PLANNING COMMITTEE
22 MAY 2003
02/01589/FUL
ITEM 3
Land at 58 Meadow Walk, Ewell, Surrey
Ground floor front, side and rear extension and loft conversion.
(Plans)
EWELL
(Residential)
(14/04/2003)
RECOMMENDATION
PERMIT subject to the following conditions:
(1)
P03 Standard Duration (Other than Outline)
Summary
The application is reported to Committee at the request of the Ward Member. The
property has been substantially extended. However, it is considered that the proposal
adheres to Local Plan Policy.
Local residents have objected. However it is not considered that the representations
received warrant the refusal of planning permission in this case, due to the
application’s compliance with the relevant policy guidance.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Site and Surroundings
The property subject to this application is a detached bungalow situated on the north
side of Meadow Walk. The railway line to the west of the site divides this road.
The site is situated within the Ewell Village Conservation Area. There is a mixture of
sizes and designs of dwellings along this street. The properties surrounding the
application site, namely Nos.56 and 60, are set back from the road, with No.58A
situated to the rear of the application site, accessed by a driveway which borders the
east of No.58. It would appear that No.58A has been built in what was originally part
of the rear garden of the application site. Directly opposite the property is a row of
two-storey terraced house.
Current Proposal
This is a full application for single storey front, side and rear extensions and loft
conversion with 2 rear dormer windows at No.58 Meadow Walk.
Relevant Planning History
The property was extended before the mid-1970’s with:
Page 1 of 4
PLANNING COMMITTEE
22 MAY 2003



02/01589/FUL
ITEM 3
Ref. 24997 - Extension to form kitchen and bathroom.
Ref. 28438 - Extension to form dining room and kitchen.
Ref. 28564 - Garage addition and formation of bay window.
Policy Context
Epsom & Ewell District-Wide Local Plan (May 2000)
Policy BE1
Policy DC1
Policy DC17
Policy DC18
General Policy on the Built Environment
General Policy
Design of Householder Development
Design of Householder Extensions
Surrey Structure Plan policies: PE10
Other relevant considerations: PPG1, Human Rights Act 1998
Other material considerations
PPG3: Housing (March 2000)
Planning Considerations
The main issues relate to (i) the impact on the character and appearance of the area
and (ii) the impact on residential amenity of neighbouring properties.
(i)
Impact on character
The proposed alterations will be visible in the street scene. It is proposed to
remove the concrete arches from the front of the dwelling and introduce two
bay windows on the front elevation, together with a garage to replace the
current carport. The alterations to be made are considered to be an
improvement to the front elevation of the property and in keeping with the
Ewell Village Conservation Area. The garage will not extend any closer to the
road than the current carport, although it will obviously represent a more
substantial structure, with a pitched rather than flat roof. The raising of the
roof by 1.8 metres will have an impact on the street scene, but as the property
is set back from the road by approximately 12 metres, it is not considered that
this will appear overbearing. The rear extension will not be visible in the
street scene, and is in any case is a minimal alteration, which will not extend
beyond the current rearward building line. The proposed extensions are
considered acceptable in terms of Policies DC17 and DC18 of the Epsom &
Ewell District-Wide Local Plan.
On balance, it is considered that the alterations proposed to the front of the
property in this case are acceptable and will make a positive contribution to
the street scene, in keeping with the area and the Ewell Village Conservation
Area.
Page 2 of 4
PLANNING COMMITTEE
22 MAY 2003
(ii)
02/01589/FUL
ITEM 3
Impact on Amenity
In terms of residential amenity, the principal objections from local residents
relate to:



Loss of privacy to No.58a with the introduction of two rear dormer
windows;
Loss of light to No.60, in particular the front garden, due to the proposed
raised roof height; and
Impact on the street scene relating to the increased roof height.
The proposed rear extension will not project past the current rear building line,
and the proposed side extension will abut the boundary with the driveway
serving No.58A, replacing the existing extension. A 2 metre high closeboarded fence marks the boundary of the rear garden of the application site.
The garden slopes up slightly away from the application dwelling. The
proposed rear dormers are set in from the rear elevation by 4.6 metres, with a
window-to-window distance with No.58A of 24 metres. It is not considered
that this will cause an unacceptable loss of privacy to the occupants of
No.58A.
The plans show that the dwelling at No.58 is set slightly off the boundary line
on the east side, however upon my site visit a fence has been erected that abuts
the current side elevation. The agent has confirmed in fax dated 16th April
2003 that the fence has been erected slightly off the boundary line, and that the
boundary line shown on Drawing No.MV/01 is correct.
The raised height of the roof will not have a substantial impact on the
neighbouring properties due to the lower level on which the application
property has been built compared to that of No’s 60, 58A and 56.
The owners of No.60 Meadow Walk expressed concern regarding loss of light
to their property due to the increased roof height. No.60 is a two-storey
property set back substantially further from the highway than the application
site, and although the increase roof height may cause some overshadowing to
the front garden, No.60 has a deep rear garden, which will not be affected by
the proposed extension. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies
with Policy DC1 of the Epsom & Ewell District-Wide Local Plan.
In conclusion, it is not considered that the neighbouring properties will not be
materially harmed by the proposed extensions.
CONSULTATIONS
The application has been advertised by means of a site notice and letters to 7
neighbouring properties. 3 local residents and the Ewell Village Residents
Association have objected on the grounds that:
Page 3 of 4
PLANNING COMMITTEE
22 MAY 2003



02/01589/FUL
Design;
Loss of light; and
Loss of privacy.
The County Council (as highway authority) raise no objections.
Contact:
Brian Woods (WS Planning Ltd)
Page 4 of 4
ITEM 3