Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 5 August 2025 by V Goldberg BSc (Hons) MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 17th September 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/J1535/W/24/3357913 Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex IG8 8BA • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Gilini Holdings Ltd against the decision of Epping Forest District Council. • The application Ref is EPF/1880/24. • The development proposed is loft conversion, including roof alterations to facilitate the provision of one new home. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Applications for costs 2. An application for an award of costs has been made against Epping Forest District Council. This is the subject of a separate decision. Preliminary Matter 3. The appellant has raised that the drawing numbers on the decision notice are incorrect. This has not been addressed by the Council. This decision has therefore been based on the drawings detailed on the drawing register submitted with the application plans. Main Issues 4.

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision The main issues are: • the effect of the proposed balcony on the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area; • the effect of the proposed balcony on the living conditions of the occupiers of Cornerways in respect of privacy; and; • the effect of the proposed development on the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation. Reasons Character and Appearance 5. The appeal site is a corner plot positioned at the junction with Turpins Lane and Manor Road. The building on site contains four flats and except for a rooflight has an unaltered tiled roof. The area to the rear provides separate private gardens to https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision The main issues are: • the effect of the proposed balcony on the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area; • the effect of the proposed balcony on the living conditions of the occupiers of Cornerways in respect of privacy; and; • the effect of the proposed development on the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation. Reasons Character and Appearance 5. The appeal site is a corner plot positioned at the junction with Turpins Lane and Manor Road. The building on site contains four flats and except for a rooflight has an unaltered tiled roof. The area to the rear provides separate private gardens to https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J1535/W/24/3357913 the flats with the site boundary having vegetative screening preventing views into the site. 6. Given its modest size, inset design and being set down from the ridge and up from the eaves, the proposed balcony would sit comfortably within the roof slope. Whilst the inset minimalist design is unusual, it would not harm the character and appearance of the host building as the original form of the roof would still be apparent. 7. Due to the site boundary being screened, the proposed balcony would not be seen in the context of other dwellings. Views of the balcony from the private rear gardens would also be limited due to their short length and position. In any event, the modest design of the balcony would not be harmful. Consequently, the proposed balcony would preserve the character and appearance of the area. 8. The proposed balcony would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore be compliant with Policy DM9 of the Epping Forest adopted Local Plan 2023 (Local Plan). This policy amongst other things requires development to be high quality and relate positively to its locality. Privacy 9.

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision The proposed balcony would be positioned directly facing the garden of flat two and the garden area behind it. However, given that a privacy screen is proposed, this would limit direct views into these private gardens. 10. Reference is made to the perception of overlooking but given the inset design of the balcony and the proposed privacy screen, users of the balcony would predominantly be within the existing roof space. As a result, they would not be seen when viewed from the private garden areas and this would therefore manage the perception of overlooking associated with the use of the balcony. 11. For the above reasons, the proposed balcony would have an acceptable effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Cornerways in respect of privacy. It would therefore be compliant with Policy DM9 of the Local Plan, insofar as it requires proposals to avoid overlooking and loss of privacy. Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation 12. A significant proportion of the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation (EFSAC) lies within the administrative area of Epping Forest District Council. The effects of the proposal on this designation must be considered in combination with other plans and projects in the area.

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision The Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) concludes that there are two identified pathways of impact whereby development within the district is likely to result in significant effects on the EFSAC. The identified pathways relate to recreational pressures and atmospheric pollution. In this case it is impossible to rule out likely significant effects arising from these pathways, in particular, traffic generated from the development. Appropriate Assessment is therefore required under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017. 13. To mitigate the likely impacts of air pollution and adverse recreational effects arising from proposed development, Policy DM2 of the Local Plan requires a contribution towards off site measures, to make proposals acceptable. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J1535/W/24/3357913 14. The appellant has submitted a draft Unilateral Undertaking (UU) to address this matter. However, the UU is neither dated nor signed and is therefore incomplete. Whilst the appellant has been waiting for the Council’s comments to finalise it, given the unilateral nature of the agreement, the Council would not be a party to it. 15. An executed and certified copy of the planning obligation should be submitted at the time of making the appeal. Given that the UU is incomplete, the required contribution towards off site measures to make the development acceptable, cannot be secured. 16. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policies DM2 and DM22 of the Local Plan which seek to protect the Epping Forest SAC. The failure to address the rigorous requirements of the Habitats Regulations is fatal to the appeal, even in the absence of other reasons for dismissal. Other Matters 17. Reference is made to the failure of the Council to engage with the appellants agent as to whether amendments or further information was required.

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision While the National Planning Policy Framework (The Framework) stresses the benefits of early engagement, the absence or limited nature of engagement with an applicant is not a reason to allow the appeal. 18. Even if the Council had addressed the planning balance and five year housing land supply, the failure to adequately address the requirements of the Habitats Regulations is fatal to the appeal. Planning Balance and Conclusion 19. The absence of a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites engages paragraph 11 d) of the Framework. This indicates that where the requisite land supply cannot be demonstrated, permission should be granted unless i. the application of policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or ii. any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. 20. Footnote 7 of the Framework confirms that the policies referred to under the first limb include those relating to habitats sites (also known as European sites).

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — Appeal Decision Given my findings on the third main issue, the proposal would not qualify as sustainable development and the tilted balance in the second limb of Framework paragraph 11 d) would not apply. The conflict with Policies DM2 and DM22 carry significant weight, given the overriding importance of the Habitats Regulations, and this brings the scheme into conflict with the development plan taken as a whole. The social and economic benefits of delivering a small dwelling does not justify a decision otherwise than in accordance with the development plan. 21. For the reasons given above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Cornerways, Turpins Lane, Chigwell, Essex, IG8 8BA — Epping Forest District Council — V Goldberg INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3