Two additional flats at 39 Amesbury Close, Epping

What was proposed

The application proposed a two-storey side extension and rear dormer enlargement to create two additional flats without off-street parking.

“The proposal seeks to extend Nos. 39 & 39A with a two-storey side extension and rear dormer roof enlargement to create an additional two flatted units on the site. One of the flats proposed would be a two-bedroom three-person unit and one would be a one bedroom two-person unit. The proposed new residential units will be accessed through new entrances on the front elevation of the side extension.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is part of a two-storey maisonette building at the end of Amesbury Close, with a shared rear garden, footpath and nearby garages.

“The site lies within the Defined Settlement of Epping. It comprises part of a two-storey building accommodating maisonettes. Tucked into the corner of Amesbury Close, the brick building has a simple elongated rectangular form with pitched roof and sits amongst a context of similarly designed buildings which front the cul-de-sac. A footpath runs along the site frontage providing pedestrian access to a garage court to the side and rear, off Pelly Court.”

“The site lies within the Defined Settlement of Epping. It is a two-storey rectangular block which lies at the end of Amesbury Close. The buildings have a simple form with a strong horizontal emphasis. There is a strong pattern of development with buildings arranged to front the road with spaces between. Numbers 39 and 39A within the existing building are maisonettes with a shared grassed private garden to the rear.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the design, living conditions, amenity space, highways effects and conservation-area mitigation acceptable subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

“Local Plan Policy DM10 requires ground floor family housing must provide access to private garden/amenity space, and family housing on upper floors should have access to a balcony and/or terrace of a usable size, subject to acceptable amenity, privacy and design considerations, or to shared communal amenity space.”

“The current amenity space for the two maisonettes is open and undivided. As part of the development this would be formally subdivided into three with close boarded timber fence. This part of the proposed development has been revised since the previous refused scheme on the site. Unit 4 would have an inset balcony which would be large enough to sit on would provide outdoor space to this unit.”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Four objections raised concerns about construction access, parking problems, sunlight, overlooking and harm to the area’s character and appearance.

“Where construction vehicles would park and access the site - No parking proposed - Existing parking problems in the locality - Loss of sunlight - Overlooking - Harm to character and appearance of local area…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from an objector and the applicant after the senior planning officer introduced the report.

The committee’s debate

Members debated parking provision and the sustainability of travel from the application’s location, noting that proposed changes had already been accepted on appeal.

“The Committee heard from an Objector and the Applicant. Debate followed about parking provisions and the sustainability of travel from the application’s location. It was noted by the Committee that the Planning Inspectorate had already accepted proposed changes to the application.”

Minutes