®Planning appeal decision
26 Leinster Square, London, W2 4NQ
‘use as a large HMO (sui generis use) and associated external and internal alterations’ without complying with conditions attached to planning permission Ref 21/04569/FULL, dated 21/11/2021
- Authority
- City of Westminster Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- residential · Change of use
- Inspector
- McDonagh C
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- For Appeal A – the effect of amending conditions 1 and 2 on the living conditions and security of occupants of the HMO.
- For Appeal B – whether the retrospective and/or proposed works preserve/would preserve the Grade II listed building, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
What decided it
The overriding factor was whether the harm caused by intrusive kitchen and bathroom 'pods' to the historic planform of the listed building outweighed the limited public benefits, which determined the split outcome on Appeal B, while acceptance of amended plans securing occupant safety determined the allowance of Appeal A.
The less than substantial harm to the significance of the listed building, to which great weight was given, was not outweighed by the limited benefits of an additional letting room and construction activity, so those elements of Appeal B were dismissed, while other unharmful elements were allowed; Appeal A was allowed as the amended conditions secured suitable living conditions.
Framework references: 212, 215
Plan policies cited: Policy 10, Policy 12, Policy 38, Policy 39
Judgments cited: Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney (2018); Bernard Wheatcroft v Secretary of State for the Environment (1982)
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.