# Wild Flowers, Wrens Hill, Oxshott

- **Decision:** allowed, 3 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: H Miles
- **Authority:** Elmbridge (South East)
- **Appeal reference:** 6007869
- **Application reference:** 2025/3383
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** One detached chalet bungalow and a pair of semi-detached houses in the garden of Wild Flowers, with access and landscaping
- **Homes:** 3
- **Site context:** inside-settlement, TPO
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Housing land supply (years):** 0.9
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** L2(1)(d)(ii)
- **Development plan policies:** Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 DM2, DM10, Elmbridge Design Code 2024
- **Main issues:** living conditions of future occupiers (daylight/sunlight)
- **Tags:** tier-2, living-conditions, transitional-no-consultation, housing-shortfall, small-scheme, garden-land, costs-application

## Summary
Three dwellings in a large Oxshott garden, refused on the daylight and sunlight that future occupiers would get under tall trees. Allowed. Site-specific BRE modelling, including a transparency allowance for deciduous canopy, showed the living room would just pass (50.6%) and the gardens would get adequate sun (DL ¶8-10, 12). The letter applied the 2026 Framework without re-consulting the parties (DL ¶3).

## What made the difference
Technical daylight evidence that modelled the trees, which the earlier failed scheme (6002519) had lacked. The inspector preferred site-specific BRE results over the Design Code's 45-degree rule of thumb (DL ¶7). A marginal pass was enough.

## Policy findings
- **L2(1)(d)(ii): pass.** code mapped by harvester — letter cites "the Framework's requirements for acceptable living standards for residents in terms of access to daylight, sunlight, and external amenity space" (DL 12); BRE daylight 50.6% of room at 30% tree transparency (DL 8); 70% of garden gets 2h sun on 21 March (DL 10)
- **DM2 / DM10 (Elmbridge DMP): accord.** adequate daylight/sunlight and outdoor space for future occupiers (DL 12)
- **HO7: benefit.** 0.9-year supply (appellant figure); "pressing need for housing of all sizes" (DL 22); weight not stated

## Key facts
- Plot 1 living room passes BRE 150 lux over 50% only marginally (50.6%) once 30% transparency applied to deciduous T1/T2 (DL 8)
- Previous appeal on the site (6002519) dismissed for a different scheme; this one's evidence modelled the deciduous trees (DL 11)
- Parties not re-consulted; "policy emphasis has not changed" on living conditions (DL 3)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6007869
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/20898a08-42b1-42d1-a914-f2e2123d42ce

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6007869.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.