®Planning appeal decision
8 Gloucester Gate, LONDON, NW1 4HG
various alterations to dwelling house and mews including replacement of the rear extension, rebuilding of mews roof, internal refurbishment consisting of demolition and reposition of some partition walls and other associated works
- Authority
- London Borough of Camden
- Appeal type
- householder · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Cullen F
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the proposal would (i) preserve the Grade I listed building known as Numbers 2 to 11 and attached railings, or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses; and (ii) preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Regent's Park Conservation Area (Appeals A and B).
- Whether the need for active cooling equipment as proposed has been satisfactorily demonstrated, having regard to the application of the London Plan cooling hierarchy (Appeal A).
What decided it
The less than substantial harm found to the significance of the Grade I listed building and the Regent's Park Conservation Area was not outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme.
The moderate weight given to the scheme's public (including heritage) benefits did not outweigh the considerable importance and weight attached to the less than substantial harm to the significance of the listed building and conservation area, so the balance tipped against the appeals.
Framework references: 212, 213, 215, 167
Plan policies cited: Policy HC1, Policy D1, Policy D2, Policy SI 4, Policy CC2, Policy D4, Policy D5, Policy CC8
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.