Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed22 January 20263369496

216 HIGH ROAD, ILFORD, IG1 1QE

Change of use of E(e)-Dental Surgery into C4-HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) for 4 persons with internal alteration

Authority
London Borough of Redbridge
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Change of use
Inspector
Szymanski D

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether or not the proposal would make adequate provision for refuse storage
  • whether or not the proposal would make adequate provision for cycle parking
  • the effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area
  • whether or not the proposal is compliant with policies for town centre uses
  • the effect of the proposal upon the SAC as a designated habitats site

What decided it

The inability to ascertain that the proposal would not have likely significant effects upon the integrity of the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation, which under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 precludes the project from proceeding.

The moderate weight given to housing delivery benefits was substantially outweighed by the substantial weight attributed to the inability to secure SAC mitigation and the significant weight given to inadequate refuse storage, moderate weight to town centre policy conflict, and limited weight to character and appearance harm, such that the policy conflicts and harm significantly and demonstrably outweighed the scheme benefits.

Framework references: 57, 11, 193

Plan policies cited: Policy LP26, Policy T5, Policy T6, Policy LP23, Policy LP9, Policy LP10, Policy LP17, Policy LP39

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.