128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 1 August 2023 by A Wright BSc (Hons) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 August 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/Z3635/W/22/3300724 128 Staines Road East, Sunbury On Thames TW16 5BB • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Philip Diamond Executor of Janet Diamond, deceased, against the decision of Spelthorne Borough Council. • The application Ref 21/00469/FUL, dated 24 March 2021, was refused by notice dated 2 February 2022. • The development proposed is the construction of a two-storey detached, one bedroom dwelling with associated parking and landscaping. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The application was originally made in the name of Mrs Diamond. By the time of the appeal, Mrs Diamond was deceased. The appeal goes forward in the name of Mr Philip Diamond who is Mrs Diamond’s authorised executor. 3. The appellant has indicated that one of the parking spaces could be removed, but I must determine the appeal on the basis of the submitted plans considered by the Council. Main Issues 4.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision The main issues are the effect of the proposed development on: • the character and appearance of the area; and • highway safety and the free flow of traffic. Reasons Character and appearance 5. The site comprises a piece of land to the side and front of a pair of semi- detached houses on Staines Road East, within a predominantly residential area opposite Kempton Park Racecourse. Part of it is hard surfaced to provide parking for vehicles for the host dwelling. Along this part of the road, walls, fences and hedges around gardens form the front boundaries of dwellings, with some gaps providing driveway accesses. There is a low boundary wall and garden in front of the existing house, and metal access gates and high boundary fences define the remaining frontage. 6. The development would introduce two parking spaces and a turntable between the proposed and existing dwellings, with a third parking space occupying https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/Z3635/W/22/3300724 much of the area in front of the host property. It would significantly increase the amount of hard surfacing alongside the road, taking up the majority of the frontage, and its extent would be discordant in the street scene. 7. The position and amount of the area occupied by the proposed parking spaces and the need for a turntable to access them would result in a cramped layout of development. Whilst the turntable would be flush with the driveway, it would operate differently to a hardstanding with the mechanical turning of cars before they egress the site. This would create an unsympathetic addition to the area and a layout that would not function well. 8. Consequently, I conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area. This would be contrary to Policy EN1 of the Spelthorne Core Strategy and Development Plan Document 2009 (CSDPD) where it requires development to provide a high standard of design and layout and to make a positive contribution to the character of the area.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision It would also conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) which requires developments to function well and add to the overall quality of an area and to be visually attractive as a result of good layout and appropriate and effective landscaping. Highway safety and the free flow of traffic 9. Staines Road East is a busy single carriageway ‘A’ road (A308) which has various speed limits but is 40 miles per hour outside the appeal site. The appellant has carried out automated traffic counts which indicate that vehicle speeds in this location are generally lower than the speed limit, a factor which dictates the size of visibility splays required to serve the development. 10. The parties agree that the required visibility splay could be achieved to the north. The visibility splay to the south is within the site boundary, but from my observations on site and the ownership declaration on the application form, it appears that part of this land belongs to 130 Staines Road East (No 130) which adjoins the site.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision There are currently fences along the road and mutual boundaries of No 130, which would interfere with visibility for drivers egressing the site onto Staines Road East, and no mechanism before me to show how an adequate visibility splay could be achieved and retained over this third-party land. 11. Furthermore, one of the proposed parking spaces would be in the area required for the visibility splay to the south. A parked vehicle in this space would block views for drivers of vehicles egressing the site of northbound traffic along Staines Road East. The lack of an acceptable visibility splay would create an unacceptable risk of accidents and, therefore, harm to the safety and movement of road users. 12. The proposal includes a turntable to turn vehicles within the site. However, the County Highway Authority (CHA) states that this would be unacceptable as it may not be properly maintained, and the available surrounding margins would make it difficult to maintain or replace. This could lead to malfunction and in turn result in vehicles being unable to turn and leave the site in forward gear. The CHA also considers that it would be unsuitable for larger vehicles.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Therefore, the proposed method for turning vehicles within the site could unnecessarily interrupt the free flow of traffic on the busy Staines Road East, https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Therefore, the proposed method for turning vehicles within the site could unnecessarily interrupt the free flow of traffic on the busy Staines Road East, https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/Z3635/W/22/3300724 with the added danger that a driver could reverse out of the site into the path of an oncoming vehicle or cyclist, potentially causing an accident. 13. There are references to examples elsewhere in Surrey, where appeal Inspectors found turntables to be both acceptable and unacceptable for on-site turning. Whilst a turntable may provide an adequate solution in some situations depending on the circumstances of the case, a condition requiring the maintenance and operation of the turntable would be difficult for the Council to enforce. 14. The appellant states that there is currently no turning area within the site, requiring drivers of vehicles to reverse onto the driveway, and no records of accidents in this location. However, at my site visit I observed large areas of hardstanding and gravel to the side of the host dwelling which are available for turning vehicles in the site. In any event, the proposal would introduce a new dwelling and additional vehicle movements, requiring the provision of a safe means of access. 15. Overall, I conclude that the proposed development would harm highway safety and the free flow of traffic.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision This would be contrary to Policy CC2 of the CSDPD where it requires development to be compatible with transport infrastructure in the area taking into account access and egress to the public highway and highway safety. It would also conflict with the Framework which requires developments to provide safe and suitable access to the site. Other Matters 16. The proposal would make a modest contribution of one dwelling to the supply of housing in a predominantly residential area close to services and public transport routes. It would help to meet Spelthorne’s housing needs on a small site which would make better use of urban land in accordance with national planning policies. This benefit of the proposed development is considered in the overall planning balance below. 17. The appellant’s Planning Statement refers to the dwelling exceeding the building regulation requirements for energy conservation, but I have little evidence of this, and the solar panels referred to are not shown on the proposed plans. Therefore, I give this matter limited weight. 18. I note that there is some support for the proposal.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Furthermore, there are no issues in relation to several matters, including the living conditions of existing and future occupiers, parking provision and the design of the proposed house. Nevertheless, compliance with the development plan in relation to these issues is a neutral factor. Planning Balance 19. The Council accepts that its current housing land supply stands at 3.52 years, which represents a shortfall against the required five years. Paragraph 11(d) of the Framework states that, where the policies which are most important for determining an application are out-of-date (which includes situations where the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites), permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. The Framework is a material consideration of great weight. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/Z3635/W/22/3300724 20. Given the harm to the character and appearance of the area and highway safety and the free flow of traffic I have identified, I conclude that the proposal conflicts with policies in the development plan. These harms also result in a conflict with the Framework for the reasons given above. I attribute moderate weight to the benefits of the proposed development set out in the other matters and limited weight to energy conservation matters. However, I consider the adverse impacts of the proposal arising from the harm to the character and appearance of the area and highway safety and the free flow of traffic would significantly and demonstrably outweigh these benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. Conclusion 21. For the reasons given above, the proposal would conflict with the development plan as a whole and there are no material considerations, including the Framework, that would outweigh that conflict. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

128 Staines Road East, SUNBURY-ON-THAMES, TW16 5BB — Spelthorne Borough Council — A Wright BSc (Hons) MRTPI INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4