Land at Grid Reference 531413 150617, Deans Lane, Nutfield, Surrey, RH1 4HR

Without planning permission; A. The material change of use of the land from woodland to a use for the stationing of residential caravan in the approximate area shown by ‘Y’ on the attached Plan ‘B’ for residential purposes and parking of vehicles. B. The formation of a hard surface in the approximate area marked in black on the attached plan ‘A’. C. Erection of fencing in the approximate area marked by a green line on the attached plan ‘B’. D. Erection of a utility building in the approximate area shown by ‘X’ on the attached plan ‘B’ and other domestic paraphernalia in association with the use of the land for the stationing of residential caravan for residential purposes

Authority: Tandridge District Council
Appeal type: enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure: Hearing
Development: caravan-gypsy · Minor traveller and caravan pitches
Inspector: Preston C

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

The extent to which the development has effected the openness of the Green Belt and the degree to which is has encroached into the countryside
The effect on the character and appearance of the area
Whether the harm to the Green Belt, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, such as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify a grant of permission

What decided it

The combined weight of significant unmet Gypsy and Traveller accommodation need, the absence of any alternative sites, and the Council's persistent failure to allocate sites clearly outweighed the limited Green Belt and other harm, amounting to very special circumstances.

the substantial harm inherent in inappropriate Green Belt development, together with limited harm to openness, encroachment and character, was clearly outweighed by the combined weight of unmet Traveller accommodation need, absence of alternative sites, persistent policy failure and personal circumstances, amounting to very special circumstances justifying the grant of permission

Framework references: 142, 155

Plan policies cited: DP10, CSP9, CSP9(a), CSP9(b), CSP9(f), CSP18, DP7, CSP20

Judgments cited: Lisa Smith v SSLUHC [2022] EWCA Civ 1391

Read the decision letter on the Inspectorate’s site

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.