# 56 Burlington Road, New Malden

- **Decision:** dismissed, 29 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: D Cleary
- **Authority:** Kingston upon Thames (London)
- **Appeal reference:** 6009988
- **Application reference:** 25/02055/FUL
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Demolition and a four-storey building with a replacement commercial unit and 7 flats
- **Homes:** 7
- **Site context:** inside-settlement, PDL
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** S4, L2(1)(d)(ii), P3
- **Development plan policies:** Kingston Core Strategy 2012 DM10, London Plan 2021 D3, D6, T6, Residential Design SPD 2013
- **Main issues:** neighbours' daylight, future occupiers' external space, parking
- **Tags:** s4-within-settlement, s4-substantially-outweighed, living-conditions, daylight-sunlight, obligation-unsecured, housing-shortfall, small-scheme, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework, tier-2

## Summary
A four-storey block of seven flats over a commercial unit in New Malden, built right up to the boundary beside a neighbour's ground-floor bedroom window. The daylight loss to that window (93.7% VSC) was so severe that it substantially outweighed substantial weight to seven homes under S4. The car-free undertaking was also defective. Dismissed.

## Issues and findings
- **Daylight.** "W15 would experience a 93.7% reduction in VSC, and a 100% loss under the NSL test" (DL ¶7). "The magnitude of this loss goes well beyond minor urban friction and represents a profound deterioration in living conditions." (DL ¶24). It conflicts with "the Framework’s decision-making policies (L2 and P3), which seek to ensure acceptable living standards in terms of daylight and sunlight" (DL ¶24).
- **Parking.** The unilateral undertaking's monitoring fee was blank: "Without a specified amount, the undertaking is incomplete and the obligation cannot be enforced." (DL ¶21).
- **Housing.** The seven flats "would contribute to addressing this shortfall, a matter to which I attach substantial weight" (DL ¶23).

## Planning balance
S4(1): "the adverse effects substantially outweigh the benefits when assessed against national decision-making policies as a whole. The proposal therefore fails the test in Policy S4." (DL ¶26).

## What made the difference
The loss of almost all daylight to the only bedroom of a one-bedroom flat, with no evidence that this massing was the only feasible redevelopment.

## Transferable points
- Severe daylight loss to a single habitable window can alone substantially outweigh substantial housing weight under S4 (DL ¶24-26).
- L2 and P3 are the Framework hooks for neighbours' daylight (DL ¶24).
- A car-free undertaking with an undefined monitoring fee is unenforceable (DL ¶21).

## Policy findings
- **L2(1)(d)(ii): fail.** ground-floor bedroom window W15 at 52-54 Burlington Road loses 93.7% VSC and 100% NSL; sole window to the only bedroom of a one-bed flat (DL 4-12, 24)
- **P3: fail.** cited with L2 on acceptable daylight standards (DL 24)
- **HO7: benefit (substantial weight).** seven flats where no five-year supply (figure not stated) (DL 23, 25)
- **TR2: harm.** mapped; car-free UU incomplete (monitoring fee undefined and unpaid), so on-street parking pressure in CPZ not controlled; London Plan T6 conflict (DL 19-22)
- **S4: fail.** severe amenity harm substantially outweighs benefits (DL 23-26)

## Key facts
- Amenity space shortfall against the SPD accepted as not harmful (play space counted as communal) (DL 13-18)
- Mirror-image test and No 50 precedent not persuasive (DL 9-10)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6009988
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/99c98bc3-1c16-450d-8025-71b43e0ec785

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6009988.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.