Planning appeal decision
Land at Homefield Nursery, Meadgate Road, Nazeing, EN9 2PB
Planning appeal 3279021 at Land at Homefield Nursery, Meadgate Road, Nazeing, EN9 2PB (Epping Forest District Council) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 9 May 2024 by Inspector Fleming D, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the development is inappropriate development for the purposes of the Framework and development plan policy.
Unauthorised use of land as a Gypsy/Romany/Traveller site of 6 pitches (enforcement) and proposed provision of 6 Gypsy/Traveller pitches each with one mobile home and one touring caravan, plus hardstanding and boundary fencing (s78 appeal)
- Authority
- Epping Forest District Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Change of use
- Inspector
- Fleming D
- Postcode
- EN9 2PB
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development is inappropriate development for the purposes of the Framework and development plan policy
- The effect of the development on the openness of the Green Belt
- The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area, having regard to its location within the Lee Valley Regional Park (LVRP)
- The suitability of the site for a gypsy and traveller site and its effect on the EFSAC
- If the development is inappropriate, whether the harm to the Green Belt and any other harm is clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development
What decided it
The substantial harm from inappropriate Green Belt development and the undemonstrated integrity of the EFSAC were not clearly outweighed by the appellants' personal circumstances and unmet need, so very special circumstances were not established.
the substantial Green Belt harm, significant loss of openness, harm to landscape character, conflict with the development plan as a whole, undemonstrated EFSAC integrity, unmet pitch need factors and intentional unauthorised development were weighed against the substantial weight given to the appellants' compelling personal circumstances and lack of alternative accommodation, and the Inspector concluded the harm was not clearly outweighed, so the appeals failed
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy DM4Policy SP5Policy DM3Policy DM1Policy DM5Policy H4Policy DM2Policy SP1Policy SP4Policy SP6
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 154Paragraph 155Paragraph 143
- Judgments
- Smith v SSLUHC & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 1391
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 Epping Forest District Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Dismissed28 October 20266011400Larksmead Nursery, St Leonards Road, Nazeing, EN9 2HQ
- Allowed27 October 20266008413Sparks Farm, Nine Ashes Road, Nine Ashes, CM4 0JZ
- Dismissed26 October 20266008699Denver Lodge, Waltham Road, Nazeing, EN9 2EB
- Dismissed23 October 20266013055Millers Farm, Epping Road, Roydon, Harlow, CM19 5DD
- Dismissed21 October 20266010759Spains Hall, Spains Hall Road, Willingale, Ongar, CM5 0QE
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.
®