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

94 The Broadway, London, SW19 1RH

Application No. 20/P3088

Ward: Trinity

Recommendation: Grant Permission Subject to Section 106 Obligation or any other enabling agreement

Decision:

RESOLVED that the application number 20/P3088 be DEFERRED pending further information to be submitted. 

 

Minutes:

Proposal: Erection of a four storey rear extension and internal reconfiguration of existing residential unit to create four additional residential dwellings.

 

The Committee noted the report and the plans presented by the Development Control Team Leader (North).  The Committee also noted the modification sheet contained supplementary agenda.  The Officer provided updates on various matters relating to the amendments.

 

Two residents had registered to speak in objection to the proposed scheme, and at the request of the Chair, had raised a number of points, including:

 

·         the proposed schemewould potentially cause substantial damage to the immunity and residents’ lives;

·         obstruction to natural light to the neighbouring properties;

·         the proposed scheme was out of character and would harm the character of the area;

·         the proposed scheme was overbearing and oppressive; 

·         residents had lived in the area for many years and want to continue enjoying living in their homes;

·         the proposed development was not in line with the surrounding buildings;

·         the current proposal would not be in contradiction to Merton Council's, DMD2, DMD3 and CS14 policies;

·         concerns in relation to lack of and rise of anti-social behaviour;

·         concerns in relation to the increased footfall andtraffic along Prince's Yard. 

 

The applicant’s agent had registered to speak, and at the request of the Chair addressed the Committee with the following points:

 

·         the proposal seeks the erection of a four-story rear extension to provide four high-quality self-contained residential dwellings;

·         all units would exceed the minimum space standards and all habitable rooms would be provided with well-sized windows;

·         the development would not be harmful to the area;

·         the development was deemed to be in keeping with the character of the area and in accordance with policy CS14;

·         the site was close proximity to several local services and amenities which residents would benefit from;

·         the development would not have an impact on the immunity to the neighbouring properties;

·         it was clarified the proposed development was significant distance from South Park Road, therefore, this would not cause loss of light to the properties on South Park Road;

·         it was clarified that only one of the proposed units would be accessed from Prince’s Yard, the other proposed dwellings would be accessed from the front of the site on Broadway;

·         the proposed units had a maximum occupancy of two individuals and was unlikely to cause disturbance to the neighbouring properties;

·         the development would provide much needed additional housing, with a provision of dwelling sizes thatwould be appropriate for the demands of the surrounding community.

 

In response to the objectors concerns and issues raised, the Development Control Leader (North) reported that with regards to the residential immunity, the wall to the rear side of the proposed development would go beyond the rear elevation of number 92 by 2.1 meters.  It was clarified that the height of the development was not excessive to the height of existing buildings.

 

In response to Members’ questions and comments’ in relation to the loss of daylight to the neighbouring properties, in particular, to number 92, the Development Control Team Leader (North) clarified that the applicant had not submitted Daylight and Sunlight Assessment.

 

Having considered all of the information before them, Members’ were minded to defer the application pending Daylight and Sunlight Assessment to be carried out.

 

The motion was moved and seconded.  The Chair put to vote and it was

 

RESOLVED that the application number 20/P3088 be DEFERRED pending Daylight and Sunlight Assessment to be carried out.

 

Supporting documents: