Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Split Decision16 November 20223276542

64A Hindes Road, HARROW, HA1 1SL

Without planning permission: 1) The construction of a loft conversion comprising of rear roof extension and gable end (Unauthorised Development) 2) The installation of an Air Conditioning unit (Unauthorised A/C Unit) 3) The installation of hardstanding to the front of the property (Unauthorised Hardstanding)

Authority
London Borough of Harrow
Appeal type
enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Other minor developments
Inspector
Higenbottam H

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the loft conversion comprising of a rear roof extension and gable end harms the character or appearance of the area
  • Whether the A/C unit has an unacceptable effect on the living conditions of nearby residents in particular with regard to noise and disturbance
  • Whether the A/C unit harms the character and appearance of the area
  • Whether the hardstanding harms the character and appearance of the area and the visual and residential amenity of occupiers of neighbouring properties

What decided it

The A/C unit cannot be demonstrated to operate without causing unacceptable noise disturbance to neighbouring residents, contrary to development plan policies protecting neighbour amenity, whereas the loft conversion and hardstanding (with conditions) comply with character and design policies.

Plan policies cited: Policy D3 (11) of the London Plan 2021, Policy DM1 of the Development Management Policies Local Plan 2013, Policy CS1B of the Core Strategy 2012, DM Policy DM12, LP Policy D3 (7), DM Policy DM9, DM Policy DM10

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.