®Planning appeal decision
Tawney Common, Theydon Mount, Epping, CM16 7PX
Planning appeal 3350742 at Tawney Common, Theydon Mount, Epping, CM16 7PX (Epping Forest District Council) was dismissed on 19 June 2025 by Inspector Ghafoor A, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the proposed use of the residential outbuilding as an annex falls within section 55(2)(d) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as a use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse and therefore does not constitute development requiring planning permission.
Internal conversion of an existing detached garage within the curtilage to provide a residential annex with kitchen, living space, bedroom and bathroom facilities
- Authority
- Epping Forest District Council
- Appeal type
- ldc · Lawful Development Certificate
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Other minor developments
- Inspector
- Ghafoor A
- Postcode
- CM16 7PX
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the proposed use of the residential outbuilding as an annex falls within section 55(2)(d) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as a use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse and therefore does not constitute development requiring planning permission
- Whether the proposed use would result in the creation of a separate planning unit
- Whether the proposed use would conflict with the conditions attached to the 1995 planning permission for the replacement detached garage
What decided it
The proposed annex would contain self-contained facilities for day-to-day living and would result in the creation of a separate planning unit, meaning the use cannot reasonably be regarded as incidental to the primary residential use of the planning unit, and it would conflict with the express conditions of the 1995 planning permission.
What the Inspector cited
- Judgments
- Emin v SSE [1989] JPL 909; Wallington v SoS for Wales [1990] 62 P & CR 150; Holding v FSS [2004] JPL 1405; Croydon LBC v Gladden [1994] 1PLR 30; Uttlesford DC v SSE & White [1992]; Peche d'or Investments v SSE [1996] JPL 311; Millington v SSE [2000] JPL 297; Harrods v SSETR [2002] JPL 1258; Sage v SSHCLG & Bromley LBC [2021] EWHC 2885 (Admin)
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 appliedThe 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.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Epping Forest District Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025
- Allowed29 October 2026601532055 Weald Hall Lane, Epping, CM16 6NB
- Dismissed28 October 20266011400Larksmead Nursery, St Leonards Road, Nazeing, EN9 2HQ
- Dismissed27 October 20266011962Russell Cottage,, Coopersale Hall, Fluxs Lane,, Epping,, CM16 7PE
- Dismissed27 October 20266011961Russell Cottage, Coopersale Hall, Fluxs Lane, Epping, CM16 7PE
- Allowed27 October 20266008413Sparks Farm, Nine Ashes Road, Nine Ashes, CM4 0JZ
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.