NEIGHBOURS of a Victorian mansion are celebrating after plans to build flats on the site were turned down by Redbridge Council.

A fierce campaign was fought to prevent Bedford House, Bedford Road, South Woodford, being demolished and nine modern apartments built in its place.

Susan Kopelman, from nearby Cleveland Road, was involved in the protests against the development which she believes would be out of keeping with the historic surroundings of the area.

She added: "We are delighted but we just have to wait and see what happens next.

"It would be fantastic if this is the final outcome but I don't think anybody will be resting on their laurels just from our experience with other buildings.

"I'm not going to gloat too much but I'm really pleased as I don't think as a community we need any more flats around here."

Proposals for 12 flats on the site were rejected by Redbridge Council in March last year so the developer submitted a revised set of plans.

The campaign against the move generated strong support from residents, ward councillors and Woodford Green MP Iain Duncan Smith.

Neighbour Susan Brown, of Bedford Road, said she was "delighted" that the proposals were turned down.

The mum-of-two added: "It has been a long fight to save this Victorian house and hope it signals a turning point in the view Redbridge take on similar applications.

"Residential areas which could lose their character if the practice of giving practically anyone planning permission were to continued may now be protected."

Another neighbour Tim Cuddleford said: "The number of flats was still very dense for the plot and the road.

"There was insufficent car parking for nine flats adding to congestion particularly near the school which is already a problem.

"The main part of number five is such a charming building and it would be so much nicer if any development could keep the original part of the house."

A statement from Redbridge Council said the plans had been rejected on grounds of over development, intrusiveness, lack of amenity space, contributions to the community or renewable energy.

It said: "The building, by reason of its scale, position, massing, design and height, would result in an intrusive development, out of scale and character with the prevailing pattern of development in the locality, as well as having a serious and adverse effect on the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring property.

"The proposal makes insufficient provision for amenity space to be provided at the site, and so would be detrimental to those enjoyed by prospective occupants of this development as well as be out of character with the prevailing pattern of the development in the surrounding area."

Developer Lee Jose, of LJ Construction, told the Guardian that he was considering legal action against the council on the basis of the refusal.