House extensions and basement at 5 Woodlands, London NW11

What was proposed

The application sought part-retrospective side and rear extensions, lowered decking, fencing, a porch, a front dormer and a basement with a lightwell.

“The planning application seeks permission for a 'Part retrospective: Part single, part two storey side and rear extension with lowered rear decking area with associated fencing. Erection of a porch and a front dormer. Formation of basement level with associated lightwell.”

Officer report

The site

The site is a two-storey semi-detached property outside a conservation area, and the host building is not listed.

“The application site is a two storey semi-detached property on the western side of Woodlands.”

“The site is not located within a Conservation Area and the host property is not a Listed Building.”

Officer report

Earlier decisions and enforcement

Earlier permissions were followed by a refusal and an enforcement notice concerning deviations from the approved development.

“Reference: 21/0780/HSE Address: 5 Woodlands, London, NW11 9QJ Decision: Approved subject to conditions Decision Date: 4 May 2021 Description: Part single, part two storey side and rear extension with new raised decking area and associated fencing. Roof extension including rear dormers and side rooflights. Formation of basement with rear lightwell. [AMENDED DESCRIPTION] Enforcement History:”

“Reference: ENF/0973/25 Address: 5 Woodlands, London, NW11 9QJ Decision: Notice Issued: Required to alter development to fully accord with the plans approved under ref 23/2158/HSE. Decision Date: 10 March 2026 Breach: Without planning permission, the erection of side and rear extensions other than in accordance with the planning permission reference 23/2158/HSE. Deviations include deeper two-storey rear extension and large basement extension with repositioned lightwell.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the revised scheme was considered acceptable in its effects on the property, street scene, locality and neighbouring amenities.

“Taking all of the above together as a whole, the revised scheme is considered to have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the host property, street scene and locality.”

“Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that the proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the application site, the street scene and the locality. The development is not considered to have an adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. This application is therefore recommended for APPROVAL.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The main issues were the effects on the character and appearance of the building and area, and the living conditions of neighbouring residents.

“The main issues for consideration in this case are: - Whether harm would be caused to the character and appearance of the existing building, the street scene and the wider locality; - Whether harm would be caused to the living conditions of neighbouring residents.”

Officer report

What people said

Objectors raised concerns about overdevelopment, neighbours’ amenity, basement works, enforcement and structural impacts; supporters considered the changes acceptable.

“Objections: - The development significantly exceeds the scale, height, and massing of the originally approved plans, resulting in overdevelopment and a visually dominant, out-of-character addition to the street. - The proposal causes unacceptable harm to neighbouring amenity, including loss of light, overshadowing, loss of privacy, and an overbearing sense of enclosure for adjoining properties.”

“- There are reports of physical damage and structural movement to neighbouring properties attributed to the works already undertaken. - The raised decking and lightwells result in direct overlooking and further loss of privacy.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer presented the report, while the applicant spoke in support and an objector spoke against the application.

Committee questions

The committee had the opportunity to ask questions of the speakers and officers.

“The Committee then had the opportunity to ask questions of the speakers and officers.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application subject to conditions and delegated authority for minor changes to the recommended conditions or reasons.

“RESOLVED the application be APPROVED subject to conditions AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Service Director – Planning and Building Control to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the Vice-Chair) of the Committee (who may request that such…”

Minutes