Development Intent
AtlasHounslowPolicyEQ7
Planning Atlas›Hounslow›EQ7
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Hounslow · Local Plan · Policy

EQ7 — - Sustainable waste management.

How Hounslow actually applies EQ7: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

EQ7 is a published Hounslow planning policy. This page records where it appears in the council's published planning decisions.

Cited under: Hounslow Local Plan (adopted)

Hounslow · EQ7
Where EQ7 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~9
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
42
times cited
in parsed decision notices
67%
appeal survival
12 dismissed · 6 allowed at appeal
12 of 22
officer reach
55% of officers recorded in this period
Bedfont
top hotspot ward
9 citations
What this policy is about

Policy EQ7 requires development proposals in Hounslow to include suitable waste management arrangements, such as location, size, and design of waste and recycling facilities, and transport access. This policy applies to all development proposals in Hounslow. The council will expect developers to meet these requirements.

Plain-English summary of the adopted policy text below. The full text is the rule; this is the gist.

The policy — as adopted

- Sustainable waste management

Our approach We will work with the West London Waste Authority boroughs to meet our waste apportionment, whilst promoting the prevention, re-use, recycling and recovery of waste, consistent with the waste hierarchy. We will achieve this by (a) Working with the West London Waste Authority boroughs to manage the borough’s London Plan waste apportionment as set out in the West London Waste Plan; (b) Promoting improvements to wastewater infrastructure, including the Mogden Sewage Treatment Works; and (c) Providing in-principle support for proposals for new sewage and wastewater infrastructure, including the Thames Tideway Sewer Tunnels. Notes The ‘waste hierarchy’ ranks five steps for dealing with waste. Prevention is at the top of the hierarchy, followed by re-use, recycling, recovery and finally disposal in terms of environmental preference. The hierarchy is established in the EU Waste Framework Directive and transposed into UK law by The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011. Thames Water prepared a Development Consent Order (DCO) for the Thames Tideway Sewer Tunnels, which was considered by the Planning Inspectorate and consented in September 2014. London Plan Policy 5.17 protects existing waste facilities and seeks to facilitate their maximum use, and also sets out criteria for determining waste-related applications. These policies are further detailed in the West London Waste Plan. Hounslow | Local Plan We will expect development proposal to (d) Incorporate suitable arrangements for waste management, including the location, size and design of waste and recycling facilities, and transport access.

Verbatim from the adopted Hounslow plan · source document. The council's published plan is the authoritative version.

How it lands
90% in approvals · 0% in refusals
42 citations in the selected period
The approval/refusal split is subscriber intelligenceUnlock →
Where it bites
Bedfont9
Feltham North5
Hanworth3
What cites it — application types
all years on record · click a slice to filter
What it means in practice

Not filled in yet. This will hold how officers actually argue EQ7 case by case, classified from their decision reports — the classification pass hasn't run. Nothing is paraphrased in its place.

What the published record shows

EQ7 appears most often in Bedfont, Feltham North, Hanworth. It appears across 12 of 22 officers recorded in this period. The map shows the pattern for the selected period.

Who cites it — case-officer spreadfrom parsed decision notices · click an officer
Who leans on this policy — and how often — is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Why it is cited — and what follows
90%
in approvals
38 citations
0%
in refusals
0 citations

This shows the decision reports in which EQ7 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 4 citations sit outside the approval/refusal split.

Reason · role · consequence

Not filled in yet — the classification pass over the citing passages hasn't run. When it has, this shows why EQ7 was used, whether it supported approval or refusal, and what changed as a result. No conclusion is shown until that classification has been checked.

Why this policy is cited, and what follows, is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Does it hold up? — appeal performance
67% survival
12 dismissed · 6 allowed — 18 PINS appeal decisions cite EQ7

From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite EQ7. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing EQ7 traced to their specific appeals — is still to come.

Related — follow the thread
Hounslow
Back to the borough policy record
Open →
Committee record
What reaches members, and what they do with it
Open →
Case officers
Hounslow's decision-makers
Open →
Citations, officer spread, ward and application-type counts parsed from published Hounslow decision notices (high-confidence parses, approvals and refusals), joined to the canonical application record. One citation = one decision citing the policy. See the policy overview for every policy cited.

Atlas intelligence summarises patterns and observations from published planning records. Past decisions do not indicate how any future application will be determined. Every application is assessed on its own merits, having regard to the proposal, site, evidence and policies applying at the time. This information is provided for general information only and is not planning, legal, financial or professional advice.