Planning application · Hackney
2024/0243.
36 Lidfield Road, Hackney, London, N16 9LX
Householder at 36 Lidfield Road, Hackney, London, N16 9LX, received 8 Feb 2024 — refused on 16 May 2024 (delegated, Danny Huber).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHackney profile →
Refused
Outcome
16 May 2024
14 wks
Decision time
6 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
10
Documents
10 linked
2
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?
Erection of a single storey first floor extension to rear of outrigger
Reference
2024/0243
Type
Householder Planning
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
8 Feb 2024
Validated
22 Mar 2024
Target date
17 May 2024
Decision date
16 May 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Reference
2024/0243
Type
Householder Planning
Show all 17 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
8 Feb 2024
Validated
22 Mar 2024
Target date
17 May 2024
Decision date
16 May 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 16 May 2024, delegated decision by Danny Huber — 14 weeks from submission (6 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
8 Feb 2024
Application received
22 Mar 2024
Application validated
17 May 2024
Statutory target date
16 May 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Danny Huber
8 Feb 2024
Application received
22 Mar 2024
Application validated
17 May 2024
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
16 May 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Danny Huber
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed outrigger extension, by reason of its scale, design
and siting would result in an obtrusive and incompatible form of
development which would fail to respect the character and
appearance of the subject property, disrupting the rhythm of the
terrace which the site is located within. As such, the proposals
would be contrary to policies D3 (Optimising site capacity through
the design-led approach) and D4(Delivering good design) of the
London Plan (2021), policy LP1 (Design Quality and Local
Character) of the Hackney Local Plan (2020).
1
The proposed outrigger extension, by reason of its scale, design
and siting would result in an obtrusive and incompatible form of
development which would fail to respect the character and
appearance of the subject property, disrupting the rhythm of the
terrace which the site is located within. As such, the proposals
would be contrary to policies D3 (Optimising site capacity through
the design-led approach) and D4(Delivering good design) of the
London Plan (2021), policy LP1 (Design Quality and Local
Character) of the Hackney Local Plan (2020).
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
2
Objections
2
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.