Planning appeal decision
The Abbey Hotel , 11 Church Street , Romsey, SO51 8BT
Planning appeal 3312542 at The Abbey Hotel , 11 Church Street , Romsey, SO51 8BT (Test Valley Borough Council) was dismissed on 1 March 2024 by Inspector Price A, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Appeal A: whether the proposed development would preserve the setting of the adjacent Grade I listed building, King John's House, and the extent to which the development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Romsey Conservation Area, including trees.
Appeal A: erection of two detached dwellings; Appeal B: erection of one dwelling
- Authority
- Test Valley Borough Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Price A
- Postcode
- SO51 8BT
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Appeal A: whether the proposed development would preserve the setting of the adjacent Grade I listed building, King John's House, and the extent to which the development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Romsey Conservation Area, including trees
- Appeal B: whether the proposed development would preserve the setting of the adjacent Grade I listed building, King John's House, the extent to which the development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Romsey Conservation Area, and the effect of the proposed development on protected sites
What decided it
Appeal A is decided by the removal of the mature Sycamore tree which would cause less than substantial but considerable harm to the conservation area character that cannot be outweighed by limited public benefits; Appeal B is decided by the absence of a satisfactorily executed legal agreement to secure mitigation for impacts on protected sites.
Appeal A: the limited economic benefits and claimed benefit of revealing views of Romsey Abbey were insufficient to outweigh the considerable importance and weight attached to the less than substantial harm to the conservation area from removal of the mature tree; Appeal B: no balancing exercise undertaken as the absence of mitigation measures for protected sites is a threshold matter of compliance.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy E2Policy E9Policy COM2Policy E5
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 205Paragraph 206Paragraph 207Paragraph 208
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 Test Valley
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Dismissed26 October 20266012951Barn South Of Former Poultry Houses, Monxton Road, Grateley, SP11 8JG
- Notice upheld21 September 20263354723Hillside Nurseries , Branches Lane the Banks, Lockerely , Hants, SO51 6JT
- Notice upheld21 September 20263354722Hillside Nurseries , Branches Lane the Banks, Lockerely , Hants, SO51 6JT
- Dismissed3 September 20266008234Landfall Annexe, Landfall, Chilworth Road, Chilworth,Romsey, SO16 7LA
- Dismissed17 August 20266009745Pine Lodge, Chilworth Drove, Chilworth, SO16 7JH
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.
®