Croydon Council approves householder extensions despite neighbour objections at Albatross Gardens
Croydon Council's Planning Sub-Committee has granted permission for householder extensions and conversions at 33 Albatross Gardens, South Croydon, despite 17 neighbour objections.
The committee approved plans for a single-storey rear extension, a single-storey front extension, and the conversion of an existing garage into habitable accommodation. The decision was made despite concerns raised by neighbours regarding the scale and bulk of the development, its impact on residential amenity, and drainage.
At 33 Albatross Gardens, the approved plans include a single-storey rear extension projecting 3.5 metres and a single-storey front extension. The conversion of the garage into habitable accommodation was also approved. The committee noted that the rear extension would retain over 7 metres of garden length and that the front extension would project less than 1.6 metres.
The council's decision was based on an officer's report which concluded that the proposed extensions were modest and would not have a significant detrimental impact on the character of the area or neighbouring amenities. This conclusion was reached after considering the scale and bulk of the development, its impact on neighbouring residential amenity, and drainage and surface water management. The report noted that the proposed front extension would not be significantly out of keeping with the existing street scene. Regarding neighbouring amenity, the report detailed that the extension would not cause significant loss of sunlight or daylight to neighbouring properties, nor would it result in undue overlooking or a sense of enclosure. The front extension was also assessed as not having a significant impact on neighbouring amenity due to its projection, height, and roof design. The report also addressed concerns about noise and disturbance, stating that as the building is already used as a single dwelling, no objection is raised regarding noise and disturbance from occupation. The proposed fenestration of the rear extension would be rear-facing and at the same floor level as the existing dwelling, and it was not considered to result in further unacceptable overlooking or loss of privacy. The report also stated that the proposed fire strategy was acceptable and that the development would not be liable for Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
Drainage and Flood Risk Concerns Addressed
Neighbours had raised concerns regarding increased flood risk, stating that little consideration of sustainable drainage systems being proposed despite the risk of/historic flooding.
The council's assessment noted that the site is located in Flood Zone 1 but is at a 'high' risk of surface water flooding and within an area of Critical Drainage. The submitted Flood Risk Assessment indicated that the proposed rear extension would have a finished floor level matching the existing dwelling and be a minimum of 150 mm above the adjoining rear garden level. The garage floor would be raised to match the dwelling's finished floor level.
Linear drainage channels would be constructed around the perimeter of the extension to intercept runoff, discharging to a new soakaway, subject to ground infiltration suitability. The soakaway would be positioned at least 5m from the rear elevation and 2.5m from the neighbouring boundary. External thresholds and surrounding surfaces would direct water towards the perimeter drainage system and away from internal accommodation. The existing house has a concrete ground-bearing floor, and the proposed works would follow the same arrangement, avoiding vulnerable subfloor ventilation openings. The drainage design would retain surface water within the site and not direct it onto neighbouring land or the public highway. Additionally, a water butt could be added for rainwater harvesting. The council considered these measures acceptable and proportionate to ensure no significant increase in on-site or off-site surface water, conforming to relevant policies.
Extension Projections and Permitted Development
While the meeting information does not explicitly state general guidelines or policies regarding the maximum permissible projection for single-storey rear and front extensions, in this specific case, the rear extension was reduced from an initial submission of 4 metres to 3.5 metres. The report also mentions that there is nothing to prevent a 3m deep extension and patio area being constructed under permitted development rights.
For the front extension, the report states it would project less than 1.6 metres frontwards and would have a width of less than 5 metres with a front facing sloping roof.
Further details of the planning application and the council's report can be found in the Public reports pack.