Planning application · Hackney
2023/1508.
1A Broadway Market Mews, Hackney, London, E8 4TS
Householder at 1A Broadway Market Mews, Hackney, London, E8 4TS, received 3 Jul 2023 — refused on 13 Mar 2024 (delegated, Jessica Neeve).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHackney profile →
Refused
Outcome
13 Mar 2024
36 wks
Decision time
28 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
—
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Hackney 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?
Proposed works: Erection of a roof extension at second floor level with bifold doors.
Reference
2023/1508
Type
Householder Planning
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
3 Jul 2023
Validated
26 Jul 2023
Target date
20 Sep 2023
Decision date
13 Mar 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Reference
2023/1508
Type
Householder Planning
Show all 17 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
3 Jul 2023
Validated
26 Jul 2023
Target date
20 Sep 2023
Decision date
13 Mar 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Hackney portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 13 Mar 2024, delegated decision by Jessica Neeve — 36 weeks from submission (28 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
3 Jul 2023
Application received
26 Jul 2023
Application validated
20 Sep 2023
Statutory target date
13 Mar 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Jessica Neeve
3 Jul 2023
Application received
26 Jul 2023
Application validated
20 Sep 2023
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
13 Mar 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Jessica Neeve
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed extension, by reason of its detailed design, in particular, its
size and appearance, proportions, and location is considered to be an
inappropriate and unsympathetic addition to the property that is out of
keeping with the host building and surrounding development. The proposal
fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the
conservation area, contrary to policies D3, D4, and HC1 of the London Plan
(2021) and policies LP1 and LP3 of the Hackney Local Plan LP33 (2020) and
Hackney's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD (2009).
2
The proposal, because of its impact on outlook, daylight, and sunlight,
would likely result in a harmful impact on the amenities enjoyed by the
occupiers of Nos.3 and 5 Broadway Market, and it has not been
demonstrated otherwise. Accordingly, the extension is considered to be
contrary to policy LP2 of the Hackney Local Plan LP33 (2020) and policy D3
(Optimising site layout through the design-led approach) of the London Plan
(2021), and the guidance in Hackney's Residential Alterations and Extensions
SPD (2009).
1
The proposed extension, by reason of its detailed design, in particular, its
size and appearance, proportions, and location is considered to be an
inappropriate and unsympathetic addition to the property that is out of
keeping with the host building and surrounding development. The proposal
fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the
conservation area, contrary to policies D3, D4, and HC1 of the London Plan
(2021) and policies LP1 and LP3 of the Hackney Local Plan LP33 (2020) and
Hackney's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD (2009).
2
The proposal, because of its impact on outlook, daylight, and sunlight,
would likely result in a harmful impact on the amenities enjoyed by the
occupiers of Nos.3 and 5 Broadway Market, and it has not been
demonstrated otherwise. Accordingly, the extension is considered to be
contrary to policy LP2 of the Hackney Local Plan LP33 (2020) and policy D3
(Optimising site layout through the design-led approach) of the London Plan
(2021), and the guidance in Hackney's Residential Alterations and Extensions
SPD (2009).
Policies cited
HC1LP1LP3LP2
Public response
Comment counts were not captured for this application.
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.