First-floor rear extension at First Floor Flat, 38 Waterford Road, London SW6

What was proposed

The application proposed a first-floor rear extension, a green flat roof, a screened roof terrace and a dormer door.

“Description: Erection of a rear extension at first floor level, on top of the existing two storey back addition; removal of the remaining part of the pitched roof to form a new green flat roof, above the upper ground floor back addition; erection of 1.7m high obscure glazed screening, around part of flat roof above proposed first floor rear extension, in connection with its use as a roof terrace; erection of a single dormer door to the rear elevation at second floor level,…”

Officer report

Site and surroundings

The site is a three-storey mid-terrace property divided into three flats within the Moore Park Conservation Area.

“The application site relates to a three-storey mid-terrace property with accommodation at roof level. The property and is split into three flats. This application relates to the two-bedroom maisonette flat at first and second floor levels.”

“The site is located on the west side of Waterford Road. The surrounding area has a residential character. Along Waterford Road, to the north, south and east are two and three storey terraced properties with accommodation at roof level. To the west is a two-storey infill residential development along Clare Mews, which is accessed from Waterford Road; beyond that are the rear gardens of 4 storey properties fronting Harwood Road.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Earlier permissions covered conversion into three flats, rear and roof extensions, and extensions to nearby properties.

“In 1983 planning permission (ref 1983/00164/FUL) was granted for the conversion of the property to 3 one bed flats, with a dustbin enclosure. This has been implemented.”

“In 1998 planning permission (ref 1998/00391/FUL) was granted for a single storey rear extension at lower ground floor level (to the side of the original back addition). This has been implemented.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the proposal was considered acceptable in visual terms and unlikely to cause unacceptable harm to neighbouring residential amenities.

“In summary, the proposal is acceptable in visual terms and is of a good quality of design which would not adversely impact upon the surrounding area. There is not considered to be resulting harm on the significance of the Moore Park Conservation Area. Subject to conditions, the proposal would not result in unacceptable impacts upon the amenities of neighbouring residential properties.”

“Officers have taken account of all the representations received and in overall conclusion for the reasons detailed in this report, it is considered having regard to the development plan as a whole and all other material considerations, that planning permission should be granted subject to the conditions listed.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

Eleven responses included one letter of support and ten objections, while Network Rail and Crossrail raised no objections.

“Individual notification letters were sent to 20 neighbouring properties. In total 11 responses were received including 1 letter of support and 10 objections which raised the following summary representations: - does not represent good design within the conservation area - limited examples of precedents in the surrounding area, and no immediate neighbours have roof terraces - direct and perceived detrimental impact to the neighbour amenity - significant overbearing, and…”

“Network Rail raised no objections to the application.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Ronny Ferley gave a presentation and there were no registered speakers.

The committee vote

The committee voted unanimously for both officer recommendations, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“The Committee voted on the officer recommendations for approval as amended by the Addendum as follows:”

Minutes

Added construction condition

A construction logistics plan was required before development began to address construction traffic, parking suspensions, delivery times and traffic management.

“7) Construction Logistic Plan Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a Construction Logistics Plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Council. This shall be in accordance with Transport for London Guidance on Construction Logistics Plans and shall include, but not be limited to, details of the numbers, size and routes of construction vehicles, details regarding the need for on-street parking bay suspensions, delivery times of…”

“To ensure that construction works do not adversely impact on the operation of the public highway, in accordance with Policy T7 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy T7 of the Local Plan (2018).”

Minutes