1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL
London Borough of Hillingdon — appeal allowed
- Outcome
- Allowed
- Decision date
- 3 July 2025
- Authority
- London Borough of Hillingdon
- Inspector
- Wilson D
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Development type
- Householder developments
- Appellant
- Mr Ian Cook
- LPA reference
- 54817/APP/2024/839
- ONS LPA code
- E09000017
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
- Start date
- 5 February 2025
Summary AI
The appeal was allowed for a replacement garden store building, as the Inspector found that it would not be a self-contained residential unit. The Inspector considered the development's layout, separation from the proposed dwellings, and the use of a condition to prevent conversion into a separate dwelling.
PDF text
1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 18 June 2025 by D Wilson BSc (Hons) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 3 July 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/R5510/W/25/3359768 1 Nicholls Avenue, Hillingdon, Uxbridge UB8 3JL • 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 Mr Ian Cook against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Hillingdon. • The application Ref is 54817/APP/2024/839. • The development proposed is replacement of garden store building. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for replacement of garden store building at 1 Nicholls Avenue, Hillingdon, Uxbridge UB8 3JL in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 54817/APP/2024/839, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule. Main Issue 2. The main issue is whether the proposed development would be tantamount to the creation of a self-contained residential unit. Reasons 3. The appeal site is a mostly open parcel of land which consists of overgrown vegetation. It is located in a predominantly residential area and there is also a garage building within the site. 4.
1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Planning permission has been granted1 for the erection of three self-contained, independent dwellings over two levels. However, no substantial works to implement this permission appear to have taken place. 5. I acknowledge the Council’s concerns in relation to the layout of the building which includes its own entrance, landscaped garden and its physical separation from the proposed self-contained dwellings. However, it is clear from the description of development and proposed plans that a garden store is proposed and it is intended to compliment and be used in connection with the proposed self- contained dwellings. 6. I note the Council’s concern that a condition could not be used to tie the proposed building to the currently unfinished development. However, there is no need to tie the building to this, instead a condition could be used to prevent it being converted into a separate self-contained dwelling. This would prevent its use as a self- contained dwelling even if it was constructed before the extant permission. 1 Council reference: 54817/APP/2022/2568 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/25/3359768 7. I therefore conclude that the proposed development would not be tantamount to the creation of a self-contained dwelling. I find no conflict with Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), and Policies DMHD 2 and DMHB 11 of Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) (LP2). Amongst other things, these seek to ensure that development makes the best use of land and the use of the building shall not be capable for use as independent residential accommodation. Other Matter 8. The Council consider that insufficient information has been provided to assess the level of internal living accommodation for any future occupiers, however, as no residential occupation is proposed this information is not necessary. For this reason, I find no conflict with Policy D6 of the London Plan and Policy DMHB 16 of the LP2. Conditions 9. Condition 1 is the standard condition which relates to the commencement of development and condition 2 specifies the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt. Condition 3 is required in order to ensure that the building is not used as a separate self-contained dwelling. 10.
1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision The Council have requested a condition requiring a landscaping scheme to be submitted. However, on the basis of the small site area and landscaping already shown on the proposed plans. As well as the Council’s consideration that the development would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the street scene or the surrounding area in terms of its physical appearance. I find that this condition would be unnecessary to make the development acceptable. Conclusion 11. For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.
1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL — London Borough of Hillingdon — D Wilson INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
1 Nicholls Avenue, UXBRIDGE, UB8 3JL — London Borough of Hillingdon — D Wilson INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2 Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/25/3359768 Schedule of Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. 2. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on submitted plans numbers: NA10-01a NA10-02b NA10-03a NA10-D&S Thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence. 3. The outbuilding hereby approved shall only be used for the purpose(s) stated on the approved drawings. It shall not be used for purposes such as a living room, bedroom, kitchen, or as a separate unit of accommodation. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3
Main issues and findings
Living conditions Against appellant ¶11
The Inspector concluded that the proposed development would not be tantamount to the creation of a self-contained residential unit, as it would be used in connection with the proposed dwellings and not independently.
Heritage impact For appellant ¶10
The Inspector found that a landscaping scheme condition would be unnecessary, as the small site area and landscaping already shown on the proposed plans would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the street scene or surrounding area.
Other For appellant ¶8
The Inspector found that insufficient information had been provided to assess the level of internal living accommodation for any future occupiers, but as no residential occupation was proposed, this information was not necessary.
Policies relied on
| Reference | Weight |
|---|---|
| Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) |
Determinative |
| Policies DMHD 2 and DMHB 11 of Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) (LP2) |
Determinative |
| Policy D6 of the London Plan |
Moderate |
| Policy DMHB 16 of the LP2 |
Moderate |
Site constraints from the Casework Database
Source
Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 3 July 2025 under the Open Government Licence.