Land Adjacent To Rosecot Moor Lane Woking Surrey

1. 1.The proposed residential dwellings and associated access track would comprise an uncharacteristic form of tandem development, which would introduce a form of development that would be entirely at odds with the established pattern and grain of development in the area. The proposed location of the dwellings within plots 1 and 2, by reason of the absence of meaningful separation distance to the eastern site boundary, would result in the unsatisfactory onset of a terracing effect toward Rosecot and Enacot, Moor Lane, and would further fail to respect the existing established building lines of these properties. The proposed site layout would result in the significant loss of existing trees and landscaping and would introduce an excessive quantum of hardstanding with no meaningful replacement landscaping. Additionally, the proposed form, scale and appearance of all four dwellings especially the proposed crown roof sections, deep, bulky form and lack of articulation would bring about an uncharacteristically incongruous and urban form of design. The proposed development would therefore significantly and severely detract from the established pattern, grain, and form of development present within the semi-rural locality contrary to the provisions of Policies CS21 and CS24 of the Woking Core Strategy (2012), Policy DM10 of the Woking Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2016), and the advice contained within the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) 'Design' (2015).
2. 2.The proposed development by reason of the proximity of the rearward facing windows of the proposed dwelling at plot 3 would give rise to significant harm to the occupants of no.69 Reed Street Woking Surrey GU22 9FU by reason of the onset of direct overlooking and loss of privacy toward the rear windows of no.69 Reed Street Woking Surrey GU22 9FU. The proposed development by reason of the proximity of the proposed access track serving plots 3 and 4 to the rear gardens of no's 25, 27, 29, 31, 33 and 35 Bullock Crescent Woking Surrey GU22 9FU would give rise to significant harm to the occupants of no's 25, 27, 29, 31, 33 and 35 Bullock Crescent Woking Surrey GU22 9FW by reason of significantly harmful noise and disturbance. In respect of the latter, no evidence (such as a noise impact assessment) or mitigation (such as screening in the form of landscaping) has been demonstrated to indicate that the harms as mentioned would be prevented. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policy CS21 'Design' of the Woking Core Strategy (2012), Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD's) Design (2015) and Outlook, Amenity, Privacy and Daylight (2022) and the provisions of Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2024) (particularly paragraph 135).
3. 3.It has not been demonstrated that the windows of habitable rooms to the front elevation of the dwellings within plots 3 and 4 would not result in significant and severe overlooking and loss of privacy toward the rear garden and rear windows of habitable rooms to the dwellings at plots 1 and 2 (and vice versa in respect of the front windows of habitable rooms to the dwellings on plots 3 and 4), to the detriment of the residential amenity of the future occupiers of all four residential dwellings proposed. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policy CS21 'Design' of the Woking Core Strategy (2012), Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD's) Design (2015) and Outlook, Amenity, Privacy and Daylight (2022) and the provisions of Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2024) (particularly paragraph 135).
4. 4.By reason of the constrained nature of Moor Lane including its narrow width, poor visibility, lack of pedestrian refuge and resultant increase in traffic caused by the proposals, the proposed development fails to demonstrate how sustainable transport modes can be supported or delivered, and how safe vehicular and pedestrian movements can be achieved. The proposed development would therefore result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, contrary to the requirements of Policy CS18 of the Woking Core Strategy (2012) and the provisions of the NPPF (2024) (particularly paragraph 116).
5. 5.In the absence of arboricultural information in line with BS5837;2012, it has not been demonstrated that the proposed development could be accommodated on the proposal site without resulting in a detrimental impact on the health and longevity of trees of public amenity value. It has also not been demonstrated that proposed development would involve the retention of/replacement of landscaping to retain existing trees and other important landscape features where practicable. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies CS21 and CS24 of the Woking Core Strategy (2012), Policy DM2 of the DM Policies DPD (2016), Supplementary Planning Document 'Design' (2015) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2024) and permission is therefore further recommended for refusal on this basis.
6. 6.In the absence of any ecological appraisal/information which would inform any necessary protected species mitigation and/or compensation requirements, and demonstrate the potential for on-site biodiversity gains (in accordance with Policy CS7 of the Woking Core Strategy (2012)), the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would conserve and protect existing biodiversity, including those habitats and species listed in the Surrey Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), and that the proposed development would not result in a potentially harmful effect and/or lead to a loss of features of interest for biodiversity, and that it would minimise impacts on biodiversity. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policy CS7 of the Woking Core Strategy (2012), the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2024) (most notably paragraph 187d) and Circular 06/05: 'Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Their Impact Within The Planning System'.
7. 7.In the absence of a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure contributions towards mitigation measures, the Local Planning Authority is unable to determine that the additional dwelling would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBH SPA), either alone or in combination with other plans and projects in relation to urbanisation and recreational pressure effects, contrary to The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the 'Habitats Regulations'), saved Policy NRM6 of the South East Plan 2009, Policies CS8 and CS17 of the Woking Core Strategy (2012) and the Updated Thames Basin Heath Avoidance Strategy (2022).

From the council's decision notice.

Application type

Full Planning Application

Scale / size

Small

Date validated

11 February 2026

Consultation expiry

17 March 2026

Consultation end

17 March 2026

Neighbour consultation end

17 March 2026

Target decision date

8 April 2026

Agent

Neil Warner Architecture Ltd

Architect profile

NEIL WARNER ARCHITECTURE LTD

Agent address

Rustlings, Robin Hood Lane, Sutton Green Guildford Surrey Guildford GU4 7QG

Statutory period

56 days

Documents

37

Constraints

11