®Planning appeal decision
46 - 48 Woodstock Road, LONDON, NW11 8ER
without planning permission, the material change of use of the property by way of the further subdivision beyond the approved 8 self-contained flats to provide additional self-contained residential flats
- Authority
- London Borough of Barnet
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- other · Change of use
- Inspector
- Thompson F
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Appeal A ground (b): whether the alleged use as self-contained residential flats has occurred as a matter of fact
- Appeal B: whether the enforcement notice specifies with sufficient clarity the alleged breach of planning control and the steps required for compliance
What decided it
In Appeal A, the factual finding that the use was as an apart-hotel (C1) rather than residential flats meant the alleged breach had not occurred. In Appeal B, the defects in identifying the breach and framing the requirements were so fundamental that correction would cause injustice.
Judgments cited: Gravesham BC v SSE & O'Brien [1983] JPL 306; Sheila Moore v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2012] EWCA Civ 1202
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.