®Planning appeal decision
57 South Street, Rochford, Essex, SS4 1BL
Planning appeal 3302837 at 57 South Street, Rochford, Essex, SS4 1BL (Rochford District Council) was dismissed on 14 July 2023 by Inspector Johnson W, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the appeal property comprises a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA).
the demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site to provide seven apartments with associated parking, amenity space and landscaping
- Authority
- Rochford District Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Johnson W
- Postcode
- SS4 1BL
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the appeal property comprises a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA)
- the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Rochford Conservation Area (RCA)
- the effect of the proposed development, with regard to flood risk and surface water drainage
- the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, and whether satisfactory accommodation would be provided for future occupiers of the scheme
What decided it
The harm to the Rochford Conservation Area and the loss of the non-designated heritage asset, which the Inspector found would not be outweighed by the limited public benefits of the scheme, particularly given the statutory duty to preserve or enhance conservation areas and the Framework's requirement to give great weight to heritage asset conservation.
The environmental harm to the conservation area and loss of a non-designated heritage asset was not outweighed by the economic and social benefits of housing delivery and construction activity, particularly where heritage assets of particular importance provide a clear reason for refusal under Framework paragraph 11(d)
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy CP1Policy H1Policy DM1Policy DM3Policy DM4Policy DM8
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 202
- Judgments
- Pugh v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] EWHC 3 (Admin); Bohm v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 3217 (Admin)
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 Rochford
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2023
- Allowed9 July 202660048639 College Gardens, Rochford, SS4 1YL
- Allowed23 October 20253364836Land Rear of 17 Hillside Road, Hockley, Essex, SS5 4RT
- Allowed6 August 20253353686Riverview, Land End of Oakfield Road, Hockley, Essex, SS5 5JY
- Allowed17 April 20253353859Land Adjacent to 1 Disraeli Road, Rayleigh, Essex, SS6 8XP
- Allowed26 February 20253346050Grove Road, Rayleigh, Essex, SS6 8UA
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.