Single-storey front and rear extensions at 9 Greenway, Aldridge, Walsall

What was proposed

The application sought full planning permission for single-storey extensions at the front and rear of the house.

“26/0275 Site location: 9, GREENWAY, ALDRIDGE, WALSALL, WS9 8XE Application proposal: Full planning application for single storey front and rear extensions Application type: Full Application: Householder Link to application documents:https://go.walsall.gov.uk/planningapps?id=26/0275 Applicant: H Nahal 9 Greenway, Aldridge, Walsall, WS9 8XE Planning agent: Jacob Sedgemore, STONELEIGH ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES, MAPLE HOUSE, KINGSWOOD BUSINESS PARK, HOLYHEAD ROAD, ALBRIGHTON, WV7…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The house is among modern detached homes facing a footpath, with rear garages and several nearby front or rear extensions.

“Recommendation Planning Committee resolve to Delegate to the Head of Planning & Building Control to Grant Planning Permission Subject to Conditions Site and surroundings A site visit was carried out on 02-04-26. The application house is a line of modern detached houses which face each other across a footpath at the front. There is no vehicular access to the front of the houses and they all have detached garages at the rear. The houses are of a variety of designs.”

“Land to the north is Green Belt land however this is approximately 60 metres from the application site.”

Officer report

Planning history

There was no recorded planning, pre-application or enforcement history for the site.

“Planning history Planning applications • No history Pre-application advice • No history Enforcement investigations • No history…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The ecology officer raised no objection, while two objections cited the 45-degree rule, loss of kitchen light and loss of a front-window view.

“Consultee comments (planning officer’s summary) Ecology Officer No objection to this application on ecological grounds…”

“Neighbour and interested parties’ comments (planning officer’s summary) Objection(s) 2 comments received objecting to proposal support for the following reasons: • Extensions breaches 45-degree code • Loss of light into kitchen window • Loss of view from front bay window…”

Officer report

Who spoke

One speaker against the application raised concerns about proximity, light, dust and noise from construction and future occupation.

Members discussed the impacts

Members discussed dust and noise controls, while officers explained a construction-management condition could regulate working hours, suppression measures and vibration.

“The Senior Planning Officer stated that construction management conditions were not normally imposed on householder applications but could be considered by the Committee if deemed necessary.”

“There followed a period of debate. Comments were received from Members regarding mitigating dust and noise during construction. The Interim Head of Planning and Building Control explained that if Members felt necessary, a condition could be applied to require a construction and environmental management plan; such plan would require details of dust suppression measures, hours of working and how noise and vibrations are controlled, however, they were not usually applied to…”

Minutes

The decision

The committee delegated approval to the Head of Planning and Building Control, subject to amended and finalised conditions.

“That Planning Committee Delegated to the Head of Planning & Building Control to Grant Planning Permission Subject to Conditions and subject to the amendment and finalisation of conditions and subject to:”

Minutes

Additional condition

The decision required a plan for dust suppression and screening between neighbouring properties.

“A plan for dust suppression and screening between neighbouring properties.”

Minutes