Three-storey rear extension at 13 Harvey Road, Guildford

What was proposed

The application sought a three-storey rear extension, Juliet balconies, fenestration and material changes, and solar panels.

“Location: Harvey Road, Guildford, GU1 3SG Proposal: Three storey rear extension, addition of juliet balconies to first and second floor rear elevations, together with other changes to fenestration, changes to external material finishes and the installation of solar panels (description amended 29/07/2026).”

Officer report

The site

The site contains a detached split-level three-storey dwelling forming one half of a pair of uniform homes.

“The application site is situated on the north-western side of Harvey Road and comprises a detached split-level three storey dwellinghouse. The dwelling is accessed from the third floor from Harvey Road. The property is finished in red brick and grey tile hanging and features a staggered asymmetric roof arrangement, comprising two mono-pitched projections. At the rear, the property…”

“No. Harvey Road comprises one half of a detached pair of uniform dwellings with no. 13A Harvey Road.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

An earlier three-storey extension was refused, while permission was later granted for a single-storey extension and related changes.

“25/P/01627 Erection of a three storey rear extension, construction of an enclosed balcony on the first floor and open balcony on the second floor with changes to fenestration and Juliet balconies to first and second floor rear façade, single roof-light, and photovoltaic panels to existing side-facing plane of roof following removal of existing external spiral staircase Refuse 05/02/2026 N/A”

“Planning permission was subsequently granted under 26/P/00231 for the erection of a single storey rear extension, the insertion of juliet balconies on the rear elevation, the installation of solar panels and a rooflight, and the application of vertical composite cladding to the second floor. The current application proposes a three storey rear extension in place of the approved single storey extension and the same changes to fenestration, materials and solar panels.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the revised proposal would not materially harm the building, heritage assets, neighbours, parking or sustainability.

“The proposed development would not result in material harm to the character of the existing building or the surrounding area, heritage assets, or the neighbouring amenity. No parking concerns result and proportionate sustainability measures have been incorporated.”

“It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with policies within the GBC local plan, NPPF and is recommended that the application is approved subject to conditions.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two people spoke against the application and one person spoke in support.

What members discussed

Members discussed the reduced scale, greater boundary separation, privacy screen, 45-degree guideline and effects on neighbouring windows and the sun terrace.

“During the debate, Members sought clarification on the differences between the current proposal and a previously refused application for a three-storey extension. Officers explained that the previous proposal had extended further towards the shared boundary and was greater in depth at first and second floor levels.”

“Members discussed the proposed 1.8 metre privacy screen to the first-floor balcony and its potential impact on the neighbouring property. Officers advised that privacy screening was necessary to prevent overlooking between the adjoining balconies and that the proposed screen would be lower than the maximum height of the existing screen.”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to approve was carried unanimously, with nine votes in favour and none against or abstaining.

“FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN 1. Councillor David Bilbe X 2. Councillor Joss Bigmore X 3. Councillor Masuk Miah X 4. Councillor Yves de Contades X 5. Councillor Catherine Houston X 6. Councillor Maddy Redpath X 7. Councillor Dominique Williams X 8. Councillor Joanne Shaw X 9. Councillor George Potter X TOTALS 9 0 0”

“The Chair moved the motion to approve application 26/P/00675, subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the Officer’s report. The motion was seconded by Councillor Bigmore and was carried.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application subject to the conditions and reasons set out by officers.

“RESOLVED: That application 26/P/00675 be APPROVED, subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the Officer’s report.”

Minutes