Planning Committee 13/01/2015 Schedule Item: 02

Planning Committee 13/01/2015 Schedule Item: 02 Ref: Address: Ward: P/2015/4759 14 Albany Road, West Ealing, W13 8PG Ealing Broadway Proposal: Part single storey, part first floor rear extension; enlargement of existing rear dormer and associated part rear addition at second floor level; two gables within front roofslope; installation of 2 windows within flanks wall at roof level; associated conversion into 6 self contained units (1x3bed, 2x2bed and 3xstudios) (following demolition of the existing extensions). Drawing numbers: Type of Application: Site Location Plan Land at 14 Albany Road, DRG 02B,DRG 03A, DRG 12F, DRG 13E, Full Planning Application Application Received: 28/08/2015 Revised: 15/12/2015 Report by: Simon Robert Recommendation: Grant subject to appropriate conditions and a section 106 agreement. Executive Summary: The proposal seeks planning permission for the conversion of the existing dwellinghouse into 6 selfcontained units, (3xstudios, 1x3bed and 2x2bed), rear extensions and a mansard rear roof extension. The report assesses the impact of the proposed development on the neighbouring properties, the property and area as a whole and living conditions for prospective occupiers. 23 objections have been received from neighbouring residential properties (including one duplicate). The main objections raised are in relation to the overdevelopment of the site, density, traffic, the impact of the proposal on the neighbouring properties, including the overlooking, the loss of light and its design and the nuisance caused by the construction works. The report concludes that the proposal would not result in a detrimental impact on the area, the appearance of the dwelling and the extensions to the rear would be appropriate in the context of the existing dwelling. No detrimental effect on neighbouring occupiers is anticipated. Therefore, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable and is consistent with the aims of the relevant policies of the Ealing Core Strategy (2012), The London Plan (2015), the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and the Ealing Development Management Development Plan (2013). It is therefore recommended that planning permission should be approved with conditions. Page 1of 12

Recommendation: Grant with Conditions and subject to s106 agreement. This permission would also be subject to a Community Infrastructure Levy payment to the Greater London Authority (GLA). Grant subject to Legal Agreement Grant planning permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to secure the following: i) Restrictions put in place to prevent occupiers of the proposed development from applying for on-street car parking permits within the Controlled Parking Zone; and ii) Payment of the Council s reasonable legal and other professional costs incurred preparing and completing the Legal Agreement. AND subject to the following conditions: Conditions/Reasons: Time Limit 3 years Full Permission 1. The development permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). Approved Plans 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing title numbers: DRG 12F, DRG 13E REASON: For the avoidance of doubt, and in the interests of proper planning. Materials 3. All external materials to be used in the development shall match the appearance of those of the existing building. REASON: To ensure that the materials harmonise with the existing building and surrounding area, in accordance with policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013, policies 1.1 (h), 1.2 (f) and 2.1 and 2.10 of the adopted Local Development Framework (Core Strategy 2012) and policies 7.4, 7.6 of the London Plan - Consolidated (2015). Obscure Glazing 4. The side windows in the and first floor level hereby approved shall contain only obscure glass (minimum level 3 obscure glazed) and non-opening unless the parts of the window can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the rooms in which the windows are installed. The windows so approved shall be retained permanently. Page 2 of 14

REASON: To protect the living conditions of occupants of nearby properties, in accordance with policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan, policies 1.1 (g) of the adopted Local Development Framework (Core Strategy 2012) and policy 7.6 of the London Plan Consolidated (2015). Ground floor amenity space 5. Notwithstanding any information submitted with the application, a 1.8m high close boarded timber fence shall be installed in the rear garden space to provide separate the outdoor amenity areas of equal size to the ground floor flats hereby approved. REASON: In the interest of the residential amenity in accordance with policies 3.5 of the London Plan (2015) and policy7d of the Ealing Development Management DPD. Refuse Storage 6. Details of the refuse storage hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the first occupation of the development. The refuse storage shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved details and permanently retained thereafter. REASON: In the interest of the character and appearance of the area and suitable refuse storage provision in accordance with policies 5.16 and 7.4 of the London Plan (2015) and policy7a and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD. Cycle storage 7. The cycle parking storage hereby approved shall be provided and fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development and retained permanently. REASON: To provide adequate facilities for cyclists in accordance with the London Plan policy 6.9. Building envelope noise mitigation 8. The insulation of the building envelope of the development hereby approved shall be provided prior to first occupation and achieve the internal criteria for sensitive room, in accordance with local planning authority standards using the specified worst mode one hour LAeq, 1hr spectrum noise level. REASON: To ensure that the future occupiers of the approved development are adequately protected against air traffic noise, in accordance with policy 7.15 of the London Plan (2015) and interim Supplementary Planning Guidance 10: Noise and Vibration and BS4142: 1997 No Balcony in flat roof 9. No part of the roof of the ground floor extension shall be used as or altered to form a balcony, roof garden, roof terrace or similar amenity area. REASON: To protect the living conditions of neighbouring properties and the visual appearance of the area, in accordance with policies 7.4, 7.6 of the London Plan (2015), policies Local variation to policy 7.4 and 7B of the Adopted Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), policies 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 and 2.10 of the Ealing Core Strategy (2012). Page 3 of 14

Informatives: 1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in National Planning Policy Guidance, the London Plan (consolidated 2015), the adopted Ealing Development (Core) Strategy (2012) and the adopted Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document (2013) and to all relevant material considerations including Supplementary Planning Guidance: National Planning Policy Framework (2012) The London Plan (consolidated 2015) Policy 3.3 Increasing housing supply Policy 3.4 Optimising housing potential Policy 3.5 Quality and design of housing developments Policy 3.9 Mixed and balanced communities Policy 3.14 Existing housing Policy 5.3 Sustainable design and construction Policy 5.13 Sustainable drainage Policy 5.14 Water quality and wastewater infrastructure Policy 5.16 Waste self sufficiency Policy 6.3 Assessing the effects of development on transport capacity Policy 6.9 Cycling Policy 6.12 Road network capacity Policy 6.13 Parking Policy 7.1 Lifetime Neighbourhoods Policy 7.2 An inclusive environment Policy 7.3 Designing out crime Policy 7.4 Local character Policy 7.6 Architecture Policy 7.14 Improving air quality Policy 7.15 Reducing and managing noise, improving and enhancing the acoustic environment and promoting appropriate soundscapes Policy 7.20 Trees and Woodlands Core Strategy 1.1 Spatial Vision for Ealing 1.2 Delivery of the Vision 2.1 Realising the Potential of the Uxbridge Road/Crossrail Corridor 2.10 Residential Neighbourhoods Ealing Development Management DPD Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 3.4 Optimising Housing Potential Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 3.5 Quality and Design of Housing Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 5.12 - Flood Risk Management Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 6.13 - Parking Policy 7A - Operational Amenity Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 7.3 - Designing out Crime Ealing Local Variation to London Plan policy 7.4 - Local Character Policy 7B - Design Amenity Policy 7D - Open Space Page 4 of 14

Other Relevant Planning Considerations: Accessible London: Achieving an inclusive environment The London Housing Strategy The London Plan: Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance In reaching the decision to grant permission, specific consideration was given to the principle of the proposed development and the provision of residential accommodation, the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring amenity, the design of the scheme and its impact on the character of the surrounding streetscene, the standard of living accommodation proposed including private amenity, parking impacts and general highway function and safety. The development is considered acceptable on these grounds, and it is not considered that there are any other material considerations in this case that would warrant a refusal. 2. To assist applicants in a positive manner, the Local Planning Authority has produced policies and written guidance, and offers and encourages a comprehensive pre-application advice service, all of which is available on the Council s website and outlined in a 24 hours automated telephone system. The scheme complied with policy and guidance. The Local Planning Authority delivered the decision proactively in accordance with requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. 3. The Council's Environmental Health Service has powers to control noise and disturbance during buildings works. It considers that normal and reasonable working hours for building sites are 8.00 am to 6.00 pm Monday to Friday, from 8.00 am to 1.00 pm on Saturday and not at all on Sunday or Public Holidays. If any activities take place on the site beyond these times which give rise to noise audible outside the site the Council is likely to take action requiring these activities to cease. 4. The applicant should attempt to install a Ultra Low NOx boiler with maximum NOx emissions of under 0.030 g/kwh in each of the flats hereby approved. 5. The developer/applicant is hereby advised to remove all site notices on or near the site that were displayed in pursuant to the application. Site Description: The application site is located on the north side of Albany Road, approximately 80m from its junction with The Avenue, West Ealing. The subject site comprises a regular shaped plot of 358sq.m. and has an extensive rear garden. The site is not located within a Conservation Area, and immediate surrounding buildings are not subject to listing controls. However it is located within a controlled parking zone (CPZ). The immediate surrounding area is residential; the property is situated in the middle of a row of properties with similar design and dimension. The site comprises a two storey single detached Victorian dwelling house with accommodation roof level. The property benefits from a part single part double storey side/rear extension with a rear roof extensions. The property is sited approximately 5m from Albany Road. There is a vehicular access to the forecourt leading to car parking space for a single car. Page 5 of 14

It was suggested that the property was previously used as a HMO, although the property does not benefit from a HMO license. The property is currently vacant. The Proposal: Part single storey, part first floor rear extension; enlargement of existing rear dormer and associated part rear addition at second floor level; two gables within front roofslope; installation of 2 windows within flanks wall at roof level; associated conversion into 6 self-contained units (1x3bed, 2x2bed and 3xstudios) (following demolition of the existing extensions). The dimensions of the single storey element would be a maximum depth of 8m and a width of 12.2m (3.2m deeper and 2.5m wider than the existing rear extension). This element would have a flat roof with a height of 3m. The two storey rear element would be 6m in depth from the original rear wall of the property and a width of 7.8m. The element would also have a shallow mono pitched roof with a height of 5.4m at eaves and 5.8m at the highest point both measured from ground level (1.5m deeper and 0.50m wider than the existing rear extension). The rear roof alterations would also result in a full rear roof extension on the main property and a mansard roof extension over the proposed two storey rear extension. The dimensions of the mansard element would be a width of 7.65m, a depth of 3m. The proposed rear roof mansard would have a height of 2.1m and would be set down approximately 0.45m from the main ridgeline of the property. Additionally, the proposal would remove the two existing chimneys. Amendments made to original submission: The reduction of the residential units, from 8 residential units to 6 residential units, Internal layout, The design of the extensions to reduce the massing and the bulk, The removal of a side facing ground floor window located along the shared boundary with 12 Albany Road, Relevant Planning History: REFNO PROPOSAL DECISION DECISION_DATE P/2004/0700 Proposed rear loft extension. (Lawful Development Certificate) Permitted Development 07/04/2004 P/2005/3362 Conversion of house to four selfcontained flats. Withdrawn 20/11/2006 P/2006/2913 First floor side and rear extensions. Conditional Consent 02/10/2006 Retention of rear roof extension (Lawful Development Certificate for Planning Permission P/2010/0384 Existing Use) Required 12/03/2010 P/2005/2967 First floor side and rear extension. Refuse 21/12/2005 Page 6 of 14

Planning Enforcement Background: A rear roof extension was constructed without planning permission, and therefore an enforcement notice was issued for 14 Albany Road (date:17/06/2008). However, the notice was withdrawn in 2011, due to its compliance with the provision set out in Class B of the Town and Country Planning (GPD) order 2015. Consultation: Public: A site notice was placed outside the property on 17/09/2015. Consultation period ended on 08/10/2015. 23 public objections received. Issues raised are summarised as follows: The design would not be in keeping with the general external appearance of the area, especially the two gables The impact of the proposed extension on neighboring properties, The first floor extension and dormer extension would intrude the neighbor s privacy, and windows will look over the neighbor s gardens, loss of privacy, Loss of light and amenity to the adjoining properties. Planning Officer s response: Above comments are noted. Please refer to the Reasoned Justification below containing the assessment of the proposal. The proposal overlaps its boundary line. Planning Officer s response: The proposal is contained within the boundary of the site. Possible of presence of tree in the rear garden. Planning Officer s response: The proposal would not affect the presence of trees on the rear garden located along the rear boundary line of the site. The construction of the prior extensions and the suitability of drainage, sewerage and possible environmental health risk, Planning Officer s response: The proposed seeks to replace existing extensions at the rear and roof level. Drainage, sewerage and environmental health matters are controlled under different legislation. The quality and materials of the proposed extensions, Planning Officer s response: The proposed materials would match those of the existing property. A condition would be suggested in the recommendation to this effect. Too many residential units in one single dwelling house (8) and increase on the density of the area, overdelopment of the existing residential units and unprecedented development in the area. Page 7 of 14

Planning Officer s response: The initial scheme comprised 8 self-contained residential units. However, the scheme has been revised and reduced from 8 to 6 residential. It should be noted the subject site property is longer than most of the semidetached dwellings along the road which allows for such proposal. Increased traffic and insufficient parking spaces in the area, Planning Officer s response: The proposal would be a car free development. On street parking permits for the proposed units would be restricted. Therefore, the proposal would neither increase traffic on street nor parking pressure the area. The proposal would cause nuisance, including the construction work, Planning Officer s response: Noted, however the proposal is a minor development and some temporary inconvenience would arise as part of the construction. However it is not considered to warrant a refusal on these grounds. The way the council has informed the interested parties, Planning Officer s response: Noted. Details of the public consultation are reported above and complied with statutory requirements. The use of the property as an HMO. Planning Officer s response: Following a site visit, it appeared that the property may have been used as a HMO. However it is noted that the property is vacant and therefore any use previously given has ceased. The subject proposal is for the conversion of the existing property into 6 self-contained units and any use different to this would require planning permission. Inconsistency in the submitted drawings, Internal: Page 8 of 14 Planning Officer s response: The amended drawings submitted do not present any inconsistency. Consultee Comments Officer Response Transport Services No objection subject to a S106 agreement to restrict car parking permits and conditions to secure cycle parking. However, it is recommended to remove the existing vehicle crossover. S106 legal agreement and cycle parking agreed. However the removal of the existing crossover is considered unreasonable, as the property already benefits from a single car space parking and this is proposed Regulatory Services (Pollution Control) No objection to the proposal subject to conditions and informative related to: - Insulation of building envelope, - External plan noise limits and Air Quality. to be retained. Noted

Environmental Services (Refuse) Planning Policies: No objection Noted Please refer to the informatives section of the report for the list of policies Reasoned Justification: Assessment This proposal has been assessed against the relevant policies of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan, the Adopted Development (Core) Strategy, the London Plan and Interim Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents. The key issues in the assessment of this planning application are: Principle of development; Quantum of development Impact on the character and appearance of the property and the area; Impact on residential amenity of adjoining properties; Residential amenity for prospective occupiers; and Transport, parking and refuse. Principle of Development Increasing the current housing stock is an important strategic objective for the London Borough of Ealing. Policy 3.3 of The London Plan Consolidated 2015 refers to the need to increase housing supply to meet demand within London and policy 3.14 promotes the efficient use of existing stock. This is supported by London Plan policy 3.4 which aims to ensure that development proposals achieve the maximum intensity of use compatible with local context. The application proposes to convert the existing single family dwellinghouse to six self-contained units (3 x studio, 1 x 3 bed and 2 x 2 bed flats). The proposed development would increase the housing stock and would deliver a higher residential density in line with planning policy. Sustainable development underpins planning policy from a local to national level, which includes the creation of residential accommodation and it is considered that the proposed development would support this policy objective. The property is located within a residential area and would therefore be acceptable in principle, subject to compliance with the relevant London Plan policies, Ealing Development Management DPD policies, Local Development Framework - Adopted Core Strategy policies and supplementry planning documents. Quantum of Development Policy 3.4 and Table 3.2 of the London Plan 2015 are appropriate when assessing residential density in Ealing. This regional policy states that boroughs should also develop residential density policies in their local plans in line with these policies and adopt the residential density ranges set out in Table 3.2 of policy 3.4. The site area is 0.0378ha and the density proposed in this scheme would be 158 Page 9 of 14

dwellings - 344 habitable rooms per hectare. The Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) on this site is 2. The setting of the site can be described as a suburban area as defined by notes of table 3.2 of the London Plan. Table 3.2 of the London Plan indicates that on suburban sites of 2.7-3.1hr/unit and with a Public Transport Accessibility Level of between 2-3 the acceptable density range would be 50-95 units per hectare and 150-250 habitable rooms per hectare. The density of the proposal is over the recommended density within the London Plan in terms of units. Density however is not the determining factor as to whether a development is acceptable. The potential for additional residential development is better considered in the context of its bulk, scale, design, sustainability, amenity and the desirability of protecting and enhancing the character of the area and the relationship with neighbouring sites. The residential density of the site may be appropriate subject to compliance with all other relevant standards and amenity of neighbouring occupiers. These matters are discussed in detail in the remainder of this report. Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Dwelling and the Area Chapter 7 of the London Plan provides overarching principles for urban design in London, highlighting considerations such as inclusive design (policy 7.2) and local character (policy 7.4). Ealing s Core Strategy polices 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 and 2.10 provide general design principles against which developments should be assessed. The proposal would replace the existing rear two storey and single storey extensions to the property. The difference in size between the existing and proposed is not considered to be significant. At ground floor level the extensions are deeper than existing; however the modest height and roof profile contribute to minimise the scale of the ground floor element. The extensions proposed at first floor and roof level are considered to present an acceptable scale, particularly considering the proportions of the original building and the fact that the proposed extension at first floor would have a similar footprint to the existing two storey rear extension of the property. It is considered that the height proposed, the footprint and overall proportions would still remain subordinate to the existing property. The roof extensions proposed would be contained to the rear and would provide a comprehensive development at roof level. The host dwellinghouse already benefits from rear dormers, however it was noted that the character and appearance of these extensions are not considered to be of high quality. The proposal would be in line with the first floor rear element and therefore would provide a comprehensive development at roof level that would integrate satisfactory to the existing property. Therefore it is considered that the element would meet the improvement for the character of the property and the area as a whole would not be significantly affected. The proposed materials would be brickwork and slates that match the host property and a condition would be suggested to secure them. At the front the proposal comprises the two gable elements. Following a site visit it was noted that properties in Albany Road benefit from a similar elements on their front elevation and therefore the proposed front gables would not detract from the property and the area. Page 10 of 14

Overall, it is considered that the design and scale of the proposed extensions (rear extensions, rear roof mansard and front gables) would be of a sufficient quality and would not detract from the area and the streetscene as a whole. It is considered that the development meets the objectives with the London Plan (2015) polices 7.1,7.4,7.6 and Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) policies 7A and 7B and policies 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 2.10 of the adopted Ealing Core Strategy. Impact on Residential Amenities of Adjoining Properties Policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management Development Plan 2013 provides that new development must achieve a high standard of amenity for users and for adjacent users by ensuring good levels of daylight and sunlight, good levels of privacy, coherent development of the site, positive visual impact and legibility and accessibility. The two properties most likely to be impacted by the proposal would be No.12 and 16 Albany Road, 13 and 15 Arlington Road. Impact on 12 Albany Road: No. 12 Albany Road is located to the west of the subject site and a 1.8m garden fence separates the two properties. Representations received raised concerns have been raised in regards the impact on the proposal on 12 Albany Road, however it is noted that No.12 Albany Road benefits from a side and rear extension infilling the side return and projecting rearwards from the rear elevation of its outrigger. The proposed ground floor rear extension would protrude approximately 0.50m further to the rear when compared to those extensions at no 12 Albany Road, which would be considered a minor difference. In terms of height, the proposed ground floor rear extension would have a flat roof at 3m. Given the dimensions of the rear extension at No.12 Albany Road and siting in close proximity of the shared boundary with the subject site, t is considered that the proposed ground floor rear extension would not result in significant amenity impacts. Overlooking or loss of privacy for No.12 Albany Road would not be raised as a concern from this element of the proposal. With regards to the extension at first floor level, it would include 4 openings, including three which are already existing. The extension would not be any closer to no. 12 when compared to the existing two storey extension currently standing on the property 2.5m away from the shared boundary and although there would be an increase in depth of 1.5m when compared to existing, no detrimental impacts would be anticipated as a result of this increase in depth. Regarding the two side facing windows, a condition is recommended to ensure that they are obscure glazed and fixed shut to a height of 1.7m above internal floor level to safeguard the neighbouring property against any perceived overlooking. The proposed development would include the enlargement of the existing roof extensions. In terms of overlooking, it was noted that the existing rear dormers benefits from five rear openings. The proposed development would include also 4 windows at roof level. Therefore the proposed would not create significantly different impacts in terms of overlooking when compare to the existing situation. The amended plans show the rear roof extension would not include side facing windows, and therefore would not result in overlooking issues or loss of privacy for this neighbouring property. Page 11 of 14

The proposed roof mansard extensions would extend a maximum of 3m from the rear wall of the property (roof extension section above proposed first floor rear extension); it would be 2.5m from the shared boundary with No.12 Albany Road. The proposed rear roof extension on the main rear roof slope of the property would not result in undue harm to this neighbouring property. As such, it is considered that there would be no detrimental impact No.12 Albany Road in terms of overbearingness, overshadowing, loss of outlook and increased sense of enclosure. Impact on No.16 Albany Road: No.16 Albany Road is located on the East of the subject site. A 1.8m high boundary fence separates the two properties. It is noted that the rear outrigger at No. 16 Albany Road is approximately 2m set back from the shared boundary with the subject site. Representations received raised concerns about the impacts on this property. Following a site visit, it was noted that that No.16 Albany Road benefits from windows in the side return serving a kitchen/dining area and also features windows in the rear wall of the outrigger serving the same room. Therefore the kitchen benefits from dual aspect. There is also another window in the main rear elevation of this neighbouring property. The existing subject property benefits from a two storey rear extension in close proximity to the shared boundary. The proposed ground floor rear extension would have a depth of 8m at a height of 3m. It is noted that an extension with 4m in depth would be admissible under permitted development on a detached property, therefore on balance, the additional depth that is being proposed and/or the ground floor rear extension as a whole would not cause detrimental effects on the residential amenity experienced in this adjoining property, particularly as the side return of this adjoining property would not appear to be used for amenity purposes but mainly a as mean of access to the kitchen/dining area. The set back of the outrigger of no. 16 form the shared boundary and orientation of other windows in its rear elevation would help to mitigate any effects to the change of outlook that the proposal would create. The proposal would not create any impact in terms of overlooking of lack of privacy. As such, it is considered that there would be no detrimental impact No.16 Albany Road in terms of overbearingness, overshadowing, loss of outlook and increased sense of enclosure as a result of the ground floor element. In terms of the first floor rear extension and the roof extension above it, the proposal would move half a metre closer to the shared boundary, leaving a distance of 2m to the boundary. This would result in a distance of 4m between the outrigger of no. 16 and the proposed first floor extension, which would be considered a reasonable distance to mitigate any potential impacts. It is noted there is a side window at first floor level facing no. 16. A condition would be suggested to require the installation of obscured glazing and for the window to be non-opening below 1.7m from the internal floor level. Impact on rear properties (13 and 15 Arlington Road): The rear properties are located on the North of the subject site. It is noted that after the proposed development there would be a rear garden area with approximately 9.5m in depth. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development would not create any demonstrable impact to these properties. Page 12 of 14

The Quality, Layout, Amenity Space of the Proposed Housing and garden space Annex 4 of the London Plan Housing SPG (Annex 4) details minimum space standards for new development. There should be detailed floor areas as part of any future application, and should comply with the minimum standards outlined in the London Plan (Table 3.3). The table below indicates the requirements of Annex 4. Policy 7D of Ealing s Development Management DPD, adopted in December 2013, recognises that in most circumstances this minimum recommended provision would need to be supplemented by additional private garden space to satisfy other policy requirements/design considerations and that the amount and form of provision should respond to the physical context, respecting the established local character and pattern of building, public space, landscape & topography, and should safeguard the privacy and amenity of existing and future occupants. Considering these various factors, Policy 7D stipulates that amenity outdoor space for flats should typically be a minimum of 15sq.m. The original floor plans comprised 8 residential units, however the plans have been amended and 2 residential units have been removed. The internal floor areas proposed are as follows: :Unit Type Number of Proposed London Plan occupants (based Floor Area Standard on bedroom size) (sqm) (sqm) and no of beds Flat 1 5p3b 115 96 basement/ground Flat 2- ground 2b3p 76 61 Flat 3 second 2b4p 68 70 Flat 4 first floor Studio 37 37 Flat 5 -first floor Studio 37 37 Flat 6 -first floor Studio 37.2 37 It is noted that the proposed floor plan for one of the 2B/4P units would have a shortage of 2 sqm, however is not considered this small shortage to be detrimental to the living conditions of prospective occupiers and would not affect the quality of the unit in a significant manner. It should also be noted that this deficit is imposed by the constraints of the existing building as the proposal is a conversion as opposed to a new built scheme. All the proposed units would benefit from natural light and it is considered they would provide acceptable living conditions for prospective occupiers. With regards to garden space, policy 7D of Ealing s Development Management DPD, adopted in December 2013, recognises that in most circumstances this minimum recommended provision would need to be supplemented by additional private garden space to satisfy other policy requirements/design considerations and that the amount and form of provision should respond to the physical context, respecting the established local character and pattern of building, public space, landscape & topography, and should safeguard the privacy and amenity of existing and future occupants. The total area of the rear garden is 110 sqm, therefore the two ground floor flats would benefit from 55sqm each for outdoor amenity, which would be considered to be acceptable for these ground floor units. The rest of the units would not benefit from amenity space; however, such shortage is not Page 13 of 14

uncommon in conversions of buildings. Also, the property is within close proximity to local open spaces (Drayton Green, Dean Gardens and Walpole Park). It should also be noted that flats in the upper floors are mainly small units of accommodation and the family unit at ground floor benefits form garden space. Therefore the proposal would not raise concerns in this regard. Transport, parking and refuse: It is noted that the London Plan has specific requirements relating to the number of vehicle parking spaces for a new development as set out below: -1 or 2 bed less than 1 car per unit and -3 bed up to 1.5 car per unit. The application site is located within a controlled parking zone as such low car housing is a requirement. The proposal would be a car free development restricting parking for 6 units, with the 3 bed unit benefiting from parking as per current arrangement. Therefore the scheme would comply with the requirements of adopted policies. Further, it is also noted that the proposal would include 7 cycle rack located within the boundaries of the site. The development would also comprise a secure refuse store located towards the eastern boundaries. Details of such storage have been requested via a planning condition. Conclusion: On balance the proposal is considered to be acceptable. The proposals would have a minimal impact on the surrounding area. The proposals would therefore preserve the character of the area, and would not impact on the neighbouring properties. It would therefore be consistent with the aims of the relevant policies of the adopted Ealing Development Management Development Plan, Interim Supplementary Planning Guidance and The London Plan (2015). Therefore, it is recommended for approval subject to conditions. Human Rights Act: In making your decision, you should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as the London Borough of Ealing to act in a manner, which is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. You are referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property). It is not considered that the recommendation for approval of the grant of permission in this case interferes with local residents right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest and the recommendation for approval is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report. Page 14 of 14