80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR

80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR — Reigate and Banstead Borough Council — Appeal Decisions Site visit made on 23 October 2023 by Tim Wood BA(Hons) BTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 4 December 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/L3625/W/23/3321357 80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0NR • 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 Ms Kerensa Samanidis against the decision of Reigate & Banstead Borough Council. • The application Ref 22/02590/F, dated 30 November 2022, was refused by notice dated 23 March 2023. • The development is the conversion of the garage to a home office and construction of a pergola and fence. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The submissions state that the development has already been undertaken and I had the benefit of seeing the fence and pergola at my site visit. The Council makes it clear that their objections relate solely to the pergola and the appellant has addressed this in her submissions. I shall concentrate on this aspect of the development in determining the appeal. Main Issue 3.

80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR — Reigate and Banstead Borough Council — Appeal Decisions The main issue in this appeal is the effects of the pergola on the character and appearance of the conservation area. Reasons 4. The appeal relates to development undertaken in the front garden area of this property. The substantial former-house has been divided into flats and sits within the Wray Common Conservation Area. The building is a large semi- detached property and is set well back from the road. The area contains a number of substantial properties of a similar era. 5. The timber pergola has been constructed just within the front boundary of the property and is visible from outside the site above and through the top of the hedge. The submitted plans indicate that it is 2.7m high and the Council suggests that it may be more in places due to the uneven ground. 6. In my consideration, the pergola appears out of place and incongruous. I saw no other similar structures in the area and, although many frontages are https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR — Reigate and Banstead Borough Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/L3625/W/23/3321357 screened or at least partly so, I did not see any built development within the area, that had been undertaken in frontages. 7. I have considered the screening effects offered by the hedge at the site. In its current form it filters some views of the pergola from outside the site, although not fully and not to such a degree that would make it acceptable, in my judgement. The appellant indicates that they would let the hedge grow sufficiently to screen the pergola. However, this would rely on the hedge being maintained at a certain height and this cannot be guaranteed. 8. In my judgement, the pergola has an unacceptable appearance within this conservation area. Its height, design and frame-like appearance mean that it is out of place within this locality. It fails to either preserve or enhance the character and appearance of this conservation area. In reaching this view I have had regard to the appellant’s statement that its height is, in part, a result of the need to accommodate the roots of the adjacent tree. 9.

80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR — Reigate and Banstead Borough Council — Appeal Decisions The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states (paragraph 199) that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset (in this case, the Conservation Area), great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It adds that this is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. Additionally stating that any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset, should require clear and convincing justification. Whilst I acknowledge that the proposal would provide a benefit to the appellant, I consider this to be a largely private benefit and not a public one. In my view, and taking account of the above, the effects on the conservation area, which I judge to be ‘less than substantial harm’ as set out in the NPPF, are primary and are not outweighed by the other matters raised by the appellant and I find no public benefit sufficient to outweigh that harm. 10. Consequently, the pergola is in conflict with Policies DES1 and NHE9 of the Reigate and Banstead Local Plan Development Management Plan (adopted 2019).

80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR — Reigate and Banstead Borough Council — Appeal Decisions The harm to the conservation area is a matter of significant weight and is not outweighed by any other matters. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

80 Doods Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0NR — Reigate and Banstead Borough Council — T Wood INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2