# Footway adjacent to 85 Upper Richmond Road, Putney

- **Decision:** dismissed, 25 August 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: Les Greenwood
- **Authority:** Wandsworth (London)
- **Appeal reference:** 6010864
- **Application reference:** 2026/0061
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** BT Street Hub unit with two illuminated digital advertisement panels (planning appeal; linked advert appeal 6011686)
- **Site context:** inside-settlement
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** S4(1)
- **Development plan policies:** Wandsworth Local Plan 2023-2038 LP1, LP9, LP22, LP49, LP50, London Plan 2021 D8, T2
- **Main issues:** amenity, public safety
- **Tags:** tier-2, s4-within-settlement, s4-substantially-outweighed, telecoms, bt-street-hub, transitional-no-consultation

## Summary
This was a BT Street Hub with digital advertising panels on a busy Putney footway, replacing a removed phone kiosk. Planning permission and advertisement consent (6011686) were refused in one letter. The inspector did not consult on the new Framework because the proposal was minor (DL ¶6). The telecoms benefits were "substantially outweighed by the adverse effect on amenity of these poorly sited proposals, with reference to Framework policy S4" (DL ¶16).

## What made the difference
Siting. A central, perpendicular position out of line with the kerbside furniture strip would force pedestrians to deflect around the unit. That was an amenity harm, not a safety harm (DL ¶12, 14). A kerb-aligned position like the old kiosk's might have passed. Here S4's "substantially outweighed" test was met by local visual and convenience harm alone, with no reference to a specific Framework refusal policy.

## Policy findings
- **S4(1): fail.** telecoms benefits (emergency calls, wifi, monitoring) substantially outweighed by amenity harm from a centrally sited, perpendicular, illuminated unit adding clutter and obstructing pedestrians (DL 10-13, 16)
- **CO1: benefit.** support for telecoms expansion noted, but not weighted (DL 16)

## Key facts
- About 3m high by 1.2m wide unit placed centrally and perpendicular on a busy A205 local-centre footway, out of line with other street furniture (DL 9-10)
- No highway safety harm found; the harm was to visual amenity and pedestrian convenience (DL 12-15)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6010864
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/de09271c-d972-40a0-87cb-5cc493adfcaf

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6010864.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.