Our client, Mariam Radi, wanted to extend her detached house in Ickenham to provide more space for her growing family. She needed additional bedrooms, better living areas, and improved functionality.
The proposed development included a single storey wraparound extension and a part double storey side and rear extension with crown roof. Internal alterations and a new garage space were also planned, along with new windows and skylights to match the existing style.
The property sits within the Ickenham Village Conservation Area, meaning that extra care was needed to come up with the right design. Every detail needed to respect the heritage character while meeting the family’s needs.
What is a Conservation Area?
Conservation areas are areas that are given special protection in the planning system because of their heritage value. They are usually attractive areas with older buildings that need to be preserved.
They are different to listed buildings because they cover a whole area, rather than individual buildings.
It is great to live in a conservation area, but there are consequences when it comes to extending your home. Firstly, permitted development rights are restricted in conservation areas. If you do need to apply for planning permission, it is also trickier, with greater restrictions on what you can do.
The Council’s Refusal
In this case, the council refused permission on design grounds, arguing that the proposal would result in an “insubordinate and visually incongruous, cramped form of development” that would be detrimental to the conservation area.
The council argued that the design had too many different roof forms, creating visual complexity. It also referred to excessive bulk and scale, impact on conservation area character and the cumulative effect of all proposed extensions.
We demonstrated that the proposal actually complied with the council’s own detailed policy requirements. The side extension was less than 50% of the original house width, meeting their specific guidelines. The first-floor extension was set back 1m from the front elevation and in 1m from the boundary, exactly as required by policy.
The ground floor rear extension was exactly 4m deep, which was the policy maximum for detached houses. All materials would match the existing building, ensuring visual consistency.
Context is Everything
We highlighted that the surrounding area already featured significant diversity. Houses of varying sizes and architectural styles lined the street, with multiple roof forms throughout. Many properties had extensive existing extensions, and crown roofs were already present in the immediate area.
The satellite imagery we provided showed substantial houses, many heavily extended, creating a varied streetscape where the proposed development would fit comfortably.
We addressed the conservation area concerns head-on. No conservation area appraisal existed for the area, and there was no heritage specialist input from the council. The property itself was not architecturally distinguished, and the surrounding context included late 20th-century development with limited heritage value.
Significantly, there were no public objections despite extensive consultation with 46 neighbouring properties and local groups.
Throughout our appeal statement, we emphasised the thoughtful design approach followed by the architects. We pointed out that the extensions would appear subordinate to the main dwelling, with careful articulation and set backs to break up building mass.
The Appeal Decision
The inspector allowed the appeal, agreeing with us that the extensions would “preserve the character and appearance” of the conservation area. The side extension would achieve a “subordinate appearance in the streetscene” while the “degree of articulation” would help break up the building’s mass.
In the context of “diverse form and proportions” of other buildings in the area, he concluded the extensions “would not appear out of place.” This assessment directly contradicted the council’s concerns about visual impact.
Critically, the inspector noted that the conservation area’s significance derives from its parkland setting and substantial detached houses on spacious, well-landscaped plots. The individual architectural styles throughout the area contribute to its overall character.
He concluded that the development would preserve this significance, finding no heritage harm from the proposed extensions.
When Councils Get It Wrong
This case demonstrates that council refusals are not the end of the road. With proper analysis, compelling evidence and clear argumentation, even heritage-related refusals can be overturned successfully.
The planning system is designed to enable appropriate development while protecting important heritage assets. This appeal succeeded because we showed that good design and heritage protection can work hand in hand.
If you are facing a similar planning refusal, don’t assume the council has got it right. Sometimes, as this case proves, they simply haven’t done their homework properly.
We are planning appeal specialists, and we win hundreds of appeals for homeowners and small developers every year.
We are particularly active in Hillingdon (see here, here and here). We find that Hillingdon regularly makes unfair and harsh decisions on proposals for extensions and for one-off, new-build houses.
If you have been refused planning permission in Hillingdon, or anywhere else for that matter, please do not hesitate to get in touch for some advice.
And for more on the planning system in general, check out Martin Gaine’s book, How to Get Planning Permission: An Insider’s Secrets.
