by Ruth, Marlene, and Steve on 2 February, 2017
Sutton Council has received six separate planning applications for 42 Blenheim Road over the last two years, to develop blocks of flats, a detached house or a semi detached house. All have been refused by the Council because of the impact on this narrow road of cottage-style houses.
However all developers have the right of appeal (which residents do not have), and the Government’s Planning Inspectorate has allowed an appeal for one of these applications. As a result they have granted planning permission for the demolition of the existing semi-detached house, and the erection of a two storey 4 bedroomed semi-detached house with two bedrooms in the roof, car parking, cycle and refuse stores and a new vehicular access onto Blenheim Road. This appeal relates to application, Ref B2016/74088/FUL, and the plans can be seen on the Council web site here.
Sutton Council had turned down this application in June, by reason of its poor design and scale. They said it would ‘fail to appear subordinate to the host building, resulting in an incongruous and unsympathetic form of development which would be out of keeping with the host property and the prevailing character of Blenheim Road.’
The Planning Inspectorate took a different view. ‘As other Inspectors have noted, despite some variations in facing materials, the street retains a broadly homogenous character with much of the original architecture and repeated features particularly to the front facades retained.
‘However, despite its many qualities, I do not find anything inherently sensitive or remarkable about the streetscape that would preclude small alterations and additions to dwellings. Blenheim Road is not subject to any special designation and as I saw on my site visit, its distinctiveness has been compromised to a degree by the loss of front gardens to parking areas, the erection of detached garages and rear dormer extensions some of which are visible from the road.’
The Council had asked that if the Inspector allowed the appeal, that a condition preventing multiple occupation should be made. This has been refused.
A copy of the Inspector’s letter is here.Leave a comment