Planning appeal decision
North West of Quatford Wood House, Chapel Lane, Quatford, Bridgnorth, WV15 6QH
Planning appeal 3341420 at North West of Quatford Wood House, Chapel Lane, Quatford, Bridgnorth, WV15 6QH (Shropshire County Council) was dismissed on 14 October 2024 by Inspector Rogers J, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the proposed development would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
the erection of two detached dwellings
- Authority
- Shropshire County Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Rogers J
- Postcode
- WV15 6QH
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposed development would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies
- the effect of the proposed development on the openness of the Green Belt
- the effect of the proposed access arrangement on highway safety with regard to users of Chapel Lane
- the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, with specific reference to the Quatford Conservation Area
- if the proposed development is inappropriate, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
What decided it
The proposed development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt that would not be justified by very special circumstances, as the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, loss of openness, highway safety concerns, and heritage harm are not clearly outweighed by the limited public benefits.
The harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and loss of openness, combined with highway safety harm and less than substantial harm to the conservation area, was not clearly outweighed by the limited public benefits of two dwellings and environmental features, particularly given the Council's demonstrated five-year housing supply.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy CS5Policy MD7aPolicy MD1Policy CS6Policy CS17Policy MD2Policy MD13
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 9Paragraph 12Paragraph 16
- Judgments
- Julian Wood v SSCLG, Gravesham Borough Council [2015] EWCA Civ 195
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 2024
- 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.
®