Interested in our services?


or call 020 7183 2578

Architectural Case Study – Rear Extension

Friday, 16th June 2017 | by: Cameron Weights

The Brief

Our clients had recently bought a mid-terrace 19th Century 4 bedroom 4 storey property in SW6 London. They had picked the property on the basis that is had great potential for development, highlighting their desire to re-develop the existing rear addition and explore the idea of splitting the property into 2 x 2 bedroom flats.

The Design

After the initial measured survey we sat down with our clients to pin-point specific design ideas that they would like to see, this included aspects such as a flat roof on the new rear extension, maximising the amount of natural light and the need to enlarge an existing bathroom and add another. A final contentious point was the request for a roof terrace. However, as with all architectural projects the design brief was constantly evolving, the roof design for instance went through a further two iterations, it initially changed to a hipped roof, then a gable end before returning to a flat roof design. Below are a couple of comparisons of the lower ground/ground floor plans.


Existing plans

Proposed plans

The Process

Once we had a final design scheme in place we were in a position to submit our design proposal to the Local Authority. I made a brief comment earlier towards a roof terrace, our clients had requested that we attempt to get a roof terrace added to the property so that the upper flat would have access to some outside space. We highlighted this as a potential point of concern and therefore made the unusual decision to submit two separate planning applications, one with the roof terrace one without. This allowed us to ensure that there would be no delay should the roof terrace be rejected and would allow the project to move forward without delay. The property was also situated in a flood risk zone and as we were adding a bedroom to the lower ground floor we submitted a report stating how we would ensure the proposal didn’t increase the flood risk to the subject and surrounding properties.

We also submitted a design and access statement to assist the application for the splitting of the property into flats.

An example of the design and access statement can be seen below.

The Outcome

8 weeks later we had a decision, as expected the proposal to include the roof terrace was rejected and the application without was granted. Not the best outcome but as desired we had a decision without having to tweak the original design and re-apply. We could now look to address the building control aspects of the project, this was quite straightforward however there was some interesting structural detailing required due to the fact we planned to change the position of the stairs, however this stage did prove to be the most straightforward.

The Product

I will let the images below speak for themselves and leave you with a comment from our clients, ‘We couldn’t be happier with the outcome, it exceeds what we hoped for.’

Architectural Case Study Rear Extension Case Study Image

If you are looking to develop your property and wish to discuss our architectural services please do not hesitate to contact a member of the architecture team by email or call 020 7183 2578 (option 4).