31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 30 April 2021 by C Rafferty LLB (Hons), Solicitor Decision by L McKay MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 10 August 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/A5270/W/20/3265987 31B Hamilton Road, Ealing W5 2EE • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Harbans Singh against the decision of Ealing Council. • The application Ref 201600FUL, dated 21 April 2020, was refused by notice dated 2 December 2020. • The development proposed is the conversion of 31B into five self contained apartments. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Appeal Procedure 2. The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. Preliminary Matters 3. The Council’s decision refers to policies of the London Plan (2016) and of the draft London Plan. The London Plan (2021) has now been adopted. As appeals must be determined in accordance with the policies in force at the time the decision is made, the policies of the London Plan (2021) have been used in this recommendation.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Parties were given the opportunity to comment on the updated position and these comments have been considered, where received. 4. The Government published on 20 July 2021 a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework. Accordingly, and in light of the reference made to the previous iteration of the Framework within the submitted evidence, the parties have been provided with a further opportunity to make submissions in respect of the publication. Any comments which have been received have been considered. Main Issue 5. The main issues are: (i) whether the proposed development would provide acceptable living conditions for future occupiers, with particular regard to floorspace, storage provision, outside space and privacy; https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A5270/W/20/3265987 (ii) the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the residents of 33 Hamilton Road, with particular regard to noise disturbance; and (iii) the effect of the proposed refuse storage arrangements on the character and appearance of the appeal site and surrounding area. Reasons for the Recommendation Living Conditions – Appeal site 6. The site comprises part of a detached property that has been split into six residential units without planning permission, which are subject to enforcement action. The lawful use of the site is unclear but may have been as a 5-bedroom maisonette. The surrounding area is residential in nature, made up primarily of large, detached, traditional style properties. The proposal would result in a two storey maisonette using the ground and part of the first floor, and five self-contained apartments at first and second floor levels. 7. Policy D6 and Table 3.1 of the London Plan 2021 set out the minimum internal space standards for new dwellings and reflect the requirements in previous versions of the Plan, to which Policy the Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document (2013) (the DPD) refers. 8.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision The parties disagree as to whether the floorspace would meet the required standards, however other than in respect of Flat 1, which I return to below, the Council’s calculations are very similar to the floor areas stated on the submitted plans. 9. Based on the figures given, Flats 3 and 5 would meet the minimum floorspace requirement. However, Flats 2 and 4 would be significantly below the 50sqm requirement for a 1 bed, 2-person dwelling, indicative of the apartments being unduly small and resulting in cramped units. A one bed, one person flat with shower room should have a minimum gross internal floor area of 37sqm. The main parties disagree on the floorspace of this flat, with the figures given ranging from 36.58sqm to 38sqm. It may therefore be marginally below the minimum standard; however the layout would allow for furniture and a separate functional kitchen space, and as such any slight under-provision would not warrant refusal on this matter alone. 10. All of the proposed bedrooms would meet the minimum size requirements. However, the plans do not show how the required areas of built-in storage would be provided in any of the proposed flats.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Given the small size of the units there would be limited space to accommodate additional, free standing storage to make up for this. 11. A communal garden would be provided to the rear of the units. However, this would provide clear views into the rear ground floor windows serving the main living areas of the maisonette. This would significantly impact on the privacy of the occupants, affecting their enjoyment of these rooms to an unacceptable degree. As such, the proposal would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of the maisonette. No provisions for sub-division of the garden or screening have been put forward and as such I cannot be certain that this harm could be satisfactorily overcome. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A5270/W/20/3265987 12. The terrace proposed for Flat 1 would look into the front facing windows of Flat 2, creating an unacceptable sense of reduced privacy even when the terrace is not in use. While the appellant has suggested an obscure screen could be secured by condition, this has the potential to have other amenity impacts on the residents of Flat 2, and to result in visual harm. In the absence of full details of the impacts of such a proposal, it would not be reasonable to require this by means of a planning condition. 13. The proposal would also fail to provide the minimum requirements for private outside space required by the London Plan. While the flats would have access to a communal garden it would offer very little privacy, being overlooked by the maisonette. The terrace for Flat 1 would also be visible from the road and from Flat 2 and as such would not provide private space. Provision of private outside space is important for the well-being of all residents, not only those in family units, and the development plan makes no distinction for single bedroom units.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision The provision of communal space and nearby public open space would not serve the day to day needs for private space of the occupiers, and therefore would not be suitable alternative provision. 14. For the reasons given above, the proposal would not provide satisfactory living conditions for the future occupiers of the proposed flats in respect of floorspace, storage provision and outside space, or for the occupiers of the maisonette and Flat 2 in respect of privacy. It would therefore be contrary to DPD Policies 3.5 and 7D; Policies D3 and D6 of the London Plan (2021); the London Housing Design Guide Interim Edition and the Greater London Authority Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (2012), which together seek to ensure adequate living conditions for future occupiers and deliver appropriate privacy and amenity. Furthermore, it would conflict with the Framework requirement to provide a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. Living Conditions – No. 33 15. The proposed flats would be accessed by an entrance on the eastern elevation of the property, via a pathway providing access to the rear gardens and cycle storage.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision The number of units proposed, and the number of likely occupants could lead to increased movements to and from the side of the building and rear space compared to the lawful use of the site. However, some such noise is to be expected in a residential area and the number of likely users would not be significantly greater than those that could be accommodated by a large, detached dwelling in its former arrangement of two sizeable maisonettes. While the side entrance to access the building would be closer to the boundary with No. 33 than the main front door, this is an existing door which will likely have been used for some time by the occupants of the upper floor when in its lawful use. Therefore, it has not been demonstrated that the proposal would result in unacceptable impacts on the noise and disturbance experienced by the residents of No. 33. 16. For the reasons given above, the proposal would not have a materially harmful impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of No. 33 Hamilton Road in respect of noise disturbance. It would not therefore conflict with DPD Policies 7A and 7B or London Plan Policy D3 insofar as they seek to ensure adequate living conditions for neighbouring occupiers.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Nor would it conflict with Framework policies on noise. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Nor would it conflict with Framework policies on noise. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A5270/W/20/3265987 Refuse storage 17. The submitted plans show an uncovered storage area for large refuse and recycling bins at the front of the property, to serve the proposed flats. While the presence of bins is not unusual in a residential area, the number and size proposed in this prominent location close to the road would appear out of place, causing clutter in the otherwise attractive surrounds in a manner that more traditional household bins would not. As such, the refuse storage arrangements would detract from the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area. 18. Accordingly, the proposal would conflict with DPD policies 7.4 and 7C, London Plan Policy D3 and the Framework, which together seek to achieve good design. 19. While the appellant would accept a condition for a bin store to be erected from matching brickwork in this location, limited details have been provided of its appearance. As such, I am unable to assess the impacts that such a development could have on the character and appearance of the area. Therefore, it would not be reasonable to deal with this by condition. Other Matters 20.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — Appeal Decision The proposal would contribute to housing provision, which is supported by local and national policies which seek to boost the supply of housing. However, the development plan and Framework also emphasise the importance of good design, therefore additional housing should not be provided at the expense of the quality of the accommodation and the living conditions of the occupants. Therefore, I afford this benefit limited weight and it does not outweigh the harm identified above Conclusion and Recommendation 21. There are no material considerations that indicate the appeal should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan. For the reasons given above, I therefore recommend that the appeal is dismissed.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — C Rafferty APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER Inspector’s Decision 22. I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report, and, on that basis, I agree that the appeal should be dismissed.

31B Hamilton Road, Ealing, LONDON, W5 2EE — London Borough of Ealing — L McKay INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4