®Planning appeal decision
Ground Floor - 40 Bideford Avenue, Perivale , UB6 7PY
Without planning permission: The material change of use of the premises to a composite use, comprising a café and mixed use restaurant and shisha lounge (marked with an 'X' on the plan attached to the notice); AND The erection of a side and rear extension (hatched in black on the plan attached to the notice); AND The erection of 2 rear retractable canopies (each marked with a 'Y' on the plan attached to the notice)
- Authority
- London Borough of Ealing
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- leisure-sport · Change of use
- Inspector
- Walker A
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effect of the development upon the living conditions of nearby occupiers (particularly as regards odour, noise and disturbance)
- The effect of the development upon highway safety through any increase in parking demand
- The effect of the development upon the integrity of the Strategic Industrial Location
What decided it
The Inspector found that the operational extensions and the sui generis mixed restaurant/café and shisha lounge use together caused unacceptable harm to living conditions, highway safety and the Strategic Industrial Location, which could not be overcome by conditions or separated from the change of use.
The appeal development does not comply with the development plan as a whole and there are no other considerations which outweigh that finding, so the balance tips against the grant of planning permission.
Plan policies cited: Policy 7A, Policy 1.1, Policy D3, Policy T1, Policy T2, Policy T4, Policy T6, Policy 3.2, Policy 1.1(c), Policy E4, Policy E5
Judgments cited: Mansi v Elstree RDC [1964] 16 P&CR 153
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.