Daylight & Sunlight Appeal – Westland Place Hackney

Daylight & Sunlight Appeals Westland Place Hackney

In a significant decision this Daylight & Sunlight Appeal in Hackney in January 2024 saw the Planning Inspectorate dismiss an appeal by Acre City Ltd concerning the proposed upward extension of a partly complete hotel development. The site in Westland Place is just around the corner from the Eagle Building on City Road.

The appeal, brought under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, challenged Hackney Council’s refusal to grant planning permission for an additional fifth floor to create 11 more hotel rooms.

The central issue in the appeal was whether the proposed increase in height would unacceptably harm the living conditions of nearby residential occupiers — particularly at Chocolate Studios and 18–28 Westland Place — due to reductions in daylight and sunlight. This decision is highly relevant to developers and planning consultants managing schemes in dense urban locations, especially when proposing massing increases near sensitive residential receptors.

Site Context - Daylight & Sunlight Appeal Hackney

The appeal site, located in a dense and varied urban area of Hackney, had an existing planning consent for a hotel. At the time of the site visit in October 2023, the structure was mostly built to its consented five-storey height, with rooftop plant equipment in place. The proposed development sought to extend above the current roofline, thereby increasing the building’s mass and elevational profile.

To the west lies Chocolate Studios — a residential development slightly taller than the hotel — and to the east, directly across narrow Westland Place, is 18–28 Westland Place, a residential building of comparable height. The constrained nature of the site and the close proximity of neighbouring homes made daylight and sunlight considerations particularly acute.

Daylight Impacts

Assessment Approach

A Daylight and Sunlight Report (DSR) accompanied the planning application. The DSR was produced according to the Building Research Establishment (BRE) Guide, "Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight – A Guide to Good Practice (2nd Edition, 2011)". Although the BRE Guide had been revised by the time of the appeal, the Inspector found no reason to doubt the continued relevance of the submitted DSR’s methodology.

Importantly, the DSR used the consented scheme as a baseline, meaning that any impact identified was in addition to reductions already permitted.

Vertical Sky Component (VSC)

The DSR evaluated daylight using the Vertical Sky Component (VSC) metric. Notably, it identified that windows at 18–28 Westland Place would suffer further reductions below the BRE’s recommended threshold of 0.8 times their former VSC value — a marker for potentially noticeable degradation.

One window’s VSC was shown to fall to just 15% of its original value — far below acceptable standards. The Inspector noted that many of these windows were already compromised by recessed balconies, which reduce sky visibility and limit daylight potential. This design feature made them particularly vulnerable to further obstruction.

Although some rooms served by these recessed balconies also contained windows on the opposite façade, the Inspector concluded that the primary daylight source was the balcony-facing windows, particularly in open-plan living areas. Therefore, despite dual-aspect layouts, the extension would still significantly impair internal amenity.

Chocolate Studios

While no windows at Chocolate Studios technically breached BRE guidelines, existing VSC values were already low, especially on lower floors. The Inspector expressed concern that even minor further erosion of daylight in this context could have disproportionate adverse effects on occupiers.

Daylight Distribution (No Sky Line)

The appeal also considered Daylight Distribution, using the No Sky Line (NSL) test, which maps the portions of a room that can see the sky from the working plane (typically 0.85m above floor level).

At 18–28 Westland Place, the NSL analysis revealed that:

The lower floors already had limited daylight.

The third floor would be most severely affected by the proposed extension.

The top floor would be unaffected.

Some affected rooms may be dual-aspect, but many were likely single-aspect bedrooms, making them more vulnerable to reductions.

At Chocolate Studios, the NSL impact was less marked, but one room breached BRE guidance, contributing cumulatively to the overall harm.

Sunlight Impacts

Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH)

Sunlight was assessed using the APSH metric. Out of 143 windows, 14 failed to meet BRE targets — all within 18–28 Westland Place. The lower floors, particularly the second floor, were hardest hit.

For some windows, the annual sunlight received would be halved, which is a profound reduction by BRE standards. Although many of these windows served bedrooms (given less weight under BRE sunlight guidance), some served living rooms — including those with recessed balconies — exacerbating the impact.

Crucially, the Inspector concluded that even without considering the already-consented massing, the proposed fifth-floor extension alone would result in unacceptable loss of sunlight to adjacent residents.

Policy Conflict

The Inspector found clear conflict with several development plan policies, including:

Hackney Local Plan 2033:

London Plan (2021):

These policies collectively underline that new developments should not significantly reduce the residential amenity of existing occupiers. The Inspector was unequivocal in stating that the development failed these tests.

Conservation Area and Other Issues

The site lies within the Underwood Street Conservation Area, which includes a mix of traditional brick buildings and newer developments. The Inspector concluded that the proposed massing would not harm the character or appearance of the conservation area.

A prior appeal at the same site had been dismissed in December 2020, though the Inspector gave this little weight due to limited detail.

The Inspector acknowledged the applicant’s argument that the scheme offered public benefits, including additional hotel rooms and associated economic activity. However, these benefits were outweighed by the harm to residential amenity, particularly in terms of daylight and sunlight loss.

Decision - Daylight & Sunlight Appeal Hackney

The appeal was dismissed. The Inspector concluded that the proposal would result in an unacceptable loss of daylight and sunlight, particularly to 18–28 Westland Place, and to a lesser extent, Chocolate Studios. The Inspector found that the harm conflicted with both local and strategic policy, and therefore refused the proposal

Key Takeaways

1. Flexible BRE Guidance Still Has Teeth: Significant breaches remain unacceptable, even where flexibility is advised.

2. Recessed Balconies Compound Failures: Already constrained windows are highly susceptible to further harm.

3. Dual Aspect Doesn’t Always Save the Day: Especially where the dominant daylight source is affected.

4. Use of Baseline Matters: Assessing against the consented scheme isolates additional impacts.

5. Small Breaches Add Up: Especially in already poor lighting conditions.

6. Public Benefits Must Be Substantial: Modest economic gains won’t override major residential harm.

Conclusion

This decision on Westland Place in Hackney serves as a useful precedent in planning appeals focused on daylight and sunlight.

The decision highlights the need to conduct rigorous analysis, make clear baseline comparisons, and apply BRE standards consistently when assessing acceptability — even where a 'flexible approach' is encouraged.

Developers, planners, and consultants must tread carefully when intensifying massing in tight urban contexts, particularly where neighbouring residential properties are already under daylight strain.

Daylight and Sunlight Appeal Hackney - Need expert support with Assessments?

Our specialist team offers detailed modelling, impact reports, and strategic advice tailored to your project.

For more advice on how we can help support a planning application with a daylight & sunlight assessments please give us a call. If you would rather we contacted you please fill in our Contact Form and we will be in touch.

For more information on all aspects of Daylight & Sunlight Assessments for planning see the collection of articles on our blog page.

For further advice on Daylight & Sunlight for planning, please call our Daylight & Sunlight Enquiry Line on 020 4534 3138.

If you’d like us to call you, please fill in our Contact Us form and we will call you back.