In this case, our client had planning permission for a single-storey side and rear extension with a depth of three and a half metres. During construction, however, the extension was built to a depth of just over six metres.
That put the development outside what had been approved, so a retrospective planning application was submitted to regularise what had been built.
The council refused the application. Their position was that, although the extension did not cause harm to neighbouring properties, it was too large and did not sit comfortably with its surroundings.
We appealed the decision.
On appeal, the inspector largely agreed with our assessment. They accepted that the extension did not harm neighbours in terms of outlook, light or privacy. However, they also agreed with the council that the overall scale of the extension was excessive and that, as built, it looked out of place.
At that point, the issue was no longer whether something could be approved, but what form of extension would be acceptable.
We worked with the client to revise the design, carefully trimming back a small part of the extension. This reduced its visual bulk without significantly affecting the internal space or how the extension functioned day to day.
A revised scheme was then submitted, and planning permission was granted by the London Borough of Croydon.
The result was a sensible and pragmatic outcome. Our client only had to remove a small part of what had been built and was able to retain the vast majority of the extension.
This case is a good reminder that retrospective cases are not always all-or-nothing. Even where a council is right to say that something has gone too far, it is often possible to find a practical compromise that avoids wholesale demolition.
If you have built more than was approved, or are facing enforcement action relating to an extension, it is worth taking advice before assuming the worst. We deal with these situations regularly as part of our planning enforcement work in Croydon.
