West Lodge, 12 Park Lane, Henlow, SG16 6AT Data via plota.co.uk

CB/26/01991/FULL - Full Application Approved

Proposal

Part two storey extension and part single side extension. Changes to rear and side fenestration Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

Received
2 Jul 2026
Approved

Approved on · Last checked 11 Sept 2026

Site constraints 4

Henlow Conservation Area conservation area
Demolition needs planning permission and permitted development is restricted.
The council must give weight to preserving or enhancing the area's character and appearance. Not every council has published its boundaries as open data.
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 2
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Also on the record
Inside the Henlow built-up area; the 1970s provisional farmland map had this area as grade 3, but it predates the buildings here and the current map does not class it as farmland.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt · No scheduled monument at the site

Checked on 11 September 2026. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England and council datasets, Open Government Licence. A boundary can run through a site and the council holds the definitive record: confirm with the council before relying on this.

Work with planning data?

Every application in Central Bedfordshire - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Application type
Full Application
Postcode
SG16 6AT
Received
2 Jul 2026
Validated
2 Jul 2026
Parish
Henlow
Case officer
Show
Target decision
27 Aug 2026
Decision
Full Application - Granted Conditions or Reasons: View Conditions or Reasons Informative Notes: 1 )Reasons for Granting: The application site is a two-storey, detached dwelling located on the south side of Park Lane, Henlow. West Lodge is constructed of brickwork with a tiled hipped roof and currently benefits from a two-storey rear extension. The proposal consists of the erection of a part two-storey and part single-storey side extension to the south east of the site, and changes to the rear and side fenestration. The proposed single-storey extension would have a depth of 4.4 metres, a maximum width of 3.2 metres, a height to the eaves of 2.7 metres and a maximum crown roof height of some 3.3 metres. The proposed first-storey addition would have a depth of 4.1 metres, a width of 1.8 metres, an overall height to the eaves of 4.4 metres and a maximum overall crown roof height of 6 metres. The footprint of the property would increase by some 13.4 square metres. Park Lane is characterised by dwellings of varied scale, age and design. Single-storey and two-storey additions to other properties across the streetscene are noted and therefore the proposal is not considered to be at odds with the existing pattern or grain of development. On the basis of design and scale, the proposed extensions would represent proportionate additions to the host dwelling which would form an infill towards the rear of the property, alongside the existing two-storey projection. The proposed first-storey element would match the height and depth of this existing extension, remaining set down from the ridge of the host dwelling by some 0.8 metres. The proposed single-storey extension would be remain heavily screened from the streetscene by the existing brick wall/hedgerow boundary treatment to the east of the site, and would be considered a modest addition to the property. Moreover, both extensions would be constructed of materials to match that of the host dwelling and as such, the proposal is not considered to result in any detrimental impact on the character or appearance of the area. The proposal also includes the alteration of fenestration to the rear, west and east elevation of the existing dwellinghouse. These would be considered minor alterations which would match the scale and design of the existing fenestration at the site, and a such would not result in any material impact on the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse or surrounding area. Regarding the siting of the proposal, the most potentially impacted neighbouring dwellings are deemed to be No. 10 and No. 12a Park Lane, and No. 4 Coach Road. In terms of neighbouring amenity, No. 10 Park Lane would be sited some 21.4 metres from the proposal and would remain entirely screened from the development by the existing built form at the application site. The proposal includes the alteration of fenestration on the west elevation facing this neighbouring property, given the above relationship and the established position of existing windows on this elevation, the proposal is not considered to give rise to any impacts on the amenity of this neighbour. To the south, No. 12a Park Lane would be sited some 15.23 metres from the development. The proposal would be readily visible from this neighbouring dwelling, however the works would not surpass the existing established rear building line of the application site. Given the retained separation distance between the properties, the proposed extensions would not give rise to any overbearing impacts or loss of light to this neighbouring property. The proposal also includes the installation of additional first-floor fenestration to the rear elevation facing this neighbouring property, it is noted that there is an existing degree of mutual overlooking between the neighbouring dwellings, with views from both ground floor and first floor at No. 12 and ground floor at No.12a. As such, the proposal is not considered to give rise to any unacceptable overlooking or loss of privacy. To the east, the proposed side extensions would be sited a minimum of 7.6 metres from neighbouring dwelling No. 4 Coach Road. This neighbouring dwelling does not contain any windows on its west elevation facing this neighbouring property, and therefore the proposal is not considered to give rise to any adverse impacts on the amenity of this neighbouring dwelling. All other neighbouring dwellings are sufficiently separated and/ or screened from the proposal as to where they would not be detrimentally impacted. The proposal does not create any additional bedrooms and therefore would not be required to demonstrate further onsite parking. The proposal would not adversely affect the existing parking or access arrangements at the application site and would therefore be acceptable on a like-for-like basis. Henlow Parish Council were consulted on this application and raised no objections. The application was subject to public consultation and no representations were received. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2 and T3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan, Section 11 of Central Bedfordshire Design Guide, Parking Standards for New Developments SPD and Chapter 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).Reasons for Granting: The application site is a two-storey, detached dwelling located on the south side of Park Lane, Henlow. West Lodge is constructed of brickwork with a tiled hipped roof and currently benefits from a two-storey rear extension. The proposal consists of the erection of a part two-storey and part single-storey side extension to the south east of the site, and changes to the rear and side fenestration. The proposed single-storey extension would have a depth of 4.4 metres, a maximum width of 3.2 metres, a height to the eaves of 2.7 metres and a maximum crown roof height of some 3.3 metres. The proposed first-storey addition would have a depth of 4.1 metres, a width of 1.8 metres, an overall height to the eaves of 4.4 metres and a maximum overall crown roof height of 6 metres. The footprint of the property would increase by some 13.4 square metres. Park Lane is characterised by dwellings of varied scale, age and design. Single-storey and two-storey additions to other properties across the streetscene are noted and therefore the proposal is not considered to be at odds with the existing pattern or grain of development. On the basis of design and scale, the proposed extensions would represent proportionate additions to the host dwelling which would form an infill towards the rear of the property, alongside the existing two-storey projection. The proposed first-storey element would match the height and depth of this existing extension, remaining set down from the ridge of the host dwelling by some 0.8 metres. The proposed single-storey extension would be remain heavily screened from the streetscene by the existing brick wall/hedgerow boundary treatment to the east of the site, and would be considered a modest addition to the property. Moreover, both extensions would be constructed of materials to match that of the host dwelling and as such, the proposal is not considered to result in any detrimental impact on the character or appearance of the area. The proposal also includes the alteration of fenestration to the rear, west and east elevation of the existing dwellinghouse. These would be considered minor alterations which would match the scale and design of the existing fenestration at the site, and a such would not result in any material impact on the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse or surrounding area. Regarding the siting of the proposal, the most potentially impacted neighbouring dwellings are deemed to be No. 10 and No. 12a Park Lane, and No. 4 Coach Road. In terms of neighbouring amenity, No. 10 Park Lane would be sited some 21.4 metres from the proposal and would remain entirely screened from the development by the existing built form at the application site. The proposal includes the alteration of fenestration on the west elevation facing this neighbouring property, given the above relationship and the established position of existing windows on this elevation, the proposal is not considered to give rise to any impacts on the amenity of this neighbour. To the south, No. 12a Park Lane would be sited some 15.23 metres from the development. The proposal would be readily visible from this neighbouring dwelling, however the works would not surpass the existing established rear building line of the application site. Given the retained separation distance between the properties, the proposed extensions would not give rise to any overbearing impacts or loss of light to this neighbouring property. The proposal also includes the installation of additional first-floor fenestration to the rear elevation facing this neighbouring property, it is noted that there is an existing degree of mutual overlooking between the neighbouring dwellings, with views from both ground floor and first floor at No. 12 and ground floor at No.12a. As such, the proposal is not considered to give rise to any unacceptable overlooking or loss of privacy. To the east, the proposed side extensions would be sited a minimum of 7.6 metres from neighbouring dwelling No. 4 Coach Road. This neighbouring dwelling does not contain any windows on its west elevation facing this neighbouring property, and therefore the proposal is not considered to give rise to any adverse impacts on the amenity of this neighbouring dwelling. All other neighbouring dwellings are sufficiently separated and/ or screened from the proposal as to where they would not be detrimentally impacted. The proposal does not create any additional bedrooms and therefore would not be required to demonstrate further onsite parking. The proposal would not adversely affect the existing parking or access arrangements at the application site and would therefore be acceptable on a like-for-like basis. Henlow Parish Council were consulted on this application and raised no objections. The application was subject to public consultation and no representations were received. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2 and T3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan, Section 11 of Central Bedfordshire Design Guide, Parking Standards for New Developments SPD and Chapter 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 2 )Based on information submitted there are no known issues raised in the context of Human Rights / The Equalities Act 2010 and as such there would be no relevant implications.Based on information submitted there are no known issues raised in the context of Human Rights / The Equalities Act 2010 and as such there would be no relevant implications. 3 )GDP Policy Informative Central Beds Local Plan In accordance with Article 35 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, the reason for any condition above relates to the Policies as referred to in the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).GDP Policy Informative Central Beds Local Plan In accordance with Article 35 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, the reason for any condition above relates to the Policies as referred to in the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 4 )This permission relates only to that required under the Town & Country Planning Acts and does not include any consent or approval under any other enactment or under the Building Regulations. Any other consent or approval which is necessary must be obtained from the appropriate authority.This permission relates only to that required under the Town & Country Planning Acts and does not include any consent or approval under any other enactment or under the Building Regulations. Any other consent or approval which is necessary must be obtained from the appropriate authority. 5 )Will a new extension affect your Council Tax Charge? The rate of Council Tax you pay depends on which valuation band your home is placed in. This is determined by the market value of your home as at 1 April 1991. Your property's Council Tax band may change if the property is extended.� The Council Tax band will only change when a relevant transaction takes place. For example, if you sell your property after extending it, the new owner may have to pay a higher band of Council Tax. If however you add an annexe to your property, the Valuation Office Agency may decide that the annexe should be banded separately for Council Tax.� If this happens, you will have to start paying Council Tax for the annexe as soon as it is completed. If the annexe is occupied by a relative of the residents of the main dwelling, it may qualify for a Council Tax discount or exemption.� Contact the Council for advice on 0300 300 8306. The website link is: https://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/council-tax-bandsWill a new extension affect your Council Tax Charge? The rate of Council Tax you pay depends on which valuation band your home is placed in. This is determined by the market value of your home as at 1 April 1991. Your property's Council Tax band may change if the property is extended.� The Council Tax band will only change when a relevant transaction takes place. For example, if you sell your property after extending it, the new owner may have to pay a higher band of Council Tax. If however you add an annexe to your property, the Valuation Office Agency may decide that the annexe should be banded separately for Council Tax.� If this happens, you will have to start paying Council Tax for the annexe as soon as it is completed. If the annexe is occupied by a relative of the residents of the main dwelling, it may qualify for a Council Tax discount or exemption.� Contact the Council for advice on 0300 300 8306. The website link is: https://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/council-tax-bands

Public comments

No public comments yet.

Last counted 11 Sept 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Consultation
2 Jul 2026
Comments by
14 Aug 2026
Site or press notice
24 Jul 2026
Central Bedfordshire
Planning Authority Score
6.3/10
Average
#88 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

Central Bedfordshire is faster than most councils at deciding householder applications, ranking #62 out of 296. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (91%) than the national average (90%).

Faster than most councils
for householder decisions
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Central Bedfordshire decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
84%
Overall approval rate
Below avg (87%) #218 of 296
91%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #169 of 296
76%
Decided in 8 weeks
Above avg (63%) #62 of 296
35%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #99 of 296
61%
Minor dwellings approved
153 decided (1-9 homes)
86%
Major dwellings approved
29 decided (10+ homes)
73%
Change of use approved
45 decided
1,444
Total decisions
226 refused in the year to March 2026