Town Planner Pro
Free trial
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed15 March 20243324691

98 Maple Road, Surbiton, London, KT6 4AL

Planning appeal 3324691 at 98 Maple Road, Surbiton, London, KT6 4AL (Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames) was dismissed on 15 March 2024 by Inspector Pattison B, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the proposals on the character and appearance of the area with particular regard to the setting of the nearby Cadogan Road Conservation Area.

demolition of existing two storey building and erection of four storey building, basement excavation with front and rear lightwells and creation of 8 self-contained flats (3 x 3-bed and 4 x 2-bed) all with private terraces and a communal terrace at roof level. Provision on of secure internal refuse and cycle storage

Authority
Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Pattison B
Postcode
KT6 4AL

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • the effect of the proposals on the character and appearance of the area with particular regard to the setting of the nearby Cadogan Road Conservation Area
  • the effect of the proposed car parking provision on highway safety
  • whether the proposal would provide satisfactory cycle parking
  • the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of future occupiers of the proposal with particular regard to outlook in the event of future development at the adjoining site
  • whether or not the proposal makes adequate provision for family housing, taking account of the relevant policies of the development plan, the location of the site and the housing needs of the borough

What decided it

The unacceptable adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area through the proposal's disproportionate built form with excessive site coverage and depth, combined with the absence of a Section 106 obligation to secure a Travel Plan and parking restrictions, meant the adverse impacts significantly and demonstrably outweighed the moderate benefits of housing delivery.

The moderate social and economic benefits of housing delivery and residential intensification on brownfield land were significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the very heavy weight of harm to character and appearance and the policy conflicts relating to highway safety and design quality.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021)Policy DM10 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2012)Policy HC1 of the London PlanPolicy DM12 of the Core StrategyPolicy DM8 of the Core StrategyPolicy DM9 of the Core StrategyPolicy T6 of the London Plan (2021)Policy T6.1 of the London Plan (2021)Policy T5 of the London PlanPolicy D6 of the London PlanPolicy DM13 of the Core Strategy
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 115
Judgments
Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin)

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 applied

The 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.

Appeals plan, £15 a month

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

371 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024

  1. Dismissed7 October 20266011912
    11 Kingsdowne Road, Surbiton, KT6 6JZ
  2. Dismissed29 September 20266009988
    56 Burlington Road, New Malden, KT3 4NU
  3. Dismissed25 September 20266009076
    74 - 76 Coombe Road, New Malden, KT3 4QU
  4. Allowed11 August 20266010924
    271 Malden Road, New Malden, KT3 6AH
  5. Dismissed3 August 20266007703
    Town End Pier, 68 High Street, Kingston Upon Thames, KT1 1HN

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.