Rear extension at 92 Grosvenor Drive, Hornchurch

“The Committee considered an application for planning permission for the erection of a part single-storey, part two-storey rear extension.”

“The report detailed that planning consent is sought for a part single, part two storey rear extension. The ground floor element of the extension has a staggered depth. On the boundary with the attached neighbour it is 4.6m in depth; on the boundary with the unattached neighbour it extends to a depth of 3.1m, before chamfering away from the boundary to an overall depth of 6m.”

“Members were shown an aerial photograph of the application site and the surrounding area, which was characterised by a mix of single-storey and two-storey dwellings of varying styles and designs. The aerial image identified the application property and the location of a first-floor rear extension at No. Windsor Road. Photographs were also presented showing the side elevation of No. Grosvenor Drive and the area surrounding the proposed extension.”

“Further photographs were provided from the first-floor level of No. Grosvenor Drive, the adjoining neighbour, illustrating views towards the application site. Additional images showed views from the neighbouring first-floor window overlooking the application property, together with photographs taken from the living room and patio area of No. 90, looking towards the site.”

“The Officer presented the proposed floor plans for the ground-floor and first- floor rear extensions. It was explained that the proposed extensions complied with the relevant planning policies and guidance. Referring to the ground-floor plan, the Officer advised that while policy guidance for semi- detached properties generally permitted a rear extension of up to four metres in depth, the proposed extension would extend to 4.6 metres.”

“In relation to the first-floor rear extension, Members were advised that the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) required such extensions to be set in a minimum of two metres from either boundary and to project no more than three metres beyond the rear wall of the dwelling. The proposed extension would be set approximately 2.45 metres from the boundary with No. 90, thereby exceeding the minimum requirement.”

“The Officer concluded that, subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal would not result in an unacceptable impact on the character of the surrounding area or on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Appropriate safeguarding conditions were proposed to protect adjoining residents.”

“Following discussion and consideration the Committee Resolved to Grant planning permission subject to conditions in the report.”

“The Committee voted unanimously in favour of officer recommendation.”