Proposed extension of the patio is designed to provide safe access to the garden from the approved single-storey rear extension. The patio is set at a suitable height to allow seamless access from the extension and includes a series of se ven steps leading down to the garden level. The patio height is 1,310mm, and there would always have been a level difference required patio or step access due to the relationship between the garden level and the finished floor level of the dwelling. A balustrade will be installed at a height of 1,100mm above the

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 17 September 2025 by A Wright BSc (Hons) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 25 September 2025 Appeal Ref: 6000267 16 Newmarket Way, Hornchurch, Havering RM12 6DS • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mrs Toni Hayes against the decision of Council of the London Borough of Havering. • The application Ref is P0258.25. • The development proposed is described as ‘The proposed extension of the patio is designed to provide safe access to the garden from the approved single-storey rear extension. The patio is set at a suitable height to allow seamless access from the extension and includes a series of se ven steps leading down to the garden level. The patio height is 1,310mm, and there would always have been a level difference required patio or step access due to the relationship between the garden level and the finished floor level of the dwelling. A balustrade will be installed at a height of 1,100mm above the finished floor level of the patio, with the exact specification to be confirmed on -site with the client’. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a raised patio area with balustrade – part retrospective’ at 16 Newmarket Way, Hornchurch, Havering RM12 6DS in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P0258.25, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: 1021/005 Rev B. 2) Prior to the construction of the balustrade hereby permitted, details of the balustrade shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Preliminary Matters 2. The description of development set out in the banner heading above is taken from the application form. However, the appeal form describes the development proposed as a ‘raised patio area with balustrade – part retrospective’. As this is a more accurate description of the proposed development, I have determined the appeal on this basis and the decision in paragraph 1 above reflects this approach. 3. A raised patio with steps down to the garden has already been built which appear to be consistent with plans, but no balustrade has yet been installed. For the avoidance of doubt, I have determined the appeal based on the submitted plans. Appeal Decision 6000267 2 Main Issue 4. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of 14 Newmarket Way, with particular regard to privacy. Reasons 5. The appeal site comprises an end terraced house in a residential area. The land slopes down to the rear so the houses in the terrace are set above the level of their back gardens. In common with many other houses on this side of Newmarket Way, the appeal dwelling has a single storey rear extension. Many properties in the locality also have raised rear patios, including some beyond the extensions. 6. The proposed raised patio is around 1m above the level of the remaining outdoor space, projecting around 3.1m beyond the existing extension. The associated steps adjoin the boundary with 14 Newmarket Way (No 14) with a stepped down fence around 1.6m high between the two properties. 7. The Council’s Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document 2011 indicates that balconies should not reduce the privacy of more sensitive private areas normally found to the rear of neighbouring properties. 8. There are views of some areas of the rear garden at No 14 from parts of the proposed rear patio, but the boundary fence provides some screening. Raised patios are common in the locality and there is already overlooking of neighbouring rear gardens from them. This includes an existing raised outdoor space beyond the ground floor extension at 12 Newmarket Way where residents using this area can see into the neighbouring gardens. 9. Considering this context and given that the proposed patio has a comparable height and projection to some others nearby, the proposal does not result in unacceptable overlooking of the neighbouring rear garden at No 14. 10. Consequently, I conclude that the proposal does not cause a harmful loss of privacy to the occupiers of 14 Newmarket Way. It complies with Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan 2021 where it seeks to protect the amenity of existing residents, including in relation to privacy. Conditions 11. I have considered whether conditions are required having regard to the statutory tests outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework and the advice in the Planning Practice Guidance. 12. I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plan. This is in the interest of certainty. In addition, condition requiring details of the balustrade to be submitted is necessary to protect the character and appearance of the area. Conclusion 13. For the reasons given above, the proposal accords with the development plan and there are no material considerations that outweigh this finding. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. A Wright INSPECTOR