Planning application · Sutton
DM2023/01784.
26 The Manor Way Wallington SM6 7PJ
Householder at 26 The Manor Way Wallington SM6 7PJ, received 27 Nov 2023 — refused on 11 Jan 2024 (delegated, Ben Rochford).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationSutton profile →
Refused
Outcome
11 Jan 2024
6 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
12
Documents
12 linked
1
Objections
0 in support
Yes
Appeal
Appeal Dismissed
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 single storey side and rear extension.
Reference
DM2023/01784
Type
Householder Application
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
27 Nov 2023
Target date
20 Dec 2023
Decision date
11 Jan 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Application Refused
Premises record
Council register
Reference
DM2023/01784
Type
Householder Application
Show all 16 rows
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
27 Nov 2023
Target date
20 Dec 2023
Decision date
11 Jan 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Application Refused
Premises record
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 11 Jan 2024, delegated decision by Ben Rochford — 6 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
27 Nov 2023
Application received
20 Dec 2023
Statutory target date
11 Jan 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Ben Rochford
Appeal
Appeal Dismissed · Appeal Dismissed
27 Nov 2023
Application received
20 Dec 2023
Statutory target date
11 Jan 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Ben Rochford
Show all 4 rows
Appeal
Appeal Dismissed · Appeal Dismissed
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, due to its excessive size, depth and width, would fail to appear
subordinate to the main dwelling, but rather would appear as an excessive and overly prominent addition
that would represent an overdevelopment within the rear setting. As such, it is considered that the design of
the proposal is unacceptable and would cause harm to the character of the area contrary to policy 28 of the
Sutton Local Plan 2018 and 'Design of Residential Extensions' SPD4.
2
Given the excessive depth of the extension within close proximity of 24 The Manor Way, it is
considered that the proposal would result in an adverse impact on No.24 in terms of loss of outlook, and
without evidence to the contrary (given the application site is due south of No.24), a loss of light. The
proposal is therefore contrary to policy 29 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018 and 'Design of Residential
Extensions' SPD4.
1
The proposed development, due to its excessive size, depth and width, would fail to appear
subordinate to the main dwelling, but rather would appear as an excessive and overly prominent addition
that would represent an overdevelopment within the rear setting. As such, it is considered that the design of
the proposal is unacceptable and would cause harm to the character of the area contrary to policy 28 of the
Sutton Local Plan 2018 and 'Design of Residential Extensions' SPD4.
2
Given the excessive depth of the extension within close proximity of 24 The Manor Way, it is
considered that the proposal would result in an adverse impact on No.24 in terms of loss of outlook, and
without evidence to the contrary (given the application site is due south of No.24), a loss of light. The
proposal is therefore contrary to policy 29 of the Sutton Local Plan 2018 and 'Design of Residential
Extensions' SPD4.
Policies cited
Sutton Local Plan 28Sutton Local Plan 29
Appeal
Appeal
Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
Outcome: Appeal Dismissed
Appeal Dismissed
Outcome: Appeal Dismissed
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
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.