®Planning appeal decision
Mr Motors, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, Essex, RM6 5QT
Planning appeal 3354884 at Mr Motors, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, Essex, RM6 5QT (London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Council) was dismissed on 7 July 2025 by Inspector Cryan M, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the proposal would be inappropriate development within the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
the construction of an additional two storeys above existing building to facilitate 9no residential units with associated refuse and cycle storage and the change of use of existing ground floor from Sui Generis to Use Class E
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Cryan M
- Postcode
- RM6 5QT
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the proposal would be inappropriate development within the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and any relevant development plan policies
- The effects of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt
- Whether the site represents an appropriate and sustainable location for the proposed development, with particular regard to accessibility, compatibility with neighbouring uses, and (in respect of the Class E use) its effect on town and district centres
- Whether there would be an appropriate housing mix, including accessible housing, to meet identified need in the area
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, including the setting of the White House, a nearby Grade II Listed Building
- The effect of the proposed development on a nearby Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (a SINC)
- Whether the proposed development would provide acceptable living conditions for future residents, with particular regard to daylight, sunlight, outlook, privacy, ventilation, overheating, noise and general disturbance
- The effect on living conditions for residents of the White House, with particular regard to outlook and natural light
- Whether the proposed development would offer safe and convenient access and servicing, with particular regard to the provision of adequate car parking, the provision of adequate refuse and cycle storage arrangements, support for the use of sustainable transport, and its effects on pedestrian and highway safety
- If the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposal
What decided it
The substantial weight attributable to the harm to the Green Belt from inappropriate development and loss of openness, combined with harm to the setting of the Grade II listed White House and other identified harms, is not clearly outweighed by the moderate benefit of housing delivery in an unsustainable location with poor design and living conditions.
The substantial weight given to Green Belt harm and loss of openness, together with harm to the heritage setting, unsustainable location, poor housing mix, unacceptable living conditions, and inadequate access and servicing, was not outweighed by the moderate benefit of housing delivery, resulting in dismissal.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy SP6 of the BDLPPolicy SP2 of the BDLPPolicy DMD1 of the BDLPPolicy DMD4 of the BDLPPolicy DMH2 of the BDLPPolicy DMNE3 of the BDLPPolicy DMSI3 of the BDLPPolicy DMSI8 of the BDLPPolicy DMT1 of the BDLPPolicy DMT2 of the BDLPPolicy DMT3 of the BDLPPolicy G2 of the London Plan 2021Policy H2 of the London Plan 2021Policy H10 of the London Plan 2021Policy D1 of the London Plan 2021Policy D3 of the London Plan 2021Policy D4 of the London Plan 2021Policy D6 of the London Plan 2021Policy D7 of the London Plan 2021Policy D13 of the London Plan 2021Policy D14 of the London Plan 2021Policy GG2 of the London Plan 2021Policy HC1 of the London Plan 2021Policy SD6 of the London Plan 2021Policy SD7 of the London Plan 2021Policy T1 of the London Plan 2021Policy T2 of the London Plan 2021Policy T5 of the London Plan 2021Policy T6 of the London Plan 2021
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 78Paragraph 110Paragraph 115Paragraph 142Paragraph 143Paragraph 149Paragraph 153Paragraph 154Paragraph 155Paragraph 156Paragraph 157
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 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025
- Dismissed8 May 2026600237933 Sandown Avenue, Dagenham, RM10 8XD
- Dismissed13 April 2026600283922 Whitebarn Lane, Dagenham, RM10 9LH
- Dismissed10 April 2026600348312 Neville Gardens, Dagenham, Essex, RM8 3QT
- Dismissed27 March 2026337071582 Holgate Road, Dagenham, Essex, RM10 8NB
- Notice varied and upheld27 March 20263340354197 Broad Street, Dagenham, RM10 9JD
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.