“Part 3 Class M of the GPDO – Appeal Decisions” – 2 additional appeal decisions (total = 97) …

The Part 3 Class M of the GPDO - Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 2 additional appeal decisions relating to retail-(etc)-to-residential conversions, for which the conclusions are as follows:

July 2018 - Code P3CM-097 (appeal dismissed):

  • This appeal decision was assessed against the issues specified by paragraph M.2 as follows:
    - “transport and highways impacts” = no assessment.
    - “contamination risks” = no assessment.
    - “flooding risks” = no assessment.
    - “impact of the change of use” = unacceptable (detailed assessment).
    - “design or external appearance” = no assessment.
  • When assessing an application for prior approval, the development plan (e.g. the LPA’s Local Plan, etc) is not the “starting point”. [Note: In some of these appeal decisions it’s not clear whether the Inspector concludes that 1) the development plan is a material consideration but not the “starting point” or 2) the development plan is not a material consideration].
    [Quote: “It has been established in the courts [R (oao Patel) v SSCLG & Johal & Wandsworth BC [2016] EWHC 3354 (Admin)] that a prior approval appeal should not be determined, expressly or otherwise, on the basis of S38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, or as though the development plan must be applied; the principle of development is established through the grant of permission by the GPDO. However, development plan policies may be relevant in prior approval cases insofar as they relate to the matters of the case.”].
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where the Inspector, when considering issue M.2(1)(d), assessed the impact of the change of use on adequate provision of services (albeit only where there is a reasonable prospect of the building being used to provide such services) and concluded that this would be unacceptable.
    [Note: The Inspector rejected an application for costs against the Council in relation to this issue].
    [Quote: “While, therefore, the change of use would not affect the provision of basic shopping facilities, it would have the potential to harmfully affect the viability and commercial character of the parade itself and the group of shops and services in the vicinity. As a result, I conclude that it would be undesirable for the appeal premises to change to a C3 use, due to the impact of the change on the adequate provision of A1 and A2 services, while no evidence has been put before me to demonstrate that there is no reasonable prospect of the building being used to provide such services.”].

July 2018 - Code P3CM-096 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

Notes:

  • To view the conclusions, full summaries, and decision notices for any of the above appeals, please view the Part 3 Class M of the GPDO - Appeal Decisions document. As a member of the Planning Jungle website, you can view the decision notices for all of the appeals within the above document for no extra cost.
  • Any of the above conclusions marked with a "(*)" contradict other appeal decisions. The "Reference Section" within the above document indicates how many appeals have supported and contradicted each particular conclusion.
  • The above document also includes 2 "Potential fallback position" appeals, which are NOT summarised (only listed).