Two residential units at Land Adjacent To 1 - 18 Evans Court Sherman Close, Crayford

What was proposed

The application sought to divide an approved duplex into two self-contained flats, add one dwelling, and make limited roof-level alterations.

“The proposal involves the subdivision of the approved 2-bedroom duplex unit to provide two self-contained residential units comprising: one 1-bedroom, 2-person flat at first floor level; and one 1-bedroom, 1-person flat at second floor (roof) level.”

“To facilitate the subdivision and ensure acceptable accommodation, the application includes minor external alterations to the previously approved scheme. These comprise the insertion of an additional side-facing dormer, two rooflights within the front roof slope, and the creation of a rear roof terrace to serve the upper floor unit.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is at the eastern end of a gated area beside residential properties, with gardens to the north and south and a conservation area nearby.

“The application site is located to the east of Crayford High Street, accessed via a private access road (Sherman Close) situated approximately 60 metres north of the junction with Bexley Lane. The area of the proposed building is located at the far eastern end of the site, within a gated area.”

“To the north, the site adjoins the rear gardens of residential properties on Rectory Close, which are situated at a higher ground level than the application site. To the south, it abuts the rear gardens of properties on Green Place, which are located at a lower level. The Iron Mill Lane Conservation Area is located to the north-west of the site and directly abuts the northern boundary of the access road from Crayford High Street.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval, finding the proposal acceptable in principle, design, neighbour amenity, accommodation, highways, servicing, fire safety and accessibility terms.

“That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.”

“For the reasons set out in the report, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in relation to its principle of development, design and impact on the character and appearance of the area, impact on neighbouring residential amenity, quality of accommodation, highways and servicing arrangements, and fire safety and accessibility. Overall, the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant policies of the Development Plan, when read as a whole.”

Officer report

What people objected to

Objections raised privacy, overlooking, noise, overdevelopment, design, boundaries, structural concerns, parking, highway safety and the application route.

“Twenty-two (22) objections from seventeen (17) households from outside of the borough have been received. Nineteen (19) objections from fifteen (15) households inside the borough have been received.”

“Concern Where addressed in report Loss of Privacy, Overlooking and noise pollution Impact on Neighbouring Properties Overdevelopment of the site and out of character Design and impact on character and appearance of the property and the area, Land Ownership and boundary concerns Response to representations Structural issues and ground stability Response to representations Increase parking pressures, vehicle movements and safety Impact on Highways Inappropriate use of a S73…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from an objector and the agent, who spoke in support of the application.

The committee discussion

Members discussed the application, considered the speakers’ observations and comments, and noted the officer report.

“The Committee discussed the application, considered all observations, points and comments made by the speakers and noted the report for this application.”

Minutes

The vote and decision

The committee voted unanimously, 8–0, to approve the application in accordance with the officers’ recommendation.

“Following their discussion, the Committee RESOLVED on a vote of 8/0 to approve the application in accordance with the recommendation as set out in the report before them.”

Minutes