Planning appeal decision
Land S of Kingfield Road and E of Westfield Avenue, Westfield Avenue Westfield, Woking, Surrey, GU22 9PF
Planning appeal 3265969 at Land S of Kingfield Road and E of Westfield Avenue, Westfield Avenue Westfield, Woking, Surrey, GU22 9PF (Woking Borough Council) was dismissed on 14 September 2021 by Inspector Wildsmith D, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Appeal A: The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the street-scene and the surrounding area.
redevelopment of the site following demolition of all existing buildings and structures to provide replacement stadium with ancillary facilities including flexible retail, hospitality and community spaces, independent retail floorspace (Classes A1/A2/A3), medical centre (Class D1) and vehicle parking, plus residential accommodation comprising 1,048 dwellings (Class C3) within 5 buildings of varying heights of between 3 and 10 storeys (and undercroft and part-basement levels) on the south and west sides of the site, together with provision of new accesses from Westfield Avenue to car parking, associated landscaping and provision of detached residential concierge building
- Authority
- Woking Borough Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Other Major Developments
- Inspector
- Wildsmith D
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Appeal A: The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the street-scene and the surrounding area
- Appeal A: Whether the proposed development would provide an acceptable and appropriate mix of dwelling types, and whether it would create a sustainable and balanced community
- Appeal A: The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of nearby residents, with particular reference to overbearing impact, loss of privacy and loss of daylight
- Appeal A: Transport matters and the effect of the proposed development on parking provision and the impact of possible overspill parking
- Appeal A: Whether the Planning Development Agreement would adequately and satisfactorily address the impacts of the proposed development
- Appeal B: The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area as a result of the loss of protected trees and woodland
- Appeal B: Whether the Planning Development Agreement would adequately and satisfactorily address the impacts of the proposed development
What decided it
The harm to character and appearance combined with the failure to provide an appropriate housing mix/sustainable community (Appeal A), and the loss of protected woodland (Appeal B), outweighed the benefits and were not overcome by the planning obligations, so both proposals conflicted with the development plan.
For both appeals the identified benefits (affordable and market housing, design, economic benefits, planning obligations, health club/stadium provision) were outweighed by the harms found (significant harm to character/appearance and substantial harm from failure to secure a sustainable and balanced community mix for Appeal A; moderate harm from loss of protected woodland for Appeal B), so the balance favoured a decision in line with the development plan, i.e. refusal in both cases.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- CS1CS5CS6CS8CS10CS11CS12CS15CS17CS18CS19CS21CS24DM2DM10DM13UA42UA44GB7SA1NRM6
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 56Paragraph 57Paragraph 60Paragraph 99Paragraph 110Paragraph 112Paragraph 119Paragraph 120Paragraph 124Paragraph 125Paragraph 129Paragraph 130Paragraph 134Paragraph 137Paragraph 147Paragraph 148
- Judgments
- Bernard Wheatcroft Ltd v SSE [JPL, 1982, P37]
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Woking Borough Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Dismissed19 October 20266006780East House, Chobham Road, Woking, GU21 2TU
- Dismissed7 August 202660055426 Beaufort Close, Maybury, Woking, GU22 8DA
- Dismissed14 July 20266006124155 Albert Drive, Woking, GU215QY
- Allowed10 July 202660058192 Sanway Close, Byflet, West Byfleet, KT14 7SP
- Dismissed17 April 202660054762 Carters Lane Cottages, Carters Lane, Old Woking, Surrey, GU22 8JQ
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®