Town Planner Pro
Free trial
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed14 April 20223264437

42 High Street, Teddington, TW11 8ES

Planning appeal 3264437 at 42 High Street, Teddington, TW11 8ES (Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council) was dismissed on 14 April 2022 by Inspector Harley S, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: The effect of the proposals on the character and appearance of the High Street and Cedar Road street scenes.

redevelopment of site to provide a mixed-use development comprising A3 restaurant at basement and ground floor and eight residential units above

Authority
Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Hearing
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Harley S
Postcode
TW11 8ES

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • The effect of the proposals on the character and appearance of the High Street and Cedar Road street scenes
  • The effect on heritage assets, namely the setting of No 40 (The Teddington Arms), a Locally Listed Building/Building of Townscape Merit, and the High Street Teddington Conservation Area

What decided it

The harmful effect of both proposals' scale, form and design on the character and appearance of the High Street and Cedar Road street scenes.

The acknowledged benefits of housing delivery, town centre vitality and employment were outweighed by the harm to the character and appearance of the street scenes and the small harm to the setting of the non-designated heritage asset, leading to overall conflict with the development plan as a whole.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy LP1Policy LP2Policy LP3Policy LP4Policy LP26
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 202

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

324 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 Richmond upon Thames

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022

  1. Dismissed3 June 20243326847
    Natsons Newsagent, 53 Church Road, London, SW13 9HH
  2. Dismissed20 May 20243331939
    26 West Temple Sheen, London, SW14 7AP
  3. Dismissed1 February 20233304468
    15 Grove Road, Twickenham, TW2 5NH
  4. Dismissed23 November 20213269590
    5-7 Cardigan Road, London, SW13 0BH
  5. Allowed10 September 20213270646
    4 Lenton Rise, Richmond, TW9 2TP

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.