Planning application · Ealing
232406HH.
60 South Parade Chiswick W4 5LH
Householder at 60 South Parade Chiswick W4 5LH, received 15 Jun 2023 — refused on 30 Nov 2023 (delegated, Patrick Franklin).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
30 Nov 2023
24 wks
Decision time
16 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
16
Documents
16 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
Yes
Appeal
Part Allowed on Appeal
Record from the Ealing 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?
Single storey side/rear extension; rear dormer window roof extension; excavation of basement extension; side dormer window roof extension; installation of window to side first floor elevation; demolition of existing garage
Reference
232406HH
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W4 5LH
Ward
Council
Received
15 Jun 2023
Target date
9 Aug 2023
Decision date
30 Nov 2023
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
232406HH
Type
Householder
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W4 5LH
Ward
Council
Received
15 Jun 2023
Target date
9 Aug 2023
Decision date
30 Nov 2023
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Ealing portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 30 Nov 2023, delegated decision by Patrick Franklin — 24 weeks from submission (16 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
15 Jun 2023
Application received
9 Aug 2023
Statutory target date
30 Nov 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Patrick Franklin
Appeal
Appeal decided · Part Allowed on Appeal
15 Jun 2023
Application received
9 Aug 2023
Statutory target date
30 Nov 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Patrick Franklin
Show all 4 rows
Appeal
Appeal decided · Part Allowed on Appeal
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed rear dormer roof extension on the hip and the side dormer roof
extension would fail to harmonise with the original building on the site. Both
extensions would constitute incongruous additions out of keeping with and detrimental
to the character of the Acton Green Conservation Area and with clear views from the
street. The development would fail to comply with the NPPF (2023), Policies D3, D4
and HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013).
2
The proposed single storey side/rear extension would fail to harmonise with the
original building and would adversely affect the dwelling's symmetry and relationship
with the street. The extension would fail to contribute positively to the existing and
emerging spatial character of the Acton Green Conservation Area. The development
would fail to comply with the NPPF (2023), Policies D3, D4 and HC1 of the London
Plan (2021) and Policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013).
3
The proposed development does not follow the standing advice published by the
Environment Agency and Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs -
Preparing a flood risk assessment: standing advice (2012). The applicant has not
demonstrated that the proposed development is appropriate for the level of flood risk
to the site. The submission has not demonstrated compliance with Paragraph 164 of
the NPPF (2023), Policy SI 12 of the London Plan (2021), and Policy 5.12 of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013).
1
The proposed rear dormer roof extension on the hip and the side dormer roof
extension would fail to harmonise with the original building on the site. Both
extensions would constitute incongruous additions out of keeping with and detrimental
to the character of the Acton Green Conservation Area and with clear views from the
street. The development would fail to comply with the NPPF (2023), Policies D3, D4
and HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013).
2
The proposed single storey side/rear extension would fail to harmonise with the
original building and would adversely affect the dwelling's symmetry and relationship
with the street. The extension would fail to contribute positively to the existing and
emerging spatial character of the Acton Green Conservation Area. The development
would fail to comply with the NPPF (2023), Policies D3, D4 and HC1 of the London
Plan (2021) and Policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013).
3
The proposed development does not follow the standing advice published by the
Environment Agency and Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs -
Preparing a flood risk assessment: standing advice (2012). The applicant has not
demonstrated that the proposed development is appropriate for the level of flood risk
to the site. The submission has not demonstrated compliance with Paragraph 164 of
the NPPF (2023), Policy SI 12 of the London Plan (2021), and Policy 5.12 of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013).
Policies cited
D3D4HC1NPPFSI12Ealing Development Management DPD 5.12
Appeal
Appeal
Outcome
Appeal decided
Outcome: Part Allowed on Appeal
Appeal decided
Outcome: Part Allowed on Appeal
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
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.