®Planning appeal decision
Church Lane Nursery , Headley , Surrey , KT18 6ND
Planning appeal 3268657 at Church Lane Nursery , Headley , Surrey , KT18 6ND (Mole Valley District Council) was dismissed on 8 August 2022 by Inspector Sturgess M, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the proposal is in an appropriate location for new housing development having regard to the policies of the development plan.
Outline planning permission for up to 13 dwellings (including affordable housing) on Site including access (with details relating to layout, appearance, landscaping and scale all reserved)
- Authority
- Mole Valley District Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Sturgess M
- Postcode
- KT18 6ND
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposal is in an appropriate location for new housing development having regard to the policies of the development plan
- whether the proposal contains a sufficient amount of affordable housing so as to comply with the rural exceptions sites' policies having regard to viability
- whether the proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and the policies of the development plan. The consideration of this issue includes any effect the proposal might have on the openness of the Green Belt and whether, should the development be found to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, any very special circumstances justify the proposal
What decided it
The appellant failed to demonstrate that 6 market houses were essential to make the affordable housing viable, meaning the proposal did not qualify for the Green Belt exception and constituted inappropriate development, and the resulting substantial harm was not clearly outweighed by other considerations.
the substantial weight given to the contribution to affordable and market housing supply did not clearly outweigh the substantial harm from inappropriate development in the Green Belt and harm to its openness, so very special circumstances did not exist
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- CS1CS2RUD1RUD5
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 78Paragraph 147Paragraph 149
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 Mole Valley District Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022
- Dismissed20 October 20266013764Priory Lodge, River Lane, Leatherhead, KT22 0AU
- Dismissed19 October 20266011465Land to the South-East of Yarm Way, Leatherhead, KT22 8RQ
- Dismissed16 September 20266008528Henhurst Lodge, Beare Green Road, Beare Green, RH5 4PX
- Allowed11 September 20266012763Fourays, Horsham Road, Capel, Dorking, RH5 5LF
- Dismissed9 September 20266005433Land Opposite Manor House,, Headley, Headley Common, KT18 6NA
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.