Town Planner Pro
Free trial
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Notice upheld9 December 20243343607

Flats 1-8, 14A Central Business Centre , Iron Bridge Close, London, NW10 0UR

Planning appeal 3343607 at Flats 1-8, 14A Central Business Centre , Iron Bridge Close, London, NW10 0UR (London Borough of Brent) was dismissed on 9 December 2024 by Inspector Savage M, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the flats provide satisfactory living conditions for their occupants, having regard to the provision of internal floor space, external amenity space, provision of bin and cycle storage, provision of wheelchair accessible units or lifetime home compliant units.

Material change of use of premises to eight flats (residential units)

Authority
London Borough of Brent
Appeal type
enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Change of use
Inspector
Savage M
Postcode
NW10 0UR

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the flats provide satisfactory living conditions for their occupants, having regard to the provision of internal floor space, external amenity space, provision of bin and cycle storage, provision of wheelchair accessible units or lifetime home compliant units
  • The effect of the appeal scheme on the site as a designated Significant Industrial Location (SIL) and its effect on the provision of land to meet current and future demands for industrial and related functions
  • Whether the appeal scheme makes appropriate provision for affordable housing
  • The effect of the appeal scheme on the provision of family sized (3 bed or more) dwellings

What decided it

The flats fail to provide satisfactory living conditions due to grossly inadequate internal floor space and external amenity space, and the residential use results in unacceptable loss of industrial floorspace within a Significant Industrial Location, harms that substantially outweigh the modest benefit of eight additional housing units.

The modest benefit of providing 8 additional residential units was substantially outweighed by the harms identified: failure to meet minimum housing standards for internal and external space, loss of industrial floorspace within a protected SIL, and compromise to the SIL's ability to operate on a 24-hour basis.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy D5 of the London Plan (2021)Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021)Policy E4 of the London Plan (2021)Policy E5 of the London Plan (2021)Policy E7 of the London Plan (2021)Policy T5 of the London Plan (2021)Policy BH5 of the Brent Local PlanPolicy BH6 of the Brent Local PlanPolicy BH13 of the Brent Local PlanPolicy BE2 of the Brent Local PlanPolicy BP1 of the Brent Local Plan (2022)Policy BP5 of the Brent Local Plan (2022)Brent Design Guide SPD1 (November 2018)
Judgments
Sage v SSETR & Maidstone BC [2003] UKHL 22; SSCLG & Anor v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council [2011] UKSC 15; Impey v Secretary of State for the Environment (1980) 47 P & CR 157; Swale BC v First Secretary of State [2005] EWCA Civ 1568; Thurrock BC v SSETR [2002] EWCA Civ 226; Swale BC v FSS & Lee [2005] EWCA Civ 1568; [2006] JPL 886; Islington LBC v SSHCLG & Maxwell Estates [2019] EWHC 2691 (Admin); [2020] JPL 532; Bansal v SSHCLG & Anor [2021] EWHC 1604; Hedges v SSHLG & Anor [2021] EWHC 2392 (Admin); Gravesham BC v SSE & O'Brien [1982] 47 P&CR 142; [1983] JPL 307; Murfitt v SSE [1980] JPL 598; Somak Travel Ltd v SSE [1987] JPL 630

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

584 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 London Borough of Brent

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024

  1. Notice upheld30 September 20263359486
    30 Randall Avenue, London, NW2 7RN
  2. Planning permission granted25 September 20263377160
    26 Sidmouth Road, London, NW2 5HJ
  3. Notice upheld24 September 20263365164
    Land and Garage, Rear of 21 Ivy Road and Adjacent to 31 Cedar Road, London, NW2 6SN
  4. Split Decision17 September 20263357462
    61 Alder Grove, London, NW2 7DE
  5. Notice varied and upheld16 September 20263365031
    73A and the Rear Part of 73 Willesden Lane, Kilburn, London, NW6 7RR

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.