Planning application · Sutton
DM2022/00639.
3 Taylor Road Wallington SM6 0AY
Full / Other Planning at 3 Taylor Road Wallington SM6 0AY, received 1 Apr 2022 — refused on 1 Aug 2022 (delegated, Ben Rochford).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationSutton profile →
Refused
Outcome
1 Aug 2022
17 wks
Decision time
9 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
16
Documents
16 linked
3
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Sutton planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Erection of a first floor side extension, alterations to fenestrations and conversion of the property into three self-contained residential units with parking.
Reference
DM2022/00639
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SM6 0AY
Ward
Council
Received
1 Apr 2022
Validated
6 Jun 2022
Target date
8 Jul 2022
Decision date
1 Aug 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Application Refused
Council register
Reference
DM2022/00639
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
SM6 0AY
Ward
Council
Received
1 Apr 2022
Validated
6 Jun 2022
Target date
8 Jul 2022
Decision date
1 Aug 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Application Refused
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Sutton portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 1 Aug 2022, delegated decision by Ben Rochford — 17 weeks from submission (9 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
1 Apr 2022
Application received
6 Jun 2022
Application validated
8 Jul 2022
Statutory target date
1 Aug 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Ben Rochford
1 Apr 2022
Application received
6 Jun 2022
Application validated
8 Jul 2022
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
1 Aug 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Ben Rochford
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The application site has a Gross Internal Area of 113 square metres (excluding extensions, garages
and loft space); the proposed extension would have a poor design quality that would detract from the
character and appearance of the area; and the proposed parking layout would adversely affect on-street
parking due new vehicle movements and inadequate highway safety. The proposal is therefore
unacceptable in principle and contrary to policy 10 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018.
2
The proposed development would erode the openness at first floor that currently exists to the north
of the site, significantly increasing the built form at first floor level within the constrained corner location, and
would appear overly prominent, unbalancing the existing semi-pair. In addition, the proliferation of doors to
the front elevation would be out of keeping with the wider streetscene, causing harm to the original dwelling
and wider semi-pair and it is therefore considered that the design of the proposal is unacceptable and
would cause harm to the character of the area and the streetscene contrary to policy D3 of the London Plan
2021 and policy 28 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018.
3
The provision of private amenity space provided to future occupiers is below the expected
standards as set out in the council's 'Urban Design Guide' SPD14 given the gardens inadequate size. The
proposal is therefore contrary to policy D6 of the London Plan 2021, policy 9 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018
and the council's 'Urban Design Guide' SPD14.
4
The level of car parking provided would be an overprovision, and the level of cycle parking would be
an under-provision, failing to encourage the use of public transport and other forms of sustainable
transport. In addition, without evidence to the contrary in the form of plans that show the proposed vehicular
access and existing street furniture, it is considered that the proposal would cause harm in terms of
highway and pedestrian safety. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy T6 of the London Plan 2021
and policies 36 and 37 of the Sutton local Plan 2018.
5
Without evidence to the contrary, the application has failed to provide evidence that the proposal will
provide a satisfactory reduction in carbon emissions and suitable water efficiency measures. As such, the
application would be contrary to Policies SI 2, SI 3, SI 4 and SI 5 of the London Plan 2021 and Policies 31
and 33 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018.
1
The application site has a Gross Internal Area of 113 square metres (excluding extensions, garages
and loft space); the proposed extension would have a poor design quality that would detract from the
character and appearance of the area; and the proposed parking layout would adversely affect on-street
parking due new vehicle movements and inadequate highway safety. The proposal is therefore
unacceptable in principle and contrary to policy 10 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018.
2
The proposed development would erode the openness at first floor that currently exists to the north
of the site, significantly increasing the built form at first floor level within the constrained corner location, and
would appear overly prominent, unbalancing the existing semi-pair. In addition, the proliferation of doors to
the front elevation would be out of keeping with the wider streetscene, causing harm to the original dwelling
and wider semi-pair and it is therefore considered that the design of the proposal is unacceptable and
would cause harm to the character of the area and the streetscene contrary to policy D3 of the London Plan
2021 and policy 28 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018.
3
The provision of private amenity space provided to future occupiers is below the expected
standards as set out in the council's 'Urban Design Guide' SPD14 given the gardens inadequate size. The
proposal is therefore contrary to policy D6 of the London Plan 2021, policy 9 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018
and the council's 'Urban Design Guide' SPD14.
Show all 5 rows
4
The level of car parking provided would be an overprovision, and the level of cycle parking would be
an under-provision, failing to encourage the use of public transport and other forms of sustainable
transport. In addition, without evidence to the contrary in the form of plans that show the proposed vehicular
access and existing street furniture, it is considered that the proposal would cause harm in terms of
highway and pedestrian safety. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy T6 of the London Plan 2021
and policies 36 and 37 of the Sutton local Plan 2018.
5
Without evidence to the contrary, the application has failed to provide evidence that the proposal will
provide a satisfactory reduction in carbon emissions and suitable water efficiency measures. As such, the
application would be contrary to Policies SI 2, SI 3, SI 4 and SI 5 of the London Plan 2021 and Policies 31
and 33 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018.
Policies cited
Sutton Local Plan 10D3Sutton Local Plan 28D6Sutton Local Plan 9T6Sutton local Plan 36Sutton local Plan 37SI2SI3SI4SI5Sutton Local Plan 31Sutton Local Plan 33
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
3
In support
0
Total comments
3
Objections
3
In support
0
Total comments
3
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.