Rear house extension at 31a Crescent Way, London SE4
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Lewisham Planning Committee A on 12 Mar 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed a part single-storey and part two-storey rear extension, with front bin storage, rear bike storage and associated works.
“DC/03/053355 - The conversion of the integral garage at 31A Crescent Way SE4 to provide additional living space, together with alterations to the front elevation. Granted 16/04/2003. DC/25/141400 - Change of use and the construction of a part single / part two-storey extension to the rear to extend the existing HMO facilities from 5 to 7 occupants and all associated works at 31A Crescent Way SE4.”
“3m from the rear elevation and would span a width of c.5.6m with a height of c. 3m at the eaves when measured from ground level at No 33 and No. 31. The two-storey element would extend c. 1.5m from the rear elevation at the first-floor level. This element would add c. 2.5m in height, resulting in an overall maximum height of both storeys at c. 5.5m. Both roofs would be flat and include green roof systems.”
Officer report
The site and its setting
The site is a three-storey end-of-terrace town house used as a licensed small HMO in a mainly residential area within the conservation area.
“Designation: PTAL 2/3 Air Quality Brockley Conservation Area Screening: N/A SITE AND CONTEXT Site description and current use 1 The application site is a three-storey end-of-terrace town house constructed in masonry and yellow brickwork, featuring a small rectangular bay window on the first-floor façade. The application site is currently in use as a C4 dwelling (small HMO for up to six occupants) and has held an HMO licence since 5 th of March 2018.”
“Heritage/archaeology 3 The site is located within the Brockley Conservation Area and is subject to an associated Article 4 direction. The building is not a Listed Building and is not in close proximity to a non-designated heritage asset or Listed building. Surrounding area 4 Hilly Fields is located approximately 0.2 miles southeast from the site. Prendergast School and Prendergast 6 th form are located approximately 0.3-0.4 miles south of the site.”
Officer report
Earlier planning history
An earlier scheme for a seven-person HMO was refused, while the current proposal keeps the established C4 use and revises the upper-floor layout.
“0.8m consisting of a metal enclosure with a timber door appearance. COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS SCHEME 14 The current application follows the refusal of an earlier scheme (ref. DC/25/141400) and includes revisions intended to address the reason for that refusal. The principal change is the removal of the proposed change of use from the existing C4 use class (small HMO for up to six unrelated occupants) to a Sui Generis HMO (seven or more unrelated…”
“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 occupants), which in the previous scheme saw internal reconfiguration providing seven bedrooms across the first and second floors.”
Officer report
What people objected to
Eleven objections raised concerns about HMO policy, family housing, conservation, garden loss, waste, parking, privacy, daylight, noise, trees and management.
“The Society considered that the Applicant had largely disregarded the objections to the previously refused 6 November 2025 application and therefore reiterated its earlier concerns. The Society argued that since the house is empty and the plan is to expand the HMO from five to six people, it would be better for the borough to return the property to a family home instead, especially because there is already a shortage of four bedroom family housing and requested that…”
“Ward Councillor objections Non-material considerations 32 The following non-material considerations were raised and have been responded to within the report: Loss of Family Housing: see para 23 34 Conflict with policy HO2, HO1 and HO8 and the Article 4 direction: see para 23 35 HMO standard of accommodation: see para 25 36 Clustering of HMO: See para 29 37 Historic Antisocial behaviour complaints: see para 24 38 Precedent and policy consistency: The objection noted the…”
Officer report
What members discussed
Members questioned the floorspace policy and whether the property could remain a five-person HMO before concluding that the policy did not apply to this extension.
“Minimum floorspace requirement in Policy HO8B. Officers responded as follows:”
“Whether the property could remain a five-person HMO. Officers responded as follows:”
Minutes
The committee’s decision
The Committee authorised permission for the rear extension and associated works, subject to conditions considered appropriate for acceptable implementation.
“MOVED, SECONDED and RESOLVED to AUTHORISE the Head of Planning to GRANT PERMISSION for…”
“- the construction of a part single / part two-storey extension to the rear and all associated works at 31A Crescent Way SE4 subject to conditions, including those set out in the report as are considered appropriate to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development.”
Minutes
Sources
- Lewisham Planning Committee A minutes, 12 March 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Lewisham's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Lewisham Planning Committee A
- Council
- Lewisham
- Date
- Thursday 12 March 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- 3 for, 0 against, 2 abstained
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Lewisham committee decisions →
Source: Plota analysis of the minutes.
This committee's year
5 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.