relation to their context and to the wider environment. This policy is reinforced by policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013 which state that developments should complement their street sequence, building pattern, scale, materials and detailing and should have high quality architecture and should not undermine the significance of a conservation area. New development is required to retain and enhance characteristic features and detailing and avoid the introduction of design and materials that undermine the significance of the Conservation Area. The site is located within the Creffield Conservation Area which has a management plan which provides general guidance on any external works to buildings within this area. To understand the proposal the existing built form needs to be carefully considered. The subject site forms the southern half of a semi-detached building. The building has been previously split into three flats with one extending over two storeys. The building appears to retain its original form, fenestrations and detailing, although it has been poorly maintained with a general deterioration of the original fabric evident. The front setback of the site has been paved and this is out of character with the neighbouring properties. The proposal will facilitate the refurbishment and reinstatement of the original features of this building to the benefit of the conservation area. The works to the street elevation, considered to be the most important view in relation to the conservation area, will not change from existing with no works to the street elevation including windows, bays, front door or front roof slope. The amended plans deleted the side facing dormer within the main roof form and the rooflights within the front roofslope. The proposal seeks to improve the front setback by reinstating a high quality landscaping scheme which includes new paving and hedging along the entire north and south boundary and part of the front boundary. This would all be set behind a new front fence which has a solid bases and piers topped with ironwork to match existing fencing within the conservation area. The proposal seeks to provide a timber refuse storage and vertical bicycle storage rack within the front setback. These structures have been sited adjoining the southern boundary, which contains an existing established hedge. The bike rake was chosen in lieu of an enclosed structure to minimise its visibility within the conservation area. These Page 12 of 18

13 structures would be well screened by the proposed front fence and softened by the proposed landscaping from views within the conservation area. Although they would have a slight impact, it is considered that overall the benefit and improvements provided by the proposal over existing, mitigate this impact. It is noted that Council has consistently allowed the provision of these structures in similar location where they area well integrated and as such it would be difficult to resist in this circumstance. The south (side) elevation within the main body of the building will remain largely as existing, with the proposal seeking to utilise the existing window openings where possible. The main change is the provision of an additional sash window on the first floor, which have proportions which match the existing windows. The built form of the side roof extension, single storey rear extension and side / rear extension at the first floor were all previously approved through PP/2014/5246 on 15/12/2014. As these works were not implemented a detailed assessment of the proposed built form is provided below. The proposed side roof extension, would introduce a box dormer on the side of the rear outrigger roofslope and therefore would not be visible from the street as it would be obscured from view by the main roofslope. The Creffied Conservation Area Management Plan states that dormer windows will usually be acceptable on the rear roofslope but only rarely on the front or side. They should not dominate the roofslope. Dormer windows should be of traditional design. A roof shape in keeping with the original profile is preferred but a flat roofed dormer may be necessary in smaller or shallower roofs, to allow 500mm to the ridge, valleys and hips. The proposed dormer has been set in from the eaves by 500mm and from the ridge by 900mm and would therefore be in accordance with the guidance set out in the Management Plan as it would not dominate the roofslope. Due to the siting and positioning of the proposed roof extension on the rear outrigger and the siting of neighbouring properties, the visual of the rear roof extension would be minimised, Number 41 Birch Grove s rear outrigger would obscure the rear roof extension from any further views from the south of the property, and the properties to the rear are located at an oblique angle to the site. The presence of trees directly to the rear of the application site would further restrict longer views of the rear roof extension from the rear. Overall it is considered that the proposed roof extension would remain subordinate and would not detract from the character or appearance of the conservation area or the host dwelling. The proposal would include a single storey rear extension and rear / side extension at the first floor. The single storey rear extension seeks to demolish unsightly poor quality existing extensions. The proposed ground floor element would infill the southeast corner for a depth of 1m, finishing inline with the existing side wall of the dwelling and matching the depth of a recently completed extension to the adjoining half of the semi-detached building. The extension would comprise a sloping roof with a maximum height of 3.4m and eaves height of 2.7m. The form, height and design of the extension is generally consistent with the adjoining half of the semi-detached building. The proposed first floor element would extend from the rear elevation of the main dwelling for a depth of 4.8m comprising of a flat roof with a height of 3m and would be set in from the side elevation by 500mm. The extension would be set back behind the existing built form. The proposed first floor extension would be constructed in matching materials and as such provides a complimentary addition that would remain sympathetic towards the host dwelling and neighbouring properties. The proposed extension would be considered small in scale and would remain subordinate to the host dwelling and would not be visible from the street and as such would accord with the Management Plan. It is considered that given the reasonable height and design of the side extension it would remain visually subordinate and would be considered acceptable in this regard. Page 13 of 18

14 The proposed rooflight to the rear of the main roofslope and the rear of the outrigger would in part take on irregular shapes and introduce a contemporary finish to the rear of the property. The proposed rooflights would not extend significantly beyond the existing roof plane and would be located to the rear of the property, largely obscured from view. Finally a number of submission received during the consultation period have raised issue with the provision of additional units on this site and the impact of units on the conservation area as it would impact the originally character of this area. It has been established in this instance that the proposal would actually facilitate the reinstatement and refurbishment of this building to the benefit of the conservation area as opposed to negatively impacting it. The conversion of large dwellings into units is common, noting the existing site already contains three units. Overall it is considered that the proposal would be an appropriate development in regard to design and appearance and is therefore considered to be acceptable with regard to the Creffield Conservation Area Management Plan, policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013 and policies 7.1, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.8 of the London Plan (2015). Impact on neighbouring properties London Plan Policy 7.6 (Architecture) states that development should not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of surrounding land and buildings, particularly residential buildings, in relation to privacy, and overshadowing. Ealing Draft Development Management DPD Policy 7B (Design Amenity) states that new development must achieve a high standard of amenity for users and adjacent uses by ensuring good levels of daylight and sunlight, good levels of privacy, and positive visual impact. Two new side facing windows are proposed within the south (side) elevation. The applicant has submitted detailed demonstrating that the windows would be offset from the windows of the directly adjoining property. Any angled views are considered to be reasonable within this density of residential development. The application identifies obscure fixed glazing to the bathroom window of Flat C below a height of 1.7m above the finished floor level. The separation provided by the rear setback and amenity space is considered to mitigate any impact associated with rear facing glazing. Further, the location of windows on a rear elevation is logical and as such any impact is considered to be within the scope of development within this density of residential. No. 45 located to the north of the application site, currently benefits from a ground floor rear extension that extends approximately 3m from the original rear wall. The proposed ground floor rear extension would extend 3m from the original rear wall and therefore it is not considered that the proposal would result in any significant amenity impact upon No. 45. The first floor element would not protrude further than the rear outrigger and therefore would be obscured from No. 45 by the existing outrigger. As such the proposal would not have any significant impact on the sunlight of daylight of the adjoining northern property. As the properties comprise of west facing gardens it is considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable loss of daylight/sunlight to No. 41 located to the south of the application site. The proposed extension has been setback from the common boundary and with an eave height of 2.7m would not have any unreasonable visual impact. It is not considered that the proposed ground floor extension would result in any significant amenity impact upon No. 41 in terms of loss of light, outlook or an increased sense of enclosure. Page 14 of 18

15 The proposed first floor extension would remain set in by 500mm from the side elevation and would extend for a depth of 4.8m. Given its location it is not considered that the proposed first floor element would result in any significant amenity impact or privacy concerns, as it would be facing the flank wall of the adjoining property at 41 Birch Grove. Given the above, it is not considered that the proposal would result in any unacceptable impacts on the amenities of nearby occupiers in terms of visual intrusion, noise and disturbance, loss of light and privacy, in accordance with policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013 and the National Planning Policy Framework. Quality and layout of proposed living accommodation London Plan policy 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing Developments and Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 3.5 require that housing developments should be of the highest quality internally and externally. Residential proposals should accord with the London Plan 2015standards, including Technical housing standards, on internal space, layout, and proportion of wheelchair adaptable units. The table below sets out the minimum space standards required for new dwellings by the London Plan (2015). The table sets out the areas of the proposed units: Unit Occupancy Floor Area London Plan Complies Standard m 2 Flat A 2B, 3P 61 m 2 61 m 2 Yes Flat B 2B, 3P 61 m 2 61 m 2 Yes Flat C 2B, 3P 61 m 2 61 m 2 Yes Flat D Studio 38 m 2 37 m 2 Yes Flat E Studio 43.5 m 2 39 m 2 Yes From the table above, it is evident that the flats comply with the minimum space standards set down in the London Plan Bedroom sizes and the combined living/dining/kitchen areas would comply with the minimum areas set down in the London Housing SPG. All habitable rooms would have access to good levels of natural light and opportunity for natural ventilation. The proposal would provide minimum bedroom sizes and living-dining/kitchen room sizes that comply with the minimum standards of the London Plan Flat E is contained within the loft conversion and will be serviced by a side facing window in the kitchen area and four rooflights. It studio will have a total area of 43.5m 2, with ceiling heights above 2.5m for 33.5m 2 and 1.5m 2.5m for 10m 2. This is considered to provide a suitable level of amenity for this low occupancy unit. The Council s planning guidance relating to the provision of amenity space is set out in policy 7D of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan (2013) and the London Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance Standard which provide that a minimum of 5sqm of private outdoor space should be provided for 1-2 person dwellings and an extra 1sqm should be provided for each additional occupant. Page 15 of 18

16 The Ealing DPD specifies that this minimum requirement set down in The London Plan should respond to the physical context, respecting the established local character and pattern of building, public space, landscape and topography and that typically it would equate to 15sqm per flat. This is an existing converted property and being within a conservation area there are limits to the amount of alterations that can be undertaken to facilitate the provision of amenity space. The proposal will provide amenity space for each of the ground units, which is an improvement on the existing situation, where only the rear unit have sole use of the rear amenity space. The use of this ground floor amenity space by each of the ground floor flats is considered to be the best use of this space and for Flat B, it would be directly accessible from the living space. Flat D and E are studio flats and as such do not have a high level occupancy due to its overall size and configuration. Although they do not have amenity space they do comply with the area standard and have a favourable western orientation and outlook towards the rear of the site, which provides a high level of internal amenity. The site is also located within a walkable catchment of Ealing Common (approx. 650m), which provide a significant area of public open space that can be utilised for both formal and informal recreation. There is no-concern with the lack of any amenity space for the upper floor flats given this is the existing situation and the site is constrained by the existing built form and the non-family nature of the flats. The proposed development is, therefore, considered to be acceptable in the context of the objectives of the London Housing SPG. Traffic and Parking Policy 6.3 of the London Plan 2015 states that development proposals should ensure that development should not adversely affect safety on the transport network. Policy 6.13 provides that an appropriate balance should be struck between promoting new development and preventing excessive car parking and that in locations with high public transport accessibility, car-free developments should be promoted. The proposal will retain two onsite parking spaces to service two of the existing two bedrooms flats, noting that the third existing flat does not currently benefit from any onsite parking. The remaining flats will not benefit from any parking and as the site is located within a controlled parking zone the applicant has agreed to enter into a s106 legal agreement to restrict the occupiers of the additional flats from obtaining parking permits. This would ensure that the proposal would not exacerbate on street parking pressure in the area to an unacceptable degree. No issue is raised with a low car scheme as the area has a PTAL of 4 which is identified as being a Very Good level of accessibility. The site is also located within a walkable catchment of both Ealing Common Underground Station (approx. 550m) and a number of local neighbourhood shops including a supermarket. Policy 6.9 of the London Plan 2015 provides that developments should provide secure, integrated and accessible cycle parking facilities in line with the minimum standards set out in table 6.3 of the London Plan. The London Plan specifies 1 space should be provided for every one bed or studio unit and two spaces for every other unit. Therefore, 8 cycle parking spaces would be required on site. The proposal plans indicate that the cycle parking would be provided in the front and rear of the site and could Page 16 of 18

17 accommodate the required provision. It would have been recommended that a condition be attached to secure the cycle provision. Environmental Health London Plan Policy 7.15 Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes states developments should seek to reduce noise by minimising the existing and potential adverse impacts of noise on, from within, or in the vicinity of development proposals. Given the location of the site in a residential area, noise mitigation conditions would not be required as part of any grant of permission. An informative would have been recommended advising the applicant to install ultra-low NOx boilers within the development including construction phase informatives had the application ben recommended for approval. The proposal has one instance where like uses are not staked vertically, with the kitchen of Flat D sitting partially above a bedroom of Flat B. This cannot be improved as Flat D is a studio unit with all facilities provided within a single room. No issue is raised as the Building Regulations require vertical and horizontal insulation of all newly created flats to ensure that noise impacts are mitigated and attenuated to achieve compliance with the standards set by the Building Regulations. Refuse & Recycling London Plan Policy 5.16 (Waste net self-sufficiency) seeks to minimize waste, exceeding recycling/composting levels in local authority collected of 45 percent by 2015, 50 per cent by 2020 and aspiring to achieve 60 per cent by London Plan Policy 5.16 (Waste Capacity) seeks proposals for waste management should be evaluated against minimising waste and achieving high reuse and recycling performance. Notwithstanding this, as part of delivering high quality design, refuse and recycling storage should not be an intrusive feature in the streetscape. A dedicated refuse storage area has been provided within the front setback of the site and provision for 30 litres of storage for recyclable waste provided within kitchen areas of each dwelling. Given this, it is considered that refuse and recycling storage provision for the proposal would be acceptable. Community Infrastructure Levy The Mayor s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was adopted on 1 st April This introduced a charging system within Ealing of 35 per square metres of gross internal floor area to be paid on the basis of the floorspace being created. The market housing component of the development would be liable for CIL. Lifetime home standard All units within the proposed residential development would need to meet lifetime home standards and this has been secured by a condition within the recommendation of this report. As such, the requirements of the development as a whole would be secured through planning condition and compliance with London Plan policy 7.2 and policy 1.1 (h) of the Ealing s Development (Core) Strategy Page 17 of 18

18 Conclusion: It is considered, given the nature and form of the proposed development, and its general compliance with all relevant adopted policies that planning permission could reasonably be granted. It is not considered that there are any other material considerations, which would warrant a refusal of the application. Accordingly it is recommended that planning permission should be granted subject to the recommended conditions. Human Rights Act: In making your decision, you should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as the London Borough of Ealing to act in a manner, which is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. You are referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property). It is not considered that the recommendation for approval of the grant of permission in this case interferes with local residents right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest and the recommendation for approval is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report. Page 18 of 18