Planning application · Croydon
26/00381/HSE.
95 Godric Crescent Croydon CR0 0HX
Householder at 95 Godric Crescent Croydon CR0 0HX, received 10 Feb 2026 — refused on 24 Apr 2026 (delegated, Haniel Li).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationCroydon profile →
Refused
Outcome
24 Apr 2026
10 wks
Decision time
2 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
9
Documents
9 linked
1
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Croydon planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Erection of double-storey side and rear extension
Reference
26/00381/HSE
Type
Householder Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
CR0 0HX
Council
Received
10 Feb 2026
Validated
27 Feb 2026
Target date
24 Apr 2026
Decision date
24 Apr 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/00381/HSE
Type
Householder Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
CR0 0HX
Council
Received
10 Feb 2026
Validated
27 Feb 2026
Target date
24 Apr 2026
Decision date
24 Apr 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Croydon portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 24 Apr 2026, delegated decision by Haniel Li — 10 weeks from submission (2 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
10 Feb 2026
Application received
27 Feb 2026
Application validated
24 Apr 2026
Statutory target date
24 Apr 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Haniel Li
10 Feb 2026
Application received
27 Feb 2026
Application validated
24 Apr 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
24 Apr 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Haniel Li
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed double-storey side and rear extension by virtue of its bulk,
height and close proximity to the boundary, would result in a significant and
unacceptable loss of outlook and an increased sense of closure to the rear
windows and garden of No. 97 Godric Crescent. This impact is further
exacerbated by the angled relationship between the two properties. The
proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and
Policy DM10.6 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018).
In reaching this decision the Local Planning Authority has sought to work in a
positive and pro-active manner based on seeking solutions to problems in the
following way:
To assist applicants the Local Planning Authority has produced policies and written
guidance, all of which is available on the Council's website and offers a pre
planning application advice service. The scheme does not comply with guidance
and no pre application discussions were entered into. The Council is ready to enter
into discussions with the applicants to assist in the preparation of a new planning
application via the Council's Pre Application process. The Local Planning
Authority's suggested improvements were not adopted by the applicant. The Local
Planning Authority delivered the decision in a timely manner.
1
The proposed double-storey side and rear extension by virtue of its bulk,
height and close proximity to the boundary, would result in a significant and
unacceptable loss of outlook and an increased sense of closure to the rear
windows and garden of No. 97 Godric Crescent. This impact is further
exacerbated by the angled relationship between the two properties. The
proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and
Policy DM10.6 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018).
In reaching this decision the Local Planning Authority has sought to work in a
positive and pro-active manner based on seeking solutions to problems in the
following way:
To assist applicants the Local Planning Authority has produced policies and written
guidance, all of which is available on the Council's website and offers a pre
planning application advice service. The scheme does not comply with guidance
and no pre application discussions were entered into. The Council is ready to enter
into discussions with the applicants to assist in the preparation of a new planning
application via the Council's Pre Application process. The Local Planning
Authority's suggested improvements were not adopted by the applicant. The Local
Planning Authority delivered the decision in a timely manner.
Policies cited
D6DM10.6
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.