Single-storey side extension at 52 Wannock Gardens, Polegate

What was proposed

A single-storey side extension would provide an open-plan kitchen, dining and living area, using matching brick and roof tiles.

“Executive Summary The application site comprises of a single storey detached property located on a corner plot in Wannock Gardens. Planning permission is sought to construct a single storey extension to the side elevation. Following officer advice, the scheme has been revised to amend the materials to the roof, reduce the scale of the extension and inset the structure from the public highway. This is to minimise the visual impact of the extension on the streetscene, given its location on a corner plot, in line with adopted policy and the supplementary guidance of the Wealden Design Guide.”

“Proposal Planning permission is sought to construct a single storey extension to the side elevation of the existing dwelling to provide an open plan kitchen/dining and living area. The extension extends from the south west elevation by 4.9m, leaving a distance of approximately 1.6m to the boundary, having been reduced by from 5.5m in width and less than a metre from the boundary, from the initially submitted proposal.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The property is a detached single-storey home on a corner plot in an established residential area, with similar properties and existing extensions.

“Site and Surroundings The application site comprises of a single storey detached property located on a corner plot in Wannock Gardens. Wannock Gardens is an established residential area, comprising properties of a similar scale, and design, where several have been extended and inform the overall character of the area.”

Officer report

Planning history and revisions

There was no relevant planning history, while officer advice led to a smaller extension, improved materials and greater separation from the public highway.

“Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history on the site pertinent to the determination of this application. Pre-Application Advice Although formal pre-application advice was not sought prior to the submission of this application, advice on reducing the overall scale and improvements to the overall design and materials were suggested (email sent to agent dated 6 July 2026) and used to inform a revised scheme which was submitted by the agent on 15 July 2026.”

Officer report

The officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the revised design would be subordinate, reduce visual impact, protect neighbour amenity and accord with planning guidance.

“Chapter 10, part 4, of the Wealden Design Guide relates to single storey extensions to the side and advises that these should present a subordinate relationship to the host dwelling. It indicates that this can be achieved by being set back from the frontage, have a roof form that does not conflict visually or physically with the main dwelling and not have a width greater than half the width of the original house.”

“The alterations to the scheme would not only meet the needs of the current and any future occupants through the enhancement of the provision of accommodation, but would accord with national and local policy and reflect the supplementary guidance of the Wealden Local Plan to be capable of support.”

Officer report

Objections and consultation

The parish council and one neighbour objected that the extension would remain prominent, overbearing, out of character and too close to the footpath.

“Initial Objection from consultation 25 June 2026 to 16 July 2026 • The proposed extension, due to its size, scale and contemporary design, prominence and intrusive location forward of the property’s building line, would represent an unacceptable form of development. This would be visually domination and unsympathetic to the character and appearance of the current dwelling and the pattern of development in the vicinity.”

“Representations Re-consultation 22 August 2026 – 5 August 2026 attracted one letter of objection which raised the following material planning considerations: • Although the extension has been reduced, it remains extremely close to the boundary with the footpath/highway • It has been set back slightly from the existing façade and the roof plan appears to match the existing • The revised plan has made no real attempt to reduce the bulk and mass of the extension which,…”

Officer report

Public speakers

No public speakers addressed the committee.

Member involvement

Councillor Shing declared a pecuniary interest, did not take part in the debate and left the meeting without returning.

“Councillor Shing, Local ward member and Committee Member declared a pecuniary interest and did not take part in the member debate and left the meeting and did not return.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor Benton proposed approval and Councillor Howell seconded the motion to approve in line with the officer recommendation.

“A motion was proposed by Councillor Benton and seconded by Councillor Howell to approve the application in line with officer recommendation.”

Minutes

The decision

Full planning permission was granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the agenda report.

“That Full planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions and informatives as set out in the agenda report.”

Minutes