# 285 High Road Leyton

- **Decision:** dismissed, 9 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: L Gardner
- **Authority:** Waltham Forest (London)
- **Appeal reference:** 6010391
- **Application reference:** 252938
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Single-storey side and rear extensions to ground-floor commercial unit, new shopfront
- **Site context:** inside-settlement, conservation-area
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** HE6(4), DP3(3), S4(1)
- **Development plan policies:** Waltham Forest Local Plan Part 1 2024 Policies 45, 53, 72, 79, London Plan 2021 D4, HC1, G6
- **Main issues:** character and conservation area, biodiversity
- **Tags:** tier-2, s4-within-settlement, s4-substantially-outweighed, heritage-harm-decisive, conservation-area, design-refusal, e2-substantial-weight, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework

## Summary
Side and rear extensions and a new shopfront to a corner commercial unit in the Leyton Town Centre Conservation Area. Dismissed. Heritage harm was "at the lower end of less than substantial" but of considerable weight, and not outweighed by moderate public benefits under HE6(4). In the S4 balance, E2 gave substantial weight to the commercial benefits, but the DP3(3) and heritage-policy failures meant the benefits were "substantially outweighed" (DL ¶31-33).

## What made the difference
The failures under the Framework's refusal-type policies (DP3(3) and the HE policies) fed S4(2)(c). Even E2's substantial weight could not overcome them. Note the inspector gave the same benefits moderate weight in the heritage balance and substantial weight in the S4 balance.

## Policy findings
- **HE6(4): harm (considerable weight).** lower end of less than substantial harm to Leyton Town Centre CA; dominant corner-plot rear extension, unbalanced shopfront; moderate public benefits do not outweigh (DL 11-19)
- **E2: benefit (substantial weight).** E2(1)(a) substantial weight to additional commercial floorspace (DL 31)
- **S4(1): fail.** failure of DP3(1)/(3), HE4, HE6 and HE9 means benefits substantially outweighed (DL 29-33)

## Key facts
- Prominent corner plot in a three-storey parade; extensions would cover most of the site
- BNG exempt; landscaping could be conditioned

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6010391
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/d37dfbf3-3326-442c-900c-bd591e4902b0

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6010391.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.