Replacement four-bedroom house at 11 Forrest Gardens, Norbury, London SW16

What was proposed

The application sought permission to partly demolish the existing bungalow and build a two-storey detached house with landscaping and parking.

“PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE AGENDA 19 February 2026 PART 5: Planning Applications for Decision Item 5.3 1 APPLICATION DETAILS Ref: 25/02172/FUL Location: Forrest Gardens, Norbury, London, SW16 4LP Ward: Norbury And Pollards Hill Description: Demolition of part of the existing bungalow and erection of a two-storey detached dwellinghouse. Provision of associated landscaping and car parking (part retrospective application).”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site retained part of the bungalow’s front wall, a large rear garden, boundary trees and surrounding detached and semi-detached homes.

“Site and Surroundings 3.2 The application site was previously occupied by a detached residential dwelling on the northern side of Forrest Gardens. The pre-existing dwelling was a traditional style bungalow with low eaves and roof ridge height with leaded diamond-shaped windows, beamed porch, a large front dormer and the original front door. The bungalow has been extensively demolished with only part of the front wall remaining.”

“The application site is located in Flood Zone 1 and has a very low risk of surface water flooding. The site is identified as being susceptible to flooding when groundwater levels are high.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered the replacement family house, its design, accommodation, neighbour effects, trees, parking, flooding, energy and fire safety acceptable.

“The appearance of the proposed extensions are acceptable. • The proposed scale and design is appropriate. • The quality of accommodation proposed is acceptable for future occupiers. • The impact on the amenity of the adjoining occupiers is acceptable. • Trees, landscaping and biodiversity matters are acceptable. • Parking and highway matters are acceptable. • Flood risk, energy and sustainability matters are acceptable. • Fire safety matters are acceptable.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A speaker’s written objection was read to the committee, and a supporter spoke in favour of the application.

Committee consideration

The committee deliberated after hearing the speakers and considered a motion to grant the application on the officer’s recommendation.

“After the speakers had finished, the Committee deliberated.”

“The motion to GRANT the application based on the officer’s recommendation, was proposed by the Chair. This was seconded by Councillor Helen Redfern.”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to grant was carried with six votes in favour, no votes against and no abstentions.

“The motion to GRANT the application was taken to a vote and carried with six members voting in favour, no members voting against and no abstentions.”

Minutes