Planning appeal decision
Sawmills, Green Lane , Outwood, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 5QP
Planning appeal 3231743 at Sawmills, Green Lane , Outwood, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 5QP (Tandridge District Council) was allowed on 23 June 2021 by Inspector Walker A, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the appeal developments are inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
change of use of land and buildings to Class B1, B2 and B8 use, retention of sawmill use, retention of existing bunding (under power lines), retention of Ryall & Edwards sales building on current site and retention of welfare buildings on existing site, widening of access road
- Authority
- Tandridge District Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- employment-industrial · Change of use
- Inspector
- Walker A
- Postcode
- RH1 5QP
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the appeal developments are inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
- The effect of the appeal developments on the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land within it.
- The effect of the appeal developments on the character and appearance of the site and area.
- The effect of the appeal developments on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, as regards noise and disturbance.
- The sustainability of the location and effect of the appeal developments on highway safety and capacity.
- Would the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, be clearly outweighed by other considerations? If so, would this amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the appeal developments?
What decided it
The Ryall & Edwards sales building and welfare portacabins lay outside the agreed Previously Developed Land area, causing Green Belt and character harm that was not clearly outweighed by the other considerations advanced.
Substantial Green Belt harm plus significant harm to character and appearance from the sales building and welfare portacabins, outside the PDL, was not clearly outweighed by the significant weight given to employment and economic benefits, so very special circumstances did not exist for that part of Appeal B; the remaining elements of both appeals, being neutral in Green Belt terms within the PDL, were found acceptable and permitted.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- DP7DP10DP13DP22CSP18CSP21
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 144Paragraph 145Paragraph 146
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Tandridge District Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Allowed29 October 20266006369Land at Thornhill, Westerham Road, Limpsfield, Oxted, RH8 0ED
- Dismissed26 October 2026601413931a Banstead Road, Caterham, CR3 5QH
- Dismissed14 October 20266008351Development Site West of Southwood, Waller Lane, Caterham, CR3 5EA
- Dismissed13 October 20266007518Rosemary Cottage, Smallfield Road, Horne, Horley, RH6 9JP
- Allowed25 September 20266006497Land at Mount Avenue, Chaldon, CR3 5BB
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®