Leytonstone B&B bid refused

First published in News East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Photograph of the Author by , Senior reporter

A BID to convert a house into a Bed and Breakfast hotel has been rejected.

The applicant, a Mr 'M Hussain', wanted permission to build an extension and change the licensed use of two family flats in Hainault Road, Leytonstone.

But officers from Waltham Forest Council refused the application under delegated powers because it would result in a loss of family accommodation in the area.

The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours were also cited as reasons.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:40pm Fri 16 Nov 12

Cornbeefur says...

How weird a tale.
How weird a tale. Cornbeefur
  • Score: 0

10:20am Sat 17 Nov 12

Helen, Walthamstow says...

Cornbeefur wrote:
How weird a tale.
Can you be more explicit?
[quote][p][bold]Cornbeefur[/bold] wrote: How weird a tale.[/p][/quote]Can you be more explicit? Helen, Walthamstow
  • Score: 0

10:51am Sat 17 Nov 12

Cornbeefur says...

Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Cornbeefur wrote:
How weird a tale.
Can you be more explicit?
There are not many B & B in the area and I would have thought that there would be quite a demand for such as it is near the Tube Station.

The Council seem to object to everything.
[quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cornbeefur[/bold] wrote: How weird a tale.[/p][/quote]Can you be more explicit?[/p][/quote]There are not many B & B in the area and I would have thought that there would be quite a demand for such as it is near the Tube Station. The Council seem to object to everything. Cornbeefur
  • Score: 0

11:25am Sat 17 Nov 12

Helen, Walthamstow says...

Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...."

Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.
Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...." Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel. Helen, Walthamstow
  • Score: 0

10:52pm Sat 17 Nov 12

Cornbeefur says...

Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...."

Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.
There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation.

Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?
[quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...." Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.[/p][/quote]There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation. Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative? Cornbeefur
  • Score: 0

6:59am Sun 18 Nov 12

Isaythat says...

Cornbeefur wrote:
Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...."

Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.
There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation.

Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?
For once WF saw sense and realise that the area has enough budget accommodation! They are making a real effort to improve the area so a second rate cramped B & B is the last thing it needs.
[quote][p][bold]Cornbeefur[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...." Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.[/p][/quote]There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation. Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?[/p][/quote]For once WF saw sense and realise that the area has enough budget accommodation! They are making a real effort to improve the area so a second rate cramped B & B is the last thing it needs. Isaythat
  • Score: 0

8:04am Sun 18 Nov 12

jef costello says...

"B&B" = dosshouse for minimum wage shift workers.

Good on WFC.
"B&B" = dosshouse for minimum wage shift workers. Good on WFC. jef costello
  • Score: 0

8:06am Sun 18 Nov 12

Helen, Walthamstow says...

Cornbeefur wrote:
Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...."

Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.
There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation.

Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?
I've looked up the planning details on the council's website. The property covers two street numbers, so may be two houses rather than two flats. (Not sure about that) The applicant applied for a two-storey rear extension plus a four-windowed loft extension.

The officers say the accommodation would be cramped. The disturbance to neighbours would cover both the extensive building work plus, later on, the coming and going of visitors.

If temporary visitors want budget accommodation, there are several places around where they can find it in this borough, soon to include the Traveodge at Walthamstow claiming to offer rooms starting at £15.
[quote][p][bold]Cornbeefur[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...." Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.[/p][/quote]There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation. Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?[/p][/quote]I've looked up the planning details on the council's website. The property covers two street numbers, so may be two houses rather than two flats. (Not sure about that) The applicant applied for a two-storey rear extension plus a four-windowed loft extension. The officers say the accommodation would be cramped. The disturbance to neighbours would cover both the extensive building work plus, later on, the coming and going of visitors. If temporary visitors want budget accommodation, there are several places around where they can find it in this borough, soon to include the Traveodge at Walthamstow claiming to offer rooms starting at £15. Helen, Walthamstow
  • Score: 0

8:09am Sun 18 Nov 12

Helen, Walthamstow says...

Sorry - typo! I meant £25 per night, not £15.
Sorry - typo! I meant £25 per night, not £15. Helen, Walthamstow
  • Score: 0

8:24am Sun 18 Nov 12

E17_er says...

Cornbeefur wrote:
Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...."

Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.
There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation.

Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?
I would have thought that someone who "claims" to live in multiple properties would realise they are part of the problem when it comes to shortage of accommodation.
[quote][p][bold]Cornbeefur[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...." Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.[/p][/quote]There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation. Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?[/p][/quote]I would have thought that someone who "claims" to live in multiple properties would realise they are part of the problem when it comes to shortage of accommodation. E17_er
  • Score: 0

8:42am Sun 18 Nov 12

myopinioncounts says...

jef costello says...
8:04am Sun 18 Nov 12
"B&B" = dosshouse for minimum wage shift workers.Good on WFC.
----------
I say, Precisely! Any other reason given for this application is highly suspect.
jef costello says... 8:04am Sun 18 Nov 12 "B&B" = dosshouse for minimum wage shift workers.Good on WFC. ---------- I say, Precisely! Any other reason given for this application is highly suspect. myopinioncounts
  • Score: 0

10:45am Sun 18 Nov 12

Cornbeefur says...

Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Cornbeefur wrote:
Helen, Walthamstow wrote:
Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...."

Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.
There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation.

Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?
I've looked up the planning details on the council's website. The property covers two street numbers, so may be two houses rather than two flats. (Not sure about that) The applicant applied for a two-storey rear extension plus a four-windowed loft extension.

The officers say the accommodation would be cramped. The disturbance to neighbours would cover both the extensive building work plus, later on, the coming and going of visitors.

If temporary visitors want budget accommodation, there are several places around where they can find it in this borough, soon to include the Traveodge at Walthamstow claiming to offer rooms starting at £15.
There are onerous conditions on certain main play Hotel Chains, have to book on line weeks in advance and so on. There are not many places around where you can stay at a reasonable rate around the Borough, I would have thought that this would have been good.

Even so, no doubt the applicant can re-submit his plans with a different layout or modifications and eventually get some form of authority. At least he has not just opened up as others have without any permission, who then try and get it retrospectively.
[quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cornbeefur[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Helen, Walthamstow[/bold] wrote: Ah! Well the report mentions "The cramped nature of the designs and concern over possible noise and disturbance to neighbours ...." Plus for B&B, I doubt if they are thinking a cosy billet with all mod cons for holiday makers. Often the term covers accommodation for homeless families placed there by other boroughs and even a form of hostel.[/p][/quote]There is a lot of demand for budget accommodation. Some peoples expectations may not be as high as yours and some do not have candles on offer as an alternative?[/p][/quote]I've looked up the planning details on the council's website. The property covers two street numbers, so may be two houses rather than two flats. (Not sure about that) The applicant applied for a two-storey rear extension plus a four-windowed loft extension. The officers say the accommodation would be cramped. The disturbance to neighbours would cover both the extensive building work plus, later on, the coming and going of visitors. If temporary visitors want budget accommodation, there are several places around where they can find it in this borough, soon to include the Traveodge at Walthamstow claiming to offer rooms starting at £15.[/p][/quote]There are onerous conditions on certain main play Hotel Chains, have to book on line weeks in advance and so on. There are not many places around where you can stay at a reasonable rate around the Borough, I would have thought that this would have been good. Even so, no doubt the applicant can re-submit his plans with a different layout or modifications and eventually get some form of authority. At least he has not just opened up as others have without any permission, who then try and get it retrospectively. Cornbeefur
  • Score: 0

11:24am Sun 18 Nov 12

walthamforesttruthwillout says...

"The applicant, a Mr 'M Hussain'"
Can the reporter, Daniel Binns, explain the significance of putting the applicants name in inverted commas?
"The applicant, a Mr 'M Hussain'" Can the reporter, Daniel Binns, explain the significance of putting the applicants name in inverted commas? walthamforesttruthwillout
  • Score: 0

2:49pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Helen, Walthamstow says...

Cornbeefur, the council gives four reasons for turning down the application. To precis:

1) It would mean losing two family homes in a area where there has already been a large number of conversions and a significant loss of family homes, which has changed the area's character

2) A B&B would create intensive occupation and an increased level of activity, noise and vehicle usage, particularly during the late evening

3) The application fails to comply with access standards particularly in terms of narrow doorways, cramped kitchen and dining area, a lack of clear access space in two bedrooms and inadequate "turning circles" in two others

4) "The proposed use, which is likely to attract significant numbers of non permanent residents, represents an inappropriate use in a non town centre location with poor public transport accessibility....."

Mr Hussain made an application in January for a lawful development certificate for an existing ground floor rear extension. That was approved.

In June, he made an application for a B&B on the same site. It was sent back to him.

On October 10 he applied for retention of an outbuilding in the rear garden. That was refused.

The most recent application for the B&B was made on October 17 - the outcome resulting in the Guardian report.

Anything else you want to know?
Cornbeefur, the council gives four reasons for turning down the application. To precis: 1) It would mean losing two family homes in a area where there has already been a large number of conversions and a significant loss of family homes, which has changed the area's character 2) A B&B would create intensive occupation and an increased level of activity, noise and vehicle usage, particularly during the late evening 3) The application fails to comply with access standards particularly in terms of narrow doorways, cramped kitchen and dining area, a lack of clear access space in two bedrooms and inadequate "turning circles" in two others 4) "The proposed use, which is likely to attract significant numbers of non permanent residents, represents an inappropriate use in a non town centre location with poor public transport accessibility....." Mr Hussain made an application in January for a lawful development certificate for an existing ground floor rear extension. That was approved. In June, he made an application for a B&B on the same site. It was sent back to him. On October 10 he applied for retention of an outbuilding in the rear garden. That was refused. The most recent application for the B&B was made on October 17 - the outcome resulting in the Guardian report. Anything else you want to know? Helen, Walthamstow
  • Score: 0

6:25pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Isaythat says...

only that he will never get it approved! thats the only thing I want to know.
only that he will never get it approved! thats the only thing I want to know. Isaythat
  • Score: 0

3:36pm Mon 19 Nov 12

Walthamster says...

Maybe the applicant is trying it on because so many others have got away with it before?

This looks like a sensible decision (for once!) by the council.
Maybe the applicant is trying it on because so many others have got away with it before? This looks like a sensible decision (for once!) by the council. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

6:39pm Thu 22 Nov 12

mdj says...

'Mr Hussain made an application in January for a lawful development certificate for an existing ground floor rear extension. That was approved...'

Sounds as if he built it first and asked questions later: too typical around here.

What difference does a refusal make, one wonders? A huge shanty was built filling the garden next door to my former home, and despite repeated complaints the council took no action. A few yards away a garden annexe is unconvincingly disguised by the retention of the garage door that served its original purpose: the puffs of steam from the boiler flue don't help the deception.

In the absence of enforcement, refusals are meaningless.
'Mr Hussain made an application in January for a lawful development certificate for an existing ground floor rear extension. That was approved...' Sounds as if he built it first and asked questions later: too typical around here. What difference does a refusal make, one wonders? A huge shanty was built filling the garden next door to my former home, and despite repeated complaints the council took no action. A few yards away a garden annexe is unconvincingly disguised by the retention of the garage door that served its original purpose: the puffs of steam from the boiler flue don't help the deception. In the absence of enforcement, refusals are meaningless. mdj
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree