Overview
This case concerned an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for a single-storey rear extension at 40A Flamborough Road in Ruislip. The London Borough of Hillingdon refused the application on the grounds that the extension would harm the character and appearance of the area and would leave the dwelling with insufficient private amenity space. Following a site visit, the planning inspector disagreed and allowed the appeal, granting planning permission.
Single-storey rear extensions
Single-storey rear extensions are probably the most common form of householder development.
They are often permitted development, but the limitations of permitted development rights sometimes means that planning permission is required.
In this case, the extension was small – it was just 3m deep and 3m wide. Hillingdon Council was against it because the house projects slightly deeper than its neighbours and also because the house is on a corner so this rear extension would be visible from the side street.
The inspector’s assessment
Happily, the appeal inspector didn’t agree. He decided that the extension would have a ‘limited depth’ and would be low in height with a shallow, pitched roof. He argued that only a small part of the extension would be visible over the side boundary fence and that it would be pebble-dashed so that it would blend in with the main part of the house.
The council had also argued that the extension would mean that the occupiers of the house would not have enough rear garden space left to provide comfortable living conditions. We thought this an odd argument – surely it is up to the homeowner what balance of internal and outside space they want?
The appeal inspector agreed, saying that the garden would be around 45sqm in area, and this would be enough for sitting out, playing or hanging laundry.
We were delighted when the appeal was allowed and our client is pressing ahead with their kitchen extension.
Why this appeal succeeded
This appeal succeeded because the council’s reasons for refusal relied on broad assertions rather than a careful assessment of the actual scale and effects of the proposal.
The inspector accepted that modest rear extensions can be acceptable on corner plots, even where they are partially visible from the street, provided they remain subordinate in scale and are well integrated in terms of design and materials. The decision also highlights that where local policy does not define a minimum garden size, councils must explain clearly why a retained garden area would be unacceptable in practice.
If you have been refused planning permission, don’t give up, check out your chances of a successful appeal. Contact us now for some advice.
Visit our dedicated Hillingdon planning appeals page for more information and advice. Don’t miss our recent posts on why Hillingdon is quick to refuse planning permission for extensions and whether it is worth appealing those decisions.
Finally, check out some other recent appeal successes we have had with ground floor extensions in Hillingdon – here, here and here.
