12 Priory Road, Richmond Upon Thames, Kew, TW9 3DF

Authority: Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council
Appeal type: minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure: Written Representations
Development: Change of use
Inspector: Livingstone C

What decided it

Although procedural unreasonableness was found, the proposal was contrary to the development plan and would have been refused regardless, so the unreasonable conduct did not cause unnecessary or wasted expense.

Read the decision letter on the Inspectorate’s site

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.

Town Planner Pro

What an account adds

Draw a red line around your site and the appraisal follows.
- Heritage. Listed buildings by grade and distance, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, registered parks and gardens, heritage at risk.
- Landscape and environment. Green belt, national parks and national landscapes, SSSIs, ancient woodland, SPA, SAC and Ramsar sites, nutrient catchments.
- Flooding. Flood zones 2 and 3, surface water, and both again with climate change.
- Transport. The 800 metre station catchment and service frequency, bus stops with their weekday frequency, the cycle network, and the Framework’s transport tests measured for the site.
Then the development plan position, the housing land supply as an Inspector last accepted it, and every appeal decided around the site with its letter.
Every English appeal since 2016, with the letter behind it wherever the Inspectorate published one. Searched by meaning as well as by words, with the key case law counted live across the letters.
Casework that chases the deadlines. Applications, appeals and conditions with their statutory dates.
The judgement stays yours. The tool gathers the material and dates it.

Join the waiting list

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.