Garage and outbuilding extension at 15 Manor Gardens, Acton, London W3

What was proposed

The application proposed extending an existing rear garage and outbuilding, adding roof lights and replacing access doors.

“P/2025/0618 Address: Manor Gardens, Acton, W3 8JU Ward: Chiswick Gunnersbury Proposal: Erection of extension and amendments to roof and fenestration of existing garage and outbuilding Application validated: March 2025 This application is presented to the Planning Committee following a request from Councillor Joanna Biddolph 1.0 SUMMARY 1.1 The proposal being considered under this application is for erection of an extension to the existing rear garage and outbuilding.”

“The proposed extension to the outbuilding would be brick and rendered white with a tile and GRP roof and Velux style roof lights. The bifold doors would be aluminium. The proposal is acceptable due to its modest height and scale, would comply with the Council’s Residential Extension Guidelines and it is not considered it would harm neighbouring properties, the appearance of the house, or Gunnersbury Park Conservation Area.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is beside similar garages and outbuildings, within the Gunnersbury Park conservation area, with access to Manor Way unchanged.

“SITE DESCRIPTION Figure 1 Site Location Plan 2.1 The application site is located to the east of Manor Gardens which lies east along a slip road off Gunnersbury Avenue (North Circular). At the rear of the site is Manor Way, a small non through road. Along Manor Way and either site of the site are existing garages and outbuildings similar to the application proposal.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the extension modest and acceptable, with no harmful effects on neighbours, the conservation area, access or parking.

“The proposal would be a modest extension to existing garage and outbuilding. No change is proposed to the height and only 3.31 square metre area would be added. The extension would bring the outbuilding in line with the neighbour at No.14. Although the extension would be larger than the neighbour at No.16, it would not appear excessive or harmful to the appearance of the site or area.”

“Highways, Transport, Access and Servicing 7.15 Local Plan policy EC2 (Developing a sustainable transport network) seeks to promote a more sustainable local travel network and maximise opportunities for walking, cycling and using public transport. Developments should provide at least a minimum number of cycle spaces and an appropriate maximum number of car spaces consistent with London Plan standards.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

Two responses raised concerns about residential use, living accommodation, parking pressure, misleading drawings, enforcement and effects on neighbours.

“Concern on intended use as residential HMO due to inclusion of bathroom and skylights There is no evidence to indicate the outbuilding would not be used incidental to the house and revised drawings have removed the bathroom. Outbuilding against guidelines as includes primary living accommodation and access door The existing access doors remains same and bathroom omitted. The application was placed on the Pending Decisions List Week 19 2025 (09/05/2025 to 16/05/2025).”

“The outbuilding was no longer being used as a garage and had been converted into a storeroom. The existing area does not meet the Council’s guidelines for a garage. Therefore, the proposal would not alter the existing parking arrangement and not result in additional on-street parking or parking stress in the area Drawings purport to show a vehicle inside a garage, the image has been falsely scaled down to fit into the space – the imagery shown appears to be deliberately…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A ward councillor supported residents’ objections, two local residents spoke against the application, and a councillor supported their concerns.

Members’ discussion

Members considered the risk of unlicensed accommodation, while officers advised that the proposal was an outbuilding and breaches could be enforced.

“Cllr Ron Mushiso spoke next. He advised that he was in agreement with Cllr Biddolph, [name withheld] and [name withheld]. He agreed with the concerns they had raised and, while acknowledging that the Application followed policies, wished for assurance that it would not be built as unlicensed accommodation.”

“[name withheld] advised that the Application was for an outbuilding, not for a new house or an HMO. There were no planning grounds for refusal, meaning that if refused the Council would likely lose any subsequent appeal. The Planning Enforcement team would take action against any breaches of the approved plans.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Members voted unanimously to approve the application, with 12 votes for, no votes against and no abstentions.

“In debate Cllr Dan Bowring observed that the objectors had acknowledged that the Application complied fully with policies and move to approve, seconded by Cllr Emma Siddhu. Members voted to approve the Application unanimously.”

“For – 12 votes Against – None Abstained – None…”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was approved subject to conditions for the extension and amendments to the existing garage and outbuilding.

“Resolved – that planning permission for planning application P/2025/0618, erection of extension and amendments to roof and fenestration of existing garage and outbuilding was approved subject to conditions.”

Minutes