Three self-contained flats at 33 And 33A Renters Avenue, Hendon, London NW4

What was proposed

The application proposed converting the existing dwellings into three flats with extensions, roof changes, parking, cycle storage and refuse facilities.

“Proposal: Conversion of the existing dwellings into 3no. self-contained flats including part single, part two storey rear and two storey side extensions, roof extension involving rear dormer window, 3no. front facing rooflights and new side gable windows. Associated cycle store/car parking and refuse/recycling…”

Officer report

The site

The site contains semi-detached dwellings in a residential area beside a footpath, railway lines, a neighbouring dwelling and the highway.

“The application site relates to a part single, part two storey semi-detached dwelling housing, nos 33 and 33A Renters Avenue, situated to the north east side of Renters Avenue at the Junction with Cheyne Walk. The surrounding area is residential in character consisting of detached, semi-detached and terraced properties.”

“The site lies within a PTAL rating of 3 which indicates the site has average accessibility to public transport.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier approvals covered extensions and conversions, while two later applications for four flats were refused, including one dismissed on appeal.

“Reference: 21/6455/FUL Address: Renters Avenue, London, NW4 3RD Decision: Refused, Appeal dismissed reference APP/N5090/W/22/3294577 dated 18 August 2022 Decision Date: February 2022 Description: Conversion of the existing dwellings into 4no self-contained flats including part single, part two storey rear extensions with juliette balconies at first floor level and roof extensions including rear dormer window with juliette balconies.”

“Reference: 24/1580/FUL Address: Renters Avenue, London, NW4 3RD Decision: Refused Decision Date: July 2024 Description: Conversion of the existing dwellings into 4no self-contained flats including part single, part two storey rear and two storey side extensions, roof extension involving hip to gable, rear dormer window 2no front and 1no. side facing rooflight and new side gable windows. Associated cycle store/car parking and refuse/recycling…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal was considered acceptable in its design, neighbour impact, accommodation, parking and highway effects.

“Having taken all material considerations into account, the proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the host property, street scene and locality. The proposal is not considered to adversely impact neighbouring amenities or highway conditions and provides an acceptable quality of accommodation for future occupiers. The application is therefore recommended for APPROVAL.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Seven objections, a 54-signature petition and two neutral letters raised concerns including overdevelopment, housing, privacy, noise, parking and traffic.

“Consultation letters were sent to 29 neighbouring properties. The responses comprised of 2 neutral letters, 7 letters of objection in addition to an objection petition with 54 signatories…”

“-Overdevelopment of the site -Loss of Family Housing -Harm the visual character of the area -Would alter the character of the neighbourhood -Over intensification -Quality of accommodation and failure to meet minimum space standards -Concerns about overshadowing, loss of light, and privacy for neighbouring properties. -Increased noise and disturbance from more occupants.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer presented the report and addendum, after which committee members had the opportunity to question officers.

Committee discussion

The committee discussed the application before moving to a vote on the officer’s recommendation.

“Following discussion, the Committee moved to a vote on Officer’s recommendations.”

Minutes

The vote

Six members voted for approval, with none against and none abstaining.

“For – (approval) 6 Against – (approval) 0 Abstention – (approval) 0”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved subject to conditions, with delegated authority granted for minor changes to the conditions or related wording.

“RESOLVED that the application be approved subject to conditions AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Service Director – Planning and Building Control to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the Vice-Chair) of the Committee (who may request that…”

Minutes