A recent case at 66 Kings Road, Kingston, exemplifies how effective ET Planning can overturn a refusal, even in complex circumstances involving retrospective applications.
- Retrospective Application: The project was already completed, making it a retrospective planning application. This added a layer of complexity as it shifted the discussion from potential impacts to actual impacts.
- Design Concerns: The refusal was based on the extension’s perceived excessive bulk and massing, a common concern in densely populated areas like Kingston.
- Neighbourhood Impact: The local authority was concerned about the extension’s impact on the street scene and neighbouring properties, an essential aspect of urban planning.
Strategy and Approach
ET Planning, undertook a detailed analysis of the refusal reasons and formulated a robust strategy. A persuasive appeal was prepared by ET Planning, highlighting the minimal actual impact and the suitability of the extension within the broader urban fabric of Kingston.
The appeal was successful. The planning inspector agreed with the appellant, noting that the extension had a minimal impact on the street scene and neighbouring amenity. This decision allowed the client to retain their extension, a significant win given the retrospective nature of the application.
This case at 66 Kings Road, Kingston, underlines the importance of expert guidance in navigating the intricacies of planning applications and appeals. Whether dealing with planning enforcement, development viability, or retrospective applications, a skilled planning consultant can make a definitive difference.
For further assistance with your planning applications, appeals, or enforcement issues, visit etplanning.co.uk for expert advice and consultation. Our team specialises in providing tailored solutions, understanding the unique challenges and opportunities within the UK’s planning landscape, particularly in England.