Appeal 6003205

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the part demolition of existing building and redevelopment of the site to provide a part-four, part three, part one-storey building, with 9 residential units (Class C3) and associated works at [site address] , Tolworth [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/00611/FUL, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

An application for costs was made by Jessona Investments Ltd against the Council. This application is the subject of a separate decision.

The appeal is against the failure of the Council to reach a decision on the application within the relevant statutory timeframe. The Council has submitted an appeal statement which confirms that, had it been in a position to do so, it would have approved the application subject to several planning conditions. Therefore, from the evidence before me, there are no substantive grounds of dispute between the appellant and the Council, and both consider that the appeal should be allowed.

However, several representations have been made by interested parties which raise a broad range of issues. Having regard to these comments, the main issues are the effect of the proposed development on:  the character and appearance of the area;  the living conditions of future occupiers, with regard to the provision of internal space;  the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with regard to noise, disturbance and privacy; and  parking provision and highway safety.

The appeal site relates to a mixed use two to three storey building on [name]. The frontage of the building is terraced and comprises two retail units at ground floor level. The first floor is also in retail use, presumably providing ancillary office/storage space to the ground floor units, as set out by the Council. There is a self-contained flat on the second floor. Surrounding development along [name] is largely characterised by ground floor commercial units with residential units on upper floors. The wider surrounding area comprises residential development.

[name] would be positioned to the front of the site, facing onto [name]. There are various examples of first and second floor projection rear extensions on several other frontage buildings on [name]. There are also various other rear mansard roof extensions evident on frontage buildings along [name]. Given the presence of such other developments in the surrounding area, the scale and form of block A would be in keeping with surrounding development. Similarly, the Council has no objections to the height and form of [name].

[name] would be located towards the rear of the site and would be three storeys in height. The overall scale and height of this block would be comparable to other development within the area, including that fronting onto the rear service road. In addition, the stepped layout would soften the visual impact of the increased bulk and massing when viewed from the service road. The proposed materials would respond positively to the character of the existing building and the surrounding area.

Overall, the Council has not raised any concerns associated with the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. After considering the points raised by the interested parties and the Council’s findings on the matter, I agree with the Council’s conclusion. The scheme would be in accordance with Policies CS8 and DM10 of the Royal Borough of [name] 2012 (CS) and Policy D3 of the London Plan 2021 (LP). Collectively, amongst other matters, these policies seek to ensure high quality design that responds positively to the local character of an area.

Concerns regarding over population and the inadequate size of the flats are raised by interested parties. However, all of the flats would meet or exceed the required minimum standards for floor areas and bedroom sizes, as set out by Policy D6 of the LP.

Flats 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 would fall short of the minimum requirements for built- in storage. However, flats 1, 2, 5 and 6 would exceed the minimum standards in terms of floor area. This, coupled with the extent of the small shortfall, would mitigate any harm associated with reduced built-in storage space.

Flat 4 would meet, and not exceed, the minimum standards in terms of floor area. As set out by the Council, the flat would provide 1.26sqm of built-in storage space, falling short of the 2.5sqm target for a flat of this size. Nonetheless, given the extent of the shortfall, and the fact that all other flats meet or exceed the space standards in terms of floor area, I do not consider that this shortfall would amount to a harmful impact. The Council similarly acknowledge that the shortfalls would not diminish the overall quality of the accommodation.

The evidence before me demonstrates that all the proposed flats would meet or exceed the minimum ceiling height requirement, as set out in Policy D6 of the LP.

Overall, for the reasons set out, I conclude that the scheme would ensure adequate living conditions for future occupiers, with regard to the provision of internal space. This would be in accordance with Policy DM13 of the CS and Policy D6 of the LP. Collectively, amongst other things, these policies seek to ensure adequate internal space in new developments.

Concerns are raised from interested parties regarding the potential for noise from the communal area and the proposed balconies. However, given the relatively small size of the balconies, and separation distances between the balconies and neighbouring properties, I do not consider that any noise from the use of the balconies would amount to a harmful impact.

The outdoor communal area is positioned between blocks A and [name] positioning would likely somewhat minimise any noise spillage from this area. Additionally, the separation distances between this area and neighbouring properties would further reduce it. In any case, any noise would be residential in nature, and the site is situated within a busy District Centre where some noise can reasonably be expected. [name] were to allow the appeal, I could use a planning condition to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the measures set out in the submitted noise assessment, in order to safeguard the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers.

Any noise and disturbance from construction would be short lived and if the appeal were to be allowed a condition to ensure compliance with a construction management plan could be used to minimise any noise and disturbance from construction.

The distance from the rear balconies and windows of [name] to the rear habitable room windows of dwellings along [address] would be in excess of 21 metres, in accordance with the guidance in the Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The distance from the rear garden boundaries of dwellings along [address] to the balconies and windows of [name] would also be in accordance with the SPD. Such separation distances would therefore ensure privacy to the neighbouring occupiers along [address].

Several representations from interested parties outline how the submitted plans incorrectly show tall trees in the rear gardens of properties along [address]. However, even if there are no trees to the rear of these properties, the separation distances between the site and the properties along [address] would ensure adequate privacy.

In order to ensure privacy to neighbouring properties along [name], privacy screens on the balconies and screening to the communal amenity area could be ensured by a planning condition. This is also suggested by the Council.

Overall, the Council raise no concerns regarding noise and disturbance and loss of privacy to neighbouring occupiers. After considering the points raised by interested parties and the Council’s finding on this matter, for the reasons set out above, I share the Council’s view. The scheme would be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the CS and Policy D3 of the LP. Collectively, amongst other matters, these policies seek to ensure that development does not harm the living conditions of neighbours.

Concerns are raised from interested parties regarding the scheme’s lack of on-site parking, which they state would exacerbate parking stress in the area. The site has a public transport accessibility level score of 3, with 1 being the lowest and 6 being the highest. It is located approximately an eight-minute walk from Tolworth railway station, which provides regular services to London and other destinations. It is also situated within a controlled parking zone.

The scheme would not provide any car parking spaces. The Council raise no objections to this, outlining how it would be in accordance with Policy T6 of the LP. To ensure the development is car free, a mechanism to ensure future occupants cannot obtain on-street parking permits is necessary. Without such a mechanism, occupiers may still utilise private cars for day-to-day transport requirements for those journeys that are not possible or practical on public transport and therefore try to obtain an on-street parking permit to park the car.

The Council also outline how the developer would be required to provide all the dwellings with at least two years free membership to the nearest car club bay provider. This would be in accordance with Policy DM9 of the CS which requires new developments to provide car club membership where appropriate, and the Council’s Sustainable Transport Supplementary Planning Document which sets out that car clubs can be effective in reducing car use and parking demand by enabling residents to have access to a car without owning one.

A planning obligation to ensure car free development and car club membership would therefore meet Paragraph 58 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) and Paragraph 2 of Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations, in that it would be necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, would be directly related to the development and would be fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

A signed unilateral undertaking has been submitted at appeal stage. The agreement would ensure that future occupiers cannot obtain on street parking permits and provide 2 years free car club membership for the first occupiers of each residential unit. The Council is satisfied that that it would be sufficient to ensure the above measures.

The main pedestrian access would be situated to the rear of the site. Cycle parking, in accordance with Policy T5 of the LP, would also be provided to the rear of the site. Pedestrians and cyclists would therefore have to travel around the back of the site and partly though a car park to access the flats. [name] have taken interested party’s comments into account, there is little substantive evidence, and nothing that I could see on-site, to suggest that the road conditions to the rear of the site are so dangerous, that the proposal would present an unacceptable highway safety in this regard. Similarly, the Council’s highway officer has not raised any concerns associated with this. [name] were to allow the appeal, a condition to ensure the submission of details of a delivery and servicing plan could be used, in the interests of the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and highway safety.

Any increase in vehicle traffic as a result of parcel delivery services would not be so significant so as to result in unacceptable congestion. Such concerns were not raised by the Council.

Overall, based on the evidence before me, I am satisfied that the proposal would be acceptable as car free development and would not harm highway safety. The scheme would be in accordance with Policies DM9, DM10 and CS6 of the CS and Policies T5 and T6 of the LP. Collectively, amongst other matters, these policies require development to have regard to local traffic conditions and ensure highway safety.

Concerns are raised by interested parties regarding inadequate waste storage. Refuse storage would be provided to the rear of the site and could be ensured via a planning condition if the appeal were to be allowed. The Council confirm that waste storage would be acceptable. After considering the points raised by interested parties, and the Council’s findings on the matter, I am satisfied that the proposed waste storage would be adequate.

The submitted bat survey states that the roof did not show any clear openings large enough for use as bat or bird access points. Interested parties have raised concerns that a removed window, and some broken windows, may now provide access points for bats and birds, and a bat survey should therefore be repeated. However, the bat survey found no evidence of bats and no signs of nesting birds or other protected species. There is no sufficiently authoritative evidence before me to confirm that there would now be bats or birds nesting in the property and such representations are therefore considered to be anecdotal in this regard, and of limited weight. Additionally, on my site visit, a window that had been removed had been blocked up with wood. The Council has not raised any concerns associated with the bat survey, or the impact of the proposed development on protected species. After considering the interested party’s points, and the findings of the bat survey, I am satisfied that the scheme would not result in harm to protected species.

A daylight/sunlight report was submitted with the application. This demonstrates that whilst there would be a slight reduction of daylight and sunlight received to neighbouring windows, this would not be significant, and the amount of sunlight and daylight reaching neighbouring windows would exceed the minimum recommendations set out in the BRE guidance. Given this, I am satisfied that any loss of daylight/sunlight to neighbouring properties would not amount to a harmful impact. The Council are also satisfied that the scheme would be acceptable in this regard.

There is no evidence before me to suggest that an asbestos survey would be necessary. Additionally, the Council’s Environmental Health service was consulted on the scheme and raised no such concerns. The Council’s Environmental Health service also raised no objections to the submitted air quality assessment. As suggested by the Council, if the appeal were to be allowed, a dust management plan could be ensured through a planning condition. Any disruption from on and off-site inspection, as part of monitoring air quality, would be short lived and not result in harm to neighbouring living conditions.

A condition to ensure the submission of a landscaping plan, to include details of locations and species of all plants, could be used. The condition would also ensure that the approved scheme is implemented within the first planting season following substantial completion of the development and maintained thereafter for five years. I do not consider that the street trees shown on plans would result in harm by way of loss of light to the proposed flats.

Concerns are raised that ongoing demolition work is not following health and safety regulations. However, such matters are not linked to land use.

The Council has raised some minor issues regarding discrepancies on plans. However, they indicate that such matters would not have led to a refusal reason. A condition requiring the submission and approval of balcony balustrades and privacy screens could be used if the appeal were to be allowed, to ensure privacy to neighbouring occupiers, consistency throughout the development and compliance with building control regulations. There is also a small discrepancy in that the boxed side of the glazing on the floor plan drawing 5062/PA/51 is inconsistent with the position shown on the side elevation illustration on drawing 5062/PA/16C. To deal with this, if I were to allow the appeal, I could use a planning condition to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the specific elevation plan, in so far as it aligns with the specific floor plan. The wall panels next to glazing on block A are vertically arranged, whereas the wall panel on the second-floor rear elevation of block B is horizontally arranged. However, I do not consider there to be any harm associated with this minor design difference.

Interested parties also refer to a new application submitted by the appellant. However, my assessment focusses on the merits of the appeal before me. Concerns are raised that whilst amended plans were submitted, many of the impact assessments were not revised. However, many of the documents, including the sunlight and daylight assessment and design and access statement were updated to take account of amendments. [name] acknowledge that an amended noise assessment and air quality assessment were not submitted, given the nature of the amendments and matters being considered under these reports, I do not consider this to be an issue. Similarly, no such concerns were raised by the Council.

The Council has suggested a number of conditions which I have considered in light of the advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. Where appropriate, I have adjusted the wording of the conditions in the interests of precision and enforceability and at times to avoid duplication.

In addition to the standard time limit condition, I have used a condition to specify the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty. I have also included the fire safety strategy and noise assessment in this condition, to avoid duplication and to safeguard the living conditions of future occupiers.

A pre-commencement condition requiring the submission of a construction management plan is necessary to maintain highway and pedestrian safety and to safeguard the living conditions of nearby residents. Pre-commencement conditions requiring the submission of a dust management plan and a delivery and servicing plan are also necessary, to safeguard the living conditions of nearby residents.

A condition requiring details of landscaping, including play space, prior to the commencement of above ground works, is necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the area and in accordance with Policy S4 of the LP. A condition, prior to the commencement above ground works, requiring details of balcony balustrades and privacy screening is necessary, to ensure the privacy of neighbouring occupiers. A condition, prior to the commencement of above ground works, requiring samples of materials to be used is required, in the interests of the character and appearance of the area.

A condition requiring the submission of drainage design and a management plan for the drainage system, prior to the commencement of above ground works is necessary, to minimise the risk of flooding to and from the site. A condition to ensure that the buildings are not occupied until the drainage system has been completed is also used, to prevent flooding. A condition to ensure that the development efficiently uses water is required.

A condition restricting the use of the flat roofs is necessary to ensure the privacy of neighbouring living conditions. Conditions are used to ensure that cycle parking facilities and refuse storage are provided in accordance with the approved plans and retained thereafter, in the interests of sustainable transport and to ensure proper waste management. A condition to ensure that external lighting is angled so as to prevent spillage or glare beyond site boundaries, to safeguard the living conditions of neighbours, is used.

A condition relating to the level of noise from any new plant is used, in the interests of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. A condition to ensure that [name] complies with specific emission standards is necessary, in the interests of air quality. Finally, a condition to ensure that no other flank windows, other than those shown on the approved plans, are provided is necessary to ensure the privacy of neighbouring occupiers.

The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has suggested conditions to require sound insulation and sound transmission reduction measures between the ground floor and first floor flats. However, I do not consider these to be necessary. [name] were to allow the appeal, I could ensure that the development is in compliance with the submitted noise assessment through an approved plans and documents condition. There is insufficient evidence before me to demonstrate that noise transmission between the ground and first floor flats would be an issue. As set out in the noise report, it is reasonable to expect that a small shop would not be particularly noisy and would likely be open during typical working hours only. In addition, the Council did not include these conditions in its list of suggested

For the reasons set out above, the appeal scheme is considered to accord with the development plan, when read as a whole. Material considerations do not indicate that decisions should be taken other than in accordance with the development plan. I therefore conclude that the appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted.

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents:  5062/PA/09B Rev.B Proposed Site Plan;  5062/PA/14B Rev.B Proposed Roof Plan;  5062/PA/15B Rev.[name];  5062/PA/19 [name];  5062/PA/20 [name];  5062/PA/21 [name] from Balcony;  5062/PA/22 Setting Out Plan;  5062/PA/23 [name] (View 2);  5062/PA/24 [name] from Balcony;  5062/PA/30B [name] of House;  5062/PA/50 Proposed 1st Floor Plan, Apt 01 to 04;  5062/PA/51 Proposed 2nd Floor Plan, Apt 05 to 08;  5062/PA/52 Proposed 3rd Floor Plan, Apt 09;  5062/PA/16C Rev.[name] (in so far as it aligns with 5062/PA/51) ;  5062/PA/10D Rev.D Proposed Ground Floor Plan;  5062/PA/11C Rev.[name] 1st Floor Plan;  5062/PA/12C [name] 2nd Floor Plan;  5062/PA/13C Rev.[name] 3rd Floor Plan;  5062/PA/17C Rev.C Proposed Section;  5062/SK/12 [name] - [name]  [name] by [name], dated 20/02/2024  Noise Assessment, [site address] , dated 23/02/2024

No development shall take place until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall include the following: i. details of the routing of construction vehicles to the site, hours of access, access and egress arrangements within the site, parking arrangements for site operatives and visitors and security procedures; ii. site preparation and construction stages of the development; iii. details of provisions for recycling of materials, the provision on site of a storage/delivery area for all plant, site huts, site facilities and materials; iv. details of wheel washing; v. the methods to be used and the measures to be undertaken to control the emission of dust, noise and vibration arising from demolition and construction works; vi. a suitable and efficient means of suppressing dust, including the adequate containment of stored or accumulated material so as to prevent it becoming airborne at any time and giving rise to nuisance; vii. noise mitigation measures for all plant and processors; viii. details of a community liaison contact for the duration of all works associated with the development; ix. the means of enclosure of the site, its erection and maintenance; x. the location of all ancillary site buildings xi. delivery, demolition and construction working hours. The approved Construction Management Plan shall be adhered to throughout the demolition and construction period for the development.

No development shall take place until a Dust Management Plan (DMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The DMP must include monitoring of dust deposition, dust flux, real-time PM10 continuous monitoring and/or visual inspections. This plan must incorporate the recommendations of (9.4. Step 3 Site Specific Mitigation) of the Air Quality Assessment and be in compliance with the [name] of Dust and Emissions during Construction and [name]. The approved DMP shall be adhered to throughout the demolition and construction period for the development.

No development shall take place until a full delivery and servicing plan (DSP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once approved the actionable measures of the DSP shall be implemented as specified and retained as such for so long as the development is in existence.

No development above ground level shall take place until a detailed landscape & planting plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The plan shall include, where appropriate, a clear key or legend corresponding to the landscaping plan and providing the following information:  Species (both Latin & Common names) for all plants  Locations of all plants or areas of planting  Plant numbers or planting densities  Sizes of all plants, particularly trees, 'at time of planting'  Details of play space  Details of all hard-landscaping areas including materials and permeability  Details of any proposed green roofs, including substrate depth, drainage and species The approved scheme shall then be implemented within the first planting season following substantial completion of the development. The tree planting and landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. Any trees or shrubs which die during this period shall be replaced at the beginning of the following planting season, and the areas shown to be landscaped shall be permanently retained for that purpose.

No development above ground level shall take place until details (appearance, dimensions, materials) of balcony balustrades and balcony privacy screening to serve the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be installed prior to first occupation of the flats hereby approved and retained thereafter.

No development above ground level shall take place until samples of all external facing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved sample details.

No development above ground level (excluding site investigations and demolition) shall take place until a final detailed drainage design, including drawings, supporting calculations, [name] and Drainage Assessment Form has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. A detailed management plan confirming routine maintenance tasks for all drainage components must also be submitted to demonstrate how the drainage system is to be maintained for the lifetime of the development. The system shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, evidence (photographs and installation contracts) shall be submitted to the local planning authority to demonstrate that the sustainable drainage scheme for the site has been completed in accordance with the submitted details. The sustainable drainage scheme shall be managed and maintained thereafter in accordance with the agreed management and maintenance plan for all of the proposed drainage components.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved evidence showing that the development has achieved internal water usage rates of no greater than 105L per person per day shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once approved, any measures necessary to meet the targets shall be maintained throughout the lifetime of the development.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted details of the positions, height, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected around the communal amenity space shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The boundary treatment shall be completed in accordance with the approved details before the flats are occupied.

Unless clearly shown otherwise on the approved plans, the flat roof areas of the development hereby approved shall not be used as roof gardens, balconies, seating areas or other similar amenity areas, and shall not be accessed except for the purpose of maintenance or in the case of emergency.

The cycle parking facilities as shown in the approved plans shall be provided prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved and shall be permanently retained for that purpose and kept free from obstruction thereafter.

The refuse and recycling facilities as shown in the approved plans shall be provided prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved and shall be permanently retained thereafter. The developer and/or their successors in title shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that all refuse and recyclable materials associated with the development are either stored within these facilities or internally within the buildings on the application site, and that no refuse or recycling material is stored or placed for collection on the public highway except on the day of collection.

Any new external lighting installed at the site shall be angled so as to prevent any spillage or glare beyond the site's boundaries.

The rating level of the noise determined by the cumulative sound emissions of any new plant to which this permission relates shall be at least 5dBA lower than the existing background noise level at any given time of operation. The noise levels shall be measured or predicted 1m externally to any window at the nearest residential facade and the measurements and assessment shall be made according to BS 4142:2014.

[name] (NRMM) of net power of 37kW and up to and including 560kW used during the course of the demolition, site preparation and construction phases shall comply with the emission standards set out in chapter 7 of the Mayor of London’s supplementary planning guidance "Control of Dust and [name] and Demolition" dated July 2014 (SPG), or subsequent guidance. Unless it complies with the standards set out in the SPG, no NRMM shall be on site, at any time, whether in use or not, without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. The developer shall keep an up to date list of all NRMM used during the demolition, site preparation and construction phases of the development on the online register at

No flank windows, other than those shown in the approved plans, shall be provided. **END OF SCHEDULE**