11/11369/FULL 19 Montpelier Street London SW7 1HF
Use as a single family dwelling (Use Class C3). Erection of a single storey extension at
rear first floor level with terrace above. Erection of roof extension to provide third floor
accommodation. Associated internal alterations including the removal and addition of
partitions.
rear first floor level with terrace above. Erection of roof extension to provide third floor
accommodation. Associated internal alterations including the removal and addition of
partitions.
The Inspector did not agree with the Council’s assessment that the loss of the public house
would have a negative effect on the character and vitality of this part of the Central Activities
Zone. He did not consider that the facility was so well used or highly prized that its loss
would reduce the community’s ability to meet its day to day needs, particularly given that
there are many eating and drinking establishments in close proximity. The appellants
argued that the current pub was not a viable operation; the Council and appellant submitted
opposing evidence in this regard. The Inspector considered that viability was a secondary
matter as there is no absolute policy requirement to demonstrate that a public house would
be unviable in order to accept its loss. The Inspector considered that the proposed physical
works to the building would result in a significant improvement to its overall appearance
sufficient to outweigh the loss of some original stairs and relocation of a fireplace.
would have a negative effect on the character and vitality of this part of the Central Activities
Zone. He did not consider that the facility was so well used or highly prized that its loss
would reduce the community’s ability to meet its day to day needs, particularly given that
there are many eating and drinking establishments in close proximity. The appellants
argued that the current pub was not a viable operation; the Council and appellant submitted
opposing evidence in this regard. The Inspector considered that viability was a secondary
matter as there is no absolute policy requirement to demonstrate that a public house would
be unviable in order to accept its loss. The Inspector considered that the proposed physical
works to the building would result in a significant improvement to its overall appearance
sufficient to outweigh the loss of some original stairs and relocation of a fireplace.
