Stop Overdevelopment at 3-7 Uxbridge Road, Hanwell W7 3PX

Planning application reference P/2014/4792.

Summary of grounds for objection:
• the three-storey building fronting onto Shirley Gardens constitutes overdevelopment (existing building is one-storey)
• there remain issues of loss of sunlight and daylight for residents in 3 and 5 Shirley Gardens which back onto the new building; the amenity space for new occupants in 3-7 Uxbridge Road would receive little sunlight except at the very start and end of the day, as all new terraces and balconies face north. The Uxbridge Road building would also overshadow the site’s communal amenity space
• there remain serious issues with respect to overlooking and privacy of existing residents in Shirley Court, 1-4 The Cottages, Shirley Gardens and the residences that back onto the site on the south side of Shirley Gardens (3, 5, 7, 9)
• the minimal provision of car parking spaces would lead to an exacerbation of the current parking difficulties in Shirley Gardens
• some issues remain in relation to the unsympathetic design in terms of appearance and materials;
• these houses are being changed into one and two bedroom flats when Ealing’s (and Hanwell’s) overwhelming housing need is for large family houses
• there would be inadequate amenity space for the development, and it would be especially lacking in safe play space for small children, given that four of the flats are two bedroomed and hence would be deemed family housing
• no details are provided of proposed landscaping

Background
This site comprises the end three properties of an Edwardian terrace. The properties had been used for several decades as a Funeral Director’s business, with some residential space above the business.

An application to demolish these properties and build 11 flats in a development of a considerably bigger footprint, in a flat-roofed, contemporary style, unsympathetic to the adjoining Edwardian terrace, was turned down in March 2011.

A further application to build new flats, with a frontage onto the Uxbridge Road similar in design to the Edwardian terrace, was made in November 2013, and amendments were made to these designs at the request of Planning Officers. Further comments were made in the public consultation process. Based on feedback from Planning Officers and comments made in consultation, revised drawings are now in consultation.

The revised proposal is, following demolition of the existing buildings, to develop a three-storey building fronting the Uxbridge Road containing 4 x two-bedroom flats (ground and first floors) and 2 x one-bedroom flats (attic space). And to build a separate three-storey building, fronting onto Shirley Gardens on the site of the existing single-storey garage/workshop, to house 4 x one-bedroom flats (two on the ground floor, and two split-level flats occupying the first and attic floors).

This totals ten units which would be sold on the open market. On the site would also be refuse storage accessed from Shirley Gardens, cycle storage for 10 x bicycles behind the communal garden, and parking for six cars (including one disabled space and one for Car Club) at the front of 3, 5 and 7 Uxbridge Road, accessed from Shirley Gardens.

Comments
Whilst we welcome the proposed, reduced footprint of both buildings, and the style of the front building which would reflect the character of the Edwardian terrace to which it would adjoin, we have serious concerns about the detail of the front building, and the mass and impact of the new building on Shirley Gardens as the latter would be replacing the existing single-storey building with a three-storey block.

We believe that this is overdevelopment of the site of three Edwardian terraced houses which had, until recently, full width, lawned space to the front, and some garden space to the rear of no 3 Uxbridge Road (used as a Rest Garden).

Shirley Gardens Frontage
• We are concerned that the Notification of a Planning Application states that this building would be two-storey, when in fact the plans show it to be four flats built over three storeys (ground floor, first floor and attic space). This increases the build by two storeys over the current single-storey garage/workshop
• We believe that this constitutes over-development of this sub-site; as the footprint considerably exceeds the footprint of the existing garage/workshop and also exceeds the height of the existing building by two storeys
• We are concerned that the external design of this building would be inelegant with the flat, green roof over the bedrooms at the rear of the ground floor flats; it looks as if it would be designed as having an ‘afterthought single-storey extension’, rather than being of a coherent design from the outset
• In order to put the bedrooms for the upper flats into the attic space, the designs show a ‘crown roof’. This is out of character with the Edwardian terrace and with the Edwardian family houses in Shirley Gardens
• The distance between habitable rooms between the windows of the flats on the right hand side (looking at the front) of the new build, and no 4, The Cottages, Shirley Gardens is only 18M. This would have breached the minimum distance in the previous UDP. We believe that this would have a detrimental impact on the privacy of both current neighbours in Shirley Gardens and future occupants of the flats
• The Daylight and Sunlight Impact Report makes no reference to the overshadowing of the communal amenity space serving the development. We believe that the communal space would receive minimal sunshine on sunny days, as it would be overshadowed for the majority of the day by 3, 5 and 7, which would severely reduce its amenity value. This is in breach of the relevant daylight and sunlight test which is that at least half a garden should receive 2 hours of sunlight on a sunny 21st March (Building Research Establishment 2011)
• The Daylight and Sunlight Impact Report makes no reference to the fact that the private amenity space at the rear of 3, 5 and 7 for the two ground floor flats and the two second floor flats, faces north and so would receive very little sunshine except, perhaps, at the very start or the very end of the day when the sun is at its coolest

3, 5 and 7 Uxbridge Road
• We welcome the reduced footprint to the rear of 3, 5 and 7
• We welcome the sympathy of the façade with the adjoining Edwardian terrace
• We welcome the use of timber-framed windows throughout the development
• We welcome the appropriately pitched roof adjoining the terrace

However:
• It is proposed that the character of the chimney pots at the apex of the gable end and on the roofline between 5 and 7, would be lost, and this would be to the detriment of the roof scape.
• The proposed Cambrian 60% roofing ‘slates’ would be acceptable, but there is no indication that the existing, original terracotta ridge tiles would be retained, or replaced like-for-like, in sympathy with the original Edwardian terrace roof-line. Some of the other properties in the terrace have retained original roofing materials
• The gable-fronted dormers to 3, 5 and 7 are proposed to have windows put into them which would not harmonise with the original adjoining Edwardian terrace
• It is not clear from the plans if the occupants of the top flats of 3, 5 and 7 could overlook, from their balconies/roof terrace, residents in Shirley Court, 1-4 The Cottages, and in the south facing houses of Shirley Gardens, and also the communal amenity space of the development
• We believe that the flanking wall of 3, 5 and 7 (currently pebble-dashed in the existing building), should be aged-London stock (not new red brick), perhaps with red brick detailing, to blend with the new build in Shirley Gardens and older established properties in Shirley Gardens such as the Edwardian terraces, The Dairy and 1-4 The Cottages; we also believe that the proposed wooden fence, replacing a pebble-dashed brick wall, would be of less visual amenity value for inhabitants of Shirley Court and 1-4 The Cottages, than would be a wall built of aged-London stock
• Given that four of the flats in this building are two-bedroomed, and therefore would be anticipated to accommodate families, there is no safe play area for under-fives and it is a considerable distance to the nearest park (Bunny Park or Dean Gardens) for older children. If the developer were to restore the existing buildings to family houses, then there would be gardens at the rear where children could play safely

Overall
• Only six car parking spaces would be provided (including a disabled space and a Car Club space) which we believe is, regardless of the relatively high Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL of 4 out of 6), inadequate for a development of 10 flats potentially accommodating 28 people on a major road where parking is prohibited;
• There are already parking issues in Shirley Gardens and we believe that this development would exacerbate them;
• Residents have indicated that they do not want a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ);
• The residents in nos 7 and 8 Shirley Court would be disturbed regularly by the headlights of cars parking after dark in the spaces facing Shirley Court, and when manoeuvring during hours of darkness.