COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE MITTING)
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE MOORE-BICK
LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN
| THE QUEEN on the Application of MAJED
|- and -
LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
165 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2DY
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr M Beard & D Kolinsky (instructed by Louise McLaughlin Senior Legal Advisor & David Cooper & Co) appeared on behalf of the Respondent and the Interested Party.
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Sullivan:
"1.1 The Statement of Community Involvement sets out how the Council intends to involve stakeholders and local communities in the preparation of development plans for the area and for the consideration of planning applications. The Statement of Community involvement is a requirement under planning legislation.
1.2. It sets out
- What the Council is seeking community involvement on
- Where the community involvement will be sought
- How the community involvement will be organised and
- Who will be involved.
1.3 Where the Statement of Community Involvement is adopted by the Council, the Council is required to follow what it says. The Government also says that the Statement of Community Involvement should enable people to get involved at an early stage in the process before policies are firmed up."
"The statutory requirement is either a site notice or letter. The occupiers of the application premises and adjoining occupiers likely to be affected by the proposals will receive a letter. Where alterations are proposed to an elevation which fronts a highway, the letter will be sent to the occupants of properties or sites on the opposite side of the highway, site notice and web advert in addition if in conservation area."
"No windows would be incorporated within the northeast elevation."
That is the elevation that faces the appellant's house.
"The subject property is located approximately 25 metres from the nearest neighbouring property and is well screened, ie from the west/northwest by mature trees. It is also noted that large windows in the northwest and a roof terrace with balustrades on the southwest elevation at second floor level already exists. It is therefore not considered that the proposed 2000mm x 50mm window in the northwest elevation or the proposed roof terrace would result in any additional amount of overlooking that would cause harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy."
"Due to the location of the dwellinghouse in relation to all neighbouring properties, the proposal would not result in any loss of daylight of sunlight, detrimental to the amenities of the neighbouring properties."
The conclusion in the Report was as follows:
"In the light of the above the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant policies on London Borough of Camden Unitary Development Plan, Camden Planning Guidance and Hampstead Conservation Area Statement."
The recommendation was to grant planning permission with conditions.
(1) Legitimate expectation
(2) Separation distance
"…and was able to assess the location of the proposed first floor side extension in relation to the host building, the distances between the surrounding properties and existing trees and vegetation.
It was considered that the distances between the buildings were sufficient to warrant that the proposal would not cause any harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties, including the possible loss of daylight and sunlight that the Claimant alleges will arise from allowing the proposed first floor extension"
"where it is found that a proposed development of whatever type has an unreasonable impact on amenity …" (emphasis added)
(3) Conservation Guideline H43.
"Normally the infilling of gaps between buildings will be resisted where an important gap is compromised or the symmetry of the composition of the building impaired. Where side extensions would not result in the loss of important gap they should be single storey and set back from the front building line."
(4) Summary Reasons
"The proposed development is in general accordance with the policy requirements of the London Borough of Camden Replacement Unitary Division Plan 2006, with particular regard to policies S1, S2, SD1, SD6, B1, B3 and B7. For a more detailed understanding of the reasons for the granting of this planning permission, please refer to the officers report."
Issue (5) Quashing Order Or Declaration.
Lord Justice Moore-Bick:
Lady Justice Arden:
Order: Application allowed