Two-storey ancillary building at 67A Upland Road, London SE22

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the existing garage and constructing a two-storey building for ancillary accommodation to the host dwelling.

“Proposal: Demolition of the existing garage. Construction of two-storey building to provide ancillary accommodation to the host dwellinghouse (to the rear) at No. 67C Upland Road (aka 'Niwa House').”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was a single-storey garage in a mainly residential area where buildings were generally two storeys high.

“The application site comprises a garage (known as 67A Upland Road). It is understood the garage is under the same ownership as the Niwa House (known as 67C Upland Road). The garage currently in situ is a single storey structure. It is aligned with the buildings on Upland Road with a setback of approximately 1.5m from the pavement edge and sits perpendicular to the properties on Friern Road.”

“The application site is not listed, nor is it located within a conservation area, nor does it form the setting of any undesignated or designated heritage assets. There are no trees within the application site, however there are trees on adjacent garden plots.”

Officer report

Planning background

A pre-application enquiry concerned demolishing the garage and constructing a two-storey ancillary building for the host property.

“Planning Pre-Application Enquiries (1No.) 25/EQ/0081 - Pre-application enquiry (meeting and written advice) for the demolition of a garage at 67A Upland Road. Construction of two-storey building to provide ancillary accommodation to the host property (to the rear) at no. 67C, Upland Road.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered the development policy-compliant, with acceptable environmental, transport, daylight, sunlight, privacy and outlook impacts subject to conditions and an undertaking.

“The principle of development is considered acceptable, with the building remaining functionally linked to the host dwelling despite physical separation. While the proposal would introduce greater bulk and visibility…”

“Submission documents confirm acceptable impacts on daylight, sunlight, privacy, and outlook, with reductions that are not considered harmful in an urban context. Environmental, transport, and servicing impacts are also deemed acceptable, and the scheme aligns overall with local and strategic planning policies.”

Officer report

Main planning effects

The additional storey would increase visibility and reduce some openness, but setbacks, a stepped roof and obscure glazing would limit the effects.

“The design of the proposed structure increases the footprint of the existing garage (bringing forward the existing building line by ~1m) and adds an additional storey (with a setback). The roof is pitched down towards the gardens on Friern Road and features a stepped roof element to the rear (aligning with the outrigger projection of 28 Friern Road). The ground floor of the structure will remain an off-street garage, whilst the first floor will be occupied by two rooms.”

“At first floor level, new views are established due to the introduction of an additional storey. The views established on the front elevation raise no concern as they look out into the public realm with adequate separation distances to the property’s opposite. On the side elevation, new views are established but they provide similar outlook to those at ground floor level (albeit a floor above). The side elevation views primarily look out on the side return wall of No.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Seven objections were received, while the urban forestry team had no objection subject to a condition and the design team maintained an objection.

“Urban Forestry Team (UBRA) – No objection, subject to condition. • Design and Conservation Team (DES) – Objection, amendments requested (setback structure at ground floor level with an additional setback at first floor level). • Design and Conservation Team – Objection (sustained), amendments do not sufficiently address initial concerns in terms of impact on the streetscape (further setback at first floor level should be introduced).”

“Case officer comment: Planning conditions have been applied as recommended, and amendments have been sought and partially actioned by the applicant. The sustained objection from the Design and Conservation Team is noted, however the case officer has assessed the application on its merits and reached an on- balance recommendation to grant planning permission.”

Officer report

Who addressed the committee

An objector, the applicant and their agent, and Councillor Janice White as ward member addressed the committee and answered questions.

Members’ questions and debate

Members questioned officers, the objector, the applicant, the agent, the ward member, and the planning and legal officers before further legal discussion.

“The planning and legal officers responded to additional questions from members of the committee.”

“The ward member responded to further questions put by members of the committee.”

Minutes

The committee vote

A motion to grant the application was moved, seconded and carried.

“A motion to grant the application subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report and amended conditions set out in the addendum report, was moved, seconded, put to the vote and declared carried.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to the report’s conditions, amended conditions and completion of a unilateral undertaking.

“That planning permission be granted subject to conditions set out in the report, amended conditions set out in the addendum report and the applicant completing a unilateral undertaking.”

Minutes

Conditions and undertaking

The undertaking would keep the building ancillary to the host dwelling and prevent its use as self-contained residential accommodation.

“A planning obligation secured via unilateral undertaking to ensure the proposed development remains ancillary to the host-dwelling:”

“The building hereby permitted shall not be used as self-contained residential accommodation and shall only be used for purposes ancillary to the host dwellinghouse known as No. 67C Upland Road (aka 'Niwa House').’.”

Officer report