®Planning appeal decision
Trystings, Hamm Court, Addlestone, KT13 8YB
described as, “Additional first floor extension, to the rear additional fenestration
- Authority
- Runnymede Borough Council
- Appeal type
- householder · Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- O'Doherty A
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt for the purposes of the Framework and development plan policy
- the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt
- the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding area
- if the proposal would be inappropriate development, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify it
What decided it
The proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt causing substantial harm to openness and character, which is not clearly outweighed by other considerations, so very special circumstances do not exist.
The substantial harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and loss of openness, together with harm to character and appearance, was not clearly outweighed by the limited other considerations (neutral neighbour impact, private accommodation benefit, and flood refuge provision), so the balance did not justify the proposal.
Framework references: 149, 148, 130, 14
Plan policies cited: Policy EE14, Policy EE1, Policy EE13
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.