Do I need planning permission for an extension in Maida Vale?

For most of Maida Vale, an external extension isn't really the question — the area is dominated by purpose-built mansion blocks, which are flats with no permitted-development rights, so works are internal and governed by your lease as much as by planning. Where you own a whole stucco terraced house, a single-storey rear can succeed by full application; the conservation area and Article 4 directions mean permitted development does little work here.

Permitted development (GPDO Class A) covers single-storey rear extensions up to 3m beyond the original rear wall on attached houses and 4m on detached, with a maximum height of 4m. The 'larger home extension' route extends this to 6m/8m through prior approval with neighbour consultation — but that larger route is not available in conservation areas.

In conservation areas, the basic 3m/4m single-storey rear PD allowance usually survives — what conservation-area status removes is side extensions and two-storey rear extensions. An Article 4 direction can remove more, but Camden's directions in Hampstead and Belsize target front-and-side appearance (solar panels, window changes, boundary treatments), not the single-storey rear allowance. Flats have no PD rights at all. Two-storey rear extensions in conservation areas always need full permission.

Practical rule across London: check the address first. If a conservation area or Article 4 direction applies, budget for a full householder application decided on design, neighbour daylight (the 45-degree test) and materials.

Under permitted development, side extensions (GPDO Class A) must be single storey, no more than 4m high and no wider than half the original house — but side extensions are excluded from PD entirely in conservation areas. Wrap-around schemes combining side and rear elements usually exceed PD limits and need full permission everywhere.

In practice, most London side returns proceed by full householder application. The good news is the precedent base: on streets of identical terraces, a consented side return three doors down is the strongest evidence your scheme can cite. Officers focus on the boundary wall height, neighbour daylight and the junction with the host roof.

Maida Vale's mansion-block flats have no permitted-development rights at all, and you typically can't extend the building's external envelope anyway — so the realistic project is internal reconfiguration, which needs a licence to alter from the freeholder and may need building regulations and party-wall notices to neighbouring flats. On the stucco terraced houses, the 3m single-storey rear allowance can survive where no Article 4 applies, but side returns are excluded from permitted development in the conservation area; assume a full application matched to the rendered context.

The defining Maida Vale mistake is treating a flat refurbishment as a planning question when it's really a lease question — a licence to alter from the freeholder is the gate, and removing or moving walls in a flat engages it. Confirm tenure first; the route is completely different for a flat versus a whole house.