First-floor rear extension at 15 Kewferry Road, Northwood

The site and surroundings

The site is a two-storey detached house with existing extensions and outbuildings in a residential area of detached and semi-detached homes.

“No.13 Kewferry Road is located along the southern site boundary and comprises a two- storey detached property which has been extended to the rear at ground floor. No.17 Kewferry Road is located along the northern site boundary and comprises a similar style dwelling with a single storey rear extension and outbuilding adjacent application site. Nos.1- 6 Harrison Close and Nos.7 -11 Harrison Close are located to the east, on the opposite side of the road.”

“The surrounding area is residential in character comprising of two-storey, semi-detached and detached dwellinghouses of a similar style and age to the application property. Generally, there is a variation of alterations to the existing dwellings along this street of Kewferry Road that have evolved overtime and contribute to the established character.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the extension would remain subordinate, preserve local character, protect neighbouring outlook and provide acceptable daylight and sunlight.

“Furthermore, the overall positioning of the extension ensures that the neighbour’s outlook would be protected to the rear garden. The extension would not lead to a sense of enclosure given it would be set in from the site boundary of both neighbouring properties. The LPA remain of the view that the proposal would not lead to unreasonable level of harm to the adjoining neighbour’s amenity.”

“The proposal is considered to comply with other objectives of the relevant planning policies and would appear subordinate in the context of the existing dwelling. It would not give rise to any significant harm to the wider local character nor impact the street scene given its location to the rear of the site. The proposal would not adversely affect highway safety, or cause harm in other respects.”

Officer report

Objections and consultation

Petitions, objections and residents’ association comments raised concerns about dominance, inaccurate plans, daylight, sunlight, outlook and construction impacts.

“The adjoining neighbouring properties and Northwood Residents Association were consulted on 5th April 2024 which expired on 26th April 2024. Two objections from one consultee were received along with one petition objecting to the proposal. An objection was also received from the Northwood Residents Association.”

“Following on from the error in the plan in the Daylight Sunlight Report, we understand that at a re -inspection by the applicant’s advisor on Daylight Sunlight, they have said the plans submitted for the application itself are incorrect. Therefore, our view is that a decision cannot be based upon the plans and report submitted.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A petitioner addressed the committee, the agent and applicant were absent, and Councillor Ekta Gohil supported the petition and requested a site visit.

Members’ discussion

Members heard that the assessments were independently reviewed, the plans had been revised, and the assessed rooms complied with daylight and sunlight guidance.

“During Members discussions officers advised that the daylight and sunlight assessments complied with the relevant standards and had been independently reviewed. It was confirmed that the plans had been re-surveyed and revised during the application process and were considered accurate.”

“In response to Members’ questions, officers presented the daylight sunlight test results findings and clarified that all three assessed rooms Kitchen (Habitable), Reception (Habitable) and Utility (Non-Habitable) complied with the relevant BRE daylight sunlight guidance. Members acknowledged the petitioner’s concerns and the potential impact…”

Minutes

The vote

The officer recommendation was moved, seconded and unanimously approved.

“The officer recommendation was moved, seconded and, upon being put to the vote, was unanimously approved.”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved in accordance with the officer recommendation.

“RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer recommendation.”

Minutes