®Planning appeal decision
High Barn, Four Ashes Estate, Six Ashes, Bridgnorth, WV15 6EP
Planning appeal 3300234 at High Barn, Four Ashes Estate, Six Ashes, Bridgnorth, WV15 6EP (Shropshire County Council) was dismissed on 12 April 2023 by Inspector Law T, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
the conversion of existing Dutch Barn to provide 1no. dwelling
- Authority
- Shropshire County Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Law T
- Postcode
- WV15 6EP
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies
- The effect on the openness of the Green Belt
- The effect on the character and appearance of the area
- The effect on biodiversity
- Whether or not the type and amount of enabling development is justified
- Would the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposal
What decided it
The proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt with substantial harm to openness and character, which is not clearly outweighed by other considerations sufficient to demonstrate very special circumstances.
The substantial weight given to Green Belt harm and other identified harm was not clearly outweighed by other considerations sufficient to demonstrate very special circumstances; the benefits of housing provision, construction jobs, and enabling development were insufficient to justify the proposal.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- CS Policy CS5CS Policy CS17SAMDev Policy MD6SAMDev Policy MD12
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 137Paragraph 130Paragraph 147Paragraph 148Paragraph 149Paragraph 150Paragraph 180Paragraph 208
- Judgments
- Hibbitt and Another v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) and Rushcliffe Borough Council (2) [2016] EWHC 2853 (Admin)
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 Shropshire
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2023
- Dismissed11 September 20266010260Land to East of Old Shackerley Lane, Old Shackerley Lane, Albrighton, WV7 3AB
- Dismissed22 April 20266004400The New Bungalow, A442 From Lodge Farm To Chapel Lane Quatford, Quatford, Bridgnorth, Shropshire, WV15 6QJ
- Dismissed21 October 202533685043 Snowdon Cottage Snowdon Road, Burnhill Green, Wolverhampton, WV6 7HS
- Planning permission granted8 September 2025336360035 The Caravan, Tong Forge, Shifnal, Telford, Shropshire, TF11 8QD
- Allowed28 August 20253364715Manege Building, Cosford Grange, Shifnal, TF11 9JB
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.