Five terraced houses at 81 Blythe Road, Hammersmith, London W14

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the vacant office building and building five residential terraced houses over four floors, with cycle parking, utility stores and amenity space.

“Description: Redevelopment of the site, comprising the demolition of the existing vacant office building and the provision of 5no. residential terraced houses (Class C3) across four floors including lower ground level, together with associated cycle parking, internal utility stores, and amenity space. Drg Nos:”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site contained a vacant two-storey office building with undercroft parking, faced Blythe Road and adjoined rear gardens on Sterndale Road.

“The site is surrounded by buildings of various styles, with a mix of residential and commercial properties. There are clusters of shops and commercial buildings to the east, a group of three storey modern stock brick houses to the west, and traditional three storey plus lower ground floor terraced housing opposite the site on the north side of Blythe Road.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier applications included an approved office extension, a withdrawn residential redevelopment and an approved scheme for eight flats.

“1998/02590/FUL - Erection of an extension at first floor level to provide additional class B1 office space (74 sq m.). Approved. 06.10.1999.”

“2021/04049/FUL - Redevelopment of the site following the demolition of the existing office building (Class E) to provide a 4 storey residential building (Class C3), including a lower-ground level, comprising 4 x 2 bedroom apartments and 4 x 3 bedroom apartments, together with associated cycle parking, refuse stores, and associated amenity spaces. Withdrawn 11.08.2022. This was withdrawn prior to determination.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions and a legal agreement, finding the housing, design, residential amenity, transport and environmental effects acceptable.

“1) 1. Land Use: The loss of employment use is considered to be acceptable in this instance, the proposal would provide five residential units contribute to the overall housing need in the Borough at this predominately residential location. The proposed residential units would make efficient use of land by optimising residential use at this infill site.”

“Housing: The proposed building would provide a mixed size of residential units, which all would have acceptable standard of living accommodation in accordance with London Plan (2021) Policy D6, the Mayor's Housing Design Standards LPG (2023), the DCLG's Nationally Described Space Standards (2015), Local Plan (2018) Policies HO4, and HO11 and Key Principles of the Planning Guidance SPD (2018) which all require new housing to be of a high-quality design and be designed to…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Thames Water raised no objection subject to a piling condition, while residents submitted 24 objections and one letter of support.

“In response to the consultations, a total of 24 objections and 1 letter of support were received.”

“Technical Consultations External - Thames Water: No objection, recommended a condition requiring a Piling Method Statement; and informatives relating to water pressure and Groundwater Risk Management Permit.”

Officer report

What people said

Objectors raised concerns about overdevelopment, privacy, daylight, design, noise, parking, construction, drainage and biodiversity; support focused on housing and the vacant site.

“Objection: - The proposed building represents an overdevelopment of the site; - Daylight report has inaccuracies to neighbours homes; - Concern for amenity of future occupiers; - The materials palette, form and design of the new building is out of character with the conservation area; - Noise disturbance, overlooking and loss of privacy from the roof terraces; - Proposed screening of 1.7m would not be sufficient for protecting neighbour privacy; - Overlooking from the new…”

Officer report

Who spoke

Neil Egerton gave a presentation and the agent spoke in support of the application.

The committee vote

The committee voted unanimously for both officer recommendations, with no votes against and no members not voting.

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

“Minutes are subject to confirmation at the next meeting as a correct record of the proceedings and any amendments arising will be recorded in the minutes of that subsequent meeting. Recommendation 2:”

Minutes

The decision

Permission was authorised subject to the report’s conditions, changes in the Addendum and authority to make minor legal agreement or condition changes.

“That the Director of Planning and Property be authorised to grant permission subject to the conditions listed in the report and changes made in the Addendum.”

“That the Director of Planning and Property, after consultation with the Assistant Director of Legal Services and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee be authorised to make any minor changes to the proposed Heads of Terms of the legal agreement or conditions, which may include the variation, addition or deletion of conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.”

Minutes