Agenda item

The presenting officer outlined that this application is for alterations and conversion of the existing 2 residential units into 1 x one-bedroom and 2 x two-bedroom units. The property is a large two-storey detached Victorian building, located on the west side of Sunderland Road with PTAL 3-4. The proposed side extension is to accommodate an internal staircase for upper flats and would be set back from the front elevation. The ramp to the entrance hall is proposed with a low retaining wall separating it from the front yard parking area. Meeting rooms at the ground floor would remain the same, and on the first floor it is proposed to provide a larger 1 one-bedroom and 1 two-bedroom unit. On the second floor and in the roof extension another two-bedroom unit is proposed. The treatment of the proposed front elevation with side extension and rooflights would match the existing property. To the rear elevation, a large rear roof extension is proposed set in from the sides and eaves and clad in zinc with two rooflights. To the side elevation 5 new windows and rooflights are proposed to be installed and to the south elevation 2 new windows and a rooflight are proposed.

The application received 3 objections from local residents in regards to overlooking, scale of the dormer and being overdeveloped with further extensions.

Highways were consulted and were satisfied with a proposal, subject to conditions.

Officer’s view on the principle of the development is that it would increase the size of the existing one-bedroom unit which is considered an improvement, that design is acceptable and sensitive to the character of the property, that there are no parking issues and no material issues to local neighboring amenities.

Cllr Copley asked for clarification of paragraph 6.8 whether it can be established or not if the use is lawful.

The presenting officer clarified that there was no planning permission, but Council Tax has been paid for several years and on balance officers are satisfied that the use has likely been in place for 4 years and would be lawful.

Cllr Copley raised concern about loss of family sized three-bedroom property and what policy we have to protect those units.

The presenting officer clarified that policies are against subdivision of houses, and flats are not protected.

Cllr Paschoud asked for clarification on which windows are overlooking and what kind of rooms are behind those windows, and if they are stairways or bathrooms.

The presenting officer outlined which windows would potentially overlook the neighboring property.

Cllr Rathbone asked for clarification on paragraph 6.33 and whether new units would meet required standard sizes.

The presenting officer clarified that the existing one-bedroom unit does not meet required size, but the enlarged unit proposed would.

Cllr Johnston-Franklin raised concern on lack of amenity space and increase in accommodation and it seems not to be considered as part of the proposal from developers.

The presenting officer clarified that there was no amenity space attached to the existing property.

The committee received verbal representations on behalf of the applicant, Richard Martin, member of Forest Hill Friends Meeting House and the architect Nicholas Jamieson. Richard highlighted their involvement with the community and work with groups helping refugees. Meeting rooms on the ground floor are used by a wide variety of groups for mutual support and afterschool activities. Meeting House is very active with families and children who are part of the church and the objective of this application was to use empty space above the meeting area and to make that available for housing in the local community and in order to improve the quality and quantity of the housing offered. It was important to separate the housing which led to the need for a staircase. Meeting House is looking to generate income from the flats that will be needed to support society friends. Furthermore, it was highlighted that the society has a strict approach to maintenance of their buildings and all their properties are subject to maintenance every 5 years.

Cllr Kelleher raised two questions, first on the noise impact, and second on whether the housing would be for low-income members.

Richard Martin clarified that their meetings are held quietly, that activities in their meetings don’t involve noise, that activities are not happening late in the evening and that they we will take interest in who would rent the flats. Furthermore, Richard clarified that in terms of rental intention, at the moment they are looking into a number of alternatives and they will set the policy.

Cllr Clarke (Chair) highlighted that rentals are not within the scope of planning committee.

The committee received verbal representations on behalf of the local residents, Jason Kee and Paul Bolger, owners of property at 32 Sunderland Road.

Cllr Clarke (Chair) asked for clarification of overlooking issue.

Jason clarified that the proposed north elevation window on far right, is overlooking directly on their patio and hallway, one large window at the bottom is 3.75m opposite our bathroom, velux window looks directly into bathroom and that placement of proposed windows is perfectly opposite.

Cllr Bourne asked about which room is to the far right and the presenting officer clarified that it is a kitchen and that that window will be obscured glazed.

Jason furthermore explained that they don’t object to the proposal in principle, but they object to the proposed fenestration and rooflight. They further propose that the rooflight could be moved to the east facing roofslope and that the far right kitchen window is superfluous as that space already has another three windows. Bathroom windows need to be open in the summer and for ventilation and therefore, they are recommending a condition on the proposed windows to be obscured glazed and fixed shut only to provide light into the staircase.

Cllr Paschoud asked if some windows don’t have conditions, and if we could put a condition on them to be obscured glazed.

Jason Kee clarified that the stairway windows don’t have a condition.

Cllr Clarke (Chair) clarified that neighbours want those windows to be fixed shut as well and that stairways need some ventilation.

The presenting officer clarified that it can be added as condition that windows are obscured glazed and fixed shut to a set level with fanlight opening.

Jason Kee added that the rooflight should be obscured glazed too.

Cllr Paschoud highlighted that there should not be any changes to move rooflights to the front elevation.

Cllr Clarke (Chair) asked the applicant and architect whether they would accept the stairway windows being obscured and fixed shut and what comment would they have on the rooflight.

Architect Nicholas Jamieson clarified that windows on the stairways have to be openable by fire regulations to vent the smoke out, and in order to protect privacy there are other solutions and agreed for the rooflight to be obscure glazed.

Cllr Clarke (Chair) proposed to put a condition on the stairway windows and rooflight to be obscured glazed and there will be no condition on limiting their opening.

Cllr Paschoud moved the vote for the application to be approved, with the additional restrictions on the windows conditioned. This was seconded by Cllr Muldoon.

Members voted as follows:

For: Councillors Copley, Adefiranye, Clarke (Chair), Anwar, Bourne, Johnston-Franklin, Kelleher, Muldoon, Paschoud, Rathbone.

Against: None

Vote was unanimous.

RESOLVED: Approve application DC/18/106214 subject to condition on stairway windows and rooflight at the north elevation to be obscured glazed.

.