®Planning appeal decision
2 Stanley Crescent, London, W11 2NB
Planning appeal 3270836 at 2 Stanley Crescent, London, W11 2NB (Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 22 November 2021 by Inspector Edginton A, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the development and works would preserve the Grade II listed 1–9 Stanley Crescent and the Park and Garden listed Grade II Ladbroke Estate or any features of special architectural or historic interest, including setting, and whether the development and works would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Ladbroke Conservation Area.
Alter external mansard shape. Alter 2nd & 3rd floor plan, connecting stair & section. Remove Lower Ground Floor Utility Room. Replace chimney pots
- Appeal type
- other · Listed Building Consent & Conservation Area Consent Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Edginton A
- Postcode
- W11 2NB
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development and works would preserve the Grade II listed 1–9 Stanley Crescent and the Park and Garden listed Grade II Ladbroke Estate or any features of special architectural or historic interest, including setting, and whether the development and works would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Ladbroke Conservation Area
What decided it
The absence of any public benefits to weigh against the less than substantial harm to the listed building, gardens, and conservation area arising from the mansard roof, second floor, and staircase alterations meant the proposals could not be justified under paragraph 202 of the Framework.
The minor benefits arising from the lower ground floor works and chimney pot replacement were outweighed by the less than substantial harm to the listed building, gardens, and conservation area from the mansard roof, second floor plan form, and staircase alterations, resulting in no net heritage benefit.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy CL1Policy CL2Policy CL3Policy CL4Policy CL8Policy CL11
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 199Paragraph 200Paragraph 202
- Judgments
- R (oao James Hall and Co Ltd) v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council and Co-operative Group Ltd [2019] EWHC 2899
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 appliedThe 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.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Planning permission granted23 July 20263328929Flat 5, 69 Oxford Gardens, London, W10 5UJ
- Allowed23 June 20263362698Flat 1 at 28 Brunswick Gardens and Flat 2 at 30 Brunswick Gardens, London, W8 4AL
- Dismissed15 June 20266001948Land to End of Ledbury Mews West, London, W11 2QZ
- Dismissed2 June 20263376699Kings Road, Outside No. 395, London, SW10 0LR
- Dismissed19 May 20266003102Kensington High Street, Outside No. 254, London, W8 6ND
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.