Planning application · Waltham Forest
260327.
1 Forest Side, Chingford, London, E4 6BA
Full / Other Planning at 1 Forest Side, Chingford, London, E4 6BA, received 5 Feb 2026 — refused on 7 May 2026 (delegated, Lauren Kimpton).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationWaltham Forest profile →
Refused
Outcome
7 May 2026
13 wks
Decision time
5 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
41
Documents
41 linked
—
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Waltham Forest 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?
Conversion of existing residential building (2x2-bed flats) (Use Class C3), together with construction of new buildings and extensions to provide a two storey residential development with habitable roof space to provide six residential units (1x3-bed dwellinghouse & 2x3-bed, 1x2-bed & 2x1-bed flats)
Reference
260327
Type
Full Planning
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
E4 6BA
Ward
Council
Received
5 Feb 2026
Validated
23 Feb 2026
Target date
7 May 2026
Decision date
7 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
260327
Type
Full Planning
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
E4 6BA
Ward
Council
Received
5 Feb 2026
Validated
23 Feb 2026
Target date
7 May 2026
Decision date
7 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Waltham Forest portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 7 May 2026, delegated decision by Lauren Kimpton — 13 weeks from submission (5 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
5 Feb 2026
Application received
23 Feb 2026
Application validated
7 May 2026
Statutory target date
7 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Lauren Kimpton
5 Feb 2026
Application received
23 Feb 2026
Application validated
7 May 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
7 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Lauren Kimpton
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of its scale, massing, height, design and
layout, would result in an incongruous and visually fragmented form of
development that would fail to integrate appropriately with the corner plot or the
surrounding streetscape. As such, the proposal is considered to be contrary to
Policies D1 and D4 of the London Plan (2021), and Policy 53 of the Waltham
Forest Local Plan Part 1 (2024).
2
The proposed development would result in an unacceptbale impact to the
neighbouring occupiers at No. 5-7 Forest Side, specifically through the creation of
a harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook resulting from an overbearing
form of development to the rear of the property. As such, the proposal is
considered to be contrary to Policy 57 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan Part 1
(2024).
3
The proposed layout would result in poor outlook to the proposed units in terms
of windows in close proximity to bounary treatments or only having rooflights,
compounded by the inadequate sub-standard provision of private amenity space,
whereby the proposal would be contrary to Policy 56 of the Waltham Forest Local
Plan and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), resulting in poor and substandard
form of accommodation for the long term health and well-being of future occupiers
4
The proposal would fail to achieve accessible and adaptable units in line with
Building Regulation M4(2) as such it would be contrary to Policy 16 of the LP1
(2024) and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021).
5
In the absence of Tree Survey that provides BS5837 categorisation or AMS ,
there is insufficient detail to assess the potential impact and any mitigation can be
achieved for the existing trees, whereby it cannot be confirmed that the
development would be in accordance with the requirements of Policy G7 of the
London Plan (2021) and Policies 79 and 80 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan LP1
(2024), which seek to ensure long term health and viability of the trees in the
interest of protecting the local biodiversity and to ensure long term resilance to
tackle climate change.
6
In the absence of the Small Sites Metric, the application fails to provide
sufficient detail to fully assess the biodiversity impacts of the proposal. As such, it
does not demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Policy 79 of the
Waltham Forest Local Plan LP1 (2024).
7
Notwithstanding the above reasons, a S278 and S106 agreements are not
entered to ensure the development is in compliance with Policy DF1 of the
London Plan (2021), Policies 3, 46, 66, 85, 87 and 94 of the adopted Waltham
Forest Local Plan LP1 (2024), in relation to the following planning obligations
requirements:
S278 Agreement for highway related works, to be paid by developer and
implemented by Local Highway Authority:
Renewal of the footway and road markings along Whitehall Road and
Forest Side
Review of waiting and loading restrictions on both Whitehall Road and
Forest Side
Financial contribution of £750.00 towards monitoring of the Construction
Logistics Plan
Carbon Offset Fund.
Financial contribution of £3,900.00 towards Strategic Access Management
and Monitoring Strategies (SAMMS) against mitigating the impact of the
development upon the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC).
Monitoring Fee - A financial Contribution towards the implementation and
monitoring of and securing compliance with the s106, equal to 5% of the
total of all other financial contributions
Legal Fees - Payment of the Council's legal fees for the preparation and
completion of the Legal Agreement.
1
The proposed development, by reason of its scale, massing, height, design and
layout, would result in an incongruous and visually fragmented form of
development that would fail to integrate appropriately with the corner plot or the
surrounding streetscape. As such, the proposal is considered to be contrary to
Policies D1 and D4 of the London Plan (2021), and Policy 53 of the Waltham
Forest Local Plan Part 1 (2024).
2
The proposed development would result in an unacceptbale impact to the
neighbouring occupiers at No. 5-7 Forest Side, specifically through the creation of
a harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook resulting from an overbearing
form of development to the rear of the property. As such, the proposal is
considered to be contrary to Policy 57 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan Part 1
(2024).
3
The proposed layout would result in poor outlook to the proposed units in terms
of windows in close proximity to bounary treatments or only having rooflights,
compounded by the inadequate sub-standard provision of private amenity space,
whereby the proposal would be contrary to Policy 56 of the Waltham Forest Local
Plan and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), resulting in poor and substandard
form of accommodation for the long term health and well-being of future occupiers
Show all 7 rows
4
The proposal would fail to achieve accessible and adaptable units in line with
Building Regulation M4(2) as such it would be contrary to Policy 16 of the LP1
(2024) and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021).
5
In the absence of Tree Survey that provides BS5837 categorisation or AMS ,
there is insufficient detail to assess the potential impact and any mitigation can be
achieved for the existing trees, whereby it cannot be confirmed that the
development would be in accordance with the requirements of Policy G7 of the
London Plan (2021) and Policies 79 and 80 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan LP1
(2024), which seek to ensure long term health and viability of the trees in the
interest of protecting the local biodiversity and to ensure long term resilance to
tackle climate change.
6
In the absence of the Small Sites Metric, the application fails to provide
sufficient detail to fully assess the biodiversity impacts of the proposal. As such, it
does not demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Policy 79 of the
Waltham Forest Local Plan LP1 (2024).
7
Notwithstanding the above reasons, a S278 and S106 agreements are not
entered to ensure the development is in compliance with Policy DF1 of the
London Plan (2021), Policies 3, 46, 66, 85, 87 and 94 of the adopted Waltham
Forest Local Plan LP1 (2024), in relation to the following planning obligations
requirements:
S278 Agreement for highway related works, to be paid by developer and
implemented by Local Highway Authority:
Renewal of the footway and road markings along Whitehall Road and
Forest Side
Review of waiting and loading restrictions on both Whitehall Road and
Forest Side
Financial contribution of £750.00 towards monitoring of the Construction
Logistics Plan
Carbon Offset Fund.
Financial contribution of £3,900.00 towards Strategic Access Management
and Monitoring Strategies (SAMMS) against mitigating the impact of the
development upon the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC).
Monitoring Fee - A financial Contribution towards the implementation and
monitoring of and securing compliance with the s106, equal to 5% of the
total of all other financial contributions
Legal Fees - Payment of the Council's legal fees for the preparation and
completion of the Legal Agreement.
Policies cited
D1D4Waltham Forest Local Plan 53Waltham Forest Local Plan 57Waltham Forest Local Plan 56D6G7Waltham Forest Local Plan 79Waltham Forest Local Plan 80DF1Waltham Forest Local Plan 3Waltham Forest Local Plan 46Waltham Forest Local Plan 66Waltham Forest Local Plan 85Waltham Forest Local Plan 87Waltham Forest Local Plan 94
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.