Town Planner Pro
Free trial
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed8 November 20233321553

Grove Cottage, 52 Ham Street, Richmond, TW10 7HT

Planning appeal 3321553 at Grove Cottage, 52 Ham Street, Richmond, TW10 7HT (Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council) was dismissed on 8 November 2023 by Inspector Parkin A, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the proposals would preserve a Grade II listed building.

Ground floor extension, new first floor window, first floor rear extension (Appeals A, D), refurbishment of porch, replacement fenestration and associated site landscaping to create a 2-bed/3-person dwelling

Authority
Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council
Appeal type
householder · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Householder developments
Inspector
Parkin A
Postcode
TW10 7HT

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the proposals would preserve a Grade II listed building
  • The effect of the proposals on the significance of the Ham House Conservation Area
  • Whether the proposals would be inappropriate development on Metropolitan Open Land, having regard to the relevant development plan policies and the National Planning Policy Framework 2023
  • The effect of the proposals on the living conditions of nearby occupiers, with particular regard to outlook
  • If the development is inappropriate, whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal

What decided it

The scale, massing, design and materials of the proposed extensions would cause less than substantial harm to the Grade II listed building and conservation area that would not be outweighed by public benefits, and the proposals would constitute inappropriate development on Metropolitan Open Land without very special circumstances.

The harm caused to designated heritage assets (less than substantial harm to the listed building and conservation area) and to Metropolitan Open Land (inappropriate development) substantially outweighed the limited economic, social and environmental benefits of the proposals, and very special circumstances did not exist to justify the development.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy HC1 (heritage conservation and growth) of the London Plan 2021Policy G3 (metropolitan open land) of the London Plan 2021Policy G7 (trees and woodlands) of the London Plan 2021Policy LP1 (local character and design quality) of the Richmond upon Thames Local Plan 2018Policy LP3 (designated heritage assets) of the Richmond upon Thames Local Plan 2018Policy LP4 (non-designated heritage assets) of the Richmond upon Thames Local Plan 2018Policy LP8 (amenity and living conditions) of the Richmond upon Thames Local Plan 2018Policy LP13 (green belt, metropolitan open land and local green space) of the Richmond upon Thames Local Plan 2018Policy C2 of the Ham and Petersham Neighbourhood Plan 2018-2033
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 138Paragraph 149

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 applied

The 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.

Appeals plan, £15 a month

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

314 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in Richmond upon Thames

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2023

  1. Dismissed26 October 20266011874
    61-63 Petersham Road, Richmond Upon Thames, TW10 6UT
  2. Dismissed6 August 20266007949
    The Lensbury, Broom Road, London, TW11 9NU
  3. Split Decision10 March 20263333609
    Pontoon and Land Adjacent to Richmond Bridge Pier, Richmond Riverside, Richmond, TW9 1TH
  4. Allowed27 January 20266001465
    The Boathouse, Ranelagh Drive, Twickenham, TW1 1QZ
  5. Dismissed21 August 20243345719
    57 Rosecroft Gardens, London, TW2 7PT

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.