Planning Appeal Statement

PLANNING APPEAL STATEMENT 1
The Name of the Class (Course)
Professor (Tutor)
The Name of the School (University)
The City and State where it is located
The Date
ABSTRACT

PLANNING APPEAL STATEMENT 2
The paper entails a government, local setting, and planning context of development in
Kingstown town where its Thames are considered valuable aspects of the borough. It also
includes some of the appeals in response to denial of proposal permissions for investors. In most
cases, these decisions are done by the royal borough of Kingston council basing on the different
planning policies and acts stipulated by the regional or local governments regarding different
standards of the town like infrastructure and construction of buildings. The paper is specifically
rooted to a case where a developer was denied planning permission for an extension of a building
over claims that it did not adhere to some of the planning policies thus could lead into the
deterioration of the borough's conserved environment. This happened at 43 market place
development, Kingston upon the Thames, KT1 1ET.
INTRODUCTION
The Thames within Kingston serves as its prime asset despite the fact that industrial
necessity and poor planning has led to the construction of buildings facing away from the river
making it hard for residents to access the waterfronts. Kingston Boroughs setting is privileged
due to its close proximity to large open spaces in Wimbledon common, bushy park, Richmond
Park and Hampton Court. Approximately a third its setting is composed of large spaces
designated as Green belt and metropolitan open land (MOL). The RB of Kingston local
development framework core strategy enhances a sustainable success and continued management
of the borough. Integration of policies from government guidance units makes sure that the core
strategies are sound and applies to national, local and regional contexts.
The core strategies take into account the Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPGs) and
Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) generated by the national government. The London context
plan formed part of a statutory plan of development for the borough where the target for strategic

PLANNING APPEAL STATEMENT 3
housing was set at 3,750 between 2011 and 2021. In this case, the government aimed at
accommodating and securing housing growth rates and types without compromising life quality
of residents and the borough's character. It also focused on increasing affordable housing levels
in an effort to meet local housing needs. Owing to these a strategic planning policy was
developed to govern the type of buildings to be constructed at specific sites depending on the
impacts incurred. As a result, the Kingston plan (2008-2020) strategy was implemented to
deliver the spatial properties for the borough's construction needs.
The Kingston town Centre exhibits a characteristic of a metropolitan town Centre where
the erection of new buildings or extension of existing buildings calls for approval by the Local
Planning Authorities. The authorities basing on different factors grant permission or deny the
extension or erection of the proposed development. The decisions are made by the Royal
Borough of Kingston upon the Thames. In the past years, different planning appeal statements
have been filed in response to development appeals that did not meet the required standards of
RBK. Constructions likely to cause major negative impacts than merits are denied planning
permissions. This goes in hand with the refused planning permission at 43 market place
development, Kingston upon the Thames, KT1 1ET Rodriguez et.al (2017, pg. 20-45).
PLANNING APPEAL APPLICATION FORM.
Being the case officer, this appeal statement is set in response to planning permission
refusal regarding a development at 43 market place, Kingston upon the Thames, KT1 1ET. The
case number was 1812151 referenced as 18/12151/FUL. The appellant applied for approval over
alterations to an existing building and construction of a two-storey extension of the same
building. The relevance of the plan targeted at providing an additional two 2x1bedroom
apartments at the second and third floors. The decisions regarding the refusal was undertaken by

PLANNING APPEAL STATEMENT 4
the Royal Borough of Kingston upon the Thames on 27th April 2018 and an appeal lodged on 15
November 2018.
The statement provides a development description and proposal assessment that relates to
the policies of planning and other material considerations of the proposed development. These
includes an outline of the site and the surrounding area context, proposal outlines, planning
history, lawful utilization of the property, main considerations based on the appeal, objections
made regarding the decisions made and the other possible reasons for the refusal Quin et.al
(2019, HST 060). The full application of the appeal was refused due to the following reasons:
I. The proposed development would hamper a satisfactory cycle of parking facilities
thus influencing the sustainable transport forms. The erection could increase
pressure on parking in areas where it is heavily subscribed upon detriment to
highway and safety of pedestrians. This reason is based on 6.9 and 6.13 policies
of the 2016 London plan, DM9, and DM10, policies CS7, local development
framework core strategy and the council's supplementary planning document
titled “sustainable transport” (2013)
II. The bulkiness, scale, material choice and design properties of the proposed
development would alter the appearance and character of a building of township
merit, setting of Grade II listed building at 4 Eden Street and old town
conservation area. As much as the reason may seem substantial, it could not be
outweighed by any of the public benefits. Also, the development could not
enhance or preserve old town conservation area and the setting of number 4 Eden
Street. As a result, this conflicts with sections 66 and 72 of the planning listed