Four Apsley homes have won outline planning permission on a former canal depot beside the Grand Union Canal in Hemel Hempstead. Inspector S F Barnes allowed Marymount Properties Ltd’s appeal on 14th October 2026, overturning Dacorum Borough Council’s refusal of the Ebberns Road scheme.
The decision approves demolition of the existing buildings and redevelopment for four homes, with access and layout settled now. Their scale, appearance and landscaping still need approval. For neighbours around Apsley Lock, this is permission for a residential redevelopment, rather than approval of every detail shown on the illustrative drawings.
I would pay particular attention to how the inspector dealt with outdoor space. The proposed gardens were only around six metres deep, but the appeal succeeded because balconies or similar private areas could provide something extra. That is a specific design solution, not a general finding that small gardens are always acceptable.
Why the Apsley homes layout was accepted
The site contains extensive hardstanding, a two-storey mixed-use building and three single-storey storage outbuildings. It sits in an established residential area, with houses and apartment blocks along Ebberns Road and the canal. The surrounding buildings are generally two or three storeys high, with gaps that help give the area a sense of spaciousness.
The inspector found that the proposed building would follow the canal-side building line established by neighbouring properties. Open space would remain between buildings, while the gap to the rear of Willow Court would increase compared with the existing arrangement. Rather than appearing cramped, the layout would respond positively to the surrounding pattern of development.
For the Apsley homes proposal, that comparison with what is already on the land mattered. The inspector also noted that the extensive existing hardstanding meant the proposed parking would have a neutral effect on appearance in that respect. Landscaping and boundary treatments remain matters for the next approval stage.
Short gardens needed something more
The decision does not dismiss the limitations of the gardens. At around six metres deep, they fall below the average minimum depth referred to in the council’s guidance. On their own, they would not support the full range of activities reasonably expected of gardens serving four-person houses, including extensive gardening or substantial children’s play space.
However, the inspector found that additional balconies or similar features could offer views and openness over the waterway. These spaces could provide different recreational opportunities, privacy and outlook alongside the gardens. In the decision’s words, they could offer value that “exceeds what can be measured by size alone”.
A condition therefore requires the reserved-matters plans for the Apsley homes to show a balcony or another outdoor area integral to the building for each dwelling. Each area must be available before its dwelling is first occupied and retained afterwards. The extra space is a requirement of the permission, rather than an optional improvement.
My reading is that the useful lesson lies in the combination of spaces. An applicant relying on a short garden would need to show what residents could actually do outside and how any additional area contributes. A nearby canal view would not, by itself, answer every concern about usable private outdoor space.
Neighbours’ privacy and sunlight considered
The separation from Willow Court would be less than the council’s guidance indicates. Nevertheless, internal layouts, window positions and room uses remain to be determined. The appellant identified possible ways of avoiding direct views, including fencing, positioning habitable rooms away from the rear elevation and obscure glazing.
The inspector accepted that a satisfactory design could be achieved. Some smaller first-floor windows at Willow Court would have a reduced outlook, but the rooms also have larger glazed doors facing private balconies away from the proposal. Sunlight evidence based on illustrative three-storey massing also supported the conclusion that neighbouring sunlight would remain satisfactory.
Those findings do not mean a final three-storey design has been approved. Scale remains reserved. Anyone assessing the Apsley homes permission needs to read the approved access and layout alongside the outstanding design matters, rather than treating the illustrative elevations as the final scheme.
Woodland mitigation secured through an undertaking
A separate issue was pressure from additional residents visiting protected woodland. The site falls within the zone of influence of Ashridge Commons and Woods, part of the Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation. Extra visits can damage vegetation and compact or erode soil.
A unilateral undertaking submitted with the appeal secures contributions towards suitable alternative natural greenspace and strategic visitor management and monitoring. The council confirmed that sufficient alternative greenspace capacity remained at Bunkers Park and Chipperfield Common as of June 2026. Natural England accepted the mitigation measures.
The inspector concluded that, with those measures secured, the development would not adversely affect the protected site’s integrity. This resolved an important concern, but it depended on the undertaking and available mitigation. It was not a finding that four additional homes could simply be ignored when considering recreational pressure.
What must happen before building starts
The Apsley homes decision contains 16 conditions. Reserved matters must be submitted within three years of the permission, and development must begin within two years of the final reserved-matters approval. Several safeguards apply before development, including clearance or demolition, can start.
These include contamination assessment, a canal stability construction method statement, biodiversity protection measures and a construction method statement. Drainage details must also be approved. Other requirements address species enhancements, refuse storage, fire access, parking and lighting. These reflect the practical constraints of developing beside an operational canal and existing homes.
For a purchaser or developer, I would start with the conditions and the undertaking before assuming the site is ready to build. For neighbours following the Apsley homes proposal, the next significant step is the detailed design submission, particularly the windows, building scale, boundaries and private outdoor areas.
The full official appeal decision and conditions identify appeal 6006896 and application 25/01363/OUT. Our planning appeals guide explains the wider process, while our planning obligations guide provides background to agreements and undertakings.
0 Comments