15 Davids Road SE23 3EP PDF 112 KB - Council meetings

Committee PLANNING COMMITTEE (B)
Report Title 15 DAVID'S ROAD SE23 3EP
Ward
Forest Hill
Contributors S Isaacson
Class PART 1 Date: 21 JUNE 2012
Reg. Nos.
DC/11/77433
Application dated 10.05.2011 completed 07.07.2011
Applicant
Forge Architects on behalf of Tanville Property
Proposal The renewal of the planning permission dated 3/07/2008
(DC/08/68497) for the construction of a new floor of
accommodation on top of the existing building at 15 David's
Road SE23 and the change of use of the first floor of the
existing gymnasium to residential and conversion of the top two
floors of the resultant building to provide 3 one-bedroom flats on
the first floor and 2 one-bedroom flats on the top floor.
Applicant’s Plan Nos. P0616/101B - P0616/106B, P0616/201C, 202C, 203C, 204C,
205A, 206C, 207C, 208C & 209C, Site Location Plan, and
Design & Access Statement.
Background Papers
Designation
(1) Case File - LE/567/15/TP
(2) National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012)
(3) The London Plan (July 2011)
(4) Adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004)
(5) Local Development Framework Core Strategy (June 2011)
(6) Planning (Listed Building & Conservation Areas) Act 1990
(7) Forest Hill Urban Design Framework & Development
Strategy - Supplemental Planning Guidance March 2003
Adopted UDP - Existing Use
1.0 Property/Site Description
1.1 15 David’s Road is a two-storey building located on the west side of David’s Road
and used as a gymnasium on both floors. The building is of post-war construction
and has a flat roof. The front elevation has a strong horizontal emphasis and is
paired with 17 David's Road, adjoining to the north. To the rear are buildings in
Havelock Walk, which formerly comprised buildings predominantly used for
workshop and storage purposes. Over the last 15 years or so, a number of
planning permissions have been granted for live/work units, so there is now a
substantial residential presence on upper floors above Class B1. Business
workshops on the ground floor. Some of these units have windows facing east
over the David's Road properties.
1.2 Immediately at the rear of the application building are commercial units numbered
16-22 Havelock Walk. Planning permission was granted in September 2011 for
the change of use of 22 Havelock Walk, from commercial to a two bedroom live/

work unit, together with the construction of a roof extension in the south side roof
slope, raising the ridge of the roof, the installation of roof lights in the north-facing
side roof slope, plus a stainless steel flue and alterations to the front and rear
elevations (DC/11/77249).
1.3 Immediately to the north of this building is a live/work unit at 24 Havelock Walk,
which has windows in the rear elevation, facing directly over the application
building. Apart from 18-22 Havelock Walk, all other buildings on the east side of
Havelock Walk are in live/work use, with residential occupation of the upper floors.
1.4 To the north of the application property is another two-storey building of the same
age and appearance, numbered 17 David's Road, which is used partly as a
children's day nursery and partly in Class B1 Business use. To the south are a
series of small Victorian properties, with 13 David's Road being in residential use,
11 David's Road is Kingdom Hall (religious use), then a series of small shops/
restaurants.
1.5 David’s Road is situated within the Forest Hill Conservation Area and lies a short
distance north of the main Forest Hill Town Centre, grouped around Forest Hill
Station and the traffic light junction between Dartmouth Road, Devonshire Road
and London Road. The property is not a listed building.
1.6 David's Road is one way southbound from the junction with Manor Mount to the
junction with Devonshire Road, the South Circular Road (A205). Havelock Walk
to the rear is an adopted no through road. There is a footpath link through from
the northern end of Havelock Walk into David’s Road. The public footpath on the
west side of David's Road remains roughly level, whereas the roadway itself drops
down to the South Circular junction, with railings along the pavement edge.
2.0 Planning History
2.1 Outline planning permission was granted in February 1958 for the erection of two
warehouse buildings on the site of 15-33 David's Road. Details of this
development were subsequently approved and the buildings constructed
thereafter.
2.2 In April 1962, planning permission was granted for the erection of a covered way
at the rear of 15-17 David's Road.
2.3 In November 1977, planning permission was granted for the change of use of 15-
17 David's Road from warehousing to light industrial use (for the manufacture of
exhibition stands and signs).
2.4 In July 1988, planning permission was granted for the use of 15 David's Road as
a gymnasium. Conditions were imposed to secure the provision and retention of
three vehicle parking spaces for use of employees and persons calling at the
building, and opening hours were restricted such that the business was only
allowed to operate between the hours of 12 noon and 10 p.m. Mondays to Fridays
and 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
2.5 A planning brief for Havelock Walk was agreed at Planning Sub-Committee (B) on
5 March 1998 (see Policy Context below). However, this was adopted for a
limited period of 3 years and has now expired. The Havelock Walk Planning Brief
is of rather historic relevance in planning terms.

However, its impact has been significant over the last 15 years, as the majority of
properties on the east side of Havelock Walk have been converted to live/work
use by a variety of artists, sculptors, documentary film makers, etc, with
commercial uses mainly on the ground floor and linked residential accommodation
above.
2.6 On 14 March 2007, planning permission was refused for the erection of a new
floor of accommodation on top of the existing building and the change of use of
the first floor of the existing gymnasium to residential and conversion of the top
two floors of the resultant building into 3 one-bedroom flats and 2 two-bedroom
flats, for the following reason:-
“The proposed building would, as a result of its height, bulk and proximity, have a
significant and adverse effect on the amenities of the occupiers of the live/work
unit at 24 Havelock Walk, contrary to policies URB 3 Urban Design, HSG 4
Residential Amenity, HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential Development
ad HSG 12 Residential Extensions of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan
(July 2004).”
2.7 The subsequent appeal to the Planning Inspectorate was dismissed. In the
appeal decision, the Inspector commented as follows:-
“The proposed new second floor would be in close proximity to the windows in the
rear of 24 Havelock Walk to the north-west. This is a live/work unit, which has
windows in its rear elevation, facing directly over the proposed development.
These windows are at second floor to a kitchen/lounge area and at the third floor
to a bedroom and a bathroom. The distance between the two buildings is no
more than 4 metres. In my view, the proposed second floor with its bulk in such
close proximity to the second floor rear windows of 24 Havelock Walk would
present an overbearing and enclosing aspect. It would thus have a significant and
detrimental impact on the outlook and hence on the living conditions of the
residents. This would be contrary to policies HSG 4 of the Lewisham Unitary
Development Plan … which seeks to safeguard the character and amenities of
residential areas, HSG 5 and HSG 12 which seeks new residential development
which provides a satisfactory level of outlook and URB 3 which it expects
alterations to existing buildings to be compatible with all complement the scale
and character of existing development.
The proposal would also affect views from 24 Havelock Walk over the local
neighbourhood towards Devonshire Road and more distantly including towards
Christ Church in South Road, which is I understand itself protected in the UDP.
The amount of morning sun reaching the rear windows of No. 24 would be
reduced by construction of the second floor above the gymnasium. It would not
however in my opinion result in loss of daylight to habitable rooms in terms of the
BRE Guidelines. They would continue to benefit from light entering from the
south where there is a roof terrace. Additionally, issues of privacy and
overlooking would improve with existing windows to the rear of the gymnasium
being removed or having obscure glazing.
I agree that the proposal would introduce a residential use into 15 David's Road,
providing for a mixed use site and that this is a highly sustainable location, well
located for public transport where best and efficient use of the site should be
encouraged and so meet objectives sought by PPS 1 and PPS 3, the London

Plan and UDP policies URB 3 and HSG 10. I further consider that the proposed
frontage on David's Road would preserve and enhance the Forest Hill
Conservation Area. Nevertheless, this would not outweigh the harm that it would
cause to the living conditions of the residents of 24 Havelock Walk."
2.8 Planning permission was granted on 7 July 2008 for the construction of a new
floor of accommodation on top of the existing building at 15 David's Road SE23
and the change of use of the first floor of the existing gymnasium to residential
and conversion of the top two floors of the resultant building to provide 3 onebedroom
flats on the first floor and 2 one-bedroom flats on the top floor
(DC/08/68497 & DC/08/68497A).
17 David’s Road
2.9 In March 1990, the Council refused planning permission for the erection of a
second floor extension at the adjoining building to the north at 17 David’s Road to
provide additional offices. The reason for refusal was:-
“The proposal will result in an increased generation of traffic movement to and
from the site and this, together with the resultant car parking generation, would be
likely to exacerbate existing severe problems of on-street parking in David's Road
and adjacent streets.”
2.10 In the subsequent appeal (decision issued 8 November 1990; Planning
Inspectorate Reference: T/APP/C5690/A/90/153416/P8), the Inspector allowed
the appeal and granted planning permission. The Inspector was of the opinion
that the decision rested on the main issue of whether the proposal would
aggravate unacceptably problems of on-street parking in the locality, to the
detriment of the free flow of traffic. His conclusion was that although at peak
periods David's Road was used extensively by traffic as a shortcut and that there
was an existing problem of on-street parking where David's Road and the nearby
streets were already used to their full parking capacity, the importance of the
company's continued prosperity and the availability of on-site parking spaces
outweighed the slight risk of additional congestion in David's Road and
neighbouring streets which may arise from the project.
2.11 The Inspector’s decision including the grant of planning permission was dated 8
November 1990 and has not been implemented, so this permission lapsed in
November 1995.
3.0 Current Application
3.1 The application is for the renewal of the July 2008 planning permission
(DC/08/68497) for the construction of a new floor of accommodation on top of the
existing building at 15 David's Road and the change of use of the first floor of the
existing gymnasium to residential and conversion of the top two floors of the
resultant building to provide 3 one-bedroom flats on the first floor and 2 onebedroom
flats on the top floor.
3.2 Compared to previous submissions and following the refusal of planning
permission and the dismissal of the earlier appeal, the applicant revised the
scheme to reduce the width of the new floor of accommodation in order to reduce
the impact on 24 Havelock Walk at the rear.

3.3 The current renewal application again involves the construction of a new floor of
accommodation on top of the existing building, but only part width, and the
change of use of the first floor of the existing gymnasium to residential and
conversion of the top two floors of the resultant building into 5 one-bedroom flats.
3.4 Access would be provided via a new entrance door, alleyway and staircase to the
upper floors. This would be located in the gap to the north of the existing building,
between it and 17 David's Road. The single storey residential entrance corridor
would be provided with a flat roof with rooflights, leading round to the back of the
building and to a new staircase up the rear of the building to provide access to the
existing first floor and new second floor. This steel-framed staircase would be
covered with an obscured panel system, creating a structure that projects 1.1
metres back from the existing rear wall of the building, reducing the gap to the
Havelock Walk buildings to 2.7 metres.
3.5 Other modifications to the building would include the replacement of windows in
the rear elevation of apartment 1 on the first floor with obscured glazing. Existing
windows in the rear elevation of proposed apartment 3 on the first floor would be
in-filled with brickwork, whilst existing windows in the north elevation would have
their glass changed to obscured glazing.
3.6 As originally submitted (and refused), the scheme proposed 6 one-bedroom flats,
with a full-width mansard roof at the new top floor level, which was set very close
to the edge of the roof. For urban design reasons, the applicant was advised to
set the mansard back slightly and this resulted in the re-planning of the top floor
accommodation and reduction from 3 one-bedroom units to 2 two-bedroom flats.
3.7 Following the refusal and dismissed appeal, the scheme approved in July 2008
was redesigned with 2 one-bedroom flats on the reduced-width upper floor.
3.8 The applicant submitted a Design and Access Statement in support of the
application. This covers the topics of use, amount of new building, layout, scale,
landscaping, appearance and sustainability. In particular, in the light of the recent
appeal, they have "significantly reduced the bulk and proximity of the roof
extension to sympathise with the outlook and living conditions of 24 Havelock
Walk. Within the design, they have endeavoured, in their view, to try and
“enhance the outlook and living conditions of 24 Havelock Walk by obscuring all
glazing that face the property’s rear windows and introducing extensive green roof
areas to our proposal, which will create an improved visual outlook.” In their view,
this reduced design would no longer effect the views from 24 Havelock Walk over
the local neighbourhood towards Devonshire Road and the Church (in Sunderland
Road / Church Rise).
3.9 The architect considers that this design approach has created a subservient
extension that complements and responds to the neighbouring buildings, in
particular the adjoining building.
3.10 Both the Design and Access Statement and the submitted drawings make
reference to the roof extension for 17 David's Road previously granted on appeal
in 1990. However, as mentioned elsewhere in this report, this permission was not
implemented and has now lapsed. No account has therefore been taken of this
historic appeal decision.

3.11 The applicant scheme includes:-
• substantial biodiverse green roof coverage;
• the introduction of a living green wall to the site and front of the
extension;
• decreased the size of the windows on the extension to detract from
matching the existing windows below;
• the removal of the existing sign for the gymnasium and relocation of a
new smaller sign above the gym entrance;
• inclusion of additional window on the first floor on the concept model,
as shown on the elevations.
3.12 They have also included additional information on windows, plus reference
material regarding the proposed vertical green walls.
3.13 The owner of the Total Body Fitness gymnasium has emphasised the importance
of the gym in the local community, recent financial pressures due to other large
fitness centres moving into the area and dwindling membership. The gym has
been in existence for over 10 years and he feels that by developing the upstairs,
this would enable him to update the gym and fitness equipment, keep it in the
community and ease the financial burden.
4.0 Consultations & Replies
Neighbours & Local Amenity Societies etc / Site Notice
4.1 A total of 38 nearby residential and commercial properties were notified of the
planning application, plus Ward Councillors. Site notices were displayed and
letters were sent to residents in the surrounding area and the relevant ward
Councillors were also consulted. Three objections and one comment have been
received, raising the following issues:-
24 Havelock Walk
4.2 The owners of 24 Havelock Walk considers the redevelopment would have a
detrimental impact on their property. Whilst they believe the proposal is the same
as the application in 2008, I feel this is not entirely clear. They consider the
impact of their enjoyment of sunlight was not fully appreciated in the 2008
application and therefore continues to have concerns on this basis. They have
submitted photographs giving an indication of how the sun enters the living room
from the windows facing the proposal. They therefore consider that an increase in
height of 15 David's Road will not only increase the feeling of enclosure to their
home, but also have an impact on their enjoyment of sunlight.
4.3 They would like assurances that the green roof is not used as an amenity area for
any of the residential units, as it would create direct overlooking into their living
space. The introduction of the rear stair would reduce even further the distance
between the Havelock Walk and David's Road properties and assurances are
required that all windows facing their property would not affect privacy.
22 Havelock Walk

4.4 The owner of 22 Havelock Walk considers the proposal will have a detrimental
impact on the rear of 22 Havelock Walk and that any additional height is going to
affect the amount of sunlight and daylight to the rear of No. 22. Also, the addition
of the stair to the rear will increase the sense of enclosure between the properties.
She is also greatly concerned about potential noise from new residential dwellings
so close by. The area between 22 Havelock Walk and 15 David's Road is
extremely narrow, so any noise will reverberate between all the hard surfaces.
Glasshouse Two, 16 Havelock Walk
4.5 The occupier of Glasshouse Two considers her property would be adversely
affected by this proposal by virtue of loss of light into her work space, particularly
as she works full-time from home in this live/work unit. This is already a densely
built up area and the proposal would prejudice the privacy of her living space.
5 David's Road
4.6 The occupier of 5 David's Road has commented on the application but has not
raised a formal objection.
(Letters are available to Members)
Highways & Transportation
4.7 Unobjectionable in principle, subject to the submission of details (and approval by
the Council prior to the commencement of works on site), illustrating commercial
waste / recycling storage and collection points. The applicant should be informed
that if Planning Consent is granted the implementation of the proposal will require
approval by the Council of a Street Naming & Numbering application. Application
forms are available on the Council’s web site.
Thames Water
4.8 Waste Comments - Thames Water would advise that with regard to sewerage
infrastructure we would not have any objection to the above planning application.
4.9 Water Comments - On the basis of information provided, Thames Water advise
that with regard to water infrastructure, they would not have any objection to the
planning application, subject to an informative regarding water pressure being
placed on any approval.
5.0 Policy Context
Government Guidance - Introduction
5.1 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) makes it
clear that the determination of planning applications must be made in accordance
with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The
development plan for Lewisham comprises the Core Strategy, Development Plan
Document (DPD) (adopted in June 2011), those saved policies in the adopted
Lewisham UDP (July 2004) that have not been replaced by the Core Strategy and
policies in the London Plan (July 2011). The NPPF does not change the legal
status of the development plan.

National Planning Policy Framework
5.2 The NPPF was published on 27 March 2012 and is a material consideration in the
determination of planning applications. It contains at paragraph 14 a ‘presumption
in favour of sustainable development’. Annex 1 of the NPPF provides guidance
on implementation of the NPPF. In summary this states that (paragraph 211),
policies in the development plan should not be considered out of date just
because they were adopted prior to the publication of the NPPF. At paragraphs
214 and 215, guidance is given on the weight to be given to policies in the
development plan. In summary, this states, that for a period of 12 months from
publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), decision
takers can give full weight to policies adopted since 2004, even if there is limited
conflict with the NPPF. Following this period, weight should be given to existing
policies according to their consistency with the NPPF.
5.3 Officers have reviewed the Core Strategy and saved UDP policies for consistency
with the NPPF and consider there is no issue of significant conflict. As such, full
weight can be given to these policies in the decision making process, in
accordance with paragraphs 211, 214 and 215 of the NPPF.
Ministerial Statement: Planning for Growth (23 March 2011)
5.4 The statement sets out that the planning system has a key role to play in
rebuilding Britain’s economy by ensuring that the sustainable development
needed to support economic growth is able to proceed as easily as possible. The
Government’s expectation is that the answer to development and growth should
wherever possible be ‘yes’, except where this would compromise the key
sustainable development principles set out in national planning policy.
Other National Guidance
5.5 The other relevant national guidance is:
By Design: Urban Design in the Planning System - Towards Better Practice
(CABE/DETR 2000); Planning and Access for Disabled People: A Good
Practice Guide (ODPM, March 2003); Safer Places: The Planning System and
Crime Prevention (ODPM, April 2004) & Code for Sustainable Homes
Technical Guide (DCLG/BRE, November 2010).
The London Plan (July 2011)
5.6 The London Plan was approved in July 2011. Relevant policies include Policy 3.3
Increasing Housing Supply, 3.4 Optimising housing potential; 3.5 Quality and
design of housing developments; 3.8 Housing choice; 3.16 Protection and
enhancement of social infrastructure; 5.2 Minimising carbon dioxide emissions;
5.3 Sustainable design and construction; 5.7 Renewable energy; 5.11 Green roofs
and development site environs; 5.13 Sustainable drainage; 6.9 Cycling; 6.13
Parking; 7.3 Designing out crime; 7.4 Local character; 7.5 Public realm, 7.6
Architecture & Policy 7.19 Biodiversity and access to nature in the London Plan.

London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG)
5.7 The London Plan SPG’s relevant to this application are:
Accessible London: Achieving an Inclusive Environment (2004);
Housing (2005)
Sustainable Design and Construction (2006).
London Plan Best Practice Guidance
5.8 The London Plan Best Practice Guidance’s relevant to this application are:
Development Plan Policies for Biodiversity (2005); Control of Dust and
Emissions from Construction and Demolition (2006); and Wheelchair
Accessible Housing (2007) & London Housing Design Guide (Interim Edition,
2010).
Local Development Framework - Core Strategy (June 2011)
5.9 The Core Strategy was adopted by the Council at its meeting on 29 June 2011.
The Core Strategy, together with the London Plan and the saved policies of the
Unitary Development Plan, form the borough's statutory development plan.
Relevant objectives and policies in the Core Strategy include Objective 10:
Protect and enhance Lewisham's character, Policy 1: Housing Provision, mix and
affordability, Policy 7: Climate change and adapting to the effects, Policy 8
Sustainable design and construction and energy efficiency, Policy 14: Sustainable
movement and transport, Policy 15: High quality design for Lewisham, Policy 16:
Conservation areas, heritage assets and the historic environment & Policy 17: The
protected vistas, the London panorama and local views, landmarks and
panoramas.
Adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004)
5.10 The saved policies of the UDP relevant to this application include STR URB 1 The
Built Environment, URB 3 Urban Design, URB 12 Landscape and Development,
HSG 4 Residential Amenity, HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential
Development, HSG 7 Gardens, HSG 8 Backland and Infill Development & STC 8:
Local Shopping Parades and Corner Shops.
Residential Standards Supplementary Planning Document (Updated May 2012)
5.11 This document sets out guidance and standards relating to design, sustainable
development, renewable energy, flood risk, sustainable drainage, dwelling mix,
density, layout, neighbour amenity, the amenities of the future occupants of
developments, safety and security, refuse, affordable housing, self containment,
noise and room positioning, room and dwelling sizes, storage, recycling facilities
and bin storage, noise insulation, parking, cycle parking and storage, gardens and
amenity space, landscaping, play space, Lifetime Homes and accessibility, and
materials.

Forest Hill Urban Design Framework & Development Strategy
5.12 The site is also covered by the Forest Hill Urban Design Framework &
Development Strategy, which was published as Supplementary Planning
Guidance by the Council and Llewellyn-Davies in March 2003. It does not lie
within a specific development site, but the strategy document sets out a vision for
Forest Hill that:-
• Creates an attractive, safe and high-quality place at its heart.
• Is friendly and of a human scale.
• Has a focus and a series of routes, spaces and landmarks that helped to
make the centre easily accessible and understood by all who use it.
• Maximises development potential of underused sites without
compromising local character.
• Has a fine-grained mix of uses that create a vital and viable place.
6.0 Planning Considerations
6.1 The main planning issues in this case are whether the changed policy landscape,
in particular the NPPF, and LDF Core Strategy / UDP policies require a different
decision to that reached in 2008. Other issues include the loss of one floor of the
gymnasium and principle of new residential units in the commercial area, the
relationship to the existing properties at the rear in Havelock Walk, given the
reduced width of the mansard floor), acceptability of external staircase access to
five flats on the upper two floors, noise from the existing gymnasium use, access
and parking issues, and whether the proposal either preserves or enhances the
Forest Hill Conservation Area. Also relevant is the impact of the recent grant of
planning permission at 22 Havelock Walk.
Acceptability of part residential use / loss of one floor of the gymnasium
6.2 Core Strategy Objective 4: Economic Activity & Local Businesses supports
investment in new and existing business and retail development, whereas UDP
policy HSG 10 provides flexibility where upper floor accommodation of commercial
uses is being under-utilised.
6.3 The building was used as a tile warehouse before it became a gym / fitness centre
in 1986. Membership continued to rise until 2000/2001, when two other fitness
centres moved into the area and membership started to slip. The main aim of the
owner is to update the gymnasium and fitness equipment by developing the upper
floor, thus enabling him to keep the business within the local community and ease
his financial burden.
6.4 The current proposal would not result in the closure of the gym, but merely a
reduction in its size. The application property is in a fairly mixed area, where
commercial uses and residential occupy adjoining sites. No objection is raised to
the principle of residential use of the existing first floor and proposed second floor
of this building, subject to the discussion later in this report regarding transmission
of noise from the existing gymnasium.

Design
6.5 In the original (refused) application, it was considered that the treatment for the
front elevation was generally acceptable, with the increased setback to the
mansard. The existing building is of relatively bland appearance and the addition
of the mansard, if well detailed, would enhance the appearance of the existing
front elevation and would improve its appearance in David’s Road, in the context
of the Forest Hill Conservation Area.
6.6 In determining the 2008 application, Members of the Planning Committee
accepted that the reduced width mansard proposal would not compromise the
architectural integrity of the existing building. The front elevation of this two-storey
yellow brick building is divided into two main elements, i.e. the right-hand entrance
end, with its three windows above, and the left-hand side with the long horizontal
windows. The proposed extension will cover the left-hand two thirds of the
building, on top of the section with the long horizontal windows. The original
proposal was designed with lead-clad dormer windows.
6.7 The windows in the front elevation will be replaced with higher-standard doubleglazed,
white, powder-coated aluminium frames to exactly match the existing.
This change will also enhance the appearance of the property in the street scene.
The dormers on the front elevation will also be provided with white aluminiumframed
windows, with lead cheeks. These design details are considered to be
satisfactory.
Relationship to the existing properties at the rear in Havelock Walk
6.8 The reduced-width mansard extension proposed at second floor level, with the
proposed top floor providing 2 one-bedroom self-contained flats, has a lesser
impact on the adjoining property to the rear at 24 Havelock Walk. The proposed
alterations to the application building would make it effectively single aspect to the
front onto David's Road. All the existing windows at first floor level would either
be blocked completely with new brickwork to match existing or have their glass
changed to obscure glazing. As a result of these changes, it is considered that
there would not be any direct overlooking between the proposed flats and any
existing residential accommodation at the rear in Havelock Walk. The proposed
steel access staircase up the rear of the building would be enclosed by an
obscured panel system, which again would prevent any direct overlooking of
properties in Havelock Walk.
6.9 There are no proposed windows in the rear elevation of the building that would
have clear glass and, if permission were to be granted, a condition could be
imposed to ensure the provision and permanent retention of such obscured glass.
6.10 The most significant problem with the refused application involved the close
proximity of the application building to windows in the rear of 24 Havelock Walk
and it has been necessary to assess whether the height and bulk of the proposed
second floor would create a significant problem for the occupiers of No. 24 in
terms of visual dominance of the proposed extension. The case officer has visited
the rooms in 24 Havelock Walk that would overlook the proposed extended

uilding and on the basis of this site inspection concluded that the increase in bulk
of the building (as originally submitted and refused) in such close proximity to
these rear windows would have a significant and detrimental impact on the
amenities of the residents. A refusal of planning permission was considered
justified on this ground alone. The Appeal Inspector's comments above in Para
2.7 are also relevant.
6.11 The reduction in the width of the proposed mansard extension in the current
application means that this impact on the occupiers of 24 Havelock Walk is
substantially reduced. The applicant's submitted drawing number P0612/207
Rev. C shows the relationship of the windows in the rear wall of 24 Havelock Walk
to the proposed mansard. It is considered that the proposed top floor extension
would not directly block these windows. Although the extension would still be
visible at an angle, this impact is not considered so severe as to warrant a refusal
of permission.
6.12 Objections have also been raised by other Havelock Walk residents, including and
Glasshouse Two in 16 Havelock Walk, regarding impact on their amenities either
by overlooking, loss of view or direct visual impact. The relationship between
these buildings and the current proposal is rather different to that of 24 Havelock
Walk, as they lie further to the south and any windows in their rear elevations
placed directly out over other properties in David's Road, rather than the
application property. Although they may have a view of this building, it would be
oblique and therefore the proposed additional floor would have considerably less
impact on the amenities of these ‘more distant’ Havelock Walk residents.
6.13 22 Havelock Walk - The only other significant change since the 2008 permission
is that 22 Havelock Walk now has planning permission for alterations and change
of use to a live / work unit. As this building does not currently have any extensive
openings in the rear elevation (facing the rear of 15 David's Road), the architect
has designed a rear internal 'light well' to bring light down to illuminate the rear
part of the building. Selected floor plans, rear elevation and section relating to this
application demonstrate this relationship and are available to Members.
6.14 On balance, it is considered that the design for 22 Havelock Walk has been
developed in order to increase light into the rear part of the building, but without
increasing any outlook towards buildings in David's Road. It should also be noted
from the proposed elevations for the scheme that the second floor level is retained
as a solid brick wall without any windows at all. On this basis, whilst the proposal
will have some impact on light received at the rear elevation of 22 Havelock Walk,
this is not such a significant impact as to warrant a refusal of planning permission,
and the schemes are considered mutually compatible.
Preserve / Enhance Forest Hill Conservation Area
6.15 Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
requires the Council, in carrying out its planning functions, to pay special attention
to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a
conservation area. Taking all the above factors into account, it is considered that
proposed scheme would result in an interesting building that would not be visually
obtrusive and would enhance the character of David’s Road and the Forest Hill
Conservation Area.

Standard of Accommodation
6.16 The 5 flats that would be provided are all one-bedroom units. The room sizes
vary between 46 sq. m. for Unit 4 and 50 sq. m. for Unit 5 on the new second
floor, with the three first floor flats measuring 47 sq. m. The London Plan
standards are set out in Table 3.3, at 37 sq. m. for a one-person flat, and 50 sq.
m. for a one-bedroom, two-person unit. Thus four of the flats are slightly below
the recently-adopted London Plan minimum standard and the other unit is exactly
on the minimum space standard. This is not ideal, as all the units layouts are
shown with double beds. Normally, the Council would seek to provide larger
family units as part of a conversion and extension scheme, but given the location
of the building in the town centre and close to Forest Hill Station, together with the
lack of amenity space, it is considered that the proposed one-bedroom units are
satisfactory in this instance.
Highways and Parking
6.17 The Highways & Transportation Officer considers the scheme is unobjectionable
in principle, subject to submission of details (and approval by the Council prior to
the commencement of works on site) illustrating commercial waste / recycling
storage and collection points and submission of details of cycle storage, which
should be dry and secure.
6.18 The site lies within the Forest Hill central area. The parking levels in the vicinity
are probably not much different from those existing at the time of the 1990 appeal
decision in relation to 17 David's Road, in that they are close to 100% on-street
parking both during the day and the evenings. The site is close to Forest Hill
Station and a number of bus routes run along the South Circular Road. In this
context, the Highways & Transportation Officer has not raised any objection to the
lack of any parking provision in the current application.
Sustainability
6.19 The applicant is proposing a ‘living roof’ and ‘living walls’ covering both the
horizontal and vertical elements of the new mansard structure. It would not be
possible to use any of the flat roof space for accessible amenity (because of close
proximity and infringement of privacy to the occupiers of 22 and 24 Havelock
Walk) and the applicant argues that it would have a variety of other potential
advantages, including:-
• helping London to adapt to climate change;
• improving building energy balance and reducing CO 2 emissions;
• reducing urban heat island effect;
• conserving and improving biodiversity;
• improving storm water attenuation;
• improve visual outlook of 24 Havelock Walk.
6.20 This will create a distinctive appearance on the upper floor that will create visual
interest, as well as enhancing the value of the site for wildlife.

6.21 London Plan and Core Strategy Policies advocate the need for sustainable
development. All new development should address climate change and reduce
carbon emissions. For major development proposals there are a number of
London Plan requirements in respect of sustainable design and construction, dedecentralised
and renewable energy. For minor development proposals such as
the current application Policy 8 Sustainable design and construction and energy
efficiency of the Core Strategy (2011) requires all new housing development to
achieve a minimum of Level 4 when assessed using the Code for Sustainable
Homes criteria. The applicant has not made any specific submission in this
respect and a condition is recommended to ensure that the development achieves
Code Level 4.
Noise Transmission from the Gymnasium
6.22 There is also a possible issue with regard to noise generated by the gymnasium
use and whether such noise would adversely affect the amenities of future
residents of the building. With regard to any noise problems, this is a question
that could be dealt with using existing powers that the Council possesses either
under planning or environmental health legislation and this issue therefore has no
specific bearing on the current application.
6.23 With regard to the relationship between the proposed residential use of the upper
floors of the building, Environmental Health officers consider that additional sound
attenuation works would most likely be necessary to protect future residential
occupiers from noise disturbance and a suitable condition is attached to the
recommendation.
Community Infrastructure Levy
6.24 The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a levy which was implemented by the
London Mayor on April 1st 2012.
6.25 This development is considered to be CIL liable. The chargeable development is
£35 per m 2 , which must be paid to the Council prior to the commencement of
building works.
7.0 Conclusion
7.1 This application has been considered in the light of policies set out in the
development plan and other material considerations including policies in the Core
Strategy and retained policies in the UDP.
7.2 It is considered that whilst there are changes to the government guidance in the
National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and the local policy
background in The London Plan and Local Development Framework - Core
Strategy, these do not lead officers to conclude that the scheme should be
refused.
7.3 On balance, officers still consider that the scheme would result in a building that
would not have a significant impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the live /
work units at 22 and 24 Havelock Walk. The design of the proposed extension is
satisfactory and it will enhance the appearance of this building in the Forest Hill
Conservation Area. Renewal of the permission is therefore recommended.

8.0 Summary of Reasons for Grant of Planning Permission
8.1 It is considered that the proposal satisfies the Council’s Land Use and
environmental criteria and is acceptable in principle, being in accordance with,
URB 3 Urban Design, & HSG 8 Backland and In-fill Development in the adopted
Unitary Development Plan (July 2004) and Objective 4: Economic activity and
local businesses, Objective 10: Protect and enhance Lewisham's character, Policy
15: High quality design for Lewisham & Policy 16: Conservation areas, heritage
assets and the historic environment of the Local Development Framework - Core
Strategy (June 2011).
8.2 It is considered that the proposal is appropriate in terms of its form and design
and would not result in material harm to the appearance or character of the
surrounding area, or the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. The proposal is
thereby in accordance with Policies URB 3 Urban Design, URB 16 New
Development, Changes of Use and Alterations to Buildings in Conservation
Areas, HSG 4 Residential Amenity, HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential
Development and HSG 8 Backland and In-fill Development in the adopted Unitary
Development Plan (July 2004) and Objective 10: Protect and enhance
Lewisham's character, Policy 15: High quality design for Lewisham & Policy 16:
Conservation areas, heritage assets and the historic environment of the Local
Development Framework - Core Strategy (June 2011).
9.0 RECOMMENDATION GRANT PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:-
(1) No development shall commence on site until details of all facing materials
(including their colour and texture) to be used on the building have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details,
unless the local planning authority agrees in writing to any variation.
(2) The new windows to be installed in the rear and flank walls of the building
shall be fitted and maintained permanently in obscured glazing.
(3) All new window and door openings shall be provided with reveals, lintel
detailing, arches and cills to match those originally provided on the existing
building.
(4) The development hereby permitted shall include secure parking provision
for cycles, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in
writing by the local planning authority before any works on site are
commenced. Such provision as may be approved as a reserved matter
under this condition, shall be provided before the residential units hereby
permitted are occupied and retained permanently thereafter.
(5) Detailed sections at a scale of not less than 1:20 and a specification of the
living roof and walls, including the form and position of enclosing parapets,
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority
prior to the implementation of the development hereby approved. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details
unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority and
maintained in that manner thereafter. The living roof shall not be used as a

alcony, roof terrace or sitting out area, and any access shall be for
maintenance purposes only.
(6) Full written details, including relevant drawings and specifications of:-
(a)
(b)
The existing construction of the ceilings and walls separating the
gymnasium and the upper floors of the premises and the adjacent
properties; and
The proposed works of soundproofing against airborne and impact
sound shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority. None of the residential units hereby permitted shall
be first occupied until the soundproofing works have been
implemented in accordance with the approved details. The
soundproofing shall be retained permanently with the approved
details.
(7) (i) The building hereby approved shall achieve a Code for Sustainable
Homes Rating Level 4.
(ii)
Prior to commencement of development a Design Stage certificate
(prepared by a qualified assessor) shall be submitted to demonstrate
compliance with (i)
(iii) Within three months of the building being brought into use, evidence
shall be submitted to demonstrate full compliance with the
requirements of this condition, which shall include a Post Construction
Code for Sustainable Homes Certificate (prepared by a qualified
assessor).
(8) Details of the construction, including facing materials, of the proposed
refuse storage facilities shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
local planning authority and the such storage facilities shall be constructed
in accordance with the approved details before any of the residential units
hereby approved are occupied.
(9) Details of a suitable refuse collection point shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority and such collection point
shall be constructed in accordance with the approved drawings before any
of the residential units hereby approved are occupied.
Reasons
(1) To ensure that the local planning authority may be satisfied as to the
external appearance of the building(s) and to comply with Policy 15 High
quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June 2011) and
Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July
2004).
(2) To avoid the direct overlooking of adjoining properties and consequent loss
of privacy thereto and to comply with Policies URB 3 Urban Design and
HSG 5 Layout and Design of New Residential Development in the adopted
Unitary Development Plan (July 2004).

(3) To ensure that the local planning authority may be satisfied as to the
external appearance of the building and to comply with Policy 15 High
quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June 2011) and
Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July
2004).
(4) In order to ensure adequate provision for cycle parking and to comply with
Policy 14 Sustainable movement and transport of the adopted Core
Strategy (June 2011).
(5) To ensure the proper construction of the living roof and walls and so that
their appearance and functioning are satisfactory and to accord with
Policies URB 3 Urban Design and OS 12 Nature Conservation on
Designated Sites in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004) and
the provision of The London Plan.
(6) To safeguard the amenities of the adjoining premises and the area
generally and to comply with Policies ENV.PRO 9 Potentially Polluting
Uses, ENV.PRO 11 Noise Generating Development and HSG 4 Residential
Amenity in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July 2004).
(7) To ensure the development achieves the maximum possible in respect of
energy and carbon emissions and to comply with Policies 5.1 Climate
change mitigation, 5.2 Minimising carbon dioxide emissions, 5.3
Sustainable design and construction, 5.7 Renewable energy, 5.15 Water
use and supplies, 5.16 Waste self-sufficiency of the London Plan (July
2011) and Policy 7 Climate change and adapting to the effects and Policy 8
Sustainable design and construction and energy efficiency of the Core
Strategy (June 2011).
(8) In order that the local planning authority may be satisfied as to the
appearance of the refuse storage facility and to comply with Policy 15 High
quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June 2011) and
Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development Plan (July
2004).
(9) In order that the local planning authority may be satisfied with the
provisions for refuse collection in the scheme and to comply with Policy 15
High quality design for Lewisham of the adopted Core Strategy (June
2011) and Policy URB 3 Urban Design in the adopted Unitary Development
Plan (July 2004).
Informative
(1) The applicant be advised that all construction work should be undertaken in
accordance with the "London Borough of Lewisham Code of Practice for
Control of Pollution and Noise from Demolition and Construction Sites", or
such codes as are applicable at the time the proposed works are carried
out, available from the Environmental Health Office, Wearside Service
Centre, Wearside Road, Lewisham, London SE13 7EZ Tel No. 020 8314
6789.

(2) The applicant be advised that the implementation of the proposal will
require approval by the Council of a Street naming & Numbering
application. Application forms are available on the Council's web site.
(3) Thames Water will aim to provide customers with a minimum pressure of
10m head (approx 1 bar) and a flow rate of 9 litres/minute at the point
where it leaves Thames Waters pipes. The developer should take account
of this minimum pressure in the design of the proposed development.