Planning appeal decision
Land at Chingford Mill Pumping Station, 35 Lower Hall Lane, Chingford, E4 8AG
Planning appeal 3280591 at Land at Chingford Mill Pumping Station, 35 Lower Hall Lane, Chingford, E4 8AG (Waltham Forest London Borough Council) was dismissed on 18 July 2023 by Inspector Harbottle M, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the conversion of the PS to self-contained flats and the conversion of the TH into a self-contained dwelling constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt ("the GB").
Without planning permission: (1) material change of use of the Pumping Station to self-contained flats; (2) material change of use of the Turbine House to a self-contained dwelling; (3) demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of 5 two storey dwellings
- Appeal type
- major · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Harbottle M
- Postcode
- E4 8JG
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the conversion of the PS to self-contained flats and the conversion of the TH into a self-contained dwelling constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt ("the GB")
- Whether the demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of 5 two-storey dwellings constitutes inappropriate development in the GB
- The effect on the openness and purposes of including land in the GB
- The effects on heritage assets
- Flood risk
- The effects on the site's contribution to recreation
- The effects on air quality
- The effects on greenhouse gas emissions
- The need for and provision of affordable housing, having regard to the financial viability of the development
- If any part of the DPA constitutes inappropriate development, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
What decided it
The harm to the openness and purposes of the Green Belt from the inappropriate development was not clearly outweighed by other considerations, so very special circumstances were not demonstrated.
the harm to the Green Belt, the less than substantial harm to heritage assets, and other identified harms were not, individually or cumulatively, clearly outweighed by other considerations including human rights, so the balance tipped against granting permission
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy GG2Policy CS5Policy DM12Policy HC1Policy CS12Policy DM28Policy SI12Policy CS4Policy CS13Policy DM34Policy SI1Policy SI2Policy H4Policy CS2Policy DM3
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 34Paragraph 58Paragraph 130Paragraph 13
- Judgments
- Ioannou v SSCLG & Enfield LBC [2014] EWCA Civ 1432; Bhandal v SSHCLG & Bromsgrove DC [2020] EWHC 2724 (Admin); [2021] JPL 611; Arnold v SSCLG [2015] EWHC 1197 (Admin), [2017] EWCA Civ 231; [2017] JPL 923
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 Waltham Forest London Borough Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2023
- Dismissed28 September 20266011324L/A to 2 Claremont Road, London, E17 5RJ
- Dismissed18 September 20266011375Land to R/O 34-40 Hillcrest Road, Walthamstow, E17 4AP
- Allowed21 July 202660069278 Mulberry Close, Chingford, London, E4 8BS
- Allowed16 July 2026600750038 Second Avenue, Walthamstow, London, E17 9QH
- Dismissed22 May 2026600313652 Withy Mead, Chingford, Waltham Forest, E4 6JZ
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.
®