Planning appeal decision
Land Rear of 50-56 Cudham Lane North, Sevennoaks, Cudham, TN14 7RA
Planning appeal 3347801 at Land Rear of 50-56 Cudham Lane North, Sevennoaks, Cudham, TN14 7RA (London Borough of Bromley) was dismissed on 14 April 2025 by Inspector Harley S, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether or not the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and development plan policies.
erection of 4 detached houses with integral garages, additional parking and planting of a wildflower meadow
- Authority
- London Borough of Bromley
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Harley S
- Postcode
- TN14 7RA
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether or not the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and development plan policies
- the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt
- the effect on the character and appearance of the area
- the effect on the living conditions of occupiers of No 50 Cudham Lane in terms of noise and disturbance
- whether adequate provision would be made in respect of biodiversity, nature conservation and protected species
- if the proposal is found to be inappropriate development, whether any 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 substantial harm to Green Belt openness and the failure to meet the Golden Rules for major development on grey belt land, combined with inadequate biodiversity provision, are not clearly outweighed by the moderate benefits of housing delivery and site restoration.
The substantial harm to Green Belt openness, inappropriate development status, small harm from disconnected layout, and inadequate biodiversity provision were not clearly outweighed by the moderate benefits of housing supply, economic benefits and site restoration, so very special circumstances do not exist.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy 49Policy 4Policy 37Policy 72Policy 69London Plan Policy G2London Plan Policy D3London Plan Policy D4London Plan Policy G6
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 143Paragraph 154Paragraph 155
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 London Borough of Bromley
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025
- Split Decision5 August 20263378375Land Adjoining and to the West of Jodeen Animal Sanctuary, Sevenoaks Road, Halstead, Kent, TN14 7HR
- Notice upheld28 July 20263353877Crystal Palace Football Club Youth Academy, Beckenham, London, BR3 1NZ
- Split Decision10 July 2026334676727 Victoria Gardens, Biggin Hill, Westerham, TN16 3DJ
- Planning permission granted17 June 20263351724Nicholas James Care Homes Ltd, 30 Station Road, Orpington, BR6 0SA
- Allowed28 May 20266007385223 Crofton Lane, Petts Wood, Orpington, Kent, BR6 0BL
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.
®