What was once a modest bungalow has been transformed into an overbearing, bulky, two-storey structure with large dormers, a raised garden, raised patio, and over-height extension. These works have been undertaken with blatant disregard for planning regulations, serious inaccuracies, missing evidence, fundamental errors in supporting documentation, and zero consideration for immediate neighbours.
The consequences on neighbouring homes are severe:
Complete Loss of Privacy: Clear glass rear windows at both ground and first-floor levels directly overlook our homes, eliminating all privacy.
Significant Overshadowing and Loss of Daylight: The development casts extensive shadows, drastically reducing natural light to our properties.
Gross Overdevelopment: The plot is severely overdeveloped, resulting in a dominant, incongruous, and out-of-character structure.
Non-Compliance with 45-Degree Rule: There is no evidence demonstrating adherence to the critical 45-degree rule, indicating potential further infringement on light and outlook.
Unverified and Inconsistent Measurements: The application relies
on unreliable and
contradictory measurements.
Retrospective Works Without Permission: Significant works have been carried out without the necessary planning permission.
Increased Flood Risk and Vermin Concerns: The raised garden, constructed using tonnes of demolition and builders’ waste, poses a serious flood risk and attracts vermin to neighbouring properties
My neighbours' and I refuse to accept permanent harm to our homes, our health, and our quality of life due to an applicant’s mistakes, cost-cutting measures and speculative overbuilding.
Alarmingly, the applicant’s supporting statement contains huge errors and omissions. He wrongly states that the property lies on the north side of the road, when it is in fact on the south side. Orientation is critical for assessing daylight, sunlight and overshadowing. Any solar or shadow analysis based on the wrong orientation is invalid and cannot be relied upon but this is what he has based his application on.
The applicant has stated in his supporting document, he failed to consider the existing building height and the topography of the site when purchasing this property. The errors and oversights the applicant has made are not my problem, but the build and this application is and I fiercely object to it and the way it has been managed.
After all that I and my neighbours have been put through over the past six months, we have no sympathy that the applicant now faces restrospectively building the single storey to the approved 2.6 metres rather than 2.85m which would result in “the new extension being visibly shorter than the existing rear element, creating an awkward step in the roofline and necessitating either stepping down the floor level or ceiling level within the extension” … Is this an issue? We don’t think so, but keeping it as is, is a much bigger issue for us and we hope the Planning Department insist that the ground level of the extension and patio be lowered to their original level.
Planning policies exist to protect communities. They are not optional.
We therefore urge the Council to:
1. Refuse the current application in full.
2. Protect our privacy.
3. Protect our natural light.
4. Require the site to be returned to its original ground levels and approved heights.
5. Reject clear glass opening windows at the rear of the property and ensure robust privacy protections.
6. Investigate potential breaches and take enforcement action where necessary.
Our neighbourhood deserves fair, lawful and transparent planning decisions. This development has failed every reasonable test.
Protect our privacy. Protect our homes. Protect Ickenham.
On reaching 20 signatures it may be considered in conjunction with the relevant live planning application at an upcoming Committee meeting. The Council's Democratic Services Team will be in touch with the lead petitioner to advise and take this petition forward accordingly.
This ePetition runs from 12/02/2026 to 12/03/2026.
3 people have signed this ePetition.