®Planning appeal decision
Lord Line Building, St Andrews Dock, Clive Sullivan Way , Hull, HU3 4PB
Planning appeal 3275021 at Lord Line Building, St Andrews Dock, Clive Sullivan Way , Hull, HU3 4PB (Kingston-Upon-Hull City Council) was dismissed on 14 December 2021 by Inspector Wilkinson F, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the proposed development would provide acceptable living conditions for future occupiers with regard to noise.
described on the application form as “the erection of building to provide self-contained flats with undercroft parking following demolition of Lord Line Building (Outline application - details of access, appearance, layout and scale submitted) – Resubmission
- Authority
- Kingston-Upon-Hull City Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Wilkinson F
- Postcode
- HU3 4PB
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposed development would provide acceptable living conditions for future occupiers with regard to noise
- whether the appeal site would be a suitable location for new housing having regard to accessibility to local services and facilities
- the effects of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area with specific regard to its design, the St Andrew's Dock Conservation Area and a locally listed building
- whether the proposed development would result in the unacceptable loss of employment land
- whether the proposed development would make acceptable provision for open space and trees
What decided it
The cumulative conflict with the development plan arising from unacceptable living conditions due to noise, unsuitability of location due to poor accessibility, and unjustified harm to the conservation area and locally listed building outweighed any material considerations.
The benefits of housing delivery and removal of a derelict building did not outweigh the less-than-substantial harm to the conservation area and locally listed building, given the weight to be attached to heritage conservation and the failure to demonstrate that demolition was necessary.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy 1(4)Policy 1(5)Policy 2Policy 4(5a)Policy 4(5b)Policy 14(a ii)Policy 14(a iii)Policy 14(a iv)Policy 14(b)Policy 16Policy 26(a)Policy 42Policy 45
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 182Paragraph 199Paragraph 202Paragraph 203
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 Kingston-Upon-Hull City Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Allowed6 May 20266005071170-172 Spring Bank, Hull, HU3 1PG
- Dismissed6 May 20266005069170-172 Spring Bank, Hull, HU3 1PG
- Dismissed6 May 20266002751International Food Store, 170-172 Spring Bank, Kingston Upon Hull, HU3 1PG
- Dismissed24 March 20266002425Former Car Park, Rawling Way, Hull, HU3 2SJ
- Allowed17 November 20253371812394A Holderness Road, Kingston Upon Hull, HU9 3DL
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.