Out-Law / Your Daily Need-To-Know

Out-Law News 2 min. read

Appeal dismissed as redevelopment would harm the heritage and character of area


A Planning Inspector has dismissed an appeal by developer Fairview New Homes for a proposed development in north London as the redevelopment would adversely impact the heritage assets and character of the surrounding area.

The proposed development involved the demolition of a pub which had been registered by Brent Council as an Asset of Community value (ACV) located in a conservation area. The developer's proposal was to erect a new tower, six to 10 storeys high which would include 53 apartments, a replacement pub and community uses.

The Council rejected the planning application on three grounds; the inadequacy of the provision for affordable housing and the lack of mitigation for the effects on the local infrastructure and environment. The final ground was the effect of the loss of the existing building and the impact the replacement building has on the character and appearance of surrounding area. Local residents also supported the Council's reasoning and argued the loss of the valued pub justified refusing planning permission.

Following the submission of the planning application, the developer and Council agreed a unilateral undertaking which addresses the concerns in relation to the affordable housing and imposes conditions to mitigate the effect on the local infrastructure and environment.

The only remaining concern was the impact of the replacement building and the effect of its loss, especially as it is a listed ACV.

The inspector, Brendon Lyons,  determined that the loss of the ACV could be resolved by the replacement pub which would meet the community's need. The inspector also recognised that the redevelopment would increase the intensity of use of the site and that the plan exceeded the targets set out in both national and local policies. However, the inspector considered whether the benefits outweighed the adverse impact the replacement building would have on the character of the immediately surrounding buildings.

A decision letter (17-page / 171 KB PDF) issued by Lyons agreed with the Council and confirmed that the replacement building would "lose the historical presence of the original built form at the gateway to the conservation area". Lyons went on to say that the new development would "continue the pattern of erosion of historic character" and that "there would be harm to the conservation area's historic interest."

Although the impact is "less than substantial", Lyons quoted previous cases and concluded that it "is clear that in the case of harm to the setting of a listed building or to the character or appearance of conservation area, the strong presumption against the grant of planning permission ... is correct."

Planning expert Alexis Coleman of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com said: "This decision is an important reminder to developers not to disregard even a minor impact of a proposed development on heritage. This is especially true in London where most development is quite likely to have some impact on a listed building or conservation area."

"The decision follows the recent line of case law highlighting the significant weight to be given to harm to the setting of listed buildings and conservation areas," she said. "In the past, l'ess than substantial' harm to heritage assets was fairly easily dismissed by councils as being outweighed by other material considerations. However, the Court of Appeal’s 2014 decision in a case involving Barnwell Manor and subsequent cases have clarified how the statutory duties with respect to harm to heritage should be treated in the local planning authority’s balancing of planning considerations."

"Since then many councils have been increasingly diligent with respect to the discharge of the duties upon them," said Coleman. "Harm to heritage should be robustly and properly assessed to minimise the chances of a refusal or successful challenge to a planning permission on similar heritage grounds to those in this case."

"Forget the transactional property risks associated with ACV listings," said Marcus Bate, another planning expert from Pinsent Masons. "The biggest threat posed by ACVs is the risk of development proposals being refused planning permission. This is glossed over by the government in its guidance on ACVs, but is increasingly being realised by well-informed objectors and is gradually embedding itself in the mind of planning decision makers."

We are processing your request. \n Thank you for your patience. An error occurred. This could be due to inactivity on the page - please try again.