Green Lane, South End, New Eltham, London, SE9 3TJ

Planning appeal 3263491 at Green Lane, South End, New Eltham, London, SE9 3TJ (Royal Borough of Greenwich) was allowed on 22 November 2021 by Inspector MacLeod R, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the proposal's public benefits would be outweighed by impacts from its siting and appearance on (a) the character and appearance of the area in relation to its siting and scale and (b) public safety in relation to driver distraction and restrictions to pedestrian flows.

installation of a 18m Phase 8 Monopole C/W wrapround Cabinet at base and associated ancillary works

Authority: Royal Borough of Greenwich
Appeal type: minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure: Written Representations
Development: telecoms · Other minor developments
Inspector: MacLeod R
Postcode: SE9 3TJ

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

Whether the proposal's public benefits would be outweighed by impacts from its siting and appearance on (a) the character and appearance of the area in relation to its siting and scale and (b) public safety in relation to driver distraction and restrictions to pedestrian flows

What decided it

The public benefits of improved 5G connectivity in accordance with NPPF Chapter 10 outweighed the limited visual impact on character and appearance, and the proposal would not compromise public safety.

The public benefits in relation to increased connectivity outweighed any harm arising from the siting and appearance on the character of the area and appearance of the street scene.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies: Policy DH1Policy DH(c)Policy IM(b)Royal Greenwich Local Plan (2014)Policy D3Policy T4(f)London Plan (2021)
National Planning Policy Framework: Paragraph 114Paragraph 115Paragraph 117

How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.

See how each was applied

The decision letter

Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.

Appeals plan, £15 a month

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

345 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision

An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter — Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.

Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app — Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.

Start your free trial

More decisions in Royal Borough of Greenwich

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021

Dismissed4 July 20253350920
O/S 546-550 Westhorne Avenue, London, SE9 6DR
Allowed4 July 20253350919
O/S 546-550 Westhorne Avenue, London, SE9 6DR
Allowed12 July 20243335657
Land at Mottingham Station, Court Road, Mottingham, London, SE9 4EW
Dismissed27 November 20233320872
Aldi Car Park, Kidbrooke Park Road, London, SE3 9BY
Dismissed27 November 20233307432
Pavement O/S Premier Inn London Woolwich (Royal Arsenal Hotel), Beresford Street, , London, SE18 6BF

The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.