Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed24 October 20233292646

10-24 Lamb Lane, London, E8 3PL

the demolition of an existing building and construction of part six, part seven storey building, with basement, providing 32 residential units (18x1, 12x2 and 2x3 bed units) and 998 sqm of commercial floor over basement and ground floor levels including roof top terrace

Authority
London Borough of Hackney
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Hearing
Development
residential · Major dwellings
Inspector
Catchpole R

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether the site is an appropriate location for the proposed development having regard to local and national planning policies
  • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the local area, bearing in mind the special attention that should be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Mare Street Conservation Area and the setting of the nearby Grade II* listed building, 'The New Lansdowne Club' (Ref: 1265590)
  • the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of future occupants with regard to the ventilation of single aspect rooms and nearby residents with regard to daylight
  • whether there are any other material considerations, including the housing land supply situation and benefits of the proposal, which would indicate that it should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan

What decided it

The harm to the character and appearance of the townscape and the less than substantial harm to the Mare Street Conservation Area, combined with conflict with the employment land policy LP27, outweighed the public benefits and meant the tilted balance did not apply.

The harm to the Conservation Area and townscape and the conflict with employment policy LP27 were given significant and considerable weight and outweighed the benefits of housing delivery, affordable housing contribution and affordable workspace, tipping the balance against the proposal.

Framework references: 11, 69, 125, 126, 130, 199, 200, 202

Plan policies cited: LP1, LP2, LP3, LP12, LP13, LP14, LP26, LP27, HC1, D6, D3(D)(7), H10

Judgments cited: North Wiltshire DC [1993] 65 P. & C.R. 137

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.