Planning appeal decision
Accommodation, Oaks Farm Philpot Lane, Chobham, Woking, GU24 8HE
Planning appeal 3326420 at Accommodation, Oaks Farm Philpot Lane, Chobham, Woking, GU24 8HE (Surrey Heath Borough Council) was allowed on 11 January 2024 by Inspector Davies N, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
the change of use of land from agricultural land to Gypsy/Traveller site comprising the siting of one static caravan
- Authority
- Surrey Heath Borough Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Change of use
- Inspector
- Davies N
- Postcode
- GU24 8HE
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt
- the effect of the development on openness and the purposes of including land in the Green Belt
- the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area
- whether the site is a suitable location for the development having regard to development plan policy and the accessibility to services and facilities
- whether the site is a suitable location for the development having regard to flood risk
- if the proposal is inappropriate development, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to very special circumstances necessary to justify the development
What decided it
The combination of the unmet need for Gypsy and Traveller sites and the personal circumstances/best interests of the appellant's children clearly outweighed the identified Green Belt and flood risk harms only when the permission was limited to a temporary, personal five-year basis.
the substantial-weight Green Belt harm together with the flood risk and character/accessibility harms were not clearly outweighed by the need and personal circumstances considerations for a permanent permission, but on a temporary and personal basis these considerations did clearly outweigh the harm, so the balance tipped in favour of allowing a five-year personal permission
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy DM6Policy DM9Policy DM10
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 57Paragraph 142Paragraph 143Paragraph 152Paragraph 153Paragraph 154Paragraph 165Paragraph 167Paragraph 168Paragraph 169Paragraph 170Paragraph 171Paragraph 173
- 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 Surrey Heath Borough Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Dismissed18 September 202660121062 Killy Hill, Chobham, GU24 8RF
- Dismissed1 July 20266003913Wilds, The Folly, Lightwater, GU18 5XA
- Allowed21 May 20266002295Land At Snows Ride, Windlesham, Surrey, GU20 6LA
- Dismissed1 May 20263376162Langshot Equestrian Centre, Gracious Pond Road, Chobham, Woking, GU24 8HJ
- Allowed17 April 20263374712Newlyn, Highams Lane, Chobham, Surrey, GU24 8TD
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.
®