Single dwelling with basement at 2a Gaynesford Road, London SE23

“Is this report easy to understand? Please give us feedback so we can improve. Go to https://lewisham.gov.uk/contact-us/send-us-feedback-on-our-reports Application details Application reference number: DC/25/138711 Application Date: January 2025 Applicant: Kallar Investments Ltd Proposal: Demolition of the existing garage and construction of a single storey plus basement dwelling, together with associated cycle and refuse storage, outdoor amenity space and landscaping at…”

“In urban design terms, the proposed development is considered to be high quality design. The proposed density would represent the optimal use of the land. It is of an appropriate height and scale and would use suitable materials. The development is considered to have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area and no impact of the Perry Vale and Christmas Estate Conservation Area.”

“Conservation: Raises no objection. Pollution (Air Quality): No response. Ecology: No response. EXTERNAL CONSULTATION 29 The following External Consultee was notified on 06/03/2025: Environment Agency: No comments (NB: Response erroneously refers to application as a discharge of conditions application).”

“The agent confirmed involvement in both the 2023 and 2016 applications for this site, but not the 2013 application. • In terms of floor space standards, the proposal met all of the national technical standards and London Plan standards in terms of room sizes, ceiling heights, overall dwelling size and bedroom dimensions. The living room shortfall that had been described was not a shortfall as this was guidance rather than policy.”

“The design was definitely M4(1) and M4(2) compliant. A lift was not required to be M4(2) compliant; the design only needed to have the facility to provide one in the future, which this design was capable of providing should it be necessary. • The officer was also recommending a condition regarding M4(2) to be demonstrated with submission of details, which they would certainly provide. The agent was entirely confident that the proposal was M4(2) compliant.”

“No off-street parking was proposed for the scheme. As a single house, the amount of parking stress it would cause to existing roads would be minimal. • With larger applications, a legal agreement would normally be required to prevent future occupiers obtaining parking permits in the event that a controlled parking zone was introduced to an area. • For this size of scheme, requiring parking legal agreement would not be reasonable or normal practice.”

“The Legal Officer advised that the sole grounds for refusal as heard was on quality of accommodation, but the officer's report was clear that the standard of quality of accommodation met standards. Where the tilted balance applied, the negative impacts of the development must demonstrably outweigh the benefits. Some work was needed to flesh out the reasons for refusal.”

“The Committee voted on the motion for deferral: three votes in support and three votes against. The Chair used the casting vote to vote against the motion for deferral. The motion for deferral was therefore not carried.”

“The Committee voted on the motion to grant planning permission: three votes in favour and three votes against. The Chair used the casting vote to vote in favour of granting the application.”

“MOVED, SECONDED and RESOLVED to AUTHORISE the Head of Planning to GRANT PERMISSION for:”

“- The demolition of existing garage and construction of a single storey plus basement dwelling, together with associated cycle and refuse storage, outdoor amenity space and landscaping at 2A Gaynesford Road SE23 subject to conditions, including those set out in the report to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development.”