Planning application · Hackney
2024/2066.
34 New Inn Yard, Hackney, London, EC2A 3EY
Full / Other Planning at 34 New Inn Yard, Hackney, London, EC2A 3EY, received 25 Sep 2024 — refused on 10 Dec 2024 (delegated, Jonathan Bainbridge).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHackney profile →
Refused
Outcome
10 Dec 2024
11 wks
Decision time
3 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
18
Documents
18 linked
1
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Hackney planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Amalgamation of two self contained flats to create a single family dwelling house and the erection of a single storey roof extension and rear infill extension with external works to the front elevation.
Reference
2024/2066
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EC2A 3EY
Council
Received
25 Sep 2024
Validated
8 Oct 2024
Target date
9 Dec 2024
Decision date
10 Dec 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Council register
Reference
2024/2066
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EC2A 3EY
Council
Received
25 Sep 2024
Validated
8 Oct 2024
Target date
9 Dec 2024
Decision date
10 Dec 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Hackney portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 10 Dec 2024, delegated decision by Jonathan Bainbridge — 11 weeks from submission (3 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
25 Sep 2024
Application received
8 Oct 2024
Application validated
9 Dec 2024
Statutory target date
10 Dec 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Jonathan Bainbridge
25 Sep 2024
Application received
8 Oct 2024
Application validated
9 Dec 2024
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
10 Dec 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Jonathan Bainbridge
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed extension, by reason of inappropriate scale, detailed design
and location, would result in an unsympathetic, obtrusive and incongruous
form of development, which would detrimentally impact the character and
appearance of the host property and wider terrace and the South Shoreditch
Conservation Area. The identified less than substantial harm to the
significance of the South Shoreditch Conservation Area would not be
outweighed by any public benefit. As such the proposed development is
contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), policies D3
(Optimising Site Capacity through the Design-led Approach) and HC1
(Heritage conservation and growth) of the London Plan 2021, policies LP1
(Design Quality and Local Character) and LP3 (Designated Heritage Assets)
of the Local Plan 2033, and the guidance as contained within Hackney
Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD 2009.
2
The proposed development, by reason of its size, design and position,
would result in an overbearing impact and increased sense of enclosure and
noise, along with a loss of daylight/sunlight and privacy which would result in
an unacceptable adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbouring
occupiers. As such the proposed development is contrary to policies D3
(Optimising Site Capacity through the Design-led Approach) D6 (Housing
Quality and Standards) of the London Plan 2021, policy LP2 (Development
and Amenity) of the Hackney Local Plan 2033 and the guidance contained
within Hackney Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD 2009.
1
The proposed extension, by reason of inappropriate scale, detailed design
and location, would result in an unsympathetic, obtrusive and incongruous
form of development, which would detrimentally impact the character and
appearance of the host property and wider terrace and the South Shoreditch
Conservation Area. The identified less than substantial harm to the
significance of the South Shoreditch Conservation Area would not be
outweighed by any public benefit. As such the proposed development is
contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), policies D3
(Optimising Site Capacity through the Design-led Approach) and HC1
(Heritage conservation and growth) of the London Plan 2021, policies LP1
(Design Quality and Local Character) and LP3 (Designated Heritage Assets)
of the Local Plan 2033, and the guidance as contained within Hackney
Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD 2009.
2
The proposed development, by reason of its size, design and position,
would result in an overbearing impact and increased sense of enclosure and
noise, along with a loss of daylight/sunlight and privacy which would result in
an unacceptable adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbouring
occupiers. As such the proposed development is contrary to policies D3
(Optimising Site Capacity through the Design-led Approach) D6 (Housing
Quality and Standards) of the London Plan 2021, policy LP2 (Development
and Amenity) of the Hackney Local Plan 2033 and the guidance contained
within Hackney Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD 2009.
Policies cited
NPPF
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
Objections
1
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.