Land south east of The Ranges (addressed as 1A Priory Stables), Chertsey Road, Shepperton, TW17 9NU

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

• Whether the development is inappropriate in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
• The effect of the development on the openness of the Green Belt and its purposes.
• The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area
• Whether the development complies with policies designed to address flood risk.
• Whether the development causes or is affected by ground contamination
• Whether the site is appropriate for this residential use having regard to potential impacts from the electricity generation development proposed on adjacent land, with particular regard to noise and air quality.
• Whether any harm to the Green Belt, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, including any need for the development and the circumstances of those living at the site, so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development.
• (Appeal A, ground (a)) Whether the development is inappropriate in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
• (Appeal A, ground (a)) The effect of the development on the openness of the Green Belt and its purposes.
• (Appeal A, ground (a)) The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area.
• (Appeal A, ground (a)) Whether the development complies with policies designed to address flood risk.
• (Appeal A, ground (a)) Whether any harm to the Green Belt, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development.

What decided it

The combination of Green Belt harm from inappropriate development and the failure to demonstrate the site was safe from flooding or that it passed the sequential test meant the benefits, including the shortfall in Traveller pitch provision, did not clearly outweigh the harm so as to amount to very special circumstances.

Substantial weight given to Green Belt harm, together with harm to character and appearance and conflict with flood risk policy and the fact of intentional unauthorised development, was not clearly outweighed by the shortage of Traveller pitches and the personal impact on occupiers, so very special circumstances did not exist and the appeals (Appeal B and Appeal A ground (a)) were dismissed.