Planning Atlas
Planning Atlas›Havering›…Harold Wood wardRM3 0ED168 Sackville Crescent ROMFORD RM3 0ED›D0209.17
Planning application · Havering

D0209.17.

168 Sackville Crescent ROMFORD RM3 0ED

Lawful Development Certificate at 168 Sackville Crescent ROMFORD RM3 0ED, received 26 May 2017 — not required on 11 Jul 2017 (delegated, Aidan Hughes).

ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHavering profile →
Not required
Outcome
11 Jul 2017
7 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
5
Conditions
attached to the decision
0
Documents
on the council file
—
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Havering 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?

Certificate of lawfulness for proposed loft conversion including rear dormer

Reference
D0209.17
Type
Lawful Development Certificate
Site
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
26 May 2017
Target date
21 Jul 2017
Decision date
11 Jul 2017
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
PP not required Conditions/Reasons
Premises record
Council register
Reference
D0209.17
Type
Lawful Development Certificate
Site
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
26 May 2017
Target date
21 Jul 2017
Decision date
11 Jul 2017
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
PP not required Conditions/Reasons
Premises record
Council register
Documents

What was filed?

No documents are recorded for this application.

Documents open on the Havering portal. View the application page ↗

Decision

What happened?

Not required on 11 Jul 2017, delegated decision by Aidan Hughes — 7 weeks from submission.

Timeline

Date
Event
26 May 2017
Application received
21 Jul 2017
Statutory target date
11 Jul 2017
Delegated decision: Not required · Aidan Hughes
26 May 2017
Application received
21 Jul 2017
Statutory target date
11 Jul 2017
Delegated decision: Not required · Aidan Hughes

Public response

Comment counts were not captured for this application.

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.