36 Albany Crescent, Claygate

appeal 6008555·Elmbridge·17 September 2026dismissed
Decision
dismissed, 17 September 2026
Decided by
Planning Inspector: Megan Thomas KC
Authority
Elmbridge (South East)
Appeal reference
6008555
Application reference
2025/3209
Procedure
written representations
Development
First-floor side extension on columns (void below) with roof-space accommodation to an upper-floor maisonette
Site context
inside settlement
Green Belt
No
Framework applied
August 2026 NPPF
Determinative policies
S4(1), L2(1)(d)
Development plan policies
Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011 CS17, Elmbridge DMP 2015 DM2, Elmbridge Design Code SPD
Main issues
character and appearance; outlook of neighbours

Summary

A first and roof-level side extension on columns to a first-floor maisonette in a semi-detached pair. Dismissed. It would unbalance the pair and look "awkward and contrived", and it would overbear neighbours' side entrances. The L2(1)(d) substantial weight was not available because the scheme was inconsistent with the street scene, and under S4(1) the benefits were substantially outweighed.

What made the difference

The symmetry of the semi-detached pairs along the Crescent, and the neighbours' front doors facing the flank. A void at ground level did not remove the sense of enclosure from the storeys above.

Policy findings

Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.

PolicyFindingWeightNote
L2(1)(d)failsubstantial-weight limb for extra floorspace not met as inconsistent with the street scene (DL 15)
S4(1)failunbalances semi-pair, less than 1 m to boundary; overbearing to neighbours' side doors and landing window 2.4 m away (DL 7-16)

Key facts

Sources

This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.