58 and 60 Waverley Road, St Albans (former sports and social club)

appeal 6009808·St Albans·25 September 2026dismissed
Decision
dismissed, 25 September 2026
Decided by
Planning Inspector: J Bell-Williamson
Authority
St Albans (East of England)
Appeal reference
6009808
Application reference
5/25/0057
Procedure
written representations
Development
Redevelopment of a cleared former sports and social club site with four houses (2 x 3-bed, 2 x 2-bed)
Homes
4
Site context
inside settlement, PDL
Green Belt
No
Housing land supply
1.12 years
Framework applied
August 2026 NPPF
Determinative policies
DP3(3), DP3(1), TR3(1)(c), S4
Development plan policies
St Albans Local Plan 2024-2041 (adopted 9 Sep 2026) SP7, SP12, DES1, DES4, TRA1
Main issues
loss of community use; character and appearance; neighbours' living conditions; amenity space; parking and highway safety

Summary

Four houses on the site of a demolished sports and social club in St Albans. Loss of the community use was accepted under HC6, since the club had failed financially. But the rear pair would be cramped and overlook neighbours, the front gardens would be too small, and highway safety was not demonstrated. With DP3(3) cited and a highway conflict under TR3(1)(c), the adverse effects substantially outweighed four homes on a 1.12-year supply. Dismissed.

Issues and findings

Planning balance

S4 (as "P4"): "I conclude that in this case the adverse effects of granting permission substantially outweigh the benefits" (DL ¶42). Plan-led conclusion against the new Local Plan (DL ¶43).

What made the difference

Squeezing a second pair of houses into the rear of the site, close to both the neighbouring garden and the Chene Mews frontages. The community-use objection fell away on the viability evidence, but the design and amenity objections did not.

Transferable points

Policy findings

Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.

PolicyFindingWeightNote
HC6passclub closed 2018 after financial decline and receivership; no reasonable prospect of the use being retained (DL 8-14)
DP3(1)conflictsubstantialrear pair cramped, too close to Chene Mews frontages and forward of their building line; plus living conditions and garden size (DL 17-19, 40)
DP3(3)failcited to support substantial weight to the DP3(1) conflict; no separate clear-justification finding (DL 40)
P3harmmapped; overlooking and overbearing effect on No 62 garden (about 4.5 m separation) and inter-visibility with Chene Mews (DL 20-25)
TR3(1)(c)failsignificanthighway safety not demonstrated - turning relies on land outside site with no obligation; splays and signs unevidenced (DL 29-34, 41)
HO7benefitsubstantialfour homes on a 1.12-year supply (DL 38)
L3benefitlimitedefficient use of land discounted because the scheme is not well designed (DL 38)
S3failletter says Policy P3 and Policy P4 for the presumption and development within settlements (S3, S4); adverse effects substantially outweigh benefits (DL 37, 42-43)

Key facts

Sources

This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.