Click here to see map for location of 35 College Road Epsom
26/00141/FLH Single storey side and rear extension following demolition of existing rear conservatory incorporating alterations to fenestration and internal layout. Rear garden outbuilding following demolition of existing shed.
This application is to use a relatively small part of the important Green Belt land separating Epsom from Ashtead. The ECS Committee discussed the proposal, which of itself is desirable, contributing much-needed affordable housing, but may be part of an aspiration eventually to develop the whole plot owned by the Applicant. The current proposal, if implemented, risks rendering the remainder of the plot “Grey Belt” and thus vulnerable to future development. Accordingly, the Society has adopted a neutral stance and commented on the EEBC Planning website as below:-
This comment is on behalf of Epsom Civic Society (ECS).
The location is in a CA with PD rights removed.
Whilst the proposals may have a minimal effect on the street scene viewed from the highway, the effect on the immediate adjoining neighbours’ outlook is not inconsiderable and has merited ECS commenting as:-
1. The proposals are too bulky and over powering.
2. The depth is excessive presenting a narrow gutted effect.
3. The side brickwork walls are too high presenting at least 4m high walls which is far in excess of that expected of a single storey building to be built on or close to the plot boundaries.
4. This excessive height is brought about by falling exterior ground level front to rear and, seemingly, the desire to maintain a level internal floor front to rear whereas the existing plans show two steps down in the existing floors coupled with a shorter current internal distance of the existing compared to that proposed.
5. The bulk and mass is rather featureless given its CA setting and lacks architectural detailing that could be applied to quoins, brick arch heads, window reveals, cills, etc.
6. The parapet design further adds at least 500mm to the side wall heights – that could be avoided by a design where the side roof eaves to the flat roof have either a rainwater gutter or check kerb with a fall to the rear.
In view of the above refusal is requested to this application.
Posted: 10 April 2026 by ecs
35 College Road Epsom KT17 4HQ
Click here to see map for location of 35 College Road Epsom
26/00141/FLH Single storey side and rear extension following demolition of existing rear conservatory incorporating alterations to fenestration and internal layout. Rear garden outbuilding following demolition of existing shed.
This application is to use a relatively small part of the important Green Belt land separating Epsom from Ashtead. The ECS Committee discussed the proposal, which of itself is desirable, contributing much-needed affordable housing, but may be part of an aspiration eventually to develop the whole plot owned by the Applicant. The current proposal, if implemented, risks rendering the remainder of the plot “Grey Belt” and thus vulnerable to future development. Accordingly, the Society has adopted a neutral stance and commented on the EEBC Planning website as below:-
This comment is on behalf of Epsom Civic Society (ECS).
The location is in a CA with PD rights removed.
Whilst the proposals may have a minimal effect on the street scene viewed from the highway, the effect on the immediate adjoining neighbours’ outlook is not inconsiderable and has merited ECS commenting as:-
1. The proposals are too bulky and over powering.
2. The depth is excessive presenting a narrow gutted effect.
3. The side brickwork walls are too high presenting at least 4m high walls which is far in excess of that expected of a single storey building to be built on or close to the plot boundaries.
4. This excessive height is brought about by falling exterior ground level front to rear and, seemingly, the desire to maintain a level internal floor front to rear whereas the existing plans show two steps down in the existing floors coupled with a shorter current internal distance of the existing compared to that proposed.
5. The bulk and mass is rather featureless given its CA setting and lacks architectural detailing that could be applied to quoins, brick arch heads, window reveals, cills, etc.
6. The parapet design further adds at least 500mm to the side wall heights – that could be avoided by a design where the side roof eaves to the flat roof have either a rainwater gutter or check kerb with a fall to the rear.
In view of the above refusal is requested to this application.
Category: Planning, Planning Applications
Recent Posts
Categories