“Part 3 Class O of the GPDO – Appeal Decisions” – 3 additional appeal decisions (total = 278) …

The Part 3 Class O of the GPDO - Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 3 additional appeal decisions relating to office-to-residential conversions, for which the conclusions are as follows:

October 2018 - Code P3CO-278 (appeal allowed):

  • This appeal decision was assessed against the issues specified by paragraph O.2 as follows:
    - “transport and highways impacts” = acceptable (detailed assessment).
    - “contamination risks” = no assessment.
    - “flooding risks” = no assessment.
    - “impacts of noise” = no assessment.
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where the Inspector, when considering the “transport and highways impacts of the development”, assessed vehicle parking and concluded that this would be acceptable.
    [Quote: “However, even if the development generated a demand for 4 parking spaces, based on the results of the parking survey undertaken on behalf of the appellant for this development, this demand can be accommodated on-street. Whilst it is clear parking is a significant concern for residents, the Council has said it has no evidence to dispute the findings of the parking survey, which indicates that even with 4 parking spaces accommodated on-street, parking stress levels would be between 83-84%. This is below the 90% which the appellant asserts is the level beyond which London boroughs generally assess parking stress levels to be unacceptable. Whilst the Council considers this is high I have not been directed to any source which demonstrates to me the 90% threshold is not appropriate. On the basis of this survey, the parking demand for the development could be accommodated on-street even in a worst case scenario.”].
  • When assessing an application for prior approval, the development plan (e.g. the LPA’s Local Plan, etc) is not the “starting point” (or is not a “decisive” factor). [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: “Policy 37 of the Local Plan is relevant to the planning judgement to be made in this case and whilst not a decisive consideration, this policy may be taken into account as a relevant factor.”].

October 2018 - Code P3CO-277 (appeal allowed):

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

October 2018 - Code P3CO-276 (appeal allowed):

  • [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 O 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 33 "Potential fallback position" appeals, which are NOT summarised (only listed).