Merton Council

Home Home Merton Adult Education Home Home Jobs in children's social care Home Merton Means Business Home Wandle Valley Low Carbon Zone Home Safeguarding Children Board
How do I contact my councillor?

Agenda item

33 Queens Road, Wimbledon, SW19 8NP

Application Number: 19/P1981      Ward: Trinity


Officer Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions and completion of S106 Agreement




PAC Resolved that Application 19/P1981 is:

Granted Planning Permission subject to Conditions in the Officer’s report and additional condition to be detailed in the minutes.


Proposal: Demolition of garage and erection of a 3 storey side extension and two storey rear extension in connection with the refurbishment/conversion of the property (containing 4 existing flats) to provide 3 additional flats (Total 7 flats).


The Committee noted the officers report, presentation and additional information in the Supplementary Agenda-Modifications.


The Committee received verbal representations from two residents objecting to the application, who made points including:

·         The proposal is overbearing and will lead to a loss of light and privacy foe neighbours.

·         It will increase noise and disturbance, particularly for neighbours overlooking the entrance

·         The proposal will put additional strain on the foul water waste system

·         The development is not sympathetic to the Conservation Area and will cause harm to the conservation area.

·         Loss of a family home, setting a precedent in the area

·         Planning Permission for a smaller scheme on this site was refused in 2007 for reasons including harm to the Conservation Area


The Committee received a verbal representation from Applicant’s Agent who made points including:

·         The property is already divided into flats but of a poor standard

·         Trees have been left unchecked and are now causing subsidence

·         Taking this opportunity to provide high quality accommodation in a sustainable location

·         We have taken account of the Conservation Area by providing architectural detail in the front brickwork which reflects the original brickwork

·         Building Gaps are maintained and landscaping introduced

·         The proposal does not set a precedent because the property is already flats


The Ward Councillor, James Holmes, addressed the Committee and made points including:

·         The refused application in 2007 was a smaller footprint

·         This will set a precedent as there’re are few flats in the area

·         In the Conservation Area Appraisal this building is picked out as making a positive contribution to the Conservation Area

·         The current Landscaping is better than that proposed

·         There will be a loss of light and privacy for neighbours

·         The proposal for 3 parking spaces is not enough, really need 7 or 8


In reply to Members’ Questions the Planning Team Leader North made comments including:

·         There were originally concerns about the symmetry of the building but this has been addressed by amending the design. The side extension has been moved away from the boundary and from the front.

·         The previous scheme in 2007 was different to this design, it contained a lot of windows staircase at the back. This scheme is only slightly wider, and we have to balance this against the need for new homes in the borough

·         At the moment this block has 1 parking space and a garage The proposal would include 2 on-site parking spaces and will be permit free. If this block was a new build it would also be permit free but with no on-site parking.

·         The trees to be removed will be replacedat6 the front and rear


Members made  comments including:

·         The hard landscaping is an unattractive treatment of the frontage, the property should look like its neighbours

·         It is overdevelopment in the Conservation Area, it is unattractive and causes a loss of rhythm


A member proposed that an additional condition be added to allow only one parking space at the front and to ensure that the rest of the space was used for additional soft landscaping.  This was seconded and so added to the Officer’s recommendation




The Committee voted to GRANT Planning Permission subject to conditions, amended condition regarding the parking space and soft landscaping and completion of S.106 Agreement


The wording of the amended condition is delegated to the Director of Environment and Regeneration


Supporting documents: