65 Nile Street, LONDON, N1 7RD

the erection of a roof extension to create one additional storey, plus erection of a single storey rear extension and conversion of the property to create 4 self-contained dwellings comprising 2 x 1 bed, 1 x 2 bed and 1 x 3 bed units, including minor external alterations

Authority: London Borough of Hackney
Appeal type: minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure: Hearing
Development: residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector: Willis S

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

The effect of the proposed development on the supply of employment sites
Whether the proposed development would provide appropriate living conditions for future occupiers of Unit RO2 with particular regard to outlook and daylight
The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of 67 Nile Street with regard to outlook and privacy, and 69 Nile Street with regard to outlook
Whether the proposed development would encourage future occupiers to use a range of transport modes, with regard to the provision of cycle storage facilities and car free development
Whether the proposed development would make appropriate provision for affordable housing
Whether the proposed development would make appropriate provision for carbon offsetting
If there is any harm and development plan conflict, whether other material considerations indicate that a decision should be made other than in accordance with the development plan

What decided it

The existence of a realistic fallback scheme (an unimplemented prior approval and certificate of lawful development for residential conversion) causing similar harm but fewer benefits than the appeal scheme, to which the Inspector attributed significant weight in favour of the appeal.

the identified harms from loss of employment floorspace and inadequate daylight/outlook for future occupiers, giving rise to conflict with the development plan as a whole, were outweighed by the significant weight attached to the fallback position together with limited weight benefits including housing supply, economic benefits, affordable housing, carbon offsetting and biodiversity enhancement, so the appeal was allowed

Framework references: 57

Plan policies cited: Policy LP27, Policy LP26, Policy LP28, Policy LP1, Policy LP2, Policy LP17, Policy LP13, Policy LP42, Policy LP43, Policy LP45, Policy LP55, Policy D6, Policy H4, Policy T4, Policy T1, Policy T5, Policy T6, Policy SI2, Policy E1, Policy E2

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.